Harry Styles - Gucci photos

[Christofle]

I think the campaign might have a very different reaction in say Japan where the lolita style has been a trend for decades amongst a small subset of the population. (Nonconformist rebelling against social norms) These global brands do sell across various regions in the world so I'm sure the reaction and interpretation of the campaign will also vary widely.

 

[maryg1]

Thank you @papertiger , I had only seen the pictures campaing on Gucci’s website and as I wrote before it just reminded me of my family album and it was typical HS and AM, nothing else

 

[hoopsie]

Thanks for the further comments. I honestly don't know what to think but it's been very interesting to read these posts.

For me, this particular Harry Styles and Gucci photo hits differently: in the wake of the Bal photos, the very "pathetic" looking bear print and the brutal/stark infant mattress.

I totally get that some adults like to adopt "cute" child like behaviours and presentation (cartoon characters, child- like clothing) but the items used to express/communicate this message seem to contradict the message in the Gucci ad.

Will be thinking more about these issues but thanks for contributing.

 

[Swanky]

Oh god. I did some digging and oh my god I feel sick. I haven’t really paid attention to Gucci runway shows, but seeing photos of one of them makes this situation worse.

One of men’s shows had ADULTS wearing children’s-styled clothing. Men’s in dresses I do not care for but not a big deal, but these dresses. These have designs that are like the ones for little girls. Soft, very cropped clothing worn tightly? Like an adult trying to wear a child’s clothing.

Something sinister is going on and I won’t be surprised the creative director was ousted like Lee was from Bottega.

People are ignoring it unlike Balenciaga because the Balenciaga one was more glaring and obvious. But Gucci is a second attempt which uses more covert imagery to fly under the radar of the average person. Which I believe was what Balenciaga was trying to do, but failed.

They are absolutely shameless showing the type of people they are. I can’t believe it.

View attachment 5675253

View attachment 5675254

View attachment 5675255

If I hid the heads and legs of these models, I’d assume these were kids clothes.
It’s late here, I haven’t seen Harry’s pics and I didn’t see them shared here, but came across this thread and skimmed it, I guess I need to go see the campaign! My thought without seeing it…. too soon & obviously deliberate.

 

[Yhte123]

You’re again misconstruing my words and even the situation. Not to mention the off-topic tangents you’re going on about Disney’s past (which have been devoid of its original context due to cultural shifts, reinterpretations, and marketing etc) But your own comment is far from relevant from the topic of this thread. in your own words:




The issue isn’t the aspect of “cute” nor is it an adult in children’s style designs. Which I have made unequivocal in my original comments by how there was no issue with Gucci’s previous designs, nor any other brand using that design style. It is not children’s inspired designs worn by women which I have also made clear. Not to mention your whataboutism about women in onesies and other children inspired designs ignores the historical contexts and differences between men and women in child abuse. The subject of the Gucci campaign is headed by a MAN.

It doesn’t matter how you feel about whatever Gucci does or celeb collabs or whatever. I originally LOVED Balenciaga and I made the mistake of defending them. Now I am able to admit my wrong in my initial thoughts of the Balenciaga campaign. I can’t even look at my stuff from them.

My point I am making: that to combine imagery of childrenswear design worn by an adult male with toddler’s furniture and beds is extremely inappropriate and ties an association with the two. Which heavily alludes to the imagery of child abuse. Not to mention in some pieces, how children’s motifs in the designs are coupled Harry’s sexual lyrics like Watermelon Sugar.

It is not the single element of children’s wear-inspired clothing you are arguing against. It is the combination of MULTIPLE elements of this collection and campaign that is disgusting and alludes to child abuse. Hence why even the LA times, NY Post and among other large outlets are covering this.

To say the media is trying to keep things going or imply them fabricating drama by covering this Gucci campaign is extremely disrespectful to the work of journalists that are trying to illuminate the very important and insidious issue of child abuse.


I never said Kering had direct involvement with the campaign, but from what I read from people who have worked the industry said online, the parent company absolutely does have eyes on these campaigns. So for them to not stop it says A LOT.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.

I could have not worded some of my feelings better.

There is NO issue at all with adults wearing clothing with designs that have motifs taken from children’s fashion. I do not have any issue with designs that take similar to children’s clothing. Gucci isn’t the only brand to do this. Hermes, LV, and Chanel have designs before evocative of children’s fashion in the past.

The issue of old cartoons with sinister and disgusting themes is 100% off topic and irrelevant.


The issue is the ASSOCIATIONS that were created with the COMBINATION of clothing with the motifs you would almost always see in children’s clothing worn by an adult man (the adult man with sexual lyrics and has been regarded as a modern sex symbol by the way) and the proximity of lounging furniture sized for children.

No one would have any problems with these things if they were completely disparate and separated.

And with this campaign, it made me rethink the children’s clothing inspired designs of previous Gucci collections since we have a brand new context to them now. Hence my second comment that was regarded as off-topic.

I understand how many of us have deep attachments to these brands. We have spent so much money on them, we have made memories while wearing them, we have devoted so much time and energy to them. However, these things should blind nor make one excuse Gucci’s actions. And being against certain actions of the brand doesn’t clear you of bias.

I get it. Gucci is popular, makes beautiful designs that make a lot of people’s heart sing. But these feelings should be cast away when the issue of child abuse comes up.

I’m so so glad big news outlets are covering this and not letting it get buried. We need to hold the large number of people that this campaign went through accountable.

 

[Jaxholt15]

I can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

 

[Jen Meyers]

I can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

I wouldn’t consider this a witch hunt. People are bringing information to light and demanding proper accountability. And with the Bal situation, we are now being more aware, cautious, and ready to call it out. It’s like how we are now more ready to call out micro aggressions now due to people bringing to light how offensive they are. If we don’t call it out, these acts continue to happen.

In response to your question. Nothing is unintentional with these brands. Ideas and these photos go through so many people who had to approve. Things are gone over with a fine tooth comb to make sure everything fits the creative director’s vision. Things are displayed in conference rooms to determine the best shots to released. I highly doubt these people were unaware of these connotations from these connections. I highly doubt this was all an honest mistake, especially with both of them being Kering brands. I highly doubt having a sex symbol wearing childrenswear-inspired clothing with a toddler bed was unintentional.

The children’s wear designs from previous collections worn by adults read different now.

With Balenciaga, they had a brash and overt imagery to their vision of child abuse. Gucci’s is more subtle and rooted in the cute imagery that plays into the theme of innocence. They are both evil.

I think that’s why Gucci’s is much more subtle. They are aware of Balenciaga’s mistake with their overt imagery and trying it again with a more subtle imagery that creates implications and allows plausible deniability. The people behind Gucci are letting the “right” crowd know that they are on their side.

 

[Swanky]

I can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

I don’t have the time or energy for that, I think for myself and take comments with a grain of salt.
In my independent thinking… it’s not looking good

 

[papertiger]

I can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

I think Bal's (campaign featuring children) was just wrong from concept through execution to aftermath.

I think tying the Gucci campaign into some Kering conspiracy actually waters-down what people are (rightfully) upset about with Balenciaga's.

I have no idea why Gucci 'hooked-up' with Harry Styles beyond another celeb-wearing-freebie ambassador, I really think it was because of some Michele man-crush, but I'm not going to say I see things when I don't.

 

[allanrvj]

I got so excited to check out this thread, expecting to see photos of Harry Styles, and yet all I see are words and more words.

I can't be bothered to read. lol

 

[Noorasi]

I can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

Personally I don't really mind the campaign photos. However what I find quite distasteful is that Gucci first observed the Balenciaga campaign scandal, saw the public reaction and THEN proceeded to run this campaign. They absolutely knew that Harry Styles, wearing a teddy bear t-shirt and carrying a children's mattress, would be linked to the same discussion. They deliberately chose to be compared to the Balenciaga campaign just for cheap publicity.

I'm attaching a picture as it was requested above.

 

[V0N1B2]

I’m guessing the campaign would have had a very different look had Harry been carrying an adult sized mattress. Kinda hard to pop that under your arm.

 

[redwings]

Personally I don't really mind the campaign photos. However what I find quite distasteful is that Gucci first observed the Balenciaga campaign scandal, saw the public reaction and THEN proceeded to run this campaign. They absolutely knew that Harry Styles, wearing a teddy bear t-shirt and carrying a children's mattress, would be linked to the same discussion. They deliberately chose to be compared to the Balenciaga campaign just for cheap publicity.

I'm attaching a picture as it was requested above.

View attachment 5676262

That’s the size of my futon in Japan. I am kinda adult. I do own an old Burberry bear T-shirt which I love to bits. It’s that old since it was made in England. Has holes in it too.

 

[880]

Kering is a parent company, it doesn't control brands' micro, it doesn't do campaigns or promote cultural trends. It can only take responsibility as a parent company. In Balenciaga's case I think they have definitely failed to take control, and the company (Bal) will suffer, in Gucci's (HA HA HA's) case they should do nothing.

I think the campaign might have a very different reaction in say Japan where the lolita style has been a trend for decades amongst a small subset of the population. (Nonconformist rebelling against social norms) These global brands do sell across various regions in the world so I'm sure the reaction and interpretation of the campaign will also vary widely.

can’t help but think this is a modern witch hunt. It appears to me that people are feeding off of each other’s comments and making this so much more than it really is. I really doubt that Balenciaga or Gucci condone child abuse in any way shape or form. If they did would they really publicize it?

Agree

 

[Jaxholt15]

Honestly I am not sure who has the warped minds here. I do not look at the pics and think child abuse.