mimo
Pernicious Enabler
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2012
- Messages
- 7,725
- Reaction score
- 5,256
Amen.Informed...as opposed to deliberately ignorant...choices--that's the key.
Last edited:
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Amen.Informed...as opposed to deliberately ignorant...choices--that's the key.
There is room in my wardrobe for HL and GY shoes alike.
Quote:
Well thats just the thing, isn't it? What you're saying is basically begging the question. Just because the cosmetics aren't in place for someone like yourself, then it doesn't follow that they aren't in place for everyone else either. Just you stipulating that "such nuances don't bother a person and hence that the cosmetics don't matter", doesn't make it so. Also, that for example G&G are only marginally technically better than shoes at a tenth of the cost (say, Meermin for example) is also not the whole truth. Even if this was true, and G&G were technically marginally better than Meermin (which I don't believe for a second, by the way), then you are forgetting, or make it seem as though you are forgetting, every other variable that makes a shoe cost more than others.
Or are you really saying that apart from strictly subjective features of a shoe (last shape, styling, finishing etc) that a G&G shoe is almost as "good" as a shoe from Meermin?
Well thats just the thing, isn't it? What you're saying is basically begging the question. Just because the cosmetics aren't in place for someone like yourself, then it doesn't follow that they aren't in place for everyone else either. Just you stipulating that "such nuances don't bother a person and hence that the cosmetics don't matter", doesn't make it so. Also, that for example G&G are only marginally technically better than shoes at a tenth of the cost (say, Meermin for example) is also not the whole truth. Even if this was true, and G&G were technically marginally better than Meermin (which I don't believe for a second, by the way), then you are forgetting, or make it seem as though you are forgetting, every other variable that makes a shoe cost more than others.
Or are you really saying that apart from strictly subjective features of a shoe (last shape, styling, finishing etc) that a G&G shoe is almost as "good" as a shoe from Meermin?
Quote:
Of course I do. Oh well, I don't want to get further into this discussion than whats been going on the last few pages. To each his own, I guess. I'll leave it at that.
I just think its a shame that so many of this forum's members have crappy G&G shoes in their wardrobes.
Of course I do. Oh well, I don't want to get further into this discussion than whats been going on the last few pages. To each his own, I guess. I'll leave it at that.
I just think its a shame that so many of this forum's members have crappy G&G shoes in their wardrobes.
In defense of esthetics, it is a shame that the shoe purists / gurus give such little credit to such things. Are we not on SF because we have equal part love for not just quality, but for style as well?
As an artist, if i painted something, and the majority of the consideration was given to the quality of my materials and the canvas used, i would be saddened. It means my skill, and the emotion / message i was trying to convey in the content, had little impact. It is something i see all the time, people do not value the visuals. They are usually taken for granted, even though so few people can do them well.
I'm not saying it's a completely comparable example, but there is something to be said at the disregard for the pre-production work on a shoe. I would expect that plenty of work goes into shoe designing and last making. There is skill & talent involved in those processes as well i would also assume.
I can look at a GG shoe and enjoy it simply for it's lines / shape, it's design, and the emotion it is trying to convey. There is nothing wrong with that, not everyone can make a good looking shoe, and it should be acceptable to enjoy these things as well i think...
^^ Interesting observation. I always thought the Deco was a bit silly (sue me!), but when I saw them in person in the shop, they don't seem so crazy. G&G's lasts really are something to behold, toe puff irregularities notwithstanding...
One thing that people seems to forget that there's been a large and active aftermarket selling and reselling of G&G shoes. And John Lobb. But much smaller market for EG.
And some forum members have a fairly high churn rate for their shoe trading inventory.