Public discourse in Indonesia often gives the impression that elegance is not a dominant quality among many public officials. Political communication frequently prioritises spectacle, emotional mobilisation, and personal branding over measured language, restraint, and institutional dignity. As a result, authority is too often expressed through noise and visibility rather than through clarity, consistency, and quiet competence.The absence of elegance is also visible in how power is exercised, where short-term popularity can outweigh proportional decision-making and ethical consideration. When policies are announced with excessive dramatization or defended through polarising rhetoric, governance risks losing its sense of balance and purpose. Elegance in public office would require an awareness that power gains legitimacy not from constant performance, but from restraint, coherence, and respect for process.
This condition does not necessarily reflect a lack of intelligence or capacity, but rather a political culture that rewards immediacy over reflection and appearance over substance. In such an environment, elegance becomes politically inefficient because it does not easily translate into viral attention or instant approval. Yet precisely for this reason, elegance remains a crucial but neglected virtue, as it signals maturity, responsibility, and confidence in democratic institutions.
The absence of elegance in public leadership is not merely an aesthetic problem, but a moral and civic one. When officials fail to embody restraint, proportion, and clarity, public trust erodes, and politics becomes a contest of impressions rather than a shared effort to govern wisely. Elegance, therefore, is not a luxury in public life, but a quiet foundation for legitimacy and long-term stability.
The lack of elegance among public officials in Indonesia has significant consequences for the quality of governance and public trust. When officials communicate without restraint, clarity, or proportionality, political discourse becomes increasingly coarse and emotionally charged, making it difficult for citizens to distinguish between genuine policy substance and mere performance. This environment weakens rational deliberation and encourages politics driven by impulse rather than reflection.
Over time, the absence of elegance erodes institutional dignity and credibility. When authority is exercised through spectacle, provocation, or self-promotion, public institutions risk being perceived as extensions of individual ambition rather than as impartial guardians of the common good. As a result, respect for procedures, rules, and ethical boundaries gradually declines, not because citizens reject them in principle, but because they no longer see them embodied in leadership.
The lack of elegance also contributes to social polarisation. Language that is careless, dismissive, or inflammatory from those in power legitimises similar behaviour among the public, normalising hostility and reducing space for civil disagreement. In such conditions, differences of opinion are more likely to be treated as threats rather than as elements of a healthy democratic society.
Economically and administratively, inelegant governance often leads to inefficiency and short-termism. Policies announced without careful framing or coherent reasoning tend to prioritise immediate applause over long-term sustainability, creating confusion among institutions, markets, and citizens alike. When decision-making lacks simplicity and coherence, implementation becomes fragmented and public confidence diminishes.
The impact of diminished elegance is moral as much as political. Leadership that fails to demonstrate restraint, balance, and seriousness weakens the ethical example expected of public office. In the long run, this condition risks producing a cynical public culture in which power is viewed primarily as performance, and governance is judged by visibility rather than by wisdom, responsibility, and lasting benefit.
Elegance is the quality of achieving beauty, clarity, or effectiveness with apparent ease and without unnecessary excess. It refers not merely to outward appearance, but to a harmonious balance between form, purpose, and restraint, whether in behaviour, language, design, or thought. Something is considered elegant when it conveys refinement through simplicity, showing that nothing essential has been added or removed beyond what is truly needed. In this sense, elegance often reflects discipline, sensitivity, and intelligence, because it arises from careful choice rather than display or extravagance.
From a philosophical perspective, elegance is closely associated with clarity of thought and coherence of reasoning, where complex ideas are expressed in a manner that is both simple and profound. Philosophers often regard elegance as a sign of truth or insight, because an idea that is internally consistent and free from unnecessary complication appears closer to intellectual honesty and wisdom. In this sense, elegance reflects a harmony between reason and meaning, where understanding is achieved without force or confusion.
From an ideological perspective, elegance can be understood as the capacity of a belief system to articulate its values without resorting to dogmatism or excessive rigidity. An elegant ideology communicates its principles in a way that is persuasive yet restrained, allowing room for dialogue and reinterpretation rather than coercion. Here, elegance signifies maturity, because it shows confidence in ideas that do not need constant exaggeration or aggressive defence.
From a political perspective, elegance is visible in leadership and governance that prioritise measured language, proportional action, and institutional dignity. Politically elegant conduct avoids unnecessary spectacle, populism, or provocation, choosing instead consistency, accountability, and respect for process. In this context, elegance becomes an ethical stance, signalling that power can be exercised with restraint rather than arrogance.
From an economic perspective, elegance is reflected in systems and policies that achieve efficiency and sustainability without waste or exploitation. An elegant economic approach balances productivity with fairness, recognising that long-term stability often emerges from simplicity, transparency, and thoughtful regulation rather than excessive complexity or unchecked accumulation. Elegance in economics thus lies in optimisation, not in excess.
From a social perspective, elegance appears in interactions marked by empathy, civility, and mutual respect. Social elegance does not depend on status or wealth, but on the ability to engage others without humiliation, aggression, or pretence. It is expressed through manners, language, and attitudes that preserve human dignity while allowing differences to exist.
From a cultural perspective, elegance is found in traditions and creative expressions that convey depth and meaning without overstatement. Culturally elegant works often endure because they speak subtly yet powerfully to shared human experiences, drawing strength from symbolism, restraint, and balance. In this domain, elegance becomes a bridge between heritage and continuity, enabling culture to remain relevant without losing its soul.
From a philosophical perspective, a practical example of elegance can be seen in a theory or argument that explains a wide range of phenomena using a small number of clear principles, such as a moral framework that resolves ethical dilemmas without relying on excessive exceptions or contradictions. When a philosophical explanation allows understanding to emerge naturally, rather than overwhelming the mind with technical complexity, it demonstrates elegance in thought.
From an ideological perspective, elegance is evident in a movement that communicates its core values through concise narratives and lived examples rather than constant slogans or rigid enforcement. An ideology that inspires commitment by example, allowing individuals to internalise its principles freely, shows elegance because it trusts the strength of its ideas instead of depending on pressure or fear.
From a political perspective, a practical example of elegance appears when a leader addresses a national crisis with calm language, clear reasoning, and proportionate policy responses, avoiding inflammatory rhetoric or unnecessary theatrics. Political elegance is present when institutions function quietly and effectively, resolving problems through procedure and law rather than spectacle or personal glorification.
From an economic perspective, elegance can be observed in a business or public policy that achieves growth while reducing waste and administrative burden, such as a tax system that is simple to understand, difficult to abuse, and fair in its impact. An elegant economic solution solves multiple problems at once, not by adding layers of regulation, but by refining the essentials.
From a social perspective, a practical example of elegance is found in everyday interactions where disagreement is expressed with respect and listening rather than insult or domination. Social elegance appears when individuals maintain courtesy even in conflict, choosing words and gestures that preserve relationships without sacrificing honesty.
From a cultural perspective, elegance can be seen in works of art, literature, or ritual that convey deep meaning through subtlety rather than excess, such as a short poem that captures grief or hope more powerfully than a lengthy explanation. Cultural elegance endures because it invites reflection instead of demanding attention, allowing meaning to unfold over time.
Elegance in Science: The Beauty of Simplicity by Ian Glynn (2010, Oxford University Press), explores how the notion of elegance operates within scientific discovery, especially in mathematics and physics, by showing that scientists often admire solutions and theories that embody beauty, simplicity, coherence, and explanatory power. Glynn argues that the term elegance, though more commonly associated with art and poetry, is surprisingly important in science and most visibly in “elegant proofs” in mathematics, where simplicity and insight lead to a profound sense of intellectual satisfaction. He demonstrates the role of elegance through a wide range of historical examples—from Pythagoras’ theorem and Archimedes’ proofs to Kepler’s Laws and the experiments that revealed the nature of heat—and shows how scientists react with admiration and excitement when they encounter elegant solutions, theories, or experiments that combine clarity, proportion and unexpected simplicity, producing a kind of “stunning and unalterable rightness” that inspires wonder. Glynn also connects this aesthetic sense of elegance to deeper philosophical questions about inference and the best explanation, suggesting that elegance is not merely a superficial criterion but is deeply related to how scientists conceive of simplicity and coherence in their work. At the same time, he cautions that an elegant explanation does not guarantee correctness, reminding readers that beauty and simplicity, while powerful guides, must be weighed alongside empirical validation.Glynn suggests that the idea of elegance in scientific practice is not merely an aesthetic flourish but a genuine intellectual criterion that scientists use to judge and pursue theories, explanations, and solutions that are both powerful and economical in their conceptual structure. Glynn explains that scientists across disciplines—especially in mathematics and physics—share a deep admiration for “elegant” proofs, theories, and experiments because such work combines clarity, proportion, and simplicity in a way that makes complex phenomena understandable and unified under a compact framework. This pursuit of elegant understanding involves imaginative insight as well as logical rigour. He draws on historical examples, such as elegant mathematical proofs and the simple foundational laws in physics, to show that scientists often experience a kind of intellectual excitement when a solution reveals itself with striking simplicity and coherence. This excitement reflects a deeper commitment to explanatory power and conceptual economy, rather than mere surface beauty. Glynn also emphasises that elegance is intertwined with philosophical issues about inference and what counts as the best explanation, illustrating how the value placed on elegant theories influences the way scientists formulate hypotheses and reason about their work, while still reminding readers that elegance alone does not guarantee empirical truth.
In The New Elegance: Stylish, Comfortable Rooms for Today (published by Rizzoli International Publications in 2019), Timothy Corrigan presents a conception of elegance that goes far beyond mere formality or ostentation. Corrigan emphasises that elegance should not be stiff, studied or reserved only for special occasions; instead, he argues that true elegance is deeply connected to comfort, ease, and personal authenticity, such that a space or lifestyle that genuinely reflects who you are and how you live can be described as elegant. According to his philosophy, elegance is not antithetical to comfort but rather supported by it, meaning that environments which make people feel at ease, confident, and harmoniously connected to their surroundings embody the new contemporary form of elegance he champions throughout the book.
Corrigan explains that the sense of elegance in interior spaces arises when rooms are conceived with a careful consideration of proportion, a disciplined restraint in decoration, and a harmonious relationship between beauty and function. He situates these ideas within a long lineage of classic design principles that have guided Western interiors for centuries, showing how scale and proportion—fundamental concepts that date back to classical architecture and continue to inform symmetry and balance in every successful room—are indispensable to creating spaces that feel right and coherent. Throughout the book’s “interludes”, Corrigan emphasises how proportion governs the relationship between furniture, architecture and human scale, how restraint prevents clutter and visual noise, and how the functional harmony of a room—where every piece has a purpose and contributes to ease of living—ensures that elegance is not merely decorative but actually livable. Rather than privileging ornament for its own sake, his approach draws on historical influences from traditional European interiors and classic forms, adapting them in a contemporary context so that the timeless principles of balance and harmony translate into modern domestic life.
Corrigan portrays elegant interior design as more than an aesthetic choice; he sees it as a reflection of deeper cultural ideals about what it means to live well and find beauty in everyday life. For Corrigan, elegance is rooted in how a space makes people feel — it draws on historical traditions of refinement, particularly European sensibilities, but translates them into rooms that are comfortable, welcoming and suited to contemporary lifestyles. His work suggests that when design embraces both classic beauty and the lived experience of daily use — blending refinement with ease — it honours a cultural ideal where beauty is not separate from life but woven through it, demonstrating an understanding that true elegance supports well-being, hospitality, and a thoughtful way of living.
Elegance and class are frequently misconstrued as external markers of wealth, refinement, or social rank, yet philosophical inquiry reveals them to be deeply ethical and cultural constructs. In the Indonesian context, where social harmony (rukun), propriety (tata krama), and sensitivity to communal space are highly valued, elegance cannot be reduced to aesthetic display. Rather, it emerges as a form of moral cultivation that integrates self-discipline, relational awareness, and cultural responsibility.
From an Aristotelian perspective, elegance may be understood as a practical expression of ethos shaped through habituation. Aristotle emphasised that virtue is not innate but cultivated through repeated, conscious practice until it becomes character. Elegance, when viewed through this lens, is not an occasional performance but a stable disposition formed by daily habits, such as measured speech, emotional moderation, and respectful conduct towards others. In Indonesian society, this resonates strongly with the principle of budi pekerti, where moral refinement is reflected not in assertion, but in restraint and appropriateness.
Kantian ethics further deepens this understanding by situating elegance within the framework of respect for persons. For Kant, dignity arises from treating human beings as ends in themselves rather than as means. Elegance, therefore, is not merely a matter of style but a moral orientation that manifests in how one speaks, listens, and responds. In public discourse and everyday interaction, an elegant individual refrains from humiliation, domination, or excessive self-centred expression. Within the Indonesian cultural milieu, this aligns with the norm of unggah-ungguh, where language and behaviour are carefully modulated to preserve mutual respect and social balance.
Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of habitus offers a sociological dimension that clarifies why elegance often appears effortless yet is socially meaningful. Habitus refers to the internalised dispositions shaped by culture, education, and social environment. What is perceived as “natural” elegance is, in fact, the embodiment of deeply ingrained social values. In Indonesia, such dispositions are visible in subtle gestures, calm demeanour, and an aversion to overt self-promotion. Elegance here functions as symbolic capital, not through conspicuous consumption, but through self-control, modesty, and sensitivity to context.
This philosophical framing illuminates why simplicity and restraint are central to elegance. Rather than excess, elegance favours balance, coherence, and proportion. In Indonesian culture, flamboyance is often viewed with suspicion, while subtlety is associated with wisdom and maturity. The idea of alon-alon asal kelakon, for instance, reflects a cultural appreciation for measured action over impulsive speed. Elegance, in this sense, is inseparable from patience and deliberation.
Emotional regulation stands as a crucial marker of class across philosophical and cultural traditions. Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean advocates emotional responses that are appropriate in degree and context, while Indonesian social norms discourage public emotional excess that might disrupt harmony. An elegant individual is therefore not emotionally absent, but emotionally literate, capable of expressing feeling without imposing it upon others.
Language and silence also acquire ethical significance. Kantian restraint in speech, combined with Aristotelian prudence, supports the view that not all truths must be spoken at all times. In Indonesian communicative culture, knowing when to remain silent is often considered a sign of intelligence and depth. Silence functions not as avoidance, but as respect for context, hierarchy, and emotional space.
Ultimately, the highest expression of elegance lies in relational ethics. How one treats service workers, elders, or those with less social power reveals character more authentically than polished appearance or eloquent speech. This principle echoes both Kantian respect and Indonesian communal values, where dignity is affirmed through everyday courtesy rather than symbolic status.
In conclusion, elegance and class are not external achievements nor imported lifestyles, but cultivated orientations shaped by philosophical virtue and cultural wisdom. In the Indonesian context, elegance emerges from the integration of self-mastery, ethical restraint, and social sensitivity. It is a quiet excellence that resists spectacle, prioritises dignity over display, and affirms humanity through calm, respectful presence. In an age of noise and performative identity, such elegance represents not nostalgia, but moral and cultural resilience.
