So, how isn’t this whole “Sketchers are ugly and no one with self-respect over the age of 10 should be wearing them, except white suburban fathers and sex offenders” about class and elitism?
Balenciaga released what even GQ, the premiere magazine for men’s luxury fashion, called “ugly” and suddenly it is lit to rock something audaciously like this:
“Key Features: These “high-fashion spec” sneakers feature a triple-stacked sole with pre-distressed details throughout. The shoe size appeared embroidered on the toe, while rope laces finish off the look
Release Date: September 21, 2017”
Im not the only one looking at these and feeling how hideous they are? Why would you want these? Or is it something a la Jay-Z? As there are no “ugly billionaires,” high fashion can’t be ugly because it’s just so expensive.
The problem to me isn’t their design. Most sneakers today capitalize off of a bulky, rock formation or coral reef look and it’s always very fine. But this is about another series railroaded for its lack of sex appeal and compelling look. Sketchers has been in the game forever, with the Cool Breeze hero saving the world from Foot Fungus.
Yet, marketing is only positioning these shoes with an insane luxury street style aesthetic. For the untrendy dads in lazy boys. Even GQs marketing department agrees: Rob Lowe has never looked more sexually neutered in his AUGUST GQ ad.
If we grow past the consumerism, sketchers could offer more to Fashion than just jabs and jokes.
What are your thoughts? Comment below!
Categories: Fashion
