Four years after advertising campaigns involving children sparked international outrage, Balenciaga has appointed its first woman creative director. A fresh perspective, a fresh start or a rather convenient change of conversation?
Martine Rose has made history. The British-Jamaican designer is Balenciaga's first woman creative director in its 109-year history, bringing her distinctive approach to fashion and years of cultural influence to one of luxury's most recognisable houses. An appointment worth celebrating, certainly. But given Balenciaga's recent history, the timing and symbolism invite a few questions.
Four years ago, the fashion house faced international outrage over advertising campaigns that left people questioning the judgment of everyone involved, from the creative teams to the executives approving the final images. Now, a Black woman is being handed the creative reins. Is Balenciaga finally recognising the value of a different perspective, or has the company found a particularly compelling face for its next chapter?
The Campaign That Should Never Have Left the Studio
In 2022, Balenciaga released two separate campaigns that became the subject of widespread criticism. Its Gift Shop campaign, photographed by Gabriele Galimberti, featured children holding teddy-bear bags with bondage-associated styling. Another campaign included documents referencing a US Supreme Court ruling concerning child sexual abuse material.
The images were disturbing. The fact that they had survived multiple levels of professional approval was arguably just as concerning.
Galimberti maintained that he hadn't selected the props or controlled the creative concept. Contractors involved in the second campaign disputed responsibility for its controversial materials. Demna, Balenciaga's creative director at the time, apologised for his judgment on the children's campaign, while then-CEO Cédric Charbit acknowledged that he held final approval authority.
The campaigns were withdrawn, apologies were issued and Balenciaga promised changes. Demna subsequently moved to Gucci, another fashion house owned by the same parent company, Kering.
Apparently, a change of creative address was easier to arrange than a convincing answer to how those decisions were approved in the first place.
Perhaps a Woman's Perspective Was Missing. Or Perhaps That's the Point.
Rose's appointment introduces a different creative voice to a house that has historically been led by men. Her credentials are well established, and her previous experience working with Balenciaga makes her an understandable choice. But the significance of appointing a Black woman to lead a brand associated with such troubling creative decisions is difficult to overlook.
Could Balenciaga have recognised that its approach to creative judgment needed reconsideration? That different experiences and perspectives might challenge ideas that previously went unquestioned? Possibly. But ethical judgment isn't exclusive to any gender, and the responsibility for protecting children should never have depended on a woman being present in the room.
There's also the less flattering possibility that Balenciaga understands the commercial appeal of a fresh narrative. Rose brings an established following, cultural credibility and an opportunity to reconnect with audiences who may have distanced themselves from the brand.
None of that makes her appointment undeserved. It simply makes the company's intentions worth examining.
A New Creative Director. A New Audience?
Fashion has become remarkably good at reinventing itself through the people it appoints. Creative directors are now celebrities in their own right, capable of attracting audiences who follow the designer as closely as the label. A new appointment generates excitement, a debut collection creates anticipation and suddenly the conversation is about what's coming rather than what happened.
For a brand looking to rebuild its image, that's quite an advantage.
And perhaps this is where the conversation extends beyond Balenciaga. When an institution with a questionable history appoints someone from a community historically excluded from leadership, the achievement can be genuine while the institution also benefits from its symbolism. A Black professional shouldn't be expected to reject an earned opportunity because of decisions made before their arrival. But their presence shouldn't become evidence of corporate progress before the company has demonstrated it.
The question isn't whether Rose deserves the job. It's whether Balenciaga deserves the renewed confidence her appointment may help generate.
Who Gets the Credit for Getting It Right?
If Rose succeeds, Balenciaga will have a compelling new creative identity to celebrate. If the house regains audiences it lost following the controversy, her influence may prove commercially invaluable. But neither outcome should erase the responsibility of those who approved the campaigns in 2022.
A new creative director can change the clothes, the campaigns and the conversation. Whether she can change the culture of decision-making depends on the authority she's given and the institution's willingness to examine itself.
And that's what makes this appointment worth watching.
Perhaps Balenciaga has learned from its mistakes and genuinely believes a different perspective is what the house needs. Perhaps Rose is simply the strongest designer for the job. Or perhaps the company recognises that a historic appointment makes for a much more appealing headline than another conversation about accountability.
All three possibilities can coexist.
The question isn't whether Balenciaga has found the right woman for the job. It's whether the company has done enough to deserve a fresh start simply because she's arrived.
