Oh, I don't know about the popularity of shell being a recent thing. My father-in-law is about as Trad as you can get. He was raised at Phillips Exeter, where his father was an eminent English master, and graduated from that institution. He later attended Harvard between 1936 and 1940, where he was a good pal of JFK's. Both he and his father were lifelong Brooks customers. He still has some Brooks-Alden shell cordovan shoes that he has had for more than 40 years. They're still in great shape, and he swears by them.

As long as we are talking about good, old-time American shoes, what about French, Shriner & Urner shoes? Anybody remember them? They used to advertise a lot in the New Yorker magazine. As I recall I had a pair back in the '60s, and they were pretty damn good.

My grandfather had a lot of Nunn-Bush shoes. I suppose they were all thrown out after he died at the beginning of 1963. He had trees in all of them, as I recall. Pity he never inculcated that practice in me. In any event, his shoe trees would surely have been too small for my shoes.

Last edited by Coolidge (2007-12-13 08:07:58)

Aside from a purely academic interest--

Why care a fig about what Brahmins or elites or working men or GIs or whatever wore 50 years ago?  Why should that have any bearing on whether you favor Aldens or Weejuns?

I think Ivy/trad debaters at both AA and FNB have made too much of historical precedent when judging the merits of contemporary adherents to "the Look."  It's nice to know about this stuff, if you're interested, and it's useful as a source for inspiration and ideas, but that's about it.

If the trads are hewing to a false tradition, the Ivy stalwarts are hung up on the way things used ta be...which, as we live in the present, isn't terribly useful.  Better to forge a personal take on the "curriculum," appreciating the good old days while making the aesthetic work for you.  This trad/Ivy thin works best as an approach, an animating idea, an attitude toward getting dressed and deciding what looks good--not so much as a historical reenactment or approximation of what your "social betters" do.

Right?

Following on from Brownshoe and Katon: I am fascinated by the old historical photos because I believe the people depicted had a much better grasp of proportions and what goes with what, than today.

Why?

I do not know, but maybe retailers were better in those days, and guided customers properly. Or style emulation by people was more rigid, or something.