Explain to me: the taste for pointed shoes

Ask any shoe enthusiast what the ultimate in ugliness is for a shoe, and you'll likely get a description that goes something like this:

When you see this shoe, how many negative connotations come to mind about its hypothetical wearer?

Or, in a less cheap, but still unglamorous version, something like this:

The leather is better, the color is sober but this design, and above all, this shape... Immediate red card.

In short, you will have understood, today we are going to talk about the famous "pointed shoe".

Why does it persist among some people despite almost unanimous lynching by both experts and the general public for many years now?

An idea that is not new

Before we get to the heart of the debate, I find it interesting to point out that pointy shoes are not just a passing fad that has emerged in the 21st century for no explicable reason.

No, it seems that our ancestors have long been fascinated by the longest, most pointed shoe possible.

The longer it was, the more you "weighed in the game" of the shoe.

In the Middle Ages, the poulaine, a sort of long leather shoe with an oversized toe, was the object of all desires. Although it was banned by the royal powers in both France (1368) and England (1463) because it was considered crazy and cumbersome for prayer, nothing changed: until the end of the 15th century, it remained a powerful marker of social status, thus representing a fashion that would last nearly 250 years.

And for good reason: the longer and more pointed the shoe, the more complex and therefore expensive the craftsmanship required to make it. It didn't matter, therefore, whether they were ugly, bulky, or too flashy.

This last point was even more of an advantage than a defect: when a nobleman or a rich merchant wore poulaines, his wealth was evident from head to toe, literally.

And one might be tempted to believe that this fascination with the "extension" of the foot stops there, but that is not the case.

Have you ever looked at engravings and illustrations of 19th century dandies?

There are no "pointed" shoes, strictly speaking, but men are always represented with the most slender morphology possible : thin hands, long limbs, wasp waists, and above all... thin feet.

In this representation of Beau Brummel, first of the "Dandies", we can clearly see an extremely fine foot, although the shoe is not strictly speaking pointed.

We are no longer in the ostentation of the medieval poulaine, because the foot remains proportional to the body, but the idea of ​​a foot as elongated as possible persists.

Here, the feet almost become needles, tiny supports destined to disappear under the trousers of these gentlemen.

This finesse, assimilated to refinement, still finds an echo in today's canons. One only has to see the preponderance of thinness among models during fashion shows.

Moreover, this refinement seems to have been supported by a craft phenomenon similar to that of poulaines: for ages, shoemakers have engaged in a relentless competition on technical prowess. And guess what... Making the narrowest, most slender shoe with the most pinched arch possible is one of the best ways to show off your know-how.

Take a look at this shoe by Daniel Wegan, a Swedish shoemaker who previously worked for the very beautiful house of Gaziano & Girling :

A masterpiece of craftsmanship, with an assumed surrealism: what kind of arch does one need to wear such a pinched sole?

It earned him first place in the world shoemaking competition in 2019. It is obviously a pure exhibition model, the aim of which is to evoke the illustrious times of shoemaking in the 19th century. However, it is said that such shoes were actually worn at the time, in order to give the wearer the slimmest possible foot... Even if it meant suffering .

However, the pinched arch remains one of the distinctive signs of very high-end shoes , and it has a reputation for making any pair of shoes more elegant by its simple presence.

As a final historical example, we could also cite cowboy boots nicknamed "santiags", whose shape, ending in a slightly turned-up point, I suspect is due to the advantage it gives to a rider.

If you've ever ridden a horse, you'll know that losing your stirrups is quite common and unpleasant. An extra length of toe on a boot would therefore allow for better control over them.

A pair of Lucchese (a traditional "western" shoe) in crocodile. The idea of ​​the tip is still there, although turned up.

It would also be this same mechanism that would be at the origin of all pointed shoes. And its very first expression in the West would go back to the soleret, a piece of armor intended for knights. The poulaines would only have arrived after the solerets, and the name "poulaine" would be explained precisely by these equestrian origins.

The soleret allowed the knight in full armour not to lose his stirrups. However, it was quite cumbersome to walk in.

It should also be noted that most shoes intended for horse riding, regardless of their origin, are often more tapered than round.

In short, in my opinion, these three cultural phenomena, namely:

• The narrowest possible foot is perceived as a refinement
• That of riders in the collective imagination, which has always been imbued with a certain virility and a certain charisma, from the cowboy to the knight.
• And above all, that of the shoe as an ostentatious means of displaying one's status.

Have endured through the ages, even semi-consciously , and largely explain the enduring fascination that the "slender" foot exerts on some people, even today.

Why do people like it?

We will therefore try to draw up a small argument of the arguments "in favor" of the so-called "pointed" shoe, or at least, give an overview of everything that fascinates about it:

• It's been associated with an idea of ​​ostentatious "prestige" since forever. Shoes are expensive, so basically "flashy shoes = money = power" .
• By playing on proportions, this creates a thinner and elongated foot , which evokes in some an idea of ​​refinement , linked in the collective unconscious, to the dandies of the 19th century.
• Like all slender objects, when they are well made, their design evokes dynamism, speed, sometimes a form of aggressiveness... Qualities that men love to adorn themselves with, precisely. Think for example of a Formula-1, or even the fire-Concorde.
  

  Now when you hear "young dynamic executive", you will imagine a salesman with two Concordes instead of shoes. You're welcome, it's a gift.

• And finally, the most psychoanalysts among us will of course see a phallic association of ideas : "You know what they say! Big feet, big..." In fact, we could extend the maxim to all the outgrowths that proudly sit on a man's body: his hands, his nose, his feet... It would seem that they are potentially associated with the size of the "virility" of their bearer.
  

  "Discover How This Kid Found A SECRET Technique To Increase His VIRILITY In Just 5 MINUTES!!! Seduction Coaches HATE Him!"

  According to my information, no scientific consensus has demonstrated any correlation of this kind, but what can you expect... As a little anecdote, Jordan told me that, when he was once a salesman for a shoe brand, he often saw women accompanying their husbands say "Oh no darling, you can't leave with this pair, your feet are way too small..." , subtly but firmly insisting on the implicit meaning of such a deficiency.

  Know, gentlemen, that there are, at this very moment, men forced to walk in shoes that are too big to preserve the image of their virility in the eyes of their wives... A minute of silence for our brothers who fell in combat, I beg you.

Why is it stuck?

The minute of silence having passed, let's now see why the pointed shoe is almost unanimously decried :

• We live in a society that really doesn't like feet , or drawing attention to them. Shoes seem to exist as much to protect and enhance them as to simply hide them . So it makes sense that a shoe shape that results in the foot being the center of attention is frowned upon.
  To be honest, I can't really say why. Is it cultural? Or do feet, on the contrary, create an innate fear in some human beings? In any case, if you want to get an idea, you should take a look at Jordan's article "Why I refuse to show my feet in the city" .
  If you still doubted it, the comments section will show you that in the eyes of more than one person, when it comes to feet and everything related to them, caution is advised.
• Following on from the previous argument, drawing attention to the foot tends to evoke comical figures : we say "stupid as one's feet", "clown's feet", we speak of "barges" or "ocean liners" when we have big feet.
• Some will add that drawing attention to the foot simply diverts attention from the face and torso, which are supposed to be the center of your person.

Pointed or tapered?

You may have noticed, but throughout the article, when talking about "pointed shoes", we are cheating a little, because we are lumping together a lot of things: from the "poultry-inspired" pair that evokes the worst stylistic disasters, to classic models with a narrow fit and more tapered lines, through to the shoe from a big bootmaker with very pinched lines.

But if I made this amalgamation it is because, for better or for worse, it is representative of a very widespread perception: in the eyes of more than one person, pointed or tapered, it is six of one and half a dozen of the other, as they say.

Yet there is something a little unfair in this judgment: how, for example, can we put a pair of Corthays, a shoemaker's shoe renowned for its design, on the same level as the awful shoes shown at the beginning of the article?

The Arca from Corthay. Sleek? Certainly. Not up to date? Probably. Ugly? No, let's be clear-headed for two minutes.

In fact, it is an opportunity to recall that when it comes to fashion, there is a variable geometry justice: " when it is well done, it passes" is a rule so powerful that it often surpasses all others. And tapered shoes are no exception.

In other words, what distinguishes a "beautiful tapered shoe" from a "horrible pointed shoe" is still the success of the shoemaker's patterns and lasts, and therefore, ultimately... its quality.

In a way, we come back to the observation that was made in the Middle Ages: a beautiful, tapered shoe cannot lie about the artisanal excellence that it implies, and if it tries, it will break the tip of its (long) nose.

I would add that often, the "pointe", which is supposed to be able to refine the foot, is a makeshift substitution for the real element of a shoe which manages to refine the foot with elegance, without ever falling into ridicule: the famous pinched arch which we spoke about above.

Look for example at this pair from Yohei Fukuda :

Look closely at the shape of these Yohei Fukuda: at first glance you get an impression of finesse. However, the tip is no less wide than on completely classic shoes.

Is there any kind of lengthening in the foot? Yes, without a doubt. However, there is no form of "pointe" strictly speaking on this shoe. It is not even necessary to obtain the desired effect. It is only the work of the arch which gives this impression.

Of course, it's not all about that, there are other elements that help to accentuate this length, such as the "eagle claw" toe, which plays on the accentuation of the curve of the toe of the shoe.

A tip called "eagle's claw". By accentuating the slope of the tip, we can further reinforce the impression of length without drawing a point. (Credits: Dandy Magazine)

But the idea is there: these are high-flying working methods.

And unfortunately, this work comes at a price that cannot be avoided.

So if you don't have the budget for such jewelry , you will be much better served with "classic" shapes, certainly less pretentious, less flashy, but harmonious, rather than trying to lengthen the tip of the foot with a "pointed" shoe.

What I personally think about it

My final verdict is that tapered, or even slightly pointed, shoes are like skinny jeans: they work for a specific body type AND gender , and they're definitely not for everyone.

It's a matter of body proportions: if you're stocky or even just average, and neither your legs, torso, nor your hands are long, pointy shoes will stand out like a nose on your face.

Can you imagine Nick Wooster wearing the same shoes, but with pointed toes? No, he'd better not.

If you are tall and slim, with a fairly small and thin foot for your height, and optionally hairy with a bit of a rock style, you can, possibly, afford the pointy shoe.

When you have this figure and you look like a "teen idol", why not. (Harry Styles in 2015, credits Teen Vogue )

I say "possibly" because on the one hand, nothing obliges you to do so, and on top of that, nothing guarantees that there will be consensus on how you wear shoes.

The "Wyatt" boot from Saint-Laurent gets its cutting-edge effect from the thinness of its sole and the narrowness of its fit. Good for an androgynous rock look, if that's what you're looking for.

You could objectively "wear them well" and it wouldn't change anything if your interlocutor has decided, in advance, to hate pointy shoes.

However, trends come and go, and I wouldn't be too surprised if I saw a comeback of pointy shoes for men in a few years.

After all, how is this more absurd than the general trend of very round shoes, even heavy in their lines, which is hovering over the world of "menswear" today? I am obviously thinking of the famous Michael from Paraboot , the epitome of the big rounded shoe.

You probably like it now, but if all of a sudden every shoe on Instagram got more slender, would that still be the case?

I got used to it myself, and even started to like it. , but could I say the same if the fashion context changed?

As a conclusion, I would like to remind you that the fit of a pair of shoes greatly affects its shape. Thin, narrow, medium, generous, or downright wide, it is not supposed to be chosen according to a style , a taste or a fashion, but according to the shape of the foot.

A thin shoe will rarely appear "pointy" and unsightly on a really thin foot, and besides, there is a greater chance that the owner of a thin foot will also have a similarly shaped, and therefore proportional, physique.

Conversely, a wide foot, or even a square one, even if it manages not to die of discomfort by being compressed in a thin shoe, will rarely look elegant in it, for the same reasons. Often, the thin shoe will have to be taken a good size above to accommodate the wide foot, and the wearer will end up with the "barge effect" so undesirable.

On that note, feel free to share your thoughts on pointed, tapered, or even round shoes, and remember: the most important thing is to be comfortable in your shoes. Literally.