Just days after a spirited features department discussion about the ugliness of Crocs, I came across this article, "The Croc Epidemic: How a Heinous Synthetic Shoe Conquered the World."
The article notes that Crocs represent a gigantic rebellion against all that is normal in the fashion industry. They thrive under a basic premise that comfort outweighs ugliness, even though most podiatrists agree the shoes only provide moderate support.
By 2006, the company was earning more than $200 million a year from sales in 40 countries, the article notes.
I still don't get it.
I'm more in line with this blog, which is "dedicated (to) the elimination of Crocs and those that think that their excuses for wearing them are viable."
In addition to poking fun at Croc testimonials, it describes various ways to destroy the shoes, and gives stories about things like breaking up with your girlfriend because she bought a pair.
Basically I really hate Crocs. I think you should only bust them out while gardening, if at all. Sometimes, when it comes to fashion, you don't necessarily have to wear the MOST comfortable thing. If that was the case, I'd wear my velour tracksuit to work every day.
Recently, I checked out a friend's wedding pics online, only to learn that she wore flip-flops during the entire reception. So now, she has a whole bunch of photos -- including her first dance, the bouquet toss and the garter removal -- in which she's wearing a $1,000+ gown. And flip-flops. That look like they came from Wal-Mart.
To me, this is fashionably unacceptable.
Granted, I shop with a journalist's salary, but I've always dressed under the assumption that beauty hurts.
Maybe that's now an archaic idea.
Do Crocs represent a major step in comfort or evidence of the erosion of the fashion industry?
