靴の分野では、どんなに実用的なものであっても、長くは続かない工夫がある。そのような例の 1 つは、ゴム製のトップピースを回転させるヒール、後ろが摩耗したときに 1 つ簡単にホイールを回転し、新しいパーツを着用することができるように。しかし、美観の問題からか、この方法はあまり受け入れられず、現在では忘れ去られている。
このヒールが作られている上の靴は、この靴が作られた1950年代に大流行したものの、回転ヒール同様、その後しばらくして埋もれてしまった英仏ブランド「バンティング」製のビンテージ靴（下にその詳細を示す追加画像を掲載）です。
![ニュース - キウイ[Kiwi]・シューケアの終焉？](https://i0.wp.com/jp.shoegazing.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Kiwi3-Klackbaren-i-Gavle-kopiera.jpg?fit=1200%2C691&ssl=1&resize=40%2C40){kind=small}
What a clever concept! As a question to Jesper and the Shoegazing community at large, what are a few areas where today’s dress shoe industry can innovate? I’ve toyed with the idea of quasi-bespoke, where the manufacturer makes a bespoke last for you, but then uses machines (like the Goodyear welt machine, for instance) to make the shoe. This could allow manufacturers to bring down the price of a good fit to USD 1,000–1,500 (plus the cost of the last for the first shoe) from USD 3,500–5,000.
George – this is an interesting point. My understanding would be (and hopefully Jesper can correct if wrong) that most of the additional time, effort and therefore cost from bespoke goes into the iteration of the process and the time of the specialists involved -eg. multiple fittings and refinements to the design.
I don’t think the approach you suggested would solve a substantial problem with fit, as it’s not uncommon for initial fittings to have issues that are traditionally solved by iteration. Indeed, it would probably lead to more frustrated customers who assume that they will get a much more perfect fit than they actually end up with.
The time that goes into creating and perfecting a last would probably only start to see returns if customers buy multiple pairs over time, which I suspect most people would not do. I believe Saint Crispin’s offer a similar service to what you’ve described though – might be worth having a look at. I would say that St C’s are actually quite market-leading in a lot of aspects of bringing some of the design flexibility and styling points from bespoke down to a RTW pricepoint.
Sam, thank you for your thoughtful reply. As someone who has never been able to afford bespoke shoes myself, I viewed the process as binary: you get fit, they make the last, and that last is what you get. But, as you state, I never appreciated the iterative nature of the process and can certainly see how that forms a significant portion of the cost. I would be very interested in seeing whether Jesper, or anyone else, has a cost breakdown for the bespoke and RTW processes (to satisfy my curiosity, and not as a way of starting my own shoe business!).
Given that most people find an RTW last that fits them–or are OK with slightly off fits–another consideration might be the number of people who will get a quasi-bespoke in the first place, let alone purchase multiple pairs to make it profitable. (That’s assuming most people chose bespoke for fit reasons, and not for the ability it gives them to customize the style. And that assumption could well be wrong.)
It also seems like my idea might not be as innovative as I thought, as Saint Crispin’s might already be doing something similar; I will have to visit a Saint Crispin’s trunk show soon!
All in all, I had a half-baked idea–one that needs more refining! Thank you, again, Sam, for your insight!
George and Sam: Interesting comments from both of you!
Regarding “machine made bespoke”, it’s existing, main example is Tricker’s who has done it for many years, they measure and have Springline make the lasts and the shoes are then produced like their regular shoes on the factory line. Another example is Broken Bird Bootmakers who tried to combine modern 3D scanning and having lasts made from that (overseen by a lastmaker before lasts was being manufactured one should mention) and then a Portuguese factory made Goodyear welted shoes to midrange standard (now they’ve switched over to only using the 3D scan to find the correct fit).
But the main reason that it isn’t more common I believe is the many disadvantages the factory made production has on actually being able to do properly fitting shoes on the same level as handmade shoes. To work with the machines, the lasts have to have flat bottom heels and archs can’t be too deep, you have to make the feather edge of the lasts a certain way, and so on. The thin insoles for Goodyear welted shoes can’t create the same footbed as full thickness soles. Also the heel stiffeners are completely different, you can’t do the fully supporting ones normally found on bespoke.
Due to this, semi bespoke where lasts are modified is a much easier way and more suitable way to make for a good fit when doing machine-made shoes.
Regarding Saint Crispin’s, since it’s hand welted handmade shoes (only machine-made sole stitch) they can do most things the same way as bespoke when it comes to shape of lasts and other things mentioned above, which is their main pro IMO. They are quite simply-made shoes otherwise regarding finishing details etc, but the fit is top.
If I were to mention one innovation that I think will have an impact in the future, it would be 3D scanning and 3D printers for bespoke lastmaking, when these are cheaper and more accessible, where for example bespoke makers could easily have the customers foot made to look at when doing the last, they could make last copies quick and easy to try new things for difficult clients, etc. Still traditional lastmaking would be very much needed, just that one could use modern tech to make some things easier.