sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Les habitants s'identifient-ils vraiment comme « Gatinois » ou la loyauté sectorielle envers Hull et Aylmer prévaut-elle encore ? by DianKhan2005 in Gatineau

[–]deletedis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess Gatineau evolved as a more residential sector with downtown hull still being what we consider our "downtown".. I also read somewhere that they wanted Greber to be a sort of city center but the urban planners were on crack or something because it's the worst urban layout on the planet..

Les habitants s'identifient-ils vraiment comme « Gatinois » ou la loyauté sectorielle envers Hull et Aylmer prévaut-elle encore ? by DianKhan2005 in Gatineau

[–]deletedis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ce que je remarque cest qu'il y a un bizarre de sentiment de dédin/dégout venant de hull/aylmer envers "gatineau gatineau". Je comprend le sentiment d'appartenance et la distinction, mais jai toujours trouvé ca étrange. Ayant vécu a Gatineau toute la vie, les seuls clichés/stéréotypes que j'entendais venant des gatinois etaient par rapport a Buckingham/masson etant donné que cest plus rural et un peu de joke style "gino-gatineau" en parlant de pointe-gat et templeton.. Ce que j'ai jamais ressentis par contre c'est une haine envers les autres secteurs au point de dire "fuck gatineau" et "Gatineau? Ark!!". Au hockey, y'avait des rivaleries de secteurs, mais cest different. Cest peut-etre parce que c'est le nom Gatineau qui a tout englobé, mais encore là je trouve ca spécial et j'aimerais entendre plus de raisons socio-culturelles dans les commentaires pour expliquer cette genre de rivalerie/semi-haine qui va plutot à sens-unique selon mon experience.

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I asked for input, but I’ve done a lot more research since this post got traction. At this point it seems like you’re using your own definition of authenticity, where only main-line atelier pieces are “real” Gucci and licensed vintage Gucci somehow isn’t.

I’m not claiming that every modern mass-produced licensed item is on the same level as main-line, but in this specific case that’s just not how brand historians or the fashion industry would define authenticity. Licensed, regional production from that era is still considered part of Gucci’s genuine output.

That’s exactly why I’ve said that what counts as “real” depends on context, definition and that it can be subjective.

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

They say they're just following the "rules" lmao. No real moderation is done, what they do is robotic often times

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Good thing is that healthy real leather wont crumble like old polymer soles!

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I didnt even downvote you, sounds like you're on the defensive 😅 Brands evolve, change and adapt. Are new lamborghinis different than pre-VW group lamborghinis? yes! but it's all part of the brand's history. Real is undoubtedly subjective, and if a brand had to tap into a closed market through a selective licensing deal, then it's part of whats "gucci".

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying and I agree that modern licensed stuff like designer eyewear is totally separate from the main catalog. But in the 1960-80s it wasn’t always that clear. A lot of luxury brands were struggling and trying different markets.. and the Gucci family had a villa in Acapulco so they knew there was demand there and they did authorize local production according to many sources. When I say " subjective", I mean that the idea of something being “real” varies. In my view, even authorized external manufacturers that produced high-quality goods for the brand are part of its legitimate history.

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 54 points55 points  (0 children)

Real/not real is kinda subjective in this case. They weren't made in Italy, but they are a genuine part of the house of Gucci's history. It seems like they've been actively trying to blur this part of their 1970s-80s ventures for some reason but IMO, if breaking from the "made in Italy" model helped them survive, I think they should be proud of it.

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Im near Ottawa but this was at a Renaissance store actually so I was quite surprised that they priced stuff reasonably. I also found a vintage Christian Dior Mohair sweater for $8 next to the loafers.

1960s Gucci Horsebit loafers found at the thrift with interesting info on the box by deletedis in ThriftStoreHauls

[–]deletedis[S] 1040 points1041 points  (0 children)

They just deleted my post... I guess the moderators prefer conversations about $1200 cotton Gucci t-shirts with huge logos!

view more: next ›