The Classics – Nude

I am a firm believer that all colors and patterns are equally open to shoes. I probably won’t wear most of them but to each her own, I say. For the most part, nude shoes fall into this category. I understand that they “go with everything” and that according to all the latest style buzz, nude is the new black. BUT really? Why would you where a shoe that blends in with skin? Why hide a magnificent shoe behind such a dull color. My other objection is that nude highlights the outfit over the shoe. In my mind, this is not acceptable, so mark my surprise when I willingly bought a pair of nude Louboutins. Yes, those nude Louboutins in this week’s picture. Why nude you ask? Why not black (my personal stand-by)? Let’s be honest, the heel alone is 6.25 inches high, the platform a staggering (literally) 2.5 inches. In any other color these shoes run the risk of looking “hookerish,” and not that there is anything wrong with that, but I’m not pairing $1000 for a pair of street-walkers. This is the shoe that nude was made for. This is the shoe that proves that Monsieur Louboutin is a genius, a mad, amazing genius.
I recently read an interview he did with a London magazine saying that he didn’t design shoes for women, he designed shoes to make women look appealing to men. The Lady Daf proves this 100%. The stilt-like heel and platform give you impossibly long, lean line no matter if you are a squat 5’3. And, in the nude, men would need to spot the tell-tale red sole to know that line was an illusion we paid for.
I admit despite their fabulousness, that I haven’t taken them outside for a spin yet. This is partly owing to the fact that one has to re-learn how to walk in order not to break something (you can ask the newest housewife in Beverly Hills, Brandie, all about that). I wear them around the house and admire the ingenuity and sheer daring. Which begs the question, why with such an example of perfection would you buy any other shoe in nude?