Spending on useless displays is a way of conveying one's high role in the social hierarchy, said Veblen. Veblen was a deep, but ironic and inadvertently funny genius. Since fur is noticeably useless, and the shoes are probably more expensive than non-furry boots, they are worn to connote extra reserves of cash and capital. As odd or critical as that sounds, one can't be too judgemental. Personally, I wear jeans with phony and useless pseudo-watch pockets or, on rare occasions, nowadays, a tie, or a button-down collar, which in Veblen's view, are also useless additions, perhaps reminiscent of an earlier sartorial age, but maintained in contemporary (admittedly Veblen was writting in the 1800s) clothing to denote status. The more useless an item, the more expensive to maintain, the more the item signals status. Those phone little watch pockets on dungarees or blue jeens hearken back to the day when wealthy men ostentatiosly consulted their pocket watches.
These extravagantly upper-class shoes may mimic shoes of yore that did require fur. Possibly at one time Native Americans or others in cold climates across the world shod their feet in fur to protect against real winter cold. Nowadays, the shoes have a slightly comic look--with the black tights favored by contemporary fashion, they give a "Puss 'n Boots" appearance, especially if the wearer is tall.
This tall aristocratic type, not very good at physical labor, was described by Veblen as a valuable addition to humankind, with their keen understanding and culture. They are nurtured along by having a more barbarian parent who provides protection for these foals. They are usually identified on sight or brief discussion and really don't need fur boots to signal status.
The display of conspicuous consumption can take mutated or inverse forms. For some, an affection of working-class solidarity is hoped to ring the proper status bells. Social activism can also be a way of signaling hidden wealth and status. As one grunt in Platton says to the idealistic Charlie Sheen character, "you have to be rich to think that way." Just the right political leaning, say, for example, what some call the bourgeois liberality of the Eastern elite, also can convey status.
Particularly risible is status-seeking en masse. In a suburb where most are living above the national income norm, a view of the street may show several people wearing furry boots. At what point are these status-signaling, preposterously upper-class shoes, approaching a vanishing point of worth. If everyone is wearing them....
The matter of furry shoes reminds me of Tolstoy's description of Ivan Illyich, in well known short story. Illyich attempts to decorate his house as befits his recent rise in barrister status.
He found a delightful house, just the thing both he and his wife had dreamt of. Spacious, lofty reception rooms in the old style, a convenient and dignified study, rooms for his wife and daughter, a study for his son — it might have been specially built for them. Ivan Ilych himself superintended the arrangements, chose the wallpapers, supplemented the furniture (preferably with antiques which he considered particularly comme il faut), and supervised the upholstering. Everything progressed and progressed and approached the ideal he had set himself: even when things were only half completed they exceeded his expectations. He saw what a refined and elegant character, free from vulgarity, it would all have when it was ready. On falling asleep he pictured to himself how the reception room would look. Looking at the yet unfinished drawing room he could see the fireplace, the screen, the what-not, the little chairs dotted here and there, the dishes and plates on the walls, and the bronzes, as they would be when everything was in place…He was particularly successful in finding, and buying cheaply, antiques which gave a particularly aristocratic character to the whole place….All this so absorbed him that his new duties — though he liked his official work –interested him less than he had expected. Sometimes he even had moments of absent-mindedness during the court sessions and would consider whether he should have straight or curved cornices for his curtains. He was so interested in it all that he often did things himself, rearranging the furniture, or rehanging the curtains…the result was charming not only in his eyes but to everyone who saw it.
In reality, it was just what is usually seen in the houses of people of moderate means who want to appear rich, and therefore succeed only in resembling others like themselves: there are damasks, dark wood, plants, rugs, and dull and polished bronzes — all the things people of a certain class have in order to resemble other people of that class. His house was so like the others that it would never have been noticed, but to him it all seemed to be quite exceptional.
I imagine that this aspiration to be admired is somewhat built in. There seems to be no domain where people seem content to be ordinary. As was said by the bard, we are the heroes of our own plays. And possibly this is the trait that will drive us and the planet to ruin.
Certain parts of the adorned body have social meanings in terms of status and conspicuous consumption. A rink on the pinkie means something different than a ring on the ring finger. The former, especially if large, denotes implied wealth or connectivity with wealth and power. The ring ties up the working use of one finger so implies conspicuous consumption. Whereas a ring on the latter is associated with domesticity and marriage.
The foot, as a source of human preoccupation, was analyzed by Freud. As odd as it sounds 100 years later, Freud said the foot was associated with the phallus. Freud was brilliant so I am loathed to bring up examples from his writings that solidify dumb stereotypes of Freud, but that is what he said, in an analysis of parapraxis. So, decorating the foot becomes, as said of, say, binding in Chinese women, a form of eroticism, as is fur. So, the excessive attention paid to picking shoes of a particular type becomes not only a sign of wealth but of robust and attractive vitality and availability.
On a different, but related topic, there is the meaning or signaling of "spectator shoes." These are the usually white shoes with brown portions on the uppers, more common in the forties or fifties than other decades. They are fabulous examples of conspicuous consumption. Indeed the very word "spectator" indicates idleness, which is a keen indicator, in Veblen's view of wealth. The more useless things we have, the better. It is better to have servants who just hang around, in terms of status signaling, than ones who work hard--an entourage so to speak. Having a lawn, a useless patch of ground reminiscent of a pasture of yesteryear is another example of status--a piece of ground that does nothing and is moreover, requiring expense to keep up. A lawn is a way of elevating one's own status. A garden, while many times more practical, doe snot do the same thing, at least traditionally. The same kind of uselessness as an expensive but impressive docked boat. It is better to have a golden, exquisite fork, that requires care, and possibly is to cumbersome to really use effectively, than to have a simple tin fork.
But back to the spectator shoes. I am hoping at some point they become a little more in style, slightly less absurd than they are considered nowadays for a typical walk around. The reason is that I already have a pair and the execution of conspicuous consumption will cost not a cent.
