The Death Of The Statement Shoe

We’ve all seen them. The look-at-me-do-you-know-how-much-these-cost type of footwear statements covered in studs, glitter and God knows whatever else. Embroidered velvet slippers with gold coats of arms, contrasting coloured rock studs or more tassels than a National Trust property; the experimentation with men’s footwear is over.

With prices pushing four figures, these are bling and bad taste all in one – and don’t they want you to know it. It’s not so much the designs that have killed this trend, it’s the type of people wearing them.

So, what’s the alternative? We’re seeing a return to more solid and handsome silhouettes. Dare we say traditional? Something that not only looks great, but works. Men are creatures of function and never more so than with footwear.

Our wardrobes consist of joined up segments. As the trouser shape changed, it had a knock on effect on our shoes. With skinny/slim cuts reigning supreme over the last few years, this made the whole shoe visible and therefore more important.

Where once the trouser covered half your footwear, it now lightly hovers above – and thus the statement shoe was born. However, it’s about time this trend gave way to something far more classic and tasteful, which works just as well with your collection of slim and skinny trousers.

The Return Of The Chelsea Boot

First, a brief history lesson: Chelsea boots, also known as Dealer boots, were initially created for horse riding. Unisex, they were tight-fitting, ankle-high boots which first appeared in Victorian times and were originally called paddock or jodhpur boots. Their most distinguishable feature was the elastic on the side that allowed you to effortlessly pull them on and off with the heel tab at the back.

Charles Goodyear’s development of vulcanized rubber in 1839 in Springfield, Massachusetts, enabled J Sparkes-Hall, bootmaker to Queen Victoria, to invent the elastic gusset boot in 1851. He later claimed “She [The Queen] walks in them daily and thus gives the strongest proof of the value she attaches to the invention.”