TRADITION: let's (re)define it.

[AKScott]

I am reminded of the picture in the HRH Duke of Rothesay thread that features a picture of the young HRH standing near a certain US president with the initials DDE.

While a current individual might bring that same suit out of mothballs and wear it to dinner tonight, there are two things to consider.

1. While it was a modern up to date suit when DDE was photographed in it, and is still a dark well tailored business suit, we might be inclined to label it as traditional, but/ and/ or vintage.

2. Very few people on the planet have tailors that good. That same suit would not look as good on me or you as it did on DDE because it was very very well tailored.

FWIW I think of "traditional" kiltwear as a tartan kilt in any of the generally accepted styles (8 yard knife pleat, 17 yard box pleat, whatever) worn in a way that looks smashing. The lapel widths we wear over the generations change. The width of our ties changes with the tides. The hose colors available change with each new generation of chemist in the dye laboratory. Shoe fashions change regularly as well.

But even with different accessories in their closets, each of CMcG, Jock, Matt, HRH Duke of Rothesay and so on back through the years manage to make the kilt look great, and look great themselves doing it.

[Pyper]

In terms of the smaller issues this thread raises, delimiting the time period of Traditional Highland Dress would be sufficient.

That would be an oxymoron. The tradition is a living tradition, so the timeline is open ended.

Nice picture, btw, and congrats!

[saxandpipes]

... The sub-forum description indicates that THCD is somehow not current because it stops in the 1980's. I believe that traditional is not the same as historical.

By saying that tradition is still living, it means that it is also still changing. The changes just happen to be slow and tend towards the classic rather than flash in the pan fads. It's what allows discussion on this part of the forum to be held with regards to established conventions, aka "rules."

Good points.

For me, it again boils down to the difference between "fashion" and "style". Two often confused words with very different connotations as far as I'm concerned.

The first to me suggests something which might or might not be modern, might have some basis on historical preferences (think "fashion" of the 1920s, 1970s etc...), but is in some way linked to what is popular at any given time.

The second word- "style" is where I think that TCHD comes in. "Style" for me is something that is tried, and tested, and indeed continues to develop- with a few little rules that help to keep it clear. Quality in the fabrication and fabric of the garments, correct fit, pleasing co-ordination of colours/textures and patterns.

By using the word "tradition", one is perhaps discounting the possibilities of some modern items, (as well as various "stylish" combinations which Jock might not see himself in) being used in the successful execution of stylish Highland Dress. Nevertheless, it's probably the best word we have...

For myself, and I imagine for most of the other (more or less newbies) who regularly visit this particular forum, the main thing we are a looking for, is the advice of those in the know. We visit, because we want to know what the "traditional" way of doing something is. We want to know the rules, we want to know how to play inside them (and how far we can push them!).

Perhaps the forum should be defined as: Traditional Highland Dress The place for discussion of Traditional and Classic Highland Apparel and Style. (Also known as: WWJD?)

Cheers,

Michael

(p.s.: Mods, what can we do about getting a "What Would Jock Do?" smiley...)

[Cowher]

No disrespect intended, but I think you're confusing the issue. No one is talking about "kilt cops."

No offense taken yet I think it was you who misunderstood me. Or rather maybe it was unclear to all what I ment by that.
By defining traditional kilt wear as ending in 1980's offends me. Who decided that the way Jock, MoR, or Matthew (and others) dress is a relic of 1901 to 1980. Was it the kilt cops?!?.

EDIT:

Perhaps the forum should be defined as: Traditional Highland Dress The place for discussion of Traditional and Classic Highland Apparel and Style. (Also known as: WWJD?)

Cheers,

Michael

***

[DWFII]

That would be an oxymoron. The tradition is a living tradition, so the timeline is open ended.

Nice picture, btw, and congrats!

Look in the OED or any other reputable dictionary...I suspect you will, if objective, come away with the realization that, as popular and politically correct as the concept may be, "living tradition", if meant in the sense of evolving or indeterminate, is itself the real oxymoron. One can live a tradition but a tradition cannot itself be informed by impulse, fashion, passion or whim.

Something...some style, or, for instance, new accessory...may in time and with general acceptance, become a tradition. But like all good things it must pass the test of time.

If it were not so the very definition of the word "traditional' would cease to communicate anything other than passing fancy.

I suspect from what I have read...and the OED definition...that a 'tradition" must endure at least a generation, if not somewhat more...and be passed on to and accepted by the next generation...before it can legitimately be considered a "tradition."

[Jock Scot]

No offense taken yet I think it was you who misunderstood me. Or rather maybe it was unclear to all what I ment by that.
By defining traditional kilt wear as ending in 1980's offends me. Who decided that the way Jock, MoR, or Matthew (and others) dress is a relic of 1901 to 1980. Was it the kilt cops?!?.

EDIT:



***

No, not the kilt cops.

I stand to be corrected here, but these parameters of 1901 to the 1980's was a genuine attempt to define the term "Traditional", in kilt terms. It was attempted way too long ago for me to remember the facts of a long and sometimes fraught debate and there may have even been discussions going on before I arrived on the scene in 2007. Anyway, I and others failed to convince the then "powers that be" that their final definition was far from satisfactory and was likely to cause further debate, misunderstandings and not a little confusion over time----and it has, to a greater or lesser degree, on all three counts.

Now, with the wonderful debate going on here with good points being aired from all directions shedding further light on the genuine and relevant subject matter of traditional kilts and attire, perhaps it is the time for Steve and the Mods to have another look at this? Please?

[theborderer]

Now, with the wonderful debate going on here with good points being aired from all directions shedding further light on the genuine and relevant subject matter of traditional kilts and attire, perhaps it is the time for Steve and the Mods to have another look at this? Please?

There are good points to all questions, whatever the question is. I would suggest that we request Steve to delete the time factors in brackets from the title. To me Traditional is still relevant as to the codes of dress for Day wear, semi Formal and Formal. Opposed to that wearing the Kilt, whether Tartan or Solid colours, with forms of dress such as Hoodies, rolled down socks and Boots is definitely Modern (non traditional).

[DWFII]

No, not the kilt cops.

I stand to be corrected here, but these parameters of 1901 to the 1980's was a genuine attempt to define the term "Traditional", in kilt terms. It was attempted way too long ago for me to remember the facts of a long and sometimes fraught debate and there may have even been discussions going on before I arrived on the scene in 2007. Anyway, I and others failed to convince the then "powers that be" that their final definition was far from satisfactory and was likely to cause further debate, misunderstandings and not a little confusion over time----and it has, to a greater or lesser degree, on all three counts.

Now, with the wonderful debate going on here with good points being aired from all directions shedding further light on the genuine and relevant subject matter of traditional kilts and attire, perhaps it is the time for Steve and the Mods to have another look at this? Please?

The thing is that I don't see a problem here. I don't know why, as I implied in my first post to this thread, it isn't sufficient to let the word "Tradition" and all it implies or stands for, be what it is. To let this thread be what it is.

I can see no good reason to expand or (re)define the assumptions that the thread is predicated on. Will Traditional Highland Dress now include practices that were seen once in some out-of-the-way Renaissance Faire in 2010? And will these will be considered Traditional, now?

Doesn't 1980 pretty much encompass most of the folks that who are posting to this thread? I wonder...I wonder how many are so young that they didn't see 1980 come and go? How many of us...Jock included...have been so bowled over by some new convention that we have markedly changed the way we wear the kilt from the way we wore it in 1980?

If anything perhaps the mods ought to consider yet another topic if this one is so untenable...something like "Stylish Riffs on Classic Highland Dress from 1980 to 2020."

[Cowher]

I disagree DWFII. wile the start date may be accurate the end date has not come yet. The great kilt of early Celtic history is obviously a historical type of wears.

Are you trying to say that the traditional style of kilt wear is 100% unchanged from the 1980's?

[Jock Scot]

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"(in consultation with interested parties of course!) 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.