Traditonal vs. Historical

[Aussie_Don]

I've always understood the forum's guidelines to place MUGs firmly outside what is discussed here. So, it seems to me that the Contemporary kilt subforum covers both Utili-kilt-ish kilts and traditionally made kilts worn in un-traditional ways, e.g. t-shirt, leather jacket, socks scrunched down, combat boots...

From http://www.hamishclarkfansite.com/ga...Series3_3.jpg:

[picture deleted for brevity]

Perhaps we need four subforums:

1. Historical (reenactor wear/ Renfair-ish garb)
2. Traditional (traditional kilt worn in a traditional style)
3. Modern (traditional kilt worn in a modern style)
4. Contemporary (non-traditional kilt worn in a modern style)

OKaaay,

So where does one look for --

1) I want to wear a kilt in a casual setting and not get sniggers behind my back

2) I want to toss on a kilt for a highland games (more knowledgeable viewers) or
other type festival (less knowledgeable) and again not look out of place (other
than to the extent that a kilt is not exactly a really common day-to-day garment
in this part of the world.)

Hey, it is certainly possible that I'm a square peg here and don't fit (quite) in
any of the accepted areas, and that I'm sufficiently in a minority to not be worth
annoying sufficient electrons to create an additional sub-forum -- or I may fit
somewhere in the above scheme.


Thanks,

-Don

[adempsey10]

One of the problems we are having here is that the understanding of certain words has slid well off their definitions, words such as "formal" "dress" "tradition" even "normal" have suffered here and elsewhere.

This is the usual impact of post-modernism, a current time in which everyone believes that their opinion is equally valuable to everyone else's. Well, sorry folks; that's posh, tosh, and nonsense! There are experts in almost any field, and they are increasingly discounted as in, "It's just your opinion." Well, personally, I think that's pretty silly.

To use myself as an example, I am knowledgeable about children's learning and how to lead a school (Specialist's qualifications in counselling and special education, Principal's qualifications, a Master's degree in educational administration & leadership, and 32 years in the school system.) I am also knowledgeable about theology (a Master's degree in theology and five years in ordained clergy and a lifetime of personal research.) Nonetheless, I do not consider myself truly an "expert" in either ...but knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion that might be valuable to somebody and old enough that I can usually offer it without offending everyone in the room - just a few.

What I see, hear, and read here and elsewhere (mostly elsewhere!) are people who mis-define or re-define the terminology being used, and insist that their experience from just being casually alive gives them equal reason to be considered correct as anyone else. Thus our terminology (which is based on words) has become largely useless because people have inserted their own experience into the meaning of the words.

To bring that into the current XMarks discussion, we have words like "tradition" which once were useful, but which are then subsumed into "well, where I live, we usually...." Well, nuts! It's in response to that sort of silliness, that folks on XMarks have come to respect our highland members. A long life of observation certainly contributes to their expertise, and it includes a memory of "how things were when [they] were kid[s]. Historical research and experience also add much and professional experience and accomplishments are often useable too, but no, everybody's opinion is not equal. My opinion about kilts and related matter has certainly improved since joining XMarks, but I'm not any kind of expert in this context yet. Outside of XMarks, I'm pleasantly surprised to discover that, thanks to what I've learned here and in my studies, actually I'm now far more expert than many around me. We have to pick our battles!

So to bring this to the current discussion... when we talk about "Traditional" what does it mean... traditionally? "Custom handed down from ancestors to posterity" (Oxford) I guess that means to me (and that's an area of expertise - I am a linguist!) that comments about "traditional dress" having changed are extremely questionable. Is what was done 50 years ago "out of date?" Possibly... but it is likely traditional.

Now, all of this is from me - crabbit and curmudgeon... and traditionalist. Whatever that used to mean.

Back to our regularly scheduled discussion!

An expert is, afterall, someone with a well formed opinion. Using my own area of expertise, if someone were to tell me that The Spartan position was greatly weakened by the seige of Sphacteria, and that my arguments to contrary were simply ' my opinion' my reaction would be to ask for a well formed counter argument from my interlocutor. If the argument were convincing I would consider changing my stance. Although we might consider ourselves experts in our respective disciplines, we must be open to new information and shifts in attitude towards our opinions (or supposed facts). Keep in mind that an expert in biology 150 years ago would be considered a bit of a quack and a nutter by today's standards.

That being said, there is nothing that annoys me more than anecdotal evidence, as you have exampled, "well where I live, we usually.." This was part of my argument several posts back about determining what the criteria, or a standard, should be for demarcating 'traditional' and 'historical'. One must not be too specific in their definition because the definition will fall prey to a wide variety of counter examples. A good definition for a broad term such as 'traditional' is one that discards minor variations and includes more general terms.

or...

As Steve laid out in his previous post, a good proscriptive definition which fits the particular use for the greatest number of people concerned in a particular setting, such as a definition which appeals to the general XMarks user.
One such example of a proscriptive definition (or in this case a rule), for XMarkers is that the kilt should be worn just above the knee. Most of us on this forum would agree that that is the proper length for a kilt. However, many, if not more wearers of the kilt outside of this forum would make a case for varying lengths. So to that effect, our 'rule' is an opinion if we include ourselves with those not a part of this forum. Within the forum, we would not call this an opinion, but rather a general rule of thumb, since we all generally agree on it.

Note: I dont necessarily intend to present a counter point to your post, but rather an addition to it. Should you disagree, please let me know. And I'm sorry if I come across as pretentious, I've had a few pints and I've been told I sound thus when drinking.

[Nathan]

One of the problems we are having here is that the understanding of certain words has slid well off their definitions, words such as "formal" "dress" "tradition" even "normal" have suffered here and elsewhere.

This is the usual impact of post-modernism, a current time in which everyone believes that their opinion is equally valuable to everyone else's. Well, sorry folks; that's posh, tosh, and nonsense! There are experts in almost any field, and they are increasingly discounted as in, "It's just your opinion." Well, personally, I think that's pretty silly.

To use myself as an example, I am knowledgeable about children's learning and how to lead a school (Specialist's qualifications in counselling and special education, Principal's qualifications, a Master's degree in educational administration & leadership, and 32 years in the school system.) I am also knowledgeable about theology (a Master's degree in theology and five years in ordained clergy and a lifetime of personal research.) Nonetheless, I do not consider myself truly an "expert" in either ...but knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion that might be valuable to somebody and old enough that I can usually offer it without offending everyone in the room - just a few.

What I see, hear, and read here and elsewhere (mostly elsewhere!) are people who mis-define or re-define the terminology being used, and insist that their experience from just being casually alive gives them equal reason to be considered correct as anyone else. Thus our terminology (which is based on words) has become largely useless because people have inserted their own experience into the meaning of the words.

To bring that into the current XMarks discussion, we have words like "tradition" which once were useful, but which are then subsumed into "well, where I live, we usually...." Well, nuts! It's in response to that sort of silliness, that folks on XMarks have come to respect our highland members. A long life of observation certainly contributes to their expertise, and it includes a memory of "how things were when [they] were kid[s]. Historical research and experience also add much and professional experience and accomplishments are often useable too, but no, everybody's opinion is not equal. My opinion about kilts and related matter has certainly improved since joining XMarks, but I'm not any kind of expert in this context yet. Outside of XMarks, I'm pleasantly surprised to discover that, thanks to what I've learned here and in my studies, actually I'm now far more expert than many around me. We have to pick our battles!

So to bring this to the current discussion... when we talk about "Traditional" what does it mean... traditionally? "Custom handed down from ancestors to posterity" (Oxford) I guess that means to me (and that's an area of expertise - I am a linguist!) that comments about "traditional dress" having changed are extremely questionable." Is what was done 50 years ago "out of date?" Possibly... but it is likely traditional.

Now, all of this is from me - crabbit and curmudgeon... and traditionalist. Whatever that used to mean.

Back to our regularly scheduled discussion!

With the greatest of respect Father Bill, I agree with everything you said about post-modernism and the fact that all opinions are not created equal, but I got off the bus at the end when you said, "that comments about "traditional dress" having changed are extremely questionable."

Traditions do change as they make their way down the generations. Each generation interprets the tradition and makes it their own in the context and time in which they live. That's how they avoid looking like they're in costumes from bygone eras. Traditions do change, just slowly.

I would argue that there has been a "tradition" of Highland attire slowly and perhaps reluctantly following an "adapted to the kilt" form of general Western fashion through the centuries. It could be said that Highland attire is on the spine rather than the cutting edge of Western fashion trends, but it comes along eventually nonetheless.

To be sure, Highland attire has hung on to some militaristic embellishments longer that its neighbours as it is a conservative form of dress but the primary reason that the Prince Charlie coatee is the formal jacket of choice among most "special occasion" kilt wearers is arguably because it more closely resembles the tuxedo dinner jackets and the tails coats that the non-kilties are wearing and because no modern kilt wearer is completely free from the influence of non-kilted fashion. That's why it's a living tradition, because it doesn't exist in a vacuum and ultimately that's why it endures.

Even among staunch traditionalists, items that were once traditional and considered nearly essential accessories in some orders of dress such as hair sporrans, plaids and dirks are viewed as over the top or costume-like by many traditionalists because their generation rejected them as too out of sync with their contemporary tastes.

Whist kilted I only wear traditional wool tartan kilts with a sporran. When I do this, I do it in the name of tradition and with a nod to my Highland roots. The accessories I choose depend on what I'm going to be doing and where I'm going. I don't dress exactly like most men I know who are 60 plus most days so it's no surprise that we differ on how much leeway one should take with the kilt.

That said, in a business or black tie context we may dress in a very similar fashion. In jeans on a Saturday night, perhaps not so much.

Which brings me to the generational thing about living traditions. In the 20th Century, it was considered traditional to wear a kilt with a jumper/sweater/pullover. Was this always the case since King George IV's visit or did this comparatively casual look evolve into the conservative tradition and eventually become accepted? Will polo shirts or t-shirts make their way to being viewed within the bounds of the traditional? Have they already? It's worth asking.

I think traditional kilts and how to wear them is the appropriate venue for that question. Leave the Contemporary thread for the canvas cargo kilt crowd. Let the older gents that were steeped in the tradition bear witness to the way it was done in their youth and let the younger gents and the unacquainted learn well from them to ensure authentic continuity. Just understand that evolution will most certainly occur in the process.

Traditions are not static. They do evolve but they do not typically mutate violently and drastically - that's revolution not evolution. It is each successive generation of tradition bearers that will be the final arbiters of how the tradition is passed down. Collectively they will decide which elements of the tradition will survive and be passed along and which will get relegated to history.

[davidlpope]

OKaaay,

So where does one look for --

1) I want to wear a kilt in a casual setting and not get sniggers behind my back

2) I want to toss on a kilt for a highland games (more knowledgeable viewers) or
other type festival (less knowledgeable) and again not look out of place (other
than to the extent that a kilt is not exactly a really common day-to-day garment
in this part of the world.)

Hey, it is certainly possible that I'm a square peg here and don't fit (quite) in
any of the accepted areas, and that I'm sufficiently in a minority to not be worth
annoying sufficient electrons to create an additional sub-forum -- or I may fit
somewhere in the above scheme.


Thanks,

-Don

Is your aim to wear the kilt as Highlanders in the Highlands wear it?

If yes, then Traditional. If not, then Modern.

[adempsey10]

With the greatest of respect Father Bill, I agree with everything you said about post-modernism and the fact that all opinions are not created equal, but I got off the bus at the end when you said, "that comments about "traditional dress" having changed are extremely questionable."

Traditions do change as they make their way down the generations. Each generation interprets the tradition and makes it their own in the context and time in which they live. That's how they avoid looking like they're in costumes from bygone eras. Traditions do change, just slowly.

I would argue that there has been a "tradition" of Highland attire slowly and perhaps reluctantly following an "adapted to the kilt" form of general Western fashion through the centuries. It could be said that Highland attire is on the spine rather than the cutting edge of Western fashion trends, but it comes along eventually nonetheless.

To be sure, Highland attire has hung on to some militaristic embellishments longer that its neighbours as it is a conservative form of dress but the primary reason that the Prince Charlie coatee is the formal jacket of choice among most "special occasion" kilt wearers is arguably because it more closely resembles the tuxedo dinner jackets and the tails coats that the non-kilties are wearing and because no modern kilt wearer is completely free from the influence of non-kilted fashion. That's why it's a living tradition, because it doesn't exist in a vacuum and ultimately that's why it endures.

Even among staunch traditionalists, items that were once traditional and considered nearly essential accessories in some orders of dress such as hair sporrans, plaids and dirks are viewed as over the top or costume-like by many traditionalists because their generation rejected them as too out of sync with their contemporary tastes.

Whist kilted I only wear traditional wool tartan kilts with a sporran. When I do this, I do it in the name of tradition and with a nod to my Highland roots. The accessories I choose depend on what I'm going to be doing and where I'm going. I don't dress exactly like most men I know who are 60 plus most days so it's no surprise that we differ on how much leeway one should take with the kilt.

That said, in a business or black tie context we may dress in a very similar fashion. In jeans on a Saturday night, perhaps not so much.

Which brings me to the generational thing about living traditions. In the 20th Century, it was considered traditional to wear a kilt with a jumper/sweater/pullover. Was this always the case since King George IV's visit or did this comparatively casual look evolve into the conservative tradition and eventually become accepted? Will polo shirts or t-shirts make their way to being viewed within the bounds of the traditional? Have they already? It's worth asking.

I think traditional kilts and how to wear them is the appropriate venue for that question. Leave the Contemporary thread for the canvas cargo kilt crowd. Let the older gents that were steeped in the tradition bear witness to the way it was done in their youth and let the younger gents and the unacquainted learn well from them to ensure authentic continuity. Just understand that evolution will most certainly occur in the process.

Traditions are not static. They do evolve but they do not typically mutate violently and drastically - that's revolution not evolution. It is each successive generation of tradition bearers that will be the final arbiters of how the tradition is passed down. Collectively they will decide which elements of the tradition will survive and be passed along and which will get relegated to history.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here with regard to traditional attire. In general, a tradition is a tradition because it is impervious to changes over times. However, everything succumbs to change, though it is a slow process. If we were to look closely at the traditional formal highland attire of 100 years ago, we might find several changes in what we would ourselves wear today, though we wouldnt say that the tradition has necessarily changed. Everything is subject to micro-evolution of that nature. There is anecdote about the shift of language from Paris to Madrid that exemplifies what I mean. It was once said that the inhabitants of Paris could understand the inhabitants (with respect to language) of a village closeby the city, and that this village could understand the people in the village next to them, and they could understand the village next to them, going all the way to Madrid. Those living in Madrid, however, could not understand those in Paris. Looking at the chain as a whole, the difference in language between each village seems so insignificant, but the overall change from one end to other, is rather large.

So, although Father Bill is correct in saying that traditional dress having changed being questionable is correct, there has been a microevolution of traditional dress over the years. The same general attire remains but changes, because of the conditions you mentioned, have occurred. We dont say that attire has changed all that much in the last 100 years in formal kilt wear but if we were to go back in time, the differences may become very apparent.

[Steve Ashton]

Hi Folks,

Would you please note that, so far, I have participated in this thread as any other forum member.

I find that I now need to speak as the forum owner.

In my memory this question of how we define “what is traditional” has been an ongoing debate. I have personally participated in eight discussions here on the open forum and five among the staff.
In the discussions among the Staff this problem of trying to define this one word has stretched for far many more pages than this thread.

After all these years I doubt we will agree or come to a definition that will satisfy everyone. It is a matter of fashion, and fashion is fickle and constantly changing. It would be nice and neat if there is, or ever was, a standard, accepted, or single example of a ‘traditional’ way of wearing the kilt.

As the forum owner I can tell you for a fact that this has led to more confusion and caused us to lose more members than any other thing in the 9 years this forum has been active.
Because we cannot, or will not, define it we end up discussing it ‘ad nauseum’. We nit-pick over the minutest detail. We have threads go on for page after page.
And in the end the result is that this forum is now seen by the outside world, and many new members, as a “traditional kilt wear only” forum. And this is troubling as it is contrary to the original concept and intent of Hank, our founder.

Hank gave us a place dedicated to the kilt. Free from the influences that had destroyed previous forums. One that did not care how you wore the kilt, only that you wore it.

I can tell you that since this thread began I have had over 20 PM’s or emails. Some have been from new or recent members, and some from the lurkers on the forum. The contact from the newest members and the lurkers are the most interesting, relevant and disturbing.

What I am hearing, (and also what I am seeing on other forums) is that this constant quibbling, that now constitutes a large part of the posts here, is causing a large number of new and prospective members to feel unwelcome.

I quote from one email. “You constantly make up excuses to grind over the same material. I guess it is one way of saying ‘I’m right and your wrong.’ If you say it often enough maybe you will convice yourself you are right. In the mean time everyone has turned away and gone to find the bar.”


As there is no way to agree on ‘What is traditional” I have decided to leave the current four style forum sections the way they are. I remember that even Jock was satisfied and commented that he liked these sections when they were introduced.



Historical Style Kilts and how to wear them - This forum sub-section is for those interested in learning about and discussing Historically made kilts and to discuss and see examples of how Historical kilts can be worn.

This forum section is where you would post about kilts that are made in a manner that was developed prior to the 1900’s. Great Kilts and/or Belted Plaids which are gathered each time they are worn. Kilts pleated all around, pleated to nothing, and or gathered into a waistband. Kilts without what we think of as modern tailoring.
If you have a historical style kilt or wish to discuss how to wear one or what to wear with it post here.
This includes if you wish to wear a historical style kilt with modern accessories or in a modern fashion.

Traditional Style Kilts and how to wear them – This forum sub-section is for those interested in learning about and discussing Historically made kilts and to discuss and see examples of how Traditional kilts can be worn.

This forum section is where you would post about kilts that a made in a manner that was developed between 1900 and 1960. We have the perfect example of a Traditional kilt. It is how it is described in "The Art of Kiltmaking" by Barb Tewksbury and Elsie Strewmeyer. This includes a Matt Newsome 4 yd Box-Pleated kilt. The determining factor is the tailoring method with internal stabilizers and interfacings.
Post here if you have a traditional kilt regardless of how you wish to wear it. Full blown Prince Charlie or boots and sweater this section is about the traditionally made kilt.

Contemporary Style Kilts and how to wear them - This forum sub-section is for those interested in learning about and discussing Historically made kilts and to discuss and see examples of how kilts can be worn to emulate a contemporary style or fashion.

This forum section is where you would post about kilt that are made in the modern style. This includes Freedom Kilts, USA Kilts Casual and Semi-Trads. Utilikilts, 21st Century Kilts, etc. Regardless if you wear it formally or uber-casual if you have or want to discuss a kilt made in the modern style you would post here.

How to Accessorize your Kilt - The place to talk about all the 'stuff' that can go with the Kilt.

Post here if you wish to discuss the accessory as a separate thing regardless of the type of kilt it is worn with.



I believe that clarifying the intent of the four sections will allow our modern kilt wearers a place all their own. One free of the "That's not traditional" or "that is not how we do it in the Highlands" comments.

If someone wishes to use the acronym THCD I ask them to remember that you are talking about a fashion style. One that is not well defined. Not even among those who call themselves traditionalists. We have seen that the person who coined the acronym and one of our most strident Highland Scots do not agree on what it means.


p.s.
(While I'm at it I would like to insert a personal comment. Something that has been itching at me to say for some time now. If THCD is used to mean how it is and has been done in Scotland then we must face up to the reality that it was not some big N. American corporation that gave us white hose, boots with scrunched down hose, belts worn with vests, and even ruche ties as these things were invented by Scots and promoted by Scottish companies. N. American got the idea that these are traditional Scottish wear from Scottish companies and they have been around long enough now to stand up to almost any definition as Traditional Scottish wear.)

[Jock Scot]

Its a tricky one Steve, particularly when we are trying to define the undefinable. Its like trying to grasp a hand full of mist, open your hand and there is nothing there. At the risk of sounding too much like an old buffer, this need to find precise definitions for everything is not at all helpful in the case of many things including kilt attire. In nuclear physics and such like that are way beyond my ken then precise definitions may well be achievable, I don't know, but I suspect that even there, there are discussions about, alterations, re-definitions etc., of present and established thinking that enquiring new minds are not satisfied with, its been ever thus and whilst this can be frustrating for all concerned, the past brings experience , the present brings discussion between the experienced and the new thinkers and the short term future is possibly decided upon and as to the long term future well who knows?

One thing is for certain sure though, no one can say that you have ducked the issue here and I for one, thank you for that.

[Steve Ashton]

Jock, while I can understand and agree with what you say, I have to look at the forum with a bit wider perspective.

The members of X Marks were once known as "The Kilted Cognizati". This meant that if there was anything that you wanted to know about the kilt, or even if you just needed reassurance that you were not alone in this world, X Marks was where you ended up.

I am seeing a troubling trend. We are now being seen as "old stuck-in-the-muds". We talk about only on thing. We will not hear, and therefore push out, everything else.

We have heard from quite a few members, even within this thead, who say that the concept some like yourself, seem to see so clearly, is not clear or evident to them.
We seem to have fallen from our acceptance of others and new or different concepts and ideas.

It started innocently enough with topics like white hose. Well I submit that, to the world in general, white hose are what is presented as Traditional Scottish Formal Attire. Is there no wonder some are confused? But when an innocent newbie comes on and posts a picture of himself in his new Scottish made outfit that includes white hose and belt plus vest we seem to chase them off with the tone of our comments.

And heaven forbid someone should come onto X Marks with a Utilikilt worn low enough to drop the hem to mid calf.

Unless we stop insisting that some undefinable thing is the ideal or goal to be achieved, we will slowly wither and die. Unless we stop insisting that the goal is to look like some retro throwback to the 1930's, soon all that will be left here are a handful of traditionalist who all look alike.

The goal of fashion is, and always has been, to be new and different. Where do we think all those different jacket styles came from?

Even in the traditional kilmaking business the goal is to be different. To find something that is unique and makes one kilt stand out from the rest.

What actually made what we today call traditional is mass production. The Prince Charlie, Argyle and Tweed Argyle jackets are the product of standard patterns and standard fittings. I think we forget this when we hold these up as "this is our tradition and how we have always done it. "

In my early days of wearing the kilt I too used what I saw on the websites of the Scottish companies as my guide to how to dress. Now, I go out of my way to avoid wearing anything from Traditional Scottish Wear.

And as the one responsible for keeping this forum receptive to its members I have to put my foot down sometimes. If we are to survive, to continue to be timely, receptive and inviting to those who find us via a google search, we simply cannot afford to confuse everyone so much.

[Phil]

I don't often rush to Jock's defence but I feel I must speak up here. What Jock said in his earlier post about a kilt being worn with various other garments according to the particular circumstances seemed perfectly valid to me. Coming from his Highland background he will, no doubt, have seen just such variations where the same kilt that was worn in an agricultural task, perhaps with a sweater and tackety boots, was later seen at a ceilidh with a shirt and tie, maybe even a Prince Charlie.
And can I also remind you that this forum is called "X Marks the SCOT", a title which infers that it is about matters Scottish and in particular that iconic Scottish garment - the kilt. For Jock to then describe his experience of kilt-wearing in Scotland seems perfectly valid to me. Agreed he may, perhaps, not always embrace more modern trends but surely most here understand the generational standpoint he is coming from and that they are his personal views only and not immutable rules which all must follow slavishly.
So please cut him some slack and not blame him for something of which he is most definitely not responsible.

[Steve Ashton]

Phil,

I am not blaming Jock for anything. I am not blaming anyone for anything. I am responding to his comments. Please note that Jock and I, while having a general discussion, have been directing our comments by using each others names. He directed his comments to "Steve" and I responded to "Jock".

And while the name of this forum does have the word Scot in it, this is not, and should never be confused or considered, a Scottish forum. It is a kilt forum plain and simple.

Red kilts, blue kilts. Plaid kilts and Camo kilts. Scottish, American, Australian, Canadian, Japanese and African kilts.

The name actually comes from a license plate frame sold by a graphic design firm called CaberDancer. Hank used to sell these at festivals and got permission to use the name with the .com added.

Hank stated very plainly that his intent was to find a name that would catch the eye but never intended X Marks to be a Scottish themed or based forum.