The merging of function with fashion may be a risky business

There's nothing fashion appears to like more than a mixed metaphor, even though in real life they are frowned upon. I give you the wedge-heeled trainer, a questionable invention, spearheaded by the normally reassuringly Gallic (read: chic) Isabel Marant. Regular readers of this column might expect me to believe otherwise. I am a long-time upholder of the ugly shoe and all it has to offer: comfort, anti arm-candy status and delicate legs by comparison. These, though, represent all that is non-committal in a wardrobe and what's the point of that?

A trainer is a trainer. It is meant for walking, running and training in. Hence the name. It is today worn by men, women and children because it is also the most practical and versatile footwear in the world. If a woman wants to lengthen her leg by wearing heels, that is her prerogative, but should she be required to cunningly hide that inside a sports shoe? Any number of vertically challenged men with far from vertically challenged women on their arms spring to mind – Nicolas Sarkozy, Tom Cruise – and we wouldn't want to be them, surely.

And yet, après Marant –whose wedge-heeled trainers have sold out – le deluge. Jil Sander, Marc by Marc Jacobs, See by Chloé and any number of high street spin-offs decree that the heeled trainer is swiftly gaining a, um, foothold. And the thoughtless merging of function and fashion doesn't stop there.