Mornings can be chaotic enough without the added stress of dealing with pesky shoelaces. But for many of us, the frustration doesn't stop there – it's a symptom of something bigger. Freelance writer Coco Khan argues that our modern obsession with 'high-performance' trainers has led to an unfortunate decline in their most basic function: staying tied. It's not just about being annoyed; this issue highlights a broader problem where style and appearance often take precedence over substance.
Khan, who's spent years studying trainer culture, notes a shift in the 2010s towards designs that prioritise aesthetics over functionality. The newer, thinner laces with synthetic or coated lines may look sleek, but they inevitably slip more easily. This is not just a personal problem for trainers' owners; it reflects a deeper issue where quality and performance are sacrificed for the sake of appearances.
But Khan's observation isn't isolated – numerous online forums have been filled with discussions from people who've experienced similar frustrations. Some have even delved into the physics behind knot-tying, pointing out that traditional methods like the 'granny knot' can be prone to failure. This collective exasperation is a clear indication of a widespread problem that's often overlooked.
Khan also critiques the disconnect between marketing and reality. Many synthetic laces are cheaper to produce, but this fact is often left out in favour of highlighting their 'high-performance' credentials. This trade-off exemplifies a contemporary trend where products are prioritised for aesthetic appeal rather than practical utility – a phenomenon some have termed 'enshittification'. It describes the gradual decline of services or products that benefits manufacturers at the expense of users.
Ultimately, Khan's critique suggests that our shoelaces serve as a microcosm for broader societal patterns. They reflect a culture where superficial improvements and cost-cutting measures are often presented as innovation, leaving us with products that look good but underperform. This minor inconvenience provides ample opportunity to reflect on how everyday objects – and perhaps society itself – have arrived at this point.