or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Need an expert eye
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need an expert eye

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
I need some help here:  I am trying to figure out if these are the same shoes. I think they are except there is a difference in the heel. In the second photo it is a traditional heel. In the first, it looks like the heel and the sole are all one piece. I would think it would be harder to repair the heel when it is that way, correct? Apart from the practical, what about use of either heel. Is one more appropriate for certain situations than the other? Or does the heel not really make a difference. I plan to use them dressed down with jeans for a Saturday at the office (unfortunately, an all too often event) or for casual elegant on a Friday or a party. Any thoughts? Photo 1 Photo 2
post #2 of 10
Quote:
I am trying to figure out if these are the same shoes. I think they are except there is a difference in the heel. In the second photo it is a traditional heel. In the first, it looks like the heel and the sole are all one piece.
I think you're just having trouble seeing detail in the Saks pictures. The shoes are identical, including the heels and soles. However, the Saks listing describes them as having a rubber sole, while it appears to me that the sole is leather. Someone else (Joe?) may be more intimately familiar with this shoe.
Quote:
I plan to use them dressed down with jeans for a Saturday at the office (unfortunately, an all too often event) or for casual elegant on a Friday or a party. Any thoughts?
They'll certainly work for the latter. As for the former, there are those amongst us who dismiss the loafers-and-jeans combo as being too "Euro-trash," but I'm not one of them. I think these would look fine with a pair of good jeans, especially if you go for the brown instead of the black.
post #3 of 10
Quote:
I think you're just having trouble seeing detail in the Saks pictures. The shoes are identical, including the heels and soles. However, the Saks listing describes them as having a rubber sole, while it appears to me that the sole is leather. Someone else (Joe?) may be more intimately familiar with this shoe.
I disagree with this assessment. The loafer in the Saks picture seems to have a molded rubber sole, similar to what you might see on a Prada Sport or a Cole Haan loafer, while the Neimans picture seems to have the more traditional sole.
Quote:
They'll certainly work for the latter. As for the former, there are those amongst us who dismiss the loafers-and-jeans combo as being too "Euro-trash," but I'm not one of them. I think these would look fine with a pair of good jeans, especially if you go for the brown instead of the black.
This one one of those rare occasions where I'll have to disagree with pstoller. I just think that slim loafers just don't look good contrasted against the weight and volume of jeans, unless the jeans are very slim - and jeans that are too tight are, to my prejudiced eye - the calling card of Eurotrash (although recently, a great number of Eurotrash seem to have adapted a vamped up version of the skater-boi look. Old school Eurotrash, especially those from Eastern Europe and Germans, still stick with the old stawart.) If you must, get the Saks version. At least the molded sole will give it a sportier look. I've harped on this enough. I promise - no more rants about Eurotrash are forthcoming.
post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 
LA Guy, I know you tend to a bit of a curmugeon when it comes to loafers (All right, wear them if you absolutely must (VBG)) so I was interested to hear your thoughts. What's your thinking on the molded-rubber sole over the traditional heel (if indeed it is different than the other)? Are you thinking that loafers should be used in only extremely casual sporty events and the moulded rubber-plastic model works better for that? I live in the Caribbean and wear loafers often, as they are the best way to combat the heat and humidity, especially when paired with tropical weight wool trousers.
post #5 of 10
I know that I'm now straying from the original query, but how do you guys feel about wearing Gucci loafers (the classic silver bit variety in black) with a pair of slim-fitting jeans? I guess I haven't noticed my not so slow descent into Eurotrash hell--it's a look I often employ.
post #6 of 10
I have no doubt that it is the identical model in both pictures. In the Saks photograph the shadow merges with the dark sole, giving the impression that its one of those shoes where sole and heal flow into each other without a waist. The roundness of the sole edge makes me believe it is a rubber sole: but it is stitched on or cemented not moulded. It started life as a sheet of rubber and not as a handful of granules like sneaker soles. The description of the Saks model is wrong: it is not a "Penny" but a "Venetian" loafer. A penny loafer has a strap with a cutout across the vamp; a Venetian loafer has a completely undecorated vamp. Whether a loafers is smart or casual is very much a question of personal preference. I think the overall look; in particular the toe shape decides whether a shoe is elegant or casual.
post #7 of 10
Quote:
LA Guy, I know you tend to a bit of a curmugeon when it comes to loafers
Actually, I am a bit of a curmudgeon about lots of things. I actually think that loafers make good summer shoes. Their low heel and slim shape complements billowy, lightweight linen or cotton pants. They can look good with summer weight suits. Its only when guys wear these loafers with winter-weight pants with full breaks and cuffs that I start to foam. And when guys wear this lightweight, rather delicate, leisure activity shoe with jeans, which see their origin in workwear and are supposed to be heavy and durable, I see this as indisputable evidence of sartorial ignorance. Yes, I know that lots of "better" men's stores advocate this look. But they are catering to the rich and ignorant.
post #8 of 10
Quote:
This one one of those rare occasions where I'll have to disagree with pstoller.
Well, of course. I had you in mind when I said, "there are those amongst us who dismiss the loafers-and-jeans combo..."
Quote:
...when guys wear this lightweight, rather delicate, leisure activity shoe with jeans, which see their origin in workwear and are supposed to be heavy and durable, I see this as indisputable evidence of sartorial ignorance.
Regardless of their origin, jeans are now habitually worn for lightweight leisure activity. Three-figure designer jeans hand-stitched from premium selvedge denim, in particular, are hardly "workwear" in the blue-collar sense. (Besides, the casual elegance of a tux shirt with jeans is pretty much the nail in the coffin of the "original purpose" argument.) Thus, I think one can be sartorially savvy even if one wears something other than trainers or boots with one's jeans. Of course, some cuts and materials are dressier than others: ultra-distressed flares are going to look stupid with shiny new Ferragamos. Still, I see no reason why a decent pair of Helmut Lang jeans can't be worn with, say, a pair of Tod's driving loafers. You don't have to speak English with an accent and a sneer to pull it off.
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Still, I see no reason why a decent pair of Helmut Lang jeans can't be worn with, say, a pair of Tod's driving loafers.
Okay, I'll concede this point, and also your previously one about the "original purpose" argument, as you put it. Still, you'll have to admit that the accent and the sneer better accessorize this look than typical "American" good looks would.
post #10 of 10
Quote:
Of course, some cuts and materials are dressier than others: ultra-distressed flares are going to look stupid with shiny new Ferragamos. Still, I see no reason why a decent pair of Helmut Lang jeans can't be worn with, say, a pair of Tod's driving loafers. You don't have to speak English with an accent and a sneer to pull it off.
I'd actually take that a step further and say that there are some loafers that ONLY look good with natty jeans. An example from my closet is a pair of black patent leather driving mocs by Tod's. Oddly, the current GQ features those shoes erroneously as "formal" shoes. I haven't seen them in an a store since summer 2001, when I bought mine on clearance. Oh, and the accent does help. Peace, JG
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Need an expert eye