After a long pause due to Covid, I went to a Value Village and found myself going through the old motions: entering, getting the lay of the land (here are the dresses, there’s the coat aisle…), and grabbing a shopping cart. I had developed a practiced eye, scanning rows of garments with efficiency. I knew, statistically, that I'd find a hidden gem every 200 items or so. This time, I saw nothing even remotely interesting. The looks actually baffled me, so I looked closer. Very few were of a quality I would call worthwhile—they were fast fashion items.
This sparked an internal debate for me. This sparkly Y2K top, that bright floral knit dress—they appeared to be from the early 2000s. My first thought was… is this vintage? It raised a lot of questions.
Can cheaply made clothing, now 20+ years old, truly be considered “vintage” when the term is often associated with quality and longevity? There is now a prevalence of fast fashion pieces in the vintage market, so it isn’t an academic question. It’s actually a hot-button issue.
While the age of fast fashion qualifies it for the vintage label, its quality and ethical implications challenge our traditional understanding of the term, forcing us to reconsider what we value in our clothing.
You may ask, why does this matter? What does it mean environmentally, ethically, and for the future of vintage collecting and wearing?
To delve deeper into this question, I reached out to the vintage community and got some really interesting responses!
Defining Vintage (and Fast Fashion)
The general definition of vintage fashion is anything 20 years old or older, while antiques start at 100 years of age. Since it became popular in the 1970s, vintage fashion has typically been associated with quality, craftsmanship, historical significance, and perhaps even rarity. What makes garments better quality? The fabrics will look and feel good, there may be linings, better-grade components such as buttons and trims, details like hand-sewn elements, carefully pieced fabric prints, appliqués and other embellishments—among many other things. By carefully observing, you can develop a better understanding of quality over time.
Fast fashion is trend-driven, mass-produced, low-cost, using cheaper materials, raising significant ethical and environmental concerns. Can something designed for short-term wear and consumption truly become a piece of enduring value? Does this matter?
Arguments for Fast Fashion as Vintage
1. Age as the sole criterion: If something is 20+ years old, it technically qualifies, regardless of quality.
2. We are seeing the appeal of Y2K and 90s styles, and that drives demand for even fast fashion pieces, especially with Gen Z. One vintage fabric dealer who responded to my post on social media said that she sees her 21-year-old daughter’s idea of vintage. “95% of her clothing and accessories are secondhand or vintage, and some of her choices are driven partly by the desire to own things that aren’t available [new] in the stores. She’s also developing her style by limiting choices and having to think more about what she likes and what she’s looking for rather than being dictated to.”
3. Reducing landfill waste: Even if a garment isn't high-quality, keeping it out of landfills is a win. One vintage clothing dealer wrote, “As long as the items are represented honestly, giving them a second life makes them a little less ‘fast’ in the long run. Keeping things out of the landfills and in someone’s closet is always a good choice!” After all, she said, “It’s already occupying space.”
4. Price point and accessibility: For some, it’s an accessible way to participate in the vintage trend, especially for plus-size individuals.
However, there are also compelling arguments against classifying these items as true vintage.
Arguments against Fast Fashion as Vintage
1. Quality concerns: As one vintage dealer wrote, “If it's not quality I don't want to buy it.”
2. Ethical implications: Even if the item is 20 years old, fast fashion was made by poorly treated and underpaid garment workers, and the environmental cost of production was egregious. For instance, the production of a single cotton t-shirt can require over 700 gallons of water; cheap, toxic chemical dyes are routinely used for fast fashion.
3. Diluting the value of true vintage: Labeling fast fashion as vintage devalues well-made pieces.
4. Misrepresentation: There is the potential for sellers to mislead buyers if they don't disclose the fast fashion origins of items. “Vintage-y” (something that is newly made to look vintage) is not the same as vintage. As one lifelong collector and wearer of vintage fashion wrote, “There are so many things made to look 50+ years old and without a trained eye unintended purchases can happen, which is a big bummer,” while a vintage blogger responded, “It feels like an extra gut punch when the things we love about vintage (quality, design, longevity) are the first things people throw out when they see a cheap, fun vintage-y dress.”
5. The future of vintage: Again from the blogger, “I’m sad future generations won’t have the thrifting experience we did if we don’t change soon.” I would add that there may be little made now that outlasts 20 years to even become vintage.
Nuance and Gray Areas
1. Not all fast fashion is equal: Some brands and pieces from the 1990s and early 2000s were better made than others. A long-time vintage fashion dealer wrote, “Gap and Banana Republic sometimes had decent pieces that have aged well.”
2. Better materials: Many acknowledge that finding fast fashion in natural fibers makes it a better bet.
3. Honest representation is key: When selling 20+-year-old fast fashion online, some stress the importance of sellers being transparent about what they are selling, regardless of whether they call it vintage.
4. Personal preference: Some people do collect fast fashion for nostalgic reasons, and that’s okay. A UK collector wrote, “Technically, Biba is a fast fashion brand of old and that is highly coveted now. I also collect ’90s Topshop and Miss Selfridge from a nostalgic point of view, as it was the fashion of my teens.”
Overall, the consensus seems to be that while giving fast fashion items a second life is beneficial, it's important to be aware of the difference between fast fashion and what might be called slow fashion—considering factors like quality, ethical sourcing, and the historical context.
This discussion highlights a shift in consumer behavior, a growing awareness of the environmental impact of fashion, and the evolving definition of “vintage” in the fast-paced world of contemporary fashion.
Rawpixel
Fast fashion is a deeply problematic industry. It thrives on cheap production and rapid consumption, leading to massive textile waste, often ending up in landfills (92 million tons every year), heavy use of water and pesticides in cotton farming, pollution from dyeing processes and synthetic materials, and significant carbon emissions from transportation and manufacturing.
Labor exploitation is widespread. Garment workers in developing countries are often paid extremely low wages and work in unsafe conditions. The lack of transparency in supply chains makes it difficult to ensure fair labor practices, and the pressure to produce quickly contributes to accidents and unsafe working environments.
Fast fashion fuels a culture of overconsumption, encouraging people to constantly buy new clothes to keep up with fleeting trends. This devalues clothing and makes it disposable.
Fast fashion is unsustainable and unethical. While it may provide affordable clothing options, the true cost is borne by the environment and garment workers.
Personal Reflection
While technically a fast fashion item from 20 years ago meets the age requirement, I believe that the term “vintage” carries more nuance.
What I would call true vintage clothing can be appreciated for its design, craftsmanship, and the quality of materials used. It represents a particular era or style. Fast fashion, by its nature, often mimics trends rather than creating unique styles. Its quality is generally lower, so it may not have aged well or be seen as particularly desirable. True vintage items often gain value because they are rare or represent a specific designer or brand and have stood the test of time. As a dealer, that matters to me. As a consumer, I’m spoiled: handle, mend, clean, and admire vintage clothing, and it’s hard to tolerate fast fashion.
As I wrote in the conclusion to my book: [Wearing vintage fashion is] about expressing one’s true self while appreciating quality, saving money, and caring for our planet. I want others to share the joy of wearing what they want. I believe in the power of vintage.
I worry about the present state of new fashion available to most of us, with much of it poorly designed, inadequately made by terribly underpaid workers, and without a sense of freshness in spirit, production, or style. I worry about the use of the world’s resources as fast fashion is bought and discarded more rapidly all the time. I worry about people and how this ever-accelerating world makes them think and act.
There’s really no comparison (denisebrain photos)
I believe that while a 20-year-old fast fashion piece could technically be called vintage, it might be more accurate to describe it as pre-loved or secondhand. Someone might ethically (honestly) sell, or wear, a 20-year-old fast fashion item, but it probably wouldn’t be possible to describe it with the same adjectives one would use to describe items at least 30 years old.
So, while that sparkly tank top from Limited Too might technically be vintage by age alone, I'm still hesitant to call it that. For me, true vintage is about more than just the passage of time.
What do you think? Share your thoughts on fast fashion and vintage in the comments below! Have you bought fast fashion items with vintage potential? What are your criteria when buying and selling vintage clothing? What do you think the future of vintage will look like in 20 years?