The point is, if you, Americans, visit Scotland, you will be a tourist, no matter if you wear a kilt or not. I thought the lion dancers towards the end of that video were very telling: the first group of lion dancers looked chinese and wore kilts, the second group's leader wore the lion dancer costume, but did not look very chinese.
A tradition "done for tourists" both communicates that tradition and offers a demarcation line. And that's where "non scots" who are knowledgeable and comfortable wearing kilts "cross the line"
I wrote my thesis about Bali as a tourist destination in the 1920s. Back then, Bali became incredibly popular as a tourist destination to fashionable Europeans and Americans, and most of its appeal as a "peaceful hindu island of artists" was consciously manufactured by a small group of artists and civil servants. In reality, Balinese society is actually pretty violent and in time "traditions" were invented that have shaped Bali's image. Such as the "kecak" monkey dance for instance, that was choreographed by Walter Spies at the request of a village leader who wanted to attract more visitors to his village. At present, Kecak is thought of by tourists as deeply traditional Balinese culture and is marketed by tour companies as the quintessence of Balinese "magic".
On the other hand, having a tradition for tourist also creates a demarcation line behind which every day Balinese culture can hide. And in that sense the line mustn't be crossed, because that allows "real" Balinese culture to be further exploited and eroded for tourists.
Likewise with Scotland and the kilt: there's the tradition invented for tourists (including going regimental, I might add, and the bit of being forbidden to wear clan tartans if you're not of the clan). You can lament that all these things are there, but the tourist tradition also serves as a demarcation line behind which the native tradition can feel safe. It functions like that in the kilt run example: no "traditionally" worn kilt in sight: all the kilt wearing is for a charity event. I bet none of these runners wear a kilt in daily life and if you look at the spectators, none of them wears a kilt.
I wore a kilt to the Vierdaagse marches in the past week, because the two relatives with whom I walked did, and because we walked for a family related charity, that family is part Scottish and we wanted to draw attention to the charity.
If I am in Scotland I bring a kilt if I plan to attend a ceilidh, when it's nice to wear one, and I wear one if I attend Highland games, or at family occasions. And if I go hill walking I find it more comfortable than trekking trousers. And that's it. I like to be well turned out in a casual way. I take my cue from certain older relatives I used to know and from gentlemen I've seen around who wore a kilt in a way I found appealing. At no time do I think I'm "not a tourist". Nor is it my ambition not to be thought a tourist.
Kecak in Uluwatu for tourists: look at the guys at the start of the videos wearing the purple kains (male sarong): this is done out of "traditional" considerations, to cover their legs if they wear shorts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0HY0oD84OM
Originally Posted by Lodrorigdzin
Bookmarks