Sometime in the last two years, it became fashionable for men to wear brown shoes with blue or black pants. I thought there was a rule against this. How did the new trend start and should it be stopped? — David, Flushing, N.Y.
During the 12 years I lived in London, there was one rule my banker friends would often recite to me: “No brown in town,” meaning no brown shoes at work. It’s an axiom that originated circa the Victorian era, when gentlemen spent their weekends hunting and otherwise marching over the vales of their country estates in — yup — brown shoes and boots to match the brown mud.
When they returned to their offices during the week, they swapped brown shoes for polished black, matching their belts and shoes, the better to continue the unbroken line of their suits — and denoting their white-collar status. The appearance of brown shoes in town thus became a statement about class as well as country, given that other nationalities, especially the Italians and the French, never hewed to quite the same dress code.
Like most erstwhile dress codes, however, this one has pretty much fallen by the wayside, a victim of the casual Friday-ization of every day and the demise of the suit and tie. After all, when your jacket and trousers no longer match, it’s less of a big deal when your shoes don’t match either. In fact, it kind of makes sense, especially if the vibe you are going for is relaxed.
Compared with the rise of the sneaker as dress shoe — and not only the sneaker, but the really weird Frankenstein sneaker — brown shoes can look not shocking, but rather establishment.
Since the men’s wear shows are going on in Paris as I write, I thought I would ask our man on the scene, Jacob Gallagher, what he is seeing.
“A lot of what once would have been a ‘wrong’ pairing,’” he responded. “Like black overcoats with blue chinos and brown shoes. These combos are now acceptable because they make you look twice, but they aren’t really that garish.”
So many dress code rules are now being smashed, he pointed out, that “dressing in once verboten color schemes is a tidier way to look interesting than chucking on a panda backpack or a puffer the shape of mutant rigatoni.” (Those were not theoretical choices by the way; he had just seen them.)
Jacob also blamed social media for the breakdown, pointing out that rules like “Don’t wear brown shoes with black pants” are pretty much catnip for the Instagram generation. They’re an establishment provocation that practically begs an “eight slide post about why ‘off’ color combos are actually great because they draw attention,” he said.
Which is the point about even the most seemingly minor choices, like brown shoes with blue pants: They draw attention. Someone will probably notice and comment. So you need to be prepared.
At the same time, the more people who opt for change, the less the formerly unexpected color choice will stand out. Right now, the balance is tipping in favor of the mix, which is why it may seem confusing. But freedom to make your own decisions, even if they are somewhat jarring ones that have to do with footwear, is never a bad thing.
To that point, Guy Trebay, one of our men’s wear critics, asserts that there’s only one footwear rule that really still holds: “Black for evening, worn with matching or complementary socks. The bare ankle thing is as stale as day-old sprezzatura.”
Speaking of socks, I’ll get to that can of worms another time.
Your Style Questions, Answered
Every week on Open Thread, Vanessa will answer a reader’s fashion-related question, which you can send to her anytime via email or Twitter. Questions are edited and condensed.
The post Is There Still a Rule Against Wearing Brown Shoes With Blue Pants? appeared first on New York Times.
