If you wander down your street, the chances are high that you'll see someone wearing Converse before you've even reached the coffee shop. Photo / 123RF
If you wander down your street, the chances are high that you'll see someone wearing Converse before you've even reached the coffee shop. Photo / 123RF
Kurt Cobain wore them on stage. David Cameron wore them on holiday. Millie Bobby Brown wore them on Stranger Things. Kamala Harris wore them on the cover of Vogue.
If you wander down your street, the chances are high that you'll see someone wearing them before you've even reached the coffee shop. Whether you call yours Chuck Taylors, All Stars or Chucks, Converse is the sneaker that ate the world, a style staple of men, women and children's wardrobes alike, which in its 114th year remains in ruder health than almost any other centenarian fashion brand, with a pair estimated to be sold every 43 seconds.
That Converse was never meant to be a fashion brand is a large part of its appeal, and never more so than in the era of the vainglorious, extortionately priced designer trainer. Launched in Massachusetts by Marquis Mills Converse in 1908 as a football and netball shoe, in 1917 the company designed the forerunner of the modern All Star sneaker, marketed under the name "Non-Skids" on account of its rubber sole. In 1921, semi-professional basketball player Charles "Chuck" Taylor joined the company, his input leading to improved flexibility and ankle support, as well as its use as a basketball shoe.
His restyled iteration also included a distinctive star logo, placed over the ankle bone to add an extra layer of protection. Before you could say "billion-dollar idea", the logo led them to become known as Chuck Taylor All Stars; the first celebrity-endorsed sports shoe, whose popularity spread rapidly from the start.
As someone who didn't take up running until her forties, and was so clueless that her inaugural run was conducted in Converse, the sneaker's lineage as a sports shoe never ceases to amaze. Even their staunchest fans would agree that comfort isn't their strong point. Their flat rubber sole is hopeless for running, not that it was designed for that purpose, but it also conducts the heat away from your feet on chilly days, and is not much better on rainy ones, since its sole becomes slippery when wet. None of which has been any barrier to Converse's ubiquity. Whatever their shortcomings, their attributes outweigh them. Their biggest strength isn't how they feel, but how they look, and what they say about the wearer.
Converse's penchant for collaborating with rock and pop legends is one way in which it has stayed relevant. Photo / Getty Images
Ironically for such a popular, ubiquitous shoe, what they say about the wearer - or what the wearer imagines they say - is that they don't belong in the mainstream. "Before trainers began to resemble something an alien would design, there were two choices: trainers for jocks, or trainers for rock stars," notes longtime aficionado and former GQ editor Jonathan Heaf, Chief Content Editor of Soho House. "I picked the latter; rather than bounce around in a fresh pair of Reebok Pumps, I pulled on a pair of sooty Chuck Taylors the colour of shortbread - instant indie cool, thanks in part to bands such as The Ramones. It's no wonder they are still the first choice for indie sleaze kids."
And also first choice for politicians who want to seem cool and down with the kids, as per David Cameron and Kamala Harris, both of whom were accused of "gesture politics" by adopting a shoe far lowlier than their status. For decades, Chuck Taylors have had countercultural associations, their affordability and simple design making them a favourite in the seventies and eighties with bands including The Sex Pistols, The Clash, The Rolling Stones and The Ramones.
In the nineties, they became a key component of grunge, thanks to Nirvana frontman Cobain. They were also popular with early hip hop stars, with Ice Cube rapping "He's 'bout hard as Darth Vader, in his sweatshirt, khakis and Chuck Taylors". Rappers including Snoop Dog, The Game and Wiz Khalifa have also sung about the shoe, leading Khalifa to collaborate on a range in 2013.
Converse's penchant for collaborating with rock and pop legends is one way in which it has stayed relevant. In 2008, it released a Kurt Cobain collection, featuring artwork and scribbles from his personal notebook, distressed to look worn-in and knackered in homage to Cobain's style. Other music collaborations include Blondie, The Doors, Pink Floyd and The Beatles. Converse has also launched more esoteric collaborations with Damian Hirst, Nintendo and The Simpsons.
Within the fashion world, it has partnered with Gap, Missoni and Maison Margiela, although the ultimate fashion partnership is its longstanding one with cult Japanese label Comme des Garcons. A limited release in 2009 was followed by a permanent collection in 2015, of particular significance because it saw the famous star logo replaced with a heart. Known as the CdG Play, so popular is the sneaker that it's often sold out, some seven years after its original release. Priced at £130 and in a slew of iterations including polkadot, it's this version of the Chuck Taylor - the one without the All Star logo - that is most in demand with Gen Z.
Since being bought by Nike in 2003 for $315 million, the Chuck Taylor has been pimped up so many times that even the most dedicated sneakerhead would be forgiven for losing count. Nike's acquisition came two years after Converse filed for bankruptcy, when annual sales were just over $200 million. Fast forward 19 years, and they've ballooned to $1.9 billion, achieved by regularly refreshing its offer with myriad new colourways, collaborations and design tweaks.
Kamala Harris is a particular fan of the shoes, wearing customised "2020" Converse for the campaign trail. Photo / Getty Images
Some fans, however, believe that recent collections have been a tweak too far, with the platform-soled iteration, the Run Star, provoking particular ire. "If ever anything should have been no platformed, it's Converse All Stars," says writer and brand consultant Richard Benson, who edited style magazine The Face in the nineties.
"It's astonishing that a brand owned by Nike, with its understanding of sportswear and marketing, should make such a grotesque, sacrilegious mistake. The essence of the All-Star is its functionalism and minimalism. Classic trainers ought to be respected for aesthetic and commercial reasons. A brand has two choices with a remix like this: it can work within the established lines, and interpret the idea for the contemporary period, or it can identify what's popular, make a shoe in that style and then stick the classic badge on it to cash in on the history and status. Converse tends to have done the former for the last two decades, and as a result it defied the worries of purists who feared what might happen when Nike bought it. With the Run Star, it has abandoned that. It's one of the ugliest trainers ever."
However outlandish Converse's redesigns have become, the public will vote with its feet - and its feet seem to suggest that basic is best. The most popular Converse this summer is the original Chuck Taylor, in a classic colourway such as black, white, khaki or red. These, fans claim, are the perfect antidote to the overpriced designer trainers that have been dominant for almost a decade, the most popular of which, such as Balenciaga's £825 Triple S, are slowly nudging towards £1000.
"Prices are getting silly now, and so are loads of the designs," says 18 year-old Ted, who is currently awaiting his A-level results. "I can't even afford £70 for a new pair of Chucks, so I just wear my dad's. I know I'm probably meant to be rebelling against it, but I like my dad's style. It's not trying to be cool, which kind of makes it cool. Everyone I know wears Chucks. They're generic, but in a good way." In a culture that relentlessly promotes individuality, perhaps looking generic is the biggest rebellion of all.
