Well, Noga, I see where you’re coming from, but I’m sure you’re overstating the case. Many, many people have said here that they cannot afford the shoes the Manolo often presents. (I certainly can’t.) But there’s no need to feel resentful or put in our “proper place” when the Manolo points out that these shoes exist or when other commenters admire them.

And I might add that there is no way to deduce anyone’s economic background from the fact that they find beautiful things beautiful, even if those things are expensive. People may simply not find it necessary to point to their own financial circumstances each time they respond, or may not feel that the Manolo is obligated to take each reader’s personal needs into account with every post. That said, I’ve seen the Manolo respond graciously any number of times when he has been asked for pointers to more affordable shoes.

“Do any of you know of any boots like these, but cheaper?” may have been a more productive comment than sweeping statements concerning the backgrounds of people about whom you know virtually nothing.

So if there is indeed friction, understated or otherwise, between you and other commenters (I hadn’t noticed it myself), you may want to look elsewhere for the cause.

Oh, and by the way, for attractive and well-made men’s boots at a lower price point (though, admittedly, still not inexpensive), you might want to take a look at Frye.

Class envy aside – several months ago New York Magazine had a Parson’s guy tear apart some Bass Weejuns and a much more expensive pair of loafers of a similar design. He analized why an expensive pair of shoes is so expensive, where corners are cut and where less expensive materials are used. A very illuminating article worth looking up. With the money you save on a less expensive pair of boots you could spend some quality time with a therapist and sort out these other people’s expensive shoes issues. Happy Holidays!

Why would I spend money on a therapist to sort out other people’s expensive shoes issues, when I get all the illumination needed right here, free of charge??

What a bizarre reaction to my initial suggestion that $1,250 for a pair of boots is quite an exorbitant price, regardless of class and quality. People really take offence at this suggestion. A real classy person, by the way, would never jeer at a person who openly admits she cannot possibly afford them. So I have to wonder at who really has expensive-shoes issues here.

If you are interested in a custom made riding boot at a “reasonable” price try

http://www.la-mundial.com/history.htm

In addition to equestrian boots they also make shoes. To give you an idea about prices (since the site does not offer amounts) a pair of tall field boots were $518 usd. To give you a comparison most other fully made custom riding boots run about $1000 – $2000. If you want a professional to measure your feet La Mundial representatives are often at horse shows and state fairs. It will take about 3 months for delivery.

Noga, I understand your shock upon seeing the price tag on these boots. I, too, was a bit surprised to see that these boots cost more than $1000. I think most other people were probably a bit surprised too. However, I believe you are overreacting a bit. Have you ever browsed for women’s Manolo Blahnik shoes on the web? The most simple of heels start around $500 and climb towards $1000 as embellishments and exotic leathers are added. Boots usually exceed $1000. So for these paddock boots to cost more than $1000 makes sense. I certainly wasn’t expecting these shoes to cost any less than, say, $700.

No one is jeering at you. Most people who read this blog are in the same boat as you–they can’t afford the shoes that are presented by the Manolo, but do admire the artistry and craftsmanship of such shoes. However, they also don’t complain about being put in their place and such nonsense.

The funny part about this blog is that I got the impression the readership was mostly people who -couldn’t- afford these shoes. Otherwise we’d be gathered in a chic bistro somwhere, lunching and comparing our shoes in that polite, non-price tag saying way that’s meant to imply that if you have to ask you can’t afford it.

I mean, I thought $50 was a lot for shoes, and the people saying more than that was reasonable normally scared the pants off me. I read here to get a sense of what the platonic ideal of a shoe is, so I can daydream of the potential.

I think I’ve extracted as much meaning as could be extracted from a pair of $1,275 boots. It’s not much, but it’s something, like this:

Have you seen the well-to-do up and down Park Avenue
On that famous thoroughfare with their noses in the air
High hats and Arrow collars white spats and lots of dollars
Spending every dime for a wonderful time

If you’re blue and you don’t know where to go to
why don’t you go where fashion sits,
Puttin’ on the ritz.
Puttin’ on the ritz.
Puttin’ on the ritz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1RsWqNIIAA&feature=related

Noga, perhaps you should find another blog that is more to your liking, rather than coming here to complain about expensive shoes and the people who like them. As has been pointed out by other commenters, you are surely not the only reader who cannot afford many of the beautiful shoes the Manolo posts for our viewing pleasure. Some of the Manolo’s readers can afford them, and those who cannot afford them still enjoy looking at them. It is beyond me why you have a problem with this. This is a blog for people who enjoy looking at beautiful shoes. If you don’t enjoy looking at them, then nobody is forcing you to come here.

It’s sort of like going to a museum. Most of us could never afford to purchase a genuine Picasso or Rembrandt, or the Hope diamond, or an imperial Faberge egg, but that doesn’t mean we cannot enjoy looking at them.

Finally, just because a person can afford to buy expensive shoes does not mean that he or she is superficial, snooty, or a bad person, as you seem to imply. I think that most of us tend to pay for the best quality items that we can afford, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Why, no, Noga; the Manolo has not hired me as “this blog’s bouncer.” However, if you are going to fill his blog with your bitterness, then you have to expect that some of his readers will take issue with your posts, and I am not the only one who has done so. You apparently have your own agenda here, as you choose to ignore valid points in favor of continuing to complain and make snide remarks. The source of any “friction” between you and other commenters (which, like Bridey, I never noticed before) is quite obvious, and it has nothing to do with your socioeconomic status. Have a nice day. :)

This shows that the Blahnik has NO EXCUSE for his preposterous proposition for the footwear for the mens. I must think it was some kind of grand joke on his part.

Wath do you think about the possibility of buy woman combat boots and use???. I thougth that is a gay way (thats not my way), but at last I tried. I bougth a pair of Dr. Martens boots (lece up, flat, 13 eye, Reboot, black leather), they are sold for woman only but they show to be very confortable.
I had to a pair of boots made for men only, i used not to much because they are heavy weigth and not look well, they are not flexible and hard to wear.
Instead, the woman`s boot wear like a glove, they are confortable and weather resistance, and my girlfriend tell my that they make me look strong and nice (sexy too, ejem). Its funny but many friends tell my that the boots like to them (they dont know that the boots are for women, ja ja).
Wath do you think about that???