I’ve heard good things about Grant Stone, and despite being a Made in USA partisan, fully acknowledge that great stuff comes out of China, which in many cases has factory equipment and technology that our own decayed manufacturing infrastructure does not.
But what’s always rubbed me the wrong way about Grant Stone is that despite its quality, which I have no firsthand experience with but no reason to doubt, is that it still feels like a knock-off factory. A lot of the designs are super derivative of Alden, and other popular makers, like its leather sneaker copy-and-pasted from Common Projects. There’s for sure great footwear coming out of China-I’d just want them to have their own point of view or identity, rather than leveraging lower manufacturing costs to replicate another label’s work.
Yeah that’s a very fair critique - on a second pass-through, their Ottawa boot is essentially the Alden tanker boot. Probably many more examples as well.
To be fair to them, I think they do a good job of incorporating different colors and textural elements (e.g., ostrich boots or that really long suede on some of their dressier models) that a lot of the bigger names wouldn’t touch, with pretty decent results
I’ll cop some grant stone one of these days. The price range is easier to stomach. I respectfully disagree with the knock off statement. It is unavoidable to not be a knockoff. Like we love drakes and everything they do is a knock off. Barbours, Shetland’s, rugbys. Nothing new. That’s why I like them. I’m not into really pushing boundaries. I love updated classics. Grant stone has a kudu leather Indy knockoff. I’m not mad about it.
Also if I had to guess I bet Alden wasn’t the first one to pull off the Indy silhouette. I have no evidence to prove this though.
Always appreciate the chance to nerd out too much about clothes!
Your point is a valid one, that all brands will inevitably be influenced by others, the same way writers, musicians, filmmakers, etc are.
But where I see a difference-and would therefore employ the rather loaded word “knock off” - is whether a brand is incorporating an existing influence into their overall brand identity, or just replicating it without leaving any firm identifier of their own.
Its true that Drake’s, for the most part, isn’t engineering wholly new garments: a lot of its staple items are classics like waxed cotton jackets or Shetland sweaters. But I’d argue that they are designed in ways that have a distinct point of view, which for Drake’s means bold, bright colors, relaxed fits, lots of extra pockets, etc.
Similarly, Ralph Lauren. The whole company is based in reinterpreting existing influences, yet when you see their take, it has a quality that makes it “very Ralph.”
What I see with Grant Stone are scores and scores of shoes that don’t feel like they have any cohesive brand identity behind them (ie, Alden tankers sitting beside Common Projects Achilles) other than them being facsimiles of existing product.
I agree with this 100%. Everything has a reference. And there is a scale to the referencing. Haha I do not have a dog in this fight, I don't know why I am defending Grant Stone. Maybe because I was thinking of making a purchase recently. But years ago when I was in my GYW red wing era I wrote off grant stone as Thursday Boots esque garbage. But recently perusing the website I was kind of impressed.
But I do agree with you. Maybe my concession is to upgrade grant stone to a tier slightly above knock-offs so I can justify my future purchase haha.
I’ve heard good things about Grant Stone, and despite being a Made in USA partisan, fully acknowledge that great stuff comes out of China, which in many cases has factory equipment and technology that our own decayed manufacturing infrastructure does not.
But what’s always rubbed me the wrong way about Grant Stone is that despite its quality, which I have no firsthand experience with but no reason to doubt, is that it still feels like a knock-off factory. A lot of the designs are super derivative of Alden, and other popular makers, like its leather sneaker copy-and-pasted from Common Projects. There’s for sure great footwear coming out of China-I’d just want them to have their own point of view or identity, rather than leveraging lower manufacturing costs to replicate another label’s work.
Yeah that’s a very fair critique - on a second pass-through, their Ottawa boot is essentially the Alden tanker boot. Probably many more examples as well.
To be fair to them, I think they do a good job of incorporating different colors and textural elements (e.g., ostrich boots or that really long suede on some of their dressier models) that a lot of the bigger names wouldn’t touch, with pretty decent results
I’ll cop some grant stone one of these days. The price range is easier to stomach. I respectfully disagree with the knock off statement. It is unavoidable to not be a knockoff. Like we love drakes and everything they do is a knock off. Barbours, Shetland’s, rugbys. Nothing new. That’s why I like them. I’m not into really pushing boundaries. I love updated classics. Grant stone has a kudu leather Indy knockoff. I’m not mad about it.
Also if I had to guess I bet Alden wasn’t the first one to pull off the Indy silhouette. I have no evidence to prove this though.
I’m just arguing for fun.
Always appreciate the chance to nerd out too much about clothes!
Your point is a valid one, that all brands will inevitably be influenced by others, the same way writers, musicians, filmmakers, etc are.
But where I see a difference-and would therefore employ the rather loaded word “knock off” - is whether a brand is incorporating an existing influence into their overall brand identity, or just replicating it without leaving any firm identifier of their own.
Its true that Drake’s, for the most part, isn’t engineering wholly new garments: a lot of its staple items are classics like waxed cotton jackets or Shetland sweaters. But I’d argue that they are designed in ways that have a distinct point of view, which for Drake’s means bold, bright colors, relaxed fits, lots of extra pockets, etc.
Similarly, Ralph Lauren. The whole company is based in reinterpreting existing influences, yet when you see their take, it has a quality that makes it “very Ralph.”
What I see with Grant Stone are scores and scores of shoes that don’t feel like they have any cohesive brand identity behind them (ie, Alden tankers sitting beside Common Projects Achilles) other than them being facsimiles of existing product.
I agree with this 100%. Everything has a reference. And there is a scale to the referencing. Haha I do not have a dog in this fight, I don't know why I am defending Grant Stone. Maybe because I was thinking of making a purchase recently. But years ago when I was in my GYW red wing era I wrote off grant stone as Thursday Boots esque garbage. But recently perusing the website I was kind of impressed.
But I do agree with you. Maybe my concession is to upgrade grant stone to a tier slightly above knock-offs so I can justify my future purchase haha.