7 min read · May 10, 2023
--
So you’ve spent your entire life wondering why some people have, as we like to say, “class” and others don’t… regardless of which of the two has the most money.
Indeed, someone can have a large bank account and overcompensate for it as if they were. These are the oft-called “new money” behaviors.
And, someone can have less money in the bank than our nouveau riche friend and carry themselves with a much higher level of dignity, restraint, and refinement. Those are most commonly known as “old money behaviors”.
As the writer George Orwell himself noted:
“Economically, no doubt, there are only two classes, the rich and the poor, but socially there is a whole hierarchy of classes, and the manners and traditions learned by each class in childhood… generally persist from birth to death… It is … very difficult to escape, culturally, from the class into which you have been born.”
Thus, today’s video at Old Money Luxury, we’ll provide you with 3 secret conversation signs that nobody tells you about that indicate whether someone has “old money” behavior or “new money” behavior.
Many of these signs will be subtle. And you may feel evensome ‘lightbulbs’ go off in your head as you look back at your life and we discuss these topics, for as the author Paul Fussell said in his iconic work that inspired this video, “Class: A Guide through the American Status System”:
“When you look at a person you don’t see ‘Roman Catholic’ or ‘liberal’… you see ‘hand-painted necktie’ or ‘crappy polyester shirt’… you hear parameters or in regards to.”
Individuals’ reactions to discussions about social class can reveal much about their own perceived position within the social hierarchy. The emotions evoked by the topic of status may range from annoyance to anxiety or even indifference, depending on one’s social class.
Middle-class individuals, or those who fall into the “new money” category, often feel anxious when social class is discussed, as they are acutely aware of their position and may be concerned about maintaining their newfound status. This heightened sensitivity to social class may be attributed to their recent ascent and the desire to solidify their standing.
A prime example of this is Rose’s mother in the film Titanic (1997). Throughout the film, she is portrayed as a woman concerned about her family’s dwindling fortune due to mounting debts. She views Rose’s marriage to Cal Hockley, legendarily played by Billy Zane, as an opportunity to secure their place among the elite.
When Leonardo Dicaprio’s Jack Dawson, a character of a lower social standing, enters the picture, Rose’s mother becomes agitated. She perceives any threat to her daughter’s advantageous marriage as, as the film saying “a bug that must be squashed”.
This is most evident in the dinner scene when Jack shares his life story to a table of old money multimillionaires. As Dawson speaks, Rose’s mother looks at him with fear and disgust, angrily asking if he finds such a lifestyle appealing.
In contrast, the higher rungs of society in the film are much less anxious about their social standing. This is exemplified by the reaction of the upper-class characters, such as John Jacob Astor IV and Archibald Gracie, to Jack Dawson at the same dinner table. They cheerfully greet Jack, inquire about his life, and even support his speech about making one’s own luck.
Working-class individuals, on the other hand, accepting of the fact they are unlikely reach the upper crusts, often view the entire concept of social hierarchies as a joke and find the class anxiety of the middle class amusing. Interestingly, in this they might have more in common with the highest echelons of society than the middle classes, with regard to in their lack of concern about social class.
An excellent example of this is career of Bill Burr, who, while having grown up firmly in the middle class in the suburbs of Boston, has made a career out of lampooning both the upper classes and new money global elite, positioning himself as a voice of the working-classes of America.
Both groups — “old money” and the lower rungs of the working class — spend little to no time worrying about their position in the social hierarchy, as their status is relatively fixed and secure.
Additionally, when discussing social class, an individual’s perception of the factors that contribute to it can reveal much about their own social standing.
Lower-class individuals often believe that class is determined primarily by wealth, while middle-class or “new money” individuals acknowledge the role of money but also emphasize the importance of education and occupation. As we’ll show in a minute in secret #3, this second part is why the constant focus on college, education, and degrees is strongly correlated with middle-class behavior.
In contrast, upper-class or “old money” individuals tend to focus on aspects such as taste, values, ideas, style, and behavior as the true indicators of social class, dismissing the importance of money, occupation, or education.
For instance, when President John F. Kennedy, first saw Richard Nixon on television, he is said to have turned to his friends and said, “The guy has no class” he was not referring to Nixon’s financial status. He was talking about a set of status-anxious attitudes and behaviors that the working-class raised Nixon exhibited as opposed to the son of massive generational wealth that Kennedy was.
Thus, “old money” individuals can be quite relaxed and unself-conscious, as they do not worry about choosing the right status symbols. They feel free to express themselves without the fear of shame, which is predominantly a feeling experienced by the middle class or “new money” individuals.
However, there is a subtle art to self-expression that is exhibited by “old money” individuals, so subtle in fact that it can even extend to paying and receiving of compliments.
In this realm, the middle class and “old money” upper class exhibit distinct differences in social behavior. The middle class often engages in the exchange of compliments as they seek reassurance and validation.
However, the “old money” upper class is more private, understated, and generally averse to showiness, including the “showy” behavior of paying and receiving verbal compliments.
The new money anxiety around compliments is excellently exhibited by the character Cousin Greg on the television series Succession, who constantly displays an awkward demeanor in conversations when trying to pay compliments, or when he is attempting to “fish” for compliments.
“But, um, if I could, if he, if he was willing to give his seat to someone a bit more per, someone who could learn the ropes, running a, a theme park, say, running the parts, just a little guy learning, you know.
I mean, could that be, can you scratch my back? I, I’m not gonna say I could scratch yours. It would it be too considerable of a space, but is there an angle there? Perhaps”
Greg’s lack of ease in such social situations clearly demonstrates his struggle with understanding the subtleties of “old money” etiquette and expectations.
For the “old money” upper class, there is an inherent understanding of one’s value, making compliments unnecessary. There’s an old story that demonstrates this that tells of a story of a British aristocrat who reacted with outrage when an artistic young guest praised his fine set of Hepplewhite chairs. The aristocrat had the guest promptly removed, citing the “damned cheek” of the fellow for actually praising his belongings out loud.
Instead of offering compliments, members of the upper class may demonstrate their approval through nuanced gestures or quiet support. For instance, they might extend an invitation to an exclusive event or discreetly offer assistance in a time of need. Such actions reflect their understanding that true appreciation and respect can be conveyed without resorting to overt flattery.
For example, when dining among the highest rungs of society, it is often considered uncouth to overtly praise the food. The hostess is expected to serve only the finest fare, rendering compliments superfluous. Furthermore, since the hostess is unlikely to have cooked the meal herself, complimenting the food would be misplaced.
The “old money” upper class values discretion and subtlety in social interactions. They eschew grand gestures or ostentatious displays of wealth, believing that such behavior is crass and distasteful. This preference for understatement also extends to their communication style, where they prioritize modesty and reserve over effusive praise.
And of course, quite naturally, that same penchant for understatement would extend to one of the most consequential lines of demarkation in the American social system… education.
In a society without a hereditary class system or titles conferred by royalty, Americans have had to rely heavily on their college and university hierarchy for snobbery and status.
With limited options for prestige, even fairly undistinguished colleges are revered, and institutions often try to elevate their status by associating with the world of academia. Universities and colleges have managed to remain relatively immune to criticism, contributing to a sense of prestige and respect.
However, this reverence for the higher education system has led to a class sensitivity regarding where individuals attended college. Constantly name-dropping one’s college or even admitting where one went to college can be seen as a middle-class, or “new money,” effort to assert status within this hierarchy.
In fact, it is quite common to hear “old money” graduates of Harvard to simply say they went to college “in Massachussetts” or at most, “Boston” rather than the more overt “in Cambridge Massachusetts” or of course saying the actual name “Harvard”.
It is important to recognize that the significance placed on college discussions and rankings is a reflection of the American quest for status and respectability, particularly among the middle class or “new money” individuals.
The sensitivity surrounding college reputation and the compulsion to name-drop or reveal one’s alma mater is indicative of a preoccupation with asserting one’s position within the ever-changing landscape of social standing. In contrast, “old money” elites may place less emphasis on these distinctions, as their social standing is often more secure and less dependent on the perceived prestige of their educational background.
