What's with the Millennial/Zoomer fascination with old crap?

In My Humble Opinion
21

The camping analogy is spot-on, as well as the point about the effects of having to clean out your parents’ crap vs. discovering it in an antique shop or thrift store. Fashion is often about rejecting one’s parents; it’s precisely because Boomers and Gen-X value the latest and greatest that their kids want the opposite.

But I also think there’s something fun about mechanical things that are simple enough that you’re can open them up, see how they work, and fix them when something goes wrong. Can’t really do that with an iPhone.

I’m also reminded of a passage from Americanah by Chimamanda Ngoze Adieche, contrasting the Nigerian preference for newer architecture with the American love of classic buildings:

But of course it makes sense because we are Third Worlders and Third Worlders are forward-looking, we like things to be new, because our best is still ahead, while in the West their best is already past and so they have to make a fetish of that past.Remember this is our newly middle-class world. We haven’t completed the first cycle of prosperity, before going back to the beginning again, to drink milk from the cow’s udder.

Whether that has any relevance to preferences for old vs new within generations, I’m not sure, but it’s stuck with me.

22

I think it was in the 1980’s Mad Magazine’s “The Lighter Side” had the cartoon strip bit where some kid is assembling a complex detailed model plane. Grandpa is saying “When I was a kid, we didn’t have plastic kits - we had to build a model airplane from scratch using balsa sticks and paper - it was serious work and took forever…”
Kid: “And those were the good old days?”
Grandpa: “Heck no! This is way better!”

23

Yeah, I’m going to go back to the sewing machines…

The reason I love my treadle machine are as follows:

  • It allows for very precise speed control and stitching precision - that’s also why I used one as a cobbler. When it’s more important to be accurate as opposed to fast the treadle machines give you different speed control options.
  • When I’m sewing very heavy items - multiple layers of denim, canvas, leather, etc. - I don’t have to worry about burning out the motor. Worst that happens is that the “motor” gets tired and takes a nap.
  • I can fix it myself.

Now, if your sewing habits are different than mine it can affect what you might find desirable. For many, many people the basic, modern, electric-powered machine is perfectly fine (and I do have a small, electric portable I also use). My mother-in-law used to sew actual coats for people out of some interesting fabrics - for what she did a modern serger was essential. If you do elaborate embroidery that’s a different machine again.

In fact, I have a local store where you can actually rent time on some very sophisticated and specialized sewing machines. Or purchase one.

But if you’re me, doing just straight-forward stitching but using a very wide variety of fabrics a treadle machine works just as well as an electric, and unlike some modern machines, is not reliant on a computer chip that can be very expensive to replace.

But for the casual sewer using just clothing-weight fabric without getting too fancy a basic electric makes a lot of sense, too.

So there can be a number of factors involved. “Old crap” isn’t always crap, even if it’s old.

I think in some cases Millenials/Zoomers are simply exploring things. Some people like to play with older technologies, just like some of us like to make our own, amateur music rather than just listen to professionals. Some people think it’s crazy to bother with cooking when you can pay someone else to do it (either at a restaurant/take-away or convenience foods) and others enjoy making things from scratch.

If it’s not for you then it’s not for you. No big deal.

24

I think if someone’s using a 8" x 10" format film camera with a tilt-shift lens and adjustable film plane then they know what they are doing and it’s not crap.

25

Can’t say I agree for one reason. Many times we aren’t given much choice in the matter. Manufactures will ‘force feed’ us the newer product by discontinuing manufacture of a previous version. This, like everything, is usually driven by money. I was disappointed that car manufacturers stopped putting CD players in cars, presuming instead that everyone wanted to listen to music with a telephone. For me it was so much easier to grab a CD or 2 on my way out the door. Whatever I felt like listening to at that particular time. I usually play satellite radio in the car but the option to play a CD would have been nice. Maybe I’m in the minority on this.

26

I should add to this. I like CD’s because I like the printed material that tells you who plays what instrument etc, etc etc. LP’s were better in this respect - more room = more information and some LP’s were worth it just for the cover art.
So for me, I have zero interest in streaming music and that’s diminished even more if it’s someone else’s playlist I’m forced to listen to. Listening to satellite radio (commercial free) in the car is OK. In my house I don’t even own a radio.
I suppose what all this comes down to is some new tech is good but it all comes down to the individual. Individuals will embrace what they like and discard what they don’t like . . .or be forced to use it because they no longer have an option.

27

Early millennial here. Dunno if my interest in old things is due to my generation or just a peculiarity of mine, but most of my interest comes from plain old curiosity. I collect slide rules and vintage calculators, for example, but for day-to-day use I a modern calculator 'cause it’s that much better.

On the other hand, I have 40s-era Toastmaster that I use and it does the job just fine. As long as I only ever want to toast bread, 'cause bagels are right out with that thing.

I’m certainly happy to “try out” anything old, and if I perceive that it can do the job as well as a modern implement, I may just stick with it. Otherwise it’s just an outdated (but interesting) relic.

28

I’m not bothered by nostalgia, even when it’s for things people have never known. Hand crank that Model T if it makes you happy - just watch out that the crank doesn’t spin back and clock you in the head.

Gosh, I miss the superior sound of LPs, especially the hissing, cracks and popping. And the skips and stuck passages - it was like you were right in front of the stage!

I still have some film processing envelopes from the old days. Sifting through 20 photos to find the half-dozen that weren’t under/overexposed, out of focus or showed subjects with eyes closed or unflattering expressions was also an adventure, along with the joy of knowing you’d wasted money getting all those bad shots developed and printed.

p.s. We’ve got printers and good paper now for printing out digital photos. Costs more than viewing them solely on devices, but you can certainly keep permanent copies in your album.

29

Some years ago. I got a new stylus and decided to compare a criterion gold CD with a vinyl record (Japanese pressing, IIRC, which tended to be better quality at the time). I synchronized them and switched back and forth, listening with headphones, on a turntable and amp that cost me about $800 put together.

There was a definite audible difference. The vinyl had a rich depth to it, while the CD sounded somewhat brittle. Of course, sitting in the living room, listening on speakers, the difference would probably be imperceptible. CDs are simply more convenient. Though, my dad recorded hundreds of cassettes of classical music off the local NPR station using high quality consumer equipment and the tapes were stunningly good.

As for cameras, I do not want to lug around a DSLR, but the expensive compacts are annoying as hell. They have 27 motors to make every little movement for you, going though elaborate gyrations to extend t(e lens when you turn them on. Then, when you do want to zoom, instead of turning the ring like you would on a film camera, you have to juke around with little switches to get the zoom right where you want it.

The worst thing, though, is the fucking screen. About 12 years ago, I picked out a meh-level camera specifically because it had a viewfinder. Now, those are almost impossible to find. To compose, you have to use the preview screen on the back, which sucks ragged donkey balls at 2 in the afternoon in July. You cannot even see the screen at all, so you just have to point and take 30 shots, hoping one is close to the composition you want.

Every goddam thing has to be motorized these days. It pisses me off. You cannot get a car with crank windows, at all, ever. All the gadgetry is, oh, neat, but why the fuck? I do not need devices doing the simplest of tasks for me (electronic vernier calipers??) which means the practical hands-on things get pushed out and are no longer made. Then the gadget breaks and you have to relearn how to do that thing.

30

Personally I LOVE the return of vinyl records. The art often (not always) put into the cover, liner notes…I really miss liner notes…and such made the experience of owning an LP album vastly more enjoyable than downloading an MP3. Having a record collection to browse on your shelf is so much better than zooming through your playlist on an iPod or phone. Going through the motions of removing a record from its sleeve, cleaning it and putting it on your turntable where the stylus ever so lightly touches down on the record and you get a little pop and crackle is, again, really satisfying.

It’s the difference between French press coffee and instant coffee. It takes more work but the end result is much more enjoyable.

That said, YMMV.

31

There’s a commonality to all of these things which is the bifurcation of consumer electronics into cheap, disposable, Chinese-made crap that never really works properly even when brand new, and ultra-precision luxury stuff for people with LOTS of money to spend who are devoted hobbyists (or, I suppose, devoted fans of toast).

The best-selling camera of 1974, the Pentax, cost $450 in 1974 dollars (equivalent to $2500 today). That was the most popular model of camera in the U.S. that year, not a super-niche product. If you were just a casual snapshot-taker you could buy a Kodak or Polaroid entry-level model for $40 ($225 today). Who spends $225 on the cheapest version of anything in 2020, or wouldn’t balk at spending $2500 to upgrade to the most popular hobbyist model? If you weren’t middle-class enough to have $225 to spend on something you weren’t really planning on getting that into, you just didn’t own a camera, and if you didn’t have $2500 then becoming a serious enthusiast was off the table.

The $225 option no longer exists now. Before the market for non-DSLR photography was completely finished off by smartphones, you could buy a disposable, single-use 35mm camera for $7, or, if you hunted through the Sunday coupons, get it for free as long as you paid for photo developing from whichever drugstore was offering a promo that week. You could buy an incredibly shitty low-model Olympus digital camera for $70 any day of the week or $50 when Staples was running a sale. Office supply and Best Buy type stores in the 2000s might stock 30 or more models of digital camera with not a single one running more than $400. If you want anything decent be prepared to go to a camera shop or head online and pay much, much more.

This is an effect of both penny-wise, pound-foolish consumer thinking, corporations seeking out a market, and a general demand for democratization. In 1974 the notion that the poorest person you knew somehow “should” be able to own a camera of all things was ridiculous. Now everyone has at least the crappy version of everything.

There’s not been a whole lot of advancement in sewing machine or toaster technology over the decades - if you have a model that’s lasted since the 70s and does what you want, of course you’ll hang on to it. The alternative is spending hundreds of dollars to get something of actual quality, or buying a new sub-$100 crap machine every year.

32

Moving this to IMHO

33

The design of older things is more interesting. Stuff with dedicated physical knobs and dials for controlling various functions is always going to seem more interesting than the same features controlled by digital menus, when digital menus are the norm, the same way digital menus were fascinating to people who were used to analog technology. Anything that differs from the mainstream is going to have a cult following.

34

And this. The experience of using something that requires some kind of unique proprietary process is going to hold a certain appeal, at a time when everything is typically accessed in the same way (through some kind of touchscreen.) Going through the motions of something, anything, is one of those things that makes life worth living.

35

I’m regularly amused by how some people are deeply into the “retro pixel” look in modern video games. As in having your game look like an old c.1992 title is something to be desired and an actual selling point rather than just a technical limitation. At no point when I was playing on my old Sega Genesis did I ever say “Man, this game is great but I sure wish it had shitty Atari graphics” but now a whole lot of people are saying “You know what this game needs? To look like we’re playing it on a Super Nintendo…”

36

When the EMP strike comes and all of your electronic gizziwigs lose their magic smoke, I’ll still be able to design structures and perform orbital mechanics calculations with my collection of slide rules and nomograms.

Stranger

37

I always enjoyed cassettes. They were easy to customize and edit in creative ways. Now you can do it on your phone, but back in the 90s you had cassettes, CDs, and even some vinyl being sold at the same time and only one of them offered cheap, easy recording on home equipment.

Even with it being super easy today with digital audio files, I always enjoyed the tactile aspect of recording/dubbing with cassettes, and I knew exactly how to precisely cue up a tape; you hit pause right at the spot you want the recording to start, then you stop the tape, eject it from the machine, and turn the reel 1/4 turn back.

You had generational quality loss of course, but that never bothered me that much. Being a teenager at the time, the solution to a crappy copy was just to turn it up louder and that worked just fine. :smiley:

38

The appeal of operating devices that provide satisfying tactile feedback can’t be overstated. There really is something to be said for feeling the crisp notchiness of a detented dial, the friction of a spring winding, the weighty but smooth spin of a tuning knob, the engagement of a lever - it’s somewhat odd to find myself in the position of putting it into so many words because it’s just one of those things I’ve unconsciously enjoyed about operating all kinds of devices, without really thinking about it. It’s the same reason that paddle shifters on the newer cars do absolutely nothing for me - they don’t provide any tactile feedback.

39

I have a pair of ~30 year old wood cross-country skis. They need to be waxed (and occasionally re-tarred). I did have modern (NNN) bindings put on (previously 3 pin bindings)
Are they better than modern skis? Probably not. (my boots are definitely nicer than the original ones) But they suit my need.

Brian

40

If I had to choose one technology, right now, as it stands, for listening to in the car for the rest of my life, it would be a hard choice between cassettes and a digital player. Cassettes are superior to CDs in the car because they are easier to carry and change, and play slightly longer if you fill them entirely up. Plus if your tape player breaks you can listen to them in a boom box whose batteries last a lot longer playing cassettes than CDs.

Digital players sound better than cassettes these days (as opposed to the early years of tinny compressed MP3s), and of course last much much longer before running out of songs than cassettes, but are a pain to get your songs onto your device and thence talking to your car audio.

Streaming would be right out because not everything is always on streaming.