Your Opinions please

[chamboid]

Sorry I'm going to put this accross a few threads here, but would like it to be seen by as many as possible...

I am writing an article about vintage clothing and those who buy it, preffering it to any modern reprodutions and why?

What I would really apprciate is your person beliefs and opinions about what it is that makes vintage so desireable and it's pros and cons to modern reproductions, etc Buzz Rickson, Mr freedom and LVC

Either post on the wall to get a conversation going or pm me.

Thanks alot

 

[splintercellsz]

I prefer vintage, because it feels of quality, has history behind it, better make, more time put into it then a 'sweat-shop' mass-produced items that are so common today, that are created of poor materials & designed to wear away in a certain time frame... also, older clothing just has the fitting that I prefer. More focused on the individual, than the mass market.

 

[chamboid]

Thank you, thats exactly what im after. a good starting point, obviously the quality of clothing ha deteriorated over the years drastically, I specifically like your comment about fit going to hell because it made for the mass shapeless market.

could you tell what your favorite item is and why?

 

[John in Covina]

True vintage is "of the period" and is accurate in all ways. In men's suits the cut is true, like high arm holes which only a few actually can do today. The tailors of the period often used construction techniques that are not used today, they also included details that aren't seen. Last is that the fabric such as wool for the suits is of a type and thread count that is no longer available today. Vintage suits wrinkled less, bounce back quickly if they were, and breathed. The new super woolens are like wearing a plastic bag they don't breathe and wear out quickly.

 

[Two Types]

Out of inteest: what publication are you writing this for?

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

Depends. I prefer vintage suits because this quality could be only made at bespoke prices today (which I can't afford)
On suits it is the fit (high armholes for example), the silhouette with anipped waist and wide trousers, the lapel shape, the fabrics, the superior canvassing (compared to modern fused stuff)...and so on.

When it comes to workwear, knit or trousers I am perfectly fine with repros. I like to wear them to preserve my original pieces.

 

[Fastuni]

Higher quality at lower prices. History.

As simple as that.

 

[CharleneC]

I prefer vintage, because it feels of quality, has history behind it, better make, more time put into it then a 'sweat-shop' mass-produced items that are so common today, that are created of poor materials & designed to wear away in a certain time frame... also, older clothing just has the fitting that I prefer. More focused on the individual, than the mass market.

I think in the old days there were plenty of sweat shops right in America. How many photos have we all seen of masses of women stooped over sewing machines, doing jobs that today must be sent to the third world because nobody here wants to do them? How could they have gotten an individualized fit for these garments? You have a very romantic view of the past.

 

[chamboid]

Absolutely Fatsuni

 

[Foxer55]

Two things: quality and style.

Quality came from clothes not being mass produced to the extent human hands actually touched it somewhere in the manufacturing process and most clothing was made of natural material. What we have now are clothes that are frequently not natural material, the material is refined and reduced to bare minimal serviceable standards, and constructed purely by machines. Then what we get is flashy junk that wears out quickly.

Style is something else altogether. Everybody wears black - and it really goes with the unshaven, unkempt, filthy look. I believe it is disrepectful to other people to look like a bum. Guys don't seem to have a clue about style and women don't seem to have a clue about flair. Some of the style and color I see guys wear are totally deranged and women seem to go out of their way to look as ugly and unsensual as they can manage. I appreciate women of the past who knew color and sensuality and used it to their advantage to make us guys sweat up a storm. Most of the quality department stores around here have closed or been bought out by Macy's and the junk they hang on the racks is just depressing. That might be a key to the question: as enlightened people who used to work in places like Strawbridge & Clothier or Woodward & Lothrop who all earned fair salaries as long term employees were lost, no one had a clue anymore of what style was about. A continuing demonstration of the collapse of a once vibrant culture.

 

[chamboid]

Its interesting that the idea of 'Planned Obsolescence" started as far back as 1932, as a device to help the economy grow after the depression, but using it as a device for companies to increase their personal revenue really started in the mid to late 50's after Brooks stevens talk on the future of advertising, not so much creating a product that will wear out faster, but for the consumer to want one that is never, and better by incremental design tweaks. It's only a small leap then to make the actual item itself par standard so you not only desire a newer one, but will need one to replace it sooner.

High street fashion relies on this, both ideas, decreased quality and increased desire, but the majority of people don't seem to mind, preferring to have the ability to change their 'look' for less money, than actually having a style of their own.

 

[chamboid]

Also, what is vintage, as a term it is so vague, for you when does an item become vintage rather than second hand?

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

As far as this forum is concerned we often talk about "vintage" as in things from the golden era (ca. 1920s - 40s) but some would extend it into the 50s or even 60s.

But if you ask in a second hand store for "vintage" they might think of 70s and 80s stuff as well. So I guess there is no fast definition for everyone. (plus time doesn't stop.

 

[splintercellsz]

To me, vintage is pre-60's.

 

[hatophile]

In vintage terms, I am on the brink of being a vintage person. The main vintage objects I wear are vintage ties and hats. Both have high quality and styles that are difficult to find in modern production pieces. I also like the "character" of these older articles of clothing.

Good luck on your article.

 

[gtdean48]

My chosen article is hats. I like vintage factory hats over modern factory hats because of the craftsmanship, quality & styles. Modern hats are simply not made with the attention to detail or the processes used back in the earlier days. Felt bodies were allowed to "age" for over a year so the body continued to "felt" thus producing a tighter texture from which to make a finished hat. Modern processes cannot allow cash to be tied up that long in the production line. Better ribbons & sweatbands were used as well because there was a large market for them that drove competition.
Vintage versions of Stetson & Borsalino are visually & tact-ally superior = see it & feel it.
Borsalino = before the factory move, Stetson = before they contracted out then sold out.

 

[chamboid]

Anymore for anymore I will be submitting on Thursday?

 

[Guttersnipe]

Higher quality at lower prices. History.

As simple as that.

Yep. I like your succinctness, by the way.

My only addition would be that the uniqueness you find with authentic vintage items is certainly a plus relative to repops.

 

[chamboid]

here's the finished piece is anyone is interested.

http://theholbornmag.com/2013/03/08/every-garment-guarantee/