[Jerry M]

I'm considering buying a pair of dark cherry Dr. Marten's chelsea boots for casual wear. I would wear them primarily with dark jeans and a button down shirt. I like how they look, but have only really seen pictures of the shoes themselves and am having a bit of a hard time imagining how they would look paired with various jeans/chinos/shirts.

Do you think they look garish? Would they be relatively versatile like oxblood shoes?

I'm pretty new to this site, but I have the impression that much of the content deals with suits and upscale clothes. I am an attorney, but I'm not wealthy and my firm, like most these days it seems, is fairly casual when we are not in court. (Even the attorneys who interviewed me were wearing jeans) I try to buy clothes that look nice, but aren't particularly expensive. I realize that many or most of you may be used to higher end garments.

I've built a decent wardrobe of suits, dress shirts and ties, but have always felt a bit less confident with my sense for more casual clothes. I'm starting with a new firm in a couple of weeks and I want to look nice and relatively modern, but I don't want to be the only attorney in the office wearing suits daily if everyone else is wearing jeans or chinos. I might wear suits more often once I have been there a bit longer.

h

 

[StephenRG]

Let us ignore all those posts that will recommend you consider chukkas instead

You are buying a pair of cheap boots. They look like corrected grain, which if done very well isn't an issue (though it's not to everyone's taste), but if done cheaply, will start looking crappy - not merely "aged" - fairly soon.

I find Doc Marten's somewhat blobby, but as you presumably like the shape, that doesn't matter. IMO Chelsea boots should at least have a certain stylishness to them, and these do not. Still, it's a personal choice.

As far as alternatives go - I suspect Magnannis or the like are not what you're looking for, but, though I have no personal knowledge of the brand, you may find that Frye has some interesting offerings on sale.

 

[Jerry M]

Let us ignore all those posts that will recommend you consider chukkas instead

You are buying a pair of cheap boots. They look like corrected grain, which if done very well isn't an issue (though it's not to everyone's taste), but if done cheaply, will start looking crappy - not merely "aged" - fairly soon.

I find Doc Marten's somewhat blobby, but as you presumably like the shape, that doesn't matter. IMO Chelsea boots should at least have a certain stylishness to them, and these do not. Still, it's a personal choice.

As far as alternatives go - I suspect Magnannis or the like are not what you're looking for, but, though I have no personal knowledge of the brand, you may find that Frye has some interesting offerings on sale.

I already have a pair of chukkas, and was interested in trying chelseas. One hesitation on the Doc Marten's for me is the thick sole and light color of the sole makes them almost exclusively casual in my opinion, but that isn't a serious issue given the way I intend to wear them.

I just looked up Magnannis. Certainly they make some nice shoes, but apparently out of my price range for the most part, though I do see a few on sale on Zappos. (first thing that came up when searching). I've never spent more than $200 for a pair of shoes. Just a few years ago $300 seemed like kind of a lot of money for a suit. I grew up somewhat poor. I am the first person in my family to get a college degree and though I am an attorney now, I still don't make a lot of money. I'm trying to up my sartorial game, but still on a budget.

In any case, my question was mainly whether they would be relatively versatile to pair or whether the color would make them harder to pair.

 

[Flanderian]

I already have a pair of chukkas, and was interested in trying chelseas. One hesitation on the Doc Marten's for me is the thick sole and light color of the sole makes them almost exclusively casual in my opinion, but that isn't a serious issue given the way I intend to wear them.

I just looked up Magnannis. Certainly they make some nice shoes, but apparently out of my price range for the most part, though I do see a few on sale on Zappos. (first thing that came up when searching). I've never spent more than $200 for a pair of shoes. Just a few years ago $300 seemed like kind of a lot of money for a suit. I grew up somewhat poor. I am the first person in my family to get a college degree and though I am an attorney now, I still don't make a lot of money. I'm trying to up my sartorial game, but still on a budget.

In any case, my question was mainly whether they would be relatively versatile to pair or whether the color would make them harder to pair.

I don't like to throw money around either, but footwear is one article of clothing that is worth paying enough for to get good quality. If properly cared for, good footwear will last many, many years. Of course, if that's not an interest, you can disregard this.

I don't care for Chelsea boots, that's purely personal. But I think most would consider those you're thinking of badly sub-optimal, unless you're into that particular aesthetic. Many Chelsea fanciers consider R M Williams the gold standard, and I agree they're very handsome and well made for what they are.

https://www.rmwilliams.com.au/men/footwear/boots?lang=en_AU

But they're $500+ now, which I take it is more than you wish to pay.

One value priced English maker from which I've purchased four different shoes, makes very solid, carefully made footwear. And if their Chelsea appeals, it would cost you around $240 Ex-VAT.

https://www.bradshawandlloyd.com/sanders-towcester-r8235t-brown

 

[Jerry M]

UPDATE: I have taken your comments and general themes from this site to heart and decided to avoid the Dr. Martens, but I did find a pair of Allen Edmonds brown suede chukkas on sale at Zappos 1/2 off - less than $200. I'm assuming these would more likely meet with your approval.

 

[eagle2250]

I don't like to throw money around either, but footwear is one article of clothing that is worth paying enough for to get good quality. If properly cared for, good footwear will last many, many years. Of course, if that's not an interest, you can disregard this.

I don't care for Chelsea boots, that's purely personal. But I think most would consider those you're thinking of badly sub-optimal, unless you're into that particular aesthetic. Many Chelsea fanciers consider R M Williams the gold standard, and I agree they're very handsome and well made for what they are.

https://www.rmwilliams.com.au/men/footwear/boots?lang=en_AU

But they're $500+ now, which I take it is more than you wish to pay.

One value priced English maker from which I've purchased four different shoes, makes very solid, carefully made footwear. And if their Chelsea appeals, it would cost you around $240 Ex-VAT.

https://www.bradshawandlloyd.com/sanders-towcester-r8235t-brown

Finding myself inspired by your most instructive post, I will be wearing my RM Williams Chestnut hued Craftsman Chelsea boots to Sunday services this AM. Unless I am mistaken there are sources from which these boots can still be had for a bit over $300. I've been wearing my first pair for well over a decade and, other than the soles/heels, they still look pristine. To my mind, that's very good value!

 

[SG_67]

It looks like something a 15 year old girl would wear. You can do better.

 

[Woofa]

It is sometimes difficult for us here in what is, for the most part, a conservative forum to choose amongst and give our blessings to clothing that would never have been acceptable thirty years ago. I think we understand that times have changed for the more casual but as a group, I believe that we think this has gone too far in many instances.
I think that you are saying you are looking for a pair of shoes/boots to wear to your new law office when dressing casually on non court days. Personally, I believe chelsea boots and chukkas can dress down well but would be very hesitant to meet with clients (or even be seen in a legal setting,) with any but the most conservative versions of those models.
Personally I cannot imagine a law firm which actually goes to court on some occasions allowing its lawyers to dress down to jeans on non court days with rare exceptions. But, things have changed since I was a kid. Still, always better to be the best dressed guy as opposed to the one dressed too casually. I think the choices shown so far are too casual for a professional job setting. Lots of good advice here to help in that but wool pants, button down shirts and relatively conservative shoes in black, dark brown or an oxblood would seem a good place to start. You can always buy more casual wear after you have been with them for a significant period of time. And these things can be bought on a budget. Many here do. I personally buy most my clothing used via thrift stores or eBay.
Finding ask Andy was a great start, I wish you luck.

 

[derum]

I'm considering buying a pair of dark cherry Dr. Marten's chelsea boots for casual wear. I would wear them primarily with dark jeans and a button down shirt. I like how they look, but have only really seen pictures of the shoes themselves and am having a bit of a hard time imagining how they would look paired with various jeans/chinos/shirts.

Do you think they look garish? Would they be relatively versatile like oxblood shoes?

I'm pretty new to this site, but I have the impression that much of the content deals with suits and upscale clothes. I am an attorney, but I'm not wealthy and my firm, like most these days it seems, is fairly casual when we are not in court. (Even the attorneys who interviewed me were wearing jeans) I try to buy clothes that look nice, but aren't particularly expensive. I realize that many or most of you may be used to higher end garments.

I've built a decent wardrobe of suits, dress shirts and ties, but have always felt a bit less confident with my sense for more casual clothes. I'm starting with a new firm in a couple of weeks and I want to look nice and relatively modern, but I don't want to be the only attorney in the office wearing suits daily if everyone else is wearing jeans or chinos. I might wear suits more often once I have been there a bit longer.

h View attachment 25114

I have a pair exactly like the picture, and wear them often whilst riding a motorcycle or walking the dogs. They are very comfortable and look good, in my opinion, with jeans.
Doc Martens generally are far more popular in the U.K. than here, though the lace up models are the most popular. If you like them, get them, but they are for casual wear only.
I am not a 15 year old girl.

 

[icky thump]

Doc Martens really gained traction from the UK Punk movement. I had a pair when y'all were merely a gleam in yo daddy's eyes.

My memory though, is that they looked good but fit very poorly in that they gave blisters galore.

Blundstones are a cheap, good-looking, better fitting alternative

 

[Jerry M]

It is sometimes difficult for us here in what is, for the most part, a conservative forum to choose amongst and give our blessings to clothing that would never have been acceptable thirty years ago. I think we understand that times have changed for the more casual but as a group, I believe that we think this has gone too far in many instances.
I think that you are saying you are looking for a pair of shoes/boots to wear to your new law office when dressing casually on non court days. Personally, I believe chelsea boots and chukkas can dress down well but would be very hesitant to meet with clients (or even be seen in a legal setting,) with any but the most conservative versions of those models.
Personally I cannot imagine a law firm which actually goes to court on some occasions allowing its lawyers to dress down to jeans on non court days with rare exceptions. But, things have changed since I was a kid. Still, always better to be the best dressed guy as opposed to the one dressed too casually. I think the choices shown so far are too casual for a professional job setting. Lots of good advice here to help in that but wool pants, button down shirts and relatively conservative shoes in black, dark brown or an oxblood would seem a good place to start. You can always buy more casual wear after you have been with them for a significant period of time. And these things can be bought on a budget. Many here do. I personally buy most my clothing used via thrift stores or eBay.
Finding ask Andy was a great start, I wish you luck.

Thank you for your input. To be honest, I am a very much a newcomer to dressing well. Though I am in my 40's, I worked in IT for most of my career and only matriculated from law school about 4 years ago. Even then, my idea of a "nice suit" was something from The Men's Wearhouse or Jos. A Banks and my sense of color coordination was minimal, but I have made a significant effort to learn over the last year or two, which includes doing a lot of reading and watching videos from Ask Andy, The Gentlemen's Gazette, and Real Men, Real Style. I live in Houston, Texas and I think you might be appalled at the general sense of style here, including what many attorneys wear to court. Cowboy boots with suits are common as are mixing chinos and ill-fitting blazers. (Mostly for short hearings before a judge, not necessarily full-length trials) Dress shoes are sometimes not well kept, for some reason brown dress shoes in particular seem like they have been worn daily without being polished for 25 years.

My new firm is a medium-sized firm of about 50 attorneys in a very nice building downtown and even I was surprised that my interviewer was wearing jeans in the interview. It wasn't even a Friday. From what I have heard from other attorneys and read in job descriptions, many law firms now have a casual dress policy and attorneys often just keep a suit at the ready in the office should they need to go to court on short notice. I would actually prefer wearing a suit everyday, having invested in several nice suits, shirts, ties, and pocket squares recently, but I don't want to stick out too much right away. I want to get a feel for the office first.

I started buying made to measure shirts around two years ago because I have a very large neck (19"), but otherwise a medium frame and I never had dress shirts that fit properly. I often had to leave the top button undone behind the tie because I couldn't get it buttoned and the rest of the shirt still fit like a tent. I made some very foolish choices at first since I was used to getting recommendations from the sales clerk and now had dozens of options and customizations to choose from without guidance. That's when I realized I definitely needed to educate myself to known what to buy.

 

[derum]

Doc Martens really gained traction from the UK Punk movement. I had a pair when y'all were merely a gleam in yo daddy's eyes.

My memory though, is that they looked good but fit very poorly in that they gave blisters galore.

Blundstones are a cheap, good-looking, better fitting alternative

They were popular long before punk, skinheads were wearing them in the sixties.
Then they were all British made, but now many are made in China, but you can buy made in Britain at a premium.
There is a comparable alternative, Solovair, who make a dealer boot as well as many other styles, and were the first to make these boots with the 'Air Wair' sole
As with all footwear if you buy the right size they will fit.

 

[SG_67]

Sorry, but the only people I see wearing Dr. Marten’s are high school kids who are into Goth.

There are so many better options even as far as Chelsea boots and yes.....Chukka boots!

A few have been featured here and make for a good jumping off point.

 

[RogerP]

I'm glad you've abandoned the Docs.... just..... no.

A higher quality and more sleek Chelsea should prove to be a versatile choice. Check out the offerings by Carlos Santos and Lof & Tung at www.skoaktiebolaget.com

And chukkas rule for versatility in smart casual mens' footwear. I'm not sure why you were cautioned to ignore them. That would be a mistake.

I regret to report that my own law office is rapidly descending to the sartorial circumstance you describe. Suits are now by far the exception to the rule - so is a jacket of any kind, to be honest.

 

[icky thump]

As with all footwear if you buy the right size they will fit.

The moral of the story is: If they had half sizes, I'd have chose a half size. I'll never make that mistake again. No half sizes Walter. At least not then, when I bought them in the 1980s.

 

[medhat]

First, I don't/didn't have an issue with those particular Docs. If you like them, that's cool. But... they are sort of a "statement" shoe, ie. people will likely notice, so if that's your intent, great. The chukka's (with the red highlights) are significantly more subtle (even with the red), and that's probably the way I'd lean, especially if you're just starting with the firm. Formal or not, having a few pairs of just regular leather lace ups (oxford or blucher, IMO really immaterial) seems a baseline starting point, and can be very versatile, depending on color and style working with anything from jeans to suiting. A more casual environment offers even more options for sole materials apart from leather. But personally, I'm glad you held off the Docs.

 

[challer]

DMs are not very great shoes. Try Carmina, JM Weston and you'll be very happy.