Guin, thanks for the links. My dream is to wear a Florentine Renaissance dress. Where can you find this sort of design being made?
OK, answering my own question… http://www.peacockdesignstudio.com/gowngallery.html
I think Peter Morris quoting Laver’s Law is a good and witty answer to the OP.
Try Past and Present Creations and tell her I sent you. 
DAMN! Why’s everything gotta be a PT Cruiser thang wit you people!
Quit beating up on my car!
Thanks so much, Guin! Those gorgeous numbers are just what I was hoping to find. If we extend Laver’s Law further back, what is 500 years old goes beyond beautiful into the realm of *fantasia…
Bellissima, grazie* 
Johanna and Guin, here are the hairstyles that go with those fab dresses
To the OP, I agree with Johanna that “Lavers Law” quoted by **Peter Morris ** nailed it. I myself am proof of **Beware of Doug’s ** point: I liked and still like the style of my parents, and I didn’t have a fashionable peergroup. Most alternative youngsters (hippie, grunge) have more elements of their parents’s style, then mainstream modern youngsters. Mainstream, ordinary, well adjusted youngsters buy what is new in stores; Alternative youngsters just dust off and combine what’s in their parents’ boxes in the attic.
“Laver’s law” is true of architecture too.
Also, over the years people will generally throw away the uglier stuff, and tear down the uglier houses. What remains is a selection of things better suited to universal taste, if there is such a thing.
Also, maybe cheaper things look ridiculous because they are, by definition, exaggerated. Product usually are designed to function well in their basic form; in order to be fashionable, they have to function *worse *. Think exaggaratedly large boomboxes or exxagaratedly small cellphones. Hence the ridiculousness a few years later.
I like the way alot of old stuff looks. Pick-ups, cars, rotary telephones, tv trays, metal lunch boxes (both kids and adults), etc. About the only exeption is clothing since bell bottoms appeared.
I even like the PT Cruiser. :o Eventhough one day while driving with my 10 yr old nephew we came up with the name PT Losers for the cars (Mini Coopers were Mini Poopers BTW) while counting PT Cruisers as part of a game.
Not too fond of women’s hair-dos like beehives, mens sideburns, or lots of hair on men either.
No problem.
Here’s a web page on women’s fashions from the 1940’s
What’s striking about many of those fashions is how normal they look. Half of the clothes on that page could be worn today, and no one would be able to tell when they were designed.
This picture surprised me. It could have been taken yesterday, including the hairstyles, makeup style, even the jewelry and watch the lady on the right is wearing. It looks totally modern. And yet it dates back 60 years.
Photos from the 1970’s and even 1980’s look far more dated.
I’ve been watching a variety of older movies over the past. They range from stuff made in the past ten years that I just never got around to seeing to stuff made in the 1920’s and 30’s. One of the things that I have noticed is that sometimes the stuff from the 1970’s or 1980’s seem the most dated to me. Movies older than a certain point seem charmingly out of time. I mean, it isn’t like they could be believable today- and some of them could (or would) not be made today (Panama Hattie (set and filmed during WWII) featured a charming scene near the end where people were saying things about the enemy that would not go over well today). Still, there is an aura of timelessness about some of them that is lacking from more contemporary movies- or maybe it is from my mind.
It’s a matter of perspective. I am an old thing. To me, a lot of new things look ridiculous.
The link’s broken.
Click on the link and then hit your “Go” button in your browser. I’m using Firefox 1.0.6 and that’s what I had to do.
I was sitting in my fashion lecture today, and we were talking about this kind of thing, and we were read this interesting little excerpt from a writer in from the 1940’s (I think) about fashion. Keeping in mind the times are probably more condensed now and the words slightly more “hip”.
Indecent - 10 years before its time
Shameless - 5 years before its time
Daring - 1 year before its time
Smart ----------------------------
Dowdy - 1 year after its time
Hideous - 10 years after its time
Ridiculous - 20 years after its time
Amusing - 30 years after its time
Quaint - 50 years after its time
Charming - 70 years after its time
Romantic - 100 years after its time
Beautiful - 150 years after its time.
Pretty interesting I thought…I suppose you do learn things at uni after all.
Dammit! Somebody else already wrote it.
humph
I’m asking it NOW.
You’re so right, Maastricht. Dank U weel. I’m in awe of the artistry done with hair at that site, especially the “Classic” styles. Now there are some timeless elegant designs that can’t look ridiculous, no matter what their age might be. Didn’t they find Nordic bog women with braids of similar design from 2,000 years ago?
wrinkles nose
Really? Today? Nah. Five-ten years ago, maybe. There was an unusual *early *60’s blip in fashion in the mid to late nineties (I say unusual because nearly every decade revisits the 60’s- but usually revisits the *late *60’s with peasant blouses, embroidered skirts, etc.) I have a couple of t-shirts in just the fit of those sweaters that are no later than 1998. Around the same time “capris” (clamdiggers to my grandmother) made a comeback. But they do look dated today.
There is a 40’s and 50’s style coming back, peeking in between the gawdawful 70’s and 80’s. That’s probably why your first link doesn’t look too strange. Still, none of that vintage stuff could really be worn as is except to a fancy party - the looks today aren’t identical, just heavily influenced.
If the PT Cruiser were bigger (much) and had a hemi and wood panels… 
I’d buy one and put some biggaz wheelz in the back.