Those stupid fucking persian rugs are 100% iGent. I had never, ever seen them in real life until I started reading the forums and realized everyone had one except me, my family, friends, and acquaintances. Millon looks well turned out in my opinion, in that full-length photo, as I don't think we all should dress like 60s advertising execs or 30s men-about-town. Except the shoos he's wearing are wrong for this appearance and dress. He would have looked okay in some of his rounded toe shoos.

Last edited by The_Shooman (2012-01-07 08:03:50)

Even the language that Millon uses exposes him as a collector and not a wearer, he describes his shoes as 'pretty'. I wouldn't describe my shoes as pretty, but then again I am not a venture capitalist rolling around in stinking dough. Handsome, might be a better word, even that the shoes possess finesse or are elegant. Pretty, no thanks.

I daren't count my shoes, well ok......17. That's more than enough, quite a few of them are not being worn at all.

If I consider what I am actually wearing in rotation: no more than 7. There's some winter/summer ones that are seasonal, but its still only 7 pairs on the go at one time. And then, when the mood strikes me, I will even wear a favored pair for a couple of days without rotation.

I think Shooey may well be right with his 80 normal shoes or 20 bespoke rule over 50 years. Or 44 mid-range shoes.

Since I've been in the Netherlands, which is nearly 8 years now, I've owned around 21/22 pairs of shoes. Of which 17 remain. All of decent standard, although non bespoke. Some I don't like anymore, so are not worn.

It would be nice to to test the 20 bespoke pairs for 50 years, but that would make me 90. And I am assured by two gypsy fortune tellers that I am going out at 83. Which leaves me only 42 years to go. Even so, 20 bespoke shoes over 40 odd years, is little over two years each, a regular bench grade C&J's will at least provide 18-24 months even if you wear them every day and walk a couple of country miles. Of course, they will disintegrate at the end of it. But does this mean the considerable extra funds for bespoke is buying only style and comfort and not longevity?

Shooey, do you have an answer?

^Yes, there is measurable, quantifiable benefit in fully hand made (bespoke) shoes in terms of quality and longevity, subject to the usual caveats, terms and conditions.

This guy treats shoes as collectable items but they are not really. Old guns; cufflinks; tie pins; watches; jewels; walking sticks: these are collectables because any other collector might want them or they could be handed on down the generations - and they can still be used. they have a worth beyond the appreciation of some vain twat who ordered them. A dead man's shoes might be interesting museum pieces for the workmanship (not that I see anything astonishing in this cupboard-load of largely lumpen clobber - the shoes that he is wearing might be hob-nailed boots), but they are of no conceivable use except to the man who will, one day, be dead. Moreover, although I am not a communist, I feel a degree of revulsion in observing a rich man spending his dough so extremely extravagantly on his own vanity; when there are people still in the sorry world in want of a bowl of rice or a cup of clean water. Maybe it is no coincidence that his favourite pair is made of reptile skin. Certainly: have a few pairs of brilliant, bespoke shoes to tread your best in your worldly endeavours but the words of Andrew Carnegie resonate here: "A man who dies rich should die ashamed" and I cannot conceive of a man who dies so uselessly rich as a man who leaves behind 550 pairs of nearly unused bespoke shoes, which were made to pander to his own vanity and, I suppose, necessarily, reflect his total lack of feeling for anyone else.

Last edited by NJS (2012-01-07 14:55:59)

Sadly, whether we like it or not, shoes are consumables like socks. Its only the shelf life that is different.

Frankly, owning 550 shoos is deep into Imelda Marcos territory.