Even in the Hebrides

[Jock Scot]

Yes it was about that time when the kilt began to be worn more generally for weddings in Scotland and I suppose in consequence, new thinking on what might be worn on the "big day" arrived. I cannot say that the thinking in general was based on fact and was led more by what the hire companies dictated than anything else and with little regard of the traditional. Still there we go.

[creagdhubh]

Yes it was about that time when the kilt began to be worn more generally for weddings in Scotland and I suppose in consequence, new thinking on what might be worn on the "big day" arrived. I cannot say that the thinking in general was based on fact and was led more by what the hire companies dictated than anything else and with little regard of the traditional. Still there we go.

Good point there, Jock.

[Nathan]

Yes it was about that time when the kilt began to be worn more generally for weddings in Scotland and I suppose in consequence, new thinking on what might be worn on the "big day" arrived. I cannot say that the thinking in general was based on fact and was led more by what the hire companies dictated than anything else and with little regard of the traditional. Still there we go.

That had crossed my mind, but I did note that not all the tuxedo shirts matched and that they weren't all wearing the same kilt, two tell-tale signs of rental rigs. There is also a fair diversity among the sporrans. Maybe I'll send him a note on fb and ask if they hired their kit or owned it.

Either way, this is a family of Gaelic speakers who are from the Highlands and Islands and who are connected to the traditional music scene. I think it would be safe to say that they had exposure to how the kilt is worn is Scotland.

Unless there's a particular kilting aesthetic that is peculiar to a certain class or demographic of landed gentry and estate owners that the common rabble just doesn't understand...

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I wonder what the point is you are trying to prove? I'm not meaning to say as an accusation. Just an observation. If all you want to do is to demonstrate that native Scots who wear the kilt in Scotland sometimes wear white and/or ecru hose and make fashion faux pas such as wearing a waist belt and a waistcoat at the same time, I don't think that point was in question. One can find plenty of evidence of this simply by doing a Google search, browsing the web pages of Highland dress suppliers, or walking down the streets of Edinburgh.

I don't think I have ever heard it said that wearing ecru hose is "something Americans do" that "is never done in Scotland." People who don't like ecru hose generally hold that opinion for aesthetic reasons. They just don't like the way they look as much as other colors. And I know plenty of people with that opinion within and without Scotland.

Wearing a waist belt (or dirk belt) with a waistcoat is something that has become more and more common over time, and I chalk it up to the decline in knowledge of formal dress in general among most people. But if you go back and look at older examples I doubt you will find this done very often, if at all. I don't think being in Scotland or Canada, or Boston, or Australia would have anything to do with it.

Scotland is the home of Highland Dress, yes. And those of us outside of Scotland look to her still to inform us as to the genuine traditions of kilt wearing. But there is still a lot of room for personal tastes and preferences, and we have to realize that just because one person -- or a lot of people -- in Scotland wear their kilt a certain way that does not necessarily mean that we will want to do the same.

No doubt there are plenty of people in Scotland who wear ecru hose and waist belts with their waistcoats. And I don't doubt there are plenty of people in Scotland who would never do either of those things. And there are plenty of people in North America who hold both of those opinions, as well. After all, we get the same Highland Dress catalogs, we look at the same web sites, etc. This is one case where I just don't think geography has much to do with it.

[Grizzled Ian]

Scotland is the home of Highland Dress, yes. And those of us outside of Scotland look to her still to inform us as to the genuine traditions of kilt wearing. But there is still a lot of room for personal tastes and preferences, and we have to realize that just because one person -- or a lot of people -- in Scotland wear their kilt a certain way that does not necessarily mean that we will want to do the same.

A majority of readers of this thread (and of others like it) are aware, I am sure, that there is a distinction between the genuine traditions that Matt refers to, and more adventurous/casual/modern approaches to kilt wearing. Some contributors to this thread make it clear that it is a pretty fine line that separates their approach from any other, but I suspect that an appreciable number of readers take a much broader approach, and embrace as acceptable alternates those styles of dress that some regard as gross violations of what they regard as the orthodox.

But I am glad that Matt refers to traditions (plural). This reminds us to accept a number of different styles as traditions, from the different eras of Scottish history, plus the 'tradition' best described as 'what was done when I was a boy', plus the tradition(s) being laid down now as people go about their kilt wearing with flair, innovation and taste. We may not like all such styles, but - there it is.

I regard as lamentable the passing of the tradition of all undergraduates learning Latin. Knowledge of Latin (or, I admit, of any other language) gives a much greater appreciation of English grammar and syntax, and improves the capacity to mount an argument, along with myriad other benefits. But I know that won't return, so I try to make the world a better place in ways other than campaigning for a reintroduction.

[Nathan]

A majority of readers of this thread (and of others like it) are aware, I am sure, that there is a distinction between the genuine traditions that Matt refers to, and more adventurous/casual/modern approaches to kilt wearing. Some contributors to this thread make it clear that it is a pretty fine line that separates their approach from any other, but I suspect that an appreciable number of readers take a much broader approach, and embrace as acceptable alternates those styles of dress that some regard as gross violations of what they regard as the orthodox.

But I am glad that Matt refers to traditions (plural). This reminds us to accept a number of different styles as traditions, from the different eras of Scottish history, plus the 'tradition' best described as 'what was done when I was a boy', plus the tradition(s) being laid down now as people go about their kilt wearing with flair, innovation and taste. We may not like all such styles, but - there it is.

I regard as lamentable the passing of the tradition of all undergraduates learning Latin. Knowledge of Latin (or, I admit, of any other language) gives a much greater appreciation of English grammar and syntax, and improves the capacity to mount an argument, along with myriad other benefits. But I know that won't return, so I try to make the world a better place in ways other than campaigning for a reintroduction.

I agree with most of the sentiments expressed here but I have to say I lament the loss of Gaidhlig more than Latin.

[TheOfficialBren]

I agree. Fashions DO change through the years. Look at any era of history and we see this as plainly as we do today. The internet and lightning-fast telecommunications may have had an enormous hand in hurrying along the dissemination of fashion trends, of course. These trends are rarely ever cut and dry stop and start phenomena.

Here is a case-in-point: when my granddaddy was a lad (at the close of the Great War and the 1920s) men wore braces for nearly every sort of trouser. Working on the farm, going to church, getting married, funerals, going to the pub, going 'into town', riding horses (they were a necessity still), and droving cattle---you get the idea. NOW, braces are so rarely seen. In my neck of the woods the only time that they are seen are on older men (passed sixty-years-of-age) who are dressed in their Sunday best and lean toward "classic" fashion rather than trends. Sure, the odd one or two younger men will be seen wearing them (usually an independently-minded or eccentric bussinessman with some hutzpah) but they are not common by any means. One notable person who does wear them is political commentor Bob Beckl.

This observation being made by an admittedly eccentric young man who doesn't bat an eye wearing a fore-and-aft hat out and about in Southern California (an extreme rarity, much more rare than a kilt around here, actually).

On the other tangent related to languages:
Aye, it is a great diaparity amd a cultural tragedy to see Gaelic slipping away. Thankfully some folks are refusing to allow it to die and are taking up the language. I read an article some while back about this subject. It focussed on Gaelic in Ireland. It suggested that some young people are alarmed that their own culture and indigeonous language is being lost and are learning the language in greater numbers than the previous generation. Perhaps in decades to follow it will see something of a return to the Gaelo-sphere. Ireland is a bilingual nation (obviously English and Gaelic). There are Gaelic-language programmes, stations, and publicatioms across the nation...even Gaelic soap operas (imagine that!). It is spoken by nearly 1/3 of the population (my statistic may be out-of-date on that one).

Regarding the Classical tongues (Latin and Greek), I believe that anyone pursuing a Master's degree or above MUST (as in make it compulsory) learn them. Especially those in the legal and medical fields but certainly any scientific discipline (including archaeology and paeleontology). There is something to be said for knowing the functions of a language and not just some commonly-used phrases (the legal world is known for this )!


Great thread, gents! I really dig it!

[Jock Scot]

That had crossed my mind, but I did note that not all the tuxedo shirts matched and that they weren't all wearing the same kilt, two tell-tale signs of rental rigs. There is also a fair diversity among the sporrans. Maybe I'll send him a not on fb and ask if they hired their kit or owned it.

Either way, this is a family of Gaelic speakers who are from the Highlands and Islands and who are connected to the traditional music scene. I think it would be safe to say that they had exposure to how the kilt is worn is Scotland.

Unless there's a particular kilting aesthetic that is peculiar to a certain class or demographic of landed gentry and estate owners that the common rabble just doesn't understand...

Looking at your last paragraph, I think that there is something very pertinant contained within. I am struggling with my words here as I do not want to give the wrong impression, I am also trying to minimise the "class aspect" although it is true that it did exist, it is more the "experianced in kilt wearing" as opposed to the "new entrant kilt-wearer". Which generally meant an availability of surplus income for those that owned kilt attire and for those who hired kilt attire for the weekend, because------. Well, it was still a lot less expensive than buying a suit and more fun!

From my recollection, which I touched on in my earlier post here, the hiring of kilt attire began to arrive in the late 1960's, early 1970's. Those that already had kilts were well versed in kilt attire traditions and those that decided to venture into kilt attire probably started with kilt hire with little or no kilt attire know how. We do also need to remember that there were no cheap kilts available in those days, military kilts were worn by serving and retired military men and besides there was(still is) the thought that only "their" Clan tartan would do. Presumably those not wearing "their" clan tartan were/ are happy to do so?

So an ideal climate for the hire firms to thrive with this new enthusiasm for kilts and of course those new to kilt wearing were advised by the hire companies and others that frankly knew no better. To those that knew the form, a black tie and a PC worn to a wedding(daytime in the UK) was a major break with tradition. To those who had no tradition in kilt wearing went along with the advice being given by the hire companies. And the hire companies laughed all the way to the bank with selling/hiring the same black tie, PC,kilt, hose, for both day events(weddings) and formal evening wear. As Phil has so ably pointed out in his post most Scots are not really bothered with the details and frankly why should they? They are presumably happy with what they do and those that are aware of the more traditional way of dressing in the kilt are an ever shrinking minority.

[creagdhubh]

Looking at your last paragraph, I think that there is something very pertinant contained within. I am struggling with my words here as I do not want to give the wrong impression, I am also trying to minimise the "class aspect" although it is true that it did exist, it is more the "experianced in kilt wearing" as opposed to the "new entrant kilt-wearer". Which generally meant an availability of surplus income for those that owned kilt attire and for those who hired kilt attire for the weekend. Well, it was still a lot less expensive than buying a suit and more fun!

From my recollection, which I touched on in my earlier post here, the hiring of kilt attire began to arrive in the late 1960's, early 1970's. Those that already had kilts were well versed in kilt attire traditions and those that decided to venture into kilt attire probably started with kilt hire with little or no kilt attire know how. We do also need to remember that there were no cheap kilts available in those days, military kilts were worn by serving and retired military men and besides there was(still is) the thought that only "their" Clan tartan would do. Presumably those not wearing "their" clan tartan were/ are happy to do so?

So an ideal climate for the hire firms to thrive with this new enthusiasm for kilts and of course those new to kilt wearing were advised by the hire companies and others that frankly knew no better. To those that knew the form, a black tie and a PC worn to a wedding(daytime in the UK) was a major break with tradition. To those who had no tradition in kilt wearing went along with the advice being given by the hire companies. And the hire companies laughed all the way to the bank with selling/hiring the same black tie, PC,kilt, hose, for both day events(weddings) and formal evening wear. As Phil has so ably pointed out in his post most Scots are not really bothered with the details and frankly why should they? They are presumably happy with what they do and those that are aware of the more traditional way of dressing in the kilt are an ever shrinking minority.

Your choice of words is spot on, Jock. Very eloquently said and it makes a lot of sense.

Cheers,

[Phil]

You are right, of course, Jock in that ownership of highland dress is, to this day, still something for the better off in society. I remember well people in Lewis who, while they would have loved to wear the kilt, did not have the disposable income for such impractical attire for their day to day livelihood.
As for hire companies, I remember my brother hiring an outfit for a wedding back in the early sixties and it was the full caboodle, Montrose, lace jabot & cuffs, tartan hose, buckle brogues and, wait for it, a shoulder plaid. So what happened? Perhaps just a dumbing down with a Henry Ford attitude - any outfit you like as long as it is a PC with white hose.
Still I would refrain from criticising anyone who dresses in the way illustrated and would rather see them kilted than in track suit and trainers. And we should all remember that fashions in dress are not set in stone. We no longer wear bowler hats and women don't wear bustles so, perhaps, we should be more accommodating to others' dress choices and carry on with our own. Then everybody can be happy.