Contemporary vs Traditional

[irishrob]

I started with a Celtic Craft Centre traditional. Now I own and wear Freedom Kilt(s) both tartan and camo, a couple of UKs, a USA semi, a couple of Stillwaters, a Gold Bros, an AK, 3 more traditionals and on and on. Where I wear the unit, the type and color or tartan of the kilt depends on the mood, the use and more importantly the occasion. Whether you start with comtemporary or traditional makes "no never mind" as long as the wearer is comfortable.

As they say, "your mileage may vary!!"

Rob

[Rawlinson]

I think the problem with this particular poll is that the topic is far too broad.

While there is only one Traditional Kilt the other side of the coin is very diverse.

I guess this problem with my question shows how new I am to the whole kilt thing.

[DryFly]

I don't think that there is a problem with the question. Since you mention being new to kilting I think Monkey@Arms' observation was probably accurate. Traditional kilts are ones that "look" traditional, contemporary kilts are more of the MUG variety. What you are discovering though is that it goes a bit deeper than that.

My opinion on the question (as opposed to "the question") is to start with one that looks traditional. The best quality you can afford. This does not translate to necessarily mean a big ticket item. Just what you can afford. There are plenty of choices.

I started with a UK. I now have 2. I like them both. The workman is indestructible and the "trad" is very comfortable. Where I live though, I constantly have to put up with the weird looks and offhand comments from the Great Unwashed. When I step out with my traditional kilt, nary a negative comment. In fact, I don't think I've ever gotten a negative comment with a traditonal kilt on. I find it an easier transition in to the unbifurcated lifestyle.

For your consideration.................

DryFly

[Rawlinson]

That makes sense. I guess a more kilt-looking kilt would be more readily recognized as a kilt, thereby getting people used to the idea more easily.

[Kid Cossack]

I'd probably have to cheat and clarify my answer. For a first kilt, I don't think you can go wrong with a USA Kilts casual from Rocky Roeger (or, even better! from Kelly). Here are my reasons: PV is cheaper than good worsted wool; Rocky sews up the casual to your measurements; his service is fast; the price is really pretty dang reasonable.

Everyone needs to own a custom made garment at some point in their life: it's a life changing experience.

Checking Rocky's website says that a non-rush order casual in my size would run about $120. For a made-to-measure garment, you can't beat that with a stick.

The casual offers a short-yardage kilt that's made to measure, of tartan, or solid, if'n you prefer, but tartan is always a good thing for a first kilt, as it says "no, this is a kilt" and that is a good thing when you're starting out. The pleats are sewn down (not just the fell) and it's wash and wear. It's got velcro closing, so it's easy on, easy off.

Once you've ordered from Rocky, you're taking the "gateway drug" to other kilts.

It's a "beater kilt" extraordinaire.

Rocky's kilts dress up well, they dress down well, they're made to measure, he's a nice guy to talk to, and once you've got a USAK, you're liable to start branching out among other custom makers. Sure, it's "just" a five yard kilt, but oh my goodness, what a five yard kilt.

I think the casual is ordinarily specced to ride as a modern kilt, down on your hips like blue jeans, but Rocky worked with me and did up one that rode like a traditional.

Love my CCK Isle of Skye, love my Newsome tweed and Leatherneck box pleats, love my Utilikilts. But a UK costs MORE than a casual from Rocky, and won't fit YOU as well.

I won't be buying most of my kilts from Rocky's casual line, but I love the one I've got, and it's dang hard to beat for the price.

Dang I need a Freedom Kilt, too, but that's a different matter.

I've worn kilts either full time or every chance I can get for about five years now, and my considered opinion is that Rocky would be the man to turn to for a "first kilt."

edited to add: If the $120 was way too much for experimenting, I'd try SWK, but it's honestly a different animal.

[xena]

Well, I voted for a traditional first too. My rationale is that once you get a sense of the traditional kilt, then you have a better appreciation of the modern variations.

It's important to have a basis in understanding what constitutes a kilt and how and why a traditional kilt outfit goes together, in order to appreciate what you are modernizing. For example, if you don't know that a kilt has flat aprons in the front and pleats in the back, you may make a mistake and wear something that isn't a kilt (even though I know that others may have broader definitions of a kilt than I do - which is okay - but those definitions have to be based, at least originally, on the traditional garment).

Or, another example is the sporran: without understanding the three principal reasons for the sporran, one may underestimate it's importance. It isn't just a substitute for pockets. It also keeps the front of the kilt down in case there is a sudden up draft; it pushes the front aprons down when seated (there is absolutely no need for a man to "sit like a lady" when kilted!); and it even acts as a shield, of sorts, for a sensitive part of one's body.

But, these are just my opinions, and not necessarily important to anyone else...

[Joseph McLaren]

I voted traditional, but it's purely a personal bias. What attracted me to kilts in the first place was tradition; the idea of wearing a garment which my ancestors had worn, in a fabric pattern which symbolises my family's heritage over the past couple of hundred years, in a form which they would recognise, and of a quality that meant a bit of saving up and sacrifice. For me, a traditional kilt has a romance about it which a modern MUG doesn't, but that's purely personal.

I think the fact that we're even able to have this discussion speaks volumes about the kilt as a living, breathing tradition. The fact that it's able to evolve into the Utilikilt and other incarnations, alongside its traditional form, is something to celebrate.

[Iolaus]

Late to the party here, but...

My own thoughts? It depends on you, and how and where you intend to wear it. I think that when most people venture out in their first kilt as a "non-special occasion casual wear," they do so with some trepidation as to how they will be received by those they meet. A modern "interpretation" of the kilt, like say a Utilikilt or a pocketed kilt, is much easier to explain to your friends and acquaintances on a night out than a traditional with the accompanying sporran, hose, etc. - in fact, they may be familiar with the MUG type already. After you dip your toes in, so to speak, it becomes easier to branch out.

I personally prefer a little attitude in my apparel, so I started out with the UK, but I now wear "traditional" (plaid, no pockets, sporran) kilts as well, also with casual attitude. I would be uncomfortable with all the traditional accoutrements worn in all the "right" ways; not that I haven't tried it, but it's like putting on a suit to me, and I don't care much for suits either.

[Panache]

I don't think I voted

And frankly my answer wouldn't fit in either

I have one of Steve Ashton's Freedom Kilts in the Tartan Model and it is everything I could want from a kilt.

It has the crisp pleats, the 13 oz. traditional wool tartan, and it fits like a glove...



But Steve has made some internal differences that make his kilts somewhat stronger than a traditional one.




And he uses machine stitching!




And it has three hidden pockets!

So my choice would be for a traditional looking kilt (with all the accroutements) but with a Modern design philosophy.

The best of both worlds!

Cheers

Jamie :ootd:

[slohairt]

I've noticed that some posters here are equating a solid coloured kilt with contemporary. That really isn't true as traditional kilts can be solid-coloured. (Saffron, Hodden Grey, etc...)