This shoe is problematic for me. As a beginning, I have to say that love the designs put fourth by United Nude. Many of their shoes seem to rely on ideas that are familiar with many designers and architects, but don’t often migrate to the land of lady’s feet. When I read that the founder Rem D. Koolhaas aimed to “downsize architecture to its smallest and most vulnerable scale, that of a woman’s foot” it made total sense. (He’s not the Rem Koolhaas, but he’s the Rem Koolhaas’s nephew.)
So what’s the problem? I’m not sure that the shoes look as good on the feet as it looks when those shoes start bravely marching for the door. If we take the Eamz Shoe as an example, does the shoe look nothing like a doorstop? Of course, the shoe takes its name and visual ques from the Iconic Eames Aluminum Group of chairs, designed in 1958 for Herman Miller. The idea that you could reconfigure the heel of a woman’s shoe so that the shoe becomes a cantilever, is entirely unique (as far as I know) and the initial misgivings I had with the shoes have migrated to greener pastures.