HELIOS FW 2024 “Imagining the Extended Self” by nyulara

McKinsey Partner, Joëlle

Grunberg on Leadership

Bearing Point’s Ryan Orabone

Guilia Berrebi at Chanel

What a Viral Instagram-Rating Series Reveals About the Future of Personal Branding

Luxury for the Masses: An Opinion on the Price of Status in a Consumer-Driven Society

Turning Dreams Into Reality: Amelia Kopp’s Journey to Revolutionize Secondhand Fashion

Editor’s Letter:

It has never been easier than now to switch personal styles—though the question remains: does personal style even exist? Pop culture and infuencer-creative-director-stylists sell ‘personal style’ like companies sell love and romance on Valentine’s Day. Fashion is merely a byproduct of everything that came before; we’re just simple imitations of one another. And now, the cultural zeitgeist is a mod podge collage of these imitations and subcultures. Language like ‘aesthetic’ and ‘core’ are cheap pre-made starter kits that could, in theory, rebrand entire personas and subcultures. Oh, did I say theory? If you walked down Bushwick Avenue, you’d see a myriad of uneven bangs, band T-shirts, athletic shorts, cotton tanks, and pink cowboy boots— sometimes all on the same person. Spoiler alert: very few are cowgirls and cowboys, and even fewer actually listen to insert obscure band name here. In simple terms, we’ve reached a point where, before stepping out the door, we ask ourselves: what persona will I wear today?

Our external appearances are signals to other people of what we like and who we are. Ballet shoes and tutus were indicators of ballerinas, and now you have to mentally hit yourself in the shin for why you asked this girl at a party if she ever did ballet. As Cher Horowitz clicks a button to generate an outft, we quickly hijack subcultures and reduce them to anodyne references. “Yes, I’ll take a Bonita headscarf and a pack of cigs. It’ll go with my cottagecore skirt,” someone probably said. Tese reduced, packaged ‘styles’ become microtrends that die in the blink of an eye. We’ve reached levels of consumerism that have broken down generations of subcultures and traditions. And even now, our consumerism has reached new horizons. Imagining our extended selves in this modern age comes with unusual consumer practices. I mean, people are paying to have their Instagram reviewed.

Love, Dee

L What a Viral Instagram-Rating Series Reveals About the Future of Personal Branding

uxury has always been about exclusivity, personalization, and curation of taste. Now, in the age of digital in uence, 19-year old TikTok creator Evan Smith is rede ning what that means with his viral Instagram rating series—a service that charges a fee to critique and curate social media pro les.

Evan Smith started his Instagram Rating Series in February 2022, initially rating the feeds of his friends. e series gained traction and quickly went viral on TikTok, with people eagerly asking him to rate their pro les.

“I started charging $3, and then that blew up immediately,” Smith says. “And I did it at night, expecting it to wake up to maybe 20 bucks a night. It was like 300.” As requests poured in, he began increasing his price, o ering private Instagram ratings, and soon expanded his services to include personalized feed designs.

“I started doing a branch-o series for people that didn’t necessarily want to post it on TikTok, but they wanted to hear my criticism, so I would send them a private Instagram rating for double the price. en I also started doing feed designs.” e process was tailored to the individual, Smith says: “I’d start by asking questions like, ‘What color scheme do you want to go for? Do you mainly use sel es?’” From there, he’d scour Pinterest to create moodboards serving as inspiration for their feeds.

With a sharp eye and a sense of humor, he critiques feeds and o ers suggestions to improve layout, themes, colors, and content curation—resonating strongly in an age where “brand” is synonymous with identity, even for individuals.

e viral success of Smith’s series is no accident—it’s re ective of the internet’s appetite for humor, tastemaking, and feed curation.

Smith’s process includes principles typically aligned with those of luxury consulting: exclusivity, personalization, and attention to detail. While his current $20 fee ($40 for a private rating) might seem modest, the tailored nature of his service elevates it amidst a space where most content is free.

In the digital age, luxury is increasingly tied to visuals that resonate with today’s audience—brands recognize that their identities now hinge as much on their visual presence as on the heritage of their products. Smith captures the importance of connecting with his audience authentically: “A lot of people were getting their Instagrams reviewed by AI,” he says. “But getting that criticism from somebody who’s known for it on TikTok is di erent. I get comments every day saying, ‘I watch

you critique and make jokes because I nd it so entertaining.’”

Balancing humor with applicable insights has made him a tastemaker for a generation obsessed with curating aspirational online personas. e concept of being “aesthetic,” particularly on social media, has become a prominent trend in recent years. e 2020s have been marked by microtrends from the “Mob Wife” to “Brat Summer” - the term encompasses a broad range of topics, including style, fashion, and the design of spaces. Typically distinguished by speci c color palettes, di erent aesthetics are marked by unique features that make each one stand out. Smith refers to this concept when explaining his approach to curating feeds - including how living in New York City has inspired it: “Especially living in New York, there’s that luxury aesthetic where people are getting dinner at the Plaza, or drinking tea. ey have those types of photos with the fur coats. at’s a speci c vibe and speci c color scheme. en there’s the people with more streetwear attire with the focus being their out t and brighter colors…I de nitely think that there’s an incorporation with fashion and style and how you present yourself.”

In many ways, Smith’s process mirrors that of a consultant or personal stylist; o ering advice on curating an cohesive, aspirational image tailored to the individual’s vision. “It’s like a one minute social media like intern where I tell them exactly what I want them to do for one minute, and then they take it and do what they want with that information. I’ve been thinking…I could do a 20 minute consultation where I could walk [the client] through my Pinterest and help them make boards,” along with analyzing whether placing one photo next to another creates harmony or causes visual clash.

Luxury brands are taking notice. In uencer-led campaigns are becoming the standard for engaging with today’s audience. Smith shares his admiration for collaborations between in uencers and brands, saying, “I love when I see an in uencer doing a campaign that makes so much sense. Like Alex Consani and Margiela.”

In a world where social media is free and accessible, the very act of paying for an Instagram rating feels like a nod to exclusivity. Evan’s work is a microcosm of a larger trend: the growing role of social media in uencers in shaping the luxury industry. Luxury brands that were once elusive have increasingly embraced social media platforms by partnering with in uencers or borrowing from their techniques. Evan’s ability to analyze visuals, provide tailored feedback, and suggest practical improvements taps into similar concepts that luxury brands use to cra their own brand images. His critiques have transformed his service into something akin to personal brand consulting—a skillset increasingly coveted in the world of luxury marketing.

u ur for the asses An inion on the Pri e of Status in a onsumer- riven So iet

e commodi cation of luxury seems like an inevitable consequence of our late capitalist society—a marketplace where everything, no matter how abstract or rare, is available for a price. But this shi is not merely economic or social; it is existential. is new treatment of luxury reveals something much deeper about our modern conception of value, desire, and self. It is, in essence, a re ection of the empty core of our society—where meaning is purchased in place of experience, and the pursuit of satisfaction is replaced by the ceaseless chase for more.

My interest in this subject began last year, when I came to read Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster by Dana omas. e book o ers a subtle dissection of how luxury, once rare and valuable, has been redened by the forces of the market. omas argues that luxury, in its purest sense, has been replaced by a symbol, a signi er of status, but not one with any real substance behind it. No matter the cost—whether real or counterfeit—luxury items still carry the weight of status. It is an emptied illusion of success, packaged neatly and sold to anyone with a wallet. e logo has become the thing, and the object itself—the cra , the history, the artistry—has dissolved into the ether. As David Brooks also observes in his book e Paradox of American Luxury, the new form of luxury “isn’t about rarity or transcendence. It’s about identity and belonging.” Luxury now signals nothing more than membership in an obscure consumer class.

But the democratization of luxury is not without its defenders. A er all, what’s the harm in making something once reserved for the elite available to the broader pub lic? In theory, the expansion of luxury markets o ers a form of ` inclusivity, a leveling of the playing eld. But this argument ignores the deeper law at the core of this shi : by democratizing luxury, we fuel an endless cycle of over-consumption, where we desperately try to patch together our sense of value and identity with things that can never truly satisfy.

omas argues that luxury has transformed from an exclusive experience to a mass-marketed product. She exempli es this through the rise of “accessible luxury” brands like Michael Kors, Coach, and Kate Spade are among the most visible mani festations of this shi ese brands produce stylish, aspira tional items at prices that are relatively a ordable, thus broaden ing their market reach.

Luxury, once reserved for the few, has been democratized—and with this democratization comes a loss of its original meaning.

In a way, the more luxury becomes accessible, the less it means. Luxury’s transformation into a commodity has stripped it of its transcendence. No longer does it symbolize something beyond the ordinary; now it merely signals a particular level of economic success. Brooks suggests that in the past, luxury had a “sense of sacredness”, an unspoken barrier to entry that imbued the experience of luxury with meaning.

But once the gates of luxury are thrown open, once luxury brands begin to ood the market, what remains? e essence of luxury was never truly about the object itself, but about the experience—the sense that the object symbolizes something unreachable, something rare. Once mass-produced, once distributed to the broad swathes of the middle class, that sense of exclusive pleasure disappears. Luxury becomes a new kind of currency—one that buys you not ful llment, but the illusion of belonging.

is brings up a question that feels a little too sharp to ignore: What do our modern rituals of luxury reveal about the desires that shape us, and the values we now cling to?

Luxury has always been a tool for signaling status, a symbol that represents success, wealth, or taste—but it is not, and never has been, a true marker of personal achievement. It is an empty construct, o ering an illusion of ful llment but leaving its consumers more fragmented than before. e paradox is that in commodifying and democratizing luxury, we lose the very essence that once made it so desirable: meaning.

Luxury has become nothing more than another item to be consumed and discarded. is is the unforgivable byproduct of American consumerism: the insatiable urge to consume beyond measure. As Brooks writes, “ e paradox of American luxury is that it is supposed to make us feel better, but it o en ends up making us feel worse.” Luxury, in its commodi ed form, mirrors our deepest insecurities and desires—an empty re ection of everything we lack, yet desperately crave. We do not just buy -ately crave. We do not just buy the object; we buy the idea that we are worthy of it, that it will somehow elevate our lives, and provide us with the acceptance we crave. But in a cycle of emotional desperation and overconsumption, the satisfaction promised by luxury goods is momentary.

Tim Kasser’s e High Price of Materialism suggests that the more we chase things—the shinier, the pricier, the trendier—the less we seem to have. It’s a cruel joke, really, how we’ve come to believe that the pretty things we crave will somehow ll the emptiness inside us. Instead, they only cover up the gaps with a glossy facade, one that eventually wears away. is, Kasser argues, mirrors the broader societal shi that Rousseau preached. Rousseau contended that in our natural state, humans were peaceful and self-su cient, “free from the insatiable desires” that plague us today. It is when we start comparing ourselves to others that arti cial needs take root—needs not based on necessity or ful llment, but on the endless drive to distinguish ourselves from the rest. In this competitive society, inequality is born: those with more are seen as superior, while the rest are caught in a cycle of perpetual striving, never satis ed. It is as if we are patching a wound with pretty plastic, pretending it will heal. But the result is always the same: more anxiety, more loneliness, and a gnawing sense that something is missing. ose climbing the ladder of material success may believe they are elevating themselves, but in reality, they are distancing themselves further from their true sense of value and identity.

e commodi cation of luxury is not just a shi in taste or trend, it is a brutal twisting of value, a distortion of meaning that turns ful llment into something brittle and evasive, and identity into a product. We seek meaning in what we own, but the more we own, the less meaningful it becomes. It is an unacknowledged truth that no matter how charming or costly, consumerism can never close the yawning chasm between us and the identities we crave. e void of self remains, and with every new object, it only yawns wider.

Amelia Kopp’s story is one of true ambition, discipline, deep passion and creativity—a source of inspiration for aspiring students just like to take action.

As the founder of In Search Of, a subscription based service for curated vintage clothing, she aims to ful ll her dream of reshaping the secondhand fashion industry. Within a short period of time Amelia’s has been able to turn her passion for sustainability and fashion into a tangible, growing business. Meanwhile she is also pursuing her undergraduate degree at NYU and endeavoring as a support analyst for an advertising technology company part-time. Talk about e cient time management! For Amelia, it’s not about simply achieving personal success it’s about creating meaningful change. She is fueled by a deep sense of purpose driven by her concerns for the environment, love for fashion and desire to address the lack of accessibility in the second hand fashion Industry.

Amelia’s Entrepreneurial journey is sparked from the very early stages of her life. Growing up in Silicon Valley, California she was surrounded by technology and innovation from the beginning. From a very young age her parents instilled in her the beauty of independence and the importance of hard work to achieve one’s goals. Inspired by her dynamic upbringing she decided to take her rst job at 14 in the restaurant industry a er realizing that she “didn’t learn well in the classroom”.

Recognizing the value of learning outside the classroom inspired her to start her rst major venture, e Innocent Shopt, a vintage resale business she founded around her sophomore year. She started with sourcing leather jackets and other unique pierces from rag houses across the country and selling them on Depop. Huge cardboard boxes were delivered to her door and she would patiently sort through the bulk of clothes to nd a couple gems. “I wasn’t just selling any clothes; I was making vintage fashion more accessible to people who wanted cool, unique a ordable pieces. By her junior year, she was making $1,000 a week and gaining attention from in uencers.

Simultaneously Amelia volunteered at the American Cancer Society thri store. During her time here, she noticed the store was overlooking the opportunity to engage with younger shoppers so she pitched a youth focused section called “On Trend”. With her expertise, she was able to curate a section that resonated with younger audiences which in turn increased daily sales b70% and soon began to be adopted by American Cancer Society thri stores across the nation.

Her experiences as a volunteer reinforced what she had already discovered through e Innocent Shop: the secondhand fashion market holds great potential to positively impact the environment but its missing innovation to make it more accessible and appealing to the general public in order to actually make an impact. She realized the secondhand market is a labor intensive process that requires hours to sort through bulks of clothing. Customer Accessibility was another one of her concerns, many consumers nd it overwhelming to navigate through unorganized thri shops and online platforms such as Depop and e Real Real. Finally, a certain level of expertise is required to curate vintage clothing, one must understand materials, durability, and brands to identify pierces with true value. ese challenges planted a seed in Amelia’s mind “I realized that the secondhand market didn’t just need xin,it needed a transformation….that’s how InSearchOf was born, to bring clarity, innovation, and excitement to sustainable fashion.”

Amelia asked herself a simple question “Can I make a tool that solves both of these problems? Provide personal convenience for customers and increase inventory turnover for sellers?”. Drawing from her experiences in previous roles, where her knowledge on technology expanded, Amelia envisioned a new approach for secondhand resale.

So, she launches InSearchOf in the fall of her sophomore year, with the intention of using technology to collect data in order to create a subscription based services that matches cusmors with curated vintage clothing tailored to their personal style preferences and goals. How it works: customers ll out a quick but detailed survey and participate in the an algorithm that Amelia calles “Tinder for Fashion” which analyses their preferences and matches them with expert vintage sellers. Everymonth, vintage sellers pick out pieces for their matches, then custmers choose what they want to buy out of this selection. With the use of technology and personalization teqniques, InSearchOf , bridges the gab between convince, sustainability, and accessibility, creating a win-win for buyer and sellers.

Amelia is a strong believer of the moment. Of starting when you feel the urge within you, in her eyes there is no perfect moment just the present moment. “You don’t need to have it all gurged out, Every experience, no matter how small, teaches you something. Taking risk and being mentally open is one of the most e cient ways to grow as a person “Every little opportunity matters, even the random ones. Say yes to the weird, random things people ask you to do because those experiences

you and help you grow”. She encourages aspiring student entrepenures to use their powerful status of Student to help them step out of their comfort zones “As student, you have so much power. You can mess up and fail, and people will just say, ‘Oh, you’re a student, that’s the whole point.’ So while you have this title, reach out to literally anybody and everybody who interests you…even if your heart is raising, do it”. Not being afraid to ask for help is essential, outsourcing what Amelia is not best at (so wear/algorythm developement) has been one of her most useful skills in making InSearchOf a reality.

Most importantly, being motivated by something bigger than herself, has allowed her to keep working hard even when she hits roadblocks and looses motivation. Amelia’s unwavering commitment to sustainability and fashion has brought her a long way. As she grows as a buissness and person, she continues to create a pathway of inspiration for other student entrepenures.