Style

Whatsa Matter With Choo?

From Old Navy to Prada, shoes this spring are really crazy—dare we say ugly, even. Artists like Cindy Sherman appreciate them. But ordinary New York women are baffled

This article was published in the April 7, 2008, edition of The New York Observer.

From left: Azzedine Alaia goes gladiator; Angie Harmon takes the Prada challenge; dubious Dolce & Gabbana.
Getty Images
From left: Azzedine Alaia goes gladiator; Angie Harmon takes the Prada challenge; dubious Dolce & Gabbana.

On Sunday, March 30, in the shoe department on the fifth floor of Bergdorf Goodman, ladies of varying age were sitting with box after box piled before them and male shopping companions collapsed at their sides, wearing the typical lobotomized expressions of men forced to undertake a woman’s expedition. A small crowd had gathered near a display of Christian Louboutin pumps made of cork, while others longingly pawed at the mass of Manolo Blahniks. But at the other end of the floor, another shoe stood tall and alone, crying out for the attention it would be denied by most, if not all, shoppers: a Marni wedge with a five-inch black platform and thick straps of brown and chartreuse patent calf leather, a cabbage in a rose bed, one ugly heel.

“It’s very retro. It feels like a costume, or a film. Like Clockwork Orange or a Mad Max kind of thing,” said Lara Greenberg, eyeing the Marni monstrosity. “It’s a statement.” Ms. Greenberg, an interior designer in her thirties with curly blond hair swept back, was wearing a stylish white trench coat and a pair of low black wedges. (Chinatown, $40!)

A woman named Gail, standing nearby, was less circumspect. “Those are insane,” she said.

This “runway wedge” (and really, where is the line that separates a wedge from a stripper shoe?) is hardly alone in a shoe season that seems to be foisting tackiness upon us and calling it couture. Prada, Miu Miu, Dolce & Gabbana, Pierre Hardy, Marc Jacobs, Gucci and others (even Old Navy!) are peddling everything from the ankle-cuff stiletto (dominatrix much?) to the spike-heeled patent leather, lace-up loafer. (We thought booties were for babies.) And don’t forget the inches-high, covertly slutty, Balenciaga-influenced gladiator sandal, a style we do our best to ignore in flats but absolutely reject in a heel.

Such shoe strangeness is everywhere: creeping into fashion spreads in everything from Vogue to Us; decorating shop windows all over Soho; peeking out from under those equally unappealing maxi-dresses. It may be expensive. It might be “wearable art,” as its (few) proponents argue. But it is godawful ugly.

‘A Little Fashion-Victimy’

Perhaps we should have anticipated this turn for the trash. After years of watching women stock their closets with those perfect Louboutin peep-toe pumps, with their tell-tale and perfectly sexy red soles; the classic Manolo ankle-tie in its metallics and pastels; and the Jimmy Choo Mary Jane with its straps across the arch and golden buckle, it seems inevitable that more adventurous designers would stage a revolt, a.k.a. give us something else to buy already.

But turning the actual heel of the shoe into a candlestick or a stem, a move some genius at Prada decided to green-light, is too easy, too silly. Same with slapping a spike, or a cork wedge, on a sneaker. As with men, height in heels does not make for automatic beauty. (And speaking of men, their reaction to these babies, judging from a casual survey of office heterosexuals, ranges from “hideous” to “horrible” to “yeesh.”)

Back at Bergdorf, a customer who won’t give her name because she “works in the industry” was examining a pair of Gucci wedge tennis shoes ($550). “They’re a little fashion-victimy,” she said. A pair of Dolce & Gabbana snakeskin lace-up booties (with black sneaker-style laces no less), selling for $1,195, were even more tragic.

But when it comes to heels, Prada, as is its wont, is definitely the most violent offender this season. Anyone else remember their hollow-soled horrors modeled by Cameron Diaz in Harper’s Bazaar a decade ago? Now it appears as though the house, which is also carrying a line of safe, classy leather stilettos this season, hired Wavy Gravy to dash off a few sketches. With thick candle-snuffer heels and cartoonish patchwork of colored leather, Prada’s “Groove is in the Heart”-esque Mary Janes look like the work of someone on acid, or at least weed. Hydroponic weed.

And how about their boots? These consist of a gold cuff that covers the calf attached to a black-and-gold peep-toe heel (though modest) with a strap over the arch ($970).

“They go too far,” said Chantal Deneef, a Belgian woman in her mid-40’s who was shopping at Bergdorf. She was wearing blue mascara and lots of perfume. “But that’s the problem with fashion at the moment,” Ms. Deneef said. She blamed the proliferation of ugly heels on newly wealthy Russians who want something more extravagant. “We European people won’t wear that,” she kindly explained. “We are very—not so fashionable, but more simple,” preferring “something chic, something that stays.” Next Page >

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

Girl about town (not verified) says:

Fashion is so ugly that they have to change it every six months!

totally trippin' (not verified) says:

OMG: EVER SINCE SEEING THE FIRST PEEP-TOE BOOTIE ON THE RUNWAY, I'VE BEEN ASKING MYSELF "WHY?".

PEEP-TOE...FINE.

ANKLE BOOTS...CUTE...EVEN WITH A MINI AND TIGHTS.

BUT IN COMBINATION? IT'S AN OXYMORON FOR ONE.

THIS STYLE WILL HAVE THE SAME SHELF LIFE AS THE $650 CLEAR PLASTIC DESIGNER TOTES. FLASH IN THE TRASH!

Poochie (not verified) says:

Where did this Hillary get her ideas from? First of all that headline was stoo-pid.

And I really can't believe some of the lines in there - "where is the line that separates a wedge from a stripper shoe?" - What??? Seriously?

And "We thought booties were for babies." !!!

I can't imagine that my black satin Prada flower heels look anything but elegant. I guess I'm just not "ordinary" and am "a bona fide intellectual who appreciates them."

Good. I hope she keeps folks away. More for me.

Plus what century is this - why the heck would I be concerned about dressing to please men. As you all should know, (most straight) men don't really have an opinion on such matters.

Luv
Poochie
www.shoedaydreams.com

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.