# Rainbow Sandals: Trendy or Timeless?



## Lawson (Dec 2, 2007)

Rainbow sandals were outrageously popular a few years ago and are still prominent on college campuses. Do the shoes deserve classic status, or should they be tossed in the same dustbin as Members Only jackets? Is there a place for them in the Trad canon? 

Once again, I am not sure how common leather flip-flops were among 1950s Ivy League students or if they are primarily linked to hippies.


----------



## videocrew (Jun 25, 2007)

I'm currently on my third pair. I don't care if they're trad or not, nothing is more comfortable to just throw on with a pair of shorts in the summer. A lifetime guarantee is nice, but I generally wear through the sole, so its a no-go for me. I wouldn't wear them for something important, but to walk down to the coffee shop on a saturday morning in the summer, I'm a fan.


----------



## Prepstyle (Jul 13, 2007)

No. Don't get me wrong, I love my rainbows, but I don't think any sandal is "trad." I'll let some of the more experienced members respond as to why not.


----------



## Untilted (Mar 30, 2006)

are they TNSIL? 

**** no.


They are comfy though. I wear flip flops in the summer at times. Although i hate it when people wear rainbows with their blazers and ties.


----------



## wnh (Nov 4, 2006)

My question is: Why wear flip-flops when you can wear pennies or boat shoes and look 10x better?

If you've got 'em and you throw 'em on to go check the mail, fine. But if you're going anywhere else, put some real shoes on.


----------



## Bob Loblaw (Mar 9, 2006)

*Disqualified due to outsourcing.*

Once advertised as "Proudly Made in the USA," Rainbow Sandals are now produced 'off shore' in China. This change in production was made in 2002.


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

wnh said:


> My question is: Why wear flip-flops when you can wear pennies or boat shoes and look 10x better?
> 
> If you've got 'em and you throw 'em on to go check the mail, fine. But if you're going anywhere else, put some real shoes on.


Amen.

Brian


----------



## Speas (Mar 11, 2004)

I blame this on the damn hippies

No one should be forced to see your toes unless you are going to or from the water (or Hawaiian - sorry Tom)


----------



## StevenRocks (May 24, 2005)

Lawson said:


> Rainbow sandals were outrageously popular a few years ago and are still prominent on college campuses. Do the shoes deserve classic status, or should they be tossed in the same dustbin as Members Only jackets? Is there a place for them in the Trad canon?


They were a trend, and not particularly Trad.


----------



## Bishop of Briggs (Sep 7, 2007)

StevenRocks said:


> They were a trend, and not particularly Trad.


+1. I wear boat shoes too.


----------



## A.Squire (Apr 5, 2006)

I think they're just the thing if you're in college (peer pressure and all) or...well I can't even think of any other time I'd wear them.


----------



## LeatherSOUL (May 8, 2005)

Speas said:


> I blame this on the damn hippies
> 
> No one should be forced to see your toes unless you are going to or from the water (or Hawaiian - sorry Tom)


Hehe. 

Definitely NOT Trad nor very fashionable, but here in Hawaii flip-flops or "slippahs" as they're called here, are standard issue.

Try these instead, they're made in the US (Pearl City, Hawaii).


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Speas said:


> I blame this on the damn hippies


I blame _everything_ on the damn hippies.


----------



## kevinbelt (Dec 2, 2007)

wnh said:


> My question is: Why wear flip-flops when you can wear pennies or boat shoes and look 10x better?


This is why I started wearing boat shoes. Flip-flops are uncomfortable, too.


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

Flipflops aren't hippie sandals, they're postwar beachbum sandals, an American-Japanese hybrid like Hawaiian shirts. Great for walking in the surf, a bit impractical off the beach, but not necessarily any more than boat shoes off the boat. I wouldn't want to go on a hike in either of them, but they're fine for loafing around in.

Rainbows are durable. They have rubber outsoles and leather straps and insoles. Until recently they were made in the US, they're understated as far as flipflops go, and the only branding is a tag with a rainbow on it that can easily be snipped off. I don't know about Rainbows in particular, but if flip flops become a classic, flip flops like Rainbows will be at the top of the pile. Only time will tell.


----------



## Arid (Feb 13, 2007)

vwguy said:


> Amen.
> 
> Brian


+1
Totally!


----------



## longwing (Mar 28, 2005)

It is rare that a new topic comes up on the trad forum, such is the nature of things. But as far as I know this is the first serious discussion of flip flops. I hope it will be the last.

They are not trad. Being popular on campus way back in 2002 does not make something trad. Anyone thinking for a second that flip flops may be trad needs to take an evening and read some of the posts on this board. 

There must be places to discuss flip flops. This isn't one.


----------



## Naval Gent (May 12, 2007)

^+100. Hear, hear. Well said, sir.

Scott


----------



## wolfhound986 (Jun 30, 2007)

wnh said:


> My question is: Why wear flip-flops when you can wear pennies or boat shoes and look 10x better?
> 
> If you've got 'em and you throw 'em on to go check the mail, fine. But if you're going anywhere else, put some real shoes on.


+100. My sentiments exactly.


----------



## Falstaff (Oct 18, 2007)

Great in college. Not great elsewhere. Definitely preppy, but not trad.


----------



## Lawson (Dec 2, 2007)

LongWing said:


> They are not trad. Being popular on campus way back in 2002 does not make something trad. Anyone thinking for a second that flip flops may be trad needs to take an evening and read some of the posts on this board.


I was hoping an expert on Trad origins would educate us on the presence of leather sandals at 1950s Ivy League schools. If they were common, perhaps Rainbows could be viewed as an innovation on the Trad look.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Lawson said:


> I was hoping an expert on Trad origins would educate us on the presence of leather sandals at 1950s Ivy League schools. If they were common, perhaps Rainbows could be viewed as an innovation on the Trad look.


When trying to imagine trad, remember that 1950's Ivy league meant rich and well connected even more than it does today. Kids from powerful families may wear pants with crabs on them, but they don't wear sandals.

I'm guessing you've seen The Wedding Crashers? You know the scene where they are at Christopher Walken's house and the put on the clothing that was there since the clothes they had of their own were their tuxedos? That's basically the casual end of trad.


----------



## wnh (Nov 4, 2006)

Falstaff said:


> Great in college. Not great elsewhere. Definitely preppy, but not trad.


I think that the "preppy" you're speaking of is vastly different than the "preppy" that is commonly referred to on this forum. "Preppy," as it is most often used here, is sort of a "gateway to trad" style, a younger trad, if you will. "Preppy" as you just used it is, I think, how many people use it today, to signify the people who wear whatever is popular currently; wearing vintage t-shirts was "preppy" a few years back, for example. Two different animals entirely.


----------



## wnh (Nov 4, 2006)

Lawson said:


> I was hoping an expert on Trad origins would educate us on the presence of leather sandals at 1950s Ivy League schools. If they were common, perhaps Rainbows could be viewed as an innovation on the Trad look.


Keep in mind, not _everything_ that Ivy League students wore during the 1950s is trad, nor is trad confined to what was worn on Ivy League campuses then. It was a place for trad style, but it wasn't the only, nor necessarily definitive, place.


----------



## 15DollarMan (Dec 28, 2005)

videocrew said:


> I'm currently on my third pair. I don't care if they're trad or not, nothing is more comfortable to just throw on with a pair of shorts in the summer. A lifetime guarantee is nice, but I generally wear through the sole, so its a no-go for me. I wouldn't wear them for something important, but to walk down to the coffee shop on a saturday morning in the summer, I'm a fan.


+1 I just ordered my second pair XXL in the same style as the OP posted. I agree with videocrew and since I live in a tropical island, 'summer' is whatever I want it to be.

Edited to add: I'm in the Caribbean AND in college so I guess I *can* wear them. I think they go well with my linen jacket, not so well with my seersucker. So I guess that's a 0 Trad quotient.



Lawson said:


> Do the shoes deserve classic status, or should they be tossed in the same dustbin as Members Only jackets?


I vote for Classic status, even if not Trad. Those in colder climates may disagree.


----------



## Falstaff (Oct 18, 2007)

wnh said:


> I think that the "preppy" you're speaking of is vastly different than the "preppy" that is commonly referred to on this forum. "Preppy," as it is most often used here, is sort of a "gateway to trad" style, a younger trad, if you will. "Preppy" as you just used it is, I think, how many people use it today, to signify the people who wear whatever is popular currently; wearing vintage t-shirts was "preppy" a few years back, for example. Two different animals entirely.


I consider "preppy" to mean polo shirts, oxfords, bow ties, and non-cargo shorts and pants. Preppy still encompasses blazers, but it doesn't exclude those that are darted and with shoulder padding. Pants can have pleats. I think of "preppy" being classic, constrainted by tradition, but without the understatement of TNSIL.
In college, at least, we all considered ourselves "preppy" because we wore those things. Polo shirts, khakis, ribbon/emblematic belt, and Rainbows/topsiders were pretty much the uniform in warm weather. We didn't exclude pleats, darts, or Wallabys, Crocs, or sandals, though. Certainly not TNSIL, but a more traditional look.
However, we did not consider kids preppy who wore those tight Abercrombie & Fitch "polos" with pre-torn cargo shorts.


----------



## Andy S. (Mar 27, 2007)

I have a pair, but I haven't worn them in almost 2 years. Boat shoes are my choice in a flip-flop situation. I have an old pair of top-siders that are incredibly comfortable and I unleash hell on them. I also have a newer pair for slightly dressier occasions, yet another alternative to Rainbows. You can't go wrong with boat shoes IMO.


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

wnh said:


> I think that the "preppy" you're speaking of is vastly different than the "preppy" that is commonly referred to on this forum. "Preppy," as it is most often used here, is sort of a "gateway to trad" style, a younger trad, if you will. "Preppy" as you just used it is, I think, how many people use it today, to signify the people who wear whatever is popular currently; wearing vintage t-shirts was "preppy" a few years back, for example. Two different animals entirely.


Well, there's preppy meaning young Trad, and there's preppy meaning I suppose the descendant of Trad that survived the 70s and can be found in frat houses today. If you took a fellow wearing a shag haircut, pastel polo shirt, shorts, and Rainbow sandals, and asked your average college-goer how that fellow was dressed, your answer would probably be "he dresses like a preppy" (or possibly "he dresses like a stupid fratboy", depending on the person asked. ). Wearing, say, a vintage school t-shirt would fit into new preppy, because it would suggest that an older relative had gone to the same school. Not Trad, but you can sort of see the family resemblance.


----------



## wnh (Nov 4, 2006)

The definition of "preppy," as I grew up hearing it used (in the semi-rural midwest), was more or less dressing like whatever is popular at the time. If it's ultra-slim-fit retro t-shirts, that was preppy. Same for madras and seersucker recently (which, though preppy in the OPH sense, were only coincidentally "preppy" for many). Whatever was in at the time was called preppy, whether or not it had anything to do with 80's prep school style.


----------



## Naval Gent (May 12, 2007)

wnh said:


> The definition of "preppy," as I grew up hearing it used (in the semi-rural midwest), was more or less dressing like whatever is popular at the time. If it's ultra-slim-fit retro t-shirts, that was preppy. Same for madras and seersucker recently (which, though preppy in the OPH sense, were only coincidentally "preppy" for many). Whatever was in at the time was called preppy, whether or not it had anything to do with 80's prep school style.


I don't mean to offend, but that's just wrong. "Prep style" has definite boundries. I admit the style can change, but a glacial pace. I don't know if Rainbow Sandals (whatver they are - sound like flip flops to me) are preppy or not to today's Preps. To my generation, they sound like something girls would wear.

My apologies for keeping this drivel going.

Scott


----------



## egadfly (Nov 10, 2006)

Why are we even discussing this? If you wear flip-flops in public, you're not Trad. Period.

EGF


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Naval Gent said:


> To my generation, they sound like something girls would wear.


Sound like that to me too, and I'm 21. I think the person you quoted was confusing preppy with trendy. Preppy is the donkey with a sweater around his neck and the donkey wearing flip flops is a **** whether or not he knows it. HAHAHAHA, funniest censoring of a word ever. S L O B????? Sorry to get around censoring mods, but in this case I figured it wouldn't be that big a deal.


----------



## GWhite (Aug 25, 2007)

egadfly said:


> Why are we even discussing this? If you wear flip-flops in public, you're not Trad. Period.
> 
> EGF


All that really needed to be said on this topic.


----------



## wnh (Nov 4, 2006)

Naval Gent said:


> I don't mean to offend, but that's just wrong. "Prep style" has definite boundries. I admit the style can change, but a glacial pace. I don't know if Rainbow Sandals (whatver they are - sound like flip flops to me) are preppy or not to today's Preps. To my generation, they sound like something girls would wear.


I know it's wrong, I was just explaining, to try to clarify my earlier reply to Falstaff, that that is the definition that I grew up hearing. I agree that it has nothing to do, except maybe coincidentally, with "preppy" as it is (correctly) used around here.


----------



## Falstaff (Oct 18, 2007)

egadfly said:


> Why are we even discussing this? If you wear flip-flops in public, you're not Trad. Period.
> 
> EGF


Sage, summary words, friend.


----------



## Lawson (Dec 2, 2007)

This discussion is useful. Part of defining Trad is establishing what it is not. Although forum members tend to agree that leather sandals are not Trad, many are drawn to them.


----------



## HistoryDoc (Dec 14, 2006)

Patrick06790 said:


> I blame _everything_ on the damn hippies.


Harumph.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Flip-flops may be hippie, trendy, and fratty...but they're not preppy.

That being said, I do own some...for the beach.


----------

