Quote Originally Posted by James
This leads back to the idea that tartans are not just pretty patterns, they have a meaning-be that meaning of Clan-a pattern reserved for the Chief , or maybe The Royal Family, and so on-maybe for an American Police Pipe Band or whatever. The last might be of recent origin, but albeit new-a tradition that I for one would respect, and a part of that respect would be to not wear that tartan, for to do so would be to masquarade under a false flag.

Coming full circle, if there is to be any validity to the kilt as we know it, we need to see it as more than just a sensible way to dress: rather it is something linking us to our heritage, a heritage of which we are, or should be proud. A heritage of which we cannot cherry pick the bits we like and ignore the bits we feel do not suit our wishes of the moment.

It is our choice, we either buy into the entire package as an entire package: or we throw it out of the window and lose any right to claim that wearing the kilt is anything other than a possibly eccentric, albeit sensible way of dressing.


James
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't most of the modern tartans created by the mills? Therefore they don't necessarily have the historical significance we ascribe to them sometimes?

Also, we cherry pick parts of history all the time. You choose the good and you leave behind the bad, that's how we move forward. Nothing is static and if we only are allowed to dress one way, the way it used to be, then we become mere historical re-enactors.

I say go for what you like; be respectful of what you choose; and have an answer to why you're choosing it. If you weren't part of a regiment and you wanted to honor that regiment is there any better way to do that than wearing their tartan? That's my opinion.