Great Kilt worn as formal attire

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

As I said earlier, the OP did a great job pleating and draping his plaid. And to David's points, I get it that the belted-plaid is not generally worn these days, but my point is: why shouldn't it be? It's only less "modern" than the 8 yd knife-pleat kilt by about 2 decades. In it's last incarnation, the belted-plaid was considered a very formal garment. I see no reason why it can't fill such a role today. It's no more "archaic" than the kilts we wear every day. If imitating the belted-plaid with fly plaids is okay, then why not the real thing?

The key phrase seems to be, "In its last incarnation..." I think the simple answer is that if worn with period clothing (such as in your avatar) the great kilt is fine, as a costume, in much the same way that a 1930's Zoot Suit is fine as a costume, but rather inappropriate for wear in the present day.

As a garment, worn in the Highlands of Scotland, the great kilt really existed for a very short period of time, compared to the two centuries that the "little kilt" has been worn. As a result, like knee britches, the great kilt really has become an item of historical costume and, like the aforementioned Zoot suit or the platform shoes and 18-inch bell bottomed trousers of the 1970s, doesn't have a place in "modern" attire.

As regards David Pope's comments concerning the fly plaid, all I can say is "Damn, but David's a perceptive chap!"

[Harold Cannon]

I think that the great kilt wold look very well with a montrose, kennemer, or like Robert Amoyt's doublet. The shorter doublets would work best and not get in the way with the upper part of the great kilt. We have tried to replicate the belted plaid by making the plaids like Matt Newsome has made, so I dont see why the great kilt just could'nt be worn instead.

[Woodsheal]

The key phrase seems to be, "In its last incarnation..." I think the simple answer is that if worn with period clothing (such as in your avatar) the great kilt is fine, as a costume, in much the same way that a 1930's Zoot Suit is fine as a costume, but rather inappropriate for wear in the present day.

As a garment, worn in the Highlands of Scotland, the great kilt really existed for a very short period of time, compared to the two centuries that the "little kilt" has been worn. As a result, like knee britches, the great kilt really has become an item of historical costume and, like the aforementioned Zoot suit or the platform shoes and 18-inch bell bottomed trousers of the 1970s, doesn't have a place in "modern" attire.

As regards David Pope's comments concerning the fly plaid, all I can say is "Damn, but David's a perceptive chap!"

Again, I get all of this! The concept being pushed here is "resurrecting" the belted-plaid for present day formal wear. Again, I ask, "Why not?" The response, "It's just not done, old boy" doesn't hold any water for me. If current traditional Highland dress was actually "modern", I might agree with you more. But ALL of its elements are holdovers from decades and centuries past (and pre-date the zoot suit!)....

[davidlpope]

The concept being pushed here is "resurrecting" the belted-plaid for present day formal wear. Again, I ask, "Why not?" The response, "It's just not done, old boy" doesn't hold any water for me.

We've come to a fundamental difference, then- a chasm of sorts that doesn't seem able to be bridged.

That being said, if one doesn't subscribe to the notion that Highland attire should be worn as it is worn in the Highlands of Scotland, then I think the bar to wearing the breacan feile is completely removed. By the same logic, there is nothing stopping one from wearing raw deerskin shoes, a powdered wig, or MC Hammer pants to a Highland evening function...

[Woodsheal]

Really? The belted-plaid is an item of Highland Dress. Your absurd example is so far removed from what we're discussing as to hardly warrant a response. As you say, this is a matter of unbridgeable differing opinions - and rigidly intrenched notions.

Finally, here's a pic of Matt in a plaid with "modern" dress. Honestly, you find this unattractive or "wrong"...?

[tartanartist]

It is interesting, as I read back over some of the "disparaging" comments that have been made about my outfit I realize that many of them describe my personality. I am I suppose a bit theatrical, over the top, eccentric. I am also incongruent. Like many Americans I am an amalgamation of several cultures, ethnicities, and personal identities. Though I do have more recent Scottish ancestry, the vast majority of my Scottish ancestors lived in Scotland during a time when the belted-plaid was more appropriate than a wee kilt. That is not the major reason I wear the kilt however, I wear it for comfort, to attract female attention (specifically my wife), and because the kilt has evolved into a major part of my personal trademark over the last three years. Many people know me as "that crazy guy who wears a kilt everyday". It sets me apart from the crowd.

I would also agree with Woodsheal's point of "why not the great kilt". Many posts on this forum go into great detail about what is most authentic, the most traditional. There are countless posts about not wearing white hose or ghillie brogues because they are not truly traditional. Following that logic we should all only wear the belted-plaids or early box pleats with the earliest doublets and accessories. Now I am not advocating that we all return to purely historical clothing, on the contrary I am wearing a modern kilt as I type this. I am suggesting that kilt fashion is growing into a new modern global phenomenon, and there is room for new traditions and styles to be developed. So why not wear a great kilt with modern accessories? I did. I received many compliments when I did. There are things about the outfit that I want to changes. Things that I will change. The point is wear what you feel makes you look good and wear it with pride.

Of course you can take this all with a grain of salt as the only suit hanging in my closet that has trousers ... is a "zoot suit"! Given that, I may have proved your point that I am irreversibly on the fringe of society.

[davidlpope]

Brian,

My third example was absurd to prove a point- reductio ad absurdum – “If there is no accepted basis to determine whether a particular attire is acceptable, then there is no basis to say that any attire is unacceptable.”

It appears based on your response, though, that you do have a basis you’re using to determine whether the belted plaid should be worn- namely, “Is it a current or historical item of Highland dress?”

This is where we differ. There are many items of historical Highland dress that I think inappropriate for a contemporary Highland-themed evening event: traditional deerskin currans, powdered wigs, cadadh, 18th century pattern doublets, 18th century pattern shoes, and the breacan feile.

Since Matt didn’t ask to be the guinea pig in this discussion, and because I consider him a friend, I will abstain from voicing an opinion on his specific attire in the posted photo. I will note, though, that Matt is not wearing a breacan feile in the photo, but rather a half-plaid and a 6yd knife-pleat kilt.

For contemporary civilian dress , I am not fond of cadadh or any piece of draped tartan that mimics the top half of the old belted plaid, whether it be a “fly” plaid, half-plaid, etc. These historical elements of Highland dress have evolved into different forms for contemporary wear- the cadadh became knit Argyll and Diced hose; the plaid was limited to military and pipe band uniforms.

As I mentioned earlier, there may be a few “old souls” that can really pull off the historical look in a fabulous way, but I think these items are best avoided in a contemporary setting.

Cordially,

David

[Woodsheal]

David, the pic of Matt shows an actual belted-plaid (it's from the "Show us your Great Kilt Pics" thread), NOT the half-plaid, little-kilt combo he's shown us in other pics. I'm not advocating a return to 18th C. dress in a modern formal setting, so the "currans & powdered wig" thing is neither here nor there. What's being put forward is very simply the use of one form of kilt in place of another, and all the other "modern" elements remaining the same (jacket/doublet, shoes, hose, etc.). It's really no different than substituting a 4 yd box-pleated kilt in place of the more "traditional" 8 yd knife-pleat, is it?

[Dale Seago]

So why not wear a great kilt with modern accessories? I did. I received many compliments when I did.

I've approached this kind of thing in several ways: wearing the feileadh mor in purely historical fashion, wearing it with more modern/traditional attire & accessories, and also with things like purely contemporary casual shirt, shoes, and cableknit jumper.

I've also gone in the opposite direction, wearing a modern tailored knife-pleated kilt to a clan society dinner (not mine, a friend's) -- with 1740s-cut jacket & waistcoat, a black lace jabot, and 18th-century reproduction buckled shoes. Everyone loved that!

But I've always been careful about how and where I did such things. Do I do this now? No, that was a phase some years ago. Would I hesitate to do it again if the whim took me? Not for a moment!

I'd say experiment all you like to gain your own sense of balance and proportion.

[Woodsheal]

The logical extension of David's and MoR's arguments is that the box-pleated, Kingussie-pleated, and other earlier and historic forms of the kilt should not be countenanced with current attire, and we should all limit ourselves to the 8 yd, knife-pleated tank - as that is what is accepted and worn in today's Scottish highlands. (I assume David has sold his box-pleats! )