Quality has to be expensive, right?
This 12-year-old pink T, who is looking a bit aged and worn has been in on my back on a 100-mile trek in the Himalayas, been washed in rivers and rocks, survived the give-away tosses, old laundromats, questionable fashion uses, and four moves. As you can see, despite the aging stretch (like it’s owner) it’s aging nicely. So well in fact, that I began to ask what is going on with the company that made it? It’s 100% cotton, made in Mariana Islands.
Back in the day, I spent under $20 at a retail store to make it part of my wardrobe. Folded nicely, next to the blue, black and white stacks, it looked practical, comfortable and durable, and like the little black dress, a pink T is almost army issue for every woman.
So why on earth would something of this caliber stop being produced? Obviously, I’m no Carrie Bradshaw, but it seems a missed opportunity to have something like this disappear completely from the mainsteam retail store shelf. Was it because the company that manufactured it had to continue its sweatshop labor conditions to produce high quality? Was it because of a $20 law suit that the company stopped producing 100% cotton shirts? Would I have bought more from this retailer in recent years had I seen the same attention to quality?
You bet.
Would I have paid slightly more?
Definitely.
Because my experience with the garment produced satisfaction and trust.
Sustainability needs to incorporate this attention to quality in every product produced. Built-in obsolescence is the norm, it seems, in just about every cheap consumer product. What if a bold company made this kind of claim to a plain old T – (preferably in organic cotton) under $30.
Quality…That’s something we need to believe in if we want to live more sustainably.
Add your comments