The Intersection of Fashion, Architecture, and Leisure: Slim Aarons as a Social Commentator

There are few photographers who have managed to capture the illusion of paradise quite like Slim Aarons. His images shimmer with an effortless glamour, transporting viewers to a world of infinity pools, mid-century villas, and sun-kissed aristocrats lounging like gods in exile. But beyond the surface-level allure of pastel swimsuits and sprawling estates, Aarons' work is a masterclass in coded commentary. His lens didn’t just document luxury — it dissected it, exposing the rituals, hierarchies, and paradoxes embedded within the worlds of fashion, architecture, and leisure.

Guests around the pool at Bouldereign, the hillside home of oil executive Carl Hogard, Carefree, Arizona, 1973. (Source: Slim Aarons/Getty Images)

Fashion as a Language of Power

Fashion in Aarons’ world was never simply about aesthetics. It was a vocabulary — one that separated insiders from outsiders, pedigree from pretenders. His subjects weren’t just well-dressed, they were strategically dressed. The women draped themselves in Pucci and Givenchy, their silhouettes sculpted into symbols of effortless affluence. The men, often clad in impeccably tailored resort wear, radiated an air of calculated nonchalance. But what did these choices really signify?

In Aarons’ photographs, clothing is less about personal style and more about a uniform of belonging. The leisure class he chronicled adhered to an unspoken dress code, one that whispered (or rather, smugly declared) wealth and exclusivity. Unlike the ostentatious displays of new money, his subjects’ fashion choices were subtle yet meticulously curated. Linen over logomania, crisp whites over garish prints — because true wealth never has to shout. But in this restraint lies its irony: the very effort to appear effortless is, in itself, an art form requiring immense effort.

Yet, fashion in Aarons’ work was also a performance of cultural dominance. Postwar America was flexing its economic muscle, and these images of white, Western leisure served as a soft power tool, reinforcing the idea that the pinnacle of civilisation involved crisp linen suits, silk scarves, and just the right shade of poolside indifference.

Architecture as a Stage for Wealth

It would be a grave mistake to assume Aarons’ images were only about people. The true co-stars in his photographs were the architectural masterpieces that framed his subjects. Palm Springs mansions, Amalfi Coast villas, and Aspen lodges weren’t just backdrops; they were declarations. Each structure served as an extension of its owner’s identity — a meticulously crafted temple to privilege and taste.

Consider his famed images of the Kaufmann Desert House, designed by Richard Neutra. The home’s clean lines and sprawling glass walls create an interplay between openness and exclusivity. It is inviting yet inaccessible, transparent yet guarded, just like the people who inhabit it. The message is clear: beauty is to be admired, but never truly touched.

Aarons understood that architecture is not neutral; it is a status symbol. The spaces we inhabit tell stories about us, sometimes more honestly than we tell them ourselves. His photographs captured this paradox — how modernist utopias, built to be open and fluid, often housed lives rigidly bound by social codes. The very homes meant to dissolve barriers between inside and outside, nature and human habitation, ultimately became fortresses of exclusivity.

Picture One on slideshow: Hotel du Cap Eden-Roc, Antibes, the timeless destination that is our travel editor Rosie Paterson's favourite hotel in the world. (Photo by Slim Aarons/Getty Images); Two: A woman sunbathing in a motorboat as it tows a waterskiier, in the sea off the Hotel du Cap-Eden-Roc in Antibes on the French Riviera, August 1969. (Photo by Slim Aarons/Getty Images)

Leisure as Performance

Perhaps Aarons’ most profound commentary lies in his portrayal of leisure itself. His subjects are never truly caught in moments of spontaneous joy. Instead, they lounge with purpose, pose with precision, and sip cocktails with the unshaken confidence of people who have never once had to check their bank balance.

Leisure, in the Aarons universe, is not a right but a performance — a spectacle of affluence designed for the gaze of others. The act of reclining by a pool, gazing into the horizon, or nonchalantly tossing one’s hair while wearing a diamond bracelet is as rehearsed as a ballet. To be rich is to master the art of looking effortlessly at ease while ensuring the world notices.

But herein lies the contradiction: true relaxation is unconscious. Aarons’ subjects, despite their air of ease, always appear acutely aware of the camera. They are performing leisure rather than experiencing it. This raises an interesting question: does wealth free people from anxiety, or does it simply replace one set of concerns with another (namely, the fear of losing status)?

Fast forward to today, and the anxiety has only intensified. The performance of leisure has transitioned from poolside loungers to Instagram grids. The modern leisure class, whether Silicon Valley billionaires or Dubai influencers, still operate within the same framework Aarons documented. The infinity pools remain, the designer wardrobes persist, and the architectural marvels still serve as backdrops. The difference? Now, the subjects hold the cameras themselves, carefully curating their own narratives.

The Aarons Aesthetic: A Double-Edged Sword

Aarons’ work has, ironically, been both a critique of wealth and a playbook for its aspirants. His images are now endlessly repurposed by brands, influencers, and designers seeking to capture a bygone era of “old money” chic. Yet, this misses the depth of his work.

His photographs, while seductive, also reveal the absurdities of the world he chronicled. The constant peacocking, the obsessive attention to appearances, the silent battles of social superiority — they are all laid bare in his images. His lens is both worshipful and wry, both celebratory and satirical.

The tragedy of Aarons’ world is that, for all its beauty, it is inherently exclusive. His subjects are frozen in time, untouched by the concerns of the real world. But as history has shown, no paradise is immune to change. The elite enclaves he photographed in the mid-20th century have since been infiltrated by new money, global tourism, and shifting cultural tides. The illusion of exclusivity is always temporary.

The Gilded Cage

As someone who moves within wealth circles, I can't help but see reflections of my own experiences in the world Slim Aarons so meticulously captured. While I remain humble and aware of my position, the subtleties of status, exclusivity, and leisure are undeniably woven into the fabric of these circles. Aarons' images resonate deeply with me because they expose the intricacies of this world — the curation of appearances, the performance of leisure, and the quiet competition to master the art of effortless grace. In this sense, his work doesn’t just serve as a critique of broader societal structures; it holds a mirror to my own world, reminding me that privilege often relies as much on perception as it does on reality. His photographs reveal how even the most pristine, idyllic scenes are laced with the complexities and anxieties of maintaining status and exclusivity.

Slim Aarons’ legacy extends beyond the allure of his visually stunning images. His work serves as both a critique and a reflection of wealth, identity, and the complexities of societal hierarchies. The elegance of his work belies the contradictions it exposes — how the desire to appear unruffled and superior often veils the deeper insecurities of fitting in and competing.

In many ways, Aarons’ world, though seemingly idyllic and timeless, was a gilded cage: one where the sunsets were always golden, the drinks perpetually chilled, but the freedom, perhaps, just a little bit staged.

S xoxo

Written in London, England

28th January 2025