Full mask sporrans revisited...

[Nathan]

Leather could also be connected to animal cruelty, at least as much as fur, and very few people have problems with leather.

By the way, I voted resolutely FOR full mask sporrans and am actually in the process of ordering one from Kate MacPherson.

This is justified by some by saying that leather is a byproduct of the meat and dairy industries whereas the popularity of fur caused the widespread trapping and killing of animals only for their pelts. You also get a lot more leather from a cow than you get fur from a mink. These were some of the talking points used to dissuade the use of fur in the textiles industry and to encourage the use of faux fur.

The campaign was largely effective. An acquaintance of mine who was a furrier in Scotland had to close his business as sales declined. He moved to Canada and makes his living as a pub musician now.

Certainly Kate MacPherson's sporrans would stand up to strict scrutiny since the animals used for her sporrans were never trapped, hunted or killed specifically to make sporrans. Her sporrans are fashioned from road kill, or nuisance animals shot by farmers etc...

She does fine work and I look forward to seeing the results, BCAC!

[knotty]

Im firmly in the full mask camp.
McCameron w Argyll.jpg
I quite like my full mask & receive nothing but good comments. I suspect the "passe" comment is because it is no longer political correct.

Knotty
Meat eater, wearer of fur & leather

[BCAC]

This is justified by some by saying that leather is a byproduct of the meat and dairy industries whereas the popularity of fur caused the widespread trapping and killing of animals only for their pelts. You also get a lot more leather from a cow than you get fur from a mink. These were some of the talking points used to dissuade the use of fur in the textiles industry and to encourage the use of faux fur.

The campaign was largely effective. An acquaintance of mine who was a furrier in Scotland had to close his business as sales declined. He moved to Canada and makes his living as a pub musician now.

Certainly Kate MacPherson's sporrans would stand up to strict scrutiny since the animals used for her sporrans were never trapped, hunted or killed specifically to make sporrans. Her sporrans are fashioned from road kill, or nuisance animals shot by farmers etc...

She does fine work and I look forward to seeing the results, BCAC!

Exactly, Nathan.

There are plenty of sources around but, in my not so humble opinion, Kate's are amongst the best (if not the best) available. The two things that pushed me to buy from Kate were evidently the workmanship and her ethical announcement where she says that "All the skins used for making my sporrans are ethically sourced, and are either left over from the game and farming industries, road kill, or have died a natural death or are reused materials from old stoles and bags."

Of course the "reasonable" price one needs to pay for a heirloom sporran will certainly push me to wear it as often as possible so I reckon that I'm on a winner.

[gwynng]

I vote against largely because there was no "middle ground" way to vote in the poll. I'm not a huge fan of the full mask, largely because they seem, well, too large. Agreed, North American animals seem a little large for the use too in virtually every species. Please don't mistake my no vote as a judgement about anyone or their (or my) views of animal rights etc. Just not my cup of tea. I've got a couple of vintage seal sporrans that I love and wear often. My hairy (similar to an Argyll and Southern Highlanders' 6 tassel white on black), I love, but rarely wear except for the most formal events. Why? Because for most things where I wear my kilts, it's just too much. I'd not advocate for or against a full mask. Don't have one and probably never will. I agree with Artificer that nearly all are either fantastic or hideous. No middle ground there.

[CMcG]

At one point (early to mid 20th century?), full mask sporrans were possibly the most versatile sporran available and were traditionally worn for almost any event, except perhaps full formal aka white tie. At this point in the 21st century, I see them as being a bit over the top for many situations. This has a lot to do with changing societal norms towards a host of interpenetrating concerns regarding formality, ornamentation, animal rights, i.e., the general tendencies of modernity.

A full mask sporran is still a valid, acceptable, and traditional option, but I would venture to say that the range of contexts where it is the most appropriate choice is dwindling. Many of the pictures we see of non-Xmarkers wearing them over the last generation (approx. 30 years) are by people with titles or who are functioning in some sort of official capacity (e.g., clan society at a Highland Games or parades). In such a situation, I think the not inconsiderable impact of a wild animal's face as an accessory is warranted and desirable. Bonus sartorial points for anyone who inherited their full mask sporran or is old enough to have purchased it when they were more common, especially if worn for a special, Highland, evening event. For a younger fellow making a trip down to the pub or being a spectator at a Games, it strikes me as verging on historical, rather than traditional.

The results of an Xmarks poll will reveal the opinions of an educated and fervent group of kilt devotees, rather than broader social mores. Kinloch Anderson may have worded their epitaph a bit too strongly, but their advice would keep the less experienced kilt wearer from raising eyebrows in circles where a full mask would be viewed as gauche, passé, or brigadoonery. A plain leather day sporran or furry, cantled evening sporran (depending on the event) would be a better all around choice and there are still many idiosyncratic options available. I voted against full masks in the binary poll, but would have chosen a more context sensitive middle ground, if given the option.

All that being said, a well executed full mask sporran is awesome and more power to the people who want to wear them

[TheOfficialBren]

I voted FOR full-mask sporrans because they are traditional and have been for ages. They are not my forst choice when selecting a sporran but should the appropriate occasion arrise I would not hesitate to wear one of the tastily (pardon the pun) crafted ones, like Kate MacPherson's.

Ethically sourced hides and furs are important to me for moral reasons. Without drifting too close to a rule violation (MODS: kindly PM me if I do and I will gladly edit this post without hesitation so-as):

PETA has absolutely zero moral high ground. (I will leave that there lest I violate a forum rule. Google it yourself.)

With that said, I can see K-A's point: better to err on the side of caution than risk appearing like a wannabe or a relic. Neither of those two things serves THCD very well. The last thing, I believe, that any of us want is to make a mockery of it.

Additional food for thought:
If full-mask furries are now, according to K-A, no longer en vogue, what about horse-hair, cantled-fur, or faux-fur sporrans? Are they also destined to the same judgement? Eventually leather will get thrown in there, too. It is inevitable considering their line of thinkin'.

[BCAC]

At one point (early to mid 20th century?), full mask sporrans were possibly the most versatile sporran available and were traditionally worn for almost any event, except perhaps full formal aka white tie. At this point in the 21st century, I see them as being a bit over the top for many situations. This has a lot to do with changing societal norms towards a host of interpenetrating concerns regarding formality, ornamentation, animal rights, i.e., the general tendencies of modernity.

A full mask sporran is still a valid, acceptable, and traditional option, but I would venture to say that the range of contexts where it is the most appropriate choice is dwindling. Many of the pictures we see of non-Xmarkers wearing them over the last generation (approx. 30 years) are by people with titles or who are functioning in some sort of official capacity (e.g., clan society at a Highland Games or parades). In such a situation, I think the not inconsiderable impact of a wild animal's face as an accessory is warranted and desirable. Bonus sartorial points for anyone who inherited their full mask sporran or is old enough to have purchased it when they were more common, especially if worn for a special, Highland, evening event. For a younger fellow making a trip down to the pub or being a spectator at a Games, it strikes me as verging on historical, rather than traditional.

The results of an Xmarks poll will reveal the opinions of an educated and fervent group of kilt devotees, rather than broader social mores. Kinloch Anderson may have worded their epitaph a bit too strongly, but their advice would keep the less experienced kilt wearer from raising eyebrows in circles where a full mask would be viewed as gauche, passé, or brigadoonery. A plain leather day sporran or furry, cantled evening sporran (depending on the event) would be a better all around choice and there are still many idiosyncratic options available. I voted against full masks in the binary poll, but would have chosen a more context sensitive middle ground, if given the option.

All that being said, a well executed full mask sporran is awesome and more power to the people who want to wear them

Here’s another go at replying as my last reply disappeared into internetshire without leaving a trace.
I’m quite amazed that someone who regularly wears a kilt and therefore by definition doesn’t care what people say about the way that he is dressed or what he is wearing will be worried that his choice of sporran will be “viewed as gauche, passé, or brigadoonery”. There was probably a period in history when there was little else available. I will be wearing a similar sort of sporran (when it arrives) as my ancestors are likely to have worn. Anyone that doesn’t like it can take a long walk off a short pier. I will be wearing it to please ME, not to please anyone else.

Edited to add: The idea that full mask sporrans are a no no but a cantled furry sporran is OK is a nonsense. In both cases the animal is just as dead.

[Nathan]

Additional food for thought:
If full-mask furries are now, according to K-A, no longer en vogue, what about horse-hair, cantled-fur, or faux-fur sporrans? Are they also destined to the same judgement? Eventually leather will get thrown in there, too. It is inevitable considering their line of thinkin'.

Is the food for thought beef? 'Cause I could really go for a burger and a new leather jacket...

The first time I saw a full mask sporran, I was a little horrified as I didn't realize it was an adorned leather sporran. To me, it looked like they had simply cut a critter's throat half way, emptied him out and put their stuff inside him. I had a vision that this could have been how the first sporrans developed. Later, when I had actually handled a nice badger regimental sporran, I came to see the beauty in them.

Colin raises an excellent point. I have seen them lauded as the most versatile sporran because they go from day to night but I don't see it that way. The less Highland/Scottish my setting, the less comfortable I am wearing the animal head. I feel it's just a little shocking to the unacquainted out of context. I would much prefer to wear my simple brown sporran to the pub.

I really believe in animal conservation and have no ethical qualms about the source of the pelt on my sporran but it does give me pause to consider the unspoken message I may be sending.

[MNlad]

I too voted on the side of the furry-headed ones, although my only fur sporran is sans face. Being of small stature, I find the vast majority of full-mask sporrans much too large for my frame.

That said, there is something pleasingly traditional about a quality full-mask sporran on someone in full highland gear. In this part of the country you still see a real menagerie of critters worn at the highland games, although I draw the line at jackalopes.

[CMcG]

Here’s another go at replying as my last reply disappeared into internetshire without leaving a trace.
I’m quite amazed that someone who regularly wears a kilt and therefore by definition doesn’t care what people say about the way that he is dressed or what he is wearing will be worried that his choice of sporran will be “viewed as gauche, passé, or brigadoonery”. There was probably a period in history when there was little else available. I will be wearing a similar sort of sporran (when it arrives) as my ancestors are likely to have worn. Anyone that doesn’t like it can take a long walk off a short pier. I will be wearing it to please ME, not to please anyone else.

Edited to add: The idea that full mask sporrans are a no no but a cantled furry sporran is OK is a nonsense. In both cases the animal is just as dead.

There's no need to take my comments personally, BCAC. I took some pains to indicate that they represent my views and that I support whomever wants to wear full mask sporrans. I'm not condemning them, but rather suggesting that KA has a valid point in some contexts. Hopefully you will report back to us once you get yours and have some experience wearing one...

As for defining all kilt-wearers as people who categorically don't care what other people say, you are painting a diverse community with too broad a brush. You're right that some people don't give a fig, but that is not a requirement for wearing the kilt. I personally care very much about how others perceive my clothing because of the way it signifies a variety of meanings. This is especially true when I am wearing the traditional attire of my ancestors and would prefer to avoid looking archaic. Just because people used to wear something does not make it eternally the ideal choice. Examples of the gradual changes in Highland attire abound: flintlocks, basket-hilt swords, great kilts, etc.

Finally, sure a cantled fur sporran is just as dead as a full mask, but they are not the same in appearance. One of them can still stare at you