Why I don’t like the word “vintage”
Back in the day when women went to the Salvation Army, Goodwill or some other type of thrift store they did so in order to save money; buying used vs. brand new. It was a cost saving method so they could maximize their clothing budget and pick up barely worn items for themselves or their children. It was a fun thing to do back in the 90s. Occasionally one could find a unique piece from another decade (60s, 70s) for under $10 bucks. Those finds are now few and far between. Great decade pieces from the 30s and 20s you could pick up at a costume store or antique store for under $50 dollars is now a hard find, with “vintage” shops popping up everywhere and the owners operating like buzzards after fresh road kill picking off and cleaning up whatever they can get their hands on.
The word “vintage” replaced old clothes or costume. It not only covered up those terms with a fancy title, it shot the price up as well. On any given Sunday, its hard to get a good vintage dress from the 50s on up to the 70s without having to fight off 10 to 15 bidders on Ebay. Yeah they all start at $4.99 but they’re all sure to end after 6 days at $75 and up (and don’t go browsing on the larger vintage shops on-line, they are even worse!) Where is the bargain in that? The point of buying “used” is to save a significant amount of money. I could go full retail and spend that kind of money. Where is the logic in it? The person that actually bought that dress 30 or more years ago didn’t pay $75? WTH? Clearly, I’m not alone in this assessment of this whole ‘vintage’ business.
The word “vintage” in my opinion, is a fancy play on words to put into women’s head that they should pay more than what the item is actually worth. Retail clothing (not to mention designer clothes) is already overpriced, why add insult to injury by “buying into” this whole “vintage scheme” to pay even more for old, second-hand stuff. I mean, to me it feels like another way to get over on the consumer, where does it end?