traditional vs. classic

[kiltedsawyer]

Probably because most of their customers are too cheap to buy quality products. The few Highland outfitters that do offer a good selection-- stores like Kinloch Anderson, or MacKenzie Frain-- survive only because discerning customers seek them out. The few firms that continue to offer bespoke tailoring-- such as Stewart Christie-- offer their services at prices that would give the average "Mr. Geoffrey" customer a nose bleed, and would produce cardiac arrest in one of the Gold Brothers shops. The bottom line, in my estimation, is that frankly, my dear, most folks don't give a damn about how they look, and are totally focused on price. It really comes down to the polar opposites of PRIDE and SHAME: Efforts.

Yes, by all means! Perhaps highland attire should be sold only to those whose income surpasses a certain threshold. I'm sure that we could arrive at a figure if we put our minds to it. After all, we can't have the proletariat running around in kilts!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I would be more worried about the PC if it were really bad, instead of just ubiquitous. When made well, it is a nice garment and nothing to be ashamed of.

That's my point. It seems the vast majority of PCs currently being sold are poorly tailored, ill fitting, and for the most part cut from cloth too light in weight to be suited to the purpose of being made into a gentleman's coat. It would seem that their only virtue is a cheap price, which in my experience is no virtue at all.

If someone chooses to to wear a PC that's fine with me. But I think it is unfortunate if they make that choice based solely on price with little or no regard as to the quality of the product they are buying.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Yes, by all means! Perhaps highland attire should be sold only to those whose income surpasses a certain threshold. I'm sure that we could arrive at a figure if we put our minds to it. After all, we can't have the proletariat running around in kilts!

Comrade Kiltedsawyer: stop waiving your red flag, and turn off the recording of the Red Army Chorus singing "The International" for just a moment, or at least long enough to go back and re-read my post (that your have quoted out of context-- I knew there was a reason why I should have kept you on my "ignore list") as well as all of the other posts in this thread.

If you do, you will find nothing in there about rationing kilts to your beloved "proletariat". It's all about people in a free-market economy choosing to buy cheap crap rather than quality goods, and how that has reduced consumer choice in the high street.

Whether you like it or not, or agree with it or not, this "buy cheap" mind-set has a negative effect on the marketplace. Cheap PCs made in China (at a cost of US$8.00 each and sold in shops for under US$110.00) crowd out better made and more expensive PCs-- along with other styles of jackets-- with the result that there is less choice for the consumer. There may be more of a single item (of highly suspect quality) but there will be far less choice. Limiting choice based on a lack of availability of goods may have appealed to Marx and Mao-- and that's probably one of the reasons that the "proletariat" dumped their philosophies into the trash can of history-- but it is a bad thing for consumers.

Now, since this is supposed to be a forum about Traditional Highland Dress, rather than a discussion about free market economics, let me return this to something more on topic with this bit of advice for all you fellow travelers out there:

It is considered bad form to wear a Che Guevara tee-shirt with a kilt.

[mull]

There are a few references in this thread regarding earlier times when multiple jackets and civillian horsehair sporrans were available for formal wear. As someone new, I would love to see examples of what could or should be available as alternatives to the PC. Can anyone share?
Thanks,
Joe

[MacLowlife]

Mull, you asked about alternatives to the PC. There is an earlier thread in this forum (Formal jackets and the cookie cutter aversion) which covers some of the ground you may want to plow. Getting pictures is another thing entirely. You can search the four or five biggest highland outfitters' sites and you will quickly recognize what is pointed out on the cookie cutter thread- that names are not consistent from one tailor to another. You will also notice the excellent contributions of Ted Crocker, who has gone silent of late. Searching for "doublet" will give you some lovely pictures on this forum.

Without duplicating that earlier thread, I have come to think of the following menu of choices:

1) Single or double breasted
2) Flaps / tails or none
3) Cuff style (plain, bucket, military)
4) High collar or lapels
5) Waist ( belted? open? Cut away?)

Almost all of these options can be combined with any other combination. You can also add in contrasting elements, be they facings, trims, etc. You can choose from a wide array of fabrics: wool, velvet, silk, cotton, as well as colors and patterns ( Tartan on the square, tartan on the bias) and some of the fabrics can be combined with others. A rich man could easily have a dozen different formal jackets and none of them a Black Prince Charlie. I wish I had more occasions to wear the few I have.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

As MacLowlife has pointed out, these things go under a variety of names; in the 1950s and 60s the common civilian styles were:

Prince Charlie coatee;
Sheriffmuir coat;
Regulation (or Standard) Doublet;
Montrose Doublet;
Kenmore Doublet (a single breasted version of the Montrose);
Dress Argyll Jacket (called a Dress Kilt jacket if made without cuffs, etc.).

Obviously there was room for a lot of variation, and styling touches, from the various tailors and Highland outfitters, and some of these variations were assigned proprietary names.

As far as day wear jackets are concerned, I remember going into Chalmers of Oban back in the sixties to buy a kilt jacket and being asked by the lady behind the counter if I wanted a plain one or fancy one. No nonsense, and no fancy names. If the coat had flaps and cuffs it was fancy; if not, it was plain.

My, but how things have changed.

[CMcG]

"Classic" in fashion to me means those things that have stood the test of time, they are timeless garments that look as good today as they did when they first originated.

<snip>

<snip>
In the end my current "eye" for what's traditional/classic is formed by those four influences: "tradtitional Highland Dress" as it was known in the 1970's, books on the history of Highland Dress, The Highlanders of Scotland, and vintage photos.

My guidance came from one kilt wearing father, six kilt wearing uncles, and a kilt wearing grandfather and the kilt wearing experiance goes back further than that too. Plus, over 60 years of kilt wearing for me.

<snip>

What I see as traditional are the materials used in the making of kilts, jackets, etc...
What I see as classic is the style in which these garments are made.

<snip>

If you take a broader view of all men's Western fashion (from the 1960's onward) I should think that the trend has been toward simpler, more casual, and more standardized garb for men.

<snip>

I believe we bring with us to the kilt wearing world the same sensibilities we have otherwise.

Where we really begin to grow, though, is when we can look at something popular and say " I can do better than that."

<snip>

My, but how things have changed.

Things have indeed changed, hence my desire to elicit reflections on the situation. Though I realize things evolve and so there aren't often hard lines, I've long been puzzled by what appears to be a somewhat fuzzy line between historical and traditional style in kiltwear...

I'm coming to realize that, MacLowlife's problematization of the word "classic" notwithstanding, my sense of classic is rather influenced by Saxonwear and more general trends towards simpler clothing . There are some things (like lace jabots or the tartan doublets mentioned by Panache) that may be traditional but just seem too over-the-top to be classic. To my eye they look rather historical.

These are things I still need to ponder...

I hope in snipping out some choice quotes from this thread so far, I haven't misrepresented anyone. Some have had to seek out a sense of Highland attire while some have been born into it, though sometimes they have ended up in the same place!

With all due consideration for personal taste, heritage, free market economics, transnationalism, etc, what is (or should be) the relationship of historical modes of dress to an evolving tradition in the 21st century?

Or am I just getting convoluted in my own head here?

[CMcG]

I have something else up my sleeve that I am eager to show, but not just yet...

MacLowlife, do tell?

[Jock Scot]

This thread has got me thinking and some how I think things are made far too complicated these days. M o R gives a fine example of simplicity with his Oban story! I am not sure all the labels are necessary, in some ways it shows insecurity, or maybe a lack of confidence to be wearing something that you can't put a label on, or compartmentalise.This is a very modern way of doing things and whilst many are strongly objecting about "conforming", in fact, that is just what they are doing!

To my mind there is little difference between "traditional" and "classic" kilt attire. Don't forget in the UK, two hundred years is hardly regarded as old.There is a most definitely a "modern" and certainly a "historical" slant on kilt attire such as a great kilt , which is only seen(rarely thank goodness) being worn in this part of the world by the theatrical crowd or a tourist.

[CMcG]

Jock Scot, pithy and valid points you have. Apologies if I have overcomplicated this.

I shall endeavor to borrow your terminology and rephrase my question. If in the realm of traditional/classic Highland apparel there is a continuum ranging from historical to modern, where is the conceptual division?

Examples are welcome but I think I'm trying to elicit more of a guiding principle... as a young, North-American man, I lean towards what seems modern and away from what seems historical. Nevertheless, I have great respect for tradition and am not interested in modernity stripped of its roots. I think my parallel question of how people have formed their sense of style is intended to be supportive to this larger question.