You wouldn't like to come drinking with me would you?
M.

The new rules:
1) All loafers must bow to the Weejun.
2) ... Whatever...

Is it fair to say that all 'U.S. looking' loafers come from the Weejun & that all 'European looking' ones owe more to the evening pump & the dancing slipper?

M.

Yea!
Bean did a good fringe & tassel not too long ago (Maybe they still do?), also El Salvadore made, like the Weejun, but a lesser animal. Trashable Trad... or CAD...
M.
Lovely Pic Ed. Gotta love a Weejun!

To Get Smart:

Post your Loakes!
Post your Loakes!
Post your Loakes!
Post your Loakes!

Ahem.

Miles

*See me walking around I'm the boy about town that you've heard of...*

You wouldn't like to come drinking with me would you Sweetbooness2?
Tell me you like Dr. John?

Miles.

Hi everybody - new member here, long time lurker/poster on the other forums.

Horace - you hit the nail on the head with how the dynamic works. It’s like the elders speak the gospel and the disciples preach it around, usually without having any first hand experience. The whole thing becomes too technical and tedious. You get posts explaining with deadly earnestness that Lobb is better than EG because it has a beveled sole, whereas Vass is superior to both because the feather is skived rather that glued on. There’s much too much significance given to the superficial aspects of better shoes and clothing: working sleeve buttons, pick stitching, channeled soles, thickness of buttons, antiquing, etc. It’s missing the big picture for the details. The comi-tragic results can be seen all over the other forums when some clueless chap commissions his first ever suit with one button and peak lapels, or is having his humble neighborhood cobbler put a beveled sole on his shoes, or is practicing home bleaching of shoe leather (the horror).

Having said that, for me, shoes are first and foremost about the last shape, and I’m afraid that in this case middle to low end shoes (AE, etc.) simply do not cut it. The inelegant lasts and stubby shapes are a deal breaker.

MA – hope I did not offend you with my generalizations. To make it clearer, in 'inelegant' I didn't necessarily mean the sort of indigenous American ‘bulky’ shoe types (which can be an acquired taste, like a Budapester). Their ‘inelegance’ is the product of some tradition, not carelessness.

I meant more the facsimiles of essentially basic British shapes, which are done with less refinement. For me, it’s the nip here, tuck there that give a shoe it’s flair and finesse. I like to think of it as the Ferrari vs. Corvette issue - both share the same basic silhouette, the difference lies in the little details. I think that Lobb London’s designs (regardless of their other problems) exemplify this quality in the bespoke world, and really almost only EG (and C&J in their better lasts) in the ready made world. Needless to say, this issue is not limited to American manufacturers. I believe it's fair to say that most shoes - low/middle/high end - are made on lasts that either lack refinement, or are flamboyant in an overstated way. Similarly, antiquing can be beautiful when done in an understated, natural way, or truly vulgar, a la Berluti.