Kilt Do's and Don'ts

[ThistleDown]

Not to put too fine a point on it...if I understood him correctly, Hamish recently commented that he has a pair of buckle shoes made in the style of the "Culloden era" and he wears them to formal events with alacrity.

Could that not mean that Ham is trying on a "new" fashion? Something like his new dayglo kilt? Of course he is in England and it was Scotland I was referring to.

As to the business with the PC, and whether to wear it during the day...that is undoubtedly determined by fashion and what is fashionable.

I was just wondering why we criticise someone who wears a PC during the day when it is/was traditional to do so (in some circumstances). Certainly it is not fashionable today, but why do we equate fashion to tradition in this case and not in others?

Maybe the impasse here is that, for myself at least, I'm just as much a rebel as those who wear non-traditional kilts, but in a different way. I am indifferent to "fashion" but I revere traditions and to some extent history. But there is a freedom that comes from knowing you've "got it right" and not caring what the moguls of fashion think.

I see no impasse here. I suppose most in this forum are rebels in one way or another. I've worn a kilt pretty well daily for the last fifty years. What kind of a rebel does that make me? What I am concerned with is the confusion of fashion with tradition, just as you are, but also with the fact that traditions evolve due to fashion in different places at different times. What is thought of -- for example -- as traditional Highland dress in the US today has already altered in Scotland and is now seen as "costume".

[DWFII]

, but why do we equate fashion to tradition in this case and not in others?.

I think...upon thinking further...that "fashion" is dictated by people who, for one reason or another are seen as the "elite"--presidents and prime ministers, opera divas and rock stars...etc. .,When those people pass on, "fashion" moves on.

Whereas traditions spring not only from the common folk but from protracted usage, that because "fashions" tend to be time (or era) limited), defies time and fashion.

I really don't think the two are connected except in the most tenuous manner.

[ThistleDown]

I think...upon thinking further...that "fashion" is dictated by people who, for one reason or another are seen as the "elite"--presidents and prime ministers, opera divas and rock stars...etc. .,When those people pass on, "fashion" moves on.

I agree that, generally speaking, fashion is fleeting and passes with the fashionable. Hmmmm...of course, it became "fashionable" for non-military men to wear the PC to somewhat match (or at least compete on the same level with) their military counterparts. And the PC stuck and is now considered traditional. To support our argument, however, there's the 19C fashion of the great hairy sporran. Fortunately that one eventually passed. At least it did in Scotland; has it in North America?

Whereas traditions spring not only from the common folk but from protracted usage, that because "fashions" tend to be time (or era) limited), defies time and fashion.

Yes. As I said in an earlier post: common use and common beliefs over time. So we cannot say, until it has passed, whether a fashion will become tradition, or not, I suppose. Tradition does not lead to fashion, for sure, but I think you will agree that sometimes tradition becomes fashionable

[Monkey@Arms]

I agree that, generally speaking, fashion is fleeting and passes with the fashionable. Hmmmm...of course, it became "fashionable" for non-military men to wear the PC to somewhat match (or at least compete on the same level with) their military counterparts. And the PC stuck and is now considered traditional. To support our argument, however, there's the 19C fashion of the great hairy sporran. Fortunately that one eventually passed. At least it did in Scotland; has it in North America?

Yes. As I said in an earlier post: common use and common beliefs over time. So we cannot say, until it has passed, whether a fashion will become tradition, or not, I suppose. Tradition does not lead to fashion, for sure, but I think you will agree that sometimes tradition becomes fashionable

I would argue that it is all fashion. As you point out the big hairy sporran used to be de rigeur, to wear a simpler one would probably have been considered a "don't" in its day. Indeed the kilt as we all know, came into vogue as a result of King George IV 's visit to Scotland, and was quite unfashionable before that time, and existed as a tradition only in the Highlands.

Sure we now have expectations about how a "traditional" kilt is "traditionally" worn, such as where a kilt pin goes if one wears one, and what style of jacket goes with what, but as you have given many examples, these customs have changed with the times.

Kilt wearing evolves, some changes take, others fall by the wayside, and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

Best regards,

Jake

[Iolaus]

[....] and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

Just thought that should be reiterated...

...again...

[....] and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

...and again...

[....] and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

...and again.

[....] and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

[macwilkin]

I would add that a kilt (and Highland attire in general) is an article of clothing that is also symbolic to some of their heritage.

Personally, if someone wants to wear a kilt only for the fact that it is a practical, comfortable garment, then I can respect that. All I ask is that the same respect be returned to those of us who value the history and heritage behind Highland attire.

Respectfully,

Todd

[Tommy Hunt]

I would argue that it is all fashion. As you point out the big hairy sporran used to be de rigeur, to wear a plainer one would probably have been condidered a "don't" in its day. Indeed the kilt as we all know, came into vogue as a result of King George IV visit to Scotland, and was quite unfashionable before that time, and existed as a tradition only in Highlands.

Sure we now have expectations about how a "traditional" kilt is "traditionally" worn, such as where a kilt pin goes if one wears one, and what style of jacket goes with what, but as you have given many examples, these customs have changed with the times.

Kilt wearing evolves, some changes take, others fall by the wayside, and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

Best regards,

Jake

I like tradition. It connects me to my past - to my tribe. People could go naked wearing only tartan turbans for all I care but other than a bizarre exhibition of self expression it won't mean anything.

[ThistleDown]

I would argue that it is all fashion. As you point out the big hairy sporran used to be de rigeur, to wear a plainer one would probably have been condidered a "don't" in its day. Indeed the kilt as we all know, came into vogue as a result of King George IV visit to Scotland, and was quite unfashionable before that time, and existed as a tradition only in Highlands.

Sure we now have expectations about how a "traditional" kilt is "traditionally" worn, such as where a kilt pin goes if one wears one, and what style of jacket goes with what, but as you have given many examples, these customs have changed with the times.

Kilt wearing evolves, some changes take, others fall by the wayside, and unless you're wearing it as a uniform, or as a re-enactor, its a clothing, not costume.

Exactly. As a uniform it must be "uniform". But it is not a uniform, it is (first) a national dress and (second) a fashionable and very personal garment. I am a traditionalist and have worn a kilt almost every day for (I just worked it out) 43 years (I was in Ireland for five more and sure didn't wear a kilt then!) But I have a personal style that has evolved over all those years -- my fashion. For example, I often use hangers for a sporran now; that's not traditional and is, therefore a fashion that may never become a tradition. Still, I defy anyone to criticise my wearing of them!

Tradition is not a set of inflexible rules. It bends this way and that -- according to perceptions and personal wishes -- and slowly finds its way forward to a new level.

In the culture in which it exists.

We have a cross-culture tradition, whether we like it or not, and this makes our task virtually impossible if we set out to critique the minutae of kilt-wearing. What has become "traditional" in the US is thought of as a "fashion" in Scotland; what is "traditional" in Scotland is "old-fashioned" in the US.

Want yet another example? Attend a Highland Games in Scotland and you will never see a kilted local except that he is wearing a jacket and tie. That is Scottish tradition. Attend a Games in the US and the vast majority of kilted locals are t-shirted. Will the latter fashion last long enough to become a tradition? I, for one, suspect that it will. In the US.

If and when it does, will those in the kilt-and-t-shirt culture have a right to tell those in the jacket-and-tie culture that they are not adhering to the "rules" of tradition? Or the reverse? Surely not. They have evolved from the same root, but they are different.

[greenguzzi]

Exactly. As a uniform it must be "uniform". But it is not a uniform, it is (first) a national dress and (second) a fashionable and very personal garment.

Well, as a kilted newbie what you say makes the most sense. I have Celtic blood, but that's not why I (sometimes) wear a kilt. I wear it because I like to wear it (a very personal garment). I am very interested in learning about the history and traditions of kilted folk. But in the end I wear what I wear in the way that I wear it because I am comfortable and enjoy doing so.

However, I do agree that it's important to know what taboos one is breaking.

I also have long hair, a mustache and a beard. I'm often told that it's not fashionable to do so. I'm grateful for the information, it makes it all the more fun being hairy!

(I'm typing this in Australia; wearing an Irish tartan kilt, a non-hairy sporran, and an American T-shirt. )

[ThistleDown]

Well, as a kilted newbie what you say makes the most sense. I have Celtic blood, but that's not why I (sometimes) wear a kilt. I wear it because I like to wear it (a very personal garment). I am very interested in learning about the history and traditions of kilted folk. But in the end I wear what I wear in the way that I wear it because I am comfortable and enjoy doing so.

However, I do agree that it's important to know what taboos one is breaking.

I also have long hair, a mustache and a beard. I'm often told that it's not fashionable to do so. I'm grateful for the information, it makes it all the more fun being hairy!

(I'm typing this in Australia; wearing an Irish tartan kilt, a non-hairy sporran, and an American T-shirt. )

Good on ya Green! "Traditionalist" that I am, I am wearing a grey shirt, a grey Freedom kilt, dark grey hose, black slip-on brogues, a grey beard, long(ish) greying hair and no sporran. Oh, and I am writing right now in Vancouver.