AIR May 2019

Opening Pages: Ensemble by
Jeremy Scott for House of Moschino, SS18,
courtesy of Moschino, United States;
Alessandro Michele for Gucci, FW16–17,
courtesy of Gucci Historical Archive
Previous Pages: Bertrand Guyon for
House of Schiaparelli, FW18–19 haute
couture, courtesy of Schiaparelli
Opposite: Jeremy Scott for House of
Moschino SS17, courtesy of Moschino.
All images courtesy of The Metropolitan
Museum of Art / © Johnny Dufort, 2019
such as Giorgio Armani, Cristóbal
Balenciaga, Jean Paul Gaultier,
Nicolas Ghesquière (for Louis
Vuitton), Bertrand Guyon (for House
of Schiaparelli), Demna Gvasalia
(for Balenciaga), Karl Lagerfeld (for
House of Chanel, Chloé, and Fendi),
Mary Katrantzou, Alessandro Michele
(for Gucci), Yves Saint Laurent, Elsa
Schiaparelli, Hedi Slimane (for Saint
Laurent), and Donatella Versace.
The Met, of course, seeks to delve
deeper – and the language used by
Sontag in her concise observations are
the key to unlocking understanding.
Another influential text is that of
David Isherwood, who in his 1954
novel The World in The Evening
first introduced the concept of
camp as an aesthetic sensibility,
by presenting it as a dichotomy –
High Camp versus Low Camp.
“For Isherwood, High Camp
‘is the whole emotional basis of
the Ballet’ and ‘of Baroque art,’ a
sophisticated connoisseurial mode
by which ‘to discuss aesthetics or
philosophy,’” quotes Bolton.
“Isherwood regards it as ‘much
more fundamental’ than Low Camp,
which he considers as ‘an utterly
debased form’. Sontag expanded on
Isherwood’s concept of camp as an
aesthetic sensibility in Notes on ‘Camp’,
which is the heart of the exhibition
both physically and philosophically.”
In the introduction to her essay,
she asserted that, “The essence of
Camp is its love of the unnatural:
of artifice and exaggeration.”
She goes on to argue that camp “has
an affinity for certain arts rather than
others” – giving fashion as an example
because of its emphasis on “texture,
sensuous surface, and style at the
expense of content.” (Incidentally,
Sontag only gives two examples of
Like most fourletter
“ words, camp
invites debate.
But unlike most
four-letter words, it
evades definition
”
fashion in her aforementioned list:
“women’s clothes of the 1920s” and
“a woman walking around in a dress
made of three million feathers.”)
For this show, which will be divided
into two parts, Sontag serves as the
ghost narrator. In the first, she is the
ghost of camp’s past, tracing both its
etymological and phenomenological
origins and taking visitors on a journey
that begins in the court of Louis XIV –
where the word camp was first
used by Molière in his 1671 play
The Impostures of Scapin, to mean
'theatricality.' Then, in the second
part, she plays the role of ‘the ghost
of camp’s present and future’.
The design, masterminded by
scenographer Jan Versweyveld, is
also twofold; while the first part
will be presented as a series of
narrow corridors with low ceilings
‘to underscore the clandestine,
underground nature of camp before
Sontag outed it in the 1960s,’ the second
part will be presented as a large, open
piazza ‘to highlight its acceptance and
integration into mainstream culture.’
“In the first part, Susan’s voice will be
heard as a quiet whisper, while in the
second it will be heard as a deafening,
earsplitting scream,” Bolton clarifies.
Sontag was actually no stranger to
The Met. She would visit “religiously”
every Sunday, and many artworks
that she mentions in her 1964 essay
are taken from The Met’s collection,
such as Crivelli’s Madonna and Child.
“As in her essay, they’ll be presented
randomly to underscore her concept
that camp has an equalising and
democratising effect on art – that
if you look at art through camp
eyes, a Caravaggio painting has
the same visual appeal as a Flash
Gordon comic,” illustrates Bolton.
What’s more significant to
understanding and appreciating
fashion as a vehicle for camp is Sontag’s
analysis of its modes of expression.
These include irony, humour, parody,
pastiche, duplicity, ambiguity,
theatricality, extravagance, and
exaggeration, among many others.
“Sontag in her essay argues that the
‘Camp eye has the power to transform
experience’ but ‘not everything can
be seen as Camp. It’s not all in the
eye of the beholder.’ That’s not been
my experience,” counters Bolton.
“When it comes to fashion – or rather
when it comes to looking at fashion
through a pair of camp spectacles –
it’s all in the eye of the beholder. It’s
this subjectivity that underpins its
mutability and capriciousness.”
Indeed Bolton admits that he is not
helming an omniscient survey. “Like
most four-letter words, camp invites
debate. But unlike most four-letter
words, it evades definition,” he says.
“For this reason, the exhibition raises
more questions than it answers. For
example: ‘Is camp kitsch?’ ‘Is camp
political?’ And ultimately, ‘What
is camp?’ The only answer to these
questions is – as the historian Gregory
Bredbeck has suggested – a camp one:
‘Only one’s hairdresser knows for sure.’”
The Costume Institute’s spring 2019
exhibition – 'Camp: Notes on Fashion'
– shows from 9 May to 8 September
this year. metmuseum.org/camp
49