The Old Money Aesthetic: It’s history of racism and classism
There has been a recent rise of ‘old money’ aesthetic and ‘quiet luxury’ style. Though those terms are often used interchangeably online, they do not mean the same thing.
First let’s start with the meanings of these terms and their fashion origins. Old Money aesthetic includes certain items and clothes associated with those that come from old money or generational wealth. It mimics a wealthy and classic fashion. Not limited to but often inclusive of pearl necklaces, polo shirts, tennis skirts, navy blazers, tweed and more. Almost crossing into preppy territories with its recognisable traits- think Blair Waldorf from Gossip Girls.
Quiet Luxury is an embodiment of the term ‘money speaks but wealth whispers’, referring to how those with wealth prefer to lay low and not flaunt their wealth. Imagine Mark Zuckerberg, his t-shirt looks plain and unassuming. No one could have thought that it would be a $300 shirt from Brunello Cucinelli. While the sentiment that they dress this way is to avoid being targeted for theft, those with wealth and in the view of the public eye dress more casually in order to avoid criticism.
The racism & classism issue
An issue following the rise of quiet luxury is that it is rooted in classicism. People are praised to the heavens and above for wearing the most basic monochromatic looks while others are bashed and called trashy for wearing branded items. As if they both do not have something in common – wealth. If that wasn’t enough, there also lies a subtle hint of racism. Inspirations for the ‘Old Money’ style are drawn from pictures of wealthy white women and as so it associates them with sophistication, timelessness and class. On the flip side ‘New Money’ styles like logomania are considered tacky which can be considered racist as most of its trends take inspiration from black fashion.
Another example of subtle racism in the fashion industry was the 1990s Chanel fashion shows led by Karl Lagerfield who often took inspiration from black streetwear. An avid watcher of the channel MTV with shows of black rappers, most of his designs included denim, large chains and belts, sneakers and a sudden use of logomania. This was met with criticism from newspapers and reporters, stating that he had strayed from his clientele of white, upper class people. It was almost as if the public deemed certain pieces of black streetwear to be unsophisticated and therefore trashy. This is of course only the case as ironically, that era is now fondly remembered with its large belts and infamous logs.
Logo mania was first led by fashion designer Dapper Dan, taking high end designs and altering them to suit hip-hop and rap styles of the 1980s-1990s. He designed his own clothing and then borrowed logos from luxury brands like Gucci and Louis Vuitton to incorporate into the finished pieces which represent much of the logo-heavy rap culture at the time. Over time it became only popular amongst new money, and people of lower economic status aspiring to appear wealthy. Thus, it led to disdain from the public as humans naturally prefer humble attitudes. However, this problem would not have occurred if people were not idolising those of higher classes, equalising wealth to success and therefore creating a superiority complex of the rich.
Continuing the discussion on its roots in classism, there seems to be a blurry boundary between dressing to look like a rich person, and dressing to look timeless and classy. Some people attribute certain clothings to the ‘Old Money’ aesthetic that only rich people wear even though it is just a piece of clothing or outfit that looks classy. Many people immediately assume that wealth is synonymous with class. That might not be the case. Just because someone dresses in expensive clothing, does not mean they are sophisticated and have class. Likewise, you do not have to be wealthy to be classy. Creating a stereotypical image of a classy wealthy person leads to elitism which idolises the upper class and frowns upon those with less privileged backgrounds.
While at the end of the day there is nothing wrong with following certain trends, we must be careful not to assume a person to have the same characteristics that their style connotes.
