Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sorry I'm late, I'm only giving it 30% today. Like every other day. It's likely that I'll get really angry and try and organise a strike if you're late with paying me though. Today is magazine reading day, but I can interrupt it to have a chat with a girlfriend about the fact that she saw an ex-boyfriend walking past a shop.


Do you want a cup of tea? It's my tea break now, like every other minute of the day.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry I'm late, I'm only giving it 30% today. Like

> every other day. It's likely that I'll get really

> angry and try and organise a strike if you're late

> with paying me though. Today is magazine reading

> day, but I can interrupt it to have a chat with a

> girlfriend about the fact that she saw an

> ex-boyfriend walking past a shop.

>

> Do you want a cup of tea? It's my tea break now,

> like every other minute of the day.


Are the workers not responding to your demands again? Tsk.

zeban Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue, Vintage doesn't mean that at all. Some people

> do however misuse the term.


xxxxx


According to Wikipedia (yes I know, may well be wrong):


Vintage clothing is a generic term for new or second hand garments originating from a previous era. The phrase is also used in connection with a retail outlet, e.g. "vintage clothing store." It can also be used as an adjective: "This dress is vintage."


The word vintage is copied from its use in wine terminology, as a more elegant-seeming euphemism for "old" clothes.

Exactly Sue so you've just proved your earlier description is quite wrong! vintage means old or new clothes- meaning they're not necessarily second hand as they may never have been worn, from a previous era, usually stopping at the 80s.


I shop and buy vintage because I can find one of a kind pieces, which often fit differently than clothes now- better for my petite frame and ridiculously small feet, and often better quality than clothes made now, and are very good value for money, cheaper than mass produced, china made high street clothes. I also enjoy the experience of going to vintage fairs and spending hours trying to find that something special, so it's a kind of experience that you either like or don't like/get or don't get.


Certainly it has become a trendy term recently and thus is bandied about way too much and often misused but vintage clothes are fab and vintage shopping is extremely fun :)). Many buyers travel all around the world to source good pieces so it's quite rude to be so derogatary that they are things you wouldn't be able to sell 10 years ago. The vintage industry has been going for ages- I discovered it 10 years ago. I certainly don't like everything I come across in a vintage fair, but I'll always find something that I really love and it's definitely better than feeling depressed walking around Oxford Street.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Deceptively spacious" - so that will mean

> extraordinarily small then, no?

>

> "Vintage" - old second hand stuff that ten years

> ago you wouldn't have been able to give away.




I think Sue's point is right though. Vintage is used (incorrectly) to describe the quality of an item, when actually it just means the year or time the item was made. "Vintage 70"s" applies to EVERYTHING made in the 70's, even if it's just the ugly tea cups at the back of the cupboard, which I think was what Sue was getting at. Other people's junk sounds much more appealing when called vintage, and people obviously fall for it. It certainly doesn't just pertain to clothing; a car can be vintage (ie: pre-war), a record (well I guess most records these days), anything really.


The other day I saw an ad for a "vintage" iphone, which made me laugh.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • @CPR Dave He needs to communicate collectively with all of the beneficiaries.  That is the whole point of my original post.  Electronic communications are the best way of doing this, as I am doing now on this forum.  Apart from the gold digger who will get a six figure sum the rest of us are on four figures, and that is going down by the day. I'm offended by any suggestion that we are not behaving well.  What on earth do you mean?  
    • Surprise, surprise. It didn't take them long, did it. This will be something of a test as to how much the council really care about parks and the environment. A footfall of 60,000. Are they mad? There is no way this park is designed for or can sustain that sort of use. Just had a look at the schedule. If allowed to go ahead, this will involve a large slice of the park (not the common) sectioned off and out of use for three weeks of May and the first week of June. Here's an idea, why not trial the festival in one of the other Southwark Parks, so the 'goodness' can be shared around the borough?
    • There was another unprovoked attack on Monday this week on a young woman nearby (Anstey Road) at 6.45pm. Don't have any other details, it was posted on a Facebook group by her flatmate. Pretty worrying  https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1EGfDrCAST/
    • OMFG is it possible for the council to do anything without a bunch of armchair experts moaning about it? The library refurb is great news, as it's lovely but completely shagged out - the toilets don't even work reliably. Other libraries in the area will be open longer house during the closure. July is a rubbish time to begin a refurb because it's just before the entire construction sector goes on summer holiday, and it would mean delaying the work another 8 months.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...