or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Shoe Damage Report & Shoe P0rn Central - Part II
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shoe Damage Report & Shoe P0rn Central - Part II - Page 1168

post #17506 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis XIV View Post

I might have overreacted, but calling my post, in which I suggest to someone to wear his (at least) 24 pairs of shoes instead of buying even more, nonsense, made my blood boil a little.
I hate watching people collect things which are meant to be used in large numbers only to use them far too little or not at all.
I consider wearing a shoe only once a year a waste of time, material and worksmanship because it's very likely the shoe will outlive me without myself getting the better part out of it beforehands and that is not what the craftsman made it for.

As for Charles, sure we don't know and never will.
But you said it yourself, it's a pair of Lobbs, they have at least one bespoke last of him, so no need for excessive fittings.
In the time they have added the patches and resoled the shoes they have for surely replaced the foot bed as well.
I'm pretty sure Charles does not wear his clothes patched because of laziness, he is much too vain for it to be true, but because he knows about and lives up to his role as a representative.
Also I think all three examples shown above look very nicely, the pieces have obviously experienced a lot and have a unique story to them.

No offense intended. I just had to poke a bit of fun at the idea that 24 pairs of shoes is too many...when it is stated on Style Forum. This is the land of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder! And, ultimately, there is nothing wrong with that. Many visit this site daily and spend considerable amounts of time researching, recording (thru photos), then composing extensive essays about our loves for items that show our personal style. In this world, there is no such thing as "too many".

To be clear, I DO agree that these items NEED to be worn. As an addict of Vintage Shoes (mainly 1920's- 1950's), it pains me to see a pair of wonderful shoes that still survives, yet sits in a closet and is never worn. What a waste! The question is, "How often must an item be worn/ used in order for it to get the respect it deserves as a work of art"?

For example, I have these 1940's Stetson alligator Oxford Captoes.





I LOVE these shoes. 100% handmade and unique. MEANT to be worn, to be sure. NOW, when the heck do I wear them? In a year, I may wear them 2x. They aren't a "regular rotation" shoe, but rather an attention grabber and conversation topic. Twice a year is fine for them. They are quite content to sit in vintage shoe trees and bathe in conditioner for 6 months, then get worn that one time... then repeat. They will one day go to my son (if they fit him), or to some other shoe lover (if they do not).
post #17507 of 19128
Here are 2 more pairs that I hope illustrate my thoughts on the matter.

Both are spring/ summer shoes, and both are really wonderful, I think.






1940's Ventilated utip spectators & 1940's perforated captoe specs.

Can one REALLY wear these on a regular basis? More importantly, did the MAKER really expect that they would be worn often? I believe that the whole idea was to create a "Special Occasion" type of footwear. Something that would be revealed rarely... but would get the attention it deserves because of it.
post #17508 of 19128
I think we should make a distinction between RTW items, and true bespoke items.

Specifically, the member who's collection was criticized seemed to be full of RTW shoes. How sentimental / philosophical can we get over a manufactured product, regardless of it's material quality?

As an artist, I can say that art is made for the layman, not for the artist. You understand that anything you make will be at the mercy of it's audience, for better or worse. That is the price of doing what you love...
post #17509 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by isshinryu101 View Post


No offense intended. I just had to poke a bit of fun at the idea that 24 pairs of shoes is too many...when it is stated on Style Forum. This is the land of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder! And, ultimately, there is nothing wrong with that. Many visit this site daily and spend considerable amounts of time researching, recording (thru photos), then composing extensive essays about our loves for items that show our personal style. In this world, there is no such thing as "too many".

To be clear, I DO agree that these items NEED to be worn. As an addict of Vintage Shoes (mainly 1920's- 1950's), it pains me to see a pair of wonderful shoes that still survives, yet sits in a closet and is never worn. What a waste! The question is, "How often must an item be worn/ used in order for it to get the respect it deserves as a work of art"?

For example, I have these 1940's Stetson alligator Oxford Captoes.





I LOVE these shoes. 100% handmade and unique. MEANT to be worn, to be sure. NOW, when the heck do I wear them? In a year, I may wear them 2x. They aren't a "regular rotation" shoe, but rather an attention grabber and conversation topic. Twice a year is fine for them. They are quite content to sit in vintage shoe trees and bathe in conditioner for 6 months, then get worn that one time... then repeat. They will one day go to my son (if they fit him), or to some other shoe lover (if they do not).

 

 

Following up to what I said earlier, I do have to admit that it is a lot of fun to see shoes which are that old, and are still in nearly new condition.  Those would never fit into my rotation, but they are beautiful and really fun to look at!

post #17510 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by isshinryu101 View Post


1940's Ventilated utip spectators & 1940's perforated captoe specs.

Can one REALLY wear these on a regular basis? More importantly, did the MAKER really expect that they would be worn often? I believe that the whole idea was to create a "Special Occasion" type of footwear. Something that would be revealed rarely... but would get the attention it deserves because of it.

 

That's another good point to consider.  If an item is meant to be used sparingly, then sparing use is still use.

post #17511 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by JubeiSpiegel View Post

I think we should make a distinction between RTW items, and true bespoke items.

Specifically, the member who's collection was criticized seemed to be full of RTW shoes. How sentimental / philosophical can we get over a manufactured product, regardless of it's material quality?

As an artist, I can say that art is made for the layman, not for the artist. You understand that anything you make will be at the mercy of it's audience, for better or worse. That is the price of doing what you love...

 

 

For me, the sentimentality takes years to accumulate.  It comes from the memories of the events that I wore the shoes to, and they almost seem like a relic of the past, which have testified to my major events in my life.  For example, I have a pair of shoes that were worn regularly for about an 8 year period, before I "retired" them.  However, I enjoy keeping them in my closet because I can take them out and reminisce over where they've been and when I wore them.  They were on my feet when I graduated high school, graduated college, graduated from graduate school, at both of my sister's weddings, at my rehearsal dinner, at friends weddings, at every job interview I've ever attended, and pretty much every other time I had reason to wear a suit.  I can't bear the thought of getting rid of them now, even though I don't wear them anymore.  They still have their original soles, and they are so stretched out that they don't even fit me properly at this point.  But, they still look good, in spite of being RTW and rather inexpensive.  I didn't pay much for them, but they are hand-made in Spain, blake-stitched, deer skin oxfords.  I got them before I knew much about fine footwear, and now I probably wouldn't give them a second look in a store, but they sure were nice to an 18 year old kid way back when I bought them.

post #17512 of 19128
Well, many of my pairs are seasonal, meaning they get alot of use part of the year, but then gets stowed away for some months. I try to use most shoes equally much over the year. Having said that though, there are favourites of course which get more wear than other pairs.
post #17513 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis XIV View Post

Some
Charles does it right

He wore these again the other day to his great friend van Cutsem's funeral.
post #17514 of 19128
The POW's parsimony in some areas and extravagance in others is fascinating.
post #17515 of 19128

^^ He would fit in well here.

 

What an excellent discussion.

 

Personally I am perfectly sentimental about many of my RTW shoes - spectators in particular.  But they get worn all year round, at least once a month.  And lest we forget, Isshinryu's beauties up there were all off the shelf at one point.  He loves them enough to collect, keep and occasionally wear them.  I'm sure that would satisfy the artist, or his memory, no end.

post #17516 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post


He wore these again the other day to his great friend van Cutsem's funeral.

 

 

How the heck to you all keep track of which shoes he is wearing?  I just Googled photos of the funeral, and I see some pictures of PC's shoes, but it would never dawn on me to have looked without your prompt.

post #17517 of 19128
...now that we've digressed to the dapper Charles, here's a quote on his wardrobe maintenance:

'Prince Charles Is a Clotheshorse Who Gets His Shoelaces Ironed

Prince Charles employs 133 staff to look after him and Camilla, more than 60 of them domestics: chefs, cooks, footmen, housemaids, gardeners, chauffeurs, cleaners, and his three personal valets—gentleman’s gentlemen—whose sole responsibility is the care of their royal master’s extensive wardrobe and choosing what he is to wear on any particular day. A serving soldier polishes the prince’s boots and shoes every day—he has 50 handmade pairs each costing over £800 [sic] by Lobb of St James’s—and a housemaid washes his underwear as soon as it is discarded. Nothing Charles or Camilla wears is ever allowed near a washing machine. Particular attention is paid to handkerchiefs, which are monogrammed and again all hand-washed, as it was found that when they were sent to a laundry, some would go missing—as souvenirs. HRH’s suits, of which he has 60, cost more than £3,000 each, and his shirts, all handmade, cost £350 a time (he has more than 200), while his collar stiffeners are solid gold or silver. Charles’s valets also iron the laces of his shoes whenever they are taken off.'

More juice here:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/30/not-in-front-of-the-corgis-juiciest-bits-from-royal-expos.html?fb_ref=article&fb_source=home_oneline
post #17518 of 19128

None of HRH's personal valets are "serving soldiers".  There is no taxpayer-funded post in the British Army of "boot polisher to the Prince of Wales".  They do often come from a military background, though.  The only one I ever spoke to was ex Royal Navy.

post #17519 of 19128
Quote:
Originally Posted by VRaivio View Post

...now that we've digressed to the dapper Charles, here's a quote on his wardrobe maintenance:

'Prince Charles Is a Clotheshorse Who Gets His Shoelaces Ironed

Prince Charles employs 133 staff to look after him and Camilla, more than 60 of them domestics: chefs, cooks, footmen, housemaids, gardeners, chauffeurs, cleaners, and his three personal valets—gentleman’s gentlemen—whose sole responsibility is the care of their royal master’s extensive wardrobe and choosing what he is to wear on any particular day. A serving soldier polishes the prince’s boots and shoes every day—he has 50 handmade pairs each costing over £800 [sic] by Lobb of St James’s—and a housemaid washes his underwear as soon as it is discarded. Nothing Charles or Camilla wears is ever allowed near a washing machine. Particular attention is paid to handkerchiefs, which are monogrammed and again all hand-washed, as it was found that when they were sent to a laundry, some would go missing—as souvenirs. HRH’s suits, of which he has 60, cost more than £3,000 each, and his shirts, all handmade, cost £350 a time (he has more than 200), while his collar stiffeners are solid gold or silver. Charles’s valets also iron the laces of his shoes whenever they are taken off.'

More juice here:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/30/not-in-front-of-the-corgis-juiciest-bits-from-royal-expos.html?fb_ref=article&fb_source=home_oneline

 

 

Very interesting.  I think the figure that surprises me the most is 200 shirts.  His dress is always so conservative when I see him in pictures that it seems impossible to fathom 200 shirts could ever be remotely useful.  Other figures just make me roll my eyes, but don't entirely surprise me.

 

If his shoes are shined every day (I assume each pair is simply shined before each wear), it doesn't surprise me that they would start to look so rough.  The poor leather is being suffocated from overuse of shoe care products.

post #17520 of 19128

I suspect there's quite a bit of exaggeration.  My guess would be that they are buffed before each wear, and polished when needed.  Just like the rest of us?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Shoe Damage Report & Shoe P0rn Central - Part II