Ambrosia Software Web Board: Shoe Horns or Shoe Trees? - Ambrosia Software Web Board

Shoe Horn:




Shoe Trees:




Let the bloodbath commence!

Shoe trees are stupid. Thus, shoe horns FTW!

-Pufer

Those names are switched around in the English language (Like donuts and donut holes! Donuts have holes in them, and donut holes are shaped like nuts!). What you people call shoe horns are far superior to real shoe horns, so I voted shoe trees, because that's the real word should be...

Show trees are the very good.

I never knew that either of these had a name, but I like horns better!

You shouldn't need to use horns and you should be buying new shoes frequently enough that you shouldn't need trees. I've changed my mind, they're both stupid.

-Pufer

I don't need to use shoe horns, but it's very luxurious, so I do it anyway.

Shoes for which shoes trees are appropriate and necessary are much more expensive than shoes that can be replaced frequently. They also tend to last much longer.

If you can't afford to replace them, then you can't afford them and don't need them. If you are in a position where you need to be using shoe trees, you should have a minimum of three pairs of $800 shoes that you wear in rotation. There isn't any reason to be doing that unless you're a partner at a NYC biglaw firm or something.

-Pufer

Does your bizarre aversion to basic maintenance apply to anything else? Computers? Cars? Buildings?

If I ever need to maintain my shoes, I'll do so. I'm not going to get too concerned about my $120 dress shoes because, first off, if they aren't perfectly without wear creases it doesn't really matter as I'm not presenting a case before the Supreme Court or meeting the Queen (and they're $120 shoes, probably not what I should be wearing in such occasions anyway). Second, in the off chance that they collapse in on themselves because they don't have a shoe tree in them, I'll just buy another pair. They haven't done that in three or four years now, and I don't expect them to anytime soon. If they do, oh well.

If ever I am presenting cases before the Supreme Court or regularly dining with the Queen, I might get a shoe rotation going with some decent shoes and invest in some shoe trees. Until then, I see no reason to perform maintenance on a regular consumable good that isn't intended for perpetual use. Least of all with everyday shoes that won't likely last more than a year in terms of sole wear anyway.

-Pufer

I'm horny.

Cool.

Hooray for random topic browsing!

shoe tree's better.

Hooray for random topic browsing!

shoe tree's better.

I really rather wish I had a shoe horn, so I voted for that. I don't even understand what a shoe tree is for. When I saw the topic, I pictured something like a really short coat tree for hanging your shoes on.

A shoe tree keeps your shoes from collapsing in on themselves or getting wear creases from the effects of gravity. Depending on the shoe (and the shoe tree), it can also help your shoes keep their shape despite wear and facilitate polishing. As far as I'm concerned, that "facilitate polishing" one is really the only reason why 98% of the people on the planet should ever consider buying a shoe tree.

-Pufer

What's the point of polishing shoes that you wouldn't want to keep from collapsing?

Shoes get dirty on a regular basis, but I've never once had a shoe collapse on me. As a matter of fact, I've never seen a collapsed shoe that hasn't been sitting off in a field for a few years or something. Up until the day he died, my grandfather would always bust out his prized $100 shoes that he got from Brooks Brothers back in the 1930s for good occasions.* He did polish and clean them regularly, but they managed to last for around 70 years without ever seeing a shoe tree as far as I know.

*The story behind the shoes: When he was off to seminary (it was subsequently decided that my grandfather would be the family's contribution to the war effort rather than the church, but that was still a few years down the road), my grandfather's uncle Dick sent him off to Brooks Brothers in NY to pick up a couple good suits on his tab. My grandfather picked out a couple suits, the aforementioned shoes, a couple belts and ties, and a dinner jacket but, after getting the clothes tailored, he was horrified to find that the total bill came to something like $1,200. Being unable to say nevermind to the already tailored suits and jacket, my grandfather put back everything he could, including the shoes, but was forced to put the rest on Uncle Dick's tab.

The sum was still rather substantial, even minus the untailored goods, and this being during the Great Depression my grandfather went sheepishly back to his uncle and apologized profusely for squandering such an enormous sum on clothes, but was ashamed to say that since they had already been tailored he was unable to return them. Upon hearing the sum demanded by the firm, Uncle Dick immediately stomped down to Brooks Brothers and admonished them for providing his nephew with such a pitiful quality of materials and workmanship so unbecoming the stature of the family, noting that whatever my grandfather could've gotten for a mere $1000 was certainly not the quality of clothing that they would give him (Uncle Dick, who was a multimillionaire in the insurance business) or my great great grandfather (a publishing magnate and one of the richest men in America at the time), so why would Brooks Brothers think that it could pass such rubbish off on one of the younger members of their family.

The end result was that my grandfather left the store with three suits, each costing more than the amount of his entire original bill, and was able to purchase the shoes after all. My grandfather swore that, until that day, it had never really occurred to him that the family was ever anything but normal, apparently figuring that every young man had a personal maid and manservant, went to parties occasionally at the Vanderbilts', and kept dozens of vacation homes floating around just for kicks.

-Pufer

This post has been edited by Pufer: 25 February 2008 - 11:55 PM

I voted shoe-pufers.

It's been said before and it'll be said again, but Pufer has the most rediculously large collection of good stories ever.

Still, the idea of a little tree with shoes hanging on it appeals to me more and more.

Abracadabra!

Is that that tree on US 50 that has all the shoes on it?

The Journalist, on Feb 28 2008, 02:18 AM, said:

I don't know. I googled "shoe tree" and found the postcard image.

I was thinking of a much smaller tree, a couple feet high at the most, holding maybe 6 or 7 shoes tops, and hanging by the foot hole, not the laces.