How do you feel about Grandfather shirts?

**KennethSime** · 12th April 21, 05:32 PM

Awhile back, I picked up two Irish Grandfather shirts from Amazon, because I had a gift card to spend. If you've never worn one, it's a bit like a collarless flannel shirt. They're quite popular over in the Kilts & Culture group on Facebook, yet I haven't quite gotten to the point where I feel super comfortable with it - definitely not as bad as the ghillie shirt/jacobite shirt, but still feels a bit "costumey."

Anyway, here's me wearing one of the two, along with my new Niagara 5-yard from Burnett's & Struth.

How do you all feel about them?

**Father Bill** · 12th April 21, 06:16 PM

Gives me the impression of a rough working man of the 19th Century.

**Jock Scot** · 13th April 21, 12:49 AM

I prefer the look of the shirt just a wee tad more than those white hose and the view of the vest at your neck.

**Highland Logan** · 13th April 21, 02:37 AM

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

I prefer the look of the shirt just a wee tad more than those white hose and the view of the vest at your neck.

Full agree. That waist coat doesn't really go with that shirt... like tennis shoes and a suit. Some will say yes, but I tend to opt away from "trends" or "fads". A rougher or coarser fabric waist coat could be a better option, if you're married to the "look". The hose appear to be ecru or almond, maybe... far enough from bleached white, for a pass.

At the end of the day, if you're happy, and your friends don't hide in the bushes, when someone comes around the corner, that's all that really matters.

But if it's unvarnished opinions you seek, come to xmarks.

Frank

**Bruce Scott** · 13th April 21, 02:45 AM

Combined with a pair of rough trousers, braces, bowyangs, flat cap and hobnail boots, I think they're perfect for the navvy look.

**Ninehostages** · 13th April 21, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Bruce Scott

Combined with a pair of rough trousers, braces, bowyangs, flat cap and hobnail boots, I think they're perfect for the navvy look.

A shirt was a shirt back then. The Navvies just left off the starched collar and so did Grandfather, sometimes (really ... I'm actually old enough to remember).
It was the same shirt minus a very uncomfortable and unnecessary accessory (think: leaving off the flashes!)

**Jock Scot** · 13th April 21, 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by Highland Logan

Full agree. That waist coat doesn't really go with that shirt... like tennis shoes and a suit. Some will say yes, but I tend to opt away from "trends" or "fads". A rougher or coarser fabric waist coat could be a better option, if you're married to the "look". The hose appear to be ecru or almond, maybe... far enough from bleached white, for a pass.

At the end of the day, if you're happy, and your friends don't hide in the bushes, when someone comes around the corner, that's all that really matters.

But if it's unvarnished opinions you seek, come to xmarks.

Frank

We have a trans-Atlantic misunderstanding of words here. When you read "vest" you think waistcoat. When I write "vest" I mean the garment worn under the shirt. You might call it a T shirt? And yes, some tailors in the UK use the term "vest" and they do mean "waistcoat"!

In the UK our vests(under garment) usually has a V neck or a deeply scalloped front part so nothing shows behind the open necked shirt. I don't know if the modern generation in the UK bother too much about the "vest" showing, but for my generation it was/is an absolute no-no. Akin to tucking your shirt into your underpants!

I was chatting to one of my Grand children, just and out of interest I asked him about a vest showing with an open shirt and apparently, "one does not have the vest showing ever! Surely you know that Grand Dad?!" I assured him that I did. Then came another comment over the phone that I think might explain the situation," I think its what Americans do?" I think he is right.

**Highland Logan** · 13th April 21, 03:12 AM

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

We have a trans-Atlantic misunderstanding of words here. When you read "vest" you think waistcoat. When I write "vest" I mean the garment worn under the shirt. And yes, some tailors in the UK use the term "vest" and they do mean "waistcoat"!

In the UK our vests(under garment) usually has a V neck or a deeply scalloped front part so nothing shows behind the open necked shirt. I don't know if the modern generation bother too much about the "vest" showing, but for my generation it was/is an absolute no-no. Akin to tucking your shirt into your underpants!

Ah.. here (depending on individual age and regional origin) that would be called a singlet, or under shirt. I recognize the phrase differences, and am glad to have learned something new. Thanks for being a fountain of knowledge Jock.

Critique still stands, despite. With that shirt style, the issue of the under shirt... "vest" showing, doesn't bother me that much, especially with a coarser fabric waist coat, or san waist coat.

I am after all just a heathen from the Colonies.

Frank

**Tobus** · 13th April 21, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

In the UK our vests(under garment) usually has a V neck or a deeply scalloped front part so nothing shows behind the open necked shirt. I don't know if the modern generation in the UK bother too much about the "vest" showing, but for my generation it was/is an absolute no-no. Akin to tucking your shirt into your underpants!

I was chatting to one of my Grand children, just and out of interest I asked him about a vest showing with an open shirt and apparently, "one does not have the vest showing ever! Surely you know that Grand Dad?!" I assured him that I did. Then came another comment over the phone that I think might explain the situation," I think its what Americans do?" I think he is right.

Yes, it's very much an American thing, I suppose. Over here, wearing an undershirt that's visibly exposed when worn with an open/unbuttoned collar on a button-front shirt is considered slightly more dressy than having one's exposed chest hair peeking out from the open front. It most likely developed as a fashion rejection of the 1970s style where showing one's chest was all the rage. Many here in the US today view undershirts as being akin to socks. They can be visible without any sense of embarrassment of "showing one's undergarments", and it's more classy than seeing one's leg hair or chest hair.

As for "grandfather shirts", I'm not a huge fan of them with the kilt. They strike me as a "Jacobite shirt lite", if that makes any sense. I'm not saying I wouldn't wear one in a very casual setting; indeed I have been known to wear a long-sleeved Henley-style shirt with the kilt, which has the same overall effect. I think my objection to the grandfather shirt is more about the marketing of it in the kilt industry rather than the style.

(edited to add photo of Henley shirt for reference)

**KennethSime** · 13th April 21, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Highland Logan

But if it's unvarnished opinions you seek, come to xmarks.

Thank you all for your feedback! That is precisely why I posted this one here. I think I prefer a nice tattersall most days. ;-)

In California, we'd call the white thing under my shirt a t-shirt, or more specifically a crew-neck undershirt. To my mind, a singlet is an athletic garment often worn for Olympic wrestling or cycling. Many here would refer to a waistcoat as a vest, basically a jacket with no sleeves, or anything that goes over your shirt without sleeves.

Amazing how words change across time and distance - one of my favorite parts of interacting with you all on the internet. :-)

P.S. The hose are "oatmeal," but I hear that they're a bit close to white. I'll admit I don't wear them often, but thought they'd be nice with this particular tartan.