foolish fire

I’m involved in fashion controversy about as often as I find myself assisting in heart bypass procedures, which is to say, not a lot. In fact the last time I remember even thinking about anything even remotely connected with my appearance as any kind of “statement” was back in my pre-hippie days when I had about an hour-long flirtation with paisely. It ended badly. Although, I will concede the shoulder length hair I sported from 1968-1975 was a sign of my rebelliousness. I know that because it’s the first thing my Dad made me lose when I got into trouble. It went something like…get caught with girl in room, cut off hair, if hair already shorn from previous transgression, sell drum set.

Alas, since my teens and early twenties fashion has been a non-issue for me for the most part. I was a photojournalist for most of the past three decades, which fortunately absolved me from wearing a suit and tie and I could fill my wardrobe easily in one hour, twice a year at the Gap or Mervyns whichever had the best sale going on. Fast forward to 2001, I’ve career-morphed into a graphic designer, and could have easily raised the fashion bar a few notches but I work from a home studio, so even if I did show up to work wearing Doc Martins, gel in my hair and skinny black horn-rimmed glasses, it would only scare my business partner, who is also my wife.

If I had to describe the fashion ‘niche’ to which I now belong (and have for most of my adult life) it’s probably something like “suburban camolflage”, or “soccer dad” and I’m necessarily not proud of that, just a little risk averse when it comes to fashion. As evidence, a tour through the 10% of available closet space that my wife sublets to me will reveal the following:

• three polo shirts, one each black, gray and blue
• 3 pairs jeans
• several pairs Dockers or similar (only 2-3 pair fit me at any given time)
• business shorts (what I wear to work 9 months out of the year)
• a few semi-nice long-sleeve shirts (for weddings, a rare business meeting, outings to the “city”)
• Several drawers devoted to workout/cycling wear and my collection of soccer jerseys from around the world
• Outer wear-wise…enough fleece to raise the ambient temperature of Finland and one black-leather coat which is what I wear when I go to any “city” so I don’t look like a tourist. (I learned my lesson about that several years ago when I was sent to Moscow on assignment and realized about 20 minutes into the country that everyone was wearing black leather except me…and very small Russian children.)

Footwear is the only clothing category with which I’ve ever pushed the envelope, probably starting in the 70’s with Earth Shoes. If you’re not of the vintage to remember Earth Shoes or have tried hard to forget this and other ugly shoe trends, let me help you relive the pain. Earth Shoes were designed in the Netherlands around “negative heel technology”. In other words they took impression your foot makes when it walks in sand and made a line of shoes out of it, and according to it’s inventor Annie Kalso, all upright bipeds are intended to wear them. They also allegedly improve your attitude, your breathing and illuminate the path to enlightenment. She wasn’t half wrong about some of that (the calf cramping is pretty enlightening alright) but damn, she came up with one ugly-ass shoe! But ,for a brief time they were a way to put your politics where your feet are, and to say to the world, “to hell with fashion, I’m going to wear these expensive, silly looking shoes that make my legs ache after 10 minutes because dammit……” I don’t honestly remember why I wore Earth Shoes.

Interesting though, that they were probably most popular on the two coasts where even barefoot, hippie liberals realize that walking on the beach all day is frickin’ painful. But did I own some? Damn right. Wore out more than one pair. Proud if it. Earth Shoes are still around, by the way, and have become slightly more stylish and can be even be purchased in “vegan”, so you can eat them without guilt. The web site depicts young progressives wearing Earth Shoes while doing yoga on hilltops and telecommuters taking breaks to stretch their IT bands. My homeys.

I can’t reconstruct the hippie shoe timeline with any accuracy (or much else from that time period) but sometime around the Earth Shoe era, Birkenstocks became all the rage and I got on that bandwagon, too. I still own a few pair of these oft-counterfeited shoes which let’s face it, are still the official footwear of Berkeley professors and good Unitarians everywhere. I especially love my Birkenstock clogs, which I’ve nearly worn out after 5 or 6 years to the point where my wife will only accompany me if we’re going to the movies…at night, if I’m wearing them. But we Birk devotees love our shoes to the point where some of us own the original pair we bought in the 70’s, we just keep having them re-corked and re-soled, procedures undergone by more than a few us owners as well…metaphorically speaking.

Which brings me to today’s topic and the latest ugly shoe trend…Crocs. And yes, I wear them, naturally, and have taken several shots across the bow from friends, family and major media alike. In fact I was most chagrined when one of my counter-culture heroes, Bill Maher, devoted an entire “New Rule” to them. I normally get all warm and glowy when he rails on about the Bush administration, but when he talks smack about my footwear, if it weren’t so painful to have something in common with Ann Coulter, I’d say I he really pissed me off.

In the interest of full disclosure there are points to be made on both sides of the Croc debate, Maher’s invective was only aimed against at their rather pedestrian appearance (hmm…that sounds oddly logical) but other less fashion conscious detractors have levied charges ranging from the fact that Crocs are made from toxic materials to reports that they can literally destroy electronic devices. The latter I find fascinating but have yet to….wait….computer…shutting down…no…power….kidding. Seriously, there are anecdotal accounts that Crocs can shock! I’m no expert but doesn’t that seem a little counter-intuitive? Standing on a golf course in Kansas during a thunder storm wouldn’t you want to be wearing ugly rubber golf shoes? Read on…

As for Crocs’ “green” report card, the anti crowd do raise a valid concern; Crocs are made extremely cheaply (over 3 million pairs produced last year) because of an EVA based material called Croslite PCR foam or Levirex, all of which sounds way to “Duponty” for my taste, but it’s what makes them so damn light, durable and moldable. Unfortunately, this foam is petroleum based so there’s that unfortunate strike against, although they can conceivably be recycled when they’re spent (basically when the tread wears off the bottom) though the corporate web site doesn’t mention anything about that. It’s the whole “just another cheap, disposable toxic commodity” thing that has tree huggers and their ranks rankled, and I can see their point. Cheap isn’t necessarily always good (I give you WalMart) but, as any good WalMart flak will remind you, tell that to a single mom of four who just shod her family for the price of a pair of Reebok running shoes from Macy’s. Point well taken…advantage Crocs, Inc.

Further, Croc-o-philes point to the fact that the shoes are made of only one material, though, except for the two, small strap rings on some models. Conventional footwear is typically made of a plethora of nasty materials including adhesives, solvents and baby seal tears. Further, Crocs, the company, does a lot of donating to shoeless people around the world. So there’s that. So like Microsoft and Starbucks, you can’t completely hate them, even if you completely hate them.

So let’s review…all in all, Crocs are “almost green”, they’re amazingly wide, spongy and comfortable and only $39.00 and the other day I wore them while doing yard work and hosed them off afterwards, which you gotta love. So why do some people still hate Crocs? Including my wife? And why are they so popular with 8 year old girls AND 50 year old men? Here are my theories…

• As for my wife…she’s obligated to hate them. It’s part of the fashion-designer-disguised-as-a-graphic-designer-Project-Runway-watching persona that takes an oath to be forever vigilant against the rise of the ugly shoe. It’s a girl thing. Oh…and she says when I walk around in them while she’s trying to sleep, it sounds like I’m walking on soggy carpet.
• As for why 8 year old girls AND 50 year old men like them….well they come in pink and lime green and I raised two girls and know that 8 year old girls will wear anything that looks like recycled Barbie cars. And we 50 year old men like them because we’ve become lazy and our feet hurt and we no longer care what you think. And double that for 50 year old ex-hippie men.

So…word to the establishment….keep your hands off my footwear! And if it’s any comfort…I draw the line at Tiva sandals. Can I get an “amen” from Bill Maher?