Brandjack News

By Quentin Langley

While trying to limit this blog to the specifics of the current case, some comment on general principles seems relevant. It would be unfortunate if people who do awful things never got a second chance. With the exception of criminals sentenced either to death or life imprisonment, even criminals are released from prison. It would sad, not only for them, but for people at large, if those released prisoners never got the chance to be employed in legal work. That would make it hard for them to reform themselves.

Galliano has not been sentenced to prison, but only to a token fine. In countries with a strong tradition of free speech, such as the US, even this seems terrible. He only said things. He was not guilty of violence or theft. But, let us put that aside. Whether or not the disgraceful things he said should be criminal, there is no doubt that they disgusted large numbers of people and Dior was well within its rights – and undoubtedly wise – to fire him. This is not, of course, because people with anti-semitic views inherently lack talent as clothes designers. Those with more interest in the subject than I seem to take the view that he has considerable talent. It is because he is a very high profile designer, and people were attracted to the Dior brand not just by the quality of the designs but by their association with John Galliano's name. People are no longer so attracted to his name, whatever they think of his talent.

To exclude him from employment in high profile roles, therefore, is the equivalent of keeping a fraudster away from roles involving money. His name used to be an asset with a positive value. Now it has a negative value. If he wishes to design clothes, he may have to do so anonymously for a while. No fashion house is likely to declare that they are carrying Galliano designs. While this might not seem to be a problem – after all, most designers are anonymous, with only a small elite having public followings – any fashion house that employed him in such a way would be accused of hiding the fact that they were employing him, and that would damage their reputation. He may really have to start at the bottom, submitting design ideas to brands anonymously, so even his employer doesn't know it is he.

It might be better for him to pursue a completely different career for a while. Perhaps a comparison should be drawn with the British politician, fraudster and spy, John Stonehouse. With his business interests failing, Stonehouse faked his own death and fled to Australia, but was eventually caught and served a prison sentence for fraud. (Allegations that he was a spy for Czechoslovakia were only confirmed after his death). On his release, Stonehouse dedicated himself to fundraising for charities. Only after some years success in this field did he become a novelist and begin to make TV appearance again – mostly discussing his failed attempt to fake his death.

If Galliano wants to earn forgiveness for the horrible things he said, he should devote his time to helping others for a while, recognising that people don't want to be seen wearing his designs at the moment. In his case, since he claims his anti-semitic rant was brought on by alcohol and drug abuse, he needs to spend time helping people with addctions. When he has proved that he has both overcome his own addiction and been a successful counsellor to other addicts, people may look again at his work in the fashion sector. Until then, anonymous hard work helping others would be his best approach.