Jump to content
Flash

Vintage clothing and footwear

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, busterthehuman said:

It sure is. & Great question, actually had to look it up. I know the WWI stuff had one pockets but I'm curious as to why they added the second pocket. Turns out it just seemed like a good idea for utility. It was introduced in (or around) 1940.

Thanks!

The only definitive info I have is the United States Navy Uniform Regulations from 1941 showing a single pocket, but the 1951 regulations specifies 2 pockets. 

It’s reasonable to assume that based on the the sheer quantities of clothing produced according to the ‘41 regs would mean the single pocket would have been used by servicemen throughout the war, however I’m sure there were changes in between the two regulations I’ve quoted (as the war developed into different arenas, uniform requirement would change and I think khaki was also introduced around 1943, never mind the unpopular ‘greys’) … hence my question as to discover the year the 2 pocket shirt was introduced.

C79FE8D8-1B2F-4017-98B1-1F44F1117740.jpeg

88347510-6E4D-4E88-B2FB-C58817652CB5.jpeg

Edited by Duke Mantee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In the 90,s I thought that 70,s clothing was antique. Big difference in style.

now clothing from the 2000,s doesn’t seem so much of a difference from todays clothing

is it my age? Would someone in his/her 20,s today think those clothing from the 2000 are odd and smellie?

Edited by smoothsailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@smoothsailor

I definitely think perceptions have changed. When I grew up in the 90s/00s the primary way to get used clothing was at a market or a charity shop - so that came with a certain stigma (trendy London markets will have been an exception though). Then with more bricks & mortar vintage clothing stores (which picked up in the 2000s in U.K.) and the rise of eBay, Etsy etc it got a whole lot more accessible so I guess that stigma fell away. It seems at some point it moved from a poverty thing to a trendy thing (or maybe poverty is cool?? as long as you’re not actually skint…) I dunno, perhaps The Strokes kickstarted it.

But to answer your question, most kids around here either wear sportswear, 90s/early 00s  inspired clothing or actual 90s/early 00s clothing. So definitely no issues with wearing vintage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is just a generational thing @smoothsailor

New generations (broadly) reject the previous one and look for something to identify as their own, and something that seems to fit that culture. I have the idea that no one wants to take their parents values so it’s probably more cool to adopt styles/ideas/music/whatever from their grandparents (or great-grandparents’) era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

But the difference seems so big to me. Style wise.

the 20yrs from 70,s to 90,s the change in style is so big. At least to my eyes.

2000,s- 2020,s not so much changed?

 

in the 90,s when thrifting I didn’t want the 70,s stuff. @Duke Mantee your right I skipped a generation.

now I like the 70,s style thing.

I guess what I’m asking, did style  evolve much  the last 20 yrs?

Edited by smoothsailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I guess in relation to the 90s and early 2000s youth culture and style did a full circle. Other styles auch as trends of skinny jeans and slim fits somehow never went away in some circles, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Men's casual style has not evolved much at all in the past twenty years. The cut has changed from floppy and formless to a slimmer-fitting, more tailored look - case in point, pretty much the standard fit of pants you see today on the average guy who's only the slightest bit (or not at all) style conscious would have been considered "skinny jeans" back in 2008 or so. Consequently, I feel weirdly rebellious wearing stiff, vintage straight-fitting jeans that are so out of sync with the predominant style. This is quite a change from ~15 years ago, when I was one of the only people I knew wearing skinny-fitting "hipster" clothing and generally considered to be at least a little bit weird as a result. My evolution is also rooted in the fact that I'm now almost in my mid-30s, and don't really want to dress like I'm 20 anymore.

The biggest change is really the rise of streetwear as a mainstream fashion style. It seems like every Gen Z kid I see is aimlessly shuffling around in floppy, oversized sweatpants, bulky sneakers, and oddly-repopularized Champion hoodies or whatever, with the same weird haircut that's poofy on the top and shaved on the size, usually dyed weird discordant colors, amidst an endless sea of hellishly polyester clothing. What's really weird is just what a homogenous monoculture this is, these kids all wear the same bizarre pseudo-uniform whether they're black, white, hispanic, Korean, American, male, female, whatever. Everything about it is utterly unnatural and inorganic, I'm convinced this style was invented by some malevolent TikTok algorithm.

When I see pictures from, say, the Mod culture revival of the late 80s and early 90s, I'm struck by how appealingly quirky and unique it looks. Even though that's not a style I'd wear, I really respect how there's a defined subculture with a lot of room for personal expression that seems far more natural than Gen Z pajama streetwear.

Edited by Cold Summer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what’s different is the absence of one (or few) specific styles being in vogue. Mod, as you mentioned above, or any other subculture/style from the past were very distinctive and would rarely intercept with each other. Something was always in, while everything else wasn’t. And now it is more dependent than ever, in my opinion, on how you present and handle yourself rather than what you decide to wear. Everything is in and nothing’s off limits. Though I’d disagree that everything is homogenous; on the contrary, I see the biggest style variations now, and also much more experimentation among younger people, both online and irl. And that feels way more natural to me than conforming to a fairly strict confines of a certain style (though people like that still exist, obviously).

Though I must admit that, of course, not literally everything works and sometimes you’d end up looking ridiculous. But that’s always been the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@smoothsailor NSYNC circa 2000. Ain't nobody wearing this stuff anymore. But there are similar motifs found today. 

vma-2000-2-1440183384.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The clothes are a bit silly, but I sort of admire the willingness to try wearing something totally ridiculous.

It's the haircuts I can't stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on. Your man next to Timberlake is wearing a Brakeman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cocoa_Lapin said:

Everything is in and nothing’s off limits. Though I’d disagree that everything is homogenous; on the contrary, I see the biggest style variations now, and also much more experimentation among younger people, both online and irl. And that feels way more natural to me than conforming to a fairly strict confines of a certain style (though people like that still exist, obviously).

This is what it is. Yea, the streetwear thing is popular, but tiktok internet is not life out there. The way it looks to me is that once skinny jeans got a little tired for some people starting in maybe 2013-2014 I started to see more cycling of decade specific styles, but now the 90's have sort of been done and it's all just a free for all.

Easy to be grumpy about them damn kids but fashion to me is more pluralistic than I've ever seen it. I've got a younger family member studying fashion and they're all about denim, but not at all in the way people here would be into it. And champion hoodies being common is a lot better than the shit that was ubiquitous in a lot of 90's circles, like abercrombie etc. 

Like many things - I think the internet has accelerated and also obliterated past patterns. So style may have been a lot different in the 70's to the 90's compared to the last 20 years - but maybe that's because it was more ubiquitous to dress a certain way and there were less options. We've had more options for years now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like many things - I think the internet has accelerated and also obliterated past patterns. So style may have been a lot different in the 70's to the 90's compared to the last 20 years - but maybe that's because it was more ubiquitous to dress a certain way and there were less options. We've had more options for years now. 
 

this might be it.

what I liked as a kid in the 80,s you could tell by the style where someone was from.

for instance, track suit pants  with Clark’s dessert boots and a mullet was Rotterdam. A green Ma1 bomber was Den-Haag (The Hague) were I’m from.

at first my mom wouldn’t let me have one, too expensive and the wrong crowd wore it. 
finaly I got a blue one. Got stolen in the swimming pool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ agreed Duke… some nice stuff from the 1880s :laugh2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
I'll add some musings... I appreciate this will be a sweeping generalisation but here goes.
I ride through student-ville every evening on my way home, i pass through the IQ district first,  blocks of studio apartments, entirely occupied by international students, IQ market themselves directly to the Chinese middle classes so as you would expect 80% of these kids are the offspring of wealthy Chinese (they're a big cash cow for Sheff uni) .... past the university and through the shared, rented, terrace houses which tend to be rented by UK resident students.. there's a def difference between the fashions of the two groups.. the Chinese kids have no sense of (what we would call) style or coordinating an outfit, and.. i suppose, why should they? most definitions of style are western ideals.. for them, it's all about the branding, Canada Goose jackets worn with Versace sweaters, Balenciaga jog-bottoms tucked into 8-hole DM's with Supreme backpacks adorned with bearbrick dangly shit..like 3 outfits in one :D all heavily logo'd. Through the shared houses i go... and it's anything goes with a  vintage lean..the girls being more adventurous than the lads..no logo's in sight unless it's vintage.
 
It always brings a smile to my face when i see a line of Chinese students (exclusively lads who've never cooked) lurking around the street corners waiting for some dude on a scooter to drop off a bag of food.. when we were their age the dude on the scooter was dropping off a bag of weed.. and if we were lucky some acid :)
 
I live in a fairly young and fashionable neighbourhood where again vintage or outdoor gear seems to be king.. my 17 year old neighbour and her friends are pretty cool, her boyfriends lurk at the end of the path to pick her up cos they're too cool to go to the house (i remember doing the same) most recent boyfriend i saw yesterday was wearing a red beret, with long curly black hair past his shoulders, a black satin varsity jacket, loose black pants and pumps.. he looked so fucking dope! like a Professor Griff / Guardian Angels love child...
 
Edited by Double 0 Soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, JMS said:

@smoothsailor NSYNC circa 2000. Ain't nobody wearing this stuff anymore. But there are similar motifs found today. 

vma-2000-2-1440183384.jpg

^ lol, yup

see some who tried the '00s comeback early... Vetements c.2016 for ss2017 collection bringing back noughties velour trackies via Juicy Couture, also doing fairly decent apron dress in collaboration with Carhartt in same collection...

image.thumb.png.2557fe3ff70dd37ecf04bd1e503f712f.png

image.thumb.png.6e667b4f9a2a364906ff4ee36c83af62.png

image.thumb.png.510f0edbb96f7cd3906d1ae4428ebd6f.png

 

and in terms of Champion sweats return, they were in on that early on too...

image.thumb.png.5b97a48f74088c29d024a1528bc78dbc.png

plus from same collection, another Champion look...

image.thumb.png.bff0f53719117e7c3338f7710adc3693.png

I'd def. say the youngers around this way are still mining the skaggy polyester big jeans '90s vibe and yet to fully grab the gel laden peacockery found in the '00s NSync toolkit...

Edited by bartlebyyphonics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2022 at 2:11 AM, Duke Mantee said:

Thanks!

The only definitive info I have is the United States Navy Uniform Regulations from 1941 showing a single pocket, but the 1951 regulations specifies 2 pockets. 

It’s reasonable to assume that based on the the sheer quantities of clothing produced according to the ‘41 regs would mean the single pocket would have been used by servicemen throughout the war, however I’m sure there were changes in between the two regulations I’ve quoted (as the war developed into different arenas, uniform requirement would change and I think khaki was also introduced around 1943, never mind the unpopular ‘greys’) … hence my question as to discover the year the 2 pocket shirt was introduced.

C79FE8D8-1B2F-4017-98B1-1F44F1117740.jpeg

88347510-6E4D-4E88-B2FB-C58817652CB5.jpeg

Oh wow!

 

Great sleuthing - this is great info. I think you're right on the money. Because of the sheer amount of these garments that were produced there were also many still being worn throughout the grace period. But then when they issues the 'new' ones with two pockets to new navy recruits you would obviously see those more often, perhaps even with older navy men switching out for the newer improved uniform. I'd be curious to find some documents stating the exact date they switched - as the info I found online was specifically unsure, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, busterthehuman said:

Oh wow!

 

Great sleuthing - this is great info. I think you're right on the money. Because of the sheer amount of these garments that were produced there were also many still being worn throughout the grace period. But then when they issues the 'new' ones with two pockets to new navy recruits you would obviously see those more often, perhaps even with older navy men switching out for the newer improved uniform. I'd be curious to find some documents stating the exact date they switched - as the info I found online was specifically unsure, as well.

TBH it wasn’t really sleuthing, the Navy Uniform Regulations are public domain and one of the the best (being actual specification) references for Uniforms and equipment. What documents are you referring to?

Given the time and conditions, uniform and equipment shortages were common so a lot of personal wore non-regulation and/or made do and mended, but it’s possible some of the luckier ones got their gear upgraded although I doubt, or at least it would be very uncommon it would have been within months of their original issue.

I guess then the question is “how do you know your shirt is WW2?” … sometimes the contract reference on the label (if there is one) can yield sufficient information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2022 at 1:40 AM, Duke Mantee said:

TBH it wasn’t really sleuthing, the Navy Uniform Regulations are public domain and one of the the best (being actual specification) references for Uniforms and equipment. What documents are you referring to?

Given the time and conditions, uniform and equipment shortages were common so a lot of personal wore non-regulation and/or made do and mended, but it’s possible some of the luckier ones got their gear upgraded although I doubt, or at least it would be very uncommon it would have been within months of their original issue.

I guess then the question is “how do you know your shirt is WW2?” … sometimes the contract reference on the label (if there is one) can yield sufficient information.

Hah - perhaps not but I'm a tad dramatic with my wording, and also I am not too good at finding info myself so if you have resources you'd like to share online, let me know! I have plenty of books with info but it's easier to have it readily available on another tab. There wasn't documents per say, just other blog pieces from Heddels and the like.

& yeah you're right. I actually learned about this recently in an Avant mag. I was always curious as to what the codes meant on the tags as I knew a little from knowledge I picked up along the way but not exactly what each letter and number meant, but now I do. Kind of... :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, busterthehuman said:

Hah - perhaps not but I'm a tad dramatic with my wording, and also I am not too good at finding info myself so if you have resources you'd like to share online, let me know! I have plenty of books with info but it's easier to have it readily available on another tab. There wasn't documents per say, just other blog pieces from Heddels and the like.

& yeah you're right. I actually learned about this recently in an Avant mag. I was always curious as to what the codes meant on the tags as I knew a little from knowledge I picked up along the way but not exactly what each letter and number meant, but now I do. Kind of... :wink:

I don’t have any resources that aren’t available to everyone else - I just read, remember and learn. But here’s the full 1941 Uniform Regulations, as I said they’re public domain.

Hopefully your shirt is a war issue, I was just curious as to how you knew … especially with it being in such great condition, it’s such a great find regardless.

However, this is exactly the point I made in the ‘blog’ thread, and more recently in ‘blunders’ thread - it’d be great if ‘information’ was actually substantive; “I love my CPO shirt” is opinion, “My CPO shirt is a WWII issue” might well be misleading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Duke Mantee said:

I don’t have any resources that aren’t available to everyone else - I just read, remember and learn. But here’s the full 1941 Uniform Regulations, as I said they’re public domain.

Hopefully your shirt is a war issue, I was just curious as to how you knew … especially with it being in such great condition, it’s such a great find regardless.

However, this is exactly the point I made in the ‘blog’ thread, and more recently in ‘blunders’ thread - it’d be great if ‘information’ was actually substantive; “I love my CPO shirt” is opinion, “My CPO shirt is a WWII issue” might well be misleading. 

For sure - thanks for sharing. 
Honestly, I took the word of the seller. The guy who was selling it spoke of it as a WW2 issued piece, but I get what you're saying. I thought of it odd to ask him 'how do you know?' instead of just taking his word for it. Last thing I wanna do is spread misinformation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, busterthehuman said:

For sure - thanks for sharing. 
Honestly, I took the word of the seller. The guy who was selling it spoke of it as a WW2 issued piece, but I get what you're saying. I thought of it odd to ask him 'how do you know?' instead of just taking his word for it. Last thing I wanna do is spread misinformation. 

Misinformation suggests corruption - I don’t believe for one second that’s your intent. It seems to me you are excited about the purchase (I would be too) and want to share that with your friends and peers.

But here’s the thing, the issue that doesn’t seem to be getting picked up - people who read your* blog just take your word; people who follow you* on IG just take your word; people who know you* from life take your word.      (you/your* is anyone/everyone who offers ‘facts’)

If we want to show off our clothes (and style) by interacting with likeminded guys and gals then this is a great place to do it, as is the Fedora Lounge, IG, Facebook, Reddit et al; however if we go beyond that basic premise and try to be informative or educational in any respect then I think we are obliged to try our utmost to ensure what we say has a sound basis.

Whenever the Duchess’s sister visits (Covid has been a blessing), invariably she has some dramatic or outrageous news. I always ask her ‘did you see that on Facebook?’, she always says ‘yes’ … 

Edited by Duke Mantee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, busterthehuman said:

I thought of it odd to ask him 'how do you know?' instead of just taking his word for it. 

Asking is never impolite, if a seller claims it is they have something to hide... If someone can demonstrate the reality of a claim in my experience they never take umbrage but happily share concrete markers that define that thing... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2022 at 10:24 AM, bartlebyyphonics said:

The first two, and last two letters of the top word on the hoodie are superfluous. :rolleyes:

image.thumb.png.bff0f53719117e7c3338f7710adc3693.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2022 at 6:28 AM, bartlebyyphonics said:

Asking is never impolite, if a seller claims it is they have something to hide... If someone can demonstrate the reality of a claim in my experience they never take umbrage but happily share concrete markers that define that thing... 

 

On 4/8/2022 at 11:47 PM, Duke Mantee said:

Misinformation suggests corruption - I don’t believe for one second that’s your intent. It seems to me you are excited about the purchase (I would be too) and want to share that with your friends and peers.

But here’s the thing, the issue that doesn’t seem to be getting picked up - people who read your* blog just take your word; people who follow you* on IG just take your word; people who know you* from life take your word.      (you/your* is anyone/everyone who offers ‘facts’)

If we want to show off our clothes (and style) by interacting with likeminded guys and gals then this is a great place to do it, as is the Fedora Lounge, IG, Facebook, Reddit et al; however if we go beyond that basic premise and try to be informative or educational in any respect then I think we are obliged to try our utmost to ensure what we say has a sound basis.

Whenever the Duchess’s sister visits (Covid has been a blessing), invariably she has some dramatic or outrageous news. I always ask her ‘did you see that on Facebook?’, she always says ‘yes’ … 

 

Thank you both - I still have a lot to learn obviously. I've only been into this community a fraction as you guys have. Hence why I'm here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Josh knows a lot, but he is not all-knowing. There are also plenty of dealers in the shop who label shit with impunity that I often find myself questioning. In reality, there are no clean breaks to date the majority of this stuff. Even the well-traveled world of vintage Levi's isn't definitive to the exact year in most cases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2022 at 4:54 PM, Duke Mantee said:

I don’t have any resources that aren’t available to everyone else - I just read, remember and learn. But here’s the full 1941 Uniform Regulations, as I said they’re public domain.

Hopefully your shirt is a war issue, I was just curious as to how you knew … especially with it being in such great condition, it’s such a great find regardless.

However, this is exactly the point I made in the ‘blog’ thread, and more recently in ‘blunders’ thread - it’d be great if ‘information’ was actually substantive; “I love my CPO shirt” is opinion, “My CPO shirt is a WWII issue” might well be misleading. 

I love my wwii (maybe) cpo

EA5E6BBB-4916-47FC-81AD-5A750CBDB3E4.jpeg

88E854B5-81C0-4614-93A3-8A01403B07E9.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@cheapmuthafukr well, one pocket suggests spec to the ‘41 uniform regs (maybe even earlier) - but I’m not expert enough to confirm anything, I just know enough to ask pertinent questions. 

Could even be a replica :ohmy:

Edited by Duke Mantee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Duke Mantee said:

@cheapmuthafukr well, one pocket suggests spec to the ‘41 uniform regs (maybe even earlier) - but I’m not expert enough to confirm anything, I just know enough to ask pertinent questions. 

Could even be a replica :ohmy:

Definitely not a replica. It smelled like old wool when I found it at the thrift store years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now