Heritage Clothing: Will it last?

[macuser3of5]

Originally Posted by makewayhomer

my litmus test is, anything I can't instantly figure out why something is so popular is a trend that will soon be out, then back in a few years, then out again.

trendy = anything flannel, anything lumberjack, anything chambray, any $300 jeans you can't wash, $400 Indy boots

lasting = shell cordovan longwings and PTB's, O'Connells Made in USA OCBD's,

heritage x trad = lasting
heritage x fashion = trendy
just... ugh. Both sound like costumes.

 

[makewayhomer]

from An Affordable Wardrobe

Authentic
This word gets bandied about like mad, especially amongst the workwear/fashion, New York Lumberjack set. Everything's just got to be so damned authentic. Drives me mad. True, your Filson tincloth jacket may authentic, your Woolrich blanket may be authentic, and those jeans you paid $400 for that you never wash may be authentic too, in that they're made in USA by some venerable old brand. But all that stuff thats designer, all those collaborations, all those poor people clothes that are priced only for millionaires? No way. There ain't nothing authentic about designer coal mining clothes, no matter where they come from or what the label says. Unless, of course, you work in an actual coal mine, in which case the other guys are likely to beat you up when they hear how much all that gear cost you.

Heritage Brand
I've got no beef with actual heritage brands. I do love my Bean Boots. But you never hear that term applied to things that actually have some heritage. That's because real heritage is usually content to be quiet, it speaks for itself and it doesn't need a label to tell you. I find that once that label is applied to something it usually means that its an overpriced copy of a romanticized version of the original thing, which was actually a commodity for average people in the first place. (See Authentic, above)

 

[brad-t]

marsupialed

 

[makewayhomer]

Originally Posted by Uncontrol

marsupialed

let me know which salvation army shop your lumberjack chambray will end up in next year

 

[macuser3of5]

how can someone with almost 1000 posts here find any validity in that

 

[brad-t]

Originally Posted by makewayhomer

let me know which salvation army shop your lumberjack chambray will end up in next year

do you know who i am???

 

[Fuuma]

1) **** you marsupials I was interested in workwear before 99% of you dirtbag lumberjacks noticed the trend and jumped on it.

2) Still the mindless attempt at differenciating yourself and your overpriced garments from the fashion crowd through the misuse of buzzwords like "authenticity" and "style not fashion" makes me want to take a sledgehammer to your stupid bearded faces.

3) **** you and your fragile masculinity

4) Die in a mineshaft

This post is not adressed to non-morons who like workwear, keep up keeping on. The rest and their illusions can just go to point 4).

 

[Makeshift_Robot]

Originally Posted by makewayhomer

from An Affordable Wardrobe

It's like all the people who say that you should only buy a motorcycle jacket if you are riding a motorcycle -- shortsighted and dictatorial.

Fashion is deeply referential. It might draw influence from bohemians, or soldiers, or the aristocracy of imperial Japan. Pulling influence from a lower-class tradition of costume doesn't make your work any less valid. I don't think many of the lumberjacks I saw in Soho thought they were actual lumberjacks; they saw something that looked cool, so they wore it. Which, fundamentally, is what any person does with clothes.

 

[mpcec]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

1) **** you marsupials I was interested in workwear before 99% of you dirtbag lumberjacks noticed the trend and jumped on it.

2) Still the mindless attempt at differenciating yourself and your overpriced garments from the fashion crowd through the misuse of buzzwords like "authenticity" and "style not fashion" makes me want to take a sledgehammer to your stupid bearded faces.

3) **** you and your fragile masculinity

4) Die in a mineshaft

This post is not adressed to non-morons who like workwear, keep up keeping on. The rest and their illusions can just go to point 4).

#2 drives me crazy.

 

[dfagdfsh]

the "heritage" clothing I wear is so generic and plain that to 99% of the population it is virtually indistinguishable to what people buy from sears today and for the last 40 years.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by Teger

the "heritage" clothing I wear is so generic and plain that to 99% of the population it is virtually indistinguishable to what people buy from sears today and for the last 40 years.


sears from 40 yrs ago:
http://www.ratrodbikes.com/forum/vie...t=6491&start=0

 

[dfagdfsh]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

sears from 40 yrs ago:
http://www.ratrodbikes.com/forum/vie...t=6491&start=0

pretty much. need more champion sweats tho

 

[brad-t]

my heritage

 

[snake]

^Paging LK

 

[coldforge]

This argument cuts both ways across the topic of heritage workwear. It's too nebulous to discuss in huge strokes. There's a legitimacy to the people who argue that heritage clothing puts more of an emphasis on what you could probably more easily argue are legitimate values—and there's also truth to the argument that it's another area of fashion like anything else.

Here's what I mean: if we accept that the trendy jeans right now are hand-dipped japanese selvage, then I think there's an argument to be made that those are more worthwhile in some sense than True Religion or Chip and Pepper—the style of jeans that was trendy before that. Both styles can have prices that are truly astronomical. But with the True Religion, one is paying extra to have someone distress your jeans, and maybe put rhinestones or paint on them. Whereas if you're paying for a ultra-high end pair of Japanese denim, you're paying for the craftsmanship and attention and the quality of the fabric and the loom. Is the latter any more _necessary_ or even _authentic_ than the former? Absolutely not. One is not getting any closer to authentic working class folk by paying for something that a Japanese craftsman made with his hands. But I think the values that you're supporting—small business, handiwork, fair working conditions, manufacturing in the first world—are generally not as short-sighted as the values expressed by many of the other fashion trends we have seen.

HOWEVER.

This impulse is just as susceptible to fashionable or aesthete-ish reasoning as any other. To wit: that exact same trend, with the exact same manufacturers and exact same aesthetic as Julius or any other fashion trend or style. If I pay a premium, or take a plane to Japan, in order to get a Levi's repro jacket with writing only on one side of the red tag, and not both, because that's how they were made in 1947 (or the other way around?), I think it can safely be said that I am not acting out of an appreciation of worksmanship, or fair trade, or good business practices, or high quality materials. Is that a bad thing? A lot of people would argue that if one expends that much resources on an essentially immaterial concern like repro-ness—as distinct from quality—that one is being wasteful. I can't necessarily argue.

But I think it's clear that heritage workwear as a whole is far too great a category to tar with either brush. Workwear is like... 'Jeans', or 'Pea coats'; within it you'll find examples on every point in the spectrum. Frankly, I think whatever distinguishes the workwear trend from previous trends has more to do with the internet, globalism, and the global economy, rather than it being quantitatively more shallow or more legitimate than anything else in fashion right now.