Originally Posted by hermes man
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.