Is this the death of 'quiet luxury'?

For the past few years, we've been living in the era of "quiet luxury" — where the ultimate flex has been to look effortlessly expensive without screaming about it. Think Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy's timeless minimalism, or Gwyneth Paltrow's courtroom cardigans that somehow cost more than most people's rent.

But if Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez's recent Venice wedding extravaganza is anything to go by, we might be witnessing the death of understated wealth. And honestly? Good riddance.

The Bezos-Sánchez wedding was the opposite of all things quiet luxury — multiple outfit changes, a star-studded guest list, and enough designer gowns to stock a small boutique. Sánchez reportedly wore custom Dolce & Gabbana, because apparently when you're marrying one of the world's richest men, subtlety is optional.

Now, don't get me wrong — I have plenty of complaints about this particular couple. From Bezos's questionable labour practices to their general approach to wealth and power, they're hardly the poster children for how to be rich responsibly. But that's exactly the point.

Watch Lauren Sanchez's Blue Origin announcement. Article continues after video.

The whole affair was peak "new money" behaviour — the kind that would have made quiet luxury devotees clutch their understated pearls. But here's the thing: does them pretending their wealth doesn't exist make it any better?

Whether you find their display tasteful or not (and let's be honest, taste is subjective), at least they're not playing the exhausting game of pretending a dress worth thousands (or even tens of thousands) is just something they "threw on." They might not be "rich-ing" right in a lot of ways, but at least they're not pretending to be something they're not.

Let's be real about what quiet luxury actually was: a way for the wealthy to feel superior about their wealth. It created this arbitrary hierarchy where spending thousands on a plain white t-shirt was somehow more virtuous than spending the same amount on something with sequins or brand logos on it.

The whole movement was built on the premise that there's a "right" way to be rich — and surprise, surprise, it just happened to align with old-money sensibilities. It was gatekeeping disguised as sophistication, where you needed insider knowledge to even recognise the status symbols.

Sánchez, with her love of body-con dresses and statement jewellery, represents everything this movement deemed "tacky." But here's the thing: who decided that understated equals classy? And why should anyone care?

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Lauren Sánchez Bezos (@laurensanchezbezos)

The quiet luxury obsession was really just the latest iteration of the age-old 'old money versus new money' debate. It suggested that people who'd inherited their wealth (and the "taste" that supposedly came with it) were somehow more refined than those who'd earned it themselves.

This kind of thinking is not just elitist — it's completely arbitrary. There's nothing inherently more sophisticated about a beige cashmere jumper than a sparkly dress. One isn't morally superior to the other. They're just different ways of spending money.

The Bezos wedding might have been over-the-top, and yes, there are legitimate criticisms to be made about how they use their wealth and influence. But at least it was honest about what it was: a very rich couple having a very expensive party. Compare that to the quiet luxury approach, where every "effortless" look requires a team of stylists and costs more than most people's annual salary.

Whether you're spending hundreds on a plain leather handbag or a hundreds on a rhinestone-covered one, you're still spending hundreds of dollars on a handbag. The idea that one choice makes you more cultured than the other is ridiculous.

Sánchez might not be everyone's style icon (and there are plenty of valid reasons to critique the couple beyond their fashion choices), but at least she's not pretending her expensive taste is somehow accidental or effortless. There's something to be said for owning your choices instead of hiding behind the pretence of "timeless elegance".

At the end of the day, the real divide isn't taste — it's access. The quiet luxury movement created yet another way to separate the haves from the have-nots. It wasn't enough to simply have money — you had to have the "right" kind of taste to spend it properly. This just added another layer of exclusion to an already exclusive world.

At least when wealth is displayed obviously, we can all see it for what it is. The quiet luxury approach made wealth invisible to those who didn't know the codes, creating a secret language of status that only insiders could read.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Lauren Sánchez Bezos (@laurensanchezbezos)

Maybe the end of quiet luxury signals something bigger: a rejection of the idea that there's only one acceptable way to display success. Whether someone chooses minimalism or maximalism, restraint or extravagance, shouldn't matter to anyone but them.

The real problem was never that some people prefer sequins while others prefer simplicity. The problem was creating a hierarchy that suggested one approach was inherently better than the other.

Honestly, Lauren Sánchez's "tacky" style is more honest than quiet luxury ever was.

If we're moving into a post-quiet luxury world, perhaps we can also move past the snobbery that came with it. Let people buy what they want, wear what they want, and express themselves however they choose — without the fashion police deciding what constitutes "good taste."

After all, at the end of the day, it's all just expensive stuff. And there's nothing particularly noble about any of it.

Feature Image: Getty.