We live in deeply superficial times. (Please forgive the oxymoron.) Given the utmost importance of appearance, what accounts for the bland, grey, dressed-down look so prevalent these days? Let’s call it the Unpretentious Genius Aesthetic. I’m not talking about Gen Z, by the way. They’re at least trying.
What is the Unpretentious Genius Aesthetic?
Well, I made it up. But I can assure you that it is very real. I used to live in San Francisco. And I used to dress this way myself.
The Unpretentious Genius (UG) look, starting at the toes, is some kind of cloth, machine-washable sneaker that has not been machine-washed. The sneaker is completely inoffensive, with no design point-of-view. Say what you will about Birkenstocks, but they stand for something (see: a funny Rick Owens interview on the subject). This sneaker looked at Chuck Taylors and the Nike Cortez and said “How do we make it less risky?”
Moving up the legs, there are two choices for day: athletic leggings, or sweatpants/“performance” pants. For night and special occasions, the UG reaches for mid-wash blue denim. Wide leg for men, skinny for women. No pocket branding, because the UG is a genius, and geniuses have taste goddamnit. They’re not falling for that mid-2000s shit again. No one could possibly criticize these jeans. Until now.
For tops, you’re going to need to check the weather. Whether it’s 40 degrees or 70 degrees, the UG will want some kind of fleece/polyester shell jacket or puffer to keep them warm on their way to the next VC meeting. A dumpy sweater works too. Underneath the outerwear, a simple, shapeless T-shirt—heather grey, white, or black—or a button-down in white, light blue, or fun checked pattern. Perhaps an Untuckit? Wrong! Too much of a point-of-view.
Accessories are best kept simple, but tech-y and corporate, with a general air of leave me alone, can’t you see I’m sending hilarious gifs on Slack over here! Think: backpack, baseball hat, sunglasses, Apple Watch, iPhone, AirPods, Bluebottle coffee to-go, etc.
It is an aesthetic defined by casual leisure, comfort, and expense. The more money each item costs, the better.
Where did it come from?
A lot of the Unpretentious Genius Aesthetic came from guys like this:
The aesthetic undeniably has hacker origins. “I don’t care what I look like, all I care about is the code, man. I care about ideas, you ever heard of those?” “Who cares about fashion? My enormous brain has more important things to think about, like email.” We are all to blame for worshipping hackers and technocrats as cool. But the origins of this aesthetic are more complicated than guys copying Zuckerberg. Clothing sends a message about the person wearing it, whether we like it or not. Even an anti-message, as seen here, is a message. What are these technocratic elites trying to say to us? They’re saying, “I don’t care.” Why is this a problem?
The narcissism of the technocratic elite
Narcissism may seem like a strange thing to bring up in this context, because these guys don’t care about how they look, and a narcissist would probably care a lot about how they present, taking great care with their appearance. But this is the trick. The UG cares a lot. He cares about appearing not to care. The only thing worse than calling yourself a genius is calling yourself an unpretentious one.
The UG is hyper-self-aware, and so self-conscious, that he doesn’t want to be seen as trying. But in the not-really-trying there’s a much harder kind of trying. Like when you’re texting with someone you’re really interested in. You may present as casual to a third party reading the exchange, but you know the emotional turmoil and back-and-forth debates in your head, the feverish stress of crafting the perfect message that seems just interested enough. Of course, as you’re doing this, you’re completely forgetting to be the person you really are.
The whole charade fundamentally lacks respect. It lacks self-respect,1 as the UG is more preoccupied with the opinions of others than his opinion of himself. He is not really apathetic, though he claims to be. Worse, he is self-righteous in his proclaimed apathy, dismissing the whole enterprise outright as not worthy of his attention. He thinks only a moron would care about “this stuff.” Unlike those who serve him, he doesn’t need to look nice or dress up because the rules don’t apply to him. This lacks respect for others.
When I look at Mark Zuckerberg and his copycats, I don’t see a guy who can’t really access fashion and is just trying to get through the day. Those guys exist and I’m not critiquing them. In Mark and the elites who emulate him, I see the final product of bourgeois individualism: no interest in doing something new, no interest in what has come before him, little respect for himself, no respect for others, plagued with anxiety, and completely self-centered.
The death of risk-taking in an age of decadence
Ross Douthat has defined decadence as:
“Economic stagnation, institutional decay, and cultural and intellectual exhaustion at a high level of material prosperity and technological development.”
(He also wrote a book on the topic, which I own, but will admit to you that I have not read.) In this article, he provides countless examples of American decadence. Douthat points out that while many are talking the big talk, claiming to make things happen and take big risks, this is simply not happening (e.g., Theranos, Fyre Festival, Uber, et al.). Broadly speaking, it feels like we have reached a stage of cultural stagnation. We are comfortably numb. When the umpteenth Marvel movie rolls out, we just roll our eyes.
Cultural institutions and those who run them are less interested in charisma, excellence, and the exceptional and more invested in correctness, mediocrity, and the relatable—always picking the safe over the sublime. It’s a cycle that puts everyone in a difficult spot: to create culture, you need to have one. There’s a palpable feeling that we aren’t really going anywhere, we’re just moving in a circle.
This same numb cycle can be found in fashion, which—putting a few designers off to one side (there are always exceptions)—hasn’t evolved that much in the last fifteen years. If you were to go back to 2006, would anyone know you are from the future? The UG aesthetic has been around that whole time, maybe even as far back as the 1990s. It hasn’t evolved at all. That was thirty years ago.
The success of a brand like Aimé Leon Dore might be a good example of modern decadence in fashion. It markets itself through imagery of daring risk, excellence, and ingrained nostalgia—Michael Jordan highlights, race car drivers, sailors, Picasso, intrepid explorers, a vague kind of Italian lifestyle and masculinity—but sells expensive sweatpants. Like most brands, it capitalizes on the image of risk without risking much of anything.
The Unpretentious Genius is so fully, spiritually immersed in this decadence and stagnation that risk doesn’t compute. The wealthy elites don’t want to look wealthy or elite, they want to appear correct and relatable. There’s nothing more correct and relatable than a grey t-shirt, jeans, and sneakers. Mark Zuckerberg’s signature style might be what you get if one of his little algorithms took the average of every man on Earth. To the narcissist, the world is a mirror.
Resisting the UG
Resisting the Unpretentious Genius Aesthetic is not at all about buying different or cooler products. Freedom to consume different things should not be confused with autonomy. It’s about not taking ourselves too seriously, seeking alternatives, and inviting a little risk into our lives. Be brave, and expect nothing in return. Seek yourself, your own definition of excellence and the exceptional. In the face of spiritual depletion and exhaustion, demonstrating a bit of courage to yourself can go a long way.
More important is to combat The UG of The Mind. Resist the undertow of apathy, and resist feeling self-righteous about that apathy. Never give up. Wear the tailored pants that are a total pain because they need to be dry cleaned. After all, a little suffering is good for the human spirit.
On Self-Respect, Joan Didion (1961). “The dismal fact is that self-respect has nothing to do with the approval of others—who are, after all, deceived easily enough.”