The Oxford-Shoe-Worn-Casually Appreciation Thread

[ValidusLA]

I would like to point out the revisionism going on here.

This is the point where this whole, frankly tiresome, debate begins. March 19:

Oxfords are only for suits, IMO.

Some here have made the case that some very specific oxfords (e.g. brown suede ones with broguing) can be worn with very formal sport coat outfits (e.g. navy sport coats with grey trousers, white shirt, black grenadine, etc). I disagree, but that combo is less bad to me than oxfords with chinos.

As I've said before, a strong statement, but not an absolute one. I have bolded where he qualifies his statement, as people keep saying he has only made absolute ones.

NA himself did not enter the ongoing tire fire until half a year later! Sept 12:

No man wearing an oxford-cloth shirt with a suit is dressing in good taste, examples of men with generally good taste committing this abomination notwithstanding.

(With a - hilariously, considering ongoing content - much more strident and absolute statement).

DWW and the cohort generally arguing against oxfords with non-suited looks have maintained, for the most part, over the last 7 months, that "Oxfords should be paired with suits" is a good baseline rule from which people can branch out once they have have digested and understood it.

Posting edge case examples of branching out in no way disproves this.

In fact, cherry picking the internet for some of the best dressed and well respected dressers to find examples of decently worn oxfords with suits actually highlights the idea that mastery should be achieved first.

From my own personal perspective, some of those pictures look ok. Some do not. But, to the actual point of the hundreds of pages of threads before this, most of the looks would look better with another shoe, be it derby, loafer, or chukka.

More importantly, as he states:

@mak1277 has followed the previous conversation closely. I don't really want to repeat myself, but yes, those photos aren't what people were talking about.

You are now essentially pulling the edge cases of what he and others might have deemed as bordering on ok-ish (though I still think most of us would say sub-optimal). The vast majority of the conversation, including looks you posted and defended were decidedly NOT in the style of these photos.

 

[mak1277]

Um...I think you may have missed a half-dozen or so extended threads. That dead horse has been beaten and beaten and beaten...

No, I haven't missed the threads, which is exactly why I posed the question.

 

[ValidusLA]

Oh my goodness! It's another one! And look: this time it has the approval of 17 other members.

View attachment 1687615

As an example.

I think the shoes here look incredibly discordant.

I think that jacket is sweet though, he wears a turtleneck well, has a good physique, and has nice hair. Its also a well framed photo.

I would hazard to say most people don't own black derbies. My guess is he wanted a laced up look and so put on oxfords. I think the shoes take an outfit that could be really successful and make it borderline weird.

 

[Stylewords]

Now that we've all agreed that oxfords can be worn with tailoring beyond suits if done with caution and considering other alternatives first, can we get back to the important business of ranking the attractiveness of the British aristocracy?

 

[ValidusLA]

Now that we've all agreed that oxfords can be worn with tailoring beyond suits if done with caution and considering other alternatives first, can we get back to the important business of ranking the attractiveness of the British aristocracy?

1st generation of descent from a Marquis or higher only, for the love of God!

 

[dieworkwear]

Every time I've discussed this issue, I've noted that I greatly admire Bruce Boyer's style. He often wears oxfords with sport coats. I'm not militant about this rule, but this

View attachment 1667949



Feels more connected to this history


View attachment 1667952


Than this

View attachment 1667955

Again, every time this has come up, I've posted photos of Bruce Boyer in oxfords and sport coats. I've only argued against this idea that "dressing well is dressing up," the "business casual" style on Allen Edmonds' Instagram, the emergence of online "dress shoe culture," and how some parts of classic men's style feel like it's drifting further away from the type of CM style that used to be discussed here.

Yes, I think oxford is the demarcating line. Some caveats: some very well dressed people I know wear oxfords outside of suits. I know Bruce Boyer often wears suede Clev oxfords with sport coats.

This convo is very strident.

I think oxfords are for suits, however, the combination of a smart sport coat with tailored (non-cotton trousers) and a very casual iteration of an oxford is less offensive to me than when the formality gap grows. For example, jeans or chinos with oxfords is a greater visual offense to me, than this:

View attachment 1609030



Every time I've written about this, I've noted that many well-dressed men, Bruce most notably, wear oxfords with sport coats. However, I still think they look better with a derby in such instances. I like these two outfits better than the one above

Bruce Boyer wears suede oxfords with a sport coat. I love how he dresses. But I personally would prefer a derby with a sport coat.

 

[ValidusLA]

@dieworkwear you have bumped the worst thread of them all with your misposting!

This is an act of unspeakable barbarity.

 

[Cause Moe]

1st generation of descent from a Marquis or higher only, for the love of God!

They call them marquesses in England.

 

[stdavidshead]

From my own personal perspective, some of those pictures look ok. Some do not. But, to the actual point of the hundreds of pages of threads before this, most of the looks would look better with another shoe, be it derby, loafer, or chukka.

I very much agree with this.

This is the point where this whole, frankly tiresome, debate begins. March 19 August 21, 1858:

The Great 2021 Oxfords with Jeans Debate:

 

[acapaca]

In fact, cherry picking the internet for some of the best dressed and well respected dressers to find examples of decently worn oxfords with suits actually highlights the idea that mastery should be achieved first.

What I believe he has argued is not merely his own opinion, but rather, a point of view that he maintains is shared by most (if not all?) of those who dress in good taste. He has gone to great lengths to describe why and how it would just feel wrong to him to even think about wearing oxfords with anything but a suit -- and yes, even in the sharpest odd-coat-and-trouser combos. And again, he wants you believe that this is not just his opinion, but the opinion of most all men who know how to dress. Who know how to dress now and who knew how to dress long, long ago, in a golden era far away. (In fact, it is this very appeal to authority that underpins his argument.)

What the 'cherry picked' examples prove is that he is wrong. Or, to try to steel man his/your case in the most charitable way I possibly can, that those 'best dressed and well respected dressers' must feel they are making a tasteless mistake but do it anyway. And for some of them, keep doing it. And keep doing it. And keep doing it.

Now, if you want to talk about cherry picking, ignoring the (many) examples of 'best dressed and well respected dressers' using their oxfords in a way that suggests perhaps they don't view them as quite the same historical relic that some on this board do, and instead focusing on tan Strands with dumpy Old Navy khakis...well, I'll let you decide if you think that's entirely fair, if we're talking about a principle in the abstract.

 

[RSS]

Just to be clear, I still haven’t seen any examples of oxfords worn casually that I appreciate, but feel free to keep trying. All things are possible.

I am middle-aged though, so do hurry.

I'm 71. Go faster.

 

[dieworkwear]

Last year actually counts as 100 years, so everyone is over 100 years old now.

 

[ValidusLA]

They call them marquesses in England.

Its true, they call Counts Earls too, but they are a confused people.

 

[Wild Strawberry Rabbit]

As an example.

I think the shoes here look incredibly discordant.

I think that jacket is sweet though, he wears a turtleneck well, has a good physique, and has nice hair. Its also a well framed photo.

I would hazard to say most people don't own black derbies. My guess is he wanted a laced up look and so put on oxfords. I think the shoes take an outfit that could be really successful and make it borderline weird.

You are overthinking. This is my photo. First of all these are not oxford shoes but these are boots. Second thing is I own many shoes, derbies included. But I wanted to wear this boots this day and I think they look OK with what I wore. I could wear derbies instead, maybe they would look better, maybe not. I don’t care, I did not want to do that. These are just clothes and I did not think more than one minute about the things that I will wear this day. Of course you may not like it and I’m not arguing with that, you can have your opinion.

 

[Nobilis Animus]

I would like to point out the revisionism going on here.

This is the point where this whole, frankly tiresome, debate begins. March 19:


As I've said before, a strong statement, but not an absolute one. I have bolded where he qualifies his statement, as people keep saying he has only made absolute ones.

NA himself did not enter the ongoing tire fire until half a year later! Sept 12:



(With a - hilariously, considering ongoing content - much more strident and absolute statement).

Oh, come on. That was clearly intended as a joke, not some proclamation (oxford shirts an abomination? really?? how anyone can miss the sarcasm in that post is beyond me).

The operative words in DWW's statement were 'I disagree.'

You are now essentially pulling the edge cases of what he and others might have deemed as bordering on ok-ish (though I still think most of us would say sub-optimal). The vast majority of the conversation, including looks you posted and defended were decidedly NOT in the style of these photos.

And so? Even if you're correct, doesn't that mean that it's an overall improvement in choices, and therefore a good thing?

Or are we simply re-hashing yesterday's arguments? To be quite frank, I'm getting a little tired of doing that.