H.Johnson
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,562
- Location
- Midlands, UK
I have issue with the header to this thread - '...can anyone get it right?'
What does this mean? Are only jackets that are close replicas of originals of any interest? Is it not worth owning a jacket that deviates from the original?
Not to me, anyway. I think that early 'reproductions' (some are no treally close enough to call them that) are of interest from a historical point of view. If you like, a memory of a time (1970s and 80s) before we became obsessed with 'authenticity' and 'accuracy' (whatever those terms may mean). In short, before there were 'jacket nerds' and 'stitch Germany's WWII-era leaderships' as Ken Calder used to call them.
I call the early reproductions that nobody wants 'orphan jackets' and there are just as many interesting early 'Irvins' as there are A-2s. I think we should honour these early attempts at reproducing such jackets, as we would any other early examples of a trend.
Just my opinion, of course.
What does this mean? Are only jackets that are close replicas of originals of any interest? Is it not worth owning a jacket that deviates from the original?
Not to me, anyway. I think that early 'reproductions' (some are no treally close enough to call them that) are of interest from a historical point of view. If you like, a memory of a time (1970s and 80s) before we became obsessed with 'authenticity' and 'accuracy' (whatever those terms may mean). In short, before there were 'jacket nerds' and 'stitch Germany's WWII-era leaderships' as Ken Calder used to call them.
I call the early reproductions that nobody wants 'orphan jackets' and there are just as many interesting early 'Irvins' as there are A-2s. I think we should honour these early attempts at reproducing such jackets, as we would any other early examples of a trend.
Just my opinion, of course.


