Traditonal vs. Historical

[Domehead]

Post deleted

[Ancienne Alliance]

There are things that you need to understand that may help you gather and interpret the information that you are looking for. THCD is an Xmarks term that was coined to differentiate "traditional" from"historical" and "contempory" and even " theatrical", and at the time it was a major break-through in trying to explain the differences of kilt attire. Now given that all these definitions are pretty vague anyway with huge grey areas that take some understanding. So, there are no exact pigeon holes to compartmentalise(is that a word?) any kilt attire and as we see even the military(see other threads on the go at the moment) with their dress regulations cannot agree! So whilst I can see your need for exact definitions to help you get to where you want to go with your kilt attire, I dont think it is actually helpful in the long run, or possible. In fact for me it is this vagueness of kilt attire that is so charming and this very fact allows the all important "personal flair" to flourish and yes, it can be confusing and so what if the end result is not THCD? It only matters if THCD is what you are wanting to achieve.... ... ...

Our thought exactly. Thank you, Jock.


Best,

Robert

[Dale Seago]

Our thought exactly. Thank you, Jock.


Best,

Robert

Yes, excellent points!

[CMcG]

It would appear, from what is now being said in this thread, that I, and others, have not understood what is meant by the acronym THCD.

When this acronym first began to appear on X Marks it was said to stand for Traditional Highland Civilian Dress.

We had already agreed and accepted that the word Tradition comes from the Latin 'traditio" meaning "to transmit, hand over, to intrust for safekeeping.".
With the inclusion of the word Highland most accepted that what was being handed over was the way the kilt was, and may still be, worn in the Highlands of Scotland.
Including the word Civilian was, I assume, to differentiate this from Military Uniforms.
Using the word Dress implied a form of use above or different from wearing, as Highland Dress would be different and distinct from Highland Wear.

That is more or less the usage of THCD that I understand. I don't think, however, that there is significant semantic variation between Highland dress, Highland attire, or Highland wear.

...
It now appears that the definition of THCD is being broadened to include "beach wear" "casual (t-shirt) wear", and some other forms of kilt attire usually assumed to have a recent development and therefore thought of as Contemporary Wear.

The way the current three sections of the forum (Historical, Traditional, and Contemporary) were defined was centered around the way the kilt itself was made, more than how it could be worn.
It was assumed that a kilt made in the manner developed in the late 1700's could be worn today but by definition would be discussed in the Historical section.

Where there appears to be some confusion is that THCD does not appear to be as concerned about the way the kilt is made as much as how the accessories are worn.

May I ask those who use the acronym THCD to help me. Can you please define what is meant by THCD and would you please help me to understand where it fits within the forum structure.

Perhaps we need to restructure the forum. Perhaps we need different terms and/or acronyms. I don't know and I ask your help.

The thing is that THCD is a practice, not a theory. Put another way, it is a living tradition, not a rule book.

Pardon me for putting an academic spin on this, courtesy of Bourdieu. The logic of practice is efficient because it is transferable to new and different situations. One's practical actions are structured by dispositions that are in turn structured by practice. That's how you can talk about a traditional approach to non-traditional weather, such as extreme heat.

As for sub-forums based on internal construction, I don't think that makes sense and I have been treating them more on overall style. While there is a world of difference between a tank and a p/v casual kilt, if they are both tartan and constructed in generally the same external style, then it could be difficult to differentiate them if one was just standing there having a chat with the wearer. A traditional looking kilt is more important than the minutiae known only to hardcore aficionados or kiltmakers and what matters more is the way the outfit is built around them...

Here is the existing Traditional sub-forum description:

"This forum sub-section is for those interested in learning about and discussing Traditionally made kilts and to discuss and see examples of how kilts can be worn to emulate a traditional style or fashion"

It would be sufficient to add a /or in order to make a more useful definition:

"This forum sub-section is for those interested in learning about and discussing Traditionally made kilts and/or to discuss and see examples of how kilts can be worn to emulate a traditional style or fashion"

[davidlpope]

It would appear, from what is now being said in this thread, that I, and others, have not understood what is meant by the acronym THCD.

When this acronym first began to appear on X Marks it was said to stand for Traditional Highland Civilian Dress.

We had already agreed and accepted that the word Tradition comes from the Latin 'traditio" meaning "to transmit, hand over, to intrust for safekeeping.".
With the inclusion of the word Highland most accepted that what was being handed over was the way the kilt was, and may still be, worn in the Highlands of Scotland.
Including the word Civilian was, I assume, to differentiate this from Military Uniforms.
Using the word Dress implied a form of use above or different from wearing, as Highland Dress would be different and distinct from Highland Wear.

It now appears that the definition of THCD is being broadened to include "beach wear" "casual (t-shirt) wear", and some other forms of kilt attire usually assumed to have a recent development and therefore thought of as Contemporary Wear.

The way the current three sections of the forum (Historical, Traditional, and Contemporary) were defined was centered around the way the kilt itself was made, more than how it could be worn.
It was assumed that a kilt made in the manner developed in the late 1700's could be worn today but by definition would be discussed in the Historical section.

Where there appears to be some confusion is that THCD does not appear to be as concerned about the way the kilt is made as much as how the accessories are worn.

May I ask those who use the acronym THCD to help me. Can you please define what is meant by THCD and would you please help me to understand where it fits within the forum structure.

Perhaps we need to restructure the forum. Perhaps we need different terms and/or acronyms. I don't know and I ask your help.

When I coined the acronym here:

http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/s...970#post882970

I meant Highland civilian dress (as distinct from military or pipe band uniforms) as it has been traditionally worn in the Highlands by Highlanders over the last 80 years or so. The several photo threads addressing this style do a better job of demonstrating what I was attempting to define than a written definition. My focus was not on the construction of the kilt, per se(although 8-yd, knife-pleated tanks almost exclusively reign), but rather the overall style in which the kilt is worn, with particular attention paid to style of accessories, etc.

I've always viewed the Traditional subforum to be the place for "Traditional-ish" kilts (i.e. in addition to the traditional "tank", I make allowances for box-pleats, low-yardage knife-pleats, Kingussies, etc. made of traditional tartan or, perhaps, tweed) worn in a traditional manner. I think a traditionally made kilt, worn in a modern way with modern accessories, to be better fitted in the Contemporary subforum.

[davidlpope]

Jock,

Thanks for the clarification. I messaged Steve about this, and I'll repeat it here, since it will help explain why I said what I did.

"I think the issue might be the forum labels. When when I first started looking at the forum before joining, I saw "Historical Kilts and how to wear them" I though, oh a spot for renfesters and other Rob Roy style guys. "Traditional Kilts and how to wear them" and I thought, oh this is for me as I don't want to wear a MUG. "Contemporary Kilts and how to wear them" and I was going oh a spot for MUG wearers.

I had already looked at different styles of kilts and learned about three kinds Traditional kilts, Casual kilts, and MUGs. This lead me to the Traditional forum and there I saw almost all the pictures of guys out in full dress or "day wear" and I had to start hunting to find a thread for a guy like me. I don't like MUGs they aren't for me and I want a kilt cut in the traditional style but I won't wear it with a suit coat very often. I think the different forums, at least Traditional and Contemporary, need subforums about wearing Formal, semi-formal, and every day. That would have helped me find pics of guys in t-shirts and button downs with nothing more than a tie to support how I was hoping to wear my kilt."

Just a few thoughts, since I know I'm new it just helps to have my perspective on what I saw. I have learned since I started lurking, and before joining that Dale's style is much what I would do to work everyday. I've also learned that you Jock are a great resource for getting the formal look right, amoung other things. I've found several guys with pictures that meet my style ideas and while I wait for a kilt to arrive they help me figure out what I would wear.

The biggest thing is even with the definitions that were linked in the welcome message, we seem to use different deffinitions while posting. So as I suggested perhaps a way to differentiat better between, what would be casual and formal THCD, since most of the photos are of formal or "day wear"*.

Hopper

*I put "day wear" in quotes since it is really a formal or historic style of dress and not actual everyday wear any more. Much as tweed suit coats have fallen out with all but the most stylish of college professors.

I've always understood the forum's guidelines to place MUGs firmly outside what is discussed here. So, it seems to me that the Contemporary kilt subforum covers both Utili-kilt-ish kilts and traditionally made kilts worn in un-traditional ways, e.g. t-shirt, leather jacket, socks scrunched down, combat boots...

From http://www.hamishclarkfansite.com/ga...Series3_3.jpg:



Perhaps we need four subforums:

1. Historical (reenactor wear/ Renfair-ish garb)
2. Traditional (traditional kilt worn in a traditional style)
3. Modern (traditional kilt worn in a modern style)
4. Contemporary (non-traditional kilt worn in a modern style)

[Downunder Kilt]

David, I like that setting up of the four sections. Should cover all the bases, well until a "what if" raises its head

[Father Bill]

One of the problems we are having here is that the understanding of certain words has slid well off their definitions, words such as "formal" "dress" "tradition" even "normal" have suffered here and elsewhere.

This is the usual impact of post-modernism, a current time in which everyone believes that their opinion is equally valuable to everyone else's. Well, sorry folks; that's posh, tosh, and nonsense! There are experts in almost any field, and they are increasingly discounted as in, "It's just your opinion." Well, personally, I think that's pretty silly.

To use myself as an example, I am knowledgeable about children's learning and how to lead a school (Specialist's qualifications in counselling and special education, Principal's qualifications, a Master's degree in educational administration & leadership, and 32 years in the school system.) I am also knowledgeable about theology (a Master's degree in theology and five years in ordained clergy and a lifetime of personal research.) Nonetheless, I do not consider myself truly an "expert" in either ...but knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion that might be valuable to somebody and old enough that I can usually offer it without offending everyone in the room - just a few.

What I see, hear, and read here and elsewhere (mostly elsewhere!) are people who mis-define or re-define the terminology being used, and insist that their experience from just being casually alive gives them equal reason to be considered correct as anyone else. Thus our terminology (which is based on words) has become largely useless because people have inserted their own experience into the meaning of the words.

To bring that into the current XMarks discussion, we have words like "tradition" which once were useful, but which are then subsumed into "well, where I live, we usually...." Well, nuts! It's in response to that sort of silliness, that folks on XMarks have come to respect our highland members. A long life of observation certainly contributes to their expertise, and it includes a memory of "how things were when [they] were kid[s]. Historical research and experience also add much and professional experience and accomplishments are often useable too, but no, everybody's opinion is not equal. My opinion about kilts and related matter has certainly improved since joining XMarks, but I'm not any kind of expert in this context yet. Outside of XMarks, I'm pleasantly surprised to discover that, thanks to what I've learned here and in my studies, actually I'm now far more expert than many around me. We have to pick our battles!

So to bring this to the current discussion... when we talk about "Traditional" what does it mean... traditionally? "Custom handed down from ancestors to posterity" (Oxford) I guess that means to me (and that's an area of expertise - I am a linguist!) that comments about "traditional dress" having changed are extremely questionable. Is what was done 50 years ago "out of date?" Possibly... but it is likely traditional.

Now, all of this is from me - crabbit and curmudgeon... and traditionalist. Whatever that used to mean.

Back to our regularly scheduled discussion!

[Hopper250]

davidlpope's suggestion is a good one. Since we have to consider the type of kilt as much as the accessories we wear with it. I've learned a lot here in a short time and I'm with Father Bill on the definition of Tradition.

When I saw a form is labeled "Traditional Kilts" I was thinking hey that's for me (I'm going to include all tartans in this) I can find a place to see what people who wear tartans are doing. What I see are traditional options that date from Victorian times and modern formal, semi-formal, business dress (using the definition all my employers have used of a full suit with tie) some semi-business dress (no tie) and very little business casual (button down with slacks/trousers or jeans). And the first two are the most seen you have to hunt to find the rest in that forum. There are no casual pictures in the forum that I found, which would be t-shirts and sandals or no hose with pushed down or ankle socks. I expected to see the whole gamut as options.

So this is where we all are having an issue. The forum is defined by the KILT not the accessories, and THCD is defined by the accessories and the kilt (this definition is also flexible?). But we have merged the two so that the forum is defined as THCD rather than a place for a tartan kilt and how you wear it. So what we need is do we want as davidlpope suggested a forum for THCD and a forum for other use of tartan kilts or do we need to reconsider what is already hear and start using the forum as already defined.

Hopper

[artificer]

I've always understood the forum's guidelines to place MUGs firmly outside what is discussed here. So, it seems to me that the Contemporary kilt subforum covers both Utili-kilt-ish kilts and traditionally made kilts worn in un-traditional ways, e.g. t-shirt, leather jacket, socks scrunched down, combat boots...

From http://www.hamishclarkfansite.com/ga...Series3_3.jpg:



Perhaps we need four subforums:

1. Historical (reenactor wear/ Renfair-ish garb)
2. Traditional (traditional kilt worn in a traditional style)
3. Modern (traditional kilt worn in a modern style)
4. Contemporary (non-traditional kilt worn in a modern style)

+ 1
I wholeheartedly agree! In fact I said the same thing quite a while back, although probably not quite as succinctly.

ith: