TRADITION: let's (re)define it.

[Cygnus]

I think Jock hit the nail on the head when he discussed the modern section of the forum, and I truly think that may be the root of the problem. I have no qualms with anyone who chooses to wear non-traditional kilts, I'm referring to a semantic problem, not one with the style of dress itself.

By referring to the more "avant-garde" kilt-wearing as "modern", it implies that other ways of wearing the kilt somehow are not modern; that they're costumey or historical. I'm not sure what term (if any) is more appropriate for describing "modern" kilt wear, but I'd be perfectly happy with this area being called the "traditional" forum with no end-date attached.

[DWFII]

DWFII

I have some sympathy with the valid points you raise, but we are (roughly) 25 years on from the "1980's", so things have moved on a tad.

Now the problem when the decision was taken "way back when" and the difficulty now, is the same. Do "we" use the precise dictionary definition of traditional, or, do "we" adjust that a tad to fit the grey areas that inevitably arise?

The problems, different ones, will exist whichever route we take and that is for sure.

Personally I like the idea of heading down the route of Matt and others which does give considerable leeway whilst sticking,more or less, to the "traditional line" and yes some will not be happy with that and I quite accept that.

At the same time "we" revise the Modern, Trendy, Mug, whatever definition chosen, as they are unarguably "modern". Not wrong, not worse,not better, just different and cater to other's genuine kilted enthusiasms.

By doing that, "we" have a clear slot for each interest and avoid the misunderstandings that do occur and we all know that they do.

Now I am just bouncing ideas about , nothing more, to see if a better way is possible. Maybe in the end the status quo will prevail and that is fine. In the meantime a fine discussion has and is taking place. Now, I have said more than enough on this subject, so over to you all.

Over and out.

Well, I, too, am happy with the way it is. I feel like I understand what is being said in this thread the way it is now.

I am not so sure that I could feel as "comfortable' with a less stringent definition of Traditional. And let is remember that the title includes the word "Classic."

What I am not sure I can accept...given what I have always believed "Traditional" and "Classic" meant...is that, whatever direction kilt wearing has taken in the last 20-30 years, I don't believe it qualifies as "tradition"...yet. It might be fine. It might be stylish. But "tradition"? I, personally, don't think so.

But then everyone who knows me and knows what I do and what philosophies I espouse would invariably say that I am a Traditionalist. I myself, while not entirely in agreement with that characterization, think it "close enough for government work."

And as a Traditionalist, what kind of bothers me about this...on a level I've not finished thinking through...is that these kind of proposals always seem to come from people or perspectives who wouldn't really consider themselves Traditionalists.

And that smacks of being just change for change sake.

Of course, you can't make something a Traditional or a Classic just by declaring it to be. But I think you can make a lot of people a bit restive by insisting that such practices be accorded the same deference as those that were honoured and valued by our fathers and grandfathers.

I don't know but that right there seems fuel aplenty for the kind of dissension I'm sure we'd all like to avoid..

[DWFII]

Jock,

Let me ask yet another question of you ...and all those following this thread...when does a 8 yard knife pleated denim kilt with castellated diced hose, staghorn sgian and a classic seal sporran cross over from Modern to Traditional (no dates included)? Or vice versa?

Where do you draw the line? And who will draw it?

[Jock Scot]

Jock,

Let me ask yet another question of you ...and all those following this thread...when does a 8 yard knife pleated denim kilt with castellated diced hose, staghorn sgian and a classic seal sporran cross over from Modern to Traditional (no dates included)? Or vice versa?

Where do you draw the line? And who will draw it?

I am trying to bow out of this discussion, as I don't want this to be Jock's "crusade".

You do raise a valid point though. For me, others will differ no doubt, I think to stay in the "traditional" camp the kilt would have to be wool and tartan, or, tweed. Synthetic materials, even in tartan(a tricky one I know------how do I know what the kilt is made from, from a distance, or photograph?OK I am open to persuasion here!), have not been around long enough as far as I am aware. Denim would, in my view, qualify in kilt terms, as modern.

[Drac]

Where would a black outfit fall? Standard tank with a black jacket, shirt, tie, hose, garters, and gillies? Not traditional but a hardly the MUG category.

Jim

[SlackerDrummer]

Where would a black outfit fall? Standard tank with a black jacket, shirt, tie, hose, garters, and gillies? Not traditional but a hardly the MUG category.

Jim

I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that what you've described still might come close to traditional.

[Drac]

I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that what you've described still might come close to traditional.

So I can go with the Shadow tartan and still be traditional

Jim

[Cygnus]

Jock,

Let me ask yet another question of you ...and all those following this thread...when does a 8 yard knife pleated denim kilt with castellated diced hose, staghorn sgian and a classic seal sporran cross over from Modern to Traditional (no dates included)? Or vice versa?

Where do you draw the line? And who will draw it?

I hadn't thought of it quite like that... I suppose the 1980 cut-off ensures that debates about such outfits (which will forever be painfully seared into my imagination, by the way) stay out of the traditional kilts area.

Hmmm... this is quite the can of worms.

[MacLowlife]

Isn't one aspect of this debate the idea of tradition as ongoing, that is, those of us who dress traditionally don't always like being stuck in 1980? Or being accused of it?

[Cowher]

Isn't one aspect of this debate the idea of tradition as ongoing, that is, those of us who dress traditionally don't always like being stuck in 1980? Or being accused of it?

Wahoo someone gets it!!

I ask this with all honesty is there any photos of this style jacket and waistcoat from the early 1900's?