Can we define THCD?

[Nathan]

Us Macphersons still wear our plant badges (Boxwood or White heather, and sometimes Red whortleberry) with the ferocity of Felis silvestris grampia!

I said "rarely" not "never". Anyway, that's my point. There are general trends and notable exceptions.

[creagdhubh]

I said "rarely" not "never". ;) Anyway, that's my point. There are general trends and notable exceptions.

I know, just having a laugh!

I always rather enjoy seeing His Grace The Duke of Argyll wearing his gigantic plant badge at the Argyllshire Gathering and Oban Highland Games. Quite a statement!

[Nathan]

I know, just having a laugh!

I always rather enjoy seeing His Grace The Duke of Argyll wearing his gigantic plant badge at the Argyllshire Gathering and Oban Highland Games. Quite a statement!

Got enough sticks there, Torquhil?!

Was he injured?

[Calgacus]

Got enough sticks there, Torquhil?!

Was he injured?

I think he's trying to out-THCD everyone else.

[CMcG]

There are two ways to define a thing, conceptually and operationally. Conceptual definitions just give you some vague general idea of what a thing is. They leave things open for debate. Operational definitions tell you exactly how to know a thing when you see it. They leave no room for argument. A thing either satisfies the definition or it doesn't. Nothing offered here so far is anything more than a conceptual definition. So, how are you actually going to know traditonal highland dress when you see it?

Deconstruction 101 (à la Derrida): Any definition—conceptual or operational—must be provided in words. Meaning is thus constantly deferred because the words we use to define a word must themselves be defined by using more words. Furthermore, even the clearest definition does not really tell you what something is, but rather what it is not. Again we are stymied by language. Using words that are not the thing we seek to define, any definition is therefore actually built on subtle difference from the thing defined.

Language, as a system of signs, is better understood as providing provisional definitions. We know what words mean enough to use them, but this is always subject to interpretation, contestation, and negotiation. For some people, the fluidity of language apparently leads to consternation

I don't see anything wrong with debate and argument. Xmarks is a community of kilt-wearers where we talk about not only different types of kilts, but also how to wear them in various styles, contexts, and levels of formality. If we were just here to come up with airtight, enduring definitions of everything related to kilts, this would be a Wiki, not a forum. In our ongoing discussions, the overall look is therefor more important than construction because we are mostly kilt-wearers, not a community of kilt-makers.

For reference, we came up with the acronym THCD in a rather long and interesting thread called "What Is Traditional Highland Dress?". Some people may not like the term or what it implies, but among the denizens of the Traditional sub-forum, there is a fair amount of consensus on what it means. For a full understanding of what we mean when we say THCD, one might do well to go back and read that whole thread...

All this being said, I think @davidlpope's idea to work out a pithier definition is worthwhile, fraught though it may be. I'm still thinking about it

[creagdhubh]

Got enough sticks there, Torquhil?!

Was he injured?

Hahaha! No, he wasn't injured. I think he was carrying the sticks for his two sons (notice their size). Probably after the march from Oban to Mossfield Park.

[McMurdo]

I think we can define THCD however that definition will be by it`s very nature subject to interpretation. I would say photographic examples would help as they will give us all something concrete to go by. That is why I added the photo of Nathan and myself at a recent Highland Games. The photo was used by the local paper to illustrate Traditional Highland Dress. Of course what we were wearing only illustrates one aspect of THCD. If it was a hike we were going on I am sure we would be dressed differently, and I am sure that for going down to the pub a jumper and a kilt is as traditional as anything else. Again this entire notion of TCHD is highly subjective and a highly personal choice. Lets face it although we are trying to define this with some loose rules, clothing of any kind will always be subject to personal taste and of course the financial means of the wearer.

I think it is important to remember the Erskine quote regarding Highland Dress:

"The Highland dress is essentially a 'free' dress -- that is to say, a man's taste and circumstances must alone be permitted to decide when and where and how he should wear it... I presume to dictate to no man what he shall eat or drink or wherewithal he shall be clothed."
-- The Hon. Stuart Ruaidri Erskine, The Kilt & How to Wear It, 1901.

As far as construction vs. appearance I really do think, to simplify things, we must use the appearance of the outfit rather than it`s construction. My reasoning for this is simply because looking at a garment from 5 feet away you can not tell what interfacing was used to construct the kilt or if it is made from wool or P.V. or how the jacket was made, where the sporran was designed and built etc. Another thought is several accessories while favoured by some will not be used by all, an example that comes to mind is the crommach. Some use them for hiking others just for Highland Games still others will use them for both or not at all. Does that mean the gent who is not holding a crommach yet wearing the kilt in the traditional manner not adhering to THCD? Of course not. So it is all up to the wearer I would say though if one would like to wear an outfit the conforms to the tenets of THCD they would do well to look to examples such as The Duke of Rothesay or the Duke of Windsor, for example though there are other fine examples such as the Duke of Argyll or our own members here, I would be looking to Nathan, Jock Scot, Kyle, Todd, and Sandy as wonderful examples of this style.

[Nathan]

snip...or our own members here, I would be looking to Nathan, Jock Scot, Kyle, Todd, and Sandy as wonderful examples of this style.

Thanks for the nod, Glen.

I'd also recommend people check out your 1 kilt 10 looks thread (It's a sticky in General Kilt Talk), Calgacus' One Kilt Several Looks thread (link is in his signature), Tobus, Keithb, Kilted Cole and MacRobert's Reply. For a smart 'Less is More' approach to THCD (or TCHD as I prefer ;), check out CMcG's thread called Less is More.

Certainly, there are others on the forum who have a good understanding of this mode of dress but the individuals named have posted a fair number of photos that should be easy to find.

[MacRobert's Reply]

Fascinating discussion chaps!

One of the big issues seems to be the distinction between appearance and substance. Those who advocate using images rather than words and focusing on appearance will doubtless arrive at a different set of criteria from those who are more concerned with substance in terms of materials and construction.

A second issue seems to be the distinction between definition and description. The former implies being able to reduce something that is complex and multi-faceted into a short all-embracing statement that is usually very abstract (eg E=MC2). However, description allows us to elaborate and give examples or exemplars.

IMHO we probably can't come up with and adequate definition but we should manage an understandable description based (as Jock has proposed) on appearance rather than substance.

Some time ago, many of you helped me produce a wee guide for grooms contemplating wearing the kilt for their wedding. It is not a definition but is a description. It was not done to satisfy experienced or well-informed kilt wearers but as a bit of guidance for newbies. Feel free to critique, adopt, adapt or reject. Two obvious weaknesses are that it includes some substance statements and is has no pictures!

The other obvious weakness is that it's limited to a single very specific context!

A gent's highland wedding outfit typically consists of the following:

For a day-time wedding, a kilt, that is usually made from eight yards of tartan wool, is normally worn with a white turn-down collar shirt and tie. The tie may be silver but should not be tartan. The jacket and matching waistcoat should be tweed with antler buttons and made in the Argyll, Crail, Braemar or similar style. Black or brown leather accessories are a sporran and brogues and can include a kilt belt, worn instead of the waistcoat but not with it. Kilt hose with garter flashes can be any plain colours, but white hose should be avoided, and they should not clash with the colours in the kilt and jacket. You will also need kilt pin.
For a day-time wedding with a more formal look, where Anglo-Saxons would wear morning dress, the kilt can be worn with a black Argyll or similar style jacket with silver buttons and matching five-button waistcoat or a black leather kilt belt with silver buckle plate. As with day wear, a waistcoat and kilt belt should not be worn together. Other accessories are black brogues, sporran with fur front or silver cantle, coloured but not white, kilt hose and garter flashes that do not clash with the colours in the kilt or jacket. A plain white day-wear shirt with a turn-down collar is best. The tie may be silver but should not be tartan. You will also need a kilt pin and cuff links.
For an evening wedding or wedding reception, where Anglo-Saxons would wear a dinner suit (tuxedo), the kilt may be worn with a Prince Charlie jacket, which is usually black with silver buttons, and three button waistcoat to match the jacket or the tartan of the kilt. Alternatively, one of the highland doublets such as the Regulation, Kenmore, Sheriffmuir or Montrose may be worn. The last three with a lace jabot or highland cravat. Accessories are a full dress sporran with fur front and silver cantle, kilt pin and cuff links, kilt hose and garter flashes to harmonise with the colours in the kilt and jacket, or tartan or diced hose that match the kilt and black brogues or buckle brogues. The white evening shirt (tuxedo shirt) worn with a black bow tie can have a wing-collar or turn-down collar. Following day-time weddings, it is normal for kilted grooms and guests to go on to evening receptions in the highland day wear or morning dress that they wore for the wedding itself.
Although rarely worn in Scotland any more, formal evening dress could include a fly plaid or belted half-plaid, which passes under the epaulette on the left shoulder and is secured to the jacket or doublet by a large plaid brooch. Dirks are rarely worn and are inappropriate for a church wedding, where weapons should not be carried. However, a sgian dubh or a safety one without a blade, is often worn in the top of the hose. Although this is more a utility knife than a real weapon, make sure it is legal in the country or state where you will be married!. A couple of things to avoid are kilts that are too low and hose that are too high. If they meet, you’ve got it wrong! The top of the kilt should be at or slightly above your belly button, and the bottom at or slightly above the middle of your knees. Hose should be a couple of inches below where your knee bends. Apart from laws about carrying of knives, there are no rules about Scottish highland dress but there are traditions and conventions. These should not dictate what you wear or prevent you from being creative and a wee bit different but knowing the form should help you look your best on your wedding day.

[MacLowlife]

AB CD THCD?
LMNO THCD
OSAR THCD

Here is the scorecard, for those who want to keep track:

STEVE swears he is not now, nor has he ever been THCD
NATHAN believes a T shirt can be THCD, in the proper context
ALLAN knows THCD, but can't be bothered most of the time
JOCK SCOT wears THCD without thinking about it
SEVERAL OTHERS think about it all of the time
CREAGDUBH is tempting me to make another THC joke with his plant badge picture, but some people didn't get the first one
CMcG is so Thesis-drunk, he can't separate philosophy from THCD - as if any of us could.
TOBUS- where are ye, lad?