Theory and practice.

[Jock Scot]

I am always interested in this subject. How we romanticize and talk about "traditional" dress when we are often looking at the garment as is was worn AFTER proscription. How the garment was worn once the ENGLISH "allowed" us to wear it once again. The more traditional would be either the great kilt or Philabeg but these are looked at as curiosities and even simply anachronistic. We would generally look at someone wearing bell-bottom jeans as odd but they were worn during a certain period.

As I often point out. The kilt was the daily, work wear of a poor people who had no need for PC jackets or Argyle hose. The Kilt is a common man's garment. We love to romanticize about the lovely royals who donned the garb, but I am a common, modern man. I see no problem with wearing a common, modern kilt. What's "proper?" Whatever you choose. I do aim to be more "traditional" in formal settings. (When in Rome.) As for daily wear... Whatever is fashionable and comfortable is fine for me.

I am afraid to say you cannot blame the English for proscription , or credit them for its repeal. That law was passed by the parliament( Scottish and English parliaments unified in 1707) of the United Kingdom(England,Wales, Ireland? and SCOTLAND) in other words the British Government. By that time the Crowns of Scotland and England had been united for nearly 150 years. England can be blamed for many things, but not this.

[Dall_Piobaire]

Funny how everything seems to boil down to how history is veiwed, and who is doing the veiwing, and to what end.

Learn from history or be doomed to repeat it, to parapharse a common saying, but who's version of history?

[Leprechaun 91]

I am afraid to say you cannot blame the English for proscription , or credit them for its repeal. That law was passed by the parliament( Scottish and English parliaments unified in 1707) of the United Kingdom(England,Wales, Ireland? and SCOTLAND) in other words the British Government. By that time the Crowns of Scotland and England had been united for nearly 150 years. England can be blamed for many things, but not this.

True enough. I stand duly corrected.

It is still not even considered remotely appropriate for wear at court (or even to a dinner party) until quite late in history. We have a view of what is correct that is really framed in a narrow window of time. Why is this one fashion icon the one garment that is not allowed to evolve? (Beyond the point it had prior to the 1900s?)

[Jock Scot]

True enough. I stand duly corrected.

It is still not even considered remotely appropriate for wear at court (or even to a dinner party) until quite late in history. We have a view of what is correct that is really framed in a narrow window of time. Why is this one fashion icon the one garment that is not allowed to evolve? (Beyond the point it had prior to the 1900s?)

It is simple really. Why re-invent the wheel? Alright the wheel has moved on from a wooden round thing to the wheel, in all its guises, of today and its taken a few thousand years to do it. The kilt,in a shorter time span, I grant you, is no different. Now, I have worn the kilt for over 60 years and I have seen minor changes to the kilt fashions. Then with the arrival of the Internet it is possible to see at a blink of an eye other greater changes, with the kilt evolving. The contemporary kilt is upon us whether we like it or not and that has happened in a very short time, who knows how these ideas will evolve? However, with the greatest of respect, I do genuinely believe that many are missing one salient point and that is; the kilt is the national attire of a country and in consequence changes are monitored by not just a few, but many millions of proud people to whom the kilt belongs. Inevitably, with that mindset, changes of a drastic nature to a national icon are bound to be slow.

[Larry124]

...to whom the kilt belongs.

Yes. And no.

[Deil the Yin]

Two shades, brother. Quite my sentiments as well. Very well put...

... As I often point out. The kilt was the daily, work wear of a poor people who had no need for PC jackets or Argyle hose. The Kilt is a common man's garment. We love to romanticize about the lovely royals who donned the garb, but I am a common, modern man. I see no problem with wearing a common, modern kilt. What's "proper?" Whatever you choose. I do aim to be more "traditional" in formal settings. (When in Rome.) As for daily wear... Whatever is fashionable and comfortable is fine for me.

[Dall_Piobaire]

It is simple really. Why re-invent the wheel? Alright the wheel has moved on from a wooden round thing to the wheel, in all its guises, of today and its taken a few thousand years to do it. The kilt,in a shorter time span, I grant you, is no different. Now, I have worn the kilt for over 60 years and I have seen minor changes to the kilt fashions. Then with the arrival of the Internet it is possible to see at a blink of an eye other greater changes, with the kilt evolving. The contemporary kilt is upon us whether we like it or not and that has happened in a very short time, who knows how these ideas will evolve? However, with the greatest of respect, I do genuinely believe that many are missing one salient point and that is; the kilt is the national attire of a country and in consequence changes are monitored by not just a few, but many millions of proud people to whom the kilt belongs. Inevitably, with that mindset, changes of a drastic nature to a national icon are bound to be slow.

Once again! No one says it better! Here Here!int:

[MacLowlife]

I tried very hard to read TWENTY TWO PAGES of this thread and made it through most ( even the part where someone told another South Carolinian to remember where he lived, as if only South Carolinians- or people living in SC, if there is a difference- were capable of getting unreasonably upset about external politics ) and I must say first ,

THANKS JOCK for sticking with this, and THANKS MATT and several others for thoughtful and thorough contributions to the learned debate. As others have pointed out, we do want to know different things. Few of us would ask how to wear jeans, but I am certain people do look at magazines and TV to see "how" the cool kids are wearing them.

But back to Jock Scot's original premise- that asking for advice includes the risk you may not like what you get in return- and then to the every useful point that Sean Connery is famous for being an actor, not an authority on dress of any sort. (If you doubt, check out his terrycloth cabana set in Goldfinger ) If we want to know how a gentleman of 60 years' kilt wearing experience living in Scotland does things, we have the resource. If we want to know how the gentry at Highland Balls do it ( and I certainly do) we have the resource. If we want to know how people who wear a kilt 24/7 do it, again, we have the technology.

I would feel a whole lot more comfortable wearing jeans at a dude ranch in Colorado than I would sporting a kilt ( any kilt, go ahead pick one ) in Edinburgh, Inverness, or Oban- and I have had the kilt on a dozen times since I last wore denim. If I were venturing out to kilt night at the local ( even that one in Inverness where I got so completely p*ssed drunk) I'd want to have enough reinforcements to make certain I didn't stand out as BOTH a tourist and the only guy in a kilt.

I leave you with Ambrose Bierce's famous observation that the kilt is a garment worn by Scotsmen in American and Americans in Scotland. It is no longer true, of course, but it is a good warning to us all to be ready for a discussion, to be ready to justify ourselves, and to contemplate the idea that somebody who knows more than I do will be close at hand.

I haven't been doing anything for 60 years, but I have learned that occasionally it is good to shut up and listen, which I shall do now.

[MacDonnell1973]

Thanks for your honesty Jock. As someone who recently got into my heritage, about three years now, I appreciate your time on this site. I also am glad about your disclaimer as to financial situations and personal flair, two huge parts of what I deal with as to celebrating my culture. I never wish to offend, rather, I would wish to be accepted as member of what I know to be my clan. So, I work with what I have and am proud to do so. If however, at anytime I cross a line that does offend, I will take opinions to heart and never scoff at those who know better than I. I can't say that a little personal flair won't always shine through. Thank you again for your honesty and knowledge. When I have questions you will hear them.


Bill

[MacRobert's Reply]

I have only just got to this lengthy, entertaining and very informative exchange. I am a Scot, living near Edinburgh but until recently my occupation took be all over Scotland so I have some sense of how the kilt fits into contemporary Scottish culture and our corporate psyche. As others have clearly pointed out, the highland kilt is a Scottish icon. As such it is woven (no pun intended) into our history and mythology; our sense of identity and belonging. Very few Scots now wear it as an every-day garment. It is generally worn on special occasions as a way of affirming national identity and pride, family (clan) identity and belonging, and the social importance of an event. It is worn at major celebrations such as rights of passage (hatching, matching and dispatching), especially weddings. Purchased or hired, wearing it is generally associated by most Scots with a sense of occasion. This is true even when worn with boots, rolled down hose and rugby or football shirts (often with the same dress sporran purchased for their wedding). The occasion may be informal and sporting but is no less a departure from the mundane into the celebratory. So for most of us here in Scotland the kilt is no longer a utilitarian garment (as it was in the mid 18th Century) but is increasingly worn for special occasions, both formal and informal. While high-quality hand-sown 8-yard tartan kilts are the most common at all these events, casual kilts, often in synthetic tartan cloth, appear at sporting events and stag nights. Well tailored kilts and kilt suits in unpatterned cloth also appear occasionally at weddings. Kilts in denim or cotton are very rare as you would expect in a country where the kilt has become associated with celebration and special occasions rather than utility.

How do Scots in Scotland respond to people wearing kilts? Well I can't speak for a nation, but a typical first response to a traditional kilt (implied or stated) is, “What's the occasion / celebration / event / reason?” (wedding, pipe band, rugby match, graduation and so on). Once that is jaloused, and the wearing of the kilt is set into some kind of social context, understanding leads to acceptance. This seems to apply irrespective of ethnicity. Being Scottish is not a prerequisite. We, like most nations, have a small proportion of people who are xenophobic, sectarian and/or tribal (clannish in the negative sense) but they will cause the outsider grief whether or not they are wearing a kilt.

I, for one, am delighted when I see people wearing a well-tailored kilt, be they Scottish or not. If I know they are not then I take it as a compliment they they should have gone to the trouble and expense to wear our national dress. I am particularly pleased to see young people in kilts, and can readily overlook the boots, scrunched hose and hipster waist … by the time they get married, most of them will have matured their dress sense and will look great for their weddings (as long as the shops and hire companies do the job right). Some may even join this forum and be much better informed of the history of this Scottish icon.

Iain