or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Vintage Revolution
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Vintage Revolution

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Some interesting aspects of human behaviour.

http://www.thestar.com/living/fashion/article/900092--on-the-front-lines-in-the-vintage-clothing-war
post #2 of 16
They used to call it "second hand" or "used", now it's called "vintage"... I suspect it's popular, because the older stuff tended to be much better made and lasted much longer.
post #3 of 16

I must admit to owning a couple of vintage clothes myself.

 

This one's a Stetson fedora made either in the late 1940s or early '50s:

 

 

http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy208/TheAntiquarian/Photoon2011-08-31at1631.jpg

 

 

The jacket is a McGregor Anti-Freeze, and probably dates to the 1960s rather than '50s, based on the interior label design:

 

http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy208/TheAntiquarian/1-9-12freeze1.jpg

 

post #4 of 16
I am the original owner of my vintage clothes, eg ties that are 30 years old,
a pair of cavalry twill slacks that show no wear that were bought in the late
70s.
post #5 of 16
I remember being very impressed w/ the vintage stores in Toronto several years ago...

It isn't surprising that vintage stuff is getting more expensive with all the workwear, steampunk, heritage, 80's revival, etc. trends out there. I doubt it's as bad as they make it out to be though. You can still get vintage made in the US stuff by Pendleton, etc. on eBay for far less than the new, imported versions retail for.

In any case, there's long been good reasons to buy used/vintage. As MDT said, older things are often better made than new ones. Some people value the "authenticity" of various vintage items. I guess there's a love of history involved in that, a desire to connect with the past, for various reasons ranging from a love for craftsmanship to escapism. I value the environmental benefits of reusing existing products, as I'm sure others do as well.

But older things have some disadvantages, such as the danger of being delicate. Leather can have hidden cracks, for example, or insect damage on a garment may not become apparent until it's been worn or cleaned.
post #6 of 16

As much as I love vintage, it does seem that every piece of second hand clothing, no matter how old is now classed as vintage. Until a couple of years ago it would have simply been termed 'charity shop'.

post #7 of 16

Well, vintage, when properly applied, doesn't really mean old, does it?

 

 

Although things that are old, are said to be of a certain vintage. Although vintage [wine age} is commonly used to date things other than wine, this is a poor choice of words, since clothing, cars, etc are not wine although I guess they can be contemporaries of a certain vintage, but then, that is also true of something made for the first time last week.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyMG View Post

As much as I love vintage, it does seem that every piece of second hand clothing, no matter how old is now classed as vintage. Until a couple of years ago it would have simply been termed 'charity shop'.



 

post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by recondite View Post

Well, vintage, when properly applied, doesn't really mean old, does it?

 

 

Although things that are old, are said to be of a certain vintage. Although vintage [wine age} is commonly used to date things other than wine, this is a poor choice of words, since clothing, cars, etc are not wine although I guess they can be contemporaries of a certain vintage, but then, that is also true of something made for the first time last week.
 



 



Exactly. It's just that there are a lot of rubbish old clothes out there that people slap a 'vintage' label on just to jump on the band wagon. It's almost as annoying as companies that are virtually brand new describing themselves as 'heritage'.

 

post #9 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyMG View Post

Exactly. It's just that there are a lot of rubbish old clothes out there that people slap a 'vintage' label on just to jump on the band wagon. It's almost as annoying as companies that are virtually brand new describing themselves as 'heritage'.

Oh "heritage" is certainly an abused marketing word, I've seen it used on a lot crappy stuff here, they often use words like that because it looks nice. It's the sort of word that Ralph Lauren loves to use as well for their marketing and product descriptions.
post #10 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by recondite View Post

Well, vintage, when properly applied, doesn't really mean old, does it?


Although things that are old, are said to be of a certain vintage. Although vintage [wine age} is commonly used to date things other than wine, this is a poor choice of words, since clothing, cars, etc are not wine although I guess they can be contemporaries of a certain vintage, but then, that is also true of something made for the first time last week.

I know how they apply "vintage" to things like cars, e.g. made before around 1930 I think. There's "vintage denim" with jeans, when in fact they're actually new.

How does one differentiate between "vintage clothes" and clothes that are just old? Is it when they're over a certain age or period, like with cars?
post #11 of 16

It is an interesting trend, I attribute it mostly to the thought that most 'vintage' pieces are unique in nature and could very well be one-of-a-kind (or at least seem that way as you are unlikely to see another person wearing that same piece) ... And well the quality of course, Made in USA means alot to some consumers

post #12 of 16
Interesting, although I'm not sure that men's vintage is quite so cut-throat... As has been said, for me the attraction of vintage clothing (which for me means 1960s at latest, preferably 1900-1940) subsists in the uniqueness of the cut, the chance of getting a one-off piece (especially if buying vintage bespoke), the solidity and wearing qualities of the materials (in most cases), the connection with the past and (not least) the opportunity for a much fuller wardrobe than if I bought new clothes of much lesser quality. So it works for me on a number of levels. Additionally, there is still a good chance of decent pieces appearing in local charity shops (yesterday for example I bought a marvellous 1930s-40s two-piece dinner suit by a Spanish tailor, in good condition, for £8 with a bow tie and collar studs thrown in) and even in retro clothing shops for a decent price (£5 for a hat, £12-£15 for waistcoats and £25 for an overcoat being some recent scores of mine.)
post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Jordan View Post

Additionally, there is still a good chance of decent pieces appearing in local charity shops (yesterday for example I bought a marvellous 1930s-40s two-piece dinner suit by a Spanish tailor, in good condition, for £8 with a bow tie and collar studs thrown in) ...

...and I went back in today on the off-chance and bought the waistcoat which went with it!* Thus for the princely sum of £12 I have acquired a fine dinner suit in very good condition, and by selling on the tie (a vintage made-up one, but still boxed) the collar studs and possibly also the three shirt studs which came with it, I have a good chance of recouping the cost of getting it cleaned ready to wear. And that's why I love vintage.

*separated from the jacket and trousers, which were themselves out separately when I found them, and only put out in the last day, apparently.
post #14 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Jordan View Post

Interesting, although I'm not sure that men's vintage is quite so cut-throat... As has been said, for me the attraction of vintage clothing (which for me means 1960s at latest, preferably 1900-1940) subsists in the uniqueness of the cut, the chance of getting a one-off piece (especially if buying vintage bespoke), the solidity and wearing qualities of the materials (in most cases), the connection with the past and (not least) the opportunity for a much fuller wardrobe than if I bought new clothes of much lesser quality.


Very well put my friend, agreed.

post #15 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

Some interesting aspects of human behaviour.

http://www.thestar.com/living/fashion/article/900092--on-the-front-lines-in-the-vintage-clothing-war

As for the Toronto chapter, and as this was an article from the Toronto Star,
That 'secret building' mentioned several times in the article is probably the little known Goodwill 'Buy The Pound' warehouse located at 50 Emblem Court (near Midland Avenue and Hwy. 401) in Scarborough. I am told people line up an hour before opening almost every day and at night there are regular 'racoons' who go through the giant waste bins and fresh donations and just take the stuff. It has been going on for years. Just a word of clarification on other matters in the article:
Goodwill Industries = Non-Profit (they had their 'charitable organization' status revoked 5 or so years ago for 'unethical practices')
(Toronto Goodwill CEO rakes in $300,000.00 / yr salary + $200,000.00 / yr in bonuses and that's just for playing golf well!)
Talize, Value Village and every 'Vintage' store = For Profit (cha-ching! for them)
Salvation Army Thrift Store = Charitable Organization (The only true Charity thrift stores left in the city)

What would be real fun for vintagewear, is some enterprising people to tap into the Deadstock warehouses and bring us some K-Mart polyester from the 1970's still with original tags!
And the shoes...oooo! Only then would a younger generation understand an older generations (over 60) hatred towards brown shoes.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Vintage Revolution