Probably many of our readers are familiar with the storm that hit Balenciaga, one of the most important fashion houses in the world. For those unaware, we report what has been reported by Sky, more concise text than others.
Special Promotions
“It all started with a Christmas ad where some kids were holding teddy bears with certain fetishes surrounded by other imaginary BDSM objects [bondage ndr]“.
“Then another campaign, this time for Spring 2023, in which an hourglass bag for Adidas rested on Supreme Court legal documents debating whether the ban on child pornography violated the First Amendment. It was later discovered that a book in the background of a third campaign celebrated a Belgian artist, Michael Borremans, who created a series of paintings depicting naked children in 2017.
“On November 29, the Maison apologized for the shock campaign, while for those of Spring 23 with the Supreme Court documents it declared that all objects were supplied by third parties and that they were all fictitious”. Its executives have also sued the company that created the advert on their behalf.
For those who want to delve into the scandal, there are more than shocking photos and articles on the internet about what happened, some perhaps too extreme, but not as much as the ads featuring the children in question.
Of excuses and coincidences
Two critical points of the story. The first is that Balenciaga executives waited a little too long to issue a sharp apology, which only happened after protests spread worldwide and angry Hollywood stars burned overpaid Balenciaga clothes and web videos.
The second is that it seems really odd that the fashion house’s leaders have remained in the dark about everything. Could it be that none of them have seen the Christmas and Spring advertising campaigns, the most important of the season? And to think that advertising plays a crucial role in fashion, they say no, they even sued the advertisers. It remains a somewhat anomalous way of working, but one can trust…
But if we refer to this scandal that shook the world last week, it is to add a touch of color to what is already known, which might perhaps arouse some curiosity. When Zelensky founded United24, a platform to raise funds for Ukraine, at the start of the war, he appointed Balenciaga Artistic Director Demna Gvasalia as United24 Ambassador for Refugees, as he was himself a refugee exiled from Georgia.
One of Demna’s initiatives for United24 was the creation of long sleeve jerseys with the yellow and blue emblem of the Ukrainian flag on them, apparently by Balenciaga. They cost about $250 and the proceeds go to help refugees. Who knows if the scandal has affected sales.
However, we don’t want to blame anything or anyone: Balenciaga denounced the advertisers and it is to be expected that irrefutable evidence will emerge at the later trial that the fashion house was not aware of the content of the ad.
Returning to United24, we instead covered this platform in another note, in which we highlighted the role of FTX, the recently collapsed cryptocurrency giant co-opted by the Kyiv government to create a channel of aid to Ukraine in the form of zu create, have detailed virtual coins.
FTX obviously has nothing to do with Balenciaga, it’s just arousing some curiosity as bad luck seems to be ravaging United24 who are thus victims of bad publicity as much as Balenciaga.
Side note. We report from Newsweek: “As social media users continue to pay attention to the luxury fashion brand [Balenciaga] and its offerings, they have also recently turned their attention to a series of artworks depicting children who have, among other features, genitalia in place of the nose and mouth, works published on the website of Christie’s, the world’s premier auction house.” .
“Christie’s is owned by Groupe Artémis, François-Henri Pinault’s holding company. Multi-billionaire Pinault, husband of movie star Salma Hayek, is also chairman and CEO of Kering, the multinational company that owns Balenciaga, which has led some online users to make connections between them.
“Despite online criticism, there is no evidence that Pinault contributed to the works in question or to any other artwork published on Christie’s website.”
“The mannequins featured on the Christie’s website were created by artists Jake and Dinos Chapman and feature depictions of naked children, some of whom are bonded. There are also depictions of severed heads.” Is it possible that Christie’s would publish and sell such things? Alas. Latinism has forgiven us: world of shit.