Tastefulness, power, and why quiet luxury was problematic

'Quiet luxury' was giving capitalist dystopian nightmare and we all really just went with it. (don't get me wrong tho i still love The Row)

‘Unlike the conspicuous consumption of the past, quiet luxury emphasizes understated elegance, authenticity, and enduring value.’

Sublimio

^ mm, not really. Because

One, conspicuous consumption is soo not a thing of the past where quiet luxury is concerned,

and

Two, quiet luxury is really all the worst parts of conspicuous consumption and its related implications (snobbery, arrogance, classist exclusion), rolled into one neatly wrapped, beige coloured fashion trend

I will explore the reasoning behind these two statements in the rest of this essay.

Conspicuous Consumption

… is a term coined by economist & sociologist Thorstein Veblen, to explain the act of ostentatious displays of wealth as a means to gain status and reputation.

And while considered in the context of the industrial revolution, when many a new magnate was beginning to build his empire, conspicuous consumption did largely manifest itself in lavish spending and general debauchery (much to the derision of the old guard of American society at the time, who turned their noses up at ‘low-class, new-money’), … it has since amassed an armoury of different masks and behaviours in society today. Evil does not die, it evolves hahaha

At its core, the concept of conspicuous consumption reflects one simple truth: man’s desire for social esteem and acceptance from his peers. We all just want to belong <3

That is to say, the conspicuous consumer’s behaviour is motivated by the opinion of the social and economic reference groups whom he is, well, referencing. He will emulate the level and degree of his spending based on the group he aspires to.

So, to look at it from a quiet luxury lense…

Why Quiet Luxury was a bit of a problem

The term began to make its rounds on mainstream social media around March 2023, referencing a dress sense underpinned by unassuming, understated clothing that carried no identifiable marker of its ultra-luxury price tag. Gwyneth Paltrow’s courtroom wardrobe of simple everyday staples from your local prada, proenza, the row, ralph lauren, and the like is prime example. Her ‘stealth-wealth / low-key rich bitch’ looks, set against the almost comic drama of her $1 luxury ski accident lawsuit, at the end of which she saunters solemnly over to her defeated opponent and offers a whispered farewell, added yet more cachet to the then oft-touted ‘money talks, wealth whispers’.

Thus began social media’s hyper-romanticisation of the ‘old-money aesthetic’, an infatuation with the social elite (whoever and wherever they are, tbh, they actually have nothing to do with this trend) and their perceived habits, style, behaviours, holiday-destinations, drinking and dining establishments. Side note, you know, I wonder if the membership applications to private members’ clubs around the world swelled at quiet luxury’s peak.

Anyways so it seemed like this mass infatuation started to take root in people from all manner of social standing, and suddenly the language of wealth and class became encoded in hushed tones, knowing smiles and secret keywords; all enshrouded in a smoke-and-mirrors, if-you-know-you-know kind of bubble. And yet, encoded as it was, everyone seemed to speak it. I began to notice more instances of people making subtle attempts at signalling their apparent membership to this club of people-who-know.

From someone who indicated their ski destination of choice was now Austria or Vienna or other because of their family’s aversion to the flashiness of moneyed favourite Gstaad; an overly correct pronunciation of Hermes complete with french accent from a non-french speaking person in a non-french conversation; a covertly innocent mention of a powerful magnate parent figure in some far flung corner of the globe; endless name dropping of correct restaurants, neighbourhoods, brands, hobbies, even childhood memories. See: Gstaad Guy whose comic parodies of the ultra-wealthy blew up around this time; his skits dictating what belonged ‘a la poubelle’ (french for ‘in the garbage’) leading to a partnership with much esteemed London’s LPM, which now carries a curated Gstaad Guy-approved wine list.

It was weird, because it felt like the lure of being esteemed as part of this legacied, exclusive social club of distinct class & taste was so enticing that normal people were really, actually trying to emulate them.

Taking us back to point One: Conspicuous consumption is so not a thing of the past where quiet luxury is concerned.

The hashtag ‘old money aesthetic’ has like 5. something billion views on TikTok, and at its height even Shein had a quiet luxury shopping edit. Masses and masses of men and women were,consuming fast fashion and the like to try to emulate this aesthetic, hoping for psychological illusion of closeness to the social elite. To be seen as one of them. And of course, the people who could afford it flocked too to the hallmarks of quiet luxury, brands like The Row, Loro Piana, Bruenello, all continued to see ££ growth amidst global economic uncertainty. So, no, conspicuous consumption has not died, it has just started shopping for a different type of wealth signifier.

Two: quiet luxury is really all the worst parts of conspicuous consumption and its related implications (snobbery, arrogance, classist exclusion), rolled into one neatly wrapped, beige coloured fashion trend

Think this is where things started to take a dystopic turn for me. Because in the process of this emulation came too a kind of arrogance and snobbish dismissal of the typical signifiers of ‘new money’ opulence, i.e. wearing flashy logos, following loud fashion trends. And it was, like, normal people doing the dismissal. Back in 1899 when Veblen coined conspicuous consumption, it was the statused-elite at the time looking down on the new money folk, but now it’s our everyday tik-tok girly looking down at other people??? This tik-tok really had me laughing -

^ She covered it all really.

It just felt like a bit of a capitalist nightmare because us little folk were now turning our noses up at each other. It was giving Bong Joon Ho’s Parasite, in which he illustrates a stark reality: ‘It’s a story about the powerless fighting each other, and that is the saddest thing.’

The saddest thing

We collectively and a bit too willingly took on roles as gatekeepers of tastefulness, the definition of which was based on pretty much just perception, assumption, and projection of what we thought the ‘elite’ would deem tasteful. It wasn’t even a personal preference - which actually brings me back to this substack from sociologist Kara V (Kara’s newsletter is what triggered me to revisit my thoughts on quiet luxury back in 2023, and thus how this current essay came to be).

It brings me back also to this chapter, ‘The Problem with Tastefulness’, in Natalie Olah’s book, and I will leave you with this quote -

Crucially, it isn't just wealth, but wealth coupled with a sound understanding of the subtle signifiers of the establishment, that now serves as a guarantee of social acceptance. As a result, we begin to see how taste serves as a proxy for submission; an external indicator of how far an individual is willing to be subsumed by the pervasive modes of power, and play the game of incremental class ascension.

---

Thank you for being here. If you liked this or didn’t, agreed or did not, I would love to hear your perspective and open up a discussion. Feel free to leave a comment or send me a private note!

If you did enjoy this essay and would like to see more in this vein, then a subscription, like, comment or recommendation to a friend would be of huge support to my work. My next piece like this will be about why I think Lululemon is losing the matcha girlies (it’s me, i’m matcha girlies haha).

x