Another protectionist kilt article from "The Scotsman"

[Jordan]

This is an interesting thread. I acctualy have a kilt from mc calls and while it is a solid kilt I wouldnt rush out to buy another one

[KiltShot]

When shopping for a kilt always look for the CMOS logo.

Cloth: Eight yards of 100 per cent wool worsted cloth of at least 12 ounces in weight
Manufacturer: Scottish
Origin: Scottish cloth woven in Scotland
Style: Leather straps and three buckles and an average of 32 pleats

[McClef]

But that label would still fail the reported definition Kiltshot if the material comes from Scotland but the kilt isn't made there.

[Squeaky McMurdo]

I'm curious what Mr. Hawthorne thinks of the mills that get their wool from New Zealand

[Slowburn]

The availability of cheap poorly made kilt does invite mockery fromthose inside and out from obviously differnt points of view. I had thought long and hard about my first purchase of the kilt. I concidered the cultural signifigance the connection with my family which is nearly 150 years removed from the establishment of family tartans. When I weighed all these conciderations I jumped at the oportunity to be properly measured by a Scottish kilt maker The interesting part is she is not making it in Scotland so does that mean my nearly nine yard worsted wool family tartan won't be a kilt I think not. I decided on my kilt because I was measured by the maker form the closest representation I could get But if money were an issue for this I don't know if I would have been able to refuse at least a PV kilt.

[Alan H]

To paraphrase the irreverent but wise George Buehler...

It's a kilt, not a shrine.

[Nighthawk]

OK, Nighthawk, let's get it right...Barb is located in New York! LOL

There are many great kilt makers the world over. Let's not say that a kilt can only come from Scotland.

I agree with many here, there's room for cheapo stuff, and quality. It's that way with everything!

Who's the lady in Albuquer... However It's Spelled, New Mexico? I could have sworn it was Barb...

[Jock Scot]

Who's the lady in Albuquer... However It's Spelled, New Mexico? I could have sworn it was Barb...

Would it be Cathy Lare(I think I have spelled it correctly) that you are thinking of?

[Jock Scot]

This is a tricky problem and as has been pointed out here, there are valid and differing opinions to Mr Hawthorne's. But unfortunately there is still a problem that needs attention.On the whole regulation and protectionism is best avoided, but there really does come a point when it has to be considered.

Scotch whisky comes from Scotland and only Scotland, Port comes from Portugal and only Portugal, Champagne comes from a certain part of France and only that part, so it does happen and in fact on the whole the world accepts it. There are drinks very similar, but cannot and do not carry that critical descriptive word. For example, there are pages and pages on this very website where we happily discuss "Scotch " whisky, we all know that there are other whiskies made elsewhere in the world of equally good quality and we don't seem to have this problem accepting that, now do we? I think Mr Hawthorne's thoughts ought to be given rather more credence than some of you are giving them.

With the benifit of hindsight this "Scottish" label should have been attached to the kilt and tartan years ago, but........Is it too late to do this now? Probably it is in this harsh commercial world we live in, but nevertheless it is not unreasonable for the problem to aired and addressed if possible. I would very much like to have a "Made in Scotland" or "Scottish Kilt" type label of some sort to get the kilt standards raised and to avoid the "Tartan Tat" problem and some of the more dubious business practices that allegedly go with it. Some of this problem has nothing to with the kilt, but there we go.

Kilts can still be made of varying quality anywhere in the world and bought by anyone who wants to buy at that particular price, but I personally see nothing wrong in having a "Scottish" label if it encourages honest labeling.

[Nighthawk]

Would it be Cathy Lare(I think I have spelled it correctly) that you are thinking of?

That's the one!! Thank you. I couldn't pull her name out of my brain. So if I get a garment made by Cathy Lare, is it not a kilt because it's made in New Mexico? Would someone in the know be able to look at a Lare and tell that it's not made in Scotland?

So let's apply this logic to other things. There is a breed of cat that I think is rather beautiful called a Russian Blue. They originated in Siberia, hence the name. Here's what one looks like:



By the logic of this kilt maker, a Russian blue born on Colorado would not be a Russian blue, but something else. I'm at a loss as to how the geographical location of the creation of a thing changes it's basic nature. It's like my sister in law insisting that the kilt outside of Scotland is nothing but a skirt, and that men wearing them are cross dressers. By this same logic, a French poodle in Germany could become a German shepherd. I don't see how this works. It seems a lot like alchemy to me- lead can become gold because... well... I said so! This is not meant to be arguementative, although I know it sounds that way- I'm just trying to understand how a Lare, Newsome or Tewksberry is not a kilt simply because of where they're made!

Jock, you brought up the alcohols. That's different. The ingredients from the local environs plays a large part. Takisker is vastly different from Laphroig. One is from the Isle of Skye, and the other is from Islay. You can taste the difference because of what they are made from and the recipe. Sheep wool is sheep wool is sheep wool! (Granted there are sheep made for eating and sheep made for wearing!) Tartan woven in Denver, from modern dyes, is the same as tartan woven in Shetland from the same dyes! There's no genuine difference. The ingredients and weaving method are all the same. The chemicals in the dyes work the same, the looms work the same. The only difference is the geographical location in which the raw materials and equipment are located. Getting back to my cat analogy, how does the geographical location of the birth of a thing fundamentally alter it's basic nature? I'm trying really hard to understand... but I just don't get it!