I'm cool with it if you want to go out of your way to wear shoes that slip on. I really am. You're a lazy fuck. But I am.
But then wear shoes that actually are intended to slip on. Don't wear shoes that USED to need to be tied that have been SEWN or GLUED (again, just a conjecture) together. These shoes still retain the SAME EXACT structure of their lace-conscious counterparts. I remember learning in AP Biology about homologous structures: some structure in a living thing that came from the same ancestor as another; one uses the structure for something (a tail, or some shit) and the other doesn't use it for shit but still has the stupid thing. What if we started sewing fake tails onto animals that never had them? That's the closest comparison I can think of that best exemplifies this insanity. (Great analogy, right? Except... what the fuck was a tail used for in the first place? Viz. "The author's reasoning is flawed in that she... A. fails to acknowledge that a tail may have been useless in the first place. [Whoops. I already wrote a blog about the LSATs. Shucks.])
Okay. So we've (and by "we" I, of course, mean "I") come to the conclusion that the lace-holes are not necessary. Now to address my other issue: Converse are already slip-ons. I've had the same pair of Cons since I was 14 and haven't untied them once. Thus, the laces are not necessarily an OBSTACLE to slipping the shoes on and off.
Conclusions:
1. If you are going to remove laces from a shoe's design, remove the lace-holes as well. Velcro anybody?
2. If you are going to design a shoe that is more conducive to ease of removal than the original shoe, make sure the original shoe's design isn't INHERENTLY slip-off-able.
3. Don't sew and/or glue tails to animals.
4. Don't reference AP Biology in a blog about sneakers.
5. This shoe is so fucking ugly I could cry.
-moon
I'd like to congratulate you on enraging me with this topic. It takes a lot to get my one tracked anger to take a different avenue but you did it. Kudos to you, young grasshopper.
ReplyDeleteI love Chucks without laces. What's the problem with 'em? If something's
ReplyDeleteclassic, and can be made THAT much better, why not? That's like saying
that you're anti Double Stuffed Oreos - just 'cause Oreos are so great,
doesn't mean that a DOUBLE STUFFED Oreo wouldn't be just as epic, if not
more-so. Now, you may be saying "That doesn't count - that's ADDING
something to a classic, as opposed to REMOVING someting (i.e. laces), in
order to come up with a new product." Normally, i would agree - this is a
much more difficult and 90% of the time LESS satisfying result [my
favorite/worst example of this would be the burrito in a bowl - subtracting
the tortilla and serving a deconstructed burrito is one of the worst things
white people have ever done to mexican food], but there are some positive
results. Chucks without laces, for me, are one. But what about the
elastic waistband? Would you want to have to wear a belt with EVERYTHING?
And what about shampoo PLUS conditioner, all in one? One less bullshit
step in the shower. And what about pre-buttered microwave popcorn? Would
you rather bust out the old hairdryer powered airpopper, or your jiffy pop,
and flavor the corn yourself? I don't think so. This may be a matter
where we must agree to disagree. I'm just saying.
I think that there is much, much more sin in the land of footwear than Converse without laces (lucite, white leather straps, 'mand-dals', Aldo to name a few). It's a look, they're comfortable in the summer without socks, and coming from someone who ties his shoes once when he buys them and never again unless tightening is required, I don't think they're all that bad. Maybe the diehard converse buffs who won't wear them unless they're 100% original and look like they were run over by a freight train and more fit for a bum are the real problem here. It's simply a modern take on a classic - that's how the world evolves, people...
ReplyDeleteCrocs, anyone? How about fur-lined Crocs? People choosing to wear Crocs with socks and not getting beaten with sticks for it? Or the actual Crocs store devoted entirely to selling one of the most horrendous items you can cover your feet with? Why are you giving Chuck shit for designing lazy-people-Converse when some madman is marketing adult-sized Jellys and people are actually being suckered into buying them? I'm all for grievances, but get your priorities straight...
I would just put laces on them for decoration. I perfer the tongue attached because on my high tops, the tongue always gets off center and it really bugs me. I'll probably get those.
ReplyDelete