How did the 2026 Met Gala transform into the ‘tacky Bezos Ball’?

One of the main reasons I enjoy the annual Met Gala is because there’s no awards show to watch after the red carpet. The Met Gala carpet is the entire show, the entire raison d’etre of the evening. There are sort of two completely different criteria for a successful or good Met Gala: either everyone nails the f–k out the theme and the fashion is completely on point, or the exact opposite, where gala guests have no idea what they’re doing or why and the whole thing is a tacky mess (which is really fun). Last year’s gala theme, “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style,” brought out the absolute best in all of the guests. It remains one of the best Met Gala carpets I’ve ever seen, and as such, I think it was always going to be difficult to follow that up. But this year’s theme – “Fashion Is Art” – was too vague in a way, so many of the guests were interpreting the theme in stupid ways (and yet many of them just wore boring black or white dresses).

Add to all of that, this year’s gala was always going to be problematic given the sponsorship of Jeff Bezos (who didn’t even walk the carpet) and his wife Lauren Sanchez, who did walk the carpet. Lauren wore Schiaparelli’s take on John Singer Sargent’s Madame X and it sucked. Completely. Well, Variety had a brutal postmortem on this year’s gala: “How the Met Gala Transformed Into the Tacky ‘Bezos Ball’.”

For decades, the first Monday in May has marked one of fashion‘s biggest nights as A-listers from around the world descend upon the Metropolitan Museum of Art to attend the Met Gala. Since 2021, the first gala post-pandemic, its prestigious crown has started to slip. A wave of influencer integration in the 2021 and 2022 editions saw the gala transition from one of prestige and exclusivity to TikTok fodder. As influencers lost their footing at the gala, however, a new fear started to emerge: corporations (and the moguls running them) rising to the fore.

In February, it was announced that Jeff Bezos, the founder, ex-CEO, and current executive chairman of Amazon, and his wife, Lauren Sánchez Bezos, would serve as honorary chairs for the evening. It was later reported by Page Six that they’d spent “at least” $10 million to sponsor the event and earn the uber-wealthy couple that coveted title. The Met’s website also prominently highlights how this year’s exhibition and gala have been “made possible” by the couple.

Critics were quick to point out the sheer irony of their involvement, given that Amazon was at the forefront of the modern fast fashion industry, and its presence in the marketplace led to a rapid decline in clothing quality, with consumers — as a result of broader economic strains — being forced to prioritize low price points over fashion (and ethics). The Bezos’s (Jeff directly, and Lauren by association) have directly harmed the artists and artisans they’ve paid a pretty penny to stand alongside. To add fuel to the fire, the plot of “The Devil Wears Prada 2” echoes longstanding rumors that the couple wishes to acquire Condé Nast, the parent company of several major publications, including Vogue. Despite all this, the Costume Institute, Anna Wintour, and Condé Nast have thus far been willing to overlook everything in the name of staying afloat.

The fashion also left much to be desired. The theme, “Fashion is Art,” invited guests to “express their own relationship to fashion as an embodied art form and celebrate the countless depictions of the dressed body throughout art history.” In a similar vein, the exhibit itself, themed “Costume Art,” explores “the centrality of the dressed body” through different body types, including the naked, classical, pregnant and aging bodies – among others. But the red carpet, at any given moment, looked like a poorly constructed collage. A general rule of thumb for the Met Gala: if you can (comfortably) wear it to the Oscars, you should probably try a little harder. That message doesn’t seem to have been conveyed.

The references (of which there were many) were to be expected, and it’s here where Hollywood’s growing lack of creativity began to seep through. With thousands of famous pieces of art to reference, it’s incredible that there were three separate iterations of “The Portrait of Madame X” from Lauren Sánchez Bezos (Schiaparelli), Claire Foy (Erdem), and Julianne Moore (Bottega Veneta). Statues were also omnipresent, with upwards of 15 stars, including the Jenner sisters (GapStudio and Schiaparelli), Heidi Klum (Mike Marino), and Doja Cat (Saint Laurent), all showing up as some iteration of a famous sculpture.

As the night wore on, the homogeneity was disrupted by several major arrivals, including Bad Bunny (in arresting old-man makeup), Madonna (in a Saint Laurent look inspired by Lenora Carrington’s “The Temptation of St. Anthony”), and Beyoncé (in Olivier Rousteing, who reimagined Caroline Durieux’s “The Visitor”). This trio, among the best dressed of the evening, had done the research necessary to create a look that was both on theme and unique. They stood out from a crowd whose preparation for the night appeared to be the result of a single Google search for “famous piece of art.”

[From Variety]

While no one said this, I think John Singer Sargent’s “Madame X” was referenced by three different women because of HBO’s The Gilded Age. Within TGA’s Season 3, the show featured Sargent as a character, commissioned to paint an heiress’s portrait, and within the show, the characters discussed Madame X and how it had recently scandalized all of Paris. Because of The Gilded Age, there was a resurgence of interest in John Singer Sargent’s work, I swear to God. Following those episodes, museums holding Sargent’s portraits were making videos and teaching a new generation of art-lovers about how groundbreaking Sargent was for that era.

Regarding the “poorly constructed collage” of the carpet… I think it goes both ways – yes, a lot of celebrities phoned it in when it came to researching “art,” but I also think that some/many fashion writers didn’t have the art history background to immediately understand what art or which artist was being referenced. For example, I thought Tessa Thompson’s Yves Klein-inspired look was actually a reference to Picasso’s Blue Period. I didn’t immediately catch Colman Domingo’s Basquiat reference. I tend to believe that Met Gala themes need to be more narrowly defined for a “successful” gala carpet.

As for the “tacky Bezos ball” of it all… while I absolutely agree that Jeff Bezos and his tacky wife suck and that Amazon should pay their workers fairly and all of that, in the grand scheme of things, I’m actually happy that Jeff and Lauren are spending their money on sh-t like “museum exhibitions” and “trying to win over Anna Wintour.” It’s a reminder that even the richest people in the world still can’t buy culture or acceptance wholesale.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.