1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

square-toed black shoes

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by matadorpoeta, May 29, 2006.

  1. matadorpoeta

    matadorpoeta Senior member

    Messages:
    4,458
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    there was a thread a while back where someone posted pics from a sears catalogue from the early 1900s. the drawings of men modeling suits showed them wearing square-toed black shoes, something many people on this board despise.

    i went to the l.a. county museum of art on friday, and saw a painting from 1834, "alexander masterton and his wife and children" by the scotsman william hamilton.

    the subject matter was a portrait of a nobleman or statesman with his wife, two daughters, and two boys. they are outiside in a park or the grounds of a large estate, next to a pond where the boys are fishing. they are all wearing square-toed black shoes.

    i just thought i'd mention this because i know there are some people who seek historical justification for their opinions on clothing and matters of style.

    here's a link to see shoes from that period: http://collectionsonline.lacma.org/m...500791&type=70

    edited for accuracy.
     
  2. Morris

    Morris Senior member

    Messages:
    124
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    there was a thread a while back where someone posted pics from a sears catalogue from the early 1900s. the drawings of men modeling suits showed them wearing square-toed black shoes, something many people on this board despise.


    Very nice post. However, it is somewhat of a blanket statement to say many here despise square-toed black shoes. I find there is a sea of difference between these ... one elegant, the other not.

    RLPL Mackay / EG

    [​IMG]

    Kenneth Cole New Yorker

    [​IMG]
     
  3. matadorpoeta

    matadorpoeta Senior member

    Messages:
    4,458
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    many here like 'chiseled toe' shoes, but detest the stacy adams/kenneth cole square shoes.
     
  4. Jovan

    Jovan Senior member

    Messages:
    2,533
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    I don't like chisel-toes... but yeah, overly squared toes are bad.
     
  5. acidboy

    acidboy Senior member

    Messages:
    21,170
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    the exaggerated kenneth cole types are sometimes referred to as duckbill toes, to differentiate themselves from the proper chisel-cut square toe shoes.
     
  6. matadorpoeta

    matadorpoeta Senior member

    Messages:
    4,458
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    the exaggerated kenneth cole types are sometimes referred to as duckbill toes, to differentiate themselves from the proper chisel-cut square toe shoes.

    the point of this thread is that there is nothing more proper about a chisel-toe than there is about a flat-out square toe, at least not in the historical sense.

    the point here is that while everyone here may dislike the square-toe, or 'duckbill', it has an historical precedent.

    i bring this up only because there are certain members here, who when involved in a discussion about whether or not a certain look is 'correct', seek to justify their position by using historical precedents.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. tiger02

    tiger02 Senior member

    Messages:
    3,799
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    I would group this in the same category as "won't wear jeans because Cary Grant didn't." Historical precedent is only one datum; current suitability and objective aesthetics are IMO more important.

    Tom
     
  8. Luc-Emmanuel

    Luc-Emmanuel Senior member

    Messages:
    1,586
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    Location:
    Paris, France
    I don't think these KC look that bad. Maybe too much of a sole extension.

    !luc
     
  9. turbozed

    turbozed Senior member

    Messages:
    564
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    I don't know if I'd agree with the whole "objective aesthetic" argument. Just based on what we know from history, fashion seems to be one of the things that changes frequently. Who is to say what looks objectively better? Most of it is just social norms and subjective beliefs. Square toed shoes are still very popular sellers so a lot of people still wear them and they don't buy them thinking "my god these are objectively ugly but oh well...." Of course, there are some styles that will stand the test of time better than others. Maybe squared toes fit into this category. Aesthetics are almost always subjective.
     
  10. tiger02

    tiger02 Senior member

    Messages:
    3,799
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    I don't know if I'd agree with the whole "objective aesthetic" argument. Just based on what we know from history, fashion seems to be one of the things that changes frequently. Who is to say what looks objectively better? Most of it is just social norms and subjective beliefs. Square toed shoes are still very popular sellers so a lot of people still wear them and they don't buy them thinking "my god these are objectively ugly but oh well...." Of course, there are some styles that will stand the test of time better than others. Maybe squared toes fit into this category. Aesthetics are almost always subjective.
    You're right, I worded that poorly. To my eye, some things look better than others, such as long sensuous curves over blocky angles. There are some exceptions; shoes are not one.
     
  11. StevenRocks

    StevenRocks Senior member

    Messages:
    617
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Location:
    Southwest Virginia
    Square-toed Kenneth Coles are very "5 years ago." Quality shoes shouldn't seem as dated as they do, so that's a good sign that they are not quality shoes.
     
  12. kronik

    kronik Senior member

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    I have a couple of square-toed loafers that I wear as work shoes - Ecco and Steve Madden. I avoid wearing my nicer shoes to work because I have a tendency of scratching them on my darn chair for some reason. But I digress.

    Square toes are not nearly as nice as the chiseled toe - a fact that I've discovered in the past months when presented with JLs, EGs, hell, any decent mid-to-high end shoe. They serve their purpose but I wouldn't suggest ever paying 200 bucks for one.. much nicer (read: sexier) can be had at that price point.
     
  13. sho'nuff

    sho'nuff Senior member

    Messages:
    22,225
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    Irvine
    i also have this problem. if i have the opportunity i always pull up a regular four legged chair instead of the cushioned rolling ones.
     
  14. josepidal

    josepidal Senior member

    Messages:
    1,924
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Very nice post. However, it is somewhat of a blanket statement to say many here despise square-toed black shoes. I find there is a sea of difference between these ... one elegant, the other not.

    RLPL Mackay / EG

    [​IMG]

    Kenneth Cole New Yorker

    [​IMG]

    I think there's something rather sacriligeous in calling an 888 last shoe a "square toed black shoe" and posting it with a Kenneth Cole duckbill monstrosity.

    Then again, I suppose you could say that SF and GQ.com are both fora where you get advice about clothing, so a rose by any other name...
     
  15. Jovan

    Jovan Senior member

    Messages:
    2,533
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Calm down, jose. He said himself that there's a difference between them. One is tacky, the other not. Both of them ARE technically squared off.
     
  16. LabelKing

    LabelKing Senior member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    I don't know if I'd agree with the whole "objective aesthetic" argument. Just based on what we know from history, fashion seems to be one of the things that changes frequently. Who is to say what looks objectively better? Most of it is just social norms and subjective beliefs. Square toed shoes are still very popular sellers so a lot of people still wear them and they don't buy them thinking "my god these are objectively ugly but oh well...." Of course, there are some styles that will stand the test of time better than others. Maybe squared toes fit into this category. Aesthetics are almost always subjective.
    Are you a fan of Hegel?
     
  17. dare-

    dare- Senior member

    Messages:
    115
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    I think he copped out when he said "almost always"
     
  18. metaphysician

    metaphysician Senior member

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Are you a fan of Hegel?

    The actual is rational; the rational actual.
     
  19. LabelKing

    LabelKing Senior member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    The actual is rational; the rational actual.
    Are you more keen on analytical philosophy?
     
  20. metaphysician

    metaphysician Senior member

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Are you more keen on analytical philosophy?

    God, no. The analytics were boring, failed to accomplish much, and did a lot to make people think that philosophy is irrelevant.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by