No longer Suz- our friend now has dementia sadly and is in London. My parents visited her when she lived there. And my uncle too.

I nannied for a year for the landed gentry - got to see pheasant shooting and hunting and go to tea at Althorp, ancestral home of Diana’s family, the Spencer’s. She wasn’t there but Charles Spencer’s ex wife Victoria was. It was a window into a life very different to mine.

Sorry Ginger for the highjack!

And yes- I agree with Suz re your style and the similarities - it really works too.

I do love how quality materials last well, and, here’s the thing, sometimes actually somehow look better with age.
Ginger you wrote an interesting and thought provoking post.
This aesthetic seems a bit of a preppy- dark academia hybrid?
On an emotional level it’s a bit disconcerting though, all this talk about old money. Mainly coz I don’t have it hahaha.

It is interesting how social class influences the perceptions of clothing wear. That is, the royal family can wear threadbare or visibly patched clothing and they look some flavor of eccentric/posh/frugal. A poorer person doing the same might simply look shabby. I'm very conscious of this as a white, upper middle class woman who wears a lot of secondhand clothing. It's a choice that at least in part is afforded to me by my privilege.

Sarah, too true. There is an element of passive-aggressive flexing going on ... Not much different from the tech billionaire wearing a t-shirt to board meetings because he's so powerful he can, or GOOP herself showing off her no makeup face (but not getting into the thousands she spends on skincare) ... There simply is no "old money" aesthetic without the implication of "in contrast to the great unwashed" ... Maybe it's semantic as I don't miffed about coastal grandmother, let's say, even though that's a fairly upper class aesthetic in a way ... But it stands alone as an aesthetic. It's doesn't rely on it's superiority to something else to make it what it is ... If that makes sense? Sorry for chiming in again! I have feelings here, clearly!!

All I know is, I dressed for (financial) success until I had success, then I kind of went into reverse, adopting a more RATEish (for me) look. I just felt like I didn’t have to try as hard. It felt good to have the choice. Whether your money is old or new, just dress the way you think is right for your life.

I hope I am not passive-aggressive flexing when wearing my secondhand wardrobe! I don't *think* you meant to accuse me of that Helena but just stating for the record!

I also wanted to say that I identify with a lot of the stuff that Ginger identifies as being common elements of her style and the "old money" stereotype -- prefer to stick with what works and repair, tolerating some wear/patina; focus on practicality; favor natural fibers. Yes, yes, and yes!

Also the idea of passing things around among family members/generations...you know I love narrative in dressing, and to me the more boho elements especially of my summer wardrobe "fit" because I imagine that I've filched them from some older relative. IDK, this totally makes sense inside my head.

Also wanted to pick up on Ginger's comment in her initial post:

"The other curious thing about this "old money" aesthetic is that it's rooted in the styles and usages of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s. It's as if clothing became codified at that time"

It strikes me that this is the era just before the explosive development of mass consumerism, no? So maybe it is somehow about a refusal to participate in that mass consumerism -- again, as a kind of passive-aggressive flex? Really interesting to think about....

Everyone, I regret posting this. The last thing I wanted was a post about judging others and breaking down how bad/wrong/mistaken the whole idea of "old money" is and people are. I was purely intrigued by how some of my own preferences and actions seem to mirror what is perceived as "old money attitudes. I'm afraid I don't have the energy to engage with the way the discussion has developed.

Ginger, I’m sorry. That’s such a rough feeling. I see some similarities between my preferred way of dressing and what you outlined, find it a bit humorous, and that’s that for me.

But this ish just got real for me—maybe. Country club casual is perhaps a similar aesthetic to “old money”. My parents and sister just called to invite my friend and me to visit them in Florida, including a county club brunch. If he comes, I’ll be surprised—and very curious re what he would choose to wear to Sunday brunch at the club, even just from a dress code perspective, no further implications required. Think I’ll advise khakis and not a polo shirt, but *which* not-polo shirt?

Oh my gosh Sarah!! Absolutely not! And I'm glad you clarified as I'd hate to give that impression. I was agreeing with your comments abou privilege. Clearly clumsily! X

Sorry GInger, I'm sure I helped push this in a direction you're not comfortable with. Also not intentional ... A complex topic I guess. Xx

Ginger, I'm so sorry, I hope I didn't contribute to that feeling.

I think you dress beautifully and elegantly and harmoniously whatever name we give to it!

Yes I'm also really sorry if I contributed to those bad feelings Ginger and I echo Suz's comments about your style!

What Suz said!!

My one Ohio boyfriend held close to these principles, but it didn’t produce that Prince Charles style. He was quite natty, but not tweedy. His polos were more golf shirts and had a pocket. One other key difference was everything he owned was brown. He hilariously one day said he was going to get new towels (after like 30 years) and then he purposely bought green ones to shock me! Lolol! He was so funny

I am sorry that I contributed to the discussion going off track and in a direction you did not intend.

Ginger you dress beautifully, and I found your post interesting and well written... I totally understood you were referring to an aesthetic, and didn’t intend to make any kind of divisive chat. My apologies.