it annoys me when people criticize "dark academia" for being inaccessible and fetishizing wealth because thats the entire point. the aesthetic is an escapist fantasy about being a rich privileged asshole studying at a prestigious private university

and also maybe killing people. its not remotely aspirational. at most it gives you a fun way to dress and to comport yourself so you can feel like youre in a novel. the "dark" part of dark academia doesnt necessarily refer to color palette--what it does necessarily refer to are

dark themes eg murder and abuse of ones privileged status in society. i mean look at the secret history. the whole point is that by trying to emulate and fit in with his rich friends richard ends up complicit in murder. the fetishization of wealth and privilege IS THE POINT

the obsession with beauty and superficiality (aesthetic) being destructive IS THE POINT. attempts to make the aesthetic inclusive to people who are not rich and privileged make this message incoherent.

to be clear by "inclusive" i dont mean consumption-wise i mean in the things it portrays. also criticism based on the overwhelming whiteness of dark academia is perfectly justified and though not completely independent of privilege esp in academia there can AND SHOULD be more

racial diversity. anyway tldr dark academia as an aesthetic is a criticism of academia as much as it is a romanticization of it. we live in a society. capitalism bad but escapist fantasies about capitalism working for you are not inherently morally corrupt and can be a unique

angle of criticism.