Dress and care of the feet /

by John Lord Peck

Fig. 5.

In this case, as in that of the foot, if the fingers lie directly forward of their metacarpal bones, they are slightly spread or separated. And the next fact to which attention is requested is, that we never think of forcing them into one position, or of confining them there, as is done with the toes—a treatment that would quickly destroy their usefulness, if attempted. They are allowed perfect freedom to close or separate; to be pushed over to one side or the other, as occasion requires; and to assume any natural position when unoccupied.

Now, although there is a greater demand for the liberty of the fingers, on account of the innumerable uses to which they are capable of being put, the difference between them and the toes, in this respect, is only a difference of degree; and it is evident that something, more or less, of the same bad effect which would attend the cramping of the former, must, as it does, attend the confinement and squeezing undergone by the latter. It seems clear that in a state of nature the toes are left equally free to “spread themselves,” or draw together when necessary, or to return to their proper places in line with the metatarsal bones, when there is nothing to draw them on one-side. In circumstances where they would not be interfered with, the large one would doubtless have the position given it by Professor Meyer, or, at least one very nearly the same; that is, the line of the toes carried backward would touch the middle of the heel, and the whole inside of the foot would have a general appearance of straightness. This, it is repeated, is the form of the normal adult foot, and of the child’s foot universally.

The only form of shoe which is absolutely correct, then, is one allowing this amount of freedom to the toes—not alone to the great one, but to all. The form recommended by Dr. Meyer, which is represented in Fig. 6, like every other now made distorts the little toe, compelling it to turn under toward the middle of the foot, and giving it that peculiar twist that almost every one may notice in his own.

Fig. 6.—Shape of Sole given in “Why the Shoe Pinches.”

This, however, is only a slight fault compared to the bending aside of the large toe, and is mentioned mainly to show that neither that form nor any other gives to all the toes the freedom which properly belongs to them. The true standard form is one that will not compel any of them to be cramped or bent aside, nor press injuriously upon any part of the foot; and to this form it should be the shoemaker’s endeavour to approximate as nearly as possible.

But such a shape as would fulfil this requirement has never been realised since the days of the ancient sandal. And the problem for the shoemaker to solve is to create a covering that will give the freedom and ease of the old sandal, combined with neatness and elegance of fit, with protection from dirt, cold, and dampness; and with propriety and beauty throughout. It will be something considerably different from any now worn, and may tax his ingenuity to a greater extent than is supposed. Professor Meyer is right concerning the form of its sole at the inside; but the curve at the outside is too much like the common style to be exactly the right thing. There seems to be required a more abrupt curve at a point somewhat farther forward than where the widest part is usually found—a curve approaching more nearly to an obtuse angle, something like what is represented in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7.