Kim Kardashian veils her identity in a radical nude ensemble at the 2025 Academy Museum Gala

19 October 2025

Frazer Harrison/WireImage

At the fifth annual Academy Museum Gala in Los Angeles, an event typically steeped in cinematic glamour and celebrity snapshots, Kim Kardashian turned heads not so much with star power as with stylistic subversion. On the red carpet, she appeared encased in a full-face nude mask paired with an elegant strapless corseted gown from Maison Margiela’s Fall 2025 Couture collection. Rather than a traditional reveal, this look concealed her identity entirely, prompting both fascination and critique.

Kardashian’s ensemble invoked her previous masked moment at the 2021 Met Gala, when she arrived in an all-black head-to-toe Balenciaga look that covered her face and body. In Los Angeles this time, she chose a nude-toned version of the concept: the fabric wrapped over her face and hair, the structured corset emphasized her figure, and dramatic long bangs of tuxedo-black curls trailed down her back.

Her accessories were overtly ornamental: a three-tiered diamond choker featuring emerald accents and pendants, a statement emerald ring, and pointed nude manicure tips that echoed the mask’s shade exactly. She later posted behind-the-scenes footage of her makeup artist finishing the look, with a tongue-in-cheek exchange about whether she looked “okay” under the mask.

Reactions were swift and divided. Some fashion watchers applauded the total commitment to avant-garde vision, calling the look a bold artistic statement about identity, celebrity and the gaze. Others found it off-putting: comments ranged from “next-level fabulous” to mockery describing the mask as resembling “a brown paper bag” or “a Halloween prop.” Online conversation referenced the likeness to her ex-husband’s aesthetic, suggesting the choice may speak less to autonomy than to echoing earlier influences.

To walk into a high-profile gala where cameras, lights and recognition traditionally converge around a known face and intentionally obscure the iconic visage raises questions about what Kardashian is really projecting. Is this an act of artistic rebellion or a commentary on fame? Is it a way to control her presence by hiding it? The visual effect unsettles in precisely the right way for a personality so known for visibility.

Beyond its shock value the moment reflects the evolving nature of celebrity fashion. Once the red carpet was about exposure, recognition and allure. Now, especially for someone whose face is arguably among the most recognized in the world, covering the face entirely may offer another kind of power: anonymity, surprise and control. In an era of constant visibility of selfies, social feeds and image saturation hiding becomes a statement.

Kardashian’s choice signals that even amidst tradition-driven events galas built on pageantry and presentation the conversation about identity and exhibition has shifted. The juxtaposition of couture craftsmanship with the elimination of recognizable features raises doubt: is celebrity about the star or the costume? With her face concealed, the costume becomes the message.

This isn’t simply fashion-over-function: Kardashian admitted that she could barely see through the mask and had to be guided down the red carpet. One observer noted that such outfits are less about practicality and more about spectacle. But spectacle is part of the event economy: for guests, brands, photographers and followers, it is the image, sharp, shareable, enduring, that matters. The mask becomes a new kind of red-carpet prop.

But there are threads of vulnerability here too. By masking herself at a glamorous event, Kardashian may also be signalling a desire to escape the illuminated intensity of celebrity. The barrier created by the mask offers distance, privacy, protection. For someone whose identity has been commodified, this visual withdrawal paradoxically communicates presence.

It remains to be seen how this look will age in cultural memory. Will it be viewed as a fashion high-concept moment, or a flamboyant misstep? Whether the outcome is critique or praise, what matters is that it provoked conversation. In doing so, it may have fulfilled a deeper purpose: shifting focus from the face of a celebrity to the image they present and the myth they perpetuate.