Living in the past

[MikeBravo]

Conservators do not spend $1300 on a new pair of handmade shoes. People who do that are using vintage as a wealth status symbol, nothing more...

You seem to be drawing a lot of conclusions from a few pairs of shoes!

 

[William Stratford]

You seem to be drawing a lot of conclusions from a few pairs of shoes!

I'm drawing conclusions from the fact that he spent $1300 on a single pair of handmade shoes - which is no small and insignificant act but rather one which speaks volumes.

 

[Ben Stephens]

I'm drawing conclusions from the fact that he spent $1300 on a single pair of handmade shoes - which is no small and insignificant act but rather one which speaks volumes.

Yes, I think this is the point. The article seems to state a lot of monetry figures he spends on these items. If it were to have been worded along the lines that he has to get his shoes hand made, due to the rarity of the originals, I think this would seemmuch more in keeping with someone who was purely aiming at an aesthetic and not any sort of status.

I have noticed people are obssessed with money at the moment, and what others have, and that is the tone through out this article. When i used to go out in my car, a few years ago the question was 'How fast does it go', now, it is always 'how much is it worth'. I find that question quite offensive, if I am honest, as to me it is irrelevant. I quote the 1934 price, and then always state that not many have sold so they have reduced that.

Ben

 

[MikeBravo]

Some people on the Lounge spend more than that on custom made suits. That doesn't mean they are "using vintage as a wealth status symbol".

He has the same attitude a lot of people here have, or would have if they had the money (myself for instance). Doesn't mean I am consumerist. In fact I rarely buy anything new, I would just buy better quality second hand clothes, cars etc.

However, I respect your opinion. Feel free to PM me if you like

Mike

 

[Edward]

USD1300... that's currently GBP830 and some pence, about the same as the equivalent London shoemakers. Big outlay, though assuming equivalent durability, over the course of twenty plus years they'll quite plausibly work out no more expensive than a clutch of cheaper pairs that would last the same length of time. Of course, a pair of Church's might do that as well on half that price, but those are production line rather than bespoke, which is a whole different ballgame.

 

[MikeBravo]

Yes, I think this is the point. The article seems to state a lot of monetry figures he spends on these items. If it were to have been worded along the lines that he has to get his shoes hand made, due to the rarity of the originals, I think this would seemmuch more in keeping with someone who was purely aiming at an aesthetic and not any sort of status.

I have noticed people are obssessed with money at the moment, and what others have, and that is the tone through out this article. When i used to go out in my car, a few years ago the question was 'How fast does it go', now, it is always 'how much is it worth'. I find that question quite offensive, if I am honest, as to me it is irrelevant. I quote the 1934 price, and then always state that not many have sold so they have reduced that.

Ben

Just because the journalist writing the article is money-focussed, doesn't mean the subject of the article is. He seems to be a passionate person who is definite about what he wants, period, style etc. And has found a way of financing it

 

[Angus Forbes]

Indeed. People who see an inheritance as a fund to be liquidated rather than a trust passed on.

We have a large accumulation spanning a number of generations. Not only does this please me spiritually (for lack of a more appropriate word), it provides a financial advantage in and of itself. By not having to "keep up with the Jonses" (an American term for conspicuous consumption, I suppose), we have been able to educate our children to the highest standard without burdening them with debt, and to accumulate substantial financial assets of our own to pass on to them, God willing.

This way of life stands in direct contrast with a number of more modernist people we know, who, for example, make fun of our dining room furniture because it has claw feet. It doesn't seem to occur to them that this table, which is more than 100 years old, once belonged to a prominent Judge, has no doubt seen its share of dinner guests far more accomplished than they, and that it cost us exactly nothing. Another guy calls our 90-year-old house a "mausoleum," not understanding that it has housed our family for three generations at minimal long-term cost. I could go on, but I won't, except to quote Mark Twain -- "thrift is a wonderful virtue, particularly in an ancestor."

 

[William Stratford]

Yes, I think this is the point. The article seems to state a lot of monetry figures he spends on these items. If it were to have been worded along the lines that he has to get his shoes hand made, due to the rarity of the originals, I think this would seemmuch more in keeping with someone who was purely aiming at an aesthetic and not any sort of status.

It is not necessary to spend $1300 to get a pair of handmade shoes made to an old pattern. I suspect that you are pulling my leg in claiming otherwise.

Edited:

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying, in which case....

Yes, I think this is the point. The article seems to state a lot of monetry figures he spends on these items. If it were to have been worded along the lines that he has to get his shoes hand made, due to the rarity of the originals, I think this would seemmuch more in keeping with someone who was purely aiming at an aesthetic and not any sort of status.

Indeed. He appears to be using "vintage" and "handmade" in the same way that people of more modern tastes would use "Prada", "Rolex" and "Jimmy Choo". It is a very nouveau riche stance (the kind of behaviour I would expect from a premiership footballer)....

 

[Ben Stephens]

It is not necessary to spend $1300 to get a pair of handmade shoes made to an old pattern. I suspect that you are pulling my leg in claiming otherwise.

That is not the point. The cost is irrelevant unless it is stated. If someone chooses to spend 10 pounds on an original vintage pair of shoes or 2000 pounds on bespoke shoes is of little consequence, if they do not state the cost. That is my only point. I have no problem with somebody spending what ever they wish, that is their choice.

Kindest Regards

Ben

 

[Ben Stephens]

So, why tell the journalist how much he spends? Surely, it has no relevance, so when asked, he could have politely refused to answer. I am afraid, in the vintage world there are those who do make it very public knowledge waht they spend, and, seem to feel that those who do not spend the same are somehow inadequate and not as 'vintage' as them.

 

[William Stratford]

That is not the point. The cost is irrelevant unless it is stated. If someone chooses to spend 10 pounds on an original vintage pair of shoes or 2000 pounds on bespoke shoes is of little consequence, if they do not state the cost. That is my only point. I have no problem with somebody spending what ever they wish, that is their choice.

Kindest Regards

Ben

Indeed it is people's choice...but if they do not wish it commented on they should not have it placed in the newspaper

 

[William Stratford]

So, why tell the journalist how much he spends? Surely, it has no relevance, so when asked, he could have politely refused to answer. I am afraid, in the vintage world there are those who do make it very public knowledge waht they spend, and, seem to feel that those who do not spend the same are somehow inadequate and not as 'vintage' as them.

Indeed.

 

[scotrace]

Vintage ain't cheap. "He spends too much?"

I must be getting old. Though I operate on what is very much a thin (thin) budget, all I got from the article was "here's a chap who is living the life, doing it well, and entertaining people, making his own way." Can we just appreciate the accomplishments of another without begrudging them the success?

 

[William Stratford]

Vintage ain't cheap. "He spends too much?"

I must be getting old. Though I operate on what is very much a thin (thin) budget, all I got from the article was "here's a chap who is living the life, doing it well, and entertaining people, making his own way." Can we just appreciate the accomplishments of another without begrudging them the success?

*shrug*

If someone wants to put themselves into the newspaper, I reserve the right to comment on what they are doing; especially when it involves spending $2600 on shoes (he bought two pairs) and says in his video "I say to myself....why don't you live like a moviestar. When I draw from the 1920s and 30s its not because I'm interested in the past.....you have to make your own party". So its not that I am "begrudging them the success", its rolling my eyes at someone who is engaging in quite vulgar consumption and who treats the past like a themepark. [huh] Hey ho.

 

[dhermann1]

I'm sorry, William S, that's just kind of snotty.

 

[William Stratford]

I'm sorry, William S, that's just kind of snotty.

That's ok; you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.

 

[LizzieMaine]

So, why tell the journalist how much he spends? Surely, it has no relevance, so when asked, he could have politely refused to answer. I am afraid, in the vintage world there are those who do make it very public knowledge waht they spend, and, seem to feel that those who do not spend the same are somehow inadequate and not as 'vintage' as them.

Doesn't matter if it's vintage or modern, if you're bragging about how much it cost, it's nothing but "bling."

 

[Feraud]

I'd be willing to bet the tone of the article was dictated by the author rather than the subject.
Imagine the constant replies of "no comment" to questions about where one purchased this or what that costs might leave the editors to question the validity of taking up space with such an article.
Very few of us have reason to be interviewed by the New York Times let alone the status to dictate how the paper should portray the subject.

 

[dhermann1]

Well, the fact is that among the vintage crowd having fancy vintage clothes can be quite a status symbol, and there are people who don't mind letting you know how much they spent. (Tho, really, most of brag about how LITTLE we spend on things). Anyhow, I don't think Michael is the type to brag. I suspect it's the author who flashed those figures around. But I will say, Michael does LOOOOVE to look cool.

 

[AntonAAK]

(Tho, really, most of brag about how LITTLE we spend on things).

:eusa_clap