Is Alden shell cordovan too dressy...

[Bona Drag]

...for a khakis-and-button-down type of work wardrobe? I have in mind specifically the plain toe blucher, as well as the monk strap and saddle oxfords, both of which have plain toes. I'm pretty sure any of these would be acceptable with khakis, but I thought I'd run it by the experts.

And while we're on the subject, cap-toes with khakis are a crime, right?

 

[NoVaguy]

they're fine.

edit: by "they're fine", i meant the 3 shell cordovan models. i agree with doc below on the cap-toes.

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by Bona Drag

...for a khakis-and-button-down type of work wardrobe? I have in mind specifically the plain toe blucher, as well as the monk strap and saddle oxfords, both of which have plain toes. I'm pretty sure any of these would be acceptable with khakis, but I thought I'd run it by the experts.

And while we're on the subject, cap-toes with khakis are a crime, right?

Shell is fine with khakis, as long as you don't choose a particularly dressy style. The Alden plain toe blucher, for example, would go great. There's nothing about shell that makes it inherently dressier than calf.

As for captoes, I'd avoid bals with khakis, of course, but captoe bluchers and khakis share a military heritage. They can look very nice together.

 

[Teacher]

Yeah, what he said.

 

[Stu]

The only thing about cordovan with khakis is that the cordovans are often so heavy, especially the Aldens, and khakis are a lighter weight summery pant.

I don't wear my Aldens with khakis for that reason -- they look off because the contrasting weights.

 

[Carey]

Doc rocks +2.

Stu, not all khakis are lightweight. My Bill's anniversary editions are quite substantial. Most khakis are not poplin, but usually a heavier twill.

Doe the OP wear other odd trousers, besides Khaki? A fancier styled shoe like a cap-toe, or a strap loafer goes well with a tropical weight wool trouser.

 

[Roger]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

There's nothing about shell that makes it inherently dressier than calf.
Well, that's certainly true. However, I think it could be argued that there's something about shell that makes it inherently less dressy than calf! To my mind, its bulk and the style of shoes to which one is restricted by this bulk make it a good choice for casual dress only--by which I mean wearing with sports jacket/odd pants/shirt & tie and down from there. I don't think you'll see many instances, for example, of a really elegant pair of fine dressy balmorals--that could be worn with a smooth worsted suit--made from shell. (I can just see a few of you searching for a counterexample as I write this!)

It works best on bluchers, particularly Norwegian-toe ones, boots, and other large-scale shoes that might be worn with a somewhat bulkier tweed suit or jacket. I have the Alden shell wingtip balmoral (974), but its bulky form (partly necessitated by the leather), with double sole and wide sole extension rule, it out completely for wear with a suit. When I inquired about ordering the Vass U-last monk shoe in shell, Vass himself said that with that particular shoe the bulkiness of shell would make it too difficult to buckle and have it look good.

So...Bona Drag, don't worry about shell cordovan being too dressy. It will work fine with what you have in mind.

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by Roger

Well, that's certainly true. However, I think it could be argued that there's something about shell that makes it inherently less dressy than calf! To my mind, its bulk and the style of shoes to which one is restricted by this bulk make it a good choice for casual dress only--by which I mean wearing with sports jacket/odd pants/shirt & tie and down from there. I don't think you'll see many instances, for example, of a really elegant pair of fine dressy balmorals--that could be worn with a smooth worsted suit--made from shell. (I can just see a few of you searching for a counterexample as I write this!)

Funny, Roger, I was thinking along this very line earlier today. My initial conclusion was the same as yours, but then I recalled some cordovan bals I've seen that were surprisingly light and refined. Tried a pair of the Peal wingtip bals in shell at Brooks just a couple of weeks ago, and was impressed at how elegant they were. Not a great fit for me, but a nice shoe, and one that testified to the versatility of cordovan.

I've never owned a pair of cordovan bals, but as you mention, I'm sure some devotees will come along to tell us just how great they are.

 

[JBZ]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

Tried a pair of the Peal wingtip bals in shell at Brooks just a couple of weeks ago, and was impressed at how elegant they were.

As far as I know, none of the Peal shoes come in shell cordovan. I think it's more likely you tried on the below linked shoe, which is made in the USA by Alden (either that, or BB has some Peal shell cordovan shoes which are not reflected on their website or in their catalogues - I haven't been in a BB B&M location in quite some time).

http://www.brooksbrothers.com/IWCatP...&Parent_Id=522

 

[DocHolliday]

Thanks, JBZ, you're absolutely right. They're the Alden shoes.

 

[JBZ]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

Thanks, JBZ, you're absolutely right. They're the Alden shoes.

You're welcome, and I agree with your assessment of the shoe. I think it looks great and could be worn both with a suit or a more casual ensemble.

 

[Roger]

I wonder whether that Alden-made BB shell cordovan full brogue is the same shoe as the Alden 974 that I have. In the picture, it looks more svelte than mine, but I'm not aware of another full brogue bal by Alden in shell. It's hard to tell whether the pictured shoe has a double sole--my 974 does. If it is the same shoe, it's much bulkier in the flesh than in the picture, and just doesn't work with any smooth worsted suit--a heavy tweed suit maybe.

Edit: As I look at that shoe again, it is different from the Alden 974 in one respect and may be made exclusively for BB and not in the Alden-branded lineup. The one immediately-apparent difference is the visible eyelet grommets (my 974s have hidden grommets). This feature alone--which to my eye make shoes look very utilitarian (think military and industrial)--would rule those shoes out for me wrt wearing with a suit.

 

[Teacher]

Just throwing this into the mix: I believe the Japanese shell is thinner than the Horween stuff, and thus might appear dressier. Can anybody confirm this?

 

[Larry Lean]

Originally Posted by Teacher

Just throwing this into the mix: I believe the Japanese shell is thinner than the Horween stuff, and thus might appear dressier. Can anybody confirm this?

I've heard this too.
The Japanese stuff is supposed to be lighter and more 'elegant'.
I've yet to see some to check out the story, but it makes sense.

 

[RIDER]

I think it could be argued that there's something about shell that makes it inherently less dressy than calf!

This I have to disagree with.....depends on what the manufacturer want's to do with the pattern/material. I find it hard to believe that someone would consider Carmina's Shell Cordovan offerings inappropriate with a suit. The most recognized American offering in SC is the long wing derby - IMO this is STRICTLY a suit shoe. Not all shoes have to be elegant....the only real requirement of a style is that they speak to the wearer. At least that's my view.

That saddle oxford would be great with khakis.