wearing other family tartan rather than your own

[Jock Scot]

I think that there are many who misunderstand the subtle difference between "..you can't do that.." and "..it's just not done.." Many, some from the UK too, from around the world misunderstand the important difference between these apparently minor, but oh so pertinent observations.

[Stratherrick]

If I were ever to wear another clan's tartan, it'd have to be in my family somewhere. We have Bruce's, my first name, and McKenzies, my middle name, and many others to choose from.

Outside of a family connection, it'd feel weird, to me anyways.

Slainte

Bruce

[RockyR]

I think that there are many who misunderstand the subtle difference between "..you can't do that.." and "..it's just not done.." Many, some from the UK too, from around the world misunderstand the important difference between these apparently minor, but oh so pertinent observations.

I agree there is a subtle difference in the 2, Jock.

Respectfully, I'd say that even with the difference, there are things that 'just aren't done', but happen often, whether in the kilt world or outside of it.

Sir Sean Connery. Many of his outfits (or parts of his outfits) would probably fall into the category of "it's just not done", but he does it. Women wearing pants... it just wasn't done (regularly) until the 1900's. Now it is the norm.

It also may be a cultural / location difference. In Scotland, there's a long standing tradition / history / custom with the kilt / way of dress. In the US, we may have a different "slant" on the same garment... a uniquely American slant. That's not to say it's right or wrong, just different.

I circle back to the same thought. It's completely up to the individual and their comfort level / sense of style. "I'll worry about what I'm doing and others worry about what they're doing". Now there are right and wrong ways to do things and people would be best advised to seek some guidance before jumping into a kilt without knowing ANYTHING about how it's worn. Knowing the rules and breaking them is different from complete ignorance to the rules.

[davidlpope]

I think that there are many who misunderstand the subtle difference between "..you can't do that.." and "..it's just not done.."

Respectfully, I'd say that even with the difference, there are things that 'just aren't done', but happen often, whether in the kilt world or outside of it.

Maybe the distinction should be between "you can't do that" and "it just shouldn't be done"... Like wearing overtight lycra garments for those of us who have less than an "athletic" physique

Cordially,

David

[Jock Scot]

Rocky you are quite right, but I think it is this cultural difference that leads to international misunderstandings, particularly on the internet. Although not exclusively so!

During the battle of the Imjin River in the Korean War the British Gloucestershire Regiment(Glorious Glosters)comprising of some 600 men were surrounded by 60,000 irate Chinese and after fending off the attacking forces for many hours the American General in command of the whole area asked over the radio the very British Colonel(Colonel Carne VC)how things were going? "....well sir things are a bit tricky...." replied the Colonel. In this case the understanding of a common language completely failed! No one's fault and I stress that, but an important position and lives was needlessly lost.

So just so every one knows: "....its just not done...." is a very British way of "firing a warning shot VERY close to the bows" and is a very pointed, but charmingly put way of saying "you can if you want BUT I wouldn't if I were you!"---meaning; "if you want to look a lemon then go ahead!". And as we are talking Scots attire here and the question was about conventions about Scots attire, well..........

[RockyR]

Understood, Jock. However I posted with the initial questions in mind:

hi all as i wear the murray tartan my question is , is it allright to wear someone else tartan just for the sake you like the colors and style of the plaid? is it wrong or do you need permission? any comments. i have not done this yet but ofthen think of it as there are kilts i really like but are not my own clan colors

I gave my personal opinion of whether it's alright or not and I didn't address the second question, but I have never heard of anyone needing 'permission' except in rare instances such as CERTAIN military tartans (I.E. US Civil Affairs) and certain Copyrighted tartans or tartans reserved for the Royal Family. As these instances are few and far between, it's not that big of an issue.

All that being said, we all know what they say about Opinions...

[Jock Scot]

Understood, Jock. However I posted with the initial questions in mind:



I gave my personal opinion of whether it's alright or not and I didn't address the second question, but I have never heard of anyone needing 'permission' except in rare instances such as CERTAIN military tartans (I.E. US Civil Affairs) and certain Copyrighted tartans or tartans reserved for the Royal Family. As these instances are few and far between, it's not that big of an issue.

All that being said, we all know what they say about Opinions...

Asking permission from a Clan Chief to wear "his" tartan is just one of those little courtesies that is sadly often neglected these days. I am told that, regrettably, many Clan Chiefs do not reply to these well meant requests these days either, which is a shame. So I suppose it is yet another of those little conventions that is slipping away. Does it really matter? No not really, but it is an example of how over the years things are changing and one day we will get to a stage where we will mourn the passing of these small courtesies. Me? I shall be long gone!

[MacLowlife]

So why am I bothering to post? Because there are definitely things that are "just not done" in the UK that are not only done in the US, but are done without any worry of offense. Rocky got it perfectly with women wearing pants. Things change, though slowly. One reason they do is because people sometimes look up and say " Wow, that was supposed to be a big deal and it turned out not to be." Of course, a lot of heart palpitations and grey hair may result along the way, as well as strong words and hurt feelings. So many X Markers go beyond what is or isn't a big deal to what might give offense- and go to great lengths to avoid giving it. This (and kilts, of course,) is what separates mankind from the beasts (sorry, Monkey at Arms, I meant MOST beasts).

Anyway, I believe the OP's thought was to avoid offense and I applaud that. But a fair amount of "When in Rome..." ought to influence our thoughts and decisions, too. Texans do things in Texas they'd never do in New York and vice versa. So it should be with kilts and tartans and our own personal choices. If you are worried about offending people in a given situation, bear that in mind. But if you are unlikely to ever be in that situation, devote your energy to other more, pressing matters. Like white hose.

[MacLowlife]

There is an old story of an American soldier from my neck of the woods ( Far far away from home) being asked by a British officer "Are you Indo-Chinese?" and he replied

"No, Sir, I'm Outdoor American."

[kilted scholar]

The original questions can be answered from two perspectives, in terms of legality and etiquette.

The legal situation is that, apart from tartans that are under copyright restrictions of varying kinds, or are limited in use to the Royal Family, anyone can wear any tartan at any time. The mere fact that a tartan is commerically manufactured establishes its availability for common use, since it is in the public domain.

Perhaps we could rephrase the question from "is it allowable to wear it?" to "is it allowable to manufacture it?" since the former is dependent on the latter. If the second question yields a positive answer (which it obviuusy does) a positive reply to the first question is entailed. This leads to a conclusion that if it is permissible to manufacture and sell a tartan, a clan chief whose clan may be associated with that tartan has yielded the right to restrict its use.

As for etiquette, as this discussion demonstrates, it is a concept subject to relative changes in cultural, social and contextual settings. One may have a cast-iron legal right to wear a particular tartan but in a few particular circumstances, though not necessarily most or all situations, using that right may - possibly, maybe - create difficulties. A person may not feel right in wearing that tartan, it may not be appropriate to wear it in a formal context or at a clan gathering, while there may be no possibility whatever of being the occasion for offence by wearing it for a walk in the hills or pottering about in the garden. Add to that differences connected by living in different countries or continents and the chances of offence being caused (who are these people so easily offended?) in, say, Idaho compared with Inverness may be so miniscule as to be reduced to vanishing point.

Moreover, there is another matter of significance. Jock wrote, "I am told that, regrettably, many Clan Chiefs do not reply to these well meant requests [for permission to wear the clan's tartan] these days either, which is a shame." This demonstrates that, to "many clan chiefs" either it matters very little or they do not have the time to reply, or even they lack the courtesy to reply. If it matters so little to many clan chiefs, what are other people doing bothering about it?

The questions could easily be developed to a reductio ad absurdum: do you need permission to wear a tie or scarf, or use a blanket in a particular tartan? If you have purchased it on the open market the answer is self-evidently no.

The contrast with the accoutrements of a private members club show this up starkly. Only members of the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club; a long-established and vital hub in the cricket world) are permiited to wear the club tie, for which proof of membership must be tendered when purchasing it. No such requirement is needed when purchasing a tartan available on the open market.