Allowed tartans

[macwilkin]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that anything other than a clan tartan is not the "real" thing either. Correct we if I'm wrong. So why not revere the tradition of tartans being associated with clans? Why not go all the way and do it "right" according to a 150 year old tradition? I'm not trying to ruffle feathers, I believe that know one can tell you what you can and can't do, but if something is tied close to a culture like the kilt is. It should be respected. So I think there is a line between a kilt and a kilt like garment. And......that brings up another topic. Which always comes up, What's that line? A non-clan associated tartan kilt, a fashion tartan kilt, solid color kilts? No matter what it was before, if it is the accepted tradition of the current times it should be respected.

Of course, if you read Matt's work on the subject, you'll find that the district tartan concept is much more "legitmate" than the clan tartan:

http://www.district-tartans.com/intro.htm

I'm sorry, but I disagree; I think the district, clan, and regimental tartan all can "work together", for lack of a better term. I don't think wearing a district tartan is disrespecting clan tartans, but on the contrary, provides yet another alternative for the kilt-wearer and is just as legitimate, if not more so, as the clan tartan.

T.