Fashion Internet, I'm Revoking Your Pitchfork Privileges
Be a hater, but do it critically
This summer, there’s been a lot of internet discourse surrounding two projects that I think perfectly reflect the current state of referencing in fashion. We’ve taken the concept of “no original ideas” to the extreme - seemingly every campaign is a recall, every buzzy red carpet moment is from the archives, every design a re-issue. We’ve become so accustomed to referencial style that we’re collectively distressed by change, unmoored by concepts that don’t lend themselves to side-by-side collage posts for Instagram.
Summer 2025 kicked off with the now-infamous Ryan Murphy Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy disaster as covered by Gabriella Karefa-Johnson, Tara Maria Gonzalez, and dozens of others. The topic was thoroughly exhausted here on fashion Substack because the poorly executed first look at American Love Story provoked such impassioned ire. CBK is deeply beloved, and the costume design appeared to be the most bare minimum of a vague copy-paste. People saw the first press photos and understood that all camel coats are not created equally. Simply imitating the types of items Bessette-Kennedy wore would be missing the vital details, losing the essential reasons that her style is so desperately emulated decades later.
The online outcry was so loud that it, in turn, prompted slews of articles that even included a Vogue exclusive from Bessette-Kennedy’s colorist. Murphy defended the project, insisted that the initial images were simply “test shots,” that the much lambasted wrong shade of blonde was only a wig, and that the sad brown coat was “just a coat we threw on for color.” Murphy then rattled off a list of authentic vintage items already collected for the show, including CBK’s favorite 90’s Manolos and the same Prada bag styles once carried by Bessette-Kennedy.
Fast forward to now, where the fashion internet is currently scoffing at the images coming from the set of the forthcoming The Devil Wears Prada sequel. Everyone I’ve seen discuss the topic so far is mad - except Mandy Lee, which is the only confirmation I need to know that I’m on the right side of the conversation.
I’m honestly a bit indifferent about the movie itself, but from what I’ve seen so far of the costumes? I think they look great.
Disappointed fans heard The Devil Wears Prada and were transported to 2006, fondly recalling their own memories of gleefully watching a 23-year-old Anne Hathaway strut through the office in Chanel boots. The desperation for nostalgia has people willing to simply forget that the last 20 years ever happened - and listen, I get it. But Andy Sachs and Miranda Priestly are characters dressed in very specific ways for very specific reasons, and neither of their characters would be interested in heavily referencing 2006 style today.
At the Michael Kors Collection Spring/Summer 2023 show, Anne Hathaway was seated beside Anna Wintour in a long brown leather coat. Hathaway’s outfit and bangs immediately sent the internet buzzing with comparisons to a (sort of) similar look from The Devil Wears Prada. Hathaway’s stylist, Erin Walsh, told People magazine: “[Hathaway is] already a fashion icon from ‘The Devil Wears Prada.’ People want to see that side. They want to see it going there, and we’re going there.”
In real life, it makes sense for a celebrity stylist to offer up a throwback moment, to play with a contemporary update of a beloved fashion memory. But the fictional Andy Sachs isn’t a celebrity, she isn’t being professionally styled to sit front row at NYFW, and regular people don’t reference their own decades-past outfits to provide fan service for an imaginary audience.
We watched Andy happily leave the fashion industry behind in 2006. Why would she still be the same try hard, wardrobe-closet-borrowing girl from the original movie? 23-year-old Andy was figuring it out. Audiences love a movie makeover, but it’s only fun because we never have to think about all of the sustained effort required after the peppy makeover montage song cuts.
We loved Andy because she was clueless, unsure, and deeply influenced by her environment. We related to her, we cheered her on, we loved seeing her emulate off-duty stars of the era because we, too, wanted to play dress up in the closets of Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar. We watched as Andy started to experiment in fashion, both following industry cues and hesitantly making her own choices, resulting in a wardrobe that was chaotic, bogged down in so much fucking Chanel, and, frankly, kind of appallingly 2000’s-coded.
Unlike Murphy’s American Love Story, The Devil Wears Prada 2 is not set to capture the past. Bessette-Kennedy is tragically frozen in time, her image endlessly mined from a limited collection of 30-year-old photos. Her sensibilities were deeply influenced by her upbringing and her lifestyle, her clothing choices informed by a New England adolescence and later, a skyrocketing career at Calvin Klein. The specific context of her style was seemingly overlooked in the original costuming for American Love Story.
I don’t think Molly Rogers, costume designer for The Devil Wears Prada 2, is making the same mistakes.
The looks shown so far make me believe that Andy, Miranda, & Co. are real people. Rogers, as a good costume designer should do, is telling me a story about the characters. I haven’t looked for a synopsis of the DWP2, or watched any trailers. Are there trailers yet? But I can gather plenty just by looking at the costumes so far!
Current day Andy favors female designers like Gabriela Hearst, Chitose Abe of Sacai, and Phoebe Philo. She’s a confident and established career woman in her 40’s who can afford really nice designer clothing, which sometimes includes vintage JPG, but also often carries the same huge Coach briefcase. She wears heels when she needs to, but prefers boots and chunky sandals. She’s maintained the comfortable, cerulean-sweater wearing Andy we knew and loved, just grown up - and with a grown up paycheck to match.
This was a departure from my usual content - I rarely (if ever?) discuss pop culture! But I felt like the overall discourse surrounding this project so far was lacking nuance and context, two things we absolutely cannot lose sight of. I’m in full support of being a hater, but you have to explain why. We can’t let nostalgia and comfort cloud our vision, to allow yearning for a sweeter past prevent us from interacting with art and culture with a sharp mind. Remember - it’s never just clothes. It’s never just TV or just movies. Even our denim commercials are selling us sinister messages these days…
Critique with care, friends.
Since writing this post, I’ve come across a video by creator Landon Reid that included really thoughtful and nuanced critiques of the DWP2 costuming. They pointed out that the overall decline in quality of clothing since the first movie came out is reflected in the lackluster appearance of certain pieces being used in the sequel. This was definitely something that I should have clocked, but totally overlooked!
They also pointed out Miranda Priestly’s very specific shoes in the first movie, which I never noticed. I think the shoes Roger chose for Priestly in the sequel are very chic, but I now realize may not make sense for her character. This is the exact kind of critique I think this conversation has been missing, and I’m always glad to be educated by someone with sharper eyes and mind than myself.