Golden Goose is a luxury shoe brand known for its worn-in grunge-style sneakers. Ranging from around $500 to $900, the brand boasts that they pride themselves on creating products “that are lived in, distressed, touched with life.” A lovely sentiment when you have $500 to spend on a pair of shoes, but when using duct tape to keep your shoes together is a necessity, it’s far less glamorous.
CNN discussed a tweet posted by comedian Christine Sydelko who wrote, “There are people in the world wearing plastic bags as shoes because they can’t afford any but these HIDEOUS things are selling for $500.”
Instead of promoting sustainable shopping and buying clothing second-hand, these luxury clothing brands cut out the middleman and allow the rich to acquire that “worn in” look immediately. These brands are ignoring the fact that, as with ripped jeans, this fashion craze will slowly phase out, leaving piles of these shoes in landfills or thrift stores when they won’t be considered “cool” anymore.
An article discussing this fascinating fashion trend said, “The goal of the high end clothing industry seems to be to promote the notion that while acceptable and even fashionable for the rich, dressing down is unacceptable for the underprivileged.”
The essence of this fashion phenomenon is that wealthy individuals have a choice. They can choose to cosplay a “grunge” look one day or wear a pristine Versace shirt the next. For those living in poverty, they don’t have that luxury. It’s cool for Taylor Swift to wear scuffed-up shoes and a beat-up jacket, but if someone wore that for a job interview because they had to, they could get turned away.
At its core, this internet debate is really about the issue of luxury fashion in general. Having some individuals spend upwards of $700 on a pair of beat-up shoes while so many individuals don’t even have access to shoes at all doesn’t make sense.
Even rising stars Chappell Roan and Noah Kahan have leaned into the effortless laid-back aesthetic when not performing. A tweet featuring Roan in a simple black tank top, oversized sunglasses and a messy bun and Kahan in a tie-dye tee and ball cap has been circulating the internet with the caption: “I love how Chappell Roan and Noah Kahan are two of the absolute biggest powerhouses in music right now but also look like they live together in a 2006 Subaru Outback.”
While this tweet may have been posted all in good fun, it highlights this double standard regarding fashion and wealth. We “love it” when stars embrace this grunge americana aesthetic, but turn up our noses at it when it is simply the only option.
Anne Hamby, associate professor of marketing with a specialization in consumer psychology, explained that the phenomenon of the rich emulating the poor is nothing new. In fact, there’s even a term for it: the status float effect.
“It’s not surprising that the trickle-down effect happens, what upper-class people do gets emulated by middle class and lower class,” Hamby said. “The status float effect is kind of counterintuitive and this is documented in the context of, denim and sneaker culture, certain types of music, even lobster.”
Another major draw that companies like Golden Goose present is their coolness factor. The “too chill to care” sort of attitude that is especially prominent within celebrity culture.
“There’s the psychology of what is cool — and unsurprisingly, nonchalance is cool,” Hamby said. “There’s a lot of research showing that being emotionally inexpressive is considered cool … Caring too much about things is not cool — in this vein, having some of this distressed fashion embodies nonchalance.”
Hamby explained that in many ways a trend is a response to something else within pop culture or a challenge of the norm.
“It’s related a little bit to optimal distinctiveness and rebel culture,” Hamby said. “Anytime there are prevailing norms where the mainstream is very buttoned down and polished and very quaffed, then anytime you have something that’s a little bit counter-cultural, a little bit more ragged that then is perceived as cool — so bucking norms and social trends.”
While Golden Goose may have succeeded in becoming a talking point within the fashion community, Hamby doesn’t believe that similar brands will see that same level of success.
“Anytime something that was counterculture becomes mainstream, then of course it’s mainstream, and no one wants to do it anymore — signal their distinctiveness,” Hamby said. “I think Golden Goose kind of nailed it in the sense that they’ve got a lot of high-visibility celebrities … I think that they were probably an exception, and there probably won’t be a lot of, like, copycat brands that are able to pull this off.”
While it’s anyone’s guess whether Golden Goose’ torn-up tennis shoes and horrendous high tops will be a one-off fashion trend, something we chalk up to the ludicrousy of the upper class, it does reveal that pulling from the lower class’ “aesthetic” while simultaneously highlighting one’s wealth is a very real phenomenon. A desperate attempt to establish relatability, coolness or a conscious or unconscious desire to illustrate one’s social status could all be driving forces in the creation and embracement of luxury brands like Golden Goose.
