Echendu Sonia 23BE032990 Assignment 2 13/6/25

 Critical Analysis of Gucci x Dapper Dan A/W ’18–’19 BTS Campaign

 

Introduction

The alliance between Gucci and Dapper Dan during the Autumn/Winter 2018–2019 season is seen as a moment in fashion and representation. Dapper Dan, a Harlem-based designer, was a pioneer who merged contemporary fashion with casual appeal brand logos during the 1980s. After decades of marginalization, his partnership with Gucci symbolized a different merging of culture with the main fashion world.

This campaign, particularly its behind-the-scenes serves as a rich text for critical analysis. To understand how meaning is created and interpreted, this paper applies Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding model, focusing on the negotiated reading of the campaign - reveals how audiences not fully accept Gucci’s message while questioning its realness and implication.

 

Stuart Hall’s Negotiated Reading: Theory Overview

Stuart Hall’s theory pinpoints the idea that media messages carry fixed meanings, Hall’s argues instead that audiences always interpret content based on their cultural experience, social position and personal experiences. Hall introduces three types of interpretations: dominant - where the viewer fully accepts the intended message oppositional - where the viewer rejects it entirely and negotiated where the viewer partly agrees but also questions certain aspects negotiated reading is used for media texts like this campaign. Where meanings are uncovered to diverse interpretations. This method pinpoints the active role audiences play in interpreting meaning rather than passively accepting it.

 

Negotiated Reading of the Gucci x Dapper Dan Campaign

1.      Power of Representation:

At first sight, the campaign encodes a message of cultural appreciation. By partnering with Dapper Dan, Gucci recognize the designer’s remarkable contribution on luxury fashion. The picture used celebrate a history oppressed community and its cultural heritage making it a global name.

From a negotiated perspective, many people will accept this representation as an uplifting. Seeing a Harlem-based designer enhanced by a global luxury brand can be good. Its pinpoint rising in an industry that has often been looked down at for cultural appropriation. This aspect of the campaign resonates positively, especially with audiences in cultural pride.

2.      Questions On Power and Authenticity:

Despite this acceptance, the negotiated reader also critically questions the campaign hidden stories behind heritage. The partnership shows symbolically, takes place within a capitalist system where Gucci revolve the narrative. Dapper Dan, although visible, does not hold equal power compared to Gucci’s corporate system. This makes us questions about the true authentic of the representation that was accepted.

Is the campaign a true celebration of Harlem and Black culture, or is it a strategic marketing designed to pinpoint from cultural art? The negotiated reading acknowledges that while Gucci may be empowering Dapper Dan’s legacy, it is benefiting from his work and culture capital, influence strategically. This makes viewers to ponder whether the partnership is an act of true inclusion or simply a repackaging of Black creativity for mainstream consumption.

 

3.      Audience Reaction and Social media:

Social media and Audience reactions to the campaign shows the negotiated reading in real time. On social media platforms, audiences unconsciously praise Gucci for recognizing Dapper Dan, a designer who was once pushed to the margin and Harlem culture.

Many people celebrate the recognition given to Black culture, yet others pinpoint the current inequalities in the fashion industry that this campaign does not rehandle. While the campaign was praised, it also brought about scepticism. Some questioned whether it was a true step toward inclusivity or just a form of fashion washing where brands major on oppressed cultures for profit without showing any effort on deeper issues. This discussion shows the   ongoing issue about racial inequality and power dynamics in the fashion industry. The mixed reactions highlight how consumers both embrace and challenge such initiatives, exposing the complex interplay between branding and social responsibility.

4.       Rewriting Fashion Narratives:

Looking at the campaign from a historical view enriches its interpretation. In the 1980s and 1990s, Dapper Dan gained recognition for combining luxury brand logos, designing bold, designs for his Harlem community. However, many fashion industry, like Gucci, put down his work unauthorized, which led to lawsuits that eventually close his fashion house. Years later, the Gucci brand that once put down his innovation is now collaborating with him.

Through a negotiated lens, it honours a designer who defied fashion norms and is now being welcomed into the industry. Yet deeper questions arise why did it take so long for this recognition to happen? Is Gucci leveraging this partnership to repair its image without fully confronting its past exclusion of Black creatives? While the collaboration appears forward-thinking, the power dynamics remain unbalanced.

 

Conclusion

Applying Stuart Hall’s negotiated reading to the Gucci x Dapper Dan A/W ’18–’19 campaign shows a real and critical discussion between message and audience. While the campaign encodes a message of celebration, audiences receive it in ways that both accept and challenge its views.

This underscores the importance of active interpretation in media consumption. The campaign’s portrayal of Harlem and Dapper Dan’s legacy make sense but is incomplete, inviting viewers to celebrate progress while demanding authenticity. It explains to us that no message is neutral.