in thinking that the term 'vintage' usually simply means 'secondhand'?

[MadameBelle]

Just been reading a magazine where there are pictures of girls snapped on the streets and it says what they are wearing. So much of it is 'vintage'. What makes vintage any different from secondhand? When I picked up a pair of trousers in Oxfam last week, they have no label, are they 'vintage'? Sounds awfully pretentious to me.

So AIBU in thinking that people who spout vintage all the time are a bit, well, up themselves?

Yes YABU because vintage describes something which was made pre 1970.

Some people might call a pair of jeans from 1995 vintage...but purists agree that tue vintage is more than 50 years old.

pre 1960 then surely?

When they say it in magazines they mean 'posh nice secondhand'.

Ahhh, I wondered if there was a 'proper' definition of vintage.

Not sure many people use it though.

I'm assuming "purist" is some who reads either Red or Grazia, not both.

someone, obv.

Except wine.

Vintage = Tenth hand, often with holes.

Vintage just means excessively over-priced second-hand, and usually not as good condition as normal second hand.

Does this mean I am a vintage lady?

I could buy a pair of jeans from topshop today, sell them tomorrow and they would be secondhand.

A lovely dress from biba in the sixties would be vintage.

To me, vintage means something quite old that is worth preserving. preferably from a particular well-defined time period (sixties hippy, seventies punk or high fashion, etc)

I saw on ebay the other day, a dress described as vintage Primark!

Sorry, but the idea that it's 'vintage' if it's pre-1970 is utter bollocks

I say that as someone who is 1970s obsessed- most of my clothes and furniture etc. are 1960s-70s. 'Vintage' is a phrase coined to denote 'fashionable second hand' (and therefore much more expensive ) and changes with the times, as it were. 1980s stuff is sold as vintage because it's in fashion. In 5 years' time, 90s stuff will be sold as vintage- however, at the moment it's just 'second hand'.

To surmise, it's a term invented by the wearers or sellers of second hand goods which implies that items are somehow of a higher quality than those found in charity shops. Before it was bandied about with gay abandon, I could get 70s bargains in charity shops and on ebay. Now I have to go up north to get anything resembling a bargain.

1960's onwards is "retro"
1950's and back is vintage

Vintage stuff is actually usually higher quality, due to the way things used to be made.

No, 'retro' is new stuff made in an old style.

'Vintage' (at present) covers everything pre-1990

Nope, the word for that is repro as in reproduced

Vintage stuff is not necessarily of a higher quality than other second hand goods from the same era- the only difference being that the old ladies in the charity shop thought that nobody would want that hideous nylon dress, whilst the people who run the vintage shop down the road came in, bought it for 50p then sold it on for £50.

No, retro does not mean anything post 1960. Even Wikipedia refers to it as specifically referring to the 1950s, which makes it even more confusing

Its general usage in second-hand circles denotes that it is a reproduction rather than the original article.

'Repro' tends to refer specifically to furniture. And rarely to anything post-war.

Wikipedia is written by anyone and everyone, it's public access and is therefore not what I would call "gospel".

Retro = Retrospective
ie. from 'days gone by' - possibly subject to the individual's own sense of retrospection I would think, and so would therefore include any era up to about 10 years ago.

Repro = Reproduction
Something that has purposely been made to replicate or give a nod to a style from the past. tethersend I think what you say about furniture, exclusively pre war, used to be the case but I think that has changed now. When my mum was an antique dealer in the 80s that was the only instance where I heard the term reproduction used in this way but now the term is used to describe many things that now replicate items from the second half of the 20th century - I'm guessing this has changed, partly, because we are now in a new century and also because it is now more fashionable to hark back to post war styles.

The Oxford Dictionary definition of the word vintage, under these circumstances is, "denoting something of the past of high quality, especially something representing the best of it's kind." ..... so in other words, not some old tat from when Primark first opened!

Someone on Freecycle listed a 90s television as 'vintage' a while back. Hmmmm, no dear, that's just an old telly. Last week another person listed a vintage 1980s "Space Helmet" design TV. Not strictly vintage, but I would say retro and a design classic (if you like that sort of thing) so not as annoying as the first listing.

I'm not sure if there is an official line on how old exactly is vintage. I know something has to be 50 years old to officially be classed as an antique but not sure if is the same rule for vintage. It seems to be the case, in fashion terms that anything that was fashionable when the baby boomers and the next generation, known as Generation X, were growing is considered vintage. Not much has changed, the scope has just got wider with the new generation as more time/fashion has passed. When we were teenagers in the 80s we would wear old 50s & 60s pieces, now the teenagers of today are inspired by the fashions their parents and grandparents wore. They didn't used to use the word vintage like we do now, or charge for it like they do now - more's the pity, but it's the same principle.

It does seriously get on my tits though that people list any old crap on ebay as vintage. It wastes so much time sifting through it all when you're looking for an actual vintage garment.

Havingkittens, don't worry, I don't think Wiki is gospel- hence the wink

That's interesting what you say about 'repro'- I haven't seen it used to describe reproduction post war furniture, but then again I don't look for reproduction post war furniture, so will defer to you on that one.

The point is, although 'Vintage' is supposed to denote quality, as per its definition, it actually is only distinguishable from 'second hand' by virtue of its popularity; essentially whether or not it's in fashion.

To some yes OP...

If you ignore the fact that vintage is supposed to denote quality (as so many 'vintage sellers' seem to) then the distinction between vintage and second hand should, at least, refer to the age. So, where you may have something classed as 'vintage' M&S - from the 50s or 60s say, anyone trying to sell anything from Primark or the like should only be allowed to describe the item as 'past season'.

It does depress me somewhat hearing the clothes I was wearing as a teenager described as vintage though... what does that make me?

Oh no, I think it should refer to the quality, as it's supposed to- but in reality it refers only to an item's popularity.

Oh yes YANBU. I hate the way the term "vintage" is bandied about these days. My sister has a lot of "vintage" stuff. Some actually is vintage i.e. dresses from the 50's. But most is just bloody second hand.

The other day DSD was wearing a gorgeous red suede jacket for a night out. I asked her where it was from. Answer, "Oh it's vintage". More probing, it was her aunty's in the early 90's. Ok nearly 20 years old but still not bloody vintage.

I just think it's pretentious bollocks. Admit you got it off ebay/Oxfam/random second hand shop.