But is it still a kilt?

[Geoff Withnell]

(Moderators, if this should go in the contemporary kilt forum, feel free to move it, but the question I am asking is I think more general)

Utilikilts has a "New Standard" model.

http://www.utilikilts.com/company/pr.../new-standard/

It is NOT a wrap garment, but a pull on. It does NOT have an integral flat front apron.

Since I have always taken the minimum definition of a kilt as a wrapped garment, the portion below the waist coming approximately to the knees, with pleats at the sides and back, and overlapping flat aprons in front; I would say this is not a kilt.

Not trying to start an argument, altho I recognize the possibility. Just trying to figure where kilts end and other MUGS begin.

[Woodsheal]

The earliest philabegs were pleated all the way around, so it's sort of a kilt. But hideous, nonetheless...!

[cessna152towser]

The New Standard comes with the a detachable and minimalist apron front, and Neo-Traditional style rectangular apron fronts in both black and heather grey can be purchased separately for $35 as an addition to the already complete New Standard. The apron pieces are completely removable and interchangeable, so you’re essentially getting two different Utilikilt looks for the price of one!

The new inverted inner apron provides the same coverage as our regular Neo Traditional designs.

From my brief viewing of the link it looks like another evolution of the Utilikilt.
They do say that the "neo traditional" front apron can be purchased separately.

[CDNSushi]

Utilikilts have never tried to pretend they were traditional kilts. They say so themselves. As such, to judge them with the same yardstick seems rather moot. It will never be a traditional kilt, but neither does it want to be.

Is it a kilt though? Yes and no. It's really not a fair question, because by answering 'yay' or 'nay' we are categorizing it using pre-existing definitions of what our concept of a kilt should be.

It is a new garment. It has been invented recently, as an unbifurcated, men's covering. It certainly isn't trousers, nor is it a ladies' skirt. I would use the word "kilt" in the descriptive sense rather than in the definitive sense... Otherwise put, I would describe it as a kilt in speaking about it, but wouldn't call it a kilt... I think I might be the only person for whom that actually makes any sort of sense whatsoever...

Let me try again... In the taxonomy of clothing, it resembles a traditional kilt more closely than it does, say, a pair of trousers... So using the terms of Carolus Linnaeus, it is likely in the same family as the traditional kilt, but most likely a different genus, and certainly an entirely different species.

Maybe something like this: (please excuse my butchering of Latin)

Kingdom: Vestiae
Phylum: Masculinis
Class: Pessum
Order: Non-bifurcatae
Family: Kiltae
Genus: Modernus
Species: neo-utilikiltus

[Tobus]

This product seems to veer further away from the concept of "kilt" than their other products, and (to my eye) looks more like a lady's skirt than anything else.

[tundramanq]

You make sense here Sushi. I do have and Original "old school" Standard with a zip fly. Tis unique, but like this new standard (I believe) it looses all the "coverage" advantage when sitting that the aproned kilts have - UK and traditional - UK just exchanged a lot of underpleating for a wide apron. It works better than the traditionals on this point. The new standard just looks like old standard with cod piece and shortened pleats to me.

Tis a shame they are abandoning the Mockers except for the pinstripe. It is the dressiest of the line. ( I have them in all colors). It combined the best of both worlds - traditional looking clean pleats and good functional front pockets.

[biblemonkey]

This product seems to veer further away from the concept of "kilt" than their other products, and (to my eye) looks more like a lady's skirt than anything else.

I agree.

[Seawolf]

To each his own. I own an early utilikilt and although it has seen use and some extreme service ( why I bought it) It still doesno take the place of my everyday wear. As for innovation, well here too I have a thing about front pleats and no apron. Maybe its my age and maybe it will appeal to the younger set. Just isno my thing.

Mòran taing,

Seawolf

[Cygnus]

Kingdom: Vestiae
Phylum: Masculinis
Class: Pessum
Order: Non-bifurcatae
Family: Kiltae
Genus: Modernus
Species: neo-utilikiltus

We really need a "like" button for things like this.

[pugcasso]

Within any definition there is a gray hazy zone of ambiguity...

If one were to require the definition of "kilt" to be a wrap-like garment, then the linked-to garment would not be a kilt.

(if there was a pair of hand-garments with a separate thumb and two sections for 2 fingers each - which would greatly facilitate the Vulcan hand sign - would these be gloves or mittens? Or some new hybrid?)


Personally I feel that one of the main characteristics of much ancient clothing like the kilt is that it is a wrap. This stems back through the millenia as a basic and primordial mode of dressing that is still found in the kilt (perhaps the 'wrap' is the earliest way to dress ... wrap something around you and tie some length of tough cord around the waist).

So the whole 'wrap' idea and feel is integral to the kilt idea in my mind.