The Irrelevantly Entertaining Details of the Met Gala Are Hard to Miss … Or Care About

Every year around this time I face a similar struggle as I read all the stories about the Met Gala. I wonder why people care so much.

Perhaps my confusion comes from the fact that the more ridiculous stories are the ones that seem to get the most traction. Like the one about how Katy Perry's AI generated images were "stealing the show" this year. Or how Serena Williams looked like a "modern day Cinderella."

Pamela Anderson got some coverage for the "bold" choice of going to the gala makeup-free. Demi Moore wore a tie. A K-pop star wore underwear with an image of Rosa Parks. Sabrina Carpenter had no pants. Kylie Jenner even glued on her shoes for the event, which created a struggle to get them off afterwards.

Ok, that glue-on shoe story was pretty entertaining.

One trend that several outlets covered was how the gala was itself turning into a "Nepo baby hotspot." Meanwhile, the legendary South Asians celebrities like Shah Rukh Khan and Diljit Dosanjh who were in attendance were generally ignored, causing a fan uproar and backlash. My favorite coverage of the entire evening of fashion/farce was one twenty-something unmarried male journalist who was assigned to cover the gala for USA Today presumably for comedic reasons. He, at least, managed to deliver by alternately praising some looks while openly pondering irrelevant details, such as why designers even bothered to put pockets on certain shirts. One line from his article pretty much summed up what I realized was my perspective on the whole gala too:

"Am I missing something? Probably. Do I care? No."