Why hasn’t high-street fashion moved on with technology?

The US Rubber Company (one of the original 12 stocks on the Dow Jones Industrial Average) started Keds, which produced the world’s first mass market sneaker in 1917. Yet you’re more likely to see a pair in London now than 80 years ago. The same is true for the ubiquitous Converse All Star, which may well have been a pioneering basketball sneaker back in the twenties but has since become a staple of everyone and anyone, including those who think the NBA is a gun club (they’re not entirely wrong).

So why don’t we want more high-tech shoes? I don’t think it’s merely the obvious answer that style is more important to people than comfort (which it clearly is). It also has a lot to do with the more obvious answer that comfort is a greater function of fit than of trainer technology.

Whereas fit requirements are relatively unique, comfort requirements are relatively universal. Personal example: I’ve got feet like a hobbit’s, and although that’s great for walking barefoot in the Shire it means that every time I wear narrow kicks like All Stars I get blisters the size of golf balls. However, I can wear my Goodyear-welted brogues all day, all week and feel great because I had my feet scanned and wear a pair that fits perfectly.

I guess the point I’m trying to make is that fashion hasn’t moved on because it hasn’t needed to. People will keep buying Keds, Cons, Waffles etc and Nike will keep bringing out new colourways of the Jordan 1 (the world’s best technology circa 1980) because they look great. You don’t need Air, Torsion or ERS technology to walk to Sainsbury’s in the morning even if there’s always a pack of hooded 16-year olds at the entrance looking at you like you’ve got their meal ticket. (They’re not entirely wrong).