There is a bias towards shoe shape, when I browse the web. People adore the beautiful line of an Italian or a French shoe. The discussion about shoe fit is there too, yet marginalized.
In a world of ready-to-wear I guess it must be so. Since very few buy bespoke shoes, which excel in fit (and make) usually, the field of focus become supreme shoe shape. Everybody can relate to that. Moreover, shoe shape is much more visible than shoe fit.
A discussion with a very experienced bespoke customer made me think about the proper shoe fit and proper shoe shape debate again.
“French shoes don’t fit”, he said directly.
I suppose some do. But I understand his priority. Super shoes begin with a super fit. In principle the rest is just styling. Clearly, well-fitting shoes with no elegant lines are useless for the man-about-town. However, true style includes functionality that only you will notice, for instance an excellent shoe fit. Style needs depth.
To bring on Nietzsche:
“Those Greeks were superficial – out of profundity.”
Moreover, if shoes don’t fit less elegant leather folds can appear over time. The once beautiful shoe shape can collapse.
Duel between bespoke shoes
Let’s look at an example of proper shoe fit and proper shoe shape within the category of bespoke shoes …
Photography: Sartorial Notes
It’s been interesting to follow your personal bespoke experiences over the years. And to get some feedback on different styles and price points within this little word. So you get what you pay for, right?
What I’ve been told about bespoke shoes is that contrary to RTW shoes, they support the footbed, giving more support from below. Is that true and if so, is that the case with both pairs shown above? Thank you, Torsten.
The extra support is all over, I would say: the footbed, the arc, the heel, the upper, especially the Klemanns have a certain “grip” around the foot.
I suppose you get, what you pay for, more or less