Buckle brogues yes, Ghillie no: Come & have a go if you think you are 'ard enough

[Good Egg]

Go look thru the vintage photo section. They are woren with pretty much anything.

Its now the convention that they are formal evening wear worn with diced or tartan hose but that was not necessarily the Victorian/Edwardian way.

Anybody got any views on whether I should wear buckle brogues with pink hose with a hodden grey kilt or should I lash out on a decent pair of London/Toronto Scottish diced hose?

PS I usually wear 1000 mile diced golf socks when I wear them with trews.

[Phil]

Yeah, "dainty" was probably a bad choice of words...it is close to the word I want but I didn't mean lightweight...just overly ornamented and "sophisticated"--in the sense of being cosmopolitan or world-weary...

There is a lot that is drab, plain and uninteresting in mens' clothing from uniform business suits to ubiquitous jeans. Wearing Highland dress allows the "dandy" inside of most of us a bit of leeway not usually accepted by a society which expects conformity and regards those who otherwise dress unconventionally as in some way perverted. For the same reason it is perfectly understandable why anyone not comfortable with their appearance, masculinity or whatever would also feel uncomfortable stepping outside these norms imposed by the expectations of society. I was, by the way, the individual with whom you had a previous discussion about buckle brogues and, yes, the buckles, where they are positioned, do not interfere with the flexing of the foot in any way. I say that as the owner and wearer of a pair and as such, that fact (as your Constitution so aptly says) is self-evident.

[DWFII]

As I mentioned my wife says they remind her of children's sandals - she is wrong of course (I can say that because she is not going to read this) but is that what you mean?

Well yes, they do remind me of chidrens' shoes but my objection on both counts is, that from a shoemaker's point of view, they are neither one thing nor the other.

A shoe made in the style of a ghilie brogue but without all the gimping and broguing ("pinking" along the edges and ornamental perforations) would be a much cleaner, less "fussy" look. And the same with the buckle brogue.

I make oxfords and derbys...both of which can be made as a brogue. And even though I acknowledge the distinct and mild attraction of the broguing, I personally, think that both styles of shoe look even better if the leather itself is allowed to "talk." It's shoemaker thing, I guess.

It's also probably why the Jacobite style of buckle shoe appeals to me--it's clean and masculine, and the skills and techniques of the shoemaker are brought to the fore and not obscured by the ornamentation. If the Jacobite shoe were brogued I wouldn't care for it half as much.

[Phil]

I'm still wearing the 'issue' buckles but would like to get something with a tad more character. I've seen some with shamrocks for the Irishly inclined but nothing I'd want.

I got some off Ebay a while back, rectangular and the same size as the originals but in cut steel as MacMillan describes. Just make sure they have a single bar at the back to thread the fixing through. The ones with pins are no good. I have a pair I tried to interest McMurdo in a while back with no success.

[The Barry]

I hate to stir the pot, but....

I really don't like the look of buckle brougues. Maybe they remind me of the "mary janes", I'm not really sure. I've seen enough photos (old and new, Scotland and elsewhere) that allow me to feel comfortable in ghillies with tartan hose.

[DWFII]

I was, by the way, the individual with whom you had a previous discussion about buckle brogues and, yes, the buckles, where they are positioned, do not interfere with the flexing of the foot in any way. I say that as the owner and wearer of a pair and as such, that fact (as your Constitution so aptly says) is self-evident.

Well I wouldn't say "self-evident." But, since I have never worn a pair, I can't call into question your first-hand experiences. And since you have so graciously identified yourself, let me apologize to you personally...by name, Phil...for questioning your testimony. I did not mean to offend.

I will say this, those who want to express their inner "dandy" are allowed...in most western societies. Some of us, myself included, tend to express what comes natural. I don't like flowery colognes, as an example. I like the smell of leather and tobacco and smoke and the good earth (dirt, in other words). I don't know whether that says to you that I am uncertain of my masculinity or not. I don't feel particularly compelled to question it one way or the other--it is what it is. I'm not a man of many pretensions.

BTW, thanks for coming to the fore...I was actually hoping you would do that...and besides which, it helps bring me just that little bit closer to the magic 500 mark.

[Phil]

I will say this, those who want to express their inner "dandy" are allowed...in most western societies. Some of us, myself included, tend to express what comes natural. I don't like flowery colognes, as an example. I like the smell of leather and tobacco and smoke and the good earth (dirt, in other words). I don't know whether that says to you that I am uncertain of my masculinity or not. I don't feel particularly compelled to question it one way or the other--it is what it is. I'm not a man of many pretensions.

Your apology is quite unnecessary but gratefully accepted nevertheless. I agree that a certain degree of eccentricity is permissible and that minor peccadillos such as you describe cause no-one any problem. If, however, you chose to wear any form of unconventional clothing it is likely that you would encounter anything from disapproval to downright aggression and for that reason most of us do tend to stick to the conventional. I would never consider travelling to work in a suit with buckle brogues and a lace jabot. Wearing Highland dress, however, gives the opportunity to stand out from the crowd to as great or lesser degree as one feels comfortable with. Some simply wish to be "one of the crowd" whereas others go for individuality. It is not an attention-seeking thing, however, simply a wish to express one's individuality. And if I am to be honest it is also to tell the world that all this stuff is mine, bought and paid for, and not some ill-fitting outfit from a hire shop. I hope this explains things and, just as I would never be critical of someone who has dressed to their own taste, so I would expect them not to criticise mine.

[Phil]

Apologies for posting these pictures again but they come from a tailor's catalogue of the 1950's (and probably pre-date then) and show the various types of shoe in fashion then with Highland dress. Some are "Mary Jane" types and some closer to "penny-loafer" style. There is even a pair which look like ghillie brogues but with shorter laces, not tied up the leg. A possible solution for another member whose legs just don't suit ghillies?

[Jack Daw]

I have a pair of buckle shoes in 18th C style by Fugawee. They are VERY comfortable, but I would think they would not be appropriate for strictly formal wear (jabot, fly plaid, etc). I thought such shoes were supposed to be in patent leather. Please advise, those in the know.

[Phil]

I have a pair of buckle shoes in 18th C style by Fugawee. They are VERY comfortable, but I would think they would not be appropriate for strictly formal wear (jabot, fly plaid, etc). I thought such shoes were supposed to be in patent leather. Please advise, those in the know.

As long as you have them clean and polished to a good shine they should be perfect. Patent just saves you the trouble.