So you know when fashion makes something a “thing” and that “thing” becomes the “thing of all things” and everyone must have that “thing” no matter the cost, practicality or, in this case, the aesthetics? Well right now, that “thing” is the backless mule.
The backless mule first made itself known in early Spring – and for fashionistas in Milan or New York with discernible seasons, perhaps it made some sense.
“But the backless mule has trotted its way into Winter and I have to ask – WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?”
Where do I start?
The concept of the backless mule is fine – easy, breezy; even pretty with a heel. But the flat, backless, loafer? It makes NO PRACTICAL SENSE WHATSOEVER.
We are Irish. We live in Ireland. On an island. That is permanently wet. We strive through the winter months (all 9 of them) to keep warm and dry.
And then you introduce a backless mule – one that has a fur trim (!?!?) – and people actually embrace it. Embrace it in the name of fashion. Because surely no-one could find them truly attractive? Can you imagine trying to strut through the wet streets of the city in your raw-hemmed ankles grazers?
“Are your feet wet or sweaty? Are they cramping with the strain of keeping the damned things on?”
How does that fur-trim withstand the splash-back from a rude taxi? And the other side of the argument is: how much foot maintenance is required? We are a nation of hideous feet; with the chaffed, chapped heel being the ugliest part of it all. So now you must invest in regular pedicures just to keep your naked heel on show.
Yes you can bejewel them, encrust them, and stick an extortionate designer label on to them, but they are U-G-L-Y. And IMPRACTICAL. And TOO EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN.
I would near suggest they should be relinquished in the same locked box as the Croc?
Bring back Stan Smiths I say.