Who Owns the Kilt - My Personal Refelction

[Jock Scot]

Outside of the lineage, what Forrester said.

I also find it interesting that while the Scots are very protective of the kilt, few (from my readings here) seem to actually wear them themselves today.

In an attempt to shed some light on the above let me explain.

I think many are under the impression that the kilt was general attire for the Scots------it never was and still is not. However there is a fairly common view here in Scotland, that probably more kilts are being worn in Scotland than perhaps 50 years ago.

The kilt is not always a practical option for general day-wear.

Cheap kilts, until recently, have never been an option available so it is hardly surprising that the kilt only puts in an appearance at special occasions.

Why shouldn't the Scots be proud, even protective, of their national attire. It is a perfectly natural desire for some, I would suggest.

[Mickey]

In an attempt to shed some light on the above let me explain.

I think many are under the impression that the kilt was general attire for the Scots------it never was and still is not. However there is a fairly common view here in Scotland, that probably more kilts are being worn in Scotland than perhaps 50 years ago.

The kilt is not always a practical option for general day-wear.

Cheap kilts, until recently, have never been an option available so it is hardly surprising that the kilt only puts in an appearance at special occasions.

Why shouldn't the Scots be proud, even protective, of their national attire. It is a perfectly natural desire.

I fully understand, Jock, I really do. I just find that protective nature very interesting. Simply an observation, sir

[Jock Scot]

I fully understand, Jock, I really do. I just find that protective nature very interesting. Simply an observation, sir

From your posts of the past I know you understand, but others here are not so understanding. May I ask you a very general question? OK, I will ask it and hope for the best!

I am not asking this question to "snipe" at anyone, but I find this interest in the "national attire question" from those that don't have a national attire(its true, so please don't take offence) as a very interesting point too.

So my question is this. If, the USA, Canada, whoever, had a national dress of obvious historical aspects, would their population be be more understanding of some Scots' point of view on this point? I don't know, but I think they might?

[federkeil]

So my question is this. If, the USA, Canada, whoever, had a national dress of obvious historical aspects, would their population be be more understanding of some Scots' point of view on this point? I don't know, but I think they might?

Speaking as a first generation born Canadian (on my fathers side). My father being born in Germany from German parents, there was no love lost for Liederhosen. From my travels to Germany it is worn as a costume during Oktoberfest, much like Calgarians pull out their blue jeans, pearl snap shirts, cowboy boots and cowboy hat for Stampede (and then tuck them away till next year).

I find the kilt to be a practical item of clothing and admire the Scott's for keeping it alive through troubled times. I can see why they are defensive and try to keep it "Scottish", but the practicality and the comfort (my favorite) of a kilt will cause it to spread regardless of whether the wearer has any ties to Scotland or not.

[Mickey]

If, the USA, Canada, whoever, had a national dress of obvious historical aspects, would their population be be more understanding of some Scots' point of view on this point? I don't know, but I think they might?

I believe that they would sir. I base that on my own military service. I dislike how anybody who hasn't served can wear an article of my old uniform as they wish, however respectfully they do so.

As far as national attire, I think (just my opinion, not speaking for anybody else) that we here in the US don't "get it" simply because we are too big. Some of our regions, even our states, have local traditions and people who hold fiercely to them, but those outside of those states or regions, don't care and generally find amusement in them, as some of our regions and states do not have those traditions, being areas of great diversity. We have plenty of folks in here from the state of Texas. Ask any Texan what they feel about anybody not from Texas and you'll get much the same answer, just as if you ask anybody not from Texas what they think about Texans.... (not picking on you Texans, but you know what I'm talking about). Personally, I hail from northern Minnesota where our local dress is whatever keeps you warm. We didn't even have clothing trends in high school, so I find the world of fashion to be relatively comical.

I used to work with folks from the Norwegian government, and on every visit here, they would bring empty suitcases just to fill them up with blue jeans and cowboys hats to take back home. As much as they were amused by buying them, we were amused at how they felt that these were symbols of America. In California, we found it funny. In Texas or New Mexico, there may have been different feelings.

Again, just things that I find interesting.

[Joshua]

I don't know about dress, per se, as American's really don't have a "National Dress". That being said, I am awfully proud of my Appalachian ancestry and roots, and quite fiercely reject folks who have decided to take root in my ancestral home, then proceed to turn it into something it isn't (over-commercialized, expensive, haven for non-native affluents). But, 100-years prior to my own birth, my ancestors themselves were "Carpetbaggers" - Union men (still considered Southerners, albeit from Union states Ohio and Kentucky) who moved to the South in an effort to find work in the rebuilding of the Post-War South.

I work hard to be accepting of these changes, but deep down it is quite difficult to break my own beliefs. But cultures define their people, and when those cultures start to change (as they always do), some people (myself included) tend to feel quite apprehensive about their own ideals about themselves and the people before them.

So, not exactly the same thing, but I can understand the viewpoint of Native Scots quite well. Going to a Highland Games in America and seeing the extreme examples of ridiculous Diaspora-Tat culture, could even be offensive to some Native Scots (just as many Native Irish reject the downright cultural abuse suffered through American St. Patrick's Day celebrations).

I won't stop wearing my kilt, even though my Scottish Ancestry came to this country 200 years ago and comprises a small amount of my genetic makeup - it defines me among my peers, and signifies something important in my life (the games, camaraderie, culture). It's also a very functional garment, while still being comfortable (although less-so in my very warm state). That being said, I very much understand and respect the viewpoint of the Scots who are politely agitated at my decision to do so.

[ForresterModern]

So my question is this. If, the USA, Canada, whoever, had a national dress of obvious historical aspects, would their population be be more understanding of the Scots point of view on this point? I don't know, but I think they might?

I guess that is an impossible scenario to even consider for us here in America, Jock, because, with the exception of the Native North and South Americans among us (whose lives have even been totally disrupted and polluted by the outsiders), our history of a little over 500 years on this land, for most of that time sparsely inhabited, and only slowly over time in bits and starts "settled" by the mixed immigrant population, and much of any local dress directly related to purpose (farming, mining, ranching, Wall street, etc..), we are truly in virtually all ways a melting pot of so many ethnicities combined with the above factors of spatial and temporal integration. Jeans and a cowboy hat might be considered national in the American west, but certainly not unique as similar attire is/was worn by those filling a similar economic niche in south america and australia. A suit and tie may be considered national dress on Wall street but certainly not so to the midwest farmer who might be in denim overalls, while a californian might be in surfing shorts and flip flops. Unlike most places in Europe, where at least some if not many can trace their roots back in one part of the world, possibly with family members inhabiting the same piece of land not just for a few generations but for possibly centuries, and whose national history can be traced backward for more than a millenium and a half, it is a rarity for an american family to live in the same spot for more than a couple generations, rarely on the same piece of land, and not uncommon for the current crop of americans to move several times in their lifetimes, not just down the street or around the corner but across multiple states, each as large as all of Scotland herself. I myself have lived in 8 different cities in 7 different states and at least a dozen different houses (not including college dorm and apartment moves) in my 53 years. We have no specific national identity, other than being that of the land of the free and the home of the brave, the land made up of 99.5% immigrants or descendents thereof, all over only a few hundred years and spread out across a huge expanse of land.

So as much as you have a "national" history and point of view and national dress that have significant lineage and stability, America has been one of constant change and migration and immigration and intermingling and integration, and thus bits and pieces of many national histories and national dresses, and national points of view, also integrated to varying degrees, making all but the most recent immigrants unlikely to hold any of those bits as specifically pure or in need of protection or absolute and strict continuation as is. We have molded into the land and environment and population as it has changed through the years and not had one specific "heritage" to hold onto, thus the desire of many to try to reach back into their past to "find" their heritage and adopt it, often to a degree in excess of and a manner different from the original and continued practitioners of that heritage, the natives of that land who still live there and never really left.
Imagine having a hundred Scots dropped on a remote island and developing a lifestyle in that place that suited that environment, and a few generations go by. How many of them do you think would still be wearing kilts even occasionally, even if the resources to make them were available, how much do you think the accents and language would have changed, and the diet, etc..... But then put them back in contact with their pre-relocation scots relatives, now generations distant, and don't you think that some of the old ways would still remain in common, and that some of the "outcasts" might desire to pick up some of those old ways of speaking, dressing, and thinking, subsisting, although I doubt they would ever revert to being true scots because of their experience. Now enlarge that, add not just a couple generations but a dozenn or more, and the influx and intermarrying of multiple nationalities, religions, societies, occupations, resources, etc... and how much further from the original would those "outcasts" be in thought, dress, and identity. But might some or many of them seek to find some of that identity in searching their heritage? And might some without that specific heritage still decide for whatever reasons that some portion of another heritage suits them, such as dress, such as the kilt.

I guess in short it is for most of us Americans an impossibiity for us to think like you, or completely understand you and have the same or even a similar point of view, as that is simply not "us" from the background whence most of us came. Neither would I ever expect you to "understand" us or be able to have or even consider a similar point of view. But it is nice when we all can try, and at least be civil about our differences, and even rejoice in them when we can.

[Bugbear]

One never knows what may happen in the future, but I don't plan to resume wearing the traditional, Highland kilt. That is what my conscience tells me after trying to see things from the Scots' point of view. It's also not my place to tell others what to do in regard to wearing the traditional kilt.

[Singlemalt]

From your posts of the past I know you understand, but others here are not so understanding. May I ask you a very general question? OK, I will ask it and hope for the best!

I am not asking this question to "snipe" at anyone, but I find this interest in the "national attire question" from those that don't have a national attire(its true, so please don't take offence) as a very interesting point too.

So my question is this. If, the USA, Canada, whoever, had a national dress of obvious historical aspects, would their population be be more understanding of some Scots' point of view on this point? I don't know, but I think they might?

Jock, I did not start this thread to rekindle a topic which has often lead to heated discussion here. In fact I avoided commenting in previous threads because I could see, and understand, both points of view. I really don't have an argument with anyone here. Some things I don't quite get but I understand there are lots of folks out there who don't "get" me.

However I did feel compelled to comment about your case for "National Attire". So if the kilt belongs to the people of Scottish Nationality I guess it would be OK for say a Syrian who has moved to Scotland and gained British citizenship to wear a kilt. However, it is not quite right for a Canadian of 100% Scottish family history to do so? Is it about nationality or is it about family and heritage? Obviously there is no right answer, thankfully we live in a time and in countries where we are free to define ourselves as we want and feel. I don't feel I am stealing the kilt from the Scots, I feel I am holding my family connection to them dear and close to my heart and in wearing my kilts displaying those affections and connections to the world.

Besides it just looks and feels great. Just last night at dinner my youngest son Callum told me he is considering wearing his kilt to his high school prom. His French-Canadian girlfriend wants him to. I told him it is up to him but in almost 50 years of kilt wearing I look back at some of the most memorable, and significant events in my life were kilted and I don't ever recall regretting the decision to wear it. Not likely I am going to ever stop.

[McElmurry]

This is a poor example but the best I could think of. Let us consider a regional adornment that has some meaning in parts of the USA, the silver belt buckle. Growing up in the intermountain west and working on farms during college I would feel comfortable wearing western boots, a tooled belt, and a western hat. But I would never wear a silver belt buckle resembling those won at a rodeo because I haven’t earned it and I would feel like a poser. Now if I went to a part of the USA where such buckles are common I could dress to fit in but my lack of leathery skin and calluses would probably give me away and my horse riding skills, or lack thereof, would certainly give me away. I would quickly be outed as a city slicker and treated accordingly.

Now if I posted a photo of myself wearing white tube socks, sandals, madras shorts, a muscle shirt, a western hat and a dinner plate sized silver belt buckle on a rodeo forum and asked for a critique of my appearance I seriously doubt the responses would be as kind as those most often expressed by the Scottish gentlemen of this site who patiently attempt to redirect the most egregious fashion misadventures of our members who seek their advice.