After the blockbuster hit that was "Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty," the Metropolitan Museum of Art decided to focus on another popular modern designer for the next Costume Institute exhibit: Prada.
As announced in August, the Met will pair the work of Miuccia Prada with that of surrealist designer Elsa Schiaparelli. Given that the McQueen exhibition brought in a record 661,509 vistors in just four months and made the deceased designer a household name (in New York, at least), you'd think Miuccia Prada would be thrilled about her new honor.
You'd be wrong. The Italian designer told Women's Wear Daily on Sunday that the exhibit, which will open to the public in May, is disappointing:
"It's too formal; they are focused on similarities, comparing feather with feather, ethnic with ethnic, but they are not taking into consideration that we are talking about two different eras, and that [Schiaparelli and I] are total opposite. [...] I told them, but they don't care."
Eek. Think Harold Koda is listening? We hope he adjusts the exhibit to Miuccia's liking by the time it's unveiled at May's Met Gala. Otherwise this year will be a repeat of 2009, when Azzedine Alaia felt so snubbed by the Met's "Model As Muse" exhibit that he and pals Stephanie Seymour and Naomi Campbell skipped the gala altogether.
And we wouldn't want Prada and her legion of fans -- mainly the Devil in Prada herself, Anna Wintour -- skipping the biggest red carpet of the year.
Read more at WWD.com. Also, apropos of nothing other than the Met, take a look at these adorable vintage pics of little kids at the museum collected by Paper.
UPDATE: A Prada rep reached out to Fashionista as well as to us to clarify Miuccia's reported comments, saying, "Miuccia Prada is honored and proud to take part in this exhibition which is 'an impossible conversation between Miuccia Prada and Elsa Schiapparelli'. The comments printed are taken out of context and therefore misconstrued. Mrs. Prada confirmed that she admires the total curatorial independence of the museum to the extent that they almost did not take into consideration her vision." So that's that.