Ahh, daintiness! Clarks don't do that, really, do they?
DD has cavemen feet like me, i.e. as broad as they're wide, so I long ago gave up any idea of her having 'princessy' shoes... at least I can be confident that the chunkiness of the Clarks is giving her feet proper support (and I have to say I personally can't bear 'girly' stuff so it's probably just was well!).
And I hate to break with the prevailing 'Clarkes are shit' view held on MN, but there IS a definite difference between them and cheap shoes. I had to buy DD a pair of school shoes in Asda at the start of term as the Clarkes ones I wanted were still on order - to a casual glance they are all but identical, same style, same fastening - but the George ones had no support to the arches, the sole was thin, pretty much flat and unpadded and the vinyl they were made out of was... well, vinyl, and looking worn by the end of a fortnight. Plus they were narrow and although they fitted DD they gave her a small rub on her heel, even in socks.
The Clarkes ones have a flexible sole that is cushioned and shaped, they are much more rugged on the bottom, made of leather and fit her beautifully. Okay, they cost £20 more than the George ones, but I'd say that was worth it to make sure her feet are properly supported and not rubbing. Plus (providing her feet don't grow too quickly, please God), they look like they will last a lot longer than the Asda jobbies.