Are these considered square toe shoes?



Sanguis Mortuum said:

It seems that every single source on the internet agrees with exactly what I said, along with every single thread or post I've read on this forum since joining almost 4 years ago. I have never seen anyone ever say that the name wing-tip refers to anything other than the shape of the toe-cap, so I would really love for you to be able to link to any kind of reputable source to back up your statement to the contrary.

Click to expand...

you didn't say that before, sorry.

please reread the post of liquidus, chogall and me. than read your post, wtf.

many thanks.



harvey_birdman said:

Sanguis Mortuum is correct on the matter of wingtips. I hereby declare him the winner.

Click to expand...

congrats

To the OP: if you're in college and are a bit intimidated/worried about wearing wingtips or brogues or oxfords, etc, then just get a nice pair of penny loafers or boat shoes. This is a nice way to dress up your shoes a bit while still keeping things young and not too formal/serious. I'd also suggest looking into a suede chukka or a more versatile ankle boot.

Once you get more comfortable with nicer shoes/develop an eye for them, then you can move into more formal footwear. No reason to rush in when it doesn't sound like you have much use for a formal shoe anyway.



fritzl said:

please reread the post of liquidus, chogall and me. than read your post, wtf.

Click to expand...

I think it's you that needs to reread the conversation.

1. Liquidus made the original quote that broguing "refers to the broguing of the leather, not the shape of the toe" (correct)
2. Chogall then replied "no" (incorrect)
3. jrd617 then replied "fail" (correct)
4. You then replied "not at all" (incorrect)
5. I corrected you.



harvey_birdman said:

Sanguis Mortuum is correct on the matter of wingtips. I hereby declare him the winner.

Click to expand...

Don't forget me!!!!!!! I gave a concurring opinion. Wingtip matters are serious business.

OP, for college, those shoes are fine. Wear them well until they reach the end of their usefulness. No one is going to judge you for wearing them; most people are ignorant of shoe bylaws. Remember that balmoral wingtips (those with closed lacing) don't always look so great with jeans and the like. Blucher wingtips tend to look better in a casual context. The shoes you have pictured are bluchers, though they are not wingtips, as you might have already surmised.

If you wear mostly jeans and casual pants, then I recommend you stick to casual footwear. Once you stray into trouser and suit territory, then you're going to want something more formal.



Samovar McGee said:

If you wear mostly jeans and casual pants, then I recommend you stick to casual footwear. Once you stray into trouser and suit territory, then you're going to want something more formal.

Click to expand...

I think a good first shoe would be a cap-toe oxford in brown suede. Formal enough to wear with a suit (although not to interviews, of course) yet also casual enough to wear with jeans (as I'm doing today in fact).

jrd617 said:

harvey_birdman said:

Sanguis Mortuum is correct on the matter of wingtips. I hereby declare him the winner.

Click to expand...

Don't forget me!!!!!!! I gave a concurring opinion. Wingtip matters are serious business.

Click to expand...

Your post was technically flawless but failed to showcase the exquisite presentation and je ne sais quos that is the mark of a true champion and was present in Sang's post. You receive an Honourable Mention, and a Certificate of Attendance.



Sanguis Mortuum said:

I think it's you that needs to reread the conversation.
1. Liquidus made the original quote that broguing "refers to the broguing of the leather, not the shape of the toe" (correct)
2. Chogall then replied "no" (incorrect)
3. jrd617 then replied "fail" (correct)
4. You then replied "not at all" (incorrect)
5. I corrected you.

Click to expand...

I can still refer to a shoe as being wing tip without it having any actual broguing.

For example, I would call this a wing tip, and ugly, but it has no broguing where the actual wing part is.
http://www.vanlier.nl/nl/collectie/original/12/637

It's basically just a detail in the leather of the toe cap/vamp.

Sanguis Mortuum said:

I think it's you that needs to reread the conversation.
1. Liquidus made the original quote that broguing "refers to the broguing of the leather, not the shape of the toe" (correct)
2. Chogall then replied "no" (incorrect)
3. jrd617 then replied "fail" (correct)
4. You then replied "not at all" (incorrect)
5. I corrected you.

Click to expand...

technical descriptions. wingtip is better described as the shape of the toe cap piece cut than the 'broguing' of the leather. you could call wingtip with full perforations as full brogue, but then where do long-wing, U shaped wingtip, etc, fit in the normal full, semi, quarter brogue scale?



Axel Ferguson said:

I can still refer to a shoe as being wing tip without it having any actual broguing.

For example, I would call this a wing tip, and ugly, but it has no broguing where the actual wing part is.
http://www.vanlier.nl/nl/collectie/original/12/637

It's basically just a detail in the leather of the toe cap/vamp.

Click to expand...

chogall said:

wingtip is better described as the shape of the toe cap piece cut than the 'broguing' of the leather.

Click to expand...

Ok, I did actually say that in my previous post but I see that what Liquidus originally said is technically slightly wrong, though I'm sure everyone still knew what he meant, he just worded it badly.

Weren't we just pedantically hammering on technicalities for fun here anyway?

Lets make a Venn diagram

Most wingtips are brogued
Not all brogues are wingtips
All square toes are ugly



GasparddeColigny said:

Lets make a Venn diagram
Most wingtips are brogued
Not all brogues are wingtips
All square toes are ugly

Click to expand...

noice

btw, not only is sanguis correct (although reasonably straying when it came to referring to the OP), fritzl you are an ubelievable dick.



Sanguis Mortuum said:

Ok, I did actually say that in my previous post but I see that what Liquidus originally said is technically slightly wrong, though I'm sure everyone still knew what he meant, he just worded it badly.

Click to expand...

that's what i said.