FAO Jock Scot / Phil re: Tat and the Scottish Identity

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I remember back in the 1980s being at the Gatlinburg Highland Games, when I overhead a Scottish woman who had recently become an American citizen making comments about people "Playing at being Scots". I did not ask her if she was "Playing at being an American." I knew she would not understand, because she wanted to be in a position of superiority. However, that is not always the case. It is my observation that often Scots ex-pats take a different position. When they lived in Scotland, they had no interest in things Highland, but when they come to America things change. They are no longer surrounded by Scottish culture and thinking about what they left behind, they take an interest in it. They buy their first kilt and join a St. Andrews Society. Typically the ex-pats make good friends and treat you as kith and kin- as the cousin you are. I do not know their motives, but I hope that it is kinship.

Of course there is the flip-side to the lady you overheard at Gatlinburg. I remember an older Scots woman who had come to live in the US some decades back, who was interviewed by a local paper after attending a Highland Games. They were looking for her perspective as a "native Scot." She loved it! She said that she had never seen that many men in kilts gathered in one place when she was in Scotland and it was nice to see the heritage being carried on here in the states.

So there are many different opinions on the issue among native born Scots.

And, I will also say that my experience with Scots ex-pats now living in America, and their attitude toward the kilt, as been on the whole similar to what you describe above. I've sold many kilts to Scots now living in the States who never even had the desire to own one till they moved here.

[Joshua]

So there are many different opinions on the issue among native born Scots.

QFT


FatherBill, that means "Quoted For Truth" At one time I thought it meant something quite offensive*













* "Quit f***ing talking*

[TimButterfield]

Come on guys, admit it, you just love wearing kilts.

Done, though it took a while to appear due to the moderation required by my newbie status. By the time it did appear, there were many posts after it and it may have been missed.

[TheBrus]

And, I will also say that my experience with Scots ex-pats now living in America, and their attitude toward the kilt, as been on the whole similar to what you describe above. I've sold many kilts to Scots now living in the States who never even had the desire to own one till they moved here.

It reminds me of what Ambrose Bierce said in The Devil's Dictionary about kilts: they are "worn by Scotchmen in America and Americans in Scotland."

[Guinness>water]

I have enjoyed reading this thread very much. I think a lot of Americans (maybe its just me) want a stamp of approval. I find myself unconsciously asking for it often regarding highland dress. I have also always done just as Phil said, having to have a reason (ancestry). Why is it so hard to just say "because I love all things Scottish"?

I also kind of view wearing the kilt as picking up a dropped torch. From what I have read, it dosent seem that many scots wear the kilt very often. My mind says "somebody should, we dont want it to be lost". I kinda feel like its a "duty", this needs to be kept alive.

[Father Bill]

So true, Guinness!

[Lyle1]

The one thing that they all have in common, though, is that apart from occasional vacations to Scotland to visit a castle or two, a pilgrimage to the home of golf, a dabble at Burns’ poems, and a penchant for haggis and shortbread, is that not one of them would actually ever consider living in the place. Not ever. Not in their wildest dreams.

I agree with you that most Americans would not want to LIVE in Scotland; it would simply be too much of a lifestyle change. On the other hand, none of the Scots that I now who moved to America want to go back to Scotland! I have a Scottish acquaintance who frequently tells us what is wrong with the US and that he will never become a citizen. When an American suggested that he move back to Scotland, where he could live quite well on the money he earned in the US, he changed the topic. His wife later told us that if he went back, he would go by himself. She would not go back with him, and their American born children who are citizens of the USA view Scotland as a place to visit, but would never move there.

As to Americans claiming to be Scottish, I think there is a cultural and a semantic problem to clear up.

If a citizen of the USA says, "I am American", they mean that they are a citizen of the USA and consider the USA to be their homeland. If that same person says, "I am Scottish (or Polish, or Irish, or French ...)", they are referring only to their ancestral heritage (usually a principal ethnic line).

They might say, "I am Scottish on my father's side, but Italian on my mother's side", and it would not mean that they could not make up their mind, but rather that they acknowledge they have several heritages in their background to which they may or may not feel connected. That same person might also describe him/her self as a Scottish-American, or and Italian-American and their fellow Americans would understand that they are talking about their ancestry.

So get over the idea that Americans are claiming that they are Scots; we have enough problems to deal with being Americans!

[Burly Brute]

I'm not full-blooded descended Scot (and I live in the American wasteland), I would say my ancestry is more of a "British Islander" mix with a tiny bit of the ole native 'murican. But I know a few things.

1. I love Kilts.
2. I love this forum and chattin with all you guys.
3. I respect the jockster (and everyone else), and love fly fishin'
4. Drink up me hearties, yo ho!

[Chirs]

...

As to Americans claiming to be Scottish, I think there is a cultural and a semantic problem to clear up.

If a citizen of the USA says, "I am American", they mean that they are a citizen of the USA and consider the USA to be their homeland. If that same person says, "I am Scottish (or Polish, or Irish, or French ...)", they are referring only to their ancestral heritage (usually a principal ethnic line).
...

Very good point! Here, in Canada, we are instructed to not say on the census that we are Canadian, but rather, to say that we are English, Scottish, Chinese... as appropriate (although it seems that most people still answer with "Canadian"). So, the question of "What am I?" becomes complicated in The New World.

In The Old World it may be largely accepted that "I am ____ (for example: Scottish)" means "I was born here" and "This is where I hold citizenship" and "This is my ancestry" (although it would be interesting to see how well that holds in the face of today's immigration patterns).

...

As I write this it occurs to me that the United Kingdom is very much The New World for many; as an example, Indians. As such, I wonder if they don't have the same identity crisis. Is it okay for the immigrants to wear the kurta and sari? (yes, of course it is) And their Scottish-born children: is there a point at which they go from being Indian to being Scottish, from wearing a kurta to wearing a kilt? If there is, is that because of the place where they were born? Does geography take precedence over ancestry?

That does seem to be the message others have delivered, isn't it. 'Even though I have Danish heritage I don't dress as a Viking.' So, I think, what is being said is that geography takes precedence over ancestry. However, as I said at the beginning of this rambling, here in North America we are encouraged by the government to be Canadian second and allow ancestry to take precedence. For example: Scottish-Canadian.

So, as Lyle has said, saying "I am American" can mean very different things depending upon several factors.

[macwilkin]

Very good point! Here, in Canada, we are instructed to not say on the census that we are Canadian, but rather, to say that we are English, Scottish, Chinese... as appropriate (although it seems that most people still answer with "Canadian"). So, the question of "What am I?" becomes complicated in The New World.

In The Old World it may be largely accepted that "I am ____ (for example: Scottish)" means "I was born here" and "This is where I hold citizenship" and "This is my ancestry" (although it would be interesting to see how well that holds in the face of today's immigration patterns).

...

As I write this it occurs to me that the United Kingdom is very much The New World for many; as an example, Indians. As such, I wonder if they don't have the same identity crisis. Is it okay for the immigrants to wear the kurta and sari? (yes, of course it is) And their Scottish-born children: is there a point at which they go from being Indian to being Scottish, from wearing a kurta to wearing a kilt? If there is, is that because of the place where they were born? Does geography take precedence over ancestry?

That does seem to be the message others have delivered, isn't it. 'Even though I have Danish heritage I don't dress as a Viking.' So, I think, what is being said is that geography takes precedence over ancestry. However, as I said at the beginning of this rambling, here in North America we are encouraged by the government to be Canadian second and allow ancestry to take precedence. For example: Scottish-Canadian.

So, as Lyle has said, saying "I am American" can mean very different things depending upon several factors.

Good points; see:

http://www.sikhchic.com/article-detail.php?id=87&cat=8
http://www.jewishtartan.com*

*Although those in Scotland's Jewish community sometimes choose to wear the Gordon tartan.

T.