I think Patrick might be a fan.
Where is Patrick?
Yes, he's been quiet lately, was thinking exactly that the other day.
Anyone remember the Gucci watches from the late 1980's? Awful.
Anyone remember Gucci anything, that wasn't awful?
Oh yes, I was bought the aftershave and that's very nice... But...
Last edited by Beatnik's ghost (2010-08-21 13:14:45)
Not for me!
Were it not for being sneaked into <i>The Official Preppy Handbook</i>, Gucci-style horse bit loafers would just be another gauche outdated trend...even for the iGentry.
I just cannot consider them to be mens shoes.
All we need now is for some awkward bugger to come along and upset the apple cart.
Oh, is that my cue?
I like them very much! They really say something about a guy... Sheer class!
Not for me. Might not be the worst thing in the world depending on the context. Though might be. Not for me.
Sorry mate.
Just read awkward bugger and I was away....
Not trying to be deliberately contrary, but I'm going to say that they can be a good thing.
Not the variety as pushed by the company in the last fifteen years or so, but the older shoe certainly had something.
Some years ago I saw a pair of Gucci horsebit moccasins in Alfie's Antique Market which I was told were from the early 1960s and they were absolutely beautiful.
The modern model with its squared toe and stacked heel is grotesque by comparison.
While Gucci was a family firm with a respected lineage in the leather goods world the shoes were at least well made and the leathers judiciously sourced. To own a pair was once almost a prerequisite for maintaining a certain kind of louche patrician elegance, along with Charvet, Hermes etc. Henry Cecil was never seen in anything else, I recall. Even at Royal Ascot. He and his kind were very much the natural Gucci demographic: moneyed, horsey dilettantes. I know most of you will despise that aesthetic, but for me it's like anything: it can be great if carried off the the right degree of style.
As the years fly by these once great brand names become debased by the worldwide democratisation of 'luxury' goods. A contradiction which seems lost on those who still seek the stuff, I'd imagine.
From time to time the modern Gucci company produces a model based on its sleeker antecedent. These never sell and can occasionally be picked up on clearance for those interested.
I'm sort of with NSB in this, never say never. In my experience a lot of these "luxury brand" companies can suddenly make something that stands out from the rest of their range.
Be like a magpie and take what you want from where you need and then put it all together. That to me is subversive.
If we just love certain brands that don't fit into the mainstream then we create our own "label" ghetto.
I did once have a pair of their driving shoes - knocked down in a sale - but I never felt quite right walking the sticky pavements of old England in them. I was interested to see white loafers - I think they were - on the Simons Facebook page. My wife would call them 'pimp' shoes.
Famously worn by Hoffman in "Kramer versus Kramer", I believe.
I've always thought them horrible - I hate redundant bits of brass on shoes. Horsebits, to me, seem at odds with the relaxed, casual softness a loafer should impart. Also, being gold in colour, they manage to purvey an air of cheapness whilst being really expensive.
A major contender for Worst Film Ever Made.
Though I spent much time around the age of 21 wanting to tup Meryl Streep.