She was the most influential style icon of the 1990s. And the Met Gala was, as it is today, fashion’s biggest night out. So, while it may come as a surprise that Princess Diana only attended the annual fundraiser once, in 1996, it’s little wonder she was the center of attention. Then the Princess of Wales, she arrived at the Metropolitan Museum of Art just hours after reaching New York City by Concorde. Cameras and commotion had accompanied her every move since divorcing Britain’s then-heir, Prince Charles, less than four months earlier. And as she ascended the Met’s iconic steps with her friend (and the evening’s chair), Harper’s Bazaar editor Liz Tilberis, it was clear Diana intended to embrace the attention. This was evident not only in her choice of gown — a daring, negligee-inspired navy slip dress with a black lace trim — but also in her decision to secretly alter the garment into something far more risqué than its designer had intended. The outfit was the work of John Galliano, who had recently left Givenchy to take the helm at Dior. That year’s Met Gala theme (and accompanying exhibition) centered on the French label’s founder, Christian Dior. And Galliano’s first couture assignment was to dress the event’s best-known attendee. He visited London’s Kensington Palace ahead of the gala to share drawings and discuss ideas with the princess. Recounting the experience in last year’s Hulu documentary series “In Vogue: The 90s,” the British designer said he lobbied Diana to wear pink but “she was not having it.” The princess had it her own way — and then some: After receiving the finished gown, she drastically modified it without Galliano’s knowledge. “Fast-forward to the event, and I just remember her getting out of the car. I couldn’t believe it. She’d ripped the corset out,” the designer revealed in the documentary. “She didn’t want to wear the corset.” Escaping royal dress codes Royal biographer Katie Nicholl has claimed that Diana worried the racy outfit might embarrass her then-14-year-old son, Prince William. But the look appeared to be well received by the press and other attendees. “She just makes it a little more glamorous, a little more beautiful, because she is both,” broadcaster Barbara Walters told tabloid TV show “Hard Copy,” whose segment gushed that Diana was “a work of art.” Later that week, a New York Times opinion piece said the princess had “demonstrated the restorative powers of celebrity.” Moreover, the look signaled that Diana was no longer constrained by a royal dress code — one that would have, surely, dictated a ballgown (or at least a far less revealing floor-length evening gown) for an event like the Met Gala. “She felt so liberated,” Galliano said in the 2024 documentary, describing the altered outfit as “much more sensuous” than his initial design. Diana’s jewelry choice also communicated reclaimed agency. She wore her sapphire engagement ring — on the ring finger of her left hand, no less. In this new context, however, the ring became a symbol of independence. It had been her mother’s, and her decision to continue wearing the jewel re-established it as a family heirloom, not the vestige of a doomed marriage. The ring was later used by William when he proposed to Kate Middleton in 2010. The statement sapphire-and-pearl choker Diana took to the Met was, meanwhile, the same one she’d sported with both her “revenge dress” (the low-cut satin gown worn after Charles’ infidelity came to light) and her “Travolta dress” (the off-the-shoulder number she’d danced with John Travolta in, 10 years earlier). Then there was Diana’s bag, which spoke to her status as a fashion icon. It was a mini version of one she had received as a gift from France’s then-first lady, Bernadette Chirac, the year prior. Designed by Galliano’s predecessor at Dior, Gianfranco Ferré, and unofficially known as the Chouchou — “favorite” in French — the original bag accompanied Diana to numerous public events. Her patronage proved so influential that in 1996 Dior renamed it The Lady Dior in her honor. Eye-catching, on-theme and full of symbolism — it was, in many ways, the perfect Met Gala look. And as fashion’s A-list prepares to follow, quite literally, in the princess’ footsteps at the 2025 fundraiser on Monday, it is worth remembering: Few arrivals on the museum’s staircase have generated quite as much excitement as Diana’s.
Remember when Princess Diana wowed the Met Gala in a risqué — and secretly altered — gown?
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Princess Diana's Iconic 1996 Met Gala Appearance Revisited"
CNN
7.2
TruthLens AI Summary
Princess Diana, known as a defining style icon of the 1990s, made a significant impact during her only appearance at the Met Gala in 1996. Arriving at the Metropolitan Museum of Art just hours after flying in from London, she commanded the attention of cameras and onlookers, particularly following her divorce from Prince Charles four months prior. Accompanied by Harper’s Bazaar editor Liz Tilberis, who chaired the event, Diana chose a daring navy slip dress with black lace trim designed by John Galliano, who had just transitioned from Givenchy to Dior. Notably, she secretly altered the gown to make it more revealing than originally intended, reflecting her desire to break away from royal constraints. Galliano recounted how Diana had removed the corset from the dress, which was a bold statement of her independence and personal style. Her choice of attire was not only a fashion statement but also a representation of her newfound freedom from royal expectations.
The reception of Diana's outfit at the Met Gala was overwhelmingly positive, with media and attendees praising her for the glamorous look that signified her liberation. Critics noted that her appearance marked a departure from the traditional royal dress code, which typically favored more conservative evening wear. Diana's jewelry choices further emphasized her independence; she wore her sapphire engagement ring, which had familial significance, and a choker that had become synonymous with her iconic style. The bag she carried, a mini version of the Lady Dior, was a nod to her influence on fashion, having inspired the name change of the bag in her honor. As the fashion world prepares for the next Met Gala, Diana's memorable entrance remains a benchmark of excitement and style, illustrating the impact she had on the event and the fashion landscape as a whole.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article provides a fascinating glimpse into Princess Diana’s memorable attendance at the Met Gala in 1996, highlighting her status as a fashion icon and the significant cultural moment that her appearance represented. By revisiting this event, the piece not only celebrates Diana’s fashion legacy but also examines the nuances of her public image post-divorce.
Cultural Significance of Diana's Appearance
Princess Diana's attendance at the Met Gala is portrayed as a pivotal moment in the 1990s fashion landscape. The narrative emphasizes her decision to wear a daring gown that she secretly altered, showcasing her desire to break free from royal constraints and express her individuality. This act of defiance against traditional royal dress codes resonates with audiences who admire her as a figure of empowerment and liberation. The article’s intent may be to evoke nostalgia for a time when Diana was at the height of her influence, contributing to her lasting legacy in fashion and culture.
Public Perception and Media Influence
By recounting the details surrounding Diana’s dress and the designer John Galliano’s reactions, the article taps into the fascination with celebrity culture and how media narratives shape public perception. The portrayal of Diana as a bold and independent woman diverging from royal expectations cultivates an image that aligns with contemporary values of self-expression and authenticity. The intention seems to be to reinforce Diana's iconic status while also prompting discussions about the pressures faced by public figures, especially women.
Hidden Agendas or Underlying Issues
The focus on Diana’s fashion choices may mask broader discussions about the pressures and scrutiny faced by women in the public eye. While celebrating her boldness, there might be an underlying commentary on the expectations placed upon her, as well as the complexities of her personal life. This could suggest a desire to redirect attention from current issues related to celebrity culture and media scrutiny onto a more nostalgic and romanticized view of Diana.
Manipulative Elements
There is a moderate level of manipulativeness present, primarily through the framing of Diana’s choices as empowering while simultaneously glossing over the societal pressures that influenced her decisions. The language used evokes admiration for her individuality but can also lead to an oversimplification of her struggles. The article seems to aim at invoking a sense of fondness for Diana while potentially diverting attention from contemporary issues of celebrity treatment and misogyny in media narratives.
Reliability of the Content
The article appears to be reliable based on the recounting of historical events and documented perspectives, particularly those of designers and biographers. However, the nostalgic tone and selective emphasis on certain aspects of Diana’s appearance may influence how the information is perceived. While the core facts are consistent with known history, the interpretation offers a subjective lens through which to view her legacy.
Societal Implications
This narrative could influence contemporary discussions regarding body image, fashion, and the autonomy of women in the public domain. It may inspire people to reflect on the evolution of fashion and the roles public figures play in shaping societal norms. Additionally, it could lead to a surge in interest in fashion history and the impact of influential figures like Diana on modern styles and perceptions of celebrity.
Target Audience
The article likely appeals to fashion enthusiasts, royal watchers, and individuals nostalgic for the 1990s culture. It seeks to engage those who admire Princess Diana not just for her royal status, but for her groundbreaking contributions to fashion and her role as a cultural icon.
Market Impact
While the article itself may not have direct implications for stock markets or global economies, it could influence brands associated with fashion or charitable causes that Diana supported. Companies and charities may leverage this renewed interest in Diana’s legacy to boost their profiles or fundraising efforts.
Geopolitical Relevance
There is no immediate geopolitical significance in the narrative, but it does touch on themes of celebrity, media power, and public perception that are relevant to contemporary discourse about the influence of public figures in politics and society.
Artificial Intelligence Involvement
It is conceivable that AI models were used in the drafting or editing process to enhance readability and engagement. The stylistic choices and narrative flow may have benefited from algorithms trained on similar content, smoothing transitions and focusing on emotional resonance.
In conclusion, the article serves as a homage to Princess Diana's legacy while subtly navigating the complexities of fame and public scrutiny. Its reliability is anchored in historical fact, yet the emphasis on certain aspects may guide the reader towards a specific emotional response.