Loafers without socks

[Caustic Man]

At least you made an attempt to contribute something.

 

[emptym]

Yep, the chain of ancestry now goes:

#menswear --> French/Italian riviera --> US preppies --> Norwegians --> Native Americans/Vikings

As Bernard of Chartres said, we see far because we are dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants.

 

[LA Guy]

Good stuff guys! Great pics!
Just to clarify, my 'evidence' is simply that when I returned to Italy and went (obvs) sockless in my (then achingly fashionable ) topsiders in teh early-mid 1980s it was remarked upon (favourably by fellow youngsters and not so favourably by my elders). It was definitely not something one saw except at the beach with beach-type footwear.
But maybe I just wasn't in a sufficiently fashionable set.

The 1980s is when a substantive number of middle-class Italians began to travel / study in the U.S. and US more or less preppy fashion was briefly very popular. By the late 1980s, sockless was de-rigueur in summer.

@JJ Katz I think you bring up an interesting point. That is, to what degree is ubiquity an important part of this question? As I mentioned above I would tend to think that going sockless was far more ubiquitous in the U.S. in the 1950s and 60s than in Europe simply because Americans have a tradition of going sockless outside a vacation or beach context, even among those without a concern for fashion. Whether this was also the case in the 1980s is interesting.

I can say that it was definitely ubiquitous in my corner of the world (South Eastern Ontario) in the late 80s, and that it's nearly certain that South Eastern Canadians were not the originators of that trend. That little blip of preppy happened when I was in middle school, so, until about 87-88. And then I went to high school and that's when Guns'n'Roses brought back that very raw style of rock, and grunge followed soon after, and preppy became anathema.

Even having all these years in and around the fashion industry now (wow, it's been nearly 20 years now!), I still can't shake that distaste for preppy clothing, at least for myself. It's like a food that you understand you ought to appreciate, but you simply can't because of an adverse childhood reaction. @A Canuker - maybe you are in the same boat as me. Not sure about your age, but if you are about my age, your aversion to the look might be explained by the same blip in trendiness that we experienced at roughly the same time. Also have never taken (back) to varsity jackets for pretty much the same reason.

@Caustic Man - I don't want to continue that discussion here, but the reference that I gave you had an incorrect spelling of the author's name. The name of the reference is The Male Image: Men's Fashion in Britain, 1300-1970 and the author is Penelope Bryde. It's out of print, but you can either get it from interlibrary loan if you are in academia, or used from Amazon:

 

[emptym]

^We're the same age, and I agree. Although punk vs prep in the early 80s made more of an impression on me. Back then there were parts of town where you'd get beaten up for wearing preppy things. My older sister was probably my most important style influence and she was pretty preppy. She even had the Preppy Handbook and a poster of Snoopy as Joe Prep. But she had some punk influences too. I followed her in that mix (which as mentioned is why I liked RL's Rugby line), but for a long time the line I wouldn't cross was penny loafers. Just too preppy for me. Then I discovered the Alden LHS and now they're my oneshoe.

Edit, found the poster online:

 

[Fluke79]

I’ll wear no show socks but the only way I could go sockless in loafers is if they were cheap and disposable shoes. I just can’t imagine a pair of shoes lasting more than a year or two when worn barefoot, no matter how meticulously you clean your feet.

 

[Bradford]

Always appropriate.

 

[volcanotristate]

It has been a southern thing for quite a long time. I discovered that if you use some kind of insole ie “odor eaters” it helps keep your feet dry in the worst of humidity, and it keeps your feet from wearing off printed labels like Ferragamo and Santoni.

 

[volcanotristate]

My dad and my grandfather sockless in Atlanta circa 1946.

 

[shade]

Comfortable and stylish

 

[JJ Katz]

My dad and my grandfather sockless in Atlanta circa 1946.

View attachment 1001391

Normally, one might say that a single image proves nothing but in this case I think it speaks to what we said earlier. I cannot imagine, an Italian (European?) man of that generation dressing like that in town, even in their back-yard.

 

[volcanotristate]

Normally, one might say that a single image proves nothing but in this case I think it speaks to what we said earlier. I cannot imagine, an Italian (European?) man of that generation dressing like that in town, even in their back-yard.

Well of course not. In Europe, at the time, only children wore shorts. Atlanta in the summer, at the golf course, shorts were true southern style. Btw it was not the shorts I was showing, it was the sockless feet.

 

[Fluke79]

My Dad was a very well dressed Shoe Salesman and later a cobbler born in the early 1920’s. I never saw him wear shorts or jeans, not that he ever commented on me wearing them. What he did comment on was if I went sockless, not only wouldn’t my shoes last because of rot, but he thought it could also lead to fungus from sweat and ingrown toenails from rubbing. Dad was of course not a Microbiologist or a Doctor, so this may be a myth.

 

[Texasmade]

If I’m in an air conditioned office, I’ll go sockless on occasion on Fridays. If I’m actually out and about walking around I’ll do no show loafer socks.

 

[Pete E]

Perhaps being a Brit, and one from the north as well, I simply don't buy into the sockless loafer look especially when worn with trousers or/and jackets ect...

I can just about get my head around it when where shorts in very hot weather, but still think its a case of comfort trumping any notion of good style...I would go as far to say that certain sandals actually look better with shorts in very casual environments such as at the beach or an informal backyard BBQ ect...

 

[JJ Katz]

Perhaps being a Brit, and one from the north as well, I simply don't buy into the sockless loafer look especially when worn with trousers or/and jackets ect...

I suppose the British 'split the difference'. Rather than wearing either no socks or knee-socks, they generally tend to wear (even otherwise very well-turned out ones) those mid-calf, low-rise... things.



Actually that is a question to which I have no answer: why do I (and, I suppose, the majority of self-appointed 'elegants') find no-sock and long-sock fine but half-sock unsightly? It's a bit like: shorts = ok, trousers = ok, cropped trousers = aaaaarg!