Caitlin Robbins

Megan Palmer wrote:

Caitlin Robbins wrote:

It turned out that the sides were glued to the sole instead of sewn, and the cobbler said that if he detached them that the shoe would just lose all shape. The heel wasn't separated either. Both things he told me about the first time when I asked if the shoes would be repairable. So yah, I'm annoyed.

Also, those are neat shoes!

Thank you.

Unless the sole extends up the sides of your shoes encasing the upper, I suspect that the cobbler was being lazy.

Neither the espadrilles nor the sandals have a separate heel.

I examined all my dress shoes and none are stitched to the sole, the uppers are all glued to the sole.

They have been resoled by shaving a thin layer off the bottom of the sole and a new sole and heel glued down in two separate sections.

The cobbler that I use is 290km away and there are various shops where you can drop off your footwear for repair.

If he can't repair the shoes, you get a call to advise you of the same.

Are there any other options for cobblers near you?

That is entirely possible. I can look at the big city to see what they might have, at least call and see what they think. The fact that this cobbler at first said they were repairable and then said they weren't is incredibly suspicious to me.  Thank you so much for the advice!

Megan Palmer wrote:It seems counter intuitive but when I buy expensive leather soled boots and shoes, I often get the soles replaced before I even wear them, with rubber to give a better grip in snow and ice.

The cobbler may not have been able to repair your shoes if there wasn't enough surface around the edges for a new sole to stick onto?

Perhaps this was a reason that they couldn't be repaired.

The espadrilles are over 30 years old and well past their best buy date but so comfortable that I can't bear to throw them out.

What were the reasons that your cobbler gave for not being able to repair your shoes?

It turned out that the sides were glued to the sole instead of sewn, and the cobbler said that if he detached them that the shoe would just lose all shape. The heel wasn't separated either. Both things he told me about the first time when I asked if the shoes would be repairable. So yah, I'm annoyed.

Also, those are neat shoes!

Mk Neal wrote:If you are looking for a flat to wear indoors, maybe look at moccasins? There are all-leather versions that should be repairable.

Do you recommend any in particular that hold up to a lot of walking on hard ground?

randal cranor wrote:Howdy,

I also have worked in the woods most of my life. There doesn't seem to be quality shoe repair around like there used to be. I also still buy handmade boots that can be repaired by the maker. I just have to ship them back. I still have some pairs that are going on quite a few years old, and possibly will out last me.

The company I buy from is in the PNW and close enough that return repairs are pretty quick. The company also makes all types of boots and shoes. It was easy to measure my feet and use their measurement scale. At different times certain styles do go on sale and that was how I was able to buy my first pair, almost a $100 off. You may be able to find a boot/shoe maker close to your area.

I also do some "repair" on my own cheaper pairs of knock around shoes, especially when the soles wear out and just glue leather or whatever to the bottoms. I do get leather scraps from taking gloves apart etc. and I use Barge Leather cement

Do they have a website and/or ship to the East Coast?

thomas rubino wrote:Hi Caitlin;
I suggest finding a cobbler to build you a custom-fit pair.
For years I worked in the woods of the northwest.
When I started I was young and broke so I wore whatever off-the-shelf boots I could get.
Quite a few were well-known name brands... they all hurt my feet and quickly wore out.
Then I was told about handmade boots, specifically made for smoke jumpers.
I had my first pair made in 1983, they did not hurt my feet, and they did not wear out quickly.
I had that original pair rebuilt three times over the next 25 years.
I did buy a second pair between rebuild number two and three.
And now that I have retired, our youngest son is firefighting and he has both pairs. (Amazingly they fit him)

It hurts financially to buy once, but as the years roll by and costs keep rising it pays off.
My mom was a librarian, and she always bought top-quality shoes, I guess it runs in the family.

I'd love to do that. The problem is that the only reputable cobbler in the area is said above cobbler who I'm hesitant to trust after his assurances fell through on the last pair. I'm looking at online custom orders such as

Adelante and Sumisurra, but I don't know how to even begin assessing them.

The story goeth thusly: I wanted to buy a pair of black flats for work (I'm a librarian and wear dresses but I am also on my feet all day). I wanted them to be repairable. I went to a local, small shoe shop and found a pair of leather flats that I liked. I went right next door to the shoe repair shop so that the cobbler could take a look at the shoes before I bought them. He declared them repairable.

Two years later, and I've worn holes in the bottom of those shoes. I take them to the same repair shop to get them fixed. The same cobbler showed me how they weren't fixable. I am very peeved. I've tried several times to find repairable flats and every time they turn out to be unrepairable. I'm starting to get to the point where I might as well buy a $20 pair of flats every year since I have to replace the $200 pair every two years. Does anyone else run into this?

I agree, too many great trees! For beauty, I love redbuds, Kwanzan Cherries, any kind of maple, Chionanthus virginicus, oh goodness there are too many! (Just add in any fluffy-looking tree. I'm addicted to fluffy-looking-and-feeling plants).

And it sounds kind of shallow, but also like some trees just for how their scientific names sound. Chionanthus is one, as is Tilia tomentosa and Liriodendron tulipifera. They just roll off the tongue!

So I just wanted to mention, in case it might apply for others, that I was just randomly browsing this thread and had the thought to see if I could find anything on off-loom weaving at the library I work at - and it turns out we have Naumann's book "The Off-Loom Weaving Book"! I, of course, put it on hold immediately. Check out your local library, it just might have it!

This is one of my future goals, though probably more decorative than as a barrier.

Knowing next to nothing about berries, would any work with traditional hedging techniques?

I'm new too! We turned our cover crop over and are letting it rot for a few weeks before planting. We thought about mowing it down, but we have community garden plots and no way of actually mowing. So we'll see how the turning it over goes!

I'm also interested about the interplanting with the garlic. Are you planning on removing the vetch at any point, or leave it the whole time?

Trace Oswald wrote:Let me start by saying I don't want to downplay the experience of anyone that has struggled with eating disorders or any other health issues.  Our health is truly the most important thing we have and I can't think of anything more stressful and terrifying than dealing with a serious health problem, either in oneself or a loved one.  That said, I think it's very important to keep in mind that fasting has been done for literally the entire evolution of the human and animal world.  Our predecessors, as well as millions of people currently living, were forced by circumstance to fast.  Nearly every religion teaches it adherents about fasting for both spiritual and physical reasons.  Healthy people have no problem at all with short term fasting, and there are untold instances of unhealthy people getting healthy by fasting.  Anything taken to an extreme can be damaging, but I think it's very easy to show that the average American diet is far, far more dangerous than fasting.   I would hate to see someone that could benefit greatly from fasting turned off to the idea by thinking the dangers are greater than they are.  

I wanted to jump in and point out the religious aspect of fasting is often misunderstood. From the perspective of an Eastern Orthodox Christian, we 'fast' about half the year: Wednesdays and Fridays, Lent, Advent, The Apostles Fast, and the Dormition Fast. But 'fasting' from this perspective is refraining from eating meat, dairy products, eggs, and olive oil. There is encouragement to eat less food and more simple food. Shellfish is allowed, and fish only on certain days. Oil and wine are also allowed on certain days, specifically weekends in Lent. Adherence to the fast is variable depending on situations: kids don't fast, nor do pregnant women. Each person works with their priest to make sure they are doing what is healthy for them - those with health conditions are certainly given leniency.

There are only a few times that a 'total fast' - that is, not eating at all - is prescribed. You are not supposed to eat or drink for the 12 hours before taking the Eucharist (and again, there are relaxations to this depending on health, age, and ability). There are also a few days in the year where it is recommended to total fast.

This, of course, applies to laypeople, that is to people who are not clerics or monastics. There are stricter rules for them, particularly around Lent. To quote the Orthodox Church in America:

   On weekdays (Monday to Friday inclusive) during the seven weeks of Lent, there are restrictions both on the number of meals taken daily and on the types of food permitted; but when a meal is allowed, there is no fixed limitation on the quantity of food to be eaten.
       On weekdays in the first week, fasting is particularly severe. According to strict observance, in the course of the five initial days of Lent, only two meals are eaten, one on Wednesday and the other on Friday, in both cases after the Liturgy of the Presanctified. On the other three days, those who have the strength are encouraged to keep an absolute fast; those for whom this proves impracticable may eat on Tuesday and Thursday (but not, if possible, on Monday), in the evening after Vespers, when they may take bread and water, or perhaps tea or fruit-juice, but not a cooked meal. It should be added at once that in practice today these rules are commonly relaxed. At the meals on Wednesday and Friday xerophagy is prescribed. Literally this means ‘dry eating’. Strictly interpreted, it signifies that we may eat only vegetables cooked with water and salt, and also such things as fruit, nuts, bread and honey. In practice, octopus and shell-fish are also allowed on days of xerophagy; likewise vegetable margarine and corn or other vegetable oil, not made from olives. But the following categories of food are definitely excluded:
           meat;
           animal products (cheese, milk, butter, eggs, lard, drippings);
           fish (i.e., fish with backbones);
           oil (i.e., olive oil) and wine (i.e., all alcoholic drinks).
       On weekdays (Monday to Friday inclusive) in the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth weeks, one meal a day is permitted, to be taken in the afternoon following Vespers, and at this one meal xerophagy is to be observed.
       Holy Week. On the first three days there is one meal each day, with xerophagy; but some try to keep a complete fast on these days, or else they eat only uncooked food, as on the opening days of the first week. On Holy Thursday one meal is eaten, with wine and oil (i.e., olive oil). On Great Friday those who have the strength follow the practice of the early Church and keep a total fast. Those unable to do this may eat bread, with a little water, tea or fruit-juice, but not until sunset, or at any rate not until after the veneration of the [Plashchanitsa] at Vespers. On Holy Saturday there is in principle no meal, since according to the ancient practice after the end of the Liturgy of St. Basil the faithful remained in church for the reading of the Acts of the Apostles, and for their sustenance were given a little bread and dried fruit, with a cup of wine. If, as usually happens now, they return home for a meal, they may use wine but not oil; for on this one Saturday, alone among Saturdays of the year, olive oil is not permitted.

The rule of xerophagy is relaxed on the following days:

   On Saturdays and Sundays in Lent, with the exception of Holy Saturday, two main meals may be taken in the usual way, around mid-day and in the evening, with wine and olive oil; but meat, animal products and fish are not allowed.
   On the Feast of the Annunciation (March 25) and Palm Sunday fish is permitted as well as wine and oil, but meat and animal products are not allowed….
   Wine and oil are permitted on the following days, if they fall on a weekday in the second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth week: [First and Second Finding of the Head of St. John the Baptist (Feb. 24), Repose of St. Raphael (Feb. 27), Holy Forty Martyrs of Sebaste (Mar. 9), Forefeast of the Annunciation (Mar. 24), Synaxis of the Archangel Gabriel (Mar. 26), Repose of St. Innocent (Mar. 31), Repose of St. Tikhon, Patriarch of Moscow (Apr. 7), Holy Greatmartyr and Victorybearer George (Apr. 23), Holy Apostle and Evangelist Mark (Apr. 25), as well as the Patronal Feast of the church or monastery].
   Wine and oil are also allowed on Wednesday and Thursday of the fifth week, because of the vigil for the Great Canon. Wine is allowed-and, according to some authorities, oil as well-on Friday in the same week, because of the vigil for the Akathist Hymn.

I think it's important to note that records that we have of religious fasting are almost always the most strict, meant for very few and under strict guidance. Laypeople almost never follow the exact guidelines of the fast. Even in monasteries, a monk would not be allowed to choose how strictly to fast - he would follow the instruction of his abbot. Just as for laypeople, you follow the guidance of your priest (who, of course, you inform about any health restrictions). This, in fact, is a great guard against disordered eating as you are not in control. In today's secular world, I would say this guidance comes from your doctor or clinical nutritionist.

This is a lot of information to basically say: I would not recommend fasting or following a diet on your own initiative. My family has had its experience with eating disorders, and as others have mentioned the point of eating disorders is control. By fasting only at the advice and under the guidance of an educated and concerned guide, you lessen the risk of falling into disordered eating. Of course, you could always run into bad doctors/nutritionists, but if you do your due diligence in research it again lessens risks there as well.