Bespoke luxury suits, long and flowing silk dresses, dark sunglasses, and, in the background, a beautiful old country estate guarded by purebred dogs and filled with antique furniture.This is a scene many young people today consider ideal. Promoted by social media, quiet luxury offers an escape from information overload through a minimalist aesthetic that is nevertheless ostentatious in its quality. But where does this desire come from, and what is the story behind the layers of fine fabrics and this elegant way of life?
Quiet Luxury
One of the most revered aesthetics today, quiet luxury, is an aesthetic defined by minimalist clothing, neutral tones, and sharply tailored silhouettes. The strength of this style isn’t found in ostentation, but in the quality of the fabric, craftsmanship, fit and durability. Before this shift, fashion was overwhelmingly maximalist, characterized by wigs, lustrous fabrics, vibrant colors, ruffles and intricate embroidery. This tension between maximalism and minimalism marked a turning point in fashion history.
This is why the term “quiet luxury” emerged: the focus was never on attracting attention, yet the garments were noble in their materials and often bespoke. This aesthetic has also been strongly influenced by another term that has recently gained traction on social media: the “old money”.
Historical context
The Industrial Revolution, which started in England around 1760, spread around the world, marking the transition from a craft-based system to a mechanized one, driven by new technologies. This was followed, from 1789 to 1799, by the French Revolution, which brought about the end of the Ancien Regime, the fall of the aristocracy and nobility, and the rise of the bourgeoisie. A few years later, in England, between 1811 and 1820, during the Regency Era, a striking figure who defied the fashion standards of the time emerged: George Brummell.
Despite belonging to the middle class, Brummel became close to the British royal family and used this position to enter high society. His elegant appearance, natural charm, and sharp wit made him famous for being famous. He was known for being preoccupied with his appearance and was one of the first to reject the ornamented silks and stockings of the aristocracy.
He realized that the culture was shifting and developed a new, more masculine look. Brummel broke away from the overly flashy aristocratic fashion, which included embroidery, bold colors, and excess, and began to advocate for a more minimalist, well-tailored, and impeccable look, focusing on quality rather than ostentation. George Brummel was the most important dandy in history.
Dandyism
Brummell, as the creator of this fashion trend, established a new style: dandyism. Dandies were complex figures who pursued elegance and sophistication in both dress and demeanor as a form of identity and resistance. The term emerged in the 19th century and was associated with men who dressed in an extremely elegant and refined manner, often in bespoke clothing designed to make them stand out. They rejected the productivity-driven ethos of the Industrial Age, opposing the growing valorization of work, as they lived for style and leisure.
At that time, fashion was highly standardized and uniform, so creating a personal style meant challenging social norms, often leading them to be portrayed as funny, eccentric, or excessive. To be a dandy, one did not need to be an aristocrat or hold noble titles. In 19th century Europe, the dandy became a public and artistic figure who based his way of dressing, walking, and speaking on a singular aesthetic ideal. For the dandy, existence itself was to be fashioned as a work of art, distancing him from political and social concerns.
Dandies were seen as peculiar figures: while they rejected bourgeois conformity, they also did not align themselves with the aristocracy, as many of them did not come from noble backgrounds.
The Gilded Age
On the other side of the ocean, in New York, United States, 1% of the population held all the money, status, and power. At that time, there was a huge tension between the “new rich” and the “old money.” The new rich represented the bourgeoisie (despised by the dandies), who possessed unimaginable fortunes and represented the economic power of the time, owning railroads and steel industries. In the era of industrialization and mass production, what mattered was having an efficient means of transportation between different cities, constantly moving the economy forward.
However, these people did not come from generationally wealthy families, they had built all this wealth within a single generation, unlike the “old rich”, who were descendants of Europeans who had become wealthy, often still in Europe. These people had influence, tradition, fortune, and properties inherited from their ancestors.
Therefore, climbing the ranks of high society from nothing was very difficult, and required good manners and modesty to be placed above ambition and ostentation. For most of history, the general consensus was that the ultra-rich liked to display their status in a visible and proud way. But everything changed when the Industrial Revolution allowed an emerging bourgeois class to accumulate even more money than the old nobility. It was then that the economist Thorstein Veblen coined the term “conspicuous consumption” in 1899 to illustrate what was happening. Veblen believed that the new rich displayed extravagant spending to match the status of the traditional elite, a process he defined as “pecuniary emulation.”
Therefore, the only way the old rich could differentiate themselves from the newcomers was by demonstrating better taste in the things they consumed. So, instead of buying everything, they needed to cultivate higher levels of cultural and intellectual capital.
This obsession with entering high society was the reality that all new rich people had to face, but it was almost exclusive to women. Since the United States does not have a pre-existing aristocracy, women, in a way, had to invent it on the spot. They became the creative and improvisational figures who defined who the new elites would be and how deserving they were.
This was a world of the new rich, they were what used to be called a “chip-cut aristocracy.” They had no lineage or genealogy, and needed to claim something to establish their cultural legitimacy. One way to do this was by living in a splendid way, becoming a spectacle and impressing others.
The Idolatry of quiet luxury
The new rich, even though they revolutionized the United States, were extremely criticized by high society. Bringing this to the present day, there are many people who, even without belonging to either of these spheres, hold strong opinions about both worlds. Some consider the new rich to be tacky figures due to its ostentatious nature, and find themselves drawn to the “quiet luxury” aesthetic, as it represents an inspiring, beautiful, and elegant ideal.
This idolatry has several explanations, such as the idea that Generation Z’s aspiration toward the old money aesthetic stems from a sense of exhaustion with “hustle culture”. There was such a large wave of influencers and entrepreneurs in the mid-2010s seeking brand deals, working to gain followers, building businesses, and selling products, that Gen Z grew up believing they needed to project themselves into side hustles and create their own brands in order to achieve success and fulfillment. The “old money” and “quiet luxury” aesthetics feel almost like an escapist sigh of relief, a pause from the hustle, supported by the idea of generational wealth.
Other interpretations suggest that “new money” provokes disdain among social media users due its ostentatious nature and pretentious lifestyle, widely displayed online. More than that,these individuals are often targets of envy for having acquired wealth quickly and easily, while “old money” feels so distant and out of reach that it is not even considered a real possibility and therefore does not need to be seen as part of this cycle of social competition. This is what sets quiet luxury apart from other trends: the impossibility of truly belonging to it. Even with its reputation for not displaying wealth, it is, in fact, still doing so, through codes and meanings, but doing so nonetheless.
There is a certain level of nonchalance and indifference among true preppies (elite individuals, often associated with traditional preparatory schools) that was lacking among those who aspired to be like them. Similarly, the journalist Vance Packard wrote in 1959 that the New England aristocrat clings to his worn-out shoes, even after many repairs, and to his old hat. Dressing too neatly can signal insecurity about one’s social position and wealth, which, to an untrained eye, may appear as laziness or lack of style.
The endless desire to belong
Quiet luxury is more about sensibility than appearance. There are certain social codes that many people follow, such as ways of speaking and specific behaviors that go far beyond clothing, all of which reflect having attended particular schools and lived within that community. In the end, the idea of a “rich person’s uniform” is a myth created by those who aspire to be rich. It makes the wealthy seem easier to decode. It makes those who want to be part of that group and lifestyle feel that, if they can just crack the code, if they buy a beautifully knitted cashmere sweater, then perhaps they can infiltrate the upper ranks of society and, maybe, rise and belong.
There are codes, manners, details, and unspoken rules that not everyone can access, precisely because they exist to exclude. The idolization of this culture is sustained by those who are not part of it. As a society, it is necessary to reflect on these anxieties of belonging in order to understand what truly makes sense within each individual reality.
______________
The article above was edited by Giovanna Rodrigues.
Liked this type of content? Check out Her Campus Cásper Líbero for more!