Which is sexier?
No flip-flopping around on this one. Would you prefer to take long walks on the beach with a man in Regency boots? Leave a comment. . .
Of the two, the boots! of course, if he lost the flip-flps and walked barefoot, his pantlegs rolled up . . . that would be sexy to me!
The boots are nice, but Regency Guy would probably expect you to pull them off for him. That would be a dealbreaker. Flip flop guy would take your shoes off and then make you a mojito. You can tell a lot about a man from his shoes.
SK, Regency Guy would have a valet to pull off his boots. And, if you were to marry Regency Guy, you would have a maidservant or two to take care of your shoes, and best of all, servants to make the mojitos.
2011 may the year of the shoe (or boots, or flip-flops) in the publishing world: Editor’s Choice in the Trib (Saturday, July 9, 2011) was a book called “Rich Boy.” Cover illustration for the book: a rather fancy, possibly expensive, pair of very shiny black shoes.
You are right, Barry, about shoes on book covers. It’s another convenient way to indicate character without showing faces or hair. If you look carefully, you will see many covers with a man or woman facing backwards, or (ouch) cropped at the neck so that you see the torso, but not the face. Leaves much to your imagination, does it not…
What would go into a Regency mojito?
A Regency mojito would be a glass of sweet madeira wine. Cheers!
I agree, the fiction of the Regency boots is far superior to the much dreaded, now ubiquitous, reality of the “flip flop.” Even the name “flip flop” suggests something may be lacking with your man– either in his purpose, or worse, his performance (ahem!).
I would definitely prefer a contemporary man in flip-flops but a Regency man? Nah. Long walks on the beach would then be with the former.
Sneakers, yes, flip flops, a definite no. He would trip on the cobblestone and no doubt break his neck!
Return to top of page
Copyright © 2017 Karen Doornebos