or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What would this Louis Vuitton shoe good for ? is it considered as Dress shoe?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What would this Louis Vuitton shoe good for ? is it considered as Dress shoe? - Page 4

post #46 of 104
I see this guy every time I get into my elevator, walk down the street or go to a trendy part of town...
post #47 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imhoff View Post
Cannot wait for Louis Vuitton to release their Toilet Paper collection with their logo plastered all over it.

And when they do, I will post "after" shots in the creepy thread.
post #48 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by razl View Post
And when they do, I will post "after" shots in the creepy thread.

post #49 of 104
Tell me, Hermes-man....do you have a half sister / ex-gf / cousing by the name of Smooki?
post #50 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by hermes man View Post
honestly it look quite impressive , but I wonder when and for what can I wear it? and with what?

i take it that it is not suitable for formal or work since its too tacky and over the top but not like that matter since i am not a white collar worker

the design is inspired from Louis Vuitton's Fall/Winter 2010 Fashion Show

I can't imagine willingly wearing them.

I know people here tell you things like that are 'hideous', and that it has no impact on you. To be honest, I don't think they are hideous, the general approach - black shoe with pattern - is rather nice. The 'problem' is that the pattern is a brand logo.

Perhaps nobody has told you why that is a 'problem', so I will try to explain it. You mention on your blog that you 'don't need to be nouveau riche' to afford some of these clothes. That may be the case, but for shoes like these, you need to be nouveau riche to _wear_ them. Families that come from money don't talk about how much money they have. My grandfather was a fairly well off englishmen. He had five stock brokers so that none of them would know what he was worth. And he was upper-middle class - still a working man. A few decades ago, a tory politician was overheard in the U.K. putting down another politician with the snub 'he bought his own furniture'. Why was that a snub? Because if you really came from an important family, you don't buy furniture. You inherit it. If you were born rich, you don't worry that someone will not realize your rich. In fact it may be annoying. Rich north americans of your age like to dress as slobs and live in areas that are a little seedy, while they 'find themselves' and try to work in a creative industry.

People who grew up poor often like shoes like the ones you posted it. They don't understand the subtle signals from fine dress that people who grew up with it do. They don't know about leather quality or last elegance. They know that they want good shoes. They are still afraid other people will look down on them, so they want shoes that will force other people to recognize that they are not poor. So for them, the ideal shoes are not just expensive, they have the brand name written on the outside so that everyone else will know they are expensive.

Rappers wear a lot of clothing like this. They grew up poor, they have a little money now, and they want everyone to know that they are _not poor now_.

It is a desire that comes from insecurity. I understand it, because I felt the same way when I was 12. I had no idea what shirts actually looked good, so it was important that they had a little man on a horse with a mallet for playing an obscure british sport on, so that my classmates would also know it was a good shirt. Interestingly, I switched to a school in a much richer area after that, and all the kids had long hair and wanted to wear vintage ac/dc t-shirts.

My sense is that the brand love in asia is a little bit the same. They are areas that were pushed around, and those who have done well want to show rich europeans (and each other) that they have _arrived_. Of course it doesn't work on rich europeans, because they have dozens of ways of regulating class beyond what you can purchase.

Why did I write all this? I wasn't sure if you, and others in your position, understood why people here would not wear logo emblazoned goods - to them, it screams insecurity, which is never attractive. I realize that young women where you live may view it differently, and you probably would rather impress them then us. That said, you may run into social/business situations with north american/europeans, and it would be useful to know how and why to tone down visible branding etc.
post #51 of 104
Get a tattoo to match the shoes:

post #52 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktrp View Post
My sense is that the brand love in asia is a little bit the same. They are areas that were pushed around, and those who have done well want to show rich europeans (and each other) that they have _arrived_. Of course it doesn't work on rich europeans, because they have dozens of ways of regulating class beyond what you can purchase.
Ethnicity and logos aside,
this sounds quite like SF.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ktrp View Post
I wasn't sure if you, and others in your position, understood why people here would not wear logo emblazoned goods - to them, it screams insecurity, which is never attractive.
I would hope that one might avoid them
due to something being less than aesthetic about them.
It would, of course,
be the height of insecurity
to avoid logos for the reason you note.
Still, I agree insecurity isn't attractive.
Neither are logos.
post #53 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktrp View Post
I can't imagine willingly wearing them.

I know people here tell you things like that are 'hideous', and that it has no impact on you. To be honest, I don't think they are hideous, the general approach - black shoe with pattern - is rather nice. The 'problem' is that the pattern is a brand logo.

Perhaps nobody has told you why that is a 'problem', so I will try to explain it. You mention on your blog that you 'don't need to be nouveau riche' to afford some of these clothes. That may be the case, but for shoes like these, you need to be nouveau riche to _wear_ them. Families that come from money don't talk about how much money they have. My grandfather was a fairly well off englishmen. He had five stock brokers so that none of them would know what he was worth. And he was upper-middle class - still a working man. A few decades ago, a tory politician was overheard in the U.K. putting down another politician with the snub 'he bought his own furniture'. Why was that a snub? Because if you really came from an important family, you don't buy furniture. You inherit it. If you were born rich, you don't worry that someone will not realize your rich. In fact it may be annoying. Rich north americans of your age like to dress as slobs and live in areas that are a little seedy, while they 'find themselves' and try to work in a creative industry.

People who grew up poor often like shoes like the ones you posted it. They don't understand the subtle signals from fine dress that people who grew up with it do. They don't know about leather quality or last elegance. They know that they want good shoes. They are still afraid other people will look down on them, so they want shoes that will force other people to recognize that they are not poor. So for them, the ideal shoes are not just expensive, they have the brand name written on the outside so that everyone else will know they are expensive.

Rappers wear a lot of clothing like this. They grew up poor, they have a little money now, and they want everyone to know that they are _not poor now_.

It is a desire that comes from insecurity. I understand it, because I felt the same way when I was 12. I had no idea what shirts actually looked good, so it was important that they had a little man on a horse with a mallet for playing an obscure british sport on, so that my classmates would also know it was a good shirt. Interestingly, I switched to a school in a much richer area after that, and all the kids had long hair and wanted to wear vintage ac/dc t-shirts.

My sense is that the brand love in asia is a little bit the same. They are areas that were pushed around, and those who have done well want to show rich europeans (and each other) that they have _arrived_. Of course it doesn't work on rich europeans, because they have dozens of ways of regulating class beyond what you can purchase.

Why did I write all this? I wasn't sure if you, and others in your position, understood why people here would not wear logo emblazoned goods - to them, it screams insecurity, which is never attractive. I realize that young women where you live may view it differently, and you probably would rather impress them then us. That said, you may run into social/business situations with north american/europeans, and it would be useful to know how and why to tone down visible branding etc.

what u say is true in many ways...
post #54 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by razl View Post
And when they do, I will post "after" shots in the creepy thread.


Wouldn't be able to tell what an "after" shot looks like since the LV monogram looks like shit anyways.
post #55 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by hermes man View Post
what u say is true in many ways...

So what you're saying is that you're a self-made man? Recently so as well...

What exactly is it that you do?
post #56 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerP View Post
So what you're saying is that you're a self-made man? Recently so as well... What exactly is it that you do?
How is that even relevant to the conversation? If hermes man likes a pair of shoes, he can buy them -- but we think they're not the greatest, and we've clearly conveyed that to him. Getting beyond that (and questioning his occupation, income etc) is just in very poor taste.
post #57 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metlin View Post
How is that even relevant to the conversation?

If hermes man likes a pair of shoes, he can buy them -- but we think they're not the greatest, and we've clearly conveyed that to him. Getting beyond that (and questioning his occupation, income etc) is just in very poor taste.
+1

But if he gets the shoes,
inquiring minds want to know.
post #58 of 104
Thread Starter 
ive got it and it costed 30% more in our local boutique compared to the website ... (around $1300)





it was money well spent i am totally satisfied with the shoe..

but i still coudlt find the MADE IN WHERE label.. but i am guessing its made in italy like other LV shoes..

anyway this was the second expensive LV shoe in the boutique there was a good year constructed shoe called Infinity Derby , cost around $1400... looks too old for my taste tho..

post #59 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imhoff View Post
Cannot wait for Louis Vuitton to release their Toilet Paper collection with their logo plastered all over it.

That is very funny and you will sure wait for a very longer time than you can ever imagine.
post #60 of 104
Wow...

I did not see that coming at all.

He actually purchased those ugly ass things.

This guy never ceases to amaze me!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What would this Louis Vuitton shoe good for ? is it considered as Dress shoe?