John Galliano and the Possibility of Re{form}

There is something almost too perfect about the name of John Galliano’s new collaboration with Zara: Re{form}.

View this post on Instagram

The concept sees Galliano take existing Zara garments and rework them: cutting, deconstructing, exaggerating and reconstructing what is already there rather than pretending to begin with an untouched piece of cloth. It is difficult not to see the metaphor. The result? It screams vintage Galliano for sure. The materials? Not so much. Lots of acrylic, viscose and polyester might make it hard to defend the prices, and send people larger than size Small who wants to look spectacularly crazy for one night only to Temu or Sheen. However, the visuals are very much in John Galliano’s spirit, with deconstructs, layers and theatrical pieces. The campaign shot for Zara by Steven Meisel furthers this vibe, it’s like the models all stepped down from the stage of a 1920s burlesque theatre. And, his fans will most likely adore it, they seem to have come out in forces this fall, especially after the Met-scandal earlier this year. And it seems the world can be divided between the two: those who love Galliano, and those who don’t, not based on his creative genius, which is undeniable. It is more the memories of “that video”, and, according to those in the know, racial slurs he supposedly have said in the past.

But, let’s stick to what we actually know: There is no need to sanitise what John Galliano said in Paris fifteen years ago. His words were ugly, racist and antisemitic. Being drunk does not make them harmless, and addiction does not absolve him of responsibility. But responsibility and eternal punishment are not the same things. Galliano lost his position at Dior, was publicly disgraced, prosecuted and convicted. He entered treatment for addictions to alcohol and prescription drugs and apologised for his behaviour. In his original 2011 statement, he explicitly talked about trying to address his personal failure and earn people’s forgiveness. And earn is an interesting choice of words. Fifteen years have now passed. At some point, then, an uncomfortable question presents itself. If we believe in rehabilitation, shouldn’t we also believe that a human being can eventually become something more than the worst thing he has ever done? If we believe forgiveness must be earned, presumably there must also be some conceivable point at which it can be earned?

View this post on Instagram

These questions feels particularly relevant in the digital age, which has given us something previous generations never really had: permanent disgrace. A drunken rant, a terrible mistake or an appalling moment of judgement can now be filmed, uploaded, copied and replayed indefinitely. The person grows older. The footage never does. Perhaps that is part of the reason Galliano remains such a fascinating and divisive figure. His return isn’t simply a story about whether fashion values genius more highly than disgrace. It asks something considerably more difficult: whether disgrace itself should ever be allowed an expiry date. Forgiveness does not mean pretending something never happened. Nor does rehabilitation require us to erase the original material. And perhaps that is where Re{form} becomes more than a clever name for a fashion project. Galliano has built a career around transformation. Here, instead of discarding what already exists, he takes it apart. He examines it, cuts into it, alters its proportions and reconstructs it into something new. The original garment hasn’t disappeared. Its history remains embedded in the finished piece. Perhaps people aren’t so different. To reform someone cannot mean returning them to some imaginary state of innocence. Galliano cannot undo what he said, just as Zara’s original garments cannot become untouched fabric again. The past remains part of the material. But does that mean nothing new can ever be made from it?

That, ultimately, may be the more interesting question surrounding John Galliano’s latest return. Not whether fashion has forgotten what he did. It clearly hasn’t. Not even whether everyone should forgive him. Forgiveness is personal, and nobody is obliged to offer it. The question is whether we still believe in reform. John Galliano’s past cannot be unmade. But perhaps, like the clothes he has taken apart for Zara, it can become part of something reconstructed, not erased. If rehabilitation is to mean anything at all, there must surely come a point when we allow a person to be judged not only by the worst thing they once did, but also by what they have done since.

Photo: Steven Meisel for Zara