Roger Vivier 1953 Boule Pumps Designed for Actress Marlene Dietrich

Hi HauteCouture,
Can you please post your 3 x photos of the soles of the shoes again?. My apologies, but in editing the post to remove duplicate photos an error occurred.
Thanks

Gayle

Here you go!
 

Attachments

  • 007.JPG
    007.JPG
    72 KB · Views: 424
  • 008.JPG
    008.JPG
    73.7 KB · Views: 301
  • 003.JPG
    003.JPG
    54.7 KB · Views: 348
Thanks so much for your expert opinion!

you're welcome :)

ok, i think i solved the mystery. vivier did design a pair of boule (french for 'ball') heels for dietrich in 1953, but not these shoes. these are a later (most likely 80s) example of vivier boule pumps.

here's an illustration of 1953 vivier shoes, created for queen elizabeth's coronation in 1953, and as you can see, the heel is a much different shape, which makes sense for 1953.

coronationvivier1954shoe.jpg


so the vivier site gave the example of your shoes as boule shoes, but not the ones designed for dietrich.
 
Last edited:
I have just listed a pair of Delman shoes from the 1950's marked on the inside strap 7M so that width was around at the same time as the A,B,C system.

that's interesting, melanie. i recall the a, b, c, d width system up until sometime in the 60s, and it then being replaced with the modern n, m, w system we now know.

you're right about charles jourdan also using the boule heel design. i had a pair from the late 70s, and wasn't aware it was vivier who first came up with the idea.
 
I agree that they look like a more recent reproduction of the '53 shoe. The first thing that struck me is that the heel looks too thin, stilettos weren't around yet.

Like Suzanne, I see '80s or early '90s when that very tapered almond shaped toe was in fashion. Of course, if they're based on a '53 style they will be close to the original, with a small amount of tweaking for a modern wearer so they don't look too old fashioned.

Classic and popular designs do get remade, it's something to keep in mind. It tickles me every time I see the classic photo of the Dior Bar suit.

344px-New-look-collection-bar-suit-by-christian-dior-in-paris-1947-spring-summer.jpg

It's always said to be 1947 but you can tell by the shoes that the photo (and perhaps the suit) was recreated in the '50s.

yes, the heels are too thin for 1953, but mostly i'm commenting because of that 1947 new look dior photo! which has always bothered me. the stiletto shoes it's shown with can't possibly be from 1947, so did someone have a forwards-and-back-again time machine to style and take the shot? :drinking2:

i think you're right. i think the 1947 dior classic new look suit shown is an original, but it only makes sense that it was shot about a decade later, shown with then-current shoes!
 
Although we share some of the letters Ruth the UK system is different yet again. UK widths are C, D, E, EE etc. any shoe marked A or B is using the american system. Some of the most traditional UK shoemakers, such as Church, have still retained this system.
 
Although we share some of the letters Ruth the UK system is different yet again. UK widths are C, D, E, EE etc. any shoe marked A or B is using the american system. Some of the most traditional UK shoemakers, such as Church, have still retained this system.

that's interesting. so i gather a u.k. c width is a narrow? very confusing.
 
Yes, occasionally you will find a Clarks shoe is listed online as a C, usually because the style comes up narrow, not because they want to make a narrow fitting shoe....
 
Clarks have shoes they offer in a choice of C, D or E, so it is deliberate.

I thought that the loss of A and B was just because we have wider feet now than decades ago, so A and B were no longer in use. But that was just my theory!
 
Yes I know they do make shoes in C by choice, but you will see some styles that only come in a C - such as some of the patterned sand boots they had recently (and lots of people in the reviews complained they were narrow!).
 
Back
Top