Natural Character of the Instep—Causes, and Prevention, of Sores
upon it—False Taste—Callosities of the Heel—Counters—Criticism of
Lasts.
In the last chapter the _instep_ was spoken of as a part of the whole
arch of the foot. It is now to be looked at from the upper side. When
the foot is in its best shape this part is elevated and prominent,
with a well-marked and graceful rise from the ball upward, and a
distinct projection or convexity at its upward portion, or about
half way between the joint and the ankle, which is the upper surface
of the first cuneiform bone, or the point where that bone joins the
first metatarsal. This place is subject to callosities or thickenings
of the skin, resembling corns, but more frequently is affected by
soreness without any thickening of the skin. In the broken-down foot
there is no convexity here at all, or but very little, the instep
being a straight inclined plane from the ankle to the ball, and
sometimes even bending downward. Insteps of this kind, whatever bad
effects may come from their flatness, are not afflicted in the way
just described. Corns and callosities are never known to fasten upon
them; an advantage which shows that some good is mixed with evil, in
the foot as well as elsewhere. It is the best formed instep, on the
contrary, that is most subject to callosity and tenderness.
This tenderness or callosity, whichever it may be, has one cause in
the general tightness of the boot worn, and may have two others,
arising from the shape of the lasts used. One of these is in the fact
that the corresponding part of the last—technically called the _cone_
of the instep—does not extend far enough forward, or is shaved off
too much—is left _too flat_, for the fitting of well-arched feet.
There is not wood enough, proportionally, in the last at this point.
The other cause comes from the whole instep, being placed too near
the _middle_, instead of on the _side_, where the foot has it. Mr.
Watkins, who was referred to in the last chapter, thus explains this
defect:
“If the instep is not in the right place, the foot swells in that
place. I have seen very troublesome sores on the instep, and very
difficult to cure, arising from the misplacing of the instep of the
last. By a peculiar measurement[5] I have been enabled to obviate
all difficulty in that respect, so that none of my customers now
complain of tender insteps. The insteps on ordinary lasts are placed
near the middle, which is erroneous, as the point of the instep lies
on one side, and not in the centre, and common sense would indicate
that the thicker parts of the lasts should be on the side of the
large joints and toe, and the thinner on the outside of the foot,
where the small toes are placed.”
It may seem, at first thought, as we look at a boot after it is made,
that the leather will accommodate itself to the shape of the foot
with the greatest ease. It appears perfectly pliable, ready to take
any form or place that the foot may give to it; and this is true to
a great extent, but it is not so entirely. When the boot is made the
leather is _stretched_, and worked into a definite shape—that of the
last. When a foot large enough to fill it is put inside, if it be of
a different form there will be more or less force exerted to change
the shape and adapt it to that of the foot. This is one reason of
the difficulty often experienced the first time, or first few times,
a new boot is worn. The resistance, pressure, and friction may be
considerable, or only slight, with a corresponding effect.
This misplacement of the instep is true of the ordinary
right-and-left lasts, and it is necessarily still more marked in the
_straight_ lasts on which the great majority of ladies’ boots and
shoes are made. If women’s insteps do not suffer from this difficulty
more than men’s, it is because they wear softer material, and boots
fitting less tightly than those of men. The latter have an advantage
of the former in this respect, as in some others; for while they
have right-and-left lasts wholly, with ladies the straight last is
the rule, the other the exception. As long as woman does not have
her boots and shoes made _right and left_, she is losing one of her
“rights,” and subjecting her feet to an “oppression” which, unless
they can bear a great deal, they will be likely to complain of in
an unpleasant way. And this right is not so unimportant, but that
it will be found best to give it a little attention, although the
remonstrating “subject” may be in a very humble position.
The best thing to be done for feet with sore insteps is to have lasts
made to fit them, and their coverings made by some one who knows the
real source of the trouble. The sore will generally disappear soon
after removing the pressure. The prevention of it is a much better
thing, and will come with a more general understanding of the foot’s
nature, and with the more correctly-shaped lasts and more perfect
skilfulness which that knowledge will give to the shoe manufacturer.
There is another deformity of the foot, chiefly of the instep, which
might be called the _stub-foot_. It is not the natural short, thick
foot of short, stout persons, but seem an unnatural chubbiness, made
by prevention of the foot’s growth lengthwise. It is an approximation
to the Chinese foot—thick and large round the ankle and instep, but
short and small at the toes. There is no correct proportion between
one part and another. The arch is high, but thick and clumsy,
without its natural regularity and beauty. The constant cramping of
small shoes, worn when the feet are young, is most probably the cause
of such development, by preventing a normal and perfect growth. As
the forward parts of the foot, being smaller and weaker, are more
easily cramped, the increase of size is at the heel, and around and
above the arch.
It is a very Chinese idea of perfection which admires feet of this
character. A correctly educated taste prefers to see a foot equally
well developed in all its parts, and of a size _proportionate to the
size of the whole body_. This is the idea of the artist, as opposed
to that of the Chinaman, and has a reason for it, while the other has
none.
If a chance is given the toes to develop themselves before the body
gets its full growth, the fault may perhaps be partially outgrown;
but after that, the foot will be almost sure to keep the same shape
always. The thing to be remedied, is the strange taste which looks
upon feet that are abnormally small with any more admiration than
would be given to a small head, or short legs, or stumpy fingers.
When people who are otherwise intelligent come to see that the foot
has the same right to a full and natural growth that belongs to any
other part of the body, they will not cramp it with tight boots, or
consider a foot of this kind as any more beautiful than a pug nose, a
dwarfed limb, or any other lack of development whatever. The defect
will then become the result of chance or misfortune only, instead of
intention, governed by a false standard of beauty.
It is not, however, intended to deny that there are many feet which
are proportionally too large, made so by some occupation or habit
demanding an extreme development of bone, muscle, and strength.
Nature committed no mistake in their production. She made them no
larger than was necessary to adapt them to the habits of their
possessor, or of the parents from whom they were inherited. To
attempt to improve them by cramping, is only to make them worse by
distortion. They will probably decrease their size somewhat in time,
if circumstances favour them in so doing; but if not, they are still
no worse than big hands, big noses, big bodies, or many of those
other unbalanced developments from which none of us can claim to be
entirely free.
Callosities upon the heel, sometimes so bad as to be called corns,
are often troublesome, and mostly so to those persons whose feet
are bony and spare of flesh. In these, if they are not broken down,
the heel bone, at its upper part, projects backward distinctly. If
the boot worn slips at the heel, there is no flesh over the bone to
ease the pressure and friction of the leather, and the skin must
thicken for its own protection. After a while it becomes so thick,
callous, and hard, that every pressure upon it hurts the bone, as
much as before it was formed. It has become similar to a hard corn,
and must be removed. This can often be done without any softening, by
carefully cutting, scraping, or lifting up gradually with the knife.
It will probably grow again, and need relifting occasionally as long
as the irritation continues. It is due to flat feet to say that they
usually escape these annoyances, as well as sores of the instep.
Slipping of the boot at the heel, is almost always the fault of the
boot-maker. It may come from bad cutting, from bad fitting of the
upper, from bad lasting, and from badly shaped lasts upon which the
boots are made. When the cutting is wrong—which affects _men’s_ boots
mainly—it is the leg through the ankle that is too large, or there
is some defect that will not allow the upper to _last_ properly.
Sometimes it is fitted badly, so as to produce the same result. More
often than either of these it is the workman, who neglects to draw it
over the last in the right way; sometimes from want of knowledge, and
sometimes from carelessness or indifference. The error consists in
not drawing it over the toe sufficiently tight to make it fit closely
at the heel.
A bad fit upon the foot is another cause, in addition to those
mentioned; and it is also true that the heels of well-arched feet
are more liable to slip than those whose arches are more or less
flattened down.
Still another and very decided influence in producing callosities on
the heel, is a counter that is hard and stiff at its upper portion.
Counters of this kind are very common, and ought to be as commonly
avoided. The stiffness of a counter _should be at the bottom of it,
where there can hardly be too much, while the upper half, or more,
should taper to a thin edge, that is soft and flexible_. Then, while
firm at the proper place, it bends and fits snugly to the heel,
preventing its slipping; when, if it stands up straight and stiff
throughout, the foot will slip almost invariably.
Lasts, particularly boot lasts, are at fault in this respect
generally. Those upon which shoes and slippers are made are so shaped
_as to force the shoe to set tightly at the heel and ankle_. The
principle upon which they are formed is well known, and is a correct
one. It is difficult to see why it should not be carried further
in its application, and govern the making of lasts for _boots and
gaiters_ as well as of those intended for _low shoes_. The necessity
is the same in both these styles; there is only a _difference in
degree_, which is greater in the _low shoe_ and _slipper_ than in
the _high gaiter_ and _boot_. The tightness at the ankle which
prevents slipping, is supplied, more or less perfectly, in side
spring gaiters, and those that are _laced_. Lacing compels the boot
to fit closely, whether it does so easily or not. In men’s boots,
where there is no lacing this effect is produced only by having them
so small about the heel and ankle that the foot can hardly move at
all after it is crowded inside. This may, or may not, be too tight
for comfort, but it is doubtful if there is need of its being so for
the sake of having a well-fitting boot. The fit can be produced in
the same way as in the slipper or shoe, and the demand for doing it
is the same, _only not to the same extent_. The slipper has nothing
to keep it on the foot, unless strings are resorted to, _except the
tightness lengthwise caused by the peculiarity of the last_. A boot,
by covering the instep is held more securely, yet it often slips at
the heel, and is all the more likely to do so when the foot is well
arched.
It seems to us that the way to remedy this trouble in boots is
precisely the same as the means taken to _prevent_ it in _shoes_:
that is, to make _more spring in the last forward of the instep;
in other words, a greater curve on the bottom_. The amount of this
_spring_ or curve need not be so great as in the shoe last, for the
reason just stated, that the boot is confined at the instep, while
the shoe is not, to the same extent. A good shoemaker would not like
to make an _Oxford shoe_ upon a boot last, although it is laced well
up toward the ankle. Why should he be willing to make a boot on it,
when the boot is confined at the instep no more than the shoe? There
is the same danger of slipping in both cases, and why should it not
be guarded against in the same way? Every one who has made or sold
shoes knows that a slipper, or low shoe of any kind, will fit on the
foot much better if made on a shoe last; that it is less liable to be
loose at the sides, and to show big wrinkles across the ball; that,
in short, it _must_ be made on such a last. The same reasoning and
the same rule applies almost as well to the boot or gaiter. If there
is any exception, it is the side-spring boot, with its elastic sides
to draw the surface smooth, and even this is not an exception when
the material is leather, though it may be when cloth of any kind is
used. In fact, there is no kind of foot clothing manufactured but
would have a better fit upon the foot, both in front and at the heel,
sides, and ankle, if a last more closely resembling the common shoe
or slipper last was used in the making. There may not be, and we are
confident there _is_ not, a necessity for having it so _flat in the
shank_ as the common slipper last, nor so _wide_ through the same
region, but the upward curve of the forward part should be nearly
or quite as great. The curve of the shank might be very nearly the
same as that of the hollow of the foot, while at the toes it may
curve, we will say, one-half as much as the whole bend of the toes in
walking. This form makes it a shoe last at the fore part, while the
shank is but little different from the ordinary _boot_ last. The part
between the heel and instep need not be so wide at the bottom, nor,
perhaps, so narrow at the top, as the best shaped lasts for shoes.
It is believed possible, however, to make the shank sufficiently
wide, at a slight distance _above_ the bottom, to accommodate the
foot easily, while it may be suddenly narrowed _below_ sufficiently
to allow a narrow-shanked sole to be made upon it, if desired,
without difficulty. If so, this would be the blending of _taste_ with
_comfort_ in the fit. The outside edge would be a little _lower_
than the other, as it is in the foot. Perhaps the whole may be well
described as half-way between the extremes of the two different
styles. There would be no difference between those designed for men
and those for women, except in width and bulk—none in the general
form.
It may be feared that a tongued boot—patent leather or Napoleon—may
be more difficult to draw on the foot if made upon a last of this
style. We believe that it can make but very little difference,
probably not any after the boot is bent in the shank, while it _will_
do much to prevent slipping at the heel when cut with a large ankle,
as is usually the case. The pitch of the leg will be very nearly the
same when on the last as when the boot is worn.
It may be observed, however, that an improvement has lately been made
in many lasts by giving them a greater degree of this curve on the
bottom. But it is easy to carry it to an extreme. The sole can be
curved too much as well as left too straight. Men’s lasts of medium
size have been made with the toes raised an inch and a half above
the level of the ball and heel; which is half an inch more than is
necessary, or useful. Too much spring, in a thick-soled, stiff boot,
prevents the straightening of the toes, while in a thin one, where
the toes can be straightened, it may create longitudinal wrinkles in
the upper, near the sole at the inside joint. An average spring of an
inch in men’s lasts, and three-fourths of an inch in those for women,
is not far from the proper standard.
Forms of lasts have always been subject to change. Fifteen or twenty
years ago boot lasts were made very hollow in the shank, and very
much curved upward at the toe. After that came the stub-toes—flat in
shank, and with scarcely any curve at all; and, in addition to all
the changes fashion has imposed, besides the two indicated, every
manufacturer seems to have a style of his own, more or less distinct.
The principles which should govern their form seem to be very loosely
understood, and hence all the differing shapes and styles.
All this is exactly the opposite of what it should be. We have no
more right to change the shape of lasts every few years than we have
to change that of the foot, and to do this, for it amounts to nothing
less, when Nature has formed it exactly in the best way to adapt it
to its design and use, is simple absurdity. To change either is just
as foolish as it would be to make hats that would flatten the head
on the back or sides, and compel it to grow in an upward direction.
The whole matter of the shape of lasts is something which fashion has
no right to meddle with, unless, it may be, to round or square the
toes. It has no right to _narrow_ them beyond a certain limit, nor
even at all except from the outside. The business of the last-maker
is to learn what is the true shape of the natural, healthy foot, and
then to imitate it as closely as possible, making only the slight
differences for different kinds of coverings that have been pointed
out. And when so formed, let it be considered as a thing not to be
altered, except to make it resemble the foot still more perfectly.
Fashion and taste may change and dictate the cut and style of the
upper parts of the boot or shoe to almost any extent, but they must
not be allowed to shorten the length of the heel, nor to interfere
in any manner with the shape of the last.
We have been somewhat particular in description, for the sake of
influencing the makers of lasts and boots, as well as for the
comfort of those who are to wear the latter. When these principles
govern in its manufacture, the boot will fit almost as easily at the
first putting on as it will after a week’s wearing. The trouble of
“breaking in” will be nearly abolished. It may also be promised that
slipping at the heel will be of rare occurrence, and the callosities
produced by it be got rid of with little difficulty. When once
removed they will not be likely to come again, with a boot that
causes no irritation.
FOOTNOTES:
[5] A measurement for such cases may be taken by drawing the
strap-measure from the _point of the instep_ around the _heel_, to
give the size, while the distance between the same two points, in a
straight line, should be taken by the _size-stick_, in the same way
we take the _length_ of the foot, to show how far forward the point
of the instep ought to be located on the last. The measure _around_
the foot at the latter place must also be taken.