Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Single Monk vs Single Monk styles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Single Monk vs Single Monk styles

    I wanted to get people's opinions on the types of single monk straps.

    On the one hand, you've got the style with the large broad strap across the shoe, like the AE Warwick.

    On the other hand, you've got the style where it's very much like a double monk strap but instead has the bottom of the strap stitched in place, like the Edward Green Audley.

    What do you all think? Any specific preference for one type over the other?
    Last edited by Domino; March 8, 2017, 08:57 PM.

  • #2
    Seems like the only two defined single monk styles are either cutaway like the EG Audley or traditional like the AE Warwick. I have no experience with cutaway single monks, I think in isolation they look nice, but I wonder if they necessitate pants with no break in order to keep the buckle visible.
    Instagram: WoofOrWeft

    Comment


    • #3
      I have a pair of BR Wyatts https://dappered.com/2015/08/in-revi...r-single-monk/ and like them enough for a pair of cheapish dress shoes (I think I paid $62 for them). I don't have a preference in general between the two styles though, I have considered picking up a pair of AE Warwicks, but every time I have had the cash and the need for a new pair of shoes another style has won out over them. Overall I think both styles can be done really well, and both styles can be done pretty horribly, depending who's making the shoes the and style/quality nuances they choose. Definitely not the first shoe i would get (or second or third) if I was just starting to build up my shoe collection, but down they road they can be a great addition.

      Comment


      • #4
        planning on Oxblood Warwick's as my next purchase, big fan of them

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Token View Post
          but I wonder if they necessitate pants with no break in order to keep the buckle visible.
          Why does the buckle need to be visible? Part of the appeal of the single monk is that it's more reserved. If you want something more ostentatious, get a double monk.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dpark View Post
            Why does the buckle need to be visible? Part of the appeal of the single monk is that it's more reserved. If you want something more ostentatious, get a double monk.
            Because I feel it's weird to want to wear a monkstrap but not want to show arguably the defining feature of a monkstrap (the buckle). It's like wanting a pair of button boots but then hiding all the buttons... why not just get a standard pair of boots then? Not sure your point about ostentatiousness is relevant: a single monk whether it has a visible buckle or not is still more reserved than a double monk. Just because I want the buckle to be visible doesn't mean I should skip the Warwick in favor of the Mora. If I'm wearing a monkstrap then I'm making a conscious decision to be more ostentatious vs. wearing a captoe, if the buckle + strap aren't even visible then I'd rather just wear wholecuts.
            Instagram: WoofOrWeft

            Comment


            • #7
              I think wanting to show the buckle vs. not is a personal preference.

              I could see someone preferring to close a buckle rather than tie a lace, and not want to show it off.

              Comment


              • #8
                Warwick is so bad ass that it's almost unbelievable.

                I just wanted to add that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by dpark View Post
                  Why does the buckle need to be visible? Part of the appeal of the single monk is that it's more reserved. If you want something more ostentatious, get a double monk.
                  Maybe it's just me, but I actually like the cutaway single monk for that same reason. I think of any monk strap as a bit more flashy and fancy, and the cutaway version as the flashiest and fanciest of the options.

                  But maybe that's just me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Also, apologies for goofing on the post, I missed a " in the code so it chopped off about half of the post, including one of the examples I was thinking of.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Warwick love....




                      ETA: Pants actually sit just a tad lower; I leaned over to get the angle right on the photo so they rode up just a tad.
                      Last edited by armedferret; March 9, 2017, 08:48 AM.
                      https://www.professorhorseyhead.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Token View Post
                        Because I feel it's weird to want to wear a monkstrap but not want to show arguably the defining feature of a monkstrap (the buckle). It's like wanting a pair of button boots but then hiding all the buttons... why not just get a standard pair of boots then? Not sure your point about ostentatiousness is relevant: a single monk whether it has a visible buckle or not is still more reserved than a double monk. Just because I want the buckle to be visible doesn't mean I should skip the Warwick in favor of the Mora. If I'm wearing a monkstrap then I'm making a conscious decision to be more ostentatious vs. wearing a captoe, if the buckle + strap aren't even visible then I'd rather just wear wholecuts.
                        First, I think that unless you wear your trousers with an unstylishly full break, the full shoe would at some point show, whether while walking or sitting down.

                        Next, I don't think it's weird to have a style feature that is somewhat hidden. In fact, I think button boots are kind of cool, but I also think they are very dandy. I would enjoy wearing them, but having the buttons go largely unnoticed. I also wear colorful socks even when I'm wearing boots, and no one would see them unless I'm sitting down cross-legged by chance.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Token View Post
                          Because I feel it's weird to want to wear a monkstrap but not want to show arguably the defining feature of a monkstrap (the buckle). It's like wanting a pair of button boots but then hiding all the buttons...
                          I'm not saying you should hide the buckle. I'm saying that the idea that you should wear no-break pants specifically to show the buckle all the time is a bit much. It's a bit like saying if you wear those button boots, you need to wear ankle swingers to ensure no one can possibly miss them. It's lacking any subtlety and seems try-hard to me. Also, as Spex pointed out, unless you're wearing pants with a really heavy break, your buckles are going to show anyway.

                          Originally posted by Domino View Post
                          Maybe it's just me, but I actually like the cutaway single monk for that same reason. I think of any monk strap as a bit more flashy and fancy, and the cutaway version as the flashiest and fanciest of the options.
                          I don't think it's fancier or flashier. I think it's sleeker. The buckle and strap across the Warwick is chunky and I find it unattractive, especially sitting on top of a shoe that's otherwise so subdued and minimal. I don't think it's an ugly style, but I'm not a big fan.
                          Last edited by dpark; March 9, 2017, 12:16 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dpark View Post
                            I'm not saying you should hide the buckle. I'm saying that the idea that you should wear no-break pants specifically to show the buckle all the time is a bit much. It's a bit like saying if you wear those button boots, you need to wear ankle swingers to ensure no one can possibly miss them. It's lacking any subtlety and seems try-hard to me. Also, as Spex pointed out, unless you're wearing pants with a really heavy break, your buckles are going to show anyway.



                            I don't think it's fancier or flashier. I think it's sleeker. The buckle and strap across the Warwick is chunky and I find it unattractive, especially sitting on top of a shoe that's otherwise so subdued and minimal. I don't think it's an ugly style, but I'm not a big fan.
                            I think you're taking extremes here. How does me saying that I like a visible monkstrap buckle (when 90%+ of monkstraps have visible buckles across the vamp) translate to me advocating for wearing ankle swingers so that every single button on my button boots is visible? Anyone who owns a pair of non-cutaway monkstraps and enjoys wearing them is either consciously or subconsciously making a decision to show off the buckle. Buckles aren't any faster to fasten than tying laces and there's less granularity to how secure of a fit you can get due to there only being 3-4 holes, so for me buckles are primarily an aesthetic feature rather than a practical one.

                            I don't own a pair of cutaway monks, and I've never seen a pair in person, so I have no idea how they interact with trousers and how the aesthetic of the shoe changes depending on whether you can see the buckle or not, however if you gave me a pair of EG Audley but with the buckle and strap removed it would look like an unbalanced wholecut variation to me and I would not wear it. I'm sure that Spex is right and that the buckle would be visible whenever you sit, and who knows if I ever get a pair of cutaway monks I might think they look fantastic. None of that changes the fact that currently all of my monkstraps have a constantly visible buckle and I quite enjoy that. If I'm in a setting where buckles are too ostentatious then I simply wear a more formal shoe rather than a more formal monkstrap.

                            I'm not really sure what you're looking to get out of this discussion. OP asked for people's opinions and I gave mine. If you're bored and just wanted to tell me that my taste lacks subtlety and I'm a try-hard with my visible monkstrap buckles then I hope you were entertained.
                            Instagram: WoofOrWeft

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I kind of think you're being a little oversensitive here. You made a statement about needing no-break pants that I found weird and I said so. That's pretty much the whole story.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X