Retro-extremists? What are we called?

[reetpleat]

I'm not sure where you're getting this, but both the Senator and I have stressed from the very beginning of the the thread that the whole concept isn't about who is or isn't "more vintage." Some people may be reading that into the thread, but they're missing the entire point of it if they are.

The reason the thread was started was because there was no suitable word to describe a particular type of "vintage living" *that is motivated for a particular set of reasons.* If all vintage types were motivated by the same reasons, we wouldn't need such a word to describe it. There are many different reasons, all of them equally valid. If those aren't *your* reasons, fine. But those of us who *are* motivated by that particular set of reasons would simply like to have a convenient shorthand way to describe it, and it honestly astounds me that it's become this big a deal. Did the rockabillies have to go thru all this when they named themselves?

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that this is about motives. I understood it to be about full time vintage living.

If you got 100 ativists in the same room you may find it hard to find the same motivation amongst any two of them.

And I dare say, while I don't know him, the senator, I suspect, lives a lifestyle that would have been perfectly acceptable in certain circles of the past era, but would be frowned upon today by certain members of this forum and certain people who consider themselves atavists.

I may be way off base. I just like the image of him galavanting around New York from swank bar to swank bar, dressed in his sharpest clothes, with a different lovely lady on his arm each night. but who knows. perhaps he spends his evenings at home darning his socks, saving money, and canning peaches.

 

[LizzieMaine]

True, I say political, but I meant more about attitude, such as that in the past people worked hard had good values, didn't waste bla bla bla. I don't think that is necessarily a part of it. Obviously, it is the senators concept to define and characterize. But do you think there needs to be two words, one who lives a full lifestyle out of love (it doesn't have to be ironic) out of rejection of modern values, (again, doesn't have to be ironic) or out of a true feeling of alienation from modern culture. If you start narrowing it down that way, you may end up with a sub group so small it is meaningless to have a term for. If there is any hope for the term to catch on, best make it apply to anyone, for whatever reasons, lives their life fully, or as fully as possible, as if they wre living in the era.

Well, I won't presume to speak for the Senator on this point, but I don't especially care if there are 5, 50, or 5000 atavists out there. But however few or many people there are who are so alienated from modern culture that they reject it, I think there ought to be a distinctive word for them, because it's a very distinctive phenomenon.

For that matter, do you really think that a guy who lives a 70s or 80s lifestyle really feels that things were great then and seeks to revive the attitudes of the era because they are alienated from this vastly different culture of today? the senator already said he wanted to include them.

Can't speak to that, because I don't know anyone like that -- but if they're out there, I'd certainly be interested in hearing about their motivations and figuring out if there's a common pattern between them and the more common 40s-50s folks.

 

[SGT Rocket]

The reason the thread was started was because there was no suitable word to describe a particular type of "vintage living" *that is motivated for a particular set of reasons.* If all vintage types were motivated by the same reasons, we wouldn't need such a word to describe it. There are many different reasons, all of them equally valid. If those aren't *your* reasons, fine. But those of us who *are* motivated by that particular set of reasons would simply like to have a convenient shorthand way to describe it, and it honestly astounds me that it's become this big a deal. Did the rockabillies have to go thru all this when they named themselves?

I totally agree that we need some sort of shorthand. Sorry if I'm pissy tonight.

Also, seriously, did the Rockabillies have to go through all this too?

You know, the "Beat Poets" didn't call themselves Beat Poets. I saw Allan Ginsberg speak in Austin Tx years ago (I say I "saw" him speak because he mumbled and was so hard to hear). Someone asked him why the Beat Poets called themselves Beat Poets. He said they didn't call themselves anything. The name was given to them years (20 years?) later.

Maybe the same thing happened with the Rockabillies?

 

[vitanola]

I think I have a problem with the underpinning argument that it has to cost a lot of money. I think it certainly can, and I don't disrespect anybody who buys their way to it, but I do not think it has to.

I myself find it far more frugal to be vintage than modern? Buy used books instead of video games. Snuggle up under blankets instead of turning up the heat. Walk to work. Have a vegetable garden. Bake and cook instead of eating out. Buy vintage clothes or learn to sew. Buy used furniture instead of stuff from Ikea that lasts three years and dies and needs to be bought again.

I don't think being an atavist requires money; if anything it may just require not caring about people raising eyebrows at "how you can live that way."

I'm interested to see if I'm an outlier in this; do other people also think vintage equals spendy?

Experience has shown me that living in the manner of an earlier day is actually LESS expensive.

We live in a pretty large old house,, more than 5000 square feet. We heat using a combination of coal, wood, and city gas. Using the modern gas furnace our fuel bills would approach $700/month in the winter. Using the kitchen range (coal) the stoves in the library a chamber, the coal fireplace in the living room and the gas fireplaces in the guest rooms, we can keep our monthly fuel bills well under $300.00.

Antique furnishings and appliances seem to be expensive, until one compares their costs with those of new items. In addition, many older appliances are very sparing in their consumption of electric current.

Clothing can be somewhat pricey, but though more expensive than current Wal-Mart or Target offerings, carefully purchased (and even bespoke) clothing in the styles of past years is generally so much more durable that there is no practical difference in cost, and the clothing can be worn as long as it remains serviceable, for not being fashionable, neither does it become passe.

No, I certainly concur. There is no reason that immersive "anachronism", "atavism" or what ever one might wish to call this life choice (how about "Ned"?) should be more costly than any other mode of life.

I suspect the problem with expensive vintage tastes arises from those who, when looking to the past, see only the life styles of the wealthier classes. If we were operating our (overly large) home "correctly", we would need a staff of three. That is not practical, is not possible, in fact, and so we emulate a more modest life style. In doing so I have come to understand the complaints of the early 20th century folks who decided that the big old barns of the 'fifties and 'sixties were impractical, and who longed for a thoroughly modern bungalow, which, if small, was easy to live in.

I had the opportunity to purchase just such a bungalow this past summer, and am currently restoring the place to its mid-1920's state, as I am sure that it will make for a more comfortable "period" life.

Know anyone who wants a Tuscan Villa?

 

[reetpleat]

Well, I won't presume to speak for the Senator on this point, but I don't especially care if there are 5, 50, or 5000 atavists out there. But however few or many people there are who are so alienated from modern culture that they reject it, I think there ought to be a distinctive word for them, because it's a very distinctive phenomenon.



Can't speak to that, because I don't know anyone like that -- but if they're out there, I'd certainly be interested in hearing about their motivations and figuring out if there's a common pattern between them and the more common 40s-50s folks.

Yes, I would love to hear from a 70s or 80s guy who is so alienated with modern culture, and has such a fondness for the attitudes, culture, and mores of that era, that they choose to live a full on vintage lifestyle. That would be so fun.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Maybe I missed it, but where does it say that this is about motives. I understood it to be about full time vintage living.

If you got 100 ativists in the same room you may find it hard to find the same motivation amongst any two of them.

At the very start of the thread, we began to get into discussion of distinctive motivations -- it's probably gotten swamped by all the side debates, but the real substance of it should still be in there if you've got the patience to dig for it.

Obviously, motivations are significant in understanding all this. People don't do something as unusual as living outside the current era without good reasons for it, and I think it's the reasons that actually define what it is that they're doing. Two different people may on the surface seem to be doing exactly the same thing -- but when you examine their motivations, you might find they're actually doing something very different -- for example, the atavist versus the performance artist. They might dress alike, but they aren't doing the same thing.

[

And I dare say, while I don't know him, the senator, I suspect, lives a lifestyle that would have been perfectly acceptable in certain circles of the past era, but would be frowned upon today by certain members of this forum and certain people who consider themselves atavists.

I may be way off base. I just like the image of him galavanting around New York from swank bar to swank bar, dressed in his sharpest clothes, with a different lovely lady on his arm each night. but who knows. perhaps he spends his evenings at home darning his socks, saving money, and canning peaches.

As said before, nobody's claiming that all atavists live the same sort of stereotypical vintage life -- that's another one of those straw men that crept into the thread somewhere along the line. Not all atavists take a stern '40s grape-juice-Methodist view of the world. Some atavists are swingin' 60s playboys -- but the grape-juicer and the cocktail-bibbler might very well be motivated by the same sense of cultural displacement, and they both categorically reject "modern culture" in their everyday life. So despite the surface differences, they're basically doing the same thing.

 

[reetpleat]

Experience has shown me that living in the manner of an earlier day is actually LESS expensive.

We live in a pretty large old house,, more than 5000 square feet. We heat using a combination of coal, wood, and city gas. Using the modern gas furnace our fuel bills would approach $700/month in the winter. Using the kitchen range (coal) the stoves in the library a chamber, the coal fireplace in the living room and the gas fireplaces in the guest rooms, we can keep our monthly fuel bills well under $300.00.

Antique furnishings and appliances seem to be expensive, until one compares their costs with those of new items. In addition, many older appliances are very sparing in their consumption of electric current.

Clothing can be somewhat pricey, but though more expensive than current Wal-Mart or Target offerings, carefully purchased (and even bespoke) clothing in the styles of past years is generally so much more durable that there is no practical difference in cost, and the clothing can be worn as long as it remains serviceable, for not being fashionable, neither does it become passe.

No, I certainly concur. There is no reason that immersive "anachronism", "atavism" or what ever one might wish to call this life choice (how about "Ned"?) should be more costly than any other mode of life.

I suspect the problem with expensive vintage tastes arises from those who, when looking to the past, see only the life styles of the wealthier classes. If we were operating our (overly large) home "correctly", we would need a staff of three. That is not practical, is not possible, in fact, and so we emulate a more modest life style. In doing so I have come to understand the complaints of the early 20th century folks who decided that the big old barns of the 'fifties and 'sixties were impractical, and who longed for a thoroughly modern bungalow, which, if small, was easy to live in.

I had the opportunity to purchase just such a bungalow this past summer, and am currently restoring the place to its mid-1920's state, as I am sure that it will make for a more comfortable "period" life.

Know anyone who wants a Tuscan Villa?

Makes a lot of sense. But if I ever decide to live a vintage lifestyle, I think I will prefer it to be that of a wealthy international playboy, rather than a depression era migrant worker. But hey, to each his own.

 

[reetpleat]

Obviously, motivations are significant in understanding all this. People don't do something as unusual as living outside the current era without good reasons for it, and I think it's the reasons that actually define what it is that they're doing. Two different people may on the surface seem to be doing exactly the same thing -- but when you examine their motivations, you might find they're actually doing something very different -- for example, the atavist versus the performance artist. They might dress alike, but they aren't doing the same thing.

So, Mr. Jones, that is an interesting um, outfit you have.

Yeah, I am an atavist.

Oh, you mean one of those people who live their lives as if they lived in the past? very well. I have heard of that.

Not exactly, you see, while I am a person who lives that way, an atavist is someone who lives that way because they feel alienated with modern life and have a certain...

Get out of my office please

If he focus is on attitudes or alienation, will you then include punk rockers, hippies, drop outs, idealists, goths, steam punks? There are plenty of people who feel alienated by modern culture and refuse to embrace it, living a lifestyle that allows them to avoid it as much as possible and show their disdain through appearance and lifestyle. I think that vintage living is only a small part of that group.

 

[LizzieMaine]

If he focus is on attitudes or alienation, will you then include punk rockers, hippies, drop outs, idealists, goths, steam punks? There are plenty of people who feel alienated by modern culture and refuse to embrace it, living a lifestyle that allows them to avoid it as much as possible and show their disdain through appearance and lifestyle. I think that vintage living is only a small part of that group.

Alienation wasn't the clearest choice of words on my part -- I should have stuck with "cultural *displacement*," because that expresses it better, I think. It's not *just* a sense of being alienated from the prevalent culture, it's that alienation *combined* with a sense of belonging to an *earlier* culture that's key here. Punks and such went out and created an entirely new culture outside the existing culture, didn't they? Not quite the same thing.

 

[vitanola]

Makes a lot of sense. But if I ever decide to live a vintage lifestyle, I think I will prefer it to be that of a wealthy international playboy, rather than a depression era migrant worker. But hey, to each his own.

Well, who wouldn't?

One does the best that one can.

I certainly cannot imagine anyone VOLUNTARILY choosing the lifestyle of, say a miner in the Anthracite fields in the 'teens, but have found that a lower-middle-class period lifestyle is quite pleasant. I suspect that, at least in the pre-1930 period the real cutoff for a practical re-creation is wether one can afford 2 appliances, the washing machine and the electric sweeper. The presence of those two appliances in a home saves labor equal to a half-time helper. I know this from experience, having lived in various iterations of 1920's re-creations for nearly thirty years, now.

 

[reetpleat]

Well, who wouldn't?

One does the best that one can.

I certainly cannot imagine anyone VOLUNTARILY choosing the lifestyle of, say a miner in the Anthracite fields in the 'teens, but have found that a lower-middle-class period lifestyle is quite pleasant. I suspect that, at least in the pre-1930 period the real cutoff for a practical re-creation is wether one can afford 2 appliances, the washing machine and the electric sweeper. The presence of those two appliances in a home saves labor equal to a half-time helper. I know this from experience, having lived in various iterations of 1920's re-creations for nearly thirty years, now.

I think that the most negative thing about living a lower class existance of the vintage era would not be so much having less stuff, although to an average american it would be. But back in the day, it would have been not having money for the things you really need. And I hope no atavists feel the need to restrict their income to replicate the poverty of the great depression, for example.

I do suppose there are those who live off in the woods somewhere, recreating the hard life of a 1900 trapper, or woodsman. Not an easy life to be sure. That guy who lived built a cabin in alaska with hand tools and lived there for 30 years could be considered an atavist I suppose.

 

[Dr Doran]

Wow, I read the whole thing ...

... it took about an hour and a half.

My thoughts: yes, the punks had a similar disdain for modern society. I was a punk in the 1980s. In the early 1990s at Club Deluxe in SF I ALWAYS saw very vintage dressed up dudes with old punk tattoos so there was and is clearly a great commonality between punk rockers and vintage people.

As to terminology and wikipedia articles: I agree with Jack that he should write the article before some idiot does. I am not comfortable presently with the term 'atavist' but perhaps I could be within a few months if it were used more. I use "vintage guy" or "1930s chick" or something like that. Sometimes I call myself a collector of old stuff. I can vaguely see the distinction Lizzie makes between collectors who use the stuff and those who don't, but both parties collect.

I think anachronist is a FINE term and quite preferable if we need something other than "vintage guy." There is no way ANYONE will confuse it with the "society of creative anachronism" as those people wear chain mail. It looks nothing like what we wear. The only chain I wear is a watch chain.

 

[Laura Chase]

Anachronist is beautiful, auditorily, but doesn't it have quite a negative connotation? I mean, the words "anachronism" and "anachronistic" are mostly used in a negative sense, kind of like "old-fashioned". In everyday language, it has a connotation of misplacement, error. Just take this into consideration.

 

[Tomasso]

That guy who built a cabin in Alaska with hand tools and lived there for 30 years could be considered an atavist I suppose.

[YOUTUBE]z7jxFbscIJY[/YOUTUBE]

 

[HadleyH]

Now we are lost in a sea of words too much verbosity on this thread already [huh] ...... why do we have to be called anything at all?... why do we have to put a name to everything? we like what we like, we are what we are, and that's it. Verbosity always drowns the meaning of things. Just let it be.

 

[Senator Jack]

Holy moley, I've been out all day and I have to go through all this, but I'm really nauseated by how a simple discussion of group psychology and subculture has deteriorated into this ridiculous 'what about us' melee. What are you people, five years-old? Can't you have adult objective discussions without getting all bent out of shape?

GO BACK AND READ THE FIRST TWO PAGES!!!!!!! It isn't difficult, and I think Lizzie and I answered most of the protests. ONCE MORE: THIS PSYCHOLOGICAL DISCUSSION ISN'T ABOUT FEDORA LOUNGERS!!!!! It's about people, anyone, who prefers a past culture to the modern to the point where it becomes a TOTAL LIFESTYLE. Sheesh.

I'm sick and going to bed. If anyone cares to take this up at a forum designed for adults and adult discussions, I'll start it again over there. You know where to reach me.

Thanks and kind regards,

Jack

 

[Tomasso]

If anyone cares to take this up at a forum designed for adults and adult discussions, I'll start it again over there.

Sister Mary Jacqueline gettin' all penguin on us.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Man this thread is a joke for the last 5 pages or so. I just don't understand what's so hard about the idea of Jack and others (I don't know if i'm in this group) trying to find a term to explain themselves more easily to others. It couldn't be more clear that this entire thread is about a very small subgroup of the vintage "community", who may (or may not in many cases) be FLoungers. You're leaving us out! we want to be part of the gang!! But if you aren't, why such an issue?

I mean, is there really a Fedora Lounge "goon squad" primed and ready to take pissy offense at any and every thread possible?

bk

[edit] It is possible that the last several pages have made it fully clear why jack is seeking a descriptive term. People, even within the vintage "community" JUST DON'T GET IT

 

[reetpleat]

I don't see the problem. Like most threads, this thread became what it will, with little respect to the original intent. that is the nature of the internet.

If the intent was to find a word strictly, then a poll would have been in order.

What it became was far more interesting in my opinion. It became a discussion of the nature of this subgroup, or other subgroups, and how it should be defined, and how it should be classified, and what are the actual characteristics of that sub group. As far as i can see, that is still up in the air.

But i do find that interesting. What are these people about? Is it about attitude, lifestyle, values, or artifacts?

If the intent is to limit the name to Forgotten man, Senator jack, and Lizzie maine, then PMs would have sufficed.

I don't see others complaining about being left out. A few felt that there was a vintager than thou attitude, which I see no evidence of.

I posted something about what shall those who just live the lifestyle, to simply make the point that there are probably far more of those, and a word that encompasses them in the set of those who live full time lifestyles will be far more useful in the world than a term that encompasses only those who are, as far as I can see, the above named individuals and a few others who do not live full on vintage lifestyles but wanted to piggy back onto the idea because they value the "values" of frugality, thriftiness, and not throwing away appliances.

As far as I can see, the original post was about living the full on lifestyle. Nothing about being disafected, out of time, alienated by a modern magazine rack or that think that people had more integrity and moral fiber back in the day.

So, i don't care if the word includes me or not. In fact, since I no longer live as I did in San Francisco, i am sure it will not. But I still don't see a consensus as to what exactly the word is going to define. But having been one that might have qualified att one time, I feel a certain involvement.

But therein lies the interesting discussion to me.

 

[DecoDahlia]

How about "Revivalist" as a term to define/describe what we do to whatever extent we do it, as a definition/description? Or has this term already been considered and rejected? My thought is that the definition of the word revival (see #2) seems to cover a lot of the bases:

re·viv·al   [ri-vahy-vuhl] –noun

1.
a. The act or an instance of reviving.
b. The condition of being revived.

2. A restoration to use, acceptance, activity, or vigor after a period of obscurity or quiescence.

3. A new presentation of an old play, movie, opera, ballet, or similar vehicle.

4.
a. A time of reawakened interest in religion.
b. A meeting or series of meetings for the purpose of reawakening religious faith, often characterized by impassioned preaching and public testimony.

5. Law Renewal of validity or effect, as of a contract or judicial decision.
​

Since I've been involved with The Art Deco Society of Los Angeles (15 years) we've referred to what we do as "Art Deco Revivalism," as well as using this term to describe the movement-such as it was/is-beyond just architectural preservation/restoration issues, that created Art Deco Societies and related groups. That's my ¢2 worth.