.png)
In this manifesto, Haley Erickson defends Demna Gvasalia’s misunderstood legacy at Balenciaga and affirms his radical appointment at Gucci. Through sharp cultural critique, personal insight, and detailed analysis of the Balenciaga by Demna exhibition, this essay argues that Demna’s provocative approach is not only innovative—it interrogates the very idea of innovation itself. Like Cristóbal Balenciaga, who designed for the realities of his time, Demna confronts the cultural conditions of ours: superficiality, meme culture, and the commodification of aesthetics. Tracing his thematic use of volume, readymade, trompe-l’œil, and upcycling, Erickson reveals how Demna mirrors society’s absurdities while reanimating Cristóbal Balenciaga’s spirit. The piece closes by forecasting how Demna’s disruptive vision is poised to revive Gucci, a house historically fueled by drama, reinvention, and bold creative leadership. For those who get it—this is fashion that dares to shape culture, not just reflect it.
In 2021 ‘The Simpsons Balenciaga’, there's a key moment when Springfield residents walk a Balenciaga runway show in Paris. Initially, the fashion crowd deemed worthy enough to surround the iconic Anna Wintour openly mocks the collection, questioning its style and legitimacy, and ultimately, missing the message. Then, after Anna quietly observes and finally states, "I like it," the critics quickly switch their stance, enthusiastically agreeing.
The Simpsons has positioned itself as a cultural thermometer that tracks and critiques trends, hypocrisy, and power structures, and if one is lucky enough to be featured on the show, it signals they are part of the global zeitgeist. It suggests a certain level of societal respect has been earned.
The Simpsons legacy leaves us as a historical and cultural touchstone. Since 1989, The Simpsons has parodied everything — politics, religion, media, technology, and class — through the lens of a dysfunctional American family in the fictional town of Springfield. It functions as a satire of middle America and, by extension, functions as a deeply profound social commentary on American culture itself.
June 28 2025 I had the honor of attending Balenciaga by Demna, presented by Kering’s official Headquarters within the historic Laennec landmark in the 7th arrondissement of Paris. A few months before this I had gotten into an internet debate of Demna’s legitimacy as a designer and his competency going forward as Creative Director in the House of Gucci. It wasn’t just @demarcusallen who felt strongly against Demna, his work at Balenciaga, and the role he has been asked to fulfill at struggling and “barely-staying-afloat” Gucci–Kering’s shares fell 13% following the official appointment of Demna.
Here is the Threads conversation:
@Haleyeerickson: “I feel like Demna knows better that his job at Gucci is to design thru the Gucci philosophy and narrative, idk why you guys are so stressed ?
@Demarcusallen: “because that was his job at balenciaga, and look at what that has become. lol”
@Haleyeerickson: “I'm interested to know more about what, in your eyes, is Balenciaga DNA and what was Demna’s impact at the house?”
@Demarcusallen: “well their DNA always included elegance around their collections especially bags. and an overall elegance, originality. that's become big asics knock-offs sold for 1000, massive cartoon boots, and horrible ads to sell horrible overpriced fast fashion. look at the ads currently in paris for their bags, nothing about this would make any smart person want to spend over 2k on this.”
Side note:
Regarding the advertisements on the streets of Paris that @demarcusallen mentioned—there’s really nothing that sets Balenciaga’s ads apart from any other luxury house. They all highlight their most popular, entry-level items. Just some food for thought…
I am here to throw you all a bone and review the exhibit “Balenciaga by Demna” as well as use it as proof in declaring a manifesto in support of Demna’s severely misunderstood creative genius at Balenciaga, and advocate for his appointment at Gucci as essential, provocative, and visionary despite market skepticism. For those who get it, get it. For those who don’t, don’t.
In short, here’s why you are all wrong.
Hold on, you might learn something.
Demna’s Balenciaga isn’t simply mocking luxury or indulging in cheap irony; rather, it operates as a mirror held directly in front of contemporary culture’s face—reflecting meme culture, poser identities, and the absurdity of consumerism itself. His art is the revelation of unnoticed truths, the exposure of what we collectively ignore or trivialize. Yet, ironically, once these revelations are widely perceived, they're instantly misinterpreted, appropriated, commodified, and stripped of nuance.
High-level creative consciousness, therefore, is paradoxically endangered by its own visibility, vulnerable to destruction through society’s misunderstanding or ignorance.
Perhaps this is his point.
But first, who is Cristóbal Balenciaga? What are his house codes?
Known as “The Master of Us All”, deemed by Christian Dior, and as “the only couturier in the truest sense of the word” by Coco Chanel, who continues, “the others are simply fashion designers”, Cristóbal Balenciaga is unanimously regarded as one of the leading and most influential couturiers of the 20th century.
A tireless perfectionist with uncompromising standards, he acquired an expert command of sewing and spent his life refining the construction of his creations and introducing extraordinary innovation that allowed him to design models that were audacious in both their form and aesthetics, disrupting the norm and setting the indisputable standard season after season.
The 1950s and 60s were the golden age of Cristóbal Balenciaga. The dresses during this period showcase the hallmarks that characterised Balenciaga’s designs.
From his formative years to the end of his career, Cristóbal Balenciaga dedicated himself to developing a technique so perfect that it has yet to be surpassed. Balenciaga never stopped experimenting with textiles or searching for aesthetic balance and harmony, guided consistently by his own concept of elegance as the synthesis of simplicity and audacity.
Balenciaga’s preoccupation with silhouettes commenced in the late 1940s and gave rise to his innovative "readymade" creations of the 50s, ranging from the tunic and sack line to the “baby doll” dress. In all of these creations, Balenciaga opted for fluid lines that caressed rather than constrained the body, thus guaranteeing comfort and freedom of movement for the user. His experiments with form culminated in the 1960s with the abstraction of the female body, which was either blurred by large floral or geometric prints, or enveloped in unprecedented columns.
Meanwhile, his profound knowledge of materials and his collaboration with the Swiss manufacturer Gustav Zumsteg in the creation of new fabrics with sculptural qualities, such as gazar, allowed him to push into innovation and develop truly extraordinary forms.
Daywear was characterised by ultimate precision showcased in pure simplicity. You see simple materials, decorative plainness and, above all, functionality for the contemporary woman due to the gradual introduction of women into the workforce. In his daywear garments, Balenciaga expressed this concept of functionality in its most extreme version, supported by a refined technique and profound knowledge of fabrics. Fluid lines, simple cuts and perfectly crafted sleeves guaranteed the comfort and freedom of movement of the women he dressed.
Cristóbal Balenciaga always used evening wear as exponents of his creative genius and technical ability. The dresses intended for grand parties gave his clients the opportunity to free themselves from the simplicity of day wear; and therefore, provided an excellent opportunity to use the most sumptuous fabrics, surprising volumes and exquisite adornments.
Balenciaga featured in each fashion show signature bridal couture that synthesized the spirit of the collection. Unlike in other haute couture shows where, according to tradition, the show was closed by the wedding dress, in Balenciaga the wedding dress was exhibited among the cocktail and evening dresses.
Finally, Balenciaga’s signature accessories were an essential element that contributed to his house's identity. Large gemstones or costume jewelry made by the best craftsmen, together with silk and feather hats, completed the elegance of the house.
Thus, you can attest that Cristóbal Balenciaga’s legacy is firmly rooted in a relentless pursuit of innovation and extraordinary craftsmanship, driven by an unwavering commitment to contemporary relevance. He consistently challenged traditional notions of elegance and pushed the boundaries of what it meant to be avant-garde. His meticulous experiments in silhouette with volume and form, paired with bold accessories and the unconventional placement of bridal couture, defined a provocative new standard for fashion. Ultimately, Balenciaga's creative philosophy did not merely follow or reflect his time—it actively shaped it, leaving a profound and enduring influence that continues to resonate through the house today.
Sounds familiar.
Demna Gvasalia, born in Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, Soviet Union during the Ethnic cleansing of Georgians under the War in Abkhazia fled with his family to Sokhumi, following an attack which destroyed his home in a bombing. During his teenage years, Demna experiences bullying as a gay youth in a “very religious, very macho country”. Demna and his parents relocated to Düsseldorf, Germany in 2001. Demna, who spoke German, served as the family’s intermediary. His experience navigating a "hardcore" bureaucracy heightened his interest in “sociological uniforms,” which include jackets, caps, armbands, boots, badges, and patches used by individuals to indicate authority within a group.
Demna studied international economics (like me) for four years at Tbilisi State University and later attended the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp, where he graduated with a Master's degree in Fashion Design in 2006 (unlike me). After graduating, Demna relocated to Paris, where he said that he was just “some Georgian weird guy” with no established connections or network.
By 2009, Demna joined Maison Martin Margiela, where he was responsible for women’s collections until 2013. In 2013, he was appointed senior designer of women’s ready-to-wear collections at Louis Vuitton, initially under Marc Jacobs and briefly under Nicolas Ghesquière.
Together with his brother Guram Gvasalia, Demna launched Vetements in 2014 with the original purpose—he has said—of subverting the high fashion status quo.
In 2015 Demna became the creative director of Balenciaga, succeeding Alexander Wang after failing to achieve profit. In September 2019, Demna abruptly left Vetements, stating he had “accomplished his mission.” This was shortly after Balenciaga (where he was already creative director since 2015) was dominating the fashion conversation. There are speculated rumors about a rift or rivalry between the Gvasalia brothers, which I will touch on in the Gucci section.
The exhibition features 101 emblematic pieces over the last decade, tracing the evolution of Demna’s vision through garments, accessories, footwear, and objects drawn from 30 different collections. It explores the conceptual and thematic foundations of Demna’s body of work at Balenciaga, including his reinterpretations of Cristóbal Balenciaga's codes; exercises in volume; studies of the “readymade” and trompe-l’oeil; upcycling; a questioning of fashion’s established norms; and an ongoing examination of the boundary between fashion and luxury through the lens of the contemporary wardrobe. The exhibition serves as both an artistic and conceptual synthesis of a decade of work that has profoundly shaped the house’s contemporary identity.
Demna’s sculptural approach to silhouette is an inquiry into how volume constructs identity, commands space, and disrupts visual expectations. At Balenciaga, he exercises with volume to operate as a dialectical tool: both exaggeration and erasure, presence and concealment. It demands attention while questioning what kind of attention is deserved. Through it, Demna rewrites the sartorial grammar of power.
The Winter 2020 waist-trainer coat, molded from bonded stretch fabrics, exemplifies this tension. It hugs the body like a corset without actually requiring one—an innovation in form, but also a commentary on the history of control embedded in fashion. It is the anti-oversized piece, yet its severity makes it just as extreme. Here, Demna explores the polarity of silhouette, revealing how both maximalism and minimalism can be used to confront fashion’s traditional relationship to the body.
In contrast, the iconic Triple S prototype from Winter 2017 speaks to volume from the ground up. Assembled from the soles of three different sneakers, it is not a commercial gimmick but a proportional manifesto. Originally conceived as an experiment in scale and visual weight, the sneaker quickly became an icon, widely imitated yet rarely understood. Its popularity obscured its original purpose: to question the vocabulary of luxury and volume, yet simultaneously mimices the aesthetics of mass fashion.
Demna’s exercises in volume critique the tyranny of classical tailoring and beauty standards. They confront viewers with silhouettes that are confrontational and sometimes grotesque. Fashion then becomes a site for resistance to cultural noise.
“I like a big fit, but I also love a small fit”
While Cristóbal hinted at “readymade” shapes, Demna makes them explicit. What appears absurd is deeply intentional and rigorously conceptual. Demna’s reinterpretations question who gets to define value, luxury, and taste in the contemporary moment.
In Demna’s hands, the claim that something is “trash” is revealed as a projection of cultural laziness, not an inherent judgment. A Carry Shopper in blue Arena Leather shaped like an IKEA bag from 2017, the 2025 Marché tote in blue Dyneema, or the 2023 Chips bag aren't ironic stunts, rather they are lived memoirs dignifying survival and posing a litmus test for cultural perception itself.
By transmuting necessity into couture through craftsmanship and material innovation, Demna asks us to reconsider our aesthetic and economic assumptions. In this reversal of fashion's upward aspiration, he elevates the utilitarian, turning everyday survival into haute couture. The readymade becomes not just an object, but an ethical and philosophical inquiry: Is beauty only that which is expensive?
Of course, part of this is having fun too. Why can’t we have a little fun in today's dystopia? These spontaneous and gestural pieces reintroduce play into fashion–a vital, and often forgotten element. To be a creative director is to take play seriously. As Demna himself put it:
“Who needs a skirt when anyone can use a towel and wear it as a skirt? And I love that it makes you question whether this is a joke or not. It's great to question things. Bye bye.”
Demna’s use of trompe-l’œil reflects a fundamental distrust of surfaces in an age dominated by them. In a world where digital screens mediate reality and luxury is often just a well-lit image on Instagram, he’s asking: What do we actually value? Is it the labor? The material? Or simply the illusion of status?
His work reveals the absurdity of modern consumerism where the mere appearance of luxury is enough to demand thousands of euros, so long as it’s branded and presented through the “right" channels.
Through pieces like a cotton canvas painted to mimic denim or a leather jacket hand-painted as faux snakeskin, Demna destabilizes the viewer’s faith in visual cues. These garments, which often require hundreds of hours of expert craftsmanship, are designed to look mass-produced or even cheap. The paradox is intentional: he’s confronting a system that equates value with surface-level cues. What is luxury if its meaning rests on perception, not substance?
This tactic echoes post-structuralist theory, where meaning is unstable, deferred, and constructed through context. Demna makes that instability visible. Fashion has always been a kind of theatrical performance; Demna simply makes it explicit.
And there’s a deeper provocation: why do we dismiss something as worthless when it’s been made with extraordinary care? This juxtaposition between effort and aesthetic triviality challenges capitalist ideas of value: is something expensive because it looks luxurious, or because it requires time, skill, and human touch? In doing so, he critiques not just fashion, but how we assign value in general.
Finally, Demna weaponizes illusion to critique illusion itself. Demna invites the viewer into a game of recognizing the consumerist trick, realizing they’ve been complicit in similar visual illusions all along such as through brand prestige or trend value. It becomes an epistemological exercise—how do we know what we’re seeing is true, and why does it matter?
Demna’s approach to upcycling at Balenciaga is deeply rooted in personal narrative, historical lineage, and a contemporary homage to couture traditions.
Take the Winter 2016 Swing Puffer, which reinterprets a childhood memory, a red coat he cherished but never wore. It's a deliberate creation between an intimate memory and Cristóbal Balenciaga’s heritage: echoing his penchant for opened necklines designed to reveal jewelry, the swing puffer forges a direct emotional and visual link between past and present.
Even more striking is the Summer 2024 Upcycled Wedding Dress, crafted from layered vintage gowns. Wedding attire has always been central to Balenciaga’s legacy: he customarily featured bridal couture within his runway shows not as a finale as per tradition, but as an integral spiritual anchor amongst cocktail gowns. Demna echoes this tradition viscerally, uniting personal memory—an expression of love for Balenciaga and his community—with respect for historic practice, weaving emotional resonance into contemporary form.
By integrating emotionally charged materials and reflecting Balenciaga’s bridal legacy, Demna elevates upcycling from mere material reuse to cultural and emotional alchemy—transforming forgotten gowns into living artefacts, rich with heritage and personal meaning. He challenges fast-fashion disposability with a more profound narrative than just "sustainability", that both honors and renews couture traditions—celebrating memory, craftsmanship, and emotional legacy in modern luxury and couture.
Honestly if I were to write a section on this I would be regurgitating past words.
Demna’s work at Balenciaga lives within contradictions: high art that welcomes misinterpretation, couture that courts kitsch, legacy filtered through meme culture. At times, it seems he not only anticipates the erosion of his work through mass consumption but he builds it into the art itself. In this way, the trivialization is the message. His project isn't to escape the absurdity of our time, but to emphasize and aestheticize it.
If you were expecting copy paste couture and evening wear from the 1960’s, I need you to go read a book or find God.
Demna’s tenure at Balenciaga has been marked by a constant probing of where high fashion ends and everyday life begins. Throughout his time at Balenciaga, Demna has used his collections to hold a mirror up to society, cleverly adapting the house’s classic couture codes to reflect the styles he sees on the streets, all while elevating ordinary “uniforms” to new heights of luxury. He has stated openly that he “[doesn’t] care much about luxury” in the traditional sense or about making people look rich; instead, his fashion works “from down up and not up down,” drawing inspiration from the street and contemporary wardrobe rather than imposing top-down elitism. This philosophy keeps Balenciaga’s output loyal to real life as much as to the brand’s heritage, resulting in collections that simultaneously respect Cristóbal Balenciaga’s legacy and resonate with the current moment.
Crucially, this embrace of the contemporary wardrobe and pop culture doesn’t mean abandoning Balenciaga’s haute couture roots – rather, Demna reframes them. In one of his most personal womenswear looks, Demna designed a sleeveless dress printed in a glossy floral pattern lifted straight from his grandmother’s kitchen tablecloth. The humble motif was rendered on a laminated fabric and cut with minimal seams – a T-shaped construction on the back reminiscent of Cristóbal Balenciaga’s minimalist pattern-cutting techniques from the 1960s cocoon coats. The result was a voluminous “tablecloth” gown (look 65) that fused nostalgic domesticity with high fashion, underlining how even the most banal household textile can be transformed into luxury when viewed through Demna’s lens. By using a tablecloth print in an haute couture context, he both nods to the house’s history of innovative cutting and comments on the erosion of barriers between everyday garments and runway glamour.
For his first Balenciaga menswear show, Demna opened with a boxy beige moleskin coat based on an unfinished coat found in Cristóbal Balenciaga’s archives. The original 1960s coat was missing one sleeve – a testament to the master’s perfectionism (legend has it Balenciaga removed the sleeve to improve it and never finished). Demna “completed” the coat and sent it down the runway as Look 1, paying homage to the unattainable ideals of couture craftsmanship. With its exaggerated silhouette and strict tailoring, this piece bridged past and present – honoring Balenciaga’s meticulous heritage while challenging contemporary proportion norms
Having examined Demna’s thematic foundations—volume, readymade, trompe-l’œil, upcycling, and his critical examination of the boundaries of luxury—it becomes clear why his work often draws misunderstanding and controversy. Demna’s provocations are not accidental or superficial; they are carefully constructed commentaries on contemporary society’s relationship with value, perception, and authenticity. Where critics dismiss his designs as mere stunts or ironic gimmicks, they inadvertently reveal the very consumerist superficiality Demna critiques.
Consider the pieces already analyzed: the waist-trainer coat, Triple S sneakers, the IKEA-inspired Carry Shopper, or the trompe-l’œil painted denim jeans. Each exemplifies meticulous craftsmanship and deep conceptual intent. Yet, public discourse often reduces them to "absurd," "ugly," or "provocative without purpose." This response misses Demna’s intentional critique entirely, reaffirming his point: luxury today has become trapped by superficial cues and brand-driven illusions, largely disconnected from the authentic craftsmanship and innovation it once embodied.
Demna’s personal and political context further illuminates his misunderstood creativity. Shaped by the stark realities of conflict, scarcity, and improvisation in his youth, Demna’s aesthetic arises naturally from the tension between necessity and luxury. His so-called “provocations” like the Chips bag or the Sock Shoe are not random acts of irony, but are deeply personal and cultural statements reflecting a resourceful approach to design born out of hardship and adaptation. His deliberate use of meme-able aesthetics serves to expose and critique the contemporary landscape, where luxury is increasingly reduced to social media spectacle and fleeting viral moments.
Moreover, Demna’s integration of playful absurdity into fashion is fundamental. It is through this playful irreverence that he invites us to question the established norms of taste and value. Demna provocatively challenges fashion’s pretense and invites deeper reflection on what luxury truly means in a culture driven by consumption and image.
Ultimately, Demna’s provocations, grounded firmly in rigorous conceptual and technical frameworks discussed in Section 4, demand that we reassess our definitions of luxury, craftsmanship, and aesthetic worth. Far from destroying Balenciaga’s legacy, Demna revitalizes it, reaffirming Cristóbal Balenciaga’s spirit of relentless innovation, disruption, and audacity. The backlash and misunderstanding his work receives are not weaknesses but rather confirmations of his success. Demna forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about fashion and society, embracing controversy not as an end in itself, but as an essential catalyst for genuine dialogue and creative evolution.
My own thoughts on absurdism:
If you weren’t already aware, the fashion world has been holding its breath while watching Gucci walk on eggshells. Once a cultural powerhouse under Tom Ford and Alessandro Michele, the house has stumbled into an identity crisis, struggling with how to reinvent itself. Under Sabato De Sarno, sales dropped by 18% in early 2024, signaling that "quiet luxury" wasn’t enough to keep Gucci afloat in the market. So when news broke that Demna would take the reins, the industry lost its collective mind.
Gucci’s very foundation is rooted in creative resilience amid turmoil. Founded in 1921 by Guccio Gucci, the Florentine leather-goods shop quickly became synonymous with innovation under pressure. During wartime leather shortages in the 1930s, Gucci artisans introduced the woven Diamante canvas as a clever substitute – a geometric pattern that would evolve into the iconic GG monogram. Similarly, in 1947 when leather was scarce post-World War II, the house invented the bamboo-handle bag, heating and bending bamboo for purse handles and creating a new Gucci signature. These early stories show how Gucci thrived by turning hardship into innovation, forging a legacy of creative problem-solving.
Yet innovation at Gucci has often gone hand-in-hand with intrigue. The Gucci family’s history reads like a dark romantic thriller – indeed, Ridley Scott’s film House of Gucci only scratches the surface. Behind the glamour lies “a story of rivalry, betrayal, murder and even witchcraft,” as one account of the Gucci saga puts it. After Guccio’s death, his sons and descendants became embroiled in a decades-long soap opera of power struggles and scandal. Brothers feuded bitterly over control. In the 1980s, Maurizio Gucci (Guccio’s grandson) ousted his uncle Aldo amid legal battles, and Aldo was later jailed for tax evasion. In 1995, Maurizio himself was infamously gunned down in Milan – a hit arranged by his ex-wife Patrizia Reggiani in a twist of bloody infidelity that shocked the fashion world. Patrizia’s trial unveiled lurid details, from hired killers to fears of witchcraft, cementing the Gucci family legend in tabloid infamy.
Gucci’s heritage, then, isn’t just one of luxury and craftsmanship – it’s one of high drama, survival, and sensational narrative. This legacy of dark glamour and reinvention through adversity forms a new backdrop that hasn't been fully explored to its depths yet. It also sets the stage for why a provocative rule-breaker like Demna might be exactly what Gucci needs now.
Demna arrives at Gucci with a reputation as a maverick designer unafraid of controversy. In fact, Demna’s own career has had its share of intrigue and rebellion, echoing Gucci’s iconoclastic spirit. Vetements was a family affair (Recall: Demna launched it with his younger brother, Guram), but creative tensions soon brewed. In 2015, Kering tapped Demna to take the helm at Balenciaga, propelling him into the spotlight and leaving Guram to steer Vetements. What followed was an intriguingly public sibling rift, with Guram hinting that Demna was “copying” Vetements ideas and airing grievances on social media. (At one point Guram even accused Demna of scheduling Balenciaga news to overshadow Vetements shows, and posted side-by-side images of similar designs as “proof” of plagiarism.) Demna, for his part, stayed aloof from the fray – a one-sided feud or perhaps a savvy media strategy, as commentators speculated. Regardless, the Gvasalia vs. Gvasalia drama only heightened Demna’s mythos as fashion’s agent provocateur. Like the Gucci family saga, it suggested that behind great creative visionaries often lies chaotic personal theater.
Importantly, Demna also brings a track record of turning controversy into commercial and creative triumphs. During nearly a decade as creative director of Balenciaga, he transformed that brand with his rule-breaking readymade aesthetic and weathered major scandals along the way. From redefining luxury with “ugly” Triple S sneakers and $2,000 trash bag purses to provoking public outcry with deliberately gritty ad campaigns, Demna has proven time and again that he’s willing to go where others won’t.
Some of his designs were derided by traditionalists, yet they invariably set social media ablaze and influenced the industry zeitgeist. Even missteps made global headlines – for instance, a 2022 Balenciaga campaign scandal involving inappropriate props drew mainstream news coverage and condemnation. But in true Gucci-esque fashion, Demna publicly apologized and forged ahead, emerging with lessons learned and his creative daring intact. This mix of notoriety and ingenuity means Demna arrives at Gucci as a well-known name. He is controversial, yes, but undeniably recognizable, arguably the most talked-about designer in Kering’s stable.
In an era when fashion operates at the speed of Instagram outrage, Demna’s ability to create conversation and conversion to sales is a powerful asset. Gucci, a house that has never been meek or modest, can benefit from a leader who thrives in the spotlight of controversy.
Gucci’s history shows that the brand shines brightest under strong, distinctive creative visions – and falters when it plays it safe. Consider the transformative eras led by designers like Tom Ford and Alessandro Michele. In the mid-1990s, Tom Ford took a struggling, family-scarred Gucci and injected it with provocative glamour and sex appeal. His famous 1995 collection of hip-hugging velvet and open shirts, paired with sultry campaigns, redefined Gucci for a new generation and made it the epitome of “porno-chic”. After his first collection at Gucci their revenue doubled.
A decade later, Alessandro Michele swung the pendulum in a different direction, embracing a fusion of romantic renaissance and an androgynous, post gender proposition. Michele’s Gucci was a riot of color, embroidery, and gender-fluid eclecticism – a bold fantasia that captivated Millennials and Gen Z, driving Gucci’s revenues to record highs through the late 2010s. Though utterly different, both eras succeeded by giving Gucci an incisive identity and cultural relevance that set it apart from competitors.
Contrast this with the interlude that just passed. After Michele’s exit in 2022, Gucci appointed Sabato De Sarno (formerly of Valentino) as creative director. De Sarno’s vision, unveiled in 2023, was a stark pivot to minimalist, normcore “quiet luxury.” In theory, this was meant to recenter Gucci on classic enduring style, but in practice it rendered the brand as faceless.
The result? Shoppers did not find anything exciting or distinctive to latch onto, and the numbers reflected that ambivalence. Gucci’s sales growth stalled and then slipped into decline – the company suffered a 24% revenue drop in the fourth quarter of 2024, even as rival brands rode post-pandemic booms.
By early 2025, it was clear the “quiet” experiment had failed: De Sarno was abruptly fired after barely two runway shows, a rare admission of defeat by Gucci’s parent company Kering. One analyst noted that under Sabato, Gucci had “plummet[ed] in relevance, shifting from a brand of bold individuality to one of conformity”. In other words, Gucci lost its soul. The house famous for fearless creativity had become boring. And if there’s one thing Gucci’s saga teaches, it’s that playing it safe can be more dangerous than any scandal.
The urgent task for Gucci’s next chapter was obvious:
restore a strong point of view and give the world something to talk about.
Facing Gucci’s stagnation, Kering made a shocking decision: rather than hiring an outside “big-name” star, they chose one of their own – you guessed it: Demna – to lead their crown jewel Gucci out of its dumpster fire. It’s a move that surprised many in the industry. Fashion watchers had speculated Gucci might woo a marquee designer from outside, with names like Hedi Slimane, Maria Grazia Chiuri, or Pierpaolo Piccioli floated in the press. Those candidates would have been safe in the sense of known quantities aligned with more traditional luxury aesthetics.
Instead, Kering’s chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault looked internally and picked Demna, the iconoclast who had turned Balenciaga into a hotbed of subversive street couture. Investors initially panicked at this audacity – Kering’s stock price plunged about 12–13% on the news of Demna’s appointment, wiping out $3 billion in market value overnight. Analysts fretted that Demna’s provocative, “hype-driven, streetwear-centric playbook” might be a “risky choice” for Gucci’s broader, more luxury-minded audience. In essence, the market gasped.
But Kering’s leadership clearly sees something the investors don’t. Pinault has expressed full confidence in Demna, stating that “[his] creative power is exactly what Gucci needs”. Gucci’s new CEO, Stefano Cantino, similarly praised Demna’s ability to honor a brand’s iconic legacy while instilling a fresh, modern sensibility – exactly what he did at Balenciaga – and precisely the balance of old and new Gucci is seeking in order to “propel the brand forward and increase sales”. Indeed, from a strategic standpoint, Demna’s appointment makes compelling sense for several reasons:
Proven Turnaround Talent: At Balenciaga, Demna engineered a stunning turnaround – taking a once-sleepy couture house and multiplying its revenue many times over. Under his tenure, Balenciaga grew from under $400 million in annual sales to over $2.3 billion. He achieved this by creating products that captured the cultural moment and broadened the brand’s appeal to younger, trend-conscious consumers. If Gucci needs a “commercial shot in the arm,” Demna’s record suggests he can deliver exactly that. He is arguably the most commercially successful creative talent left within Kering’s ranks (especially after Kering’s other rising star, Bottega Veneta’s Matthieu Blazy, departed to Chanel). In plain terms, Demna has already made Kering a lot of money, and corporate leadership clearly expects him to repeat that magic at their flagship label.
Familiarity with the Kering Playbook: Demna is not an unknown outsider but a Kering insider who understands the group’s culture and expectations. Having spent nearly a decade at a sister brand, he has existing relationships with Kering’s top brass and a grasp of the internal dynamics. This means less ramp-up time adjusting to corporate bureaucracy and more focus on creative work from day one. (Notably, because he’s coming from within Kering, there’s likely no onerous non-compete delay; he can start at Gucci almost immediately in July 2025.) By choosing Demna, Kering avoided the gamble of importing an external star who might clash with management or need time to “learn” Gucci. Instead, they elevated a known quantity – one who has already demonstrated loyalty and inter-company synergy (as seen in Gucci and Balenciaga’s past collaboration in 2021 on the “Hacker Project”).
Name Recognition and Buzz: Unlike Sabato de Sarno who was virtually unknown outside insider circles, Demna is a bona fide celebrity designer. His mononymous name, headline-making shows, and even controversies have made sure of that. Appointing Demna sends a message that Gucci will not fade into the background but will be loud, visible, and culturally tuned-in. As one commentator wryly noted, Demna landing the Gucci job was unsurprising because he earned it by “making Balenciaga – and thus Kering – a lot of money” and by being “the most proven tastemaker” in the group. In an age of TikTok hype and luxury streetwear, Demna’s cult of personality is an asset that can re-energize Gucci’s brand heat almost overnight. Gucci is Kering’s crown jewel, and there is urgency to get it back on top; plugging in a ready-made star like Demna is a faster route to relevance than betting on an unproven newcomer.
If there’s one arena where Gucci absolutely must excel, it’s accessories – the handbags, shoes, and leather goods that drive a huge portion of its revenue. Here, Demna’s strengths align perfectly with Gucci’s needs. Under Alessandro Michele, Gucci enjoyed a streak of coveted “It” items (think fur-lined Princetown loafers, Dionysus GG bags, oversized logo belts) that kept the cash registers ringing. In the last year or so, however, Gucci has lacked a breakout hit – nothing in Sabato de Sarno’s brief tenure captured the public’s imagination or social media feeds.
Demna’s knack for zeitgeist-defining products makes him uniquely skilled at producing buzzy, desirable accessories that become cultural phenomena. During his time at Balenciaga, he unleashed one viral product after another: the Triple S dad sneaker (igniting the chunky shoe trend), the Speed Sock sneaker, the Hourglass handbag, outrageous platform Crocs, futuristic mono-frame sunglasses, the Rodeo bag, and let’s not forget about the City bag…These items not only sold out and spawned knockoffs, but they also kept Balenciaga in countless conversations online – a free advertising machine of memes and hype.
“You can turn your nose up at Demna’s intentional provocations … leather trash bags and shredded shoes … and his ‘unglamorous’ chunky sneakers and big grungy jeans. But you can’t deny the influence”
Gucci, whose own legacy includes iconic bags like the Jackie, the Bamboo, and the Dionysus, stands to gain from Demna’s accessory genius. In fact, Kering explicitly needs Gucci to regain its dominance in leather goods – a sector where it’s been losing ground. By the end of 2024, sales of Gucci’s handbags and famed horsebit loafers were sliding significantly, contributing to the brand’s overall decline.
Demna has proven he can reverse such fortunes by creating must-have pieces. Crucially, he understands the power of novelty with a nod to heritage: for example, at Balenciaga he rejuvenated the classic motorcycle “City” bag (originally a early-2000s design) by tweaking its proportions and details for a new generation, transforming a legacy style into a modern must-have. We can expect him to take a similar approach at Gucci – respecting the house codes, but rejuvenating them.
Demna is a designer who thinks in terms of products that spark conversation. In today’s luxury market, where the line between a “commercial” item and a “creative” item has blurred, Demna’s ability to create accessories that are both artistic statements and sales blockbusters will be a major boon. This cyclical hype machine is something Gucci sorely lacked in the past year – and something Demna was virtually hired to deliver. As Kering’s financial rationale indicates, Gucci needs that “shot in the arm,” and Demna’s track record suggests he’s the man to administer it.
Beyond the balance sheets, fashion is also about narrative and cultural positioning. Here, the convergence of Gucci’s dramatic heritage and Demna’s subversive sensibility presents an exciting opportunity. We’ve seen how rich and even scandalous Gucci’s backstory is – a saga of glamour and gore that could inspire novels. Yet in recent years, Gucci’s creative output hasn’t tapped into this trove of drama.
Alessandro Michele flirted with romantic nostalgia and retro eccentricity, but he stayed away from the house’s darker themes. Sabato de Sarno, aiming for polite luxury, avoided narrative excess entirely. Demna, however, is a designer who relishes storytelling through fashion – often with an ironic or transgressive edge. This is the man who staged a Balenciaga runway in a simulated snowstorm to comment on climate anxiety, who sent models trudging through mud in a bleak post-apocalyptic setting, who referenced political protests and internet culture in his shows.
One could easily imagine Demna drawing from Gucci’s noir family lore for inspiration. Such moves would generate enormous buzz and reinforce Gucci’s identity as a house unafraid to confront its own dramatic mythology. It would also set Gucci apart in a luxury landscape that has lately been dominated by quiet, risk-averse marketing. In a time when many brands stick to influencer-safe blandness, a bit of Gucci shock value could reassert its cultural leadership.
As Alexander McQueen wove dark romanticism into collections that became legend, Demna has the potential to channel Gucci’s singular blend of glamour and grit into era-defining fashion moments. The world’s current fatigue with cookie-cutter “quiet luxury” style suggests the pendulum is swinging back toward the bold and theatrical – and no brand has a better well of theatricality to draw from than Gucci.
It’s worth noting that Demna’s appointment comes at a peculiar cultural moment in luxury. The 2020s have seen rapid-fire creative director swaps (the industry’s game of musical chairs), often stirring excitement briefly before audiences move on. Consumers are thirsty for real innovation and genuine excitement, not just a new name on the door. Gucci’s own recent struggles testify to the danger of falling out of the cultural conversation. By choosing Demna, Gucci is making a statement that it intends to be talked about relentlessly again – to set trends, spark debates, even court controversy in the name of creativity.
This willingness to be daring is woven into Gucci’s DNA. After all, Guccio Gucci himself was an innovator; the family that followed was nothing if not bold (sometimes recklessly so); Tom Ford shocked the prudish with overt eroticism; Michele challenged gender norms and maximalist extremes. Now Demna can carry that torch of unapologetic creativity forward. He has the credibility to galvanize both the high-fashion cognoscenti (who respect his Maison Margiela-trained avant-garde chops) and the hypebeast youth (who adore his streetwise sensibility). Marrying those two audiences is exactly the alchemy Gucci needs for renewed cultural dominance. As one luxury analyst put it, Kering’s decision to hire Demna “appeared as an attempt to make the label a global trendsetter again” – a recognition that Gucci must reclaim the cutting edge, not trail behind.
No bold move comes without skeptics. The immediate investor and some fan backlash show that not everyone is convinced this is a match made in heaven. But history is full of examples in fashion where initial shock gave way to resounding success. A telling anecdote recalls the reception of Martin Margiela’s radical debut in 1989: “The critics loathed it. The industry loved it.” What seemed too extreme at first eventually proved visionary – and Margiela’s influence is now undeniable. The same could be said of Galliano’s audacious Dior debut or even Alessandro Michele’s eccentric first Gucci show (which had its many doubters until the sales surged).
Demna’s Gucci will not be business-as-usual, and that’s precisely the point. Early discomfort is the price of real change. The short-term stock dip and social media meltdowns are knee-jerk reactions to the unaware and the unknown, but Gucci’s leadership is clearly playing an educated long game. They have entrusted the house’s future to a designer who, despite all the noise, has consistently delivered results both artistic and commercial.
Demna brings the firepower to reignite Gucci’s imaginative spark, the business savvy to supercharge its sales, and even the personal resilience to handle the slings and arrows that come with helming such a high-profile brand. Gucci’s narrative has always been one of high stakes and higher creativity. In Demna, Gucci has a creative director who embraces risk and controversy as the fertilizer for innovation, much like the Guccis of old turned crises into new beginnings. Yes, it’s a gamble – but Gucci was built on glamorous gambles and emerged each time stronger and more legendary.
Why is Demna right for Gucci? Because Gucci, at its heart, has never been a brand for the faint of heart. It has always rewarded bold vision and brazen creativity. Demna, the industry’s reigning master maverick, offers both in spades. He is poised to write the next chapter of Gucci’s saga – one that, if all goes well, will be talked about for decades to come as the moment the house got its talisman back.
With Gucci’s heritage of drama under his feet and a mandate to shake things up, Demna just might lead this storied house into a new golden era of audacious genius.
And if there’s any doubt left, recall the words of Kering’s CEO:
“His creative power is exactly what Gucci needs.”
Looking ahead, one can anticipate that Demna’s creative direction at Gucci will honor the house’s rich heritage – but always through a radical, contemporary lens. Just as he once scoured Cristóbal Balenciaga’s archives and alchemized those classical elements into something startlingly new, he will undoubtedly do the same at Gucci.
This goes without saying but expect to see iconic Gucci codes reborn under his touch. This won’t be desecration; it will be a daring homage. Demna’s reverence for legacy runs deep – he has proven he can grasp a founder’s essence and twist it into the now.
Yet, beyond the products, Demna brings something even more profound to Gucci: a personal narrative that could entwine with the house’s own dramatic story. The Gucci saga is the stuff of fashion legend – a family fortress built on opulence and intrigue, scarred by feuds, scandal, and even murder, then reborn through creativity time and again. Demna’s life, too, has been marked by extraordinary drama. He grew up amid conflict and displacement, witnessing the collapse of the familiar and the need to invent anew.
He’s weathered public controversies and family tensions on his ascent in the fashion world. In Demna, Gucci gains not just a designer, but a storyteller with firsthand experience of turmoil and resilience. We can anticipate a deep integration of this personal narrative into his work – perhaps subtly at first, through campaigns that hint at themes of exile, unity, or survival, and later in collections that wear their heart on their sleeve.
This kind of romanticized storytelling could give Gucci an emotional richness we haven’t felt in years, turning each season into a chapter of an ongoing saga that fascinates the public as much as any Hollywood drama.
Demna’s Gucci, in all likelihood, will find strength in contrasts – balancing controversy with craftsmanship, irony with earnestness, and personal truth with pop-culture spectacle. He will push buttons, as he always has, challenging what luxury means by daring to put absurdity on the pedestal next to elegance. But underpinning every outrageous gesture will be meticulous construction and artisan skill. Gucci will once again be the conversation-starter of fashion, the brand unafraid to take a stand or crack a joke, all while upholding the luxury craftsmanship that confers credibility.
Finally, one can even imagine Demna adding a metaphysical, cinematic flair to Gucci’s identity – blurring the lines between the runway and the silver screen, reality and myth. This is the designer who put The Simpsons on a Paris runway; he clearly delights in culture-crossing moments.
There is potential to reference the House of Gucci film or the lore around the Gucci family in his creative projects. In Demna’s hands, Gucci could become almost metatextual: a brand telling the story of its own legend while simultaneously critiquing it. This kind of layered narrative would suit Demna’s intellectual mischief. It’s a visionary approach that treats the brand as a living story, inviting the world not just to buy products, but to engage with the mythos, the questions, and the emotions behind them.
In sum, the future Demna imagines for Gucci is one where the house’s past is not erased but electrified, where luxury’s decorum courts downtown’s irreverence, and where a designer’s personal truth amplifies a brand’s identity. It’s a future in which Gucci reclaims its place at the center of culture by daring the world to feel something again.
If Demna’s vision unfolds as boldly as anticipated, Gucci’s next chapter will not only restore the sparkle that’s faded in recent years, but push the narrative of high fashion forward. Controversy will feed creativity, craftsmanship will anchor it, and storytelling will propel it into legend.
Fashion, at its most powerful, is not merely a reflection of culture but a provocation—a prism refracting society’s deepest truths, hidden tensions, and latent aspirations. Demna Gvasalia’s tenure at Balenciaga has been an embodiment of this power, a masterclass in using absurdity, irony, and provocative aesthetics to interrogate our collective assumptions about luxury, authenticity, and value. His misunderstood creativity, often labeled as mere gimmickry or shock-value spectacle, reveals precisely why his approach matters: it challenges cultural laziness, unsettles complacency, and invites profound reflection on what luxury should represent today. Demna held up a mirror to our meme-driven consumerism and asked, “What do you really see?” What many dismissed as gimmickry or trolling was, in fact, the point: provocation as a form of clarity.
His critics, like those surrounding Anna Wintour in The Simpsons Balenciaga episode, miss the message until it’s safe to clap. But Demna lets misunderstanding do the heavy lifting, because misunderstanding reveals everything: our discomfort with truth, our hunger for status, our fear of being left out. His fashion doesn’t beg to be liked—it dares to be seen. And once it’s seen, it’s too late: the work has already done its job.
Now, as Demna steps into Gucci, a house born from drama and sustained through reinvention, his radical vision promises to reclaim the provocative spirit necessary for the house's revival. In an era oversaturated with superficiality and exhausted by repetition, Demna's creative audacity and fearless storytelling are exactly the disruptive forces needed. A couture that doesn’t just decorate the body, but demands something of the culture.
As this manifesto has argued, misunderstanding isn't merely a byproduct of Demna's work—it’s proof of its significance. Ultimately, the controversy surrounding his designs is not an obstacle; it is the catalyst for conversation, transformation, and cultural renewal. In embracing Demna’s misunderstood creativity, Gucci is poised to rewrite the rules of luxury, igniting a future where fashion dares not only to reflect society but to boldly shape it.
So let the critics roll their eyes. Let the market tremble. If you're still confused, good. It's good to question things. Bye bye!
Prestige is more important than fame. Prestige remains, fame is ephemeral.
Cristóbal Balenciaga.
In this manifesto, Haley Erickson defends Demna Gvasalia’s misunderstood legacy at Balenciaga and affirms his radical appointment at Gucci. Through sharp cultural critique, personal insight, and detailed analysis of the Balenciaga by Demna exhibition, this essay argues that Demna’s provocative approach is not only innovative—it interrogates the very idea of innovation itself. Like Cristóbal Balenciaga, who designed for the realities of his time, Demna confronts the cultural conditions of ours: superficiality, meme culture, and the commodification of aesthetics. Tracing his thematic use of volume, readymade, trompe-l’œil, and upcycling, Erickson reveals how Demna mirrors society’s absurdities while reanimating Cristóbal Balenciaga’s spirit. The piece closes by forecasting how Demna’s disruptive vision is poised to revive Gucci, a house historically fueled by drama, reinvention, and bold creative leadership. For those who get it—this is fashion that dares to shape culture, not just reflect it.
In 2021 ‘The Simpsons Balenciaga’, there's a key moment when Springfield residents walk a Balenciaga runway show in Paris. Initially, the fashion crowd deemed worthy enough to surround the iconic Anna Wintour openly mocks the collection, questioning its style and legitimacy, and ultimately, missing the message. Then, after Anna quietly observes and finally states, "I like it," the critics quickly switch their stance, enthusiastically agreeing.
The Simpsons has positioned itself as a cultural thermometer that tracks and critiques trends, hypocrisy, and power structures, and if one is lucky enough to be featured on the show, it signals they are part of the global zeitgeist. It suggests a certain level of societal respect has been earned.
The Simpsons legacy leaves us as a historical and cultural touchstone. Since 1989, The Simpsons has parodied everything — politics, religion, media, technology, and class — through the lens of a dysfunctional American family in the fictional town of Springfield. It functions as a satire of middle America and, by extension, functions as a deeply profound social commentary on American culture itself.
June 28 2025 I had the honor of attending Balenciaga by Demna, presented by Kering’s official Headquarters within the historic Laennec landmark in the 7th arrondissement of Paris. A few months before this I had gotten into an internet debate of Demna’s legitimacy as a designer and his competency going forward as Creative Director in the House of Gucci. It wasn’t just @demarcusallen who felt strongly against Demna, his work at Balenciaga, and the role he has been asked to fulfill at struggling and “barely-staying-afloat” Gucci–Kering’s shares fell 13% following the official appointment of Demna.
Here is the Threads conversation:
@Haleyeerickson: “I feel like Demna knows better that his job at Gucci is to design thru the Gucci philosophy and narrative, idk why you guys are so stressed ?
@Demarcusallen: “because that was his job at balenciaga, and look at what that has become. lol”
@Haleyeerickson: “I'm interested to know more about what, in your eyes, is Balenciaga DNA and what was Demna’s impact at the house?”
@Demarcusallen: “well their DNA always included elegance around their collections especially bags. and an overall elegance, originality. that's become big asics knock-offs sold for 1000, massive cartoon boots, and horrible ads to sell horrible overpriced fast fashion. look at the ads currently in paris for their bags, nothing about this would make any smart person want to spend over 2k on this.”
Side note:
Regarding the advertisements on the streets of Paris that @demarcusallen mentioned—there’s really nothing that sets Balenciaga’s ads apart from any other luxury house. They all highlight their most popular, entry-level items. Just some food for thought…
I am here to throw you all a bone and review the exhibit “Balenciaga by Demna” as well as use it as proof in declaring a manifesto in support of Demna’s severely misunderstood creative genius at Balenciaga, and advocate for his appointment at Gucci as essential, provocative, and visionary despite market skepticism. For those who get it, get it. For those who don’t, don’t.
In short, here’s why you are all wrong.
Hold on, you might learn something.
Demna’s Balenciaga isn’t simply mocking luxury or indulging in cheap irony; rather, it operates as a mirror held directly in front of contemporary culture’s face—reflecting meme culture, poser identities, and the absurdity of consumerism itself. His art is the revelation of unnoticed truths, the exposure of what we collectively ignore or trivialize. Yet, ironically, once these revelations are widely perceived, they're instantly misinterpreted, appropriated, commodified, and stripped of nuance.
High-level creative consciousness, therefore, is paradoxically endangered by its own visibility, vulnerable to destruction through society’s misunderstanding or ignorance.
Perhaps this is his point.
But first, who is Cristóbal Balenciaga? What are his house codes?
Known as “The Master of Us All”, deemed by Christian Dior, and as “the only couturier in the truest sense of the word” by Coco Chanel, who continues, “the others are simply fashion designers”, Cristóbal Balenciaga is unanimously regarded as one of the leading and most influential couturiers of the 20th century.
A tireless perfectionist with uncompromising standards, he acquired an expert command of sewing and spent his life refining the construction of his creations and introducing extraordinary innovation that allowed him to design models that were audacious in both their form and aesthetics, disrupting the norm and setting the indisputable standard season after season.
The 1950s and 60s were the golden age of Cristóbal Balenciaga. The dresses during this period showcase the hallmarks that characterised Balenciaga’s designs.
From his formative years to the end of his career, Cristóbal Balenciaga dedicated himself to developing a technique so perfect that it has yet to be surpassed. Balenciaga never stopped experimenting with textiles or searching for aesthetic balance and harmony, guided consistently by his own concept of elegance as the synthesis of simplicity and audacity.
Balenciaga’s preoccupation with silhouettes commenced in the late 1940s and gave rise to his innovative "readymade" creations of the 50s, ranging from the tunic and sack line to the “baby doll” dress. In all of these creations, Balenciaga opted for fluid lines that caressed rather than constrained the body, thus guaranteeing comfort and freedom of movement for the user. His experiments with form culminated in the 1960s with the abstraction of the female body, which was either blurred by large floral or geometric prints, or enveloped in unprecedented columns.
Meanwhile, his profound knowledge of materials and his collaboration with the Swiss manufacturer Gustav Zumsteg in the creation of new fabrics with sculptural qualities, such as gazar, allowed him to push into innovation and develop truly extraordinary forms.
Daywear was characterised by ultimate precision showcased in pure simplicity. You see simple materials, decorative plainness and, above all, functionality for the contemporary woman due to the gradual introduction of women into the workforce. In his daywear garments, Balenciaga expressed this concept of functionality in its most extreme version, supported by a refined technique and profound knowledge of fabrics. Fluid lines, simple cuts and perfectly crafted sleeves guaranteed the comfort and freedom of movement of the women he dressed.
Cristóbal Balenciaga always used evening wear as exponents of his creative genius and technical ability. The dresses intended for grand parties gave his clients the opportunity to free themselves from the simplicity of day wear; and therefore, provided an excellent opportunity to use the most sumptuous fabrics, surprising volumes and exquisite adornments.
Balenciaga featured in each fashion show signature bridal couture that synthesized the spirit of the collection. Unlike in other haute couture shows where, according to tradition, the show was closed by the wedding dress, in Balenciaga the wedding dress was exhibited among the cocktail and evening dresses.
Finally, Balenciaga’s signature accessories were an essential element that contributed to his house's identity. Large gemstones or costume jewelry made by the best craftsmen, together with silk and feather hats, completed the elegance of the house.
Thus, you can attest that Cristóbal Balenciaga’s legacy is firmly rooted in a relentless pursuit of innovation and extraordinary craftsmanship, driven by an unwavering commitment to contemporary relevance. He consistently challenged traditional notions of elegance and pushed the boundaries of what it meant to be avant-garde. His meticulous experiments in silhouette with volume and form, paired with bold accessories and the unconventional placement of bridal couture, defined a provocative new standard for fashion. Ultimately, Balenciaga's creative philosophy did not merely follow or reflect his time—it actively shaped it, leaving a profound and enduring influence that continues to resonate through the house today.
Sounds familiar.
Demna Gvasalia, born in Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, Soviet Union during the Ethnic cleansing of Georgians under the War in Abkhazia fled with his family to Sokhumi, following an attack which destroyed his home in a bombing. During his teenage years, Demna experiences bullying as a gay youth in a “very religious, very macho country”. Demna and his parents relocated to Düsseldorf, Germany in 2001. Demna, who spoke German, served as the family’s intermediary. His experience navigating a "hardcore" bureaucracy heightened his interest in “sociological uniforms,” which include jackets, caps, armbands, boots, badges, and patches used by individuals to indicate authority within a group.
Demna studied international economics (like me) for four years at Tbilisi State University and later attended the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp, where he graduated with a Master's degree in Fashion Design in 2006 (unlike me). After graduating, Demna relocated to Paris, where he said that he was just “some Georgian weird guy” with no established connections or network.
By 2009, Demna joined Maison Martin Margiela, where he was responsible for women’s collections until 2013. In 2013, he was appointed senior designer of women’s ready-to-wear collections at Louis Vuitton, initially under Marc Jacobs and briefly under Nicolas Ghesquière.
Together with his brother Guram Gvasalia, Demna launched Vetements in 2014 with the original purpose—he has said—of subverting the high fashion status quo.
In 2015 Demna became the creative director of Balenciaga, succeeding Alexander Wang after failing to achieve profit. In September 2019, Demna abruptly left Vetements, stating he had “accomplished his mission.” This was shortly after Balenciaga (where he was already creative director since 2015) was dominating the fashion conversation. There are speculated rumors about a rift or rivalry between the Gvasalia brothers, which I will touch on in the Gucci section.
The exhibition features 101 emblematic pieces over the last decade, tracing the evolution of Demna’s vision through garments, accessories, footwear, and objects drawn from 30 different collections. It explores the conceptual and thematic foundations of Demna’s body of work at Balenciaga, including his reinterpretations of Cristóbal Balenciaga's codes; exercises in volume; studies of the “readymade” and trompe-l’oeil; upcycling; a questioning of fashion’s established norms; and an ongoing examination of the boundary between fashion and luxury through the lens of the contemporary wardrobe. The exhibition serves as both an artistic and conceptual synthesis of a decade of work that has profoundly shaped the house’s contemporary identity.
Demna’s sculptural approach to silhouette is an inquiry into how volume constructs identity, commands space, and disrupts visual expectations. At Balenciaga, he exercises with volume to operate as a dialectical tool: both exaggeration and erasure, presence and concealment. It demands attention while questioning what kind of attention is deserved. Through it, Demna rewrites the sartorial grammar of power.
The Winter 2020 waist-trainer coat, molded from bonded stretch fabrics, exemplifies this tension. It hugs the body like a corset without actually requiring one—an innovation in form, but also a commentary on the history of control embedded in fashion. It is the anti-oversized piece, yet its severity makes it just as extreme. Here, Demna explores the polarity of silhouette, revealing how both maximalism and minimalism can be used to confront fashion’s traditional relationship to the body.
In contrast, the iconic Triple S prototype from Winter 2017 speaks to volume from the ground up. Assembled from the soles of three different sneakers, it is not a commercial gimmick but a proportional manifesto. Originally conceived as an experiment in scale and visual weight, the sneaker quickly became an icon, widely imitated yet rarely understood. Its popularity obscured its original purpose: to question the vocabulary of luxury and volume, yet simultaneously mimices the aesthetics of mass fashion.
Demna’s exercises in volume critique the tyranny of classical tailoring and beauty standards. They confront viewers with silhouettes that are confrontational and sometimes grotesque. Fashion then becomes a site for resistance to cultural noise.
“I like a big fit, but I also love a small fit”
While Cristóbal hinted at “readymade” shapes, Demna makes them explicit. What appears absurd is deeply intentional and rigorously conceptual. Demna’s reinterpretations question who gets to define value, luxury, and taste in the contemporary moment.
In Demna’s hands, the claim that something is “trash” is revealed as a projection of cultural laziness, not an inherent judgment. A Carry Shopper in blue Arena Leather shaped like an IKEA bag from 2017, the 2025 Marché tote in blue Dyneema, or the 2023 Chips bag aren't ironic stunts, rather they are lived memoirs dignifying survival and posing a litmus test for cultural perception itself.
By transmuting necessity into couture through craftsmanship and material innovation, Demna asks us to reconsider our aesthetic and economic assumptions. In this reversal of fashion's upward aspiration, he elevates the utilitarian, turning everyday survival into haute couture. The readymade becomes not just an object, but an ethical and philosophical inquiry: Is beauty only that which is expensive?
Of course, part of this is having fun too. Why can’t we have a little fun in today's dystopia? These spontaneous and gestural pieces reintroduce play into fashion–a vital, and often forgotten element. To be a creative director is to take play seriously. As Demna himself put it:
“Who needs a skirt when anyone can use a towel and wear it as a skirt? And I love that it makes you question whether this is a joke or not. It's great to question things. Bye bye.”
Demna’s use of trompe-l’œil reflects a fundamental distrust of surfaces in an age dominated by them. In a world where digital screens mediate reality and luxury is often just a well-lit image on Instagram, he’s asking: What do we actually value? Is it the labor? The material? Or simply the illusion of status?
His work reveals the absurdity of modern consumerism where the mere appearance of luxury is enough to demand thousands of euros, so long as it’s branded and presented through the “right" channels.
Through pieces like a cotton canvas painted to mimic denim or a leather jacket hand-painted as faux snakeskin, Demna destabilizes the viewer’s faith in visual cues. These garments, which often require hundreds of hours of expert craftsmanship, are designed to look mass-produced or even cheap. The paradox is intentional: he’s confronting a system that equates value with surface-level cues. What is luxury if its meaning rests on perception, not substance?
This tactic echoes post-structuralist theory, where meaning is unstable, deferred, and constructed through context. Demna makes that instability visible. Fashion has always been a kind of theatrical performance; Demna simply makes it explicit.
And there’s a deeper provocation: why do we dismiss something as worthless when it’s been made with extraordinary care? This juxtaposition between effort and aesthetic triviality challenges capitalist ideas of value: is something expensive because it looks luxurious, or because it requires time, skill, and human touch? In doing so, he critiques not just fashion, but how we assign value in general.
Finally, Demna weaponizes illusion to critique illusion itself. Demna invites the viewer into a game of recognizing the consumerist trick, realizing they’ve been complicit in similar visual illusions all along such as through brand prestige or trend value. It becomes an epistemological exercise—how do we know what we’re seeing is true, and why does it matter?
Demna’s approach to upcycling at Balenciaga is deeply rooted in personal narrative, historical lineage, and a contemporary homage to couture traditions.
Take the Winter 2016 Swing Puffer, which reinterprets a childhood memory, a red coat he cherished but never wore. It's a deliberate creation between an intimate memory and Cristóbal Balenciaga’s heritage: echoing his penchant for opened necklines designed to reveal jewelry, the swing puffer forges a direct emotional and visual link between past and present.
Even more striking is the Summer 2024 Upcycled Wedding Dress, crafted from layered vintage gowns. Wedding attire has always been central to Balenciaga’s legacy: he customarily featured bridal couture within his runway shows not as a finale as per tradition, but as an integral spiritual anchor amongst cocktail gowns. Demna echoes this tradition viscerally, uniting personal memory—an expression of love for Balenciaga and his community—with respect for historic practice, weaving emotional resonance into contemporary form.
By integrating emotionally charged materials and reflecting Balenciaga’s bridal legacy, Demna elevates upcycling from mere material reuse to cultural and emotional alchemy—transforming forgotten gowns into living artefacts, rich with heritage and personal meaning. He challenges fast-fashion disposability with a more profound narrative than just "sustainability", that both honors and renews couture traditions—celebrating memory, craftsmanship, and emotional legacy in modern luxury and couture.
Honestly if I were to write a section on this I would be regurgitating past words.
Demna’s work at Balenciaga lives within contradictions: high art that welcomes misinterpretation, couture that courts kitsch, legacy filtered through meme culture. At times, it seems he not only anticipates the erosion of his work through mass consumption but he builds it into the art itself. In this way, the trivialization is the message. His project isn't to escape the absurdity of our time, but to emphasize and aestheticize it.
If you were expecting copy paste couture and evening wear from the 1960’s, I need you to go read a book or find God.
Demna’s tenure at Balenciaga has been marked by a constant probing of where high fashion ends and everyday life begins. Throughout his time at Balenciaga, Demna has used his collections to hold a mirror up to society, cleverly adapting the house’s classic couture codes to reflect the styles he sees on the streets, all while elevating ordinary “uniforms” to new heights of luxury. He has stated openly that he “[doesn’t] care much about luxury” in the traditional sense or about making people look rich; instead, his fashion works “from down up and not up down,” drawing inspiration from the street and contemporary wardrobe rather than imposing top-down elitism. This philosophy keeps Balenciaga’s output loyal to real life as much as to the brand’s heritage, resulting in collections that simultaneously respect Cristóbal Balenciaga’s legacy and resonate with the current moment.
Crucially, this embrace of the contemporary wardrobe and pop culture doesn’t mean abandoning Balenciaga’s haute couture roots – rather, Demna reframes them. In one of his most personal womenswear looks, Demna designed a sleeveless dress printed in a glossy floral pattern lifted straight from his grandmother’s kitchen tablecloth. The humble motif was rendered on a laminated fabric and cut with minimal seams – a T-shaped construction on the back reminiscent of Cristóbal Balenciaga’s minimalist pattern-cutting techniques from the 1960s cocoon coats. The result was a voluminous “tablecloth” gown (look 65) that fused nostalgic domesticity with high fashion, underlining how even the most banal household textile can be transformed into luxury when viewed through Demna’s lens. By using a tablecloth print in an haute couture context, he both nods to the house’s history of innovative cutting and comments on the erosion of barriers between everyday garments and runway glamour.
For his first Balenciaga menswear show, Demna opened with a boxy beige moleskin coat based on an unfinished coat found in Cristóbal Balenciaga’s archives. The original 1960s coat was missing one sleeve – a testament to the master’s perfectionism (legend has it Balenciaga removed the sleeve to improve it and never finished). Demna “completed” the coat and sent it down the runway as Look 1, paying homage to the unattainable ideals of couture craftsmanship. With its exaggerated silhouette and strict tailoring, this piece bridged past and present – honoring Balenciaga’s meticulous heritage while challenging contemporary proportion norms
Having examined Demna’s thematic foundations—volume, readymade, trompe-l’œil, upcycling, and his critical examination of the boundaries of luxury—it becomes clear why his work often draws misunderstanding and controversy. Demna’s provocations are not accidental or superficial; they are carefully constructed commentaries on contemporary society’s relationship with value, perception, and authenticity. Where critics dismiss his designs as mere stunts or ironic gimmicks, they inadvertently reveal the very consumerist superficiality Demna critiques.
Consider the pieces already analyzed: the waist-trainer coat, Triple S sneakers, the IKEA-inspired Carry Shopper, or the trompe-l’œil painted denim jeans. Each exemplifies meticulous craftsmanship and deep conceptual intent. Yet, public discourse often reduces them to "absurd," "ugly," or "provocative without purpose." This response misses Demna’s intentional critique entirely, reaffirming his point: luxury today has become trapped by superficial cues and brand-driven illusions, largely disconnected from the authentic craftsmanship and innovation it once embodied.
Demna’s personal and political context further illuminates his misunderstood creativity. Shaped by the stark realities of conflict, scarcity, and improvisation in his youth, Demna’s aesthetic arises naturally from the tension between necessity and luxury. His so-called “provocations” like the Chips bag or the Sock Shoe are not random acts of irony, but are deeply personal and cultural statements reflecting a resourceful approach to design born out of hardship and adaptation. His deliberate use of meme-able aesthetics serves to expose and critique the contemporary landscape, where luxury is increasingly reduced to social media spectacle and fleeting viral moments.
Moreover, Demna’s integration of playful absurdity into fashion is fundamental. It is through this playful irreverence that he invites us to question the established norms of taste and value. Demna provocatively challenges fashion’s pretense and invites deeper reflection on what luxury truly means in a culture driven by consumption and image.
Ultimately, Demna’s provocations, grounded firmly in rigorous conceptual and technical frameworks discussed in Section 4, demand that we reassess our definitions of luxury, craftsmanship, and aesthetic worth. Far from destroying Balenciaga’s legacy, Demna revitalizes it, reaffirming Cristóbal Balenciaga’s spirit of relentless innovation, disruption, and audacity. The backlash and misunderstanding his work receives are not weaknesses but rather confirmations of his success. Demna forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about fashion and society, embracing controversy not as an end in itself, but as an essential catalyst for genuine dialogue and creative evolution.
My own thoughts on absurdism:
If you weren’t already aware, the fashion world has been holding its breath while watching Gucci walk on eggshells. Once a cultural powerhouse under Tom Ford and Alessandro Michele, the house has stumbled into an identity crisis, struggling with how to reinvent itself. Under Sabato De Sarno, sales dropped by 18% in early 2024, signaling that "quiet luxury" wasn’t enough to keep Gucci afloat in the market. So when news broke that Demna would take the reins, the industry lost its collective mind.
Gucci’s very foundation is rooted in creative resilience amid turmoil. Founded in 1921 by Guccio Gucci, the Florentine leather-goods shop quickly became synonymous with innovation under pressure. During wartime leather shortages in the 1930s, Gucci artisans introduced the woven Diamante canvas as a clever substitute – a geometric pattern that would evolve into the iconic GG monogram. Similarly, in 1947 when leather was scarce post-World War II, the house invented the bamboo-handle bag, heating and bending bamboo for purse handles and creating a new Gucci signature. These early stories show how Gucci thrived by turning hardship into innovation, forging a legacy of creative problem-solving.
Yet innovation at Gucci has often gone hand-in-hand with intrigue. The Gucci family’s history reads like a dark romantic thriller – indeed, Ridley Scott’s film House of Gucci only scratches the surface. Behind the glamour lies “a story of rivalry, betrayal, murder and even witchcraft,” as one account of the Gucci saga puts it. After Guccio’s death, his sons and descendants became embroiled in a decades-long soap opera of power struggles and scandal. Brothers feuded bitterly over control. In the 1980s, Maurizio Gucci (Guccio’s grandson) ousted his uncle Aldo amid legal battles, and Aldo was later jailed for tax evasion. In 1995, Maurizio himself was infamously gunned down in Milan – a hit arranged by his ex-wife Patrizia Reggiani in a twist of bloody infidelity that shocked the fashion world. Patrizia’s trial unveiled lurid details, from hired killers to fears of witchcraft, cementing the Gucci family legend in tabloid infamy.
Gucci’s heritage, then, isn’t just one of luxury and craftsmanship – it’s one of high drama, survival, and sensational narrative. This legacy of dark glamour and reinvention through adversity forms a new backdrop that hasn't been fully explored to its depths yet. It also sets the stage for why a provocative rule-breaker like Demna might be exactly what Gucci needs now.
Demna arrives at Gucci with a reputation as a maverick designer unafraid of controversy. In fact, Demna’s own career has had its share of intrigue and rebellion, echoing Gucci’s iconoclastic spirit. Vetements was a family affair (Recall: Demna launched it with his younger brother, Guram), but creative tensions soon brewed. In 2015, Kering tapped Demna to take the helm at Balenciaga, propelling him into the spotlight and leaving Guram to steer Vetements. What followed was an intriguingly public sibling rift, with Guram hinting that Demna was “copying” Vetements ideas and airing grievances on social media. (At one point Guram even accused Demna of scheduling Balenciaga news to overshadow Vetements shows, and posted side-by-side images of similar designs as “proof” of plagiarism.) Demna, for his part, stayed aloof from the fray – a one-sided feud or perhaps a savvy media strategy, as commentators speculated. Regardless, the Gvasalia vs. Gvasalia drama only heightened Demna’s mythos as fashion’s agent provocateur. Like the Gucci family saga, it suggested that behind great creative visionaries often lies chaotic personal theater.
Importantly, Demna also brings a track record of turning controversy into commercial and creative triumphs. During nearly a decade as creative director of Balenciaga, he transformed that brand with his rule-breaking readymade aesthetic and weathered major scandals along the way. From redefining luxury with “ugly” Triple S sneakers and $2,000 trash bag purses to provoking public outcry with deliberately gritty ad campaigns, Demna has proven time and again that he’s willing to go where others won’t.
Some of his designs were derided by traditionalists, yet they invariably set social media ablaze and influenced the industry zeitgeist. Even missteps made global headlines – for instance, a 2022 Balenciaga campaign scandal involving inappropriate props drew mainstream news coverage and condemnation. But in true Gucci-esque fashion, Demna publicly apologized and forged ahead, emerging with lessons learned and his creative daring intact. This mix of notoriety and ingenuity means Demna arrives at Gucci as a well-known name. He is controversial, yes, but undeniably recognizable, arguably the most talked-about designer in Kering’s stable.
In an era when fashion operates at the speed of Instagram outrage, Demna’s ability to create conversation and conversion to sales is a powerful asset. Gucci, a house that has never been meek or modest, can benefit from a leader who thrives in the spotlight of controversy.
Gucci’s history shows that the brand shines brightest under strong, distinctive creative visions – and falters when it plays it safe. Consider the transformative eras led by designers like Tom Ford and Alessandro Michele. In the mid-1990s, Tom Ford took a struggling, family-scarred Gucci and injected it with provocative glamour and sex appeal. His famous 1995 collection of hip-hugging velvet and open shirts, paired with sultry campaigns, redefined Gucci for a new generation and made it the epitome of “porno-chic”. After his first collection at Gucci their revenue doubled.
A decade later, Alessandro Michele swung the pendulum in a different direction, embracing a fusion of romantic renaissance and an androgynous, post gender proposition. Michele’s Gucci was a riot of color, embroidery, and gender-fluid eclecticism – a bold fantasia that captivated Millennials and Gen Z, driving Gucci’s revenues to record highs through the late 2010s. Though utterly different, both eras succeeded by giving Gucci an incisive identity and cultural relevance that set it apart from competitors.
Contrast this with the interlude that just passed. After Michele’s exit in 2022, Gucci appointed Sabato De Sarno (formerly of Valentino) as creative director. De Sarno’s vision, unveiled in 2023, was a stark pivot to minimalist, normcore “quiet luxury.” In theory, this was meant to recenter Gucci on classic enduring style, but in practice it rendered the brand as faceless.
The result? Shoppers did not find anything exciting or distinctive to latch onto, and the numbers reflected that ambivalence. Gucci’s sales growth stalled and then slipped into decline – the company suffered a 24% revenue drop in the fourth quarter of 2024, even as rival brands rode post-pandemic booms.
By early 2025, it was clear the “quiet” experiment had failed: De Sarno was abruptly fired after barely two runway shows, a rare admission of defeat by Gucci’s parent company Kering. One analyst noted that under Sabato, Gucci had “plummet[ed] in relevance, shifting from a brand of bold individuality to one of conformity”. In other words, Gucci lost its soul. The house famous for fearless creativity had become boring. And if there’s one thing Gucci’s saga teaches, it’s that playing it safe can be more dangerous than any scandal.
The urgent task for Gucci’s next chapter was obvious:
restore a strong point of view and give the world something to talk about.
Facing Gucci’s stagnation, Kering made a shocking decision: rather than hiring an outside “big-name” star, they chose one of their own – you guessed it: Demna – to lead their crown jewel Gucci out of its dumpster fire. It’s a move that surprised many in the industry. Fashion watchers had speculated Gucci might woo a marquee designer from outside, with names like Hedi Slimane, Maria Grazia Chiuri, or Pierpaolo Piccioli floated in the press. Those candidates would have been safe in the sense of known quantities aligned with more traditional luxury aesthetics.
Instead, Kering’s chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault looked internally and picked Demna, the iconoclast who had turned Balenciaga into a hotbed of subversive street couture. Investors initially panicked at this audacity – Kering’s stock price plunged about 12–13% on the news of Demna’s appointment, wiping out $3 billion in market value overnight. Analysts fretted that Demna’s provocative, “hype-driven, streetwear-centric playbook” might be a “risky choice” for Gucci’s broader, more luxury-minded audience. In essence, the market gasped.
But Kering’s leadership clearly sees something the investors don’t. Pinault has expressed full confidence in Demna, stating that “[his] creative power is exactly what Gucci needs”. Gucci’s new CEO, Stefano Cantino, similarly praised Demna’s ability to honor a brand’s iconic legacy while instilling a fresh, modern sensibility – exactly what he did at Balenciaga – and precisely the balance of old and new Gucci is seeking in order to “propel the brand forward and increase sales”. Indeed, from a strategic standpoint, Demna’s appointment makes compelling sense for several reasons:
Proven Turnaround Talent: At Balenciaga, Demna engineered a stunning turnaround – taking a once-sleepy couture house and multiplying its revenue many times over. Under his tenure, Balenciaga grew from under $400 million in annual sales to over $2.3 billion. He achieved this by creating products that captured the cultural moment and broadened the brand’s appeal to younger, trend-conscious consumers. If Gucci needs a “commercial shot in the arm,” Demna’s record suggests he can deliver exactly that. He is arguably the most commercially successful creative talent left within Kering’s ranks (especially after Kering’s other rising star, Bottega Veneta’s Matthieu Blazy, departed to Chanel). In plain terms, Demna has already made Kering a lot of money, and corporate leadership clearly expects him to repeat that magic at their flagship label.
Familiarity with the Kering Playbook: Demna is not an unknown outsider but a Kering insider who understands the group’s culture and expectations. Having spent nearly a decade at a sister brand, he has existing relationships with Kering’s top brass and a grasp of the internal dynamics. This means less ramp-up time adjusting to corporate bureaucracy and more focus on creative work from day one. (Notably, because he’s coming from within Kering, there’s likely no onerous non-compete delay; he can start at Gucci almost immediately in July 2025.) By choosing Demna, Kering avoided the gamble of importing an external star who might clash with management or need time to “learn” Gucci. Instead, they elevated a known quantity – one who has already demonstrated loyalty and inter-company synergy (as seen in Gucci and Balenciaga’s past collaboration in 2021 on the “Hacker Project”).
Name Recognition and Buzz: Unlike Sabato de Sarno who was virtually unknown outside insider circles, Demna is a bona fide celebrity designer. His mononymous name, headline-making shows, and even controversies have made sure of that. Appointing Demna sends a message that Gucci will not fade into the background but will be loud, visible, and culturally tuned-in. As one commentator wryly noted, Demna landing the Gucci job was unsurprising because he earned it by “making Balenciaga – and thus Kering – a lot of money” and by being “the most proven tastemaker” in the group. In an age of TikTok hype and luxury streetwear, Demna’s cult of personality is an asset that can re-energize Gucci’s brand heat almost overnight. Gucci is Kering’s crown jewel, and there is urgency to get it back on top; plugging in a ready-made star like Demna is a faster route to relevance than betting on an unproven newcomer.
If there’s one arena where Gucci absolutely must excel, it’s accessories – the handbags, shoes, and leather goods that drive a huge portion of its revenue. Here, Demna’s strengths align perfectly with Gucci’s needs. Under Alessandro Michele, Gucci enjoyed a streak of coveted “It” items (think fur-lined Princetown loafers, Dionysus GG bags, oversized logo belts) that kept the cash registers ringing. In the last year or so, however, Gucci has lacked a breakout hit – nothing in Sabato de Sarno’s brief tenure captured the public’s imagination or social media feeds.
Demna’s knack for zeitgeist-defining products makes him uniquely skilled at producing buzzy, desirable accessories that become cultural phenomena. During his time at Balenciaga, he unleashed one viral product after another: the Triple S dad sneaker (igniting the chunky shoe trend), the Speed Sock sneaker, the Hourglass handbag, outrageous platform Crocs, futuristic mono-frame sunglasses, the Rodeo bag, and let’s not forget about the City bag…These items not only sold out and spawned knockoffs, but they also kept Balenciaga in countless conversations online – a free advertising machine of memes and hype.
“You can turn your nose up at Demna’s intentional provocations … leather trash bags and shredded shoes … and his ‘unglamorous’ chunky sneakers and big grungy jeans. But you can’t deny the influence”
Gucci, whose own legacy includes iconic bags like the Jackie, the Bamboo, and the Dionysus, stands to gain from Demna’s accessory genius. In fact, Kering explicitly needs Gucci to regain its dominance in leather goods – a sector where it’s been losing ground. By the end of 2024, sales of Gucci’s handbags and famed horsebit loafers were sliding significantly, contributing to the brand’s overall decline.
Demna has proven he can reverse such fortunes by creating must-have pieces. Crucially, he understands the power of novelty with a nod to heritage: for example, at Balenciaga he rejuvenated the classic motorcycle “City” bag (originally a early-2000s design) by tweaking its proportions and details for a new generation, transforming a legacy style into a modern must-have. We can expect him to take a similar approach at Gucci – respecting the house codes, but rejuvenating them.
Demna is a designer who thinks in terms of products that spark conversation. In today’s luxury market, where the line between a “commercial” item and a “creative” item has blurred, Demna’s ability to create accessories that are both artistic statements and sales blockbusters will be a major boon. This cyclical hype machine is something Gucci sorely lacked in the past year – and something Demna was virtually hired to deliver. As Kering’s financial rationale indicates, Gucci needs that “shot in the arm,” and Demna’s track record suggests he’s the man to administer it.
Beyond the balance sheets, fashion is also about narrative and cultural positioning. Here, the convergence of Gucci’s dramatic heritage and Demna’s subversive sensibility presents an exciting opportunity. We’ve seen how rich and even scandalous Gucci’s backstory is – a saga of glamour and gore that could inspire novels. Yet in recent years, Gucci’s creative output hasn’t tapped into this trove of drama.
Alessandro Michele flirted with romantic nostalgia and retro eccentricity, but he stayed away from the house’s darker themes. Sabato de Sarno, aiming for polite luxury, avoided narrative excess entirely. Demna, however, is a designer who relishes storytelling through fashion – often with an ironic or transgressive edge. This is the man who staged a Balenciaga runway in a simulated snowstorm to comment on climate anxiety, who sent models trudging through mud in a bleak post-apocalyptic setting, who referenced political protests and internet culture in his shows.
One could easily imagine Demna drawing from Gucci’s noir family lore for inspiration. Such moves would generate enormous buzz and reinforce Gucci’s identity as a house unafraid to confront its own dramatic mythology. It would also set Gucci apart in a luxury landscape that has lately been dominated by quiet, risk-averse marketing. In a time when many brands stick to influencer-safe blandness, a bit of Gucci shock value could reassert its cultural leadership.
As Alexander McQueen wove dark romanticism into collections that became legend, Demna has the potential to channel Gucci’s singular blend of glamour and grit into era-defining fashion moments. The world’s current fatigue with cookie-cutter “quiet luxury” style suggests the pendulum is swinging back toward the bold and theatrical – and no brand has a better well of theatricality to draw from than Gucci.
It’s worth noting that Demna’s appointment comes at a peculiar cultural moment in luxury. The 2020s have seen rapid-fire creative director swaps (the industry’s game of musical chairs), often stirring excitement briefly before audiences move on. Consumers are thirsty for real innovation and genuine excitement, not just a new name on the door. Gucci’s own recent struggles testify to the danger of falling out of the cultural conversation. By choosing Demna, Gucci is making a statement that it intends to be talked about relentlessly again – to set trends, spark debates, even court controversy in the name of creativity.
This willingness to be daring is woven into Gucci’s DNA. After all, Guccio Gucci himself was an innovator; the family that followed was nothing if not bold (sometimes recklessly so); Tom Ford shocked the prudish with overt eroticism; Michele challenged gender norms and maximalist extremes. Now Demna can carry that torch of unapologetic creativity forward. He has the credibility to galvanize both the high-fashion cognoscenti (who respect his Maison Margiela-trained avant-garde chops) and the hypebeast youth (who adore his streetwise sensibility). Marrying those two audiences is exactly the alchemy Gucci needs for renewed cultural dominance. As one luxury analyst put it, Kering’s decision to hire Demna “appeared as an attempt to make the label a global trendsetter again” – a recognition that Gucci must reclaim the cutting edge, not trail behind.
No bold move comes without skeptics. The immediate investor and some fan backlash show that not everyone is convinced this is a match made in heaven. But history is full of examples in fashion where initial shock gave way to resounding success. A telling anecdote recalls the reception of Martin Margiela’s radical debut in 1989: “The critics loathed it. The industry loved it.” What seemed too extreme at first eventually proved visionary – and Margiela’s influence is now undeniable. The same could be said of Galliano’s audacious Dior debut or even Alessandro Michele’s eccentric first Gucci show (which had its many doubters until the sales surged).
Demna’s Gucci will not be business-as-usual, and that’s precisely the point. Early discomfort is the price of real change. The short-term stock dip and social media meltdowns are knee-jerk reactions to the unaware and the unknown, but Gucci’s leadership is clearly playing an educated long game. They have entrusted the house’s future to a designer who, despite all the noise, has consistently delivered results both artistic and commercial.
Demna brings the firepower to reignite Gucci’s imaginative spark, the business savvy to supercharge its sales, and even the personal resilience to handle the slings and arrows that come with helming such a high-profile brand. Gucci’s narrative has always been one of high stakes and higher creativity. In Demna, Gucci has a creative director who embraces risk and controversy as the fertilizer for innovation, much like the Guccis of old turned crises into new beginnings. Yes, it’s a gamble – but Gucci was built on glamorous gambles and emerged each time stronger and more legendary.
Why is Demna right for Gucci? Because Gucci, at its heart, has never been a brand for the faint of heart. It has always rewarded bold vision and brazen creativity. Demna, the industry’s reigning master maverick, offers both in spades. He is poised to write the next chapter of Gucci’s saga – one that, if all goes well, will be talked about for decades to come as the moment the house got its talisman back.
With Gucci’s heritage of drama under his feet and a mandate to shake things up, Demna just might lead this storied house into a new golden era of audacious genius.
And if there’s any doubt left, recall the words of Kering’s CEO:
“His creative power is exactly what Gucci needs.”
Looking ahead, one can anticipate that Demna’s creative direction at Gucci will honor the house’s rich heritage – but always through a radical, contemporary lens. Just as he once scoured Cristóbal Balenciaga’s archives and alchemized those classical elements into something startlingly new, he will undoubtedly do the same at Gucci.
This goes without saying but expect to see iconic Gucci codes reborn under his touch. This won’t be desecration; it will be a daring homage. Demna’s reverence for legacy runs deep – he has proven he can grasp a founder’s essence and twist it into the now.
Yet, beyond the products, Demna brings something even more profound to Gucci: a personal narrative that could entwine with the house’s own dramatic story. The Gucci saga is the stuff of fashion legend – a family fortress built on opulence and intrigue, scarred by feuds, scandal, and even murder, then reborn through creativity time and again. Demna’s life, too, has been marked by extraordinary drama. He grew up amid conflict and displacement, witnessing the collapse of the familiar and the need to invent anew.
He’s weathered public controversies and family tensions on his ascent in the fashion world. In Demna, Gucci gains not just a designer, but a storyteller with firsthand experience of turmoil and resilience. We can anticipate a deep integration of this personal narrative into his work – perhaps subtly at first, through campaigns that hint at themes of exile, unity, or survival, and later in collections that wear their heart on their sleeve.
This kind of romanticized storytelling could give Gucci an emotional richness we haven’t felt in years, turning each season into a chapter of an ongoing saga that fascinates the public as much as any Hollywood drama.
Demna’s Gucci, in all likelihood, will find strength in contrasts – balancing controversy with craftsmanship, irony with earnestness, and personal truth with pop-culture spectacle. He will push buttons, as he always has, challenging what luxury means by daring to put absurdity on the pedestal next to elegance. But underpinning every outrageous gesture will be meticulous construction and artisan skill. Gucci will once again be the conversation-starter of fashion, the brand unafraid to take a stand or crack a joke, all while upholding the luxury craftsmanship that confers credibility.
Finally, one can even imagine Demna adding a metaphysical, cinematic flair to Gucci’s identity – blurring the lines between the runway and the silver screen, reality and myth. This is the designer who put The Simpsons on a Paris runway; he clearly delights in culture-crossing moments.
There is potential to reference the House of Gucci film or the lore around the Gucci family in his creative projects. In Demna’s hands, Gucci could become almost metatextual: a brand telling the story of its own legend while simultaneously critiquing it. This kind of layered narrative would suit Demna’s intellectual mischief. It’s a visionary approach that treats the brand as a living story, inviting the world not just to buy products, but to engage with the mythos, the questions, and the emotions behind them.
In sum, the future Demna imagines for Gucci is one where the house’s past is not erased but electrified, where luxury’s decorum courts downtown’s irreverence, and where a designer’s personal truth amplifies a brand’s identity. It’s a future in which Gucci reclaims its place at the center of culture by daring the world to feel something again.
If Demna’s vision unfolds as boldly as anticipated, Gucci’s next chapter will not only restore the sparkle that’s faded in recent years, but push the narrative of high fashion forward. Controversy will feed creativity, craftsmanship will anchor it, and storytelling will propel it into legend.
Fashion, at its most powerful, is not merely a reflection of culture but a provocation—a prism refracting society’s deepest truths, hidden tensions, and latent aspirations. Demna Gvasalia’s tenure at Balenciaga has been an embodiment of this power, a masterclass in using absurdity, irony, and provocative aesthetics to interrogate our collective assumptions about luxury, authenticity, and value. His misunderstood creativity, often labeled as mere gimmickry or shock-value spectacle, reveals precisely why his approach matters: it challenges cultural laziness, unsettles complacency, and invites profound reflection on what luxury should represent today. Demna held up a mirror to our meme-driven consumerism and asked, “What do you really see?” What many dismissed as gimmickry or trolling was, in fact, the point: provocation as a form of clarity.
His critics, like those surrounding Anna Wintour in The Simpsons Balenciaga episode, miss the message until it’s safe to clap. But Demna lets misunderstanding do the heavy lifting, because misunderstanding reveals everything: our discomfort with truth, our hunger for status, our fear of being left out. His fashion doesn’t beg to be liked—it dares to be seen. And once it’s seen, it’s too late: the work has already done its job.
Now, as Demna steps into Gucci, a house born from drama and sustained through reinvention, his radical vision promises to reclaim the provocative spirit necessary for the house's revival. In an era oversaturated with superficiality and exhausted by repetition, Demna's creative audacity and fearless storytelling are exactly the disruptive forces needed. A couture that doesn’t just decorate the body, but demands something of the culture.
As this manifesto has argued, misunderstanding isn't merely a byproduct of Demna's work—it’s proof of its significance. Ultimately, the controversy surrounding his designs is not an obstacle; it is the catalyst for conversation, transformation, and cultural renewal. In embracing Demna’s misunderstood creativity, Gucci is poised to rewrite the rules of luxury, igniting a future where fashion dares not only to reflect society but to boldly shape it.
So let the critics roll their eyes. Let the market tremble. If you're still confused, good. It's good to question things. Bye bye!
Prestige is more important than fame. Prestige remains, fame is ephemeral.
Cristóbal Balenciaga.
