Karl Lagerfeld: A Flawed Legacy?

A fashion icon – impeccably uniformed in monochrome, sporting a powdered ponytail since 1976. Lagerfeld’s conspicuously dark look was an intriguing part of his guise, with his signature oversized shades casting an obscure veil over his face. Other than his appearance, nothing else about him seemed to be in black and white. Whilst he was a creative genius, he was also a true enigma; even concealing the date of his own birthday. He once said: ‘I am like a caricature of myself, and I like that. It is like a mask. And for me, the Carnival of Venice lasts all year long.’ There is little wonder then, that the prolific designer has been labelled as a complex and compelling character. Why is it, that he chose to waltz through life behind an elaborate mask? It seems to me, that his life was somewhat a spectacle to be admired: a dramatisation of his unparalleled vision that made his influence inimitable. As eccentric as he was, he gained mass popularity and became a pop culture icon – albeit for controversial reasons. So, why is it that many have painted his legacy black?

As an individual who dedicated his entire life to the creation of beauty, his words weren’t always a reflection of that. Despite having had many female muses that inspired his creative vision, he had made disparaging remarks about women and their physiques. His misogynistic attitude towards femininity reveals how he embodied many of the fashion industry’s negative stereotypes, claiming that ‘no one wants to see curvy women on the catwalk.’ For him, women were simply trophies to be admired; objects to be consumed. He was also known for his explicit derision of women that he found displeasing. Take his comments on the Middleton sisters as a fitting example: ‘Kate Middleton has a nice silhouette and she is the right girl for that boy. I like that kind of woman, I like romantic beauties. On the other hand, her sister struggles. I don’t like the sister’s face. She should only show her back.’ First of all, his seemingly flattering comments about Kate just aren’t flattering at all. He gives the impression that a woman’s demeanour deciphers whether or not she is good enough for a man, referring to Kate’s ‘nice silhouette’ and then immediately concluding that she is ‘the right girl for that boy.’ Worst of all, he measures beauty by comparison: Pippa is unfavourably compared to her older sister because she ‘struggles’ – with what exactly? The pursuit of beauty? Whatever it is, Lagerfeld makes it clear that she is less of a woman because of it, dispossessing her of her own name. She is referred to merely as the ‘sister’, whose face he does not like. His acerbic tongue even let slip that ‘she should only show her back’; a statement that illustrates just how problematic the fashion industry can be when ruled by misogynistic men.

Lagerfeld supposedly liberated women through the creation of beautiful clothes, but were the lavish materials really that liberating? I am in awe of his beautiful creations, but there is just one problem – they are unattainable, and so is the image of beauty that they represent. Most women cannot afford couture and certainly cannot maintain youth forever. Modelled by the world’s youngest, thinnest and prettiest women, his clothes were exclusively designed for those conditioned to do so. Rather than liberating the modern woman, his clothes are a representation of what most women simply aren’t, subverting Coco Chanel’s very values. What about the women actually modelling his clothes – were they liberated by his little black dresses? Somewhat, yes. They strut down the catwalk, asserting their femininity. However, there is a price to pay for this privilege: the catwalk is nothing but an industrial conveyor belt, rotating beautiful trophies in the name of profit. Lagerfeld told Numero Magazine that he was ‘fed up’ with the #MeToo movement: ‘If you don’t want your pants pulled about, don’t become a model! Join a nunnery, there’ll always be a place for you in the convent.’ His disdainful attitude towards women shows exactly how he considers them as objects that may be toyed with. It is absolutely impossible for a woman to be liberated whilst she is still attached to the strings of the puppet-master.

Lagerfeld, like many of his male counterparts in the fashion industry, was a narrow-minded misogynist. Whilst his talent as a prolific designer cannot be overlooked, I ask myself: is it possible to separate the artist from his art? Or are they one and the same? 

Let me know your thoughts!

R x