The Kids Think I'm A Shoe
February 17, 2017 7:43 PM Subscribe
Stan Smith and the iconic shoe that bears his name are profiled in New York Magazine.
I met Stan in '99 or 2000 and took up tennis a month or so later, at 27 or 28 years old. I'm still playing when I can these days - he (completely unintentionally) changed my life for the better.
The man is a pretty darn good storyteller, too.
posted by rock swoon has no past at 10:03 PM on February 17, 2017 [4 favorites]
The man is a pretty darn good storyteller, too.
posted by rock swoon has no past at 10:03 PM on February 17, 2017 [4 favorites]
Sort of like Chuck Taylor. I wore Chuckie T's all through elementary school and through college. It was the 70s. I wore them to actually play basketball. Never knew there was a real guy named Chuck Taylor. I wonder if one day, the kids on my lawn will not realize that Michael Jordan was not only a player but the best of all time.
posted by AugustWest at 10:53 PM on February 17, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by AugustWest at 10:53 PM on February 17, 2017 [4 favorites]
I understand branding. I'm not immune to it, but the photo of the various versions of the sneaker, and how they all look virtually alike, yet the prestige brands cost several times more, zoinks, we humans are so easily duped over the silliest crap.
posted by Beholder at 11:20 PM on February 17, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Beholder at 11:20 PM on February 17, 2017 [1 favorite]
Ahh, I love the variations on this shoe. I wore a brown pair into the ground after outfitting them with pastel pink laces—they were my ice-cream sandwich shoes. I also have the Adidas Originals "Battle Pack" variant, with all the hexagons, though I rarely wear them because 1. I want to keep them pristine and 2. they really are hard to pair with anything. I've never bought a new pair; those I got secondhand from the same local place. Sneakerheads, untie!
posted by limeonaire at 5:02 AM on February 18, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by limeonaire at 5:02 AM on February 18, 2017 [3 favorites]
The appearance isn't the only thing with these, though: They are so so so comfy. I would only buy the Adidas version, even if there are knockoffs, for that reason, as well as the superior craftsmanship.
posted by limeonaire at 5:17 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by limeonaire at 5:17 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
I was a fan of the rival brand of shoe - Nike Wimbledon.
posted by Edward L at 6:18 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Edward L at 6:18 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
Beholder, I agree that it's silly that luxury brands of basically the same thing cost so much more. But, at the same time, that's kind of the point of a luxury brand - it's so people can display the extent of their disposable wealth.
That said, the quality of a $300 shoe is quite a bit higher than a $90 shoe.
Stan Smiths are on the way out, anyway. Adidas was too slow in bringing them back to market. They are too slim for the next wave of fashion, which is chunkier, more comfort-focused. Adidas would do well to shift the brand focus towards the Rad Laver
posted by rebent at 6:53 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
That said, the quality of a $300 shoe is quite a bit higher than a $90 shoe.
Stan Smiths are on the way out, anyway. Adidas was too slow in bringing them back to market. They are too slim for the next wave of fashion, which is chunkier, more comfort-focused. Adidas would do well to shift the brand focus towards the Rad Laver
posted by rebent at 6:53 AM on February 18, 2017 [1 favorite]
Superstars, with the clamshell toes, are still big.
posted by Room 641-A at 7:35 AM on February 18, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by Room 641-A at 7:35 AM on February 18, 2017 [2 favorites]
Beholder, I agree that it's silly that luxury brands of basically the same thing cost so much more. But, at the same time, that's kind of the point of a luxury brand - it's so people can display the extent of their disposable wealth.
I know. I'm not immune to it. Most people aren't, not completely, which is why it's so disturbing.
posted by Beholder at 8:49 AM on February 18, 2017
I know. I'm not immune to it. Most people aren't, not completely, which is why it's so disturbing.
posted by Beholder at 8:49 AM on February 18, 2017
I was mocked by the tennis club guys on my high school team in the late eighties for wearing Stans. The looked primitive next to the Nike and Reebok lines of the day, I admit. Same with K-Swiss, which I wore a lot, too.
Now my 17 year old son, who doesn't play tennis, loves their minimalist design, which is pretty cool. His whole crowd rolls with vintage looking, dad-style sneakers from New Balance, Asics, Converse, Puma, etc. So in a way I'm back to being mocked, just ironically this time.
posted by Caxton1476 at 12:30 PM on February 18, 2017 [3 favorites]
Now my 17 year old son, who doesn't play tennis, loves their minimalist design, which is pretty cool. His whole crowd rolls with vintage looking, dad-style sneakers from New Balance, Asics, Converse, Puma, etc. So in a way I'm back to being mocked, just ironically this time.
posted by Caxton1476 at 12:30 PM on February 18, 2017 [3 favorites]
So I'm ahead of the curve with Dunlop Green Flash, then?
posted by scruss at 12:31 PM on February 18, 2017
posted by scruss at 12:31 PM on February 18, 2017
I have a pair of Stan Smiths, but my Tretorn are my favorite. I will soon want to replace my white leather Nylites with the navy accents, as they are finally wearing out.
posted by droplet at 1:01 PM on February 18, 2017
posted by droplet at 1:01 PM on February 18, 2017
« Older A president's words. A supervillain's mouth. | In these words I often think you'd recognize me Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Room 641-A at 9:05 PM on February 17, 2017 [2 favorites]