>> OLD VS NEW <<

New or Vintage? Some people see vintage simply as "old stuff". True, not going to debate symantics here but old is not always bad! I would so rather a vintage Astin Martin than a new Lexus. There's just a certain class about vintage that seems to have been lost somewhere along the way. I blame the 80s. There is little class in fluro and leg warmers and the cars from this period are hardly note-worthy. So yes, I definitely blame the 80s for the demise of class in fashion and cars. (Note: I like cars. I mostly like vintage [surprise surprise] and this is mostly due to my father liking them. My mum has a 60's MG convertible. Now that's class)

Anyways, back to the debate. So old or new? Vintage might be old, but at least you know it lasts. Something from the 70s has been around 40 years already. It's got history and it hasn't fallen apart at the seams like so much stuff you buy nowdays. Plus it's one of a kind. It would be a very freaky coincidence if you saw someone else wearing the exact same vintage piece as you.

New stuff on the other hand - sure, it's new, but unless it's not mass manufactured, I'm willing to bet it will not last that long. Especially if it's something you would wear fairly frequently. Also, everyone else has one! Unless you purchase something unique from a high-end boutique (which the masses usually can't afford) you'll have something that most probably half the population have or want also.

My argument is that vintage is unique, interesting, inexpensive most of the time and it's already lasted 40 or so years so it's already proven it's worth!

Again, 80's does not qualify as vintage with me. Just to make my point -


0 Responses

Post a Comment