Thoughts on Shell #8 Color for wearability?

Discussion in 'Andy's Trad Forum' started by At Law, Apr 26, 2019.

  1. challer

    challer Active Member with Corp. Privileges

    297
    United States
    Virginia
    Alexandria
    Depends on which 8 you get. The near black, deep burgundy, tend to do well. The purplish version I found challenging to work with. My collection has morphed to mostly black shell and suede. Some whisky and brown, but few. No #8.
     
  2. frankmartin

    frankmartin New Member

    60
    United States
    Georgia
    Suwanee
  3. richard warren

    richard warren Active Member with Corp. Privileges

    477
    United States
    Louisiana
    covington
    I sometimes put my 2160’s (No. 8) on thinking they are my 2161’s (black), but usually realize it before I hit the door.

    The No. 8 is more versatile perhaps but I like the black just as well.

    There was a time when the only nonblack leather shoes I had were penny loafers and boat shoes, and and I got along fine.
     
  4. SG_67

    SG_67 Connoisseur

    United States
    Illinois
    Chicago
  5. frankmartin

    frankmartin New Member

    60
    United States
    Georgia
    Suwanee
    Take a look at the pictures in that auction. What color do you think the shoes are?
     
  6. FLMike

    FLMike Connoisseur

    United States
    FL
    West Coast
    Ah, the controversial cap toe blucher. And not just one pair, but two!
     
  7. SG_67

    SG_67 Connoisseur

    United States
    Illinois
    Chicago
    Did it occur to you that the seller might just have made an error? It happens on eBay.

    Also, online pics are a poor representation of the true nature of the color.
     
    Corcovado likes this.
  8. richard warren

    richard warren Active Member with Corp. Privileges

    477
    United States
    Louisiana
    covington
    I think technically they are Derby’s (Derbies?) even though Alden calls them Bluchers and you’d think they would know.

    Don’t know if I have ever seen any actual cap toe Bluchers.

    I take it you don’t think highly of them.

    Oh well.
     
  9. Mike Petrik

    Mike Petrik Honors Member

    United States
    Georgia
    Atlanta
    Derbies (UK) = Bluchers (US)
    Oxfords (UK) = Balmorals (US)

    Cap toe bluchers definitely exist, but they are a bit controversial in some foolishly dogmatic quarters. The thinking is that since bals, all other things equal, are pretty much universally understood to be more formal than bluchers, they should be the shoe of choice for cap toes, which are regarded as the dress shoe highest on the scale of formality aside from actual formal wear (patent leather, opera pumps, etc.). Some dogmatists (not FLMike) argue, therefore, that if one wants a cap toe dress shoe it would be incongruous to select a blucher rather than a bal. The chief rebuttal is that some gents simply are more comfortable wearing bluchers due to the architecture of their feet. In any case knowledgeable men know that there is nothing wrong with cap toe bluchers, even if (all other things equal) they are just a bit less formal in appearance than cap toe bals. Finally, it is important to note that many characteristics of a shoe contribute to its formality or informality, for instance the shape of the last. And in this regard some bluchers have far more elegant lasts than some bals, and will appear more formal as a consequence.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019
    FLMike likes this.
  10. richard warren

    richard warren Active Member with Corp. Privileges

    477
    United States
    Louisiana
    covington
    There are people who profess to be experts who maintain there is a difference between the Blucher (forgive the capital but the word makes me think of the anti-Napoleon general, not the shoe; I also “mispronounce” it because I cannot bring myself to pronounce it improperly) and the derby (is it pronounced ”darby”? I will consult Google for support on this score.
     

Share This Page