Let me give my final conclusion first, NO.
However, the thinking process is not so stragitforward as there are many aspects and dimensions in this question.
First of all, why do we have this question?
Because of the price.
When many people come to know classic dress shoes for the first time, the basic price range is about 3,000 RMB and up. We don’t need to mention the prices of Berluti and John Lobb, because they belong to famous luxury group (LVMH and Hermes separately), they ARE luxury.
Based on this price range, people will think that classic dress shoes are a luxury, and only a few people can wear (afford) them.
I think there are two definitions of luxury.
The first is the intuitive reaction of the public, Luxury is something that shows you are rich.
From this perspective, classic dress shoes are extremely lacking in this social attribute value. Although in a very small circle, people know that your shoes are more expensive than those of Hermes at a glance, however in the eyes of most people (consumers), the cost performance is too low. It is much better to carry an LV bag than your broken shoes.
Another attribute of luxury is more primitive, extremely high quality, exclusively selling to the best people who can enjoy, and scarcity. This is completely in line with the definition of the word luxury. Luxury originally has nothing to do with pretending and showing off. The real luxury should not be shouted loudly. I’m very expensive. Look at me and see how awesome my owner is. And a person who needs others to recognise how awesome he is may not be truly awesome.
So can classic dress shoes be regarded as a luxury of the original doctrine? I think the three requirements meet two, that is, high quality and supply to people who can appreciate, but the last one, scarcity is not met.
This is also why many brands like to emphasise that they are fully handmade, or have a small annual output, which is to make up for the third requirement and makes them a fundamental luxury. Unfortunately, most of the shoes we come into contact with are factory-produced which are actively marketing, hoping that the inventory on the shelves can be sold faster and discounted endlessly. This is a complete joke in the face of the scarcity of luxury.
To sum up, classic dress shoes are not a luxury.
So, what are they? So expensive, and not a luxury.
I think I have made an argument, and it seems that it holds true today. Crafts with strong use value.
If you like the style of classic menswear, it is absolutely no exaggeration to wear dress shoes 300 out of 365 days a year.
When it comes to handicrafts, what can you think of? Such as a wood carving for home furnishings. Why do you call it a handicraft? Because it has considerable artificial production skills in it.
For a handicraft with strong use value, what kind of people does it attract? I think they should be very pragmatic. They don’t need to amaze others. At the same time, who have considerable appreciation and willingness for art and beautiful things.
It is indeed expensive, but its use value makes it worth it. It is indeed very expensive, but art is not a necessity in the first place. It is indeed a luxury to taste elegant things.
