I don’t know how to really process these 'sneaker of the year' arguments or discussions…they’re so opinion-based and there are very few sneaker opinions I take seriously enough to change my own personal preferences. These lists, though, I feel like most of them are self-congratulatory and entirely unproductive. I sometimes think most of these lists are more a way for commerce-minded individuals to trick the easily-swayed bunch into spending money on stuff they don't need as a way to buy some sort of validation.
'Personal' top 10 lists, although fun, don't really highlight any facts. And knowing what the Island Boyz chose as their top ten sneakers of the year doesn’t really enhance my life, at least, for the time being.
That being said, I'm much more a fan of the 'most important sneaker of the year' type discussion, which doesn’t really seem to take place on social media. But when it does, it mostly takes subjectivity out of the equation. And it'd be an even better argument, although probably less culturally relevant, if we took the 'most important NEW sneaker of the year' into consideration. That means we wouldn't be looking at 30-40 year old silhouettes as our basis for 'importance' and we'd only rely strictly on new ideas. Really limits the choices, then, huh?
But…anyway…that’s all tangential. I saw this tweet and I’d say it made me feel more confused than anything. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. It really is a cool shoe, just...totally and utterly inaccessible for 99.99% of the types of people I consider 'sneakerheads'. I guess I’m more just wondering what constitutes these ‘sneaker of the year’ requirements. Are there any kind of guidelines when it comes to these arguments?
(BTW, turn your post notifications on: you’re gonna love my pick for sneaker of the year droppin next week!)