This sort of thing makes me furious...

[Zemke Fan]

I don't know guys. While I respect the majority viewpoint here, there's more surplus WWII stuff out there that can EVER be used/displayed in museums and other places around the globe. More even than thousands of personal collectors can collect/save. Historically significant items, especially items with clear provenance to important figures? Well, that's a different matter. Ya'll need to spend some time crawling through the eBay nooks and crannies if you think these items (even the A2) are "truly interesting and historic items."

 

[martinsantos]

Fred,

I wouldn't say nothing about WWII stuff - here this is pretty rare - but I don't see this as the point.

If we admit turning this in little pieces for watches, then necessarilly we MUST admit when a highly apreciated piece is destructed by others. If we say "OK" because certain thing has no value to us, then what could we say when what we really like is destructed for fun or a strange marketing like the watches? I believe this is a 2 way road.

It's like burning books; these can be really pure junk, but my ideology (the best word I can find now) can't admit.

I don't know guys. While I respect the majority viewpoint here, there's more surplus WWII stuff out there that can EVER be used/displayed in museums and other places around the globe. More even than thousands of personal collectors can collect/save. Historically significant items, especially items with clear provenance to important figures? Well, that's a different matter. Ya'll need to spend some time crawling through the eBay nooks and crannies if you think these items (even the A2) are "truly interesting and historic items."

 

[Zemke Fan]

Not following your logic, Martin. The marketplace largely dictates these decisions. If the VALUE of these items being converted to watches straps was high enough (in other words if they were SCARCE enough) then there would be no conversion. It's why you don't see a lot of intact P-51 mustangs being broken up for parts. Doesn't make economic sense.

Seriously, if you boys are interested in collecting/saving this kind of stuff, then knock yourselves out. I have a VERY extensive (and very specific) WWII collection and know the difference between rare/historic and interesting/common. Do an eBay search on some of those leather goods and see what comes up. Or, better still, subscribe to a service like Terrapeak and find out what they sold for over the past few months. You just might get my point.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think the highest and best use for any item is its original use -- if you must use a vintage holster, use it to hold a gun -- don't cut it up to make craft items and think you're "preserving" it. Same thing with vintage typewriters -- if you really appreciate them, use them to type on, don't chop them up to make jewelry or ironic sculptures. And if you *can't* or *don't want* to do this, why not sell them to someone who does?

Once there were billions and billions of passenger pigeons, and nobody cared if someone went out and shot one or two or a dozen or a few hundred. And then one day there weren't any left at all.

 

[martinsantos]

Agree with you!!

I would ever add that the marketplace can make things very strange. I know a man who is a heavy old camera collector, with thousands of pieces. Don't make a single shot with them. But his cameras, if sold, would make a true fortune, specially those boxed models from factory. And this make me to think a funny thing: that Rolleiflex, still with the seals from factory, NEVER will take a single shot. To start using it probably it would to be repaired almost completely. So we have, in fact, a "killed" camera - and here I'm agreeing with Lizzie.

But for me the point here isn't the marketplace. These things (at least here) have little demand, and then the prices are low. That's why I saw radios throwed away - nobody wants them, except a few crazy guys like me.

The point, to me, is to accept or not such destruction of something.

Not following your logic, Martin. The marketplace largely dictates these decisions. If the VALUE of these items being converted to watches straps was high enough (in other words if they were SCARCE enough) then there would be no conversion. It's why you don't see a lot of intact P-51 mustangs being broken up for parts. Doesn't make economic sense.

 

[Zemke Fan]

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just can't get all that upset about this subject. I'm a collector of certain vintage things, have a few vintage items that I rotate into my wardrobe, listen to classic jazz, and watch old movies from time to time. But I know a lot of you guys breathe this stuff 24-7-365 and I respect that. I just think it helps to get some perspective on this kind of thing. Would I rather see an old car or pickup rust away in a field or be converted to a hot rod? Would it be wonderful if every old car in every farmer's field was restored to show room like condition? Hell yeah. But if its rust vs. hot rod. I'll take the hot rod option any time. Same dif with this leather stuff too in my book.

 

[Chas]

What the heck is someone supposed to do with hundreds (or thousands) of pistol holsters and Sam Browne belts??? How many of these same items do you think have been buried in landfills over the years? Tons of it. Not to mention vehicles, a/c, parts, weapons etc etc. All sent to Davy Jones' locker at the end of the war, from what I understand. The allies produced so much stuff that it boggles the mind. Then the war ended, and it's essentially trash, a lot of it.

Think about that scene in "The Best Days Of Our Lives" when the three guys are in a plane, flying over all the mothballed bombers that are being turned into prefab housing. This has been going on for some time, kids.

What's the big deal? It's just stuff. If it was all that vital to the preservation of history, it would all be in a museum. So someone has a few crates of them and they want to make some belts. So what? Free enterprise, n'est pas? What are they supposed to do with all this stuff? I say, more power to 'em. Make me a new wallet while you're at it.

 

[martinsantos]

Of course is just stuff - and not always these must have a place in a museum. Ever a stuff that here isn't so common, and sometimes can be pretty expensive. (And now I'm understanding why so many folks go to US and come back with lots of things! If this is so common and unexpensive, it can be a very good deal...)

My point is that is wrong to destroy something just because is old. If I accept this with one kind of thing, I would have to accept with everything else.

Let's see another example, more familiar to me. Here in some fine home decoration stores you can find big pannels with seals of old 78s records. Usually 20 to 40 seals. The original recordings were cut and just remaining the shellac under the seal, and these seals are pressed between two glasses. Historic stuff? No. Have we plenty of old records? Yes. The music was transcripted to CD or LP? Probably. But I still think it's something very stupid. Why use the original thing? When is so easy to reproduce?

By the way, once I saw in one of these pannels the seal of a pretty rare recording, from the very first series of Brazilian Victor, in 1926. There's no transcription to CD or LP, had only 1000 copies - and probably today there is less than 100 - if we are really lucky.

 

[Spitfire]

What the heck is someone supposed to do with hundreds (or thousands) of pistol holsters and Sam Browne belts??? How many of these same items do you think have been buried in landfills over the years? Tons of it. Not to mention vehicles, a/c, parts, weapons etc etc. All sent to Davy Jones' locker at the end of the war, from what I understand. The allies produced so much stuff that it boggles the mind. Then the war ended, and it's essentially trash, a lot of it.

Think about that scene in "The Best Days Of Our Lives" when the three guys are in a plane, flying over all the mothballed bombers that are being turned into prefab housing. This has been going on for some time, kids.

What's the big deal? It's just stuff. If it was all that vital to the preservation of history, it would all be in a museum. So someone has a few crates of them and they want to make some belts. So what? Free enterprise, n'est pas? What are they supposed to do with all this stuff? I say, more power to 'em. Make me a new wallet while you're at it.

If any of you guys throwing stuff out find a size 8 Pre-War Irvin - give me a buzz, eh?

 

[John in Covina]

The first question is does the person that owns an item have the right to use it in the way that they see fit? Personal property rights have a historic nature.

In the case of items that are considered surplus and or discarded and re-tasked?
Many items are already in the private collectors hands, those that want to save them already have, the others ones are in a way leftovers?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Anyone *can* do anything they want with anything they own. Nobody's arguing that they should be legally restrained from doing whatever they want. But just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you *should*, or that others are required to nod their assent and say "good idea."

The thing that I keep coming back to is the wastefulness of such "repurposing." There are plenty of leather scraps in the world that could be used to make "vintage looking" watch straps -- so why destroy a usable, functional item to make them? I'm not arguing these are invaluable one of a kind relics -- but they're items that could still be used for their intended purpose, so why not leave them for people who would like to use them for such purpose. The world is not in danger of being buried alive under the burden of war surplus holsters. There's no need to thin the herd for the greater good of humanity. So why destroy unnecessarily -- unless, I dunno, it's a way of subconsciously saying "ha ha ha, I might not have fought to save the world from tyranny, but I can sure take that generation's artifacts and turn them into kitschy crap. Now who's the Greatest?"

 

[Steven C P]

Pure wickedness perpetrated by phillistines ! I don't agree with it but have to admit that the straps do look good. I expect it is about the patination rather than a cheap trick of trying to buy into the heroism perhaps of those that may have used them in combat.
At least the US pilot jacket number one isn't a military issue jacket !

Steven.

 

[John in Covina]

The people that owned the surplus holsters obviously did not make a good enough attempt to sell the holsters to all of those consciensious collectors. They really must have been so surprised to be stuck with a pile of them when they didn't sell? Military surplus often comprises of well made items that don't sell very well because the public doesn't want them. The business people that bought them and held them and tried to sell them spent money on them. Every month they sit and don't sell costs them money. In order to get a return on their investment the holsters must sell. Chances are the government had these made in the tens of thousands, over time the people that would want to own one to use or just have on display already got theirs. So there is probably a significant portion of these holsters already in private hands, there will be a fair number around for historic purposes. While it would be wonderful to pass legislation to force every person that owns the gun it fits to have one of these holsters and legally require them to use it and care for it, my guess is that is not going to happen. Which means there is a pile of these holsters that are sitting a rotting in a warehouse some place. But instead of using them for some purpose it's better to have them sit in a warehouse someplace and deteriorate into useless dust?

 

[Pompidou]

Where is the line drawn, you have to ask. A WWII holster gets people up in arms. If a person were doing something with 60s-70s bell bottom jeans, would there be ire? 5.25" floppy discs? I'm going to have to basically agree with Fred - the value of the item in question should determine the reaction.

 

[LizzieMaine]

As far as I'm concerned, whether it's a holster or a pair of hippie pants is irrelevant. I don't need a holster myself -- I keep my gun in the nightstand drawer -- but if I did, I'd rather use a vintage one than some cheesy Chinese thing from Wal-Mart. It's the principle of using things for the purpose for which they were manufactured rather than chopping them into novelty junk that will likely end up in the landfill anyway that I'm thinking about.

There's an interesting comment in the discussion board post that was referenced in the very first post in this thread. Apparently one of the members of that group had approached the person in charge of this "repurposing" project and had offered to buy the jacket that was slated to be shredded into watch straps -- he basically asked the "repurposer" to name his price, and was flatly refused. That, to me, seems to point to motives other than a desire to recycle an item "nobody wants."

There's no mention in that original post of any involvement by owners of vast warehouse stock backing the project, desperate for a return on their lost investment. It seems to be just one guy with a pair of scissors who seems bound and determined to chop up old stuff just because he can. Maybe he can move on next to turning NOS Borsalinos into Jughead beanies, just because he can.

 

[martinsantos]

But sometimes the market value isn't a good way to evaluate a thing. Some objects have the value of a kiss - for some, it's well worth 1 million. To others, it doesn't mean anything.

For example, again, 78rpm records. Their usual price here is around 25 to 40 CENTS of dollar. (once I bought a box with 40, so I was able to pay around 15 cents each). Cheaper than the taxi I got to be back home. Probably the cheapest vintage thing you can find.

Al least to me, the true "value" with these records are much and much highter than the nominal 25 cents.

Where is the line drawn, you have to ask. A WWII holster gets people up in arms. If a person were doing something with 60s-70s bell bottom jeans, would there be ire? 5.25" floppy discs? I'm going to have to basically agree with Fred - the value of the item in question should determine the reaction.

 

[FRASER_NASH]

I actually like the straps they look good and I know this maker produces excellent quality items (I have one).

 

[John in Covina]

Yes it is a shame that they are not being used for there original purpose, but the chance they will be used for that purpose is very very low. So the leather now actually gets a use and that is bad.

My parents that came from Europe lived thru the Depression, my dad who fought in the US Army in Europe and my mom who lived under the oppression of the Nazis were both the type of people that hated waste and often reused retasked materials through out their lives. It was a lesson of make do and can do.

We are not talking about irreplaceable items, either linked to a historic person or some sort of Strattavarius violin. If they sit in a warehouse unused at some point they wind up in the land fill, here they get some type of honorable use before they get tossed.

A business lesson - in business when you buy stuff to sell - the operative word is SELL. This is where the profit incentive comes in and business stays in business.

A museum buys stuff to keep.

Investing too much value in the holster to be able to that? This is surplus non moving overstock and is not crown jewels or a Bing Crosby 78.

I guess it is a case of whose ox is gored here but not all trash is gold or one will wind up on that Horders TV show sometime.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The difference between "Make Do and Mend" and this stuff, though, is that one deals in essentials, and one deals in nonessentials. One is practical, the other is frivolous. As I said, you can find tons of leather scrap that isn't a usable wartime relic if your *real* interest is recycling something with no value. To destroy a usable item for frivolous reasons is the very opposite of a real wartime ethic, I'd think.

I have no interest in the "monetary or historic value" of the items in question -- I just think what this guy is doing is unnecessarily wasteful, especially when there's plenty of actual leather scrap trimmings that he could be using instead.

 

[John in Covina]

An analogy - National Geographic magazines fine mag great pictures superb articles. Some one has a collection going back to 1950 -61 years of great pictures and fine articles roughly 780 issues of sublime publishing. Time to move and no room at the new place. Try to get rid of these, one you won't get any money for them, no one will take them for free and you can't pay anyone to take them away except the trash haulers. Now it pains me to say this but the only use is to give them to grade school teachers so their students can cut out the pictures as a cut and paste exercise.

Sad to say but when you have stuff that you value and no one else does a certain reality will come knocking when the time comes to part with it.