I Spent $24 On My Wedding Shoes
All hail hoofing it the vintage way in this comfort-minded brand.
I took a break from here to work on an ongoing project. But now…I’m back. Also, I got married…so you can learn about the matrimonial footwear moment below. IMPORTANT and off-topic, I’m doing a survey about wallets for an article. Please take it here, you’ll be anonymous! Unless you don’t want to…then email me. PS. A new season of NEVERWORNS is returning…now uncensored and loose. Giddy up…
I ended up getting my wedding shoes on Poshmark for $24; $30 total including shipping. They are a modest block-heeled pump; modest in the sense that there isn’t a whisper of toe cleavage. It’s footwear fit for the ladies of the Father Yod cult except for the subtle hardware: a square gold plate on the back of the heel with three Paloma Picasso X’s. I sent them to a handful of friends, including a fashion critic and a visuals editor who both noted that the shoes “looked like The Row.” Instead, they were vintage Stuart Weitzman, probably from the early ‘90s.
I went down the Stuart Weitzman rabbit hole after my friend sent me vintage suggestions from Manolo Blahnik and Jimmy Choo. Don’t get me wrong, I love the nakedness and the excessive flourish of a Manolo; those delicious sculptural accouterments that take shape in hand-cut leather flowers and beaded tassels. I also adore impossibly strappy and vertiginous rich bitch Jimmy Choos and their black car-only, maximalist attitude.
But I can’t walk in those types of shoes all that well. I also didn’t want to take the risk of paying $150 upwards and having something bludgeon my feet for five hours. That is the odd thing about wedding shoes: They are marketed as occasion-only so the once-in-a-lifetime hobbling is supposed to be kosher, right? It’s only for one night? No! I read on fstoppers.com that a wedding photographer trudged a whopping 20,000 steps during the ceremony and the party. I’d imagine that amount is close to the same amount of steps that the bride is walking during her own nuptials. That’s a lot of steps, and whether that’s only for a few hours, no one wants to risk losing a toenail because of their shoes. Also, I personally can’t think of dropping a boatload of cash on a hammertoe-causing heel that I will toss the day after. Why not spend very little on something—vintage!—that is also comfortable? A wedding shoe should feel akin to a lovingly worn-in sneaker that you walk around the supermarket in.
I needed something sturdy to trek in; something made to live in. And that’s where Stuart Weitzman comes to the rescue. His footwear is unsung in the vintage-verse. We give so much airtime to the Italians and the occasional quiet Frenchie like Stephane Kélian or Robert Clergerie, but I hear nothing about American designer Stuart Weitzman. Sure, the name doesn’t necessarily roll off the tongue like a seductive Manolo Blahnik or a smooth Jimmy Choo. Stuart Weitzman sounds like a partner at a personal injury law firm. Auditory perception aside, Weitzman’s vintage shoes are equipped with cushioned comfort but have those killer elements of high-brow flair. Great leather. Great soles that slap the ground with that full-bodied oomph. Sensible shapes that you can walk in.
To understand why vintage Stuart Weitzman is great, we have to understand the man himself. Weitzman grew up in a manufacturing hub of the small North Shore town Haverhill, Massachusetts where his father owned a shoe factory that he closed in 1971. Weitzman took the business over, designing in New York, gathering materials in Italy, and eventually taking production to Spain. The company’s aim was to have the quality of the Italian designers—Gucci, Ferragamo—but also comfort. An article in The New York Times from 1992 says it best: “He would make styles that were pretty and whimsical and cut from exotic materials. And he would not overlook comfort, for if a shoe did not feel good, it was of little use to anybody.”
The comfort appeal of Stuart Weitzman’s shoes comes to life in another Times article from 2002 that chronicles the trials and tribulations of podiatrist Dr. Johanna Youner, a shoe addict when she’s not treating bunions. In one instance, she squishes her foot into her “favorite pair of Manolo Blahniks” and then takes an X-ray that reveals phalangeal chaos” “With the shoe-heel height, about four inches, putting so much pressure on the ball of her foot, Dr. Youner’s big toe appeared almost dislocated.”
Is beauty pain? Yes, duh, but not necessarily in Weitzman’s case. Amidst the teetering “Jimmy Choo feather-and-rhinestone-trimmed stiletto-heeled mules in a fairy-tale lilac peau de soie” that warp the foot into a perpetual en pointe silhouette, Dr. Youner discovers an alternate going-out shoe by Stuart Weitzman, specifically a “black calf two-inch-high chunky-heeled loafer pump with a roomy toe box” which she refers to as a “crowd pleaser.”
There’s no such thing as having it all, at least according to Youner, who refers to the Weitzman shoes as “not cutting edge.” I understand where she is coming from as many of the vintage Stuart Weitzman pieces online have a minimalist ‘90s look to them but there are indeed some freaky-chic finds. If only Youner could search multiple resale sites on her Y2K-era desktop! These incredible hits from Weitzman have that hot-young-thing sass that makes women want to go out—and are so comfortable that women actually want to stay out.
On The RealReal, Poshmark, and eBay you’ll find incredible Weitzman footwear that won’t break the bank. Strappy little things for $39 that are covered in freaky-girl nuclear hues; fiesta-striped pumps for $90. Kitten heels with a Pucci-style print for less than $35. And for those wedding shoes? You’re in luck with some pearly beige pumps for under $25. Or wedding guest heels? Stewie has you covered in lush black suede pumps for under $35. My personal favorite is a shoe that makes me think it’s summertime in the late ‘90s and I’m going going to my 9-5 but subverting my cubicle-cog-mandated attire in my subtly sexpot footwear…a leather kitten heel adorned with an O-ring. Who would have thought that Stuart had some freak in him?
While Stuart Weitzman’s footwear has historically fit the calloused hooves of working women, there is measured fab to his shoes that are fit for, yes, a wedding as well as the red carpet. (I used to get pages of emails loaded with Stuart Weitzman credits during awards season.) That’s sensible luxury at its finest. It’s peak Everyday Aspirational, as in clothes that you can move and live in. Going out in beautiful shoes but feeling the leather gnaw at the backs of your ankles or a mule that grinds the tops of your toes? There’s no happily ever after in that. You’d need a trip to Dr. Youner. Until then, Weitzman to the rescue.
New #NEVERWORNS coming soon…until then you can watch this.
your wedding shoes look amazing, truly the definition of 'look as good going as you do coming', that gold plate up the back is such a delicious detail, like 'SURPRISE bitch!". Also your entire wedding look is 11/10, vintage but somehow modern in the way it's being worn.
this is where I admit I first heard of Stuart Weitzman in a YA novel - specifically, one of the Mediator ones by Meg Cabot (same lady who wrote The Princess Diaries), also this was so long ago that they weren't even called 'young adult', just 'teen fiction'! The heroine had a wardrobe that sounded amazing on the page and very aspirational to me at 17, it included these Stuart Weitzman boots that she picked up at a New Jersey outlet mall, also some Miu Miu mules that I wanted even though I had no idea what they looked like.
Loved this. I used to write copy for a fancy San Francisco show boutique that specialized in what we called rich-lady shoes: mostly Ferragamo, Amalfi, Thierry Rabotin. And Stuart Weitzman, who made red-carpet shoes for awards shows and every year did a spectacular bridal style. Lots of widths and sizes, if memory serves. Unfortunately, the one pair of SW shoes I managed to get out of that gig—gorgeous suede knee-high boots—nearly crippled me the first time I wore them, and I had to give them away.