[never behind]

I know these have been around a while, but their wear has exploded in my office lately. I even saw someone wearing with a suit. I get being casual but why not wear loafers, camp mocs, boat shoes or even canvas sneakers? I know it’s a personal opinion but to me they look terrible. Bored rant over.

 

[Peak and Pine]

I know it’s a personal opinion but to me they look terrible.
View attachment 87132

Those are the SUVs of the shoe world. I like them, especially the AE Strand shown. This is not dumbing down dress shoes, it's classing up casuals.

 

[William Kazak]

Might has well wear a leather version of the wingtips. That rubber bottom is not for me. I could wear Sperry CVO or other Sperry varieties with rubber bottoms but not these

 

[makingmark]

100% agree, ugly AF.

I get what I think they're trying to do. Dress shoes are about image, not practicality. No different for women: you don't walk any significant distance in stilettos. At least men's dress shoes are better in that regard.

The most comfortable men's traditional shoes I own are Alden LHS suede loafers, and even with their oiled more flexible leather soles, I woudn't wear them on a day with any significant walking or more than a light shower in the forecast. Rubber soles are more impervious and more comfortable and hard wearing. That's just how it is. And yeah - probably for most US men, it doesn't matter. They drive everywhere or are driven. NYC? No. Mass transit or walk. Better for the wallet and the environment and often, A to B time as well.

Thing is, it's completely stupid to put a totally casual white sole on a dress upper. It's like a mullet: business up top, party below. Just no.

Even Paul Stuart with their Metro Collection doesn't get this right. More comfortable dress shoes that are metro-practical, yes please. But no white in the soles! Hello? It looks terrible. Flashy. The point of dressing well is subtlety and personal expression of style. Not high contrast elements that try to grab attention. Leave that sh*t to Cole Haan and their disposable junk. Hmm, their creative director once worked at Cole Haan - is that the problem? Mass =/= class.

I'm rather cynical about most clothing companies. Sooner or later even the conservative ones do stupid things to try to increase revenue because style is steady business, not growth business. I think Paul Stuart was going for a distinctive look, so that people would notice and say hey, where'd you get those shoes. They did a much better job with with their Hooper and Houston loafers, which are rubber soled and comfortable, but more classically styled.

 

[georginamorris]

You should try it

 

[eagle2250]

I don't see myself "trying it," but I do understand what they are trying to do...combine the style of a dress shoe with the all day comfort of a gym shoe. I do wear gym shoes a lot, but only at the gym or while out on fitness walks around. the neighborhood. However, if the concept fits your tastes, wear them.

 

[Peak and Pine]

100% agree, ugly AF.

I get what I think they're trying to do. Dress shoes are about image, not practicality. No different for women: you don't walk any significant distance in stilettos. At least men's dress shoes are better in that regard.

The most comfortable men's traditional shoes I own are Alden LHS suede loafers, and even with their oiled more flexible leather soles, I woudn't wear them on a day with any significant walking or more than a light shower in the forecast. Rubber soles are more impervious and more comfortable and hard wearing. That's just how it is. And yeah - probably for most US men, it doesn't matter. They drive everywhere or are driven. NYC? No. Mass transit or walk. Better for the wallet and the environment and often, A to B time as well.

Thing is, it's completely stupid to put a totally casual white sole on a dress upper. It's like a mullet: business up top, party below. Just no.

Even Paul Stuart with their Metro Collection doesn't get this right. More comfortable dress shoes that are metro-practical, yes please. But no white in the soles! Hello? It looks terrible. Flashy. The point of dressing well is subtlety and personal expression of style. Not high contrast elements that try to grab attention. Leave that sh*t to Cole Haan and their disposable junk. Hmm, their creative director once worked at Cole Haan - is that the problem? Mass =/= class.

I'm rather cynical about most clothing companies. Sooner or later even the conservative ones do stupid things to try to increase revenue because style is steady business, not growth business. I think Paul Stuart was going for a distinctive look, so that people would notice and say hey, where'd you get those shoes. They did a much better job with with their Hooper and Houston loafers, which are rubber soled and comfortable, but more classically styled.

Don't hold back.
I never get posts like that one. Or even this thread. How about not buying what you don't like and leaving it at that? Or is it some sort of goal to contaminate the choices of others with a long look down the nose and a hardy scoff.

 

[medhat]

It's the fashion. Not MY fashion, but clearly it has traction (hah, rubber sole, pun intended) among more than a few. I was at a meeting a few weeks ago and while still in the minority, these type shoes, with suits, have definitely made inroads. I'm sticking to my AEs with leather soles until they pry my cold dead hands from the laces. Which may come sooner than expected.

 

[William Kazak]

It is also about learning more about what is out there; trying to understand if it might be a practical choice or not. It is a new discussion. We discuss. We prefer, and we do not and we state some of the reasons how it may or not apply. Every thread need not be read if you are finding a topic uncomfortable to to your sensibilities.

 

[delicious_scent]

Don't hold back.
I never get posts like that one. Or even this thread. How about not buying what you don't like and leaving it at that? Or is it some sort of goal to contaminate the choices of others with a long look down the nose and a hardy scoff.

Well the shoe has 0 connection with classic menswear, tailoring, or timeless style.

It has the upper of a formal shoe in a casual colour: a brogued oxford in a tan colour. Already not going to work well with tailoring in most men's wardrobes. Tan AE Strands are generally not a versatile shoe.

Now let's slap on a sneaker sole to make it even more confusing and less useful.

This is part of a larger issue of online men's style: focusing on singular objects. Even in your earlier post, you mentioned "shoe world". It's easy to post pictures of shoes and only focus on wearing shoes. It's difficult to dress well in a cohesive manner. I see this with watches, shoes, and purses online.

I see @StephenRG post purple monstrosities, and I've seen your green wingtips. None of these have any history or connection to being worn in a classic menswear outfit.

There is nothing wrong with focusing on shoes as an aesthetic; streetwear and sneakerhead culture is built off this.

This isn't the streetwear and sneakerhead forum though.

Constructive criticism is important in adhering to an overall style.

I remember wearing a tie with a rust check sports coat, similiar to your Haspel, and you mentioned the jacket was too casual for a tie. Looking back, I agree. It was a very tweedy, rustic looking wool/silk/linen blend jacket.

I had an emerald green pair of trousers made in a wide waistband and a high rise. I recall you mentioning that it looked off worn by itself. I was defensive, but again you were right. I was focusing on a singular object rather than a cohesive whole for building an outfit.

 

[never behind]

I thought I was on the Timeless Style forum to discuss men’s style.

 

[Peak and Pine]

^^
Didn't come across as much of a discussion. More like a dump.

I know it’s a personal opinion but to me they look terrible. Bored rant over.

Let me explain something. My view on this will not hold up in a year probably (I hope). And I too may start a thread just as a dump. But right now, this very minute, all these threads bemoaning the state of Brooks Brothers, and now Allen Edmonds, come as unnecessary musings in a time already beset with the most depressing social climate in my lifetime. With such an atmosphere, the smallest pile on can ruin a brief check in here. But it will pass. (The Texas thing may take longer.)

 

[Peak and Pine]

Well the shoe has 0 connection with classic menswear, tailoring, or timeless style.

So? A made-up criteria, but go with it anyway.

I've added a ticket pocket type thing on the wrong side (I'm left handed) to a jacket, sized just to hold my specific cell phone, unflap'ed for easy access, the depth of the pocket a half-inch less than the length of the phone so it will peek out a smidge for easy grabbing. It has zero tie in to classical men's style because this is 2022, so you might consider moving with the flow, or maybe, like my pocket thing, making the flow up.

Anyway, you have written a long and highly entertaining post in which you recall a number of posts, forgotten by me but not disowned, and while seeming to have floated away from the specific topic at hand, the sh*t on of a new AE model, you have brought up some interesting points as you almost always do and I would like to join in with them when time allows. So, later. And they're not green wingtips, they're spectators, Winnipeg should catch up on the latest in 1920s footwear.

 

[Peak and Pine]

It is also about learning more about what is out there; trying to understand if it might be a practical choice or not. It is a new discussion. We discuss. We prefer, and we do not and we state some of the reasons how it may or not apply.

Why thank you. Inform Websters, have them stick that in there as an example in their patronizing entry.

Every thread need not be read if you are finding a topic uncomfortable to your sensibilities.

Ah, the old America, love it or leave it. I've missed that hoary, old tact.

 

[makingmark]

Don't hold back.
I never get posts like that one. Or even this thread. How about not buying what you don't like and leaving it at that? Or is it some sort of goal to contaminate the choices of others with a long look down the nose and a hardy scoff.

I think you get it pretty clearly. I don’t get this trend, you don’t get my looking down it. We expressed our opinions. How about not critiquing critiques you don’t agree with? Nope. I will look down on stupid fashion and you’re free to look down at me looking down.

 

[smmrfld]

I think you get it pretty clearly. I don’t get this trend, you don’t get my looking down it. We expressed our opinions. How about not critiquing critiques you don’t agree with? Nope. I will look down on stupid fashion and you’re free to look down at me looking down.

Agree completely with you…ugly AF.

 

[Peak and Pine]

I will look down on stupid fashion and you’re free to look down at me looking down.

Fair enough.
I've run into people who think and talk like you all my life. The advantage here, as opposed to real life, is that I can take a little cyber stroll to the other side of the world whenever I see a bitch fest coming, and should have done so earlier. My apologies.

 

[never behind]

You should try it

I honestly want to know why I should try it. I am sure they are comfortable but I have comfortable casual shoes. Are they THAT comfortable? More so than canvas sneaker or a boat shoe? They seem to me too “nice” with the upper to wear with a chino (I don’t like the look of oxfords with casual pants). And the white rubber sole too casual for slacks. To me they tried to make something that worked with both sides but ended up working with nothing.

 

[jackmccullough]

I know these have been around a while, but their wear has exploded in my office lately. I even saw someone wearing with a suit. I get being casual but why not wear loafers, camp mocs, boat shoes or even canvas sneakers? I know it’s a personal opinion but to me they look terrible. Bored rant over.

View attachment 87132

Yeah, those are awful. It seems that they're trying to have it both ways.

Are these AE? Every one of their shoes that edges into the casual shoe/dressier sneaker category is as ugly as sin.

 

[never behind]

Yeah, those are awful. It seems that they're trying to have it both ways.

Are these AE? Every one of their shoes that edges into the casual shoe/dressier sneaker category is as ugly as sin.

Yes those are AE.