The meaning of vintage

NBLondon

This clearly shows that the world of advertising slaps labels on things without ever thinking if the word has a meaning already and people blindly follow....


In the car world, vintage means specifically pre-1930 so I'd always have assumed vintage fashion meant either the same or pre-World War II. 60s or 70s items aren't vintage in my mind. They might be "period" or "original". Retro doesn't help; that's just styling and could be original or reproduction. Of course, it also depends on how old you are and whether you remember those styles form your childhood! Maybe the furniture world is more accurate is that there is a clearer distinction between original or restored or reproduction. Plus it gives the wonderful term "mid-Century" or "mid-Century modern" to mean designs from 1950 to 1970.


Maybe you do need to state "Original" in the listing title to help the idiots after all...

soolin

NBLondon wrote: »

This clearly shows that the world of advertising slaps labels on things without ever thinking if the word has a meaning already and people blindly follow....


In the car world, vintage means specifically pre-1930 so I'd always have assumed vintage fashion meant either the same or pre-World War II. 60s or 70s items aren't vintage in my mind. They might be "period" or "original". Retro doesn't help; that's just styling and could be original or reproduction. Of course, it also depends on how old you are and whether you remember those styles form your childhood! Maybe the furniture world is more accurate is that there is a clearer distinction between original or restored or reproduction. Plus it gives the wonderful term "mid-Century" or "mid-Century modern" to mean designs from 1950 to 1970.


Maybe you do need to state "Original" in the listing title to help the idiots after all...

Cars definitely are better, there is an accepted terminology which helps, although I'm sure some people do still get muddled about reproductions. I sell (well I really used to sell until the market died off) proper antiques, and to me the accepted view is that a general item needs to be 100 years old or older to be antique , but even that causes argument on some antique forums where people say something from the 1960s must be antique as it was 'before their time'. I suspect this is a discussion that will go on and on.

I do like the idea of stating something is original, I tend to do that but I fear it is not enough. The tablecloth from my opening post clearly stated it was an original 1950s item (I have seen the listing and it was sold in the collectable category as well!), but apparently that doesn't help because it seems some people cannot work out how long ago the 1950s were.

I have some 1940s items I am about to take to my retail space - I assume if I wanted to sell them on ebay I would need to put my usual line 'this is an original 1940s widget and dates from the late 1940s' and then to cover myself put something like 'please note the 1940s were last century and this item is therefore over 70 years old'. I suspect someone somewhere would still complain about it being old.

NBLondon

soolin wrote: »

and to me the accepted view is that a general item needs to be 100 years old or older to be antique , but even that causes argument on some antique forums where people say something from the 1960s must be antique as it was 'before their time'.

That's what I would have said was the traditional definition of "antique". If things made in the 60s are antique then so am I! But you're right - some people have no idea.

Another example from the classic car world - New Old Stock. e.g. a spare part for a 1960s MG, never been used, still in the original box. It may well have been sitting in a stock room for years; or was bought and sold on but never actually used. The packaging may be faded and bashed, but the part is still good. If it's the part they need, restorers will pay good money for them. If you laid your hands on a pile of dresses or handbags or whatever that had never been worn but left in the back of a shop - could you describe them as New and Vintage?

soolin

NBLondon wrote: »

That's what I would have said was the traditional definition of "antique". If things made in the 60s are antique then so am I! But you're right - some people have no idea.

Another example from the classic car world - New Old Stock. e.g. a spare part for a 1960s MG, never been used, still in the original box. It may well have been sitting in a stock room for years; or was bought and sold on but never actually used. The packaging may be faded and bashed, but the part is still good. If it's the part they need, restorers will pay good money for them. If you laid your hands on a pile of dresses or handbags or whatever that had never been worn but left in the back of a shop - could you describe them as New and Vintage?

A fascinating question. On ebay I would probably play safe and go for used and then note that they are unused but old and warn that they date from the 1960s. Also of course I would then have to state that the 1960s were last century and mean these have been stored for 60 years or so for all those buyers who cannot work out when the 1960s were.

I do often get completely unused vintage items, it is quite common to see decorative tableware given as wedding presents and then stored for use as 'best' and never to have seen the light of day. I think it was not unusual in those days (and I date from that era) to keep things for best, and then forget to ever use them. I would still sell them though as used - vintage and give a complete description of them in the full listing.

Thinking about it I do have linen in stock from the 1950s - but having seen the other seller get a neg for a tablecloth mine will be going to a vintage area at my retail space. I do also have some novelty cruet sets , all boxed with the seal unbroken from the 1970s - again I will sell these as used to cover myself if I decide to list on ebay.

This is a fascinating discussion though, it really makes a person think about the language we use. We not only have to make ourselves understood by potential buyers, but also by ebay customer services who may well be based overseas where the whole 'vintage - collectable' scene just doesn't exist.

Fuzzy_Pear

I consider myself vintage!

Rosemary7391

I guess this is a specific example of the general point - always consider your reader when you're writing something, whether it's a book, article or in this case an ebay listing. Sad that they can't figure this one out though...

PasturesNew

"Any fool" knows that vintage means something specific, as does antique.
To call something vintage when it's vintage inspired or vintage-style but new .... is tantamount to false advertising.

Buyers might be a bit thick... but sellers have no excuse.

gollum007

This discussion reminds me of those sellers who plaster RARE , SCARCE anything, no matter what it is....

Inevitably as well it's mega overpriced, and probably poorly described too....

hollydays

PasturesNew wrote: »

"Any fool" knows that vintage means something specific, as does antique.
To call something vintage when it's vintage inspired or vintage-style but new .... is tantamount to false advertising.

Buyers might be a bit thick... but sellers have no excuse.

Chinese sellers do this and even if you report it ebay do nothing, in my own experience

forgotmyname

Is it antique because its old or antique in colour? Even though it was made 6 weeks ago in a sweatshop?