Tartan hose vs plain hose

[Friday]

xxxxx

[Jack Daw]

My personal preference is to save the tartan hose for evening attire, even if I am only wearing a black Argyll jacket. I do like to wear my various diced hose with daywear. I never wear tartan hose for piping, just diced, except when I'm dressed in black tie.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

If one really wanted "tartan" hose, he would have to make them form tartan, like Dr. Newsome's photo shows.

Thanks for the compliment, but I'm one degree shy of that appellation. :-)


Mr. Newsome.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I still say WHY! Maybe this is the style this person likes. Maybe it has to do with a family or clan tradition. Maybe his wife knit them and he is wearing them for her.

Perhaps it should be said that YOU think they look better when the designs match. When it is said that the designs "needs to meet up" I again asks for the reference from the kilt police manual.

Different strokes for different folks.

Some of the messages I've been reading lately (not only this one) have indicated to me that some people might be overreacting a bit to what they perceive as "kilt police."

All Rathdown is saying here is that this particular pair of hose look to be made too short for those particular legs. And he's right. Maybe they shrunk. Maybe they were made too short to begin with. Who knows?

But the WHY has nothing to do with being a tartan nazi or enforcing any made up rules. It's how this style of hose are designed to be worn. They are made so that when you turn over the cuff, the pattern on the cuff meets up with the pattern on the hose, so the whole sock is covered with the same matching argyle pattern.

When the leg of the hose is too short, you either can a) fold the cuff down where it is supposed to be folded and the hose will look right in themselves but they will look short on your leg, or b) pull the hose way up and don't turn down as much of the cuff, which will perhaps put the top of the hose at the right height but will mean the argyle pattern of the cuff won't meet the sock pattern. The latter is what we see here.

It's not a negative comment on Alistair here -- heck, he probably didn't even realize his hose have shrunk! It's just a comment that, when you are buying Argyle hose, the length of the sock is an important consideration.

Pointing out that a garment isn't being worn the way it was designed to be worn is not being hyper critical. It's just a statement of fact, like pointing out to someone that the pleats go in the back of the kilt, or that shoes have a right and a left foot. That's just the way the garment is designed to be worn.

Let's not all be so quick to throw out that "tartan police" label, shall we?

[DWFII]

Pointing out that a garment isn't being worn the way it was designed to be worn is not being hyper critical. It's just a statement of fact, like pointing out to someone that the pleats go in the back of the kilt, or that shoes have a right and a left foot. That's just the way the garment is designed to be worn.

Let's not all be so quick to throw out that "tartan police" label, shall we?

Hear! hear! (but good luck with that)

PS...nothing personal towards anyone--just seems like that, once started, "tartan police," "kilt nazi," and "kilt taliban, " are never gonna go away.

[macwilkin]

Some of the messages I've been reading lately (not only this one) have indicated to me that some people might be overreacting a bit to what they perceive as "kilt police."

All Rathdown is saying here is that this particular pair of hose look to be made too short for those particular legs. And he's right. Maybe they shrunk. Maybe they were made too short to begin with. Who knows?

But the WHY has nothing to do with being a tartan nazi or enforcing any made up rules. It's how this style of hose are designed to be worn. They are made so that when you turn over the cuff, the pattern on the cuff meets up with the pattern on the hose, so the whole sock is covered with the same matching argyle pattern.

When the leg of the hose is too short, you either can a) fold the cuff down where it is supposed to be folded and the hose will look right in themselves but they will look short on your leg, or b) pull the hose way up and don't turn down as much of the cuff, which will perhaps put the top of the hose at the right height but will mean the argyle pattern of the cuff won't meet the sock pattern. The latter is what we see here.

It's not a negative comment on Alistair here -- heck, he probably didn't even realize his hose have shrunk! It's just a comment that, when you are buying Argyle hose, the length of the sock is an important consideration.

Pointing out that a garment isn't being worn the way it was designed to be worn is not being hyper critical. It's just a statement of fact, like pointing out to someone that the pleats go in the back of the kilt, or that shoes have a right and a left foot. That's just the way the garment is designed to be worn.

Let's not all be so quick to throw out that "tartan police" label, shall we?

Well said, Matt!

Todd

[macwilkin]

Hear! hear! (but good luck with that)

PS...nothing personal towards anyone--just seems like that, once started, "tartan police," "kilt nazi," and "kilt taliban, " are never gonna go away.

Thank you, DWFII, for raising this point.

I hate the term "kilt nazi", or any other variant, because it dilutes the pure evil of the fascist thugs that the term was originally used for. May we never forget the men and women of the 26 Allied nations who fought to defeat them.

It is unfair and insulting, INMHO, to refer to a traditionalist by terms such as above. I certainly do not condone behaviour that might lead to these terms, though.

Kilt/tartan polis isn't as bad to me, but comparisons to these two groups does bother me.

Apologies to the Mods for the OT

Regards,

Todd

[Bugbear]

I'm glad MacMillan of Rathdown pointed it out because I have learned a great deal from the discussion. Oddly enough, he was saying at the same time that the tartan hose were fine to wear with daywear as shown in the picture other than the length issue. That happened to also be another useful piece of information.

And yes, cajunscot , that term being used carelessly bothers me too.

[davedove]

...
All Rathdown is saying here is that this particular pair of hose look to be made too short for those particular legs. And he's right. Maybe they shrunk. Maybe they were made too short to begin with. Who knows?

But the WHY has nothing to do with being a tartan nazi or enforcing any made up rules. It's how this style of hose are designed to be worn. They are made so that when you turn over the cuff, the pattern on the cuff meets up with the pattern on the hose, so the whole sock is covered with the same matching argyle pattern.

And thanks for pointing out the reasons, Matt. At least with the reason we can make informed decisions.

I understand the frustration of some here when someone makes a comment about how something should be worn but doesn't explain why, other than "that's just the way it's done." I know I always like to know the "why" of things.

[thescot]

I found these hose at a very reasonable price: £49.50
(American Dollars) ($73.59)

That's a pretty fair price for all wool kilt hose.

Unfortunately, with really big feet, I doubt any will fit me, but if you wear a 13 or smaller, you can find something here.