Yes, Courtney Love wore it and wasn’t “canceled” because cancellation as we frame it today barely existed in that form and that’s part of the argument. The moral panic wasn’t some universal ethical reckoning, it was situational outrage, amplified by optics and proximity. Which is precisely why it aged the way it did.
Saying the pieces sell today because “the masses don’t know” or “don’t read the title” assumes the work only survives through ignorance, which feels kind of dismissive of both collectors and history. These garments are not obscure. The Galliano Dior era is probably one of the most dissected periods in modern fashion. People know about it but they just dont react the same way.
Also, compassion and provocation aren’t opposites. Galliano wasn’t mocking homelessness, he was exposing the fragility of luxury and how close it always is to ruin. He could see the "democratization" of fashion coming and bluring that line between taste, acess and luxury. That discomfort is the point, the same discomfort that we fell when we see Balenciaga destroyed sneakers being sold by a very high price. Calling that “insensitivity” flattens the work into a moral checklist, which fashion has never survived by following.
And yes, public outrage is a right. Im not against protest. But outrage doesn’t have to last forever. When it fades, it doesn’t mean society was silenced, it means people looked again and thought differently. Fashion history is full of things that caused scandals at the time and are now taught as references, not mistakes.
The irony is that we now accept ripped Balenciaga sneakers and fetishized “homeless aesthetics” without blinking, stripped of context, stripped of critique. Galliano’s work at least had his work had strength, authority, and a clear conceptual spine. If anything, the world didn’t get more sensitive. It just got more comfortable consuming the surface without the discomfort of meaning.
So no, craftsmanship alone doesn’t defeat “wokeness.” Coherence does. And that’s why the work remains.
Canceled tale is as old as time
People during that time also got canceled the term is only used now as slang but does not mean it did not excited back then and like John's dismissal from Dior was also pre cancel in woke terms era per example.
Society always as old as the bible talks about banishing, boycotting, or ostracizing a person or a group of people etc removing someone from society because whatever reason etc.
Selling power of Dior by JG
The piece sold because the person wanting it bought it for reasons we both don't know factually, but you relating it as some sort of victory of anti wokeness as a testament of the strength of the dress or the collection was filling in the blanks as an made up op ed piece against your personal feelings of the way cancel culture is a problem to you.
While i simply stated that the reasons for the high sale number was for more reasons and anti woke idea would play minor role in it as other collections of john sold as well for high price like the first Dior HC show dress of John that is the Masai dress.
Creative responsibility
Galliano´s intend (for which i know what his public press statement were at the time are clear to me* ) for the collection inspiration could have been well or ill intent that does not matter, as when you present a work even if artistic you're still dealing with the audience which in this case i one of a fashion luxury house, and one has to have also responsibility for the work if not well received as much as when praise is given.
In these case we are speaking of commerce
a product that sells for lost of money (nit a movie not an art piece) and mimics the life and aesthetics of people that don't have anything and are looked down upon, you have to be brain dead to not see that there is friction in the concept and possible push back is natural.
When you are a provocateur you should also be prepared for the audience to not get it or be against it no matter your intend.
Good intent does not absolve humans from responsibility of the negative reaction or consequences of their good intended action.
*(John was running on the seine as part of his sober work out lifestyle and he would always see the homeless people and saw the poetry in that life bla bla etc )
Society
The outrage did not last forever because the many years of work that needed to be done to save his life and get better court dealings etc .
He is even back as guest at the Dior show and mentioned by the person who rightfully fired him as a great contributor to Dior´s legacy .
People just want people to take ownership of their wrong doing thats what its about, many people make comebacks after mistakes Hollywood is full of that.
Its not that society changes their mind on the wrong doing, its that the person that did wrong does better because they know better.
We can't live in a world where your not thinking of what your own actions can have as effect on others, and being offended is not being right either, but an intelligent person would take in account that saying whatever you like or doing whatever you like does not create an civilized society either.
That nauce is important.
Balenciaga and new times
Balenciaga homeless products styles also had some push backs/rage baiting, but more so that people laugh at how ridiculous it is and he did not present it as a homeless collection put embedded it in his overall dystopian internet aesthetics. so origin of idea is more hidden thus less or no backlash.
Vintage John Galliano
Work remains because its material, it lives on internet, its beautiful objects that again has
nothing to do with the strength of the intend behind the work we have landfills full of trash plastics cheap products that also remains
Conclusion
The correlation to coherence is odd connection, there nothing logical or consistent about creativity or design or intend or its supposed survival.
But it's ok let's leave it at this because we are opening too many side doors lol
And its too much to fact check on a weekend with out one morning coffee yet in my system or a butter warm croissant.
xoxo
