I’m slightly offended this morning. Maybe I’m just being a little sensitive, and I wouldn’t dream of calling out someone’s inspiration for what they write, but in Prepidemic’s recent post about saddle shoes, something rubbed me wrong. I can fully get behind the look they pulled together based on saddle shoes, but I still didn’t like part of their post. The paragraph in question is as follows:
But resist the urge to look like a southern lawyer. The seersucker suit and saddle shoes thing is certainly a tradition we respect, but for most guys, it’s a little contrived, a bit old-mannish, perhaps a tad dated. The real trick to saddle shoes is not to put them in the context of an outfit with the influences of a rural prep, but to keep them hip by throwing them into the context of an outfit with the influences of a city prep. Those saddle shoes will look awesome when you prepily urbanize them.
The particular part that irked me is the notion that “rural prep” (as they put it) is inferior to “city prep” because of it being “old-mannish, perhaps a tad dated.” I’m sorry, but I didn’t realize there were classifications of “prep” based on big cities and rural settings. Also, I’d say that the “southern lawyer” look is as classic as it gets. I am probably reading in to this a bit too much, but to me, this comes across as if to say that “our style is better than yours because yours is based on where you live, and we like where we live better.” Can’t we all just get along?
So today, I am boycotting Prepidemic… I’ll be back after today, but for now, I just need a little time to cool off. Maybe a little seersucker with saddle shoes will help with that:
To this “rural prep,” this Piece by Piece look is perfect.