Category Archives: s for shoes

I’m in love

With these, among other things:

Bologna/ Duo

They’re called the Bologna, and they’re sold by British shop Duo. Here’s the kicker (as it were): Duo’s boots come in a variety of calf sizes. The question now is whether I can justify spending roughly $250 on them…

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under s for shoes

Uncanny

Here’s a flat from Steve Madden, named “Pavement”, and priced at $70 (less 30% at the moment):

Steve Madden Pavement

And here is “Candbury” by Chloé, originally 465 of the US dollars but down to $232.50 at Net-a-Porter:

Chloe Candbury

I like this sort of thing because it’s very easy to take a Fred Mertz view of the runways: that high fashion is ridiculous and outrageously priced and irrelevant. And although I wouldn’t argue with the first two, the fact is that what is available for us more humble consumers to buy is very often influenced by the runways. Sometimes, it’s a little more than influence, but I won’t tell if you don’t.

Leave a comment

Filed under f for fashion, s for shoes

Why was I not informed?!

I’m not really shopping for shoes right now, since I just bought two lovely pair of Indigo sandals yesterday. However, I bought those shoes at an Allen-Edmonds tent sale, which got me thinking about dress shoes (I love really classic men’s business wear). Also, apparently today was a Saturday Sale at Shoes.com. All of the above having been noted, I am a little sad that these have sold out in my size:

Seychelles “Beyond the Pale”

Wouldn’t these be kind of fabulous with a skirt suit? Or no? I’m inclined to say yes, because their flatness (which normally I might not like) would prevent me from being six feet tall in the (hypothetical) workplace, and also facilitate efficient scurrying around. I think they’re gorgeous: a perfect quoting of old-school men’s style in a form that is just feminine enough without losing the business vibe.

It’s not surprising at all that I love this pair:

Seychelles “Etiquette”

I love the canvas-and-leather thing. In fact, I own a pair from Etienne Aigner in exactly this color scheme, plus a 3 inch heel, a buckle, a peep toe, and a snobby attitude. Or how about this style’s unusual but rather charming green cousin–

Seychelles “Etiquette”

Love, love, love. The flat heel is working for me yet again, the bit of fringe highlights that lovely shape, and I can never turn down a spectator.

Off to see if there are any loose pairs floating around the internet…

Leave a comment

Filed under s for shoes

Dear Mr. Madden,

You may think that I am past these shoes. You would be wrong.

judyy-brn-leather.jpg

Oh yes, I still intend to own these shoes, even though it has been months since that day I tried them on under the witchy eye of one of your sub-sub-managers. They will be mine, mark my words. My work-study allotment and I are simply biding our time.

Yours sincerely,

Me

Leave a comment

Filed under s for shoes

A fine line

Cute? Or ugly?

Natural Resource

Of course, they’d probably just chop my toes all to pieces anyway.

Leave a comment

Filed under s for shoes

The old college try (to remember)

Do you remember that whole thing last year or so, about the girls who wore flip flops to the White House? I think it was last year, but I don’t really remember. I’m so out of touch it took me an age to realize that it was my own school’s women’s lacrosse team what done it (and had won the championship besides, ooops).

Anyway, here’s what’s on Facebook today:

flipflops.jpg

All publicity is good publicity, but I wonder how many of my fellow students will know (or remember) why this promotion is significant.

Hmm, I could actually go to that game, if I had any clue where the sporting facilities are.

Leave a comment

Filed under s for school, s for shoes, s for sightings

Now that’s a dealbreaker

My feet are recovering from their blisters, and so it’s time to leap right back on the horse and start looking at shoes. Hope springs eternal that someday I will have a pair of shoes that does not eat my feet alive. I have been grudgingly looking at the wide sized shoes, mostly out of a desire to prevent a repetition of multiple blisters on the littlest toes. Wide sized shoes seem to be universally boring and ugly, to the point that I look at these and think, not bad:clarkspismo.jpg

Named the “Pismo” (what?), they’re… not bad, I guess. Not what I’d like to get for my nearly $100. But check this:

clarkscloseup.jpg

Velcro???!!! They expect me to pay nearly a hundred dollars for shoes that have a velcro closure? Uh, no. For that money, I want a real buckle, no matter how fugly the shoes are.

And while we’re on the subject, I’d like to point out that old ladies aren’t the only ones with grotesquely wide feet. Would it kill Clarks to put their Indigo line in wide sizes?

Leave a comment

Filed under s for shoes