"Too good to use..."

[Pinhead]

How much of that do you own?

A very recent thread meantioned Johnston & Murphy. I don't own their shoes. But, I recently found a nice leather briefcase / satchel at the thrift store. $3. I googled it when I got home and it's a Johnston & Murphy. $350 retail, new. It cleaned up very nice and looks new.

Now, it's "Too good to use". I can't abuse it on my daily travels (I travel for work). It's too good for that. I'll have to save it for when I have to go into the office, to impress the stuffed shirts, I guess.

I posted in the Cowichan sweater thread. It was suggested that I just buy a REAL Pendelton "Dude" sweater. I could, but then it would be immediately become "Too good to use"!

I do that often.

I have a lot of fine vintage stuff that is.... well, you know.

What's up with that?

I have many knives. Some very expensive ones. I can, actually, carry them.... but..... they are too good to abuse like a real knife!

Ya'll do that too. I'm not the only one.

Why do we do that?

 

[HudsonHawk]

Unless you're buying something as an investment, I can't understand how it could be "too good to use". Otherwise what's the point?

 

[Shangas]

To me, nothing is "too good to use". I use everything I buy, no matter how old it is. Otherwise why would I waste the money on it?

I have vintage straight-razors. I use them. I have antique pens, some of them over 100 years old. I use them. I have an 80-year-old typewriter on my desk. I use that, too.

I don't believe in buying something to put it behind a glass dome. To me, that's a huge waste of money. You buy something to use it, not to coddle it up in cotton wool.

 

[Pinhead]

Otherwise what's the point?

Welcome to my life.

A razor, pen or typewriter can't be wrecked by using it.

A sweater can, easily.

I possess some of Dad's camping equipment (knives included). It can't be abused any more than he did, himself.

Now, I can't use it as it was intended. It's too good.

What a waste.

Right?

I can't use that leather satchel as intended. It's too good.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Welcome to my life.

A razor, pen or typewriter can't be wrecked by using it.

A sweater can, easily.

I possess some of Dad's camping equipment (knives included). It can't be abused any more than he did, himself.

Now, I can't use it as it was intended. It's too good.

What a waste.

Right?

I can't use that leather satchel as intended. It's too good.

It's a waste only because you insist on making it one. Again, I don't understand why you feel that way.

 

[Shangas]

A razor, pen or typewriter can't be wrecked by using it.

You haven't seen some of the pen-nibs that I've had to beat the dents and dings out of.

Nothing is "too good to use". You can use whatever you like. It's a matter of how well you look after it. I could easily destroy my typewriter if I wanted to. But I treat it with care and attention.

I agree with HudsonHawk. It's only a 'waste' if you insist on making it one. The only reason it's a waste is because you insist on NOT using it because according to you, 'it's too good to use'. That's something that you decided on. Not something that the product itself enforced on you.

--

I also agree with HH's signature. Something we should always remember

 

[kiwilrdg]

Rather than being "too good to use" fine items are good enough to use. It is like a knife that is dull will cut your fingers more because it slips off what it should be cutting.

I can not afford to buy cheap stuff because it will not last like the good stuff.

 

[Tomasso]

I have an assortment of things which I've deemed too good to abuse. They get used but only in ideal situations where the chances of them getting damaged are slim. The rest are considered workhorse items that I give little consideration to their well being. They are properly cared for and maintained but I don't sweat their use.

 

[Tomasso]

I also agree with HH's signature. Something we should always remember

But one man's junk can be another man's treasure.....

 

[Shangas]

But one man's junk can be another man's treasure.....

Surely you mean another guy's trash? I'd be wary of a guy coveting some other fellah's 'junk'.

And yes, there is a big difference between "use" and "abuse". We really should consider which of the two we mean, and which of the two we use in this context of 'too good to use'.

 

[Anthony Jordan]

I do understand, I think. A while ago I picked up a pair of vintage brown Oxfords which turned out to be new old stock and in perfect condition. They were a beautiful shoe, too - with channelled soles and leather top lifts - and I couldn't bear to be the one to take them out of that state. Used items I am less concerned about, provided that they are not too fragile, but these I had to sellmon in the end. I think they went to a good home.

 

[Two Types]

'Too Good to Use'?

Use it with care, make it last a lifetime and get some enjoyment out of it. If it a really good item it should be repairable.

I have suits that i am very careful with and only wear on the right occasion. So i wouldn't wear them to wlak to work in the rain. But they have to be worn. If it is really too good to use then it's a museum piece.

 

[Dragon Soldier]

If you have half an eye on investment, or are particularly concerned about whether or not there are remaining examples of a particular item for future generations to see and admire then things can be too good to use. Although too valuable to use would probably be a better description in those circumstances.

I have bits and pieces of military equipment which is displayed to the public on occasion, in the right circumstances this can be a "hands on" experience. There are things which I now consider "too good" to be used for this purpose. Worth too much cash and simply irreplaceable.

 

[Virginia Creeper]

Most of the items I consider "too good to use" are things I've inherited from my grandparents. It's not that they're especially valuable to someone else, but I emotionally can't handle the thought of them being ruined.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I posted about a similar issue a while back. It's often a dilemma for me:

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/show...o-Wear-or-Not-to-Wear&highlight=new+old+stock

 

[scottyrocks]

I can't buy stuff just to have it sit around. If I buy something to wear, I wear it, and take care of it.

 

[Talbot]

Good depression era attitude - 'Save it for best'.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I can't buy stuff just to have it sit around. If I buy something to wear, I wear it, and take care of it.

Agreed. I don't have a "collection," I have a wardrobe.

 

[rue]

Agreed. I don't have a "collection," I have a wardrobe.

Exactly.

As William Morris said: Have nothing in your house that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.

 

[Edward]

I have some pieces I wear only sparingly because I don't want to destroy them, but they still get worn. It's the main reason I would, all other things being equal, choose repro over real every time; the repro is replaceable, as a rule. If I can't or won't wear soemthing, I don't have the space forf it. I'm not at all opposed to people having things in a collection (some stuff is just so rare and valuable, it needs to be a museum piece), it's more that I personally simply don't have the space for it.