Too Traditional?

[creagdhubh]

I've been following this thread keenly (although I've only just posted a reply).

My own thoughts on the matter are this:

It is not possible to be too traditional (full stop).

It is however, possible to be over or under-dressed. It is possible to be too matchy. It is possible to be too old-fashioned, too theatrical, too modern even.

The main point I'm trying to make is that many outfits/accessories might be considered traditional (in various combinations) but the problem arises when the wrong outfit or the wrong accessories are worn in the wrong situation. Example: an Argyll jacket is traditional, as is a Sheriffmuir doublet. However, there are situations where one or the other might be inappropriate (hopefully this will be obvious, although I fear it isn't) (Bearing in mind of course the lack of a RULE book!)

I wore this to a wedding in Spain last week:





(sorry for the closed eyes... bad timing)

One can see that I am wearing a glengarry, which could be considered traditional- but, would it be appropriate outside performing my duties as the piper (I was also a guest)? No. Hence, I dropped it when I dropped the pipes. The other question arises: whether or not the kilt was traditional attire for a Spanish wedding...? Well, no, it's not. But- the wedding in question was at least half Scottish, with the groom and his family being Scottish (almost all the gents kilted), and the bride being Spanish. I was asked to pipe (and wear the kilt) so it was appropriate. (On a side note, I don't have pics of the other kilted men- only the ones that were taken here by a friend- at least until the official pics come back).

Tobus and a few others have raised the excellent point that one can often be over-dressed, simply because the rest of the people around you are under-dressed. This is a tricky one, but I imagine that all that can be done in these situations is to set a good example- this is what I hope to do, not over-doing it, just attempting to let it be seen that I am doing the best I can. (At least, I try!) Also, that it's nice to pay a bit of attention to how one presents oneself. The other thing to remember is that there are simply a large number of people nowadays (particularly, although not exclusively, men) who just don't seem to care how they dress... or at least what seems to be fashionable is to dress as slovenly as possible- at least when compared with the "styles" of eras past. (Think ill-fitting jackets, underpants as an accessory! )

Basically, I think it's a question of doing the best we can with our attire, without crossing the border into fantasy or theatre, and to bear in mind how we can be as smartly dressed as possible for the occassion without over-doing it. I understand that to some (especially people here on this forum- bearing in mind it is a forum with a sartorial basis) this comes completely naturally, seeemingly without any effort at all. While others of us might struggle somewhat- but that's why we're here, to get advice, to get feedback, criticism and hopefully also pass on some of our own knowledge or wisdom.

Cheers,

Michael

Well said, Michael!

[creagdhubh]

I don't think the Duke is matchy matchy at all. I think this is what causes confusion. Rather his accessories complement each other- and he is (always!) dressed appropriate for the setting. There is no better example to follow. (MHO)

Cheers,

Michael

I agree.

[MacLowlife]

LOOKING 2012?

Here is what I think:

One of the many advantages of age is the kind of subtle perspective that gets internalized. Not that he has much age on him, but I think Jock demonstrates that internalized knowledge nicely. Some members under 35 or so may feel the beginnings of the long view, but as some wise person said about clothing fads- they come along just often enough to embarrass you in later life by reminding you of how ridiculous you looked in your youth. Put another way, if you aren't mildly embarrassed by the way you dressed when you were younger, maybe you haven't lived long enough.

I think a part of what AA was referring to about dressing like it is 2012 was those things we see all around us. In the US today, and I expect elsewhere, you will bump into people who have glasses or shoes or hairstyles or articles of clothing that intentionally refer to another time ( maybe an idealized notion of that time, but some other time). If you really pay attention, you may run into a guy whose 1960-70s facial hair actually recalls 1890s facial hair. Or maybe not.

The people who make and sell clothing, to a man, have found it in their own interest to subtly change their goods, so that every five or ten years, you can look and see that Things Have Changed. Collars wax and wane, taking ties, lapels, and shoulder width with them. When I was younger, people seemed to more uniformly observe those changes, but I think I was just not noticing how many people opt out. And now, in the Brave New Twenty First Century, eclecticism reigns. 2012 may be much harder to pin down than, say,
1985:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K38xNqZvBJI

[creagdhubh]

Of course, this is who I always look to for guidance and inspiration in regards to tradtional Highland attire with the addition of personal flair:



Hahaha! Just kidding! Just a wee bit of a joke for you "Monarch of the Glen" fans out there.

Slainte,

[creagdhubh]

LOOKING 2012?

Here is what I think:

One of the many advantages of age is the kind of subtle perspective that gets internalized. Not that he has much age on him, but I think Jock demonstrates that internalized knowledge nicely. Some members under 35 or so may feel the beginnings of the long view, but as some wise person said about clothing fads- they come along just often enough to embarrass you in later life by reminding you of how ridiculous you looked in your youth. Put another way, if you aren't mildly embarrassed by the way you dressed when you were younger, maybe you haven't lived long enough.

I think a part of what AA was referring to about dressing like it is 2012 was those things we see all around us. In the US today, and I expect elsewhere, you will bump into people who have glasses or shoes or hairstyles or articles of clothing that intentionally refer to another time ( maybe an idealized notion of that time, but some other time). If you really pay attention, you may run into a guy whose 1960-70s facial hair actually recalls 1890s facial hair. Or maybe not.

The people who make and sell clothing, to a man, have found it in their own interest to subtly change their goods, so that every five or ten years, you can look and see that Things Have Changed. Collars wax and wane, taking ties, lapels, and shoulder width with them. When I was younger, people seemed to more uniformly observe those changes, but I think I was just not noticing how many people opt out. And now, in the Brave New Twenty First Century, eclecticism reigns. 2012 may be much harder to pin down than, say,
1985:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K38xNqZvBJI

Fantastic points and I do agree with you. I think that is what AA may have been getting at. Great video...in 1985 I was 4! Wow!

Cheers,

[auld argonian]

I'm really hoping auld argonian will clarify his statement, because I took it to be completely different than you did. I interpret his response as meaning he wears whatever he would normally wear in everyday life... but with a kilt. This might mean wearing modern shirts (say, a polo style shirt), etc.

Actually, I never wear polo shirts....did a while back but somehow they just don't work anymore. When I say that I'm trying to dress "in the here and now", what I mean is that I would, for example, like a jacket that was cut to wear with a kilt but didn't have epaulets, shiny metal buttons and busy sleeve details; the equivalent of a basic, clean, nicely cut blazer that doesn't look 19th Century or military-ish. When I do wear a suit and tie, the suits are all plain and dark colors, the shirts are solid colors and my neckties are solid colors...I confess that I do not have a sghian dhub, basically because I can't find one plain and elegantly simple enough to suit my taste (MY taste...not imposing my sense of style on anyone else)...knotty deer horns, however trad they are, are not my style. Fine if you want to look like a 19th Century gentleman...your privilege...on you it may look great...I just think that the kilt is enough of a statement and the accoutrements can and should be simple and contemporary (difficult as it may be to find such things). At this point in my life, I just know who and what I am and like to dress accordingly.

Best

AA

[creagdhubh]

Well said, AA. Thank you for your explanation, it makes complete sense. I especially liked your final sentence.

Cheers,

[davidlpope]

While it is true that button-down collars were designed for active pursuits and brogues were originally country shoes I think we are well past the point that these things are strictly relegated to these positions. It may show more class (or at least better fashion sense) to not wear button-downs or brogues with a suit, but at least in the United States we are well past the point where doing so is gauche. Remember clothing styles evolve.

Kenneth, good point. My concern is that many changes in style have more to do with marketing by retailers than an actual evolution by society. By way of example, two friends of mine, both college graduates and Marine officers, one a graduate of a well-respected western law school, were leaving the Marine Corps and interviewing for civilian jobs. They came to me with questions about interview attire, etc. I was amazed by how little they knew concerning men's business attire. Their entire knowledge base was what the salesman at Brooks Brothers had shared with them during a visit to the shop. They had dinner at the house and I took about an hour and discussed some basic pointers about a man's conservative business wardrobe and they left very appreciative and well-prepared for interviews.

My point is this: these are very sharp, very bright guys, but there was no mechanism in their 25+ years of life to transmit this info to them. As a result, they were at the mercy of the salesman at the shop. Since they had gone to BB, they were luckier than most. I can attest that the local saleswoman at the small neighborhood Belk store is much, much less knowledgeable, and generally recommends whatever the store has in stock.

The same happens with many highland attire retailers- hence gads and gads of white hose, fly plaids, ruche ties, tartan flashes, and pirate shirts foisted on the unsuspecting consumer because they think "this is what I'm supposed to wear when I dress up in Scottish duds". Most novice kiltwearers simply rely on what "the guy at the shop told them." Some highland suppliers (thankfully, not the folks who are wise enought to advertise on Xmarks...) are simply ignorant concerning the products they sell to the public.

That's one of the reasons that Xmarks provides such a great service to the kilt-wearing world...

[CMcG]

Colin,

So, is my attire not '2012' enough? I'm confused here. I really do not see that vast of a difference in approach, personal flair and style in regards to my Highland day attire and those of the men featured in your photo examples. Of course, the Lonach Highlanders (Forbes and Wallace men) are in uniform, appropriate to the context of the Lonach Gathering, but as far as everyone else, what is the major difference between my approach and theirs?

In the past, I have looked to HRH The Duke of Rothesay, His Grace The Duke of Argyll, my own Chief, Sir William Macpherson of Cluny and Blairgowrie, P/M Gordon Walker, John D. Burgess and others (David Pope, Sandy MacLean, Jock Scot, Todd Wilkinson, etc) for gentle guidance - not too copy or emulate completely (I have my own tastes, preferences, style and fashion sense), but for general inspiration, if you will (arguably, that is what we all do here on XMTS, we learn and grow from and with eachother). I see nothing inherently wrong with that - not saying you do - I'm just saying.

When I mentioned that I am a 'one foot in the past' sort of chap when it comes to mindset, manners and clothing, well, with respect to the aspect of clothing, what a I mean is my actual approach and attitude towards being a well-dressed man and not some sloppy, pajama wearing in-the-daytime, bloke. I don't actually mean I am trying to look like a chap that has walked out of the early 1930's! Definitely not a literal sense, though I am fond of bygone days when men always wore suits and women always wore dresses. Am I a romantic? Possibly, yes.

Kyle, my musings about the idea of wearing the kilt traditionally, but also for 2012, were not directed at you personally, so please don't take offence. I think you have answered your own questions about your attire and we have seen that the Xmarkers you admire all approve of your approach to THCD. I'll ask the Dukes the next time I see them

[creagdhubh]

Kenneth, good point. My concern is that many changes in style have more to do with marketing by retailers than an actual evolution by society. By way of example, two friends of mine, both college graduates and Marine officers, one a graduate of a well-respected western law school, were leaving the Marine Corps and interviewing for civilian jobs. They came to me with questions about interview attire, etc. I was amazed by how little they knew concerning men's business attire. Their entire knowledge base was what the salesman at Brooks Brothers had shared with them during a visit to the shop. They had dinner at the house and I took about an hour and discussed some basic pointers about a man's conservative business wardrobe and they left very appreciative and well-prepared for interviews.

My point is this: these are very sharp, very bright guys, but there was no mechanism in their 25+ years of life to transmit this info to them. As a result, they were at the mercy of the salesman at the shop. Since they had gone to BB, they were luckier than most. I can attest that the local saleswoman at the small neighborhood Belk store is much, much less knowledgeable, and generally recommends whatever the store has in stock.

The same happens with many highland attire retailers- hence gads and gads of white hose, fly plaids, ruche ties, tartan flashes, and pirate shirts foisted on the unsuspecting consumer because they think "this is what I'm supposed to wear when I dress up in Scottish duds". Most novice kiltwearers simply rely on what "the guy at the shop told them." Some highland suppliers (thankfully, not the folks who are wise enought to advertise on Xmarks...) are simply ignorant concerning the products they sell to the public.

That's one of the reasons that Xmarks provides such a great service to the kilt-wearing world...

Wonderfully put, David.