or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb Edward
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

John Lobb Edward

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
I need some help here.

I bought a pair of John Lobb Paris stated as 1st Choice Discontinued item from Bespoke England. It is a pair of Edward in Plum Musuem Calf. There are some slight polish imperfections which I am not fussy about. What really troubled me was the inside of the shoe. Per the pictures, on the inside of the shoe, the left and right side of the leather are 'cut' hence exposing the suede so to speak.

My questions are
1. Anyone seen this or knows why this is done? I have seen R and S being stamped but not stripping the leather upper on the inside of a shoe.
2. Would you return the shoe if you were in my position?

Am grateful for your comments and opinions.



post #2 of 10

I want this shoe. 

post #3 of 10
It appears the shoe is partially lined and the purple you see is the flesh-side (underside) of the upper leather.

That is a creative decision the people at Lobb/Northampton have taken. You might like that or you might not, but it is not a production fault.
post #4 of 10

maybe its more breathable this way

post #5 of 10
"Creative decision?!" What is being created beyond an opportunity to make more profit with less expense (labour and material)?
post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

"Creative decision?!" What is being created beyond an opportunity to make more profit with less expense (labour and material)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

That's always been my policy--don't criticize or bad mouth any other maker's work.



post #7 of 10
Wrong again...I wasn't criticizing the maker, I was criticizing your choice of words and the misleading impression they leave...if not intentionally at least indifferently.
post #8 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

I wasn't criticizing the maker,

So you were not inferring that the partial lining was decided on purely economic grounds and was not based on a stylistic choice? If you were saying this partial lining was solely done to save a few pence, that would not have been a criticism but a compliment, or at least value-free?

I'm personally not keen on a partial- or no lining for dress shoe; but I adore unlined loafers and boots with an unlined leg, they are divinely comfortable. I did say deliberately "You might like that or not" and, in this particular case, I include myself in the 'nots'.

Lobb/Northampton dress shoes are usually fully lined (in tan). Here they tried something different with a purple lining and showing off the purple flesh side of the leather. It might not have come off particular well, but at least they tried. And for that, they deserve credit and not abuse.
post #9 of 10
What I was inferring or not inferring is no more relevant than your throw-away "You might like that or not."

If I wanted to critique the design choices I would have spoken to those issues.

For that matter, I have never said that any maker should be exempt from criticism. You yourself are quick to criticize, even admitted students and people who are, at least trying...and as often as not from a perspective of ignorance. I don't want to be like that, that's all...hence my "policy."

But if, through happenstance or in the course of a conversation (I'm just as flawed and human as the next guy), it plays out that way, I don't care if my remarks are seen as criticism. I'll own it.

Rather, it is just my policy to speak to, and about, technique and objective reasons why a particular approach is flawed or misunderstood. Those are the salient issues in any event....all the rest is misdirection.

If it comes to it, I don't care one way or the other if a loafer is lined or not, although I wouldn't do it myself...not and charge the kind of money that some high end makers charge for unlined. I understand it is a "style."

But objectively, turning the unlined fleshside to the foot does not guaranteed that the shoes will breathe any better but it does mean that the interior will pick up and hold dirt and grime more quickly and more tenaciously than a shoe that is lined.

.
--
Edited by DWFII - 9/2/16 at 8:47pm
post #10 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

But objectively, turning the unlined fleshside to the foot does not guaranteed that the shoes will breathe any better but it does mean that the interior will pick up and hold dirt and grime more quickly and more tenaciously than a shoe that is lined.

 

makes sense. thanks

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb Edward