Breaking the Culture for Capital

 

The short video “Gucci x Dapper Dan Made in Harlem A” shows models and stylists walking the streets of Harlem dressed in high-end Gucci clothing. It’s colorful, stylish, and full of energy, but underneath all that glamour is a message that isn’t so simple. The video is presented as a celebration — Gucci and Dapper Dan, two fashion giants from different worlds, coming together. While it looks like a win for diversity and inclusion, this blog post will look at it from a different angle, using Stuart Hall’s representation theory, especially the oppositional reading. We’ll break down what the video says about power, class, and how Black culture is often used for show but not always respected or empowered.

To understand what’s going on in this video, we first need to look at the context in which it was made and shared. Gucci made this video not just as a creative project but also to fix its public image. Back in 2018, Gucci was criticized for releasing a sweater that looked like blackface — a deeply offensive stereotype rooted in racism. The backlash was strong, and as part of their response, Gucci partnered with Dapper Dan. Dapper Dan is a Harlem designer who, back in the 1980s and 90s, remixed luxury brand logos to make streetwear that spoke to Black communities — something luxury brands didn’t like at the time. Gucci once took legal action against him. Now, years later, they’re working together. The video was shared on platforms like Instagram and YouTube — places where young, trendy audiences hang out. So, this wasn’t just a random fashion video. It was a calculated move by Gucci to clean up its image, reach a new market, and make a statement that they’ve changed. But who benefits from this change?

The story that Gucci wants people to see — what Stuart Hall would call the “preferred reading” — is one of growth and partnership. According to that message, Gucci isn’t just a luxury brand anymore; it learns from its mistakes, supports Black designers, and values Harlem’s creative energy. In the video, you see people of color styled in bold clothes, posing with confidence on Harlem’s sidewalks. It looks like Gucci is finally listening, finally giving space to Black creators who’ve been ignored for so long. Dapper Dan, once an outsider, is now in the spotlight, with Gucci’s full support. This reading makes Gucci look like a brand that is progressive, inclusive, and ready to embrace difference. It gives viewers a feel-good story about reconciliation, respect, and mutual success.

But if we take the oppositional reading — a way of looking at media that questions the dominant message — a different picture comes into focus. From this angle, the video feels less like a true collaboration and more like a smart business move by Gucci. Think about it: Harlem, a historically Black neighborhood that has dealt with poverty and neglect, is being used as a pretty background for Gucci’s brand. Dapper Dan is shown as a symbol of Harlem’s success, but he’s also now working under Gucci’s terms. Yes, he’s respected, but Gucci still owns the products, controls the marketing, and decides the prices. So while it seems like Dapper Dan is winning, he’s still not on equal ground with Gucci. His creative style — once criticized — is now being used to sell more Gucci products to young Black people. It’s like Gucci is borrowing Harlem’s soul just to make itself look good. That’s what Hall’s oppositional reading helps us see — the way power and control still remain with the brand, not the community.

The audience for this video is split in many ways. On one side, there are young Black consumers who know Dapper Dan and what he stands for — people who have seen his work, admired how he made luxury fashion more accessible, and who feel proud to see him finally getting the recognition he deserves. On the other side, there are Gucci’s usual customers — wealthy, global fashion lovers who see this campaign as trendy and bold. These two groups view the same video but might feel very different about it. Someone from Harlem might be proud to see their neighborhood on screen, but they might also feel that their reality is being glossed over. A rich consumer in Paris might love the video’s “urban vibe” without understanding or caring about what Harlem really represents. Stuart Hall reminds us that people understand media based on their life experiences. The different ways people view this video show how representation is never neutral — it always connects to power, identity, and position.

What’s really important here is how the video handles power. Representation isn’t just about who appears in a video — it’s about who gets to tell the story, who holds control behind the scenes, and who benefits from it all. Gucci may be showing more Black faces, but that doesn’t mean they’re shifting real power. The video gives the impression that Harlem and Gucci are equals, but in truth, Gucci is still the boss. They control the brand, the business, and the platform. Harlem gets attention, but Gucci gets the profits. Dapper Dan may be in the room now, but he’s still working within Gucci’s structure. The community that shaped him — Harlem — doesn’t share in the wealth that this collaboration creates. The stylish shots of stoops and murals feel more like decoration than true inclusion. That’s where Stuart Hall’s theory hits hardest: representation can often hide inequality, even while pretending to fix it.

By looking at the “Gucci x Dapper Dan Made in Harlem A” video through Stuart Hall’s representation lens — especially from the oppositional reading point of view — we can see beyond the fashion and flashy visuals. While the video tries to tell a story of redemption and progress, it actually shows how big brands like Gucci use culture for their own benefit. The deeper issues of inequality, ownership, and authenticity are covered up with stylish editing and uplifting music. But if we take a closer look, we’ll notice that not much has changed. Representation in media doesn’t always lead to real change — sometimes it just helps the people in power stay powerful, while making it look like they’re doing the right thing. This video is a perfect example of how important it is to question what we see, ask who’s really in charge, and keep pushing for deeper, more honest storytelling.

When we think about this kind of representation, it’s not just about clothes and celebrities. It’s about history, respect, and truth. Dapper Dan is a cultural icon not because Gucci said so, but because of what he did when no one was watching — giving style and voice to a community that had been left out. The video wants to celebrate that, but in doing so, it also risks erasing the struggle that made Dapper Dan’s work powerful in the first place. This isn’t just a critique of Gucci, but of all media that use diversity as a decoration without changing the system. Representation matters, but real power and ownership matter more. We should enjoy the art, yes — but we should also keep asking tough questions. That’s what Stuart Hall teaches us, and that’s why this kind of critical reading is so important.