Please explain...

[JakobT]

Suppose for a moment that this is a forum about 1957 Chevrolets. Now how much modification does that '57 Chevy require before it ceases to be a '57 Chevy and becomes a hotrod?

The same applies to non-traditional kilts. When you take a traditional kilt, chop it, add pockets, change the way it closes, and make it out of some other material, whether it's the latest kind of vinyl or woven sea grass, it really ceases to be a kilt, and becomes something else. In the same way that a 1969 VW modified to resemble a 1952 MGTD isn't a 1952 MGTD (although it has a casual resemblence to the MG) the "contemporary kilt" isn't really a kilt, any more than a terry cloth bath wrap is a kilt. It's a different kind of garment.

This raises the interesting question of exactly what makes a kilt a kilt, and what the difference between a traditional one and a contemporary one consists of.

Your example is interesting, but in my opinion doesn't entirely cover the case. If you modify a VW to resemble an MG, it's true that it would no longer be a Volkswagen, nor would it be an MG, but it would still be a car. In order to find out how much alteration a kilt can take before it would cease to be a kilt, we would have to look at what is unique about a kilt that separates it from other pieces of clothing. In my own personal opinion, the aprons, the pleats at the back and the straps, are the three things that separate a kilt from a skirt, because you might find some of them on a skirt, but never all three together. The tartan might be part of what makes a kilt traditional, but it's not what makes a kilt a kilt, because many other garments use the tartan in some form. As for the number and type of pleats, the material used, length and so on, that can and does vary. I'm told that one of the first known examples of a tailored kilt is a 4yd box pleated kilt. This might easily be regarded as something other than a kilt if it were defined as narrowly as your example suggests.

On the other hand, the definition of a traditional kilt vs. a contemporary one is much closer to your example, though still not quite there, I think. But at least here, we have very specific details, such as the rise, the weight of material and the tartan, that are almost always present on a traditional kilt, but which may or may not be there on a contemporary one, and there are also pockets and other details on contemporary kilts that never appear on traditional ones.

My own kilt is a case in point. It is a plain 6yd 13oz poly/wool kilt, made to measure by a Scottish kiltmaker. In other words, the main difference is that my kilt has no rise, no tartan, and slightly less yardage. But in my opinion, it's very definitely a kilt, and a good deal more traditional than, say, a Utilikilt. Still, the UK, though different from traditional kilts, is a real kilt in my opinion, much like a PC jacket and a suit jacket are both jackets, even though you would never mistake one for the other.