Another protectionist kilt article from "The Scotsman"

**Monkey@Arms** · 5th November 10, 10:23 AM

http://news.scotsman.com/news/Kiltma...tle.6613757.jp

a top kilt-maker yesterday called for a nationwide campaign to protect our national dress from being debased by a flood of cheap imports.

Iain Hawthorne, managing director of McCalls, Scotland's largest Highlandwear retailer, said cut-price imports of "inferior tat" threatened the kilt's status as an expression of "Caledonian splendour and heritage".

SNIP

"The kilt should be a bespoke item, made by a Scottish manufacturer, from Scottish cloth woven in Scotland. . . . .

He continued: "A traditional kilt uses eight yards of 100 per cent wool worsted cloth of at least 12 ounces in weight with an average of 32 pleats.

"In my opinion, it should be designed, authenticated and woven in Scotland. It should have leather straps and three buckles. The third buckle is good practice as it allows adjustment as we mature over time."

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Best regards,

Jake

**Jock Scot** · 5th November 10, 10:38 AM

Whilst there may be some skilled kilt makers from outwith Scotland frowning at the content of the article, I think that their skill will shine through, no matter what. However, one can't help but agree with Mr Hawthorne.

**Lallans** · 5th November 10, 10:42 AM

I say that all dyes must be made from native materials gathered by hand by crofter women and the cloth must be from yarn spun by hand and woven in one-yard hand powered looms only in the day time or by candlelight. Tallow candles.

The three buckles in question must be hammered from sterling silver by silversmiths based only north of Edinborough. They must burn only briarwood and heather flowers to heat the metal. The buckle straps must be made from the top hides of Highland Cattle that are driven to market along an unpaved high road on an authentic market day.

Seriously, no harm in encouraging local artisans of quality, but the principles even as given in The Scotsman would ensure kilts remain a very elite garment indeed in Scotland. But that may be what most Scots want.

EDIT PS: Jock, I typed up this sass before I saw your post as above.

**JerseyLawyer** · 5th November 10, 10:46 AM

I'm sure there are some Eurocrats in Brussels just waiting for the opportunity to release a regulation or directive on what constitutes a kilt. Of course, you might not like what you get when all is said and done.

I believe Matt posted elsewhere an article in which he concludes that what is sold in "tat shops" and what one might get from a bespoke kilt maker are both kilts. The former is just not a very good kilt. We see this in all sorts of things, especially clothes. I can buy a dress shirt from Wal-Mart (or Sainsbury, or wherever), or I can buy one from Turnbull and Asser or Thomas Pink. Both are shirts. One is just of significantly higher quality.

I'd prefer to think that quality will out, regardless of the call for protectionist legislation. Still, I have no problem with Mr. Hawthorne calling attention to the issue. I'm sure his business will only benefit from the press.

**Alan H** · 5th November 10, 11:16 AM

They are most certainly allowed to scream and cry all they want, and of course they are entitled to their opinion.

**cessna152towser** · 5th November 10, 11:35 AM

As I have said before there is room for tat and for quality in the kilt market. Indeed cheap imported kilts have introduced lots more guys to kilt wearing, many of whom will no doubt go on to buy a better quality kilt later.

**artificer** · 5th November 10, 11:50 AM

It's a bit funny, really. On one hand we have "Group A": people whinging that the kilt is a rarity, a garment for weddings and other 'special occasions' (and in many cases, rented).

On the other hand we have our protectionist Mr. Hawthorne, who I will place in Group B: those would like to see the kilt relegated to hand-made and costing $850 or more- thereby ensuring it REMAINS a garment out of reach of most of the Scottish public.

I wonder if Mr. Hawthorne is a group A/B complainer, and whines about the kilt becoming extinct WHILE at the same time whining that all the tat is reducing the grandeur of the kilt? In my experience GRAND usually equals EXPENSIVE.

If people want the kilt to stay alive, it has to be affordable. I think there's probably room for the tat alongside the treasure.

**Monkey@Arms** · 5th November 10, 11:59 AM

It appears that Mr. Hawthorne belongs to the school that says kilts are for special occasions only, and should stay that way. (Well he is in the kilt rental business too, afterall.)

From the McCall's website:

The kilt has now become the accepted alternative dress wear for formal occasions rather than a practical garment. It is most commonly worn at weddings and formal functions, and is acceptable on occasions where one would wear a dinner suit or tuxedo.

Emphasis mine.

Best regards,

Jake

**tulloch** · 5th November 10, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Canuck of NI

I say that all dyes must be made from native materials gathered by hand by crofter women and the cloth must be from yarn spun by hand and woven in one-yard hand powered looms only in the day time or by candlelight. Tallow candles.

The three buckles in question must be hammered from sterling silver by silversmiths based only north of Edinborough. They must burn only briarwood and heather flowers to heat the metal. The buckle straps must be made from the top hides of Highland Cattle that are driven to market along an unpaved high road on an authentic market day.

By Jove! That is good. I do think that room should be made for nickle-plated steel buckles. Do they grow nickle in Scotland?

**Nighthawk** · 5th November 10, 01:32 PM

As my Granny MacLeod used to say- you can't put a German collar on a poodle and call it a shepherd. A kilt is a kilt is a kilt, no matter where it's made or the accent of the person making it. How is a USA Kilts Premiere not a kilt just because Rocky is not Scottish? Or a Tewksbury- is that not a kilt simply because it's made in New Mexico?