Freedom in Tradition

[Whidbey78]

But here is an analogy...

We are dealing with something we might term Dinna Ken wha' or as our friend Robert calls it Je ne Sais Quoi....

Similarly, many of us can't afford to buy brand new, even off the rack brand new. A virtue of the necessity of cobbling together is the style that emerges from the process of tinkering and modifying and altering. I'd like to think that comes from paying attention, instead of just paying a lot of money.

That's a very good point. The pics posted earlier illustrate it very well. The "PC" in the photo was fashioned from a used tailcoat. At a glance it looks like another PC but something is different, though it isn't immediately apparent. If the workmanship is good it is a one-of-a-kind peice that is unique in an understated way.

I wish I had known what I know now when we had our wedding. I wore my kilt, but skipped the PC and went with an Argyle (a rental no less)in black with white shirt and black tie. It's the exact same one we see in every rental shop, almost every company website, etc. The whole kit looked good, but didn't look "like me." If I had it to do over I would have picked up a tux jacket or tailcoat and went to work on it adding all those details I've come to love.

One thing that I also have noticed is that it's easy to spot the guys who are truly comfortable in a kilt--comfortable enough to "do their own thing". It took me wearing it frequently for months, as everyday clothing, before my own style started to show. In my case I had to get comfortable enough to see it as "just another article of clothing" before I could shake the idea that it has to be worn this way or that. Now I find myself mixing black and brown leathers(if HRH Prince Charles can do it, why can't I), wearing flashes or ties that aren't of a color in the tartan, wearing a grey jacket with the blue waistcoat I just got. My wife says I'm starting to look like I dress in the dark...after seeing a lot of pics, many being of royalty and aristocracy in Scotland(no offense intended), I take it as a compliment because that's what I though of them at first! I know better now--thanks in large part to the folks on this forum.

That could be one of the things leading some to see the guidlines as chisled in stone rules. Those who only wear a kilt for special occasions often have one or two "outfits" that fit withing the confines of what is often preached as "proper" and haven't spent enough time between the apron and pleats to be comfortable breaking out of the mold. Others seem to see it as a sacred thing and hence it must be done in an almost ritualistic way. That is how they are comfortable doing it, and that's perfectly fine. I'm not a kilt-kop. I noticed a long time ago that even in a wall of black suits the guy who wears a unique tie and shirt stands out--not because it's flashy or bright, but because he looks (and is) comfortable enough to let his persona show through.

[macwilkin]

That could be one of the things leading some to see the guidlines as chisled in stone rules. Those who only wear a kilt for special occasions often have one or two "outfits" that fit withing the confines of what is often preached as "proper" and haven't spent enough time between the apron and pleats to be comfortable breaking out of the mold. Others seem to see it as a sacred thing and hence it must be done in an almost ritualistic way. That is how they are comfortable doing it, and that's perfectly fine. I'm not a kilt-kop. I noticed a long time ago that even in a wall of black suits the guy who wears a unique tie and shirt stands out--not because it's flashy or bright, but because he looks (and is) comfortable enough to let his persona show through.

Ah, the old stereotype...those who only wear their kilts for "special occasions" are somehow not the kilties that the "full-timers" are.

I've been wearing a kilt since I was 18. Just because I choose not to wear my Highland attire on a daily basis does not mean that I haven't spent enough time between apron and pleats to break the mold.

If anything, I think those of us here who do not make a "cause" of kilts, save that of promoting tradition and heritage, are breaking the mold. I don't begrudge any FT-kiltie, but one doesn't have to make a daily thing of it to be a kiltie.

Enough with the stereotyping...horses for courses and all that.

T.

[fluter]

Ah, the old stereotype...those who only wear their kilts for "special occasions" ...

Ah, but first, he said:

... it's easy to spot the guys who are truly comfortable in a kilt--comfortable enough to "do their own thing".

Somehow, Todd, I think we'll "spot" you among them. Otherwise, we are in agreement about stereotypes.

[CMcG]

<snip>
We are dealing with something we might term Dinna Ken wha' or as our friend Robert calls it Je ne Sais Quoi....

That is to say, there ARE obvious things one can change to make one's dress individual, but the better part is in subtlety and style. Sure, you can wear a red doublet or a tartan waistcoat where others wear black, but the style that distinguishes need not be obvious....

...And what is so hard to put one's finger on is good tailoring, careful fitting, distinctive fabrics and the patina of age and quality. Look for the man who looks better than everybody else, even if he is dressed "the same" as everybody else.

While I agree that the subtle nuances of good tailoring and confidence are always important, I'm thinking of freedom more in terms of exploring the limits of tradition. Rather than looking the same but doing it better, how much room is there to look different?

Can we try to explore some examples? As always, pictures are most welcome

Let's imagine one has something like a really unique, "loud," or interesting sporran. Would it be better to build an equally idiosyncratic outfit around it or play it more conservative to let the sporran shine?

What about perspective? Is it possible to build an outfit that at a distance would have a standard sort of appearance but up close would reveal a wealth of individualized details? Would it be enough to make one look the same as a rented outfit in a line up but deeply different standing face-to-face and comparing the rental vs. individualist?

How far can one go? Is there anyone who is recognized as being a maverick of Highland attire, while also remaining traditional?

<snip>
Similarly, many of us can't afford to buy brand new, even off the rack brand new. A virtue of the necessity of cobbling together is the style that emerges from the process of tinkering and modifying and altering. I'd like to think that comes from paying attention, instead of just paying a lot of money.

That remark resembles me!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

While I agree that the subtle nuances of good tailoring and confidence are always important, I'm thinking of freedom more in terms of exploring the limits of tradition. Rather than looking the same but doing it better, how much room is there to look different?

The danger of looking too different is that in doing so one can easily (and inadvertently) step over the line into parody.

Let's imagine one has something like a really unique, "loud," or interesting sporran. Would it be better to build an equally idiosyncratic outfit around it or play it more conservative to let the sporran shine?

The essence of being well dressed is that no single item of one's attire should "stand out" from the rest of the outfit. That being the case, one should have probably avoided buying the "loud or interesting" sporran in the first place. But suppose it is a family heirloom, a sporran made from the mane of a lion shot by Uncle Bulgaria whilst on safari in 1929, the cantle set with goose-egg sized moonstones? Well, in that instance one relegates the sporran to evening dress only and dresses as conservatively as possible (although a red waistcoat may help to divert some of the attention away from "Leo the Sporran"). And if asked about the sporran (and one will be asked) be prepared to have a damn good story to go with it!

What about perspective? Is it possible to build an outfit that at a distance would have a standard sort of appearance but up close would reveal a wealth of individualized details?

Of course. It's the details-- custom buttons, velvet trim to the collar, grosgrain silk lapels can all add individuality to ones attire. The key word is subtlety, which is the hallmark of being well dressed.

Would it be enough to make one look the same as a rented outfit in a line up but deeply different standing face-to-face and comparing the rental vs. individualist?

Certainly. It's the details that make the difference.

How far can one go? Is there anyone who is recognized as being a maverick of Highland attire, while also remaining traditional?

Well, "maverick" may not be quite the word, but both David Pope and Sandford MacLean dress with individual style (indeed, one could say with a great deal of flair) without transgressing the boundaries of traditional Highland attire. And with a little forethought, anyone can do the same.

[Zardoz]

As always, pictures are most welcome

Indeed! Some photos in would certainly help back up the usual supects authoritarian statements and sycophantic agreement!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Indeed! Some photos in would certainly help back up the usual supects authoritarian statements and sycophantic agreement!

34 posts, and your non-authoritarian contribution to this thread is?... a request for photos.

Okay. As soon as I can I'll post photos of Uncle Bulgaria's lion mane sporran. Mean time, you might want to scroll through the thread and look at some of the photos posted by the sycophantic usual suspects...

[CMcG]

Indeed! Some photos in would certainly help back up the usual supects authoritarian statements and sycophantic agreement!

Is that another way of saying you disagree with Erskine and that THCD is not a free style of dress?

I don't think Zardoz is the only one around the forum who seems to feel negatively toward the rules of Highland dress, as expressed by our resident experts. In some ways I'm surprised no-one else has voiced these opinions on this thread...

I know the traditionalists are strong in their opinions, but does anyone want to take a crack at arguing for a different interpretation of Erskine? I'm not trying to incite any flaming and I trust that this would be done while staying within the rules of the forum.

[tripleblessed]

I liked Erskine's statement the first time I read it. I still like it. I hear a gentleman saying that while he might have his own ideas of what constitutes good taste, he has no willingness to decide for others choices he feels they must make for themselves. He was well aware that highland dress did not arise out of whole cloth in Victorian or even Georgian times, but evolved into what was current then (and on into what we know now). He was also aware that Scots were a pretty diverse and entertaining lot, and their wardrobes were the proof. If they had to appear at court, requirements must be met, likewise with serving military Outside that, Devil take those rude enough to comment. I tend to be pretty casual in my attire, unless the occasion calls for more. When it does, I tend to choose pretty conservatively. I don't have a problem taking center stage, but I don't have any need to do so. If someone else wants to, I pray for good choices, but I'm willing to give them room to crash and burn, hoping next time they'll think first. It appears that some agree with my position, and the words of Erskine, that Highland dress is free, others feel instead that the rules ARE hard hard and fast, and that those who disagree should remove themselves from view. If I have misstated anyone's position, it was in error, not malice, as all I have to go on are the poster's own words.

[artificer]

Is that another way of saying you disagree with Erskine and that THCD is not a free style of dress?

I don't think Zardoz is the only one around the forum who seems to feel negatively toward the rules of Highland dress, as expressed by our resident experts. In some ways I'm surprised no-one else has voiced these opinions on this thread...

I know the traditionalists are strong in their opinions, but does anyone want to take a crack at arguing for a different interpretation of Erskine? I'm not trying to incite any flaming and I trust that this would be done while staying within the rules of the forum.

I'm not a native Scot, nor did I grow up in a Scots-American household, so my views are heavily coloured by my Saxon (quite literally) background.

I find casual Highland dress VERY free, and formal dress equally so. I'll do a quick comparison by event / Saxon / Highland. I may make a few mistakes, so be kind, but here's how I see it:

Day event -nice casual
Saxon- polo and khakis, maybe broadcloth shirt. Possibly cords & sweater/jacket if cool out. Your choice of shoes/belt.

Highland - polo, sweater, jacket - your choice. A rainbow of hose and garters to choose from. Multiple sporran choices and leather goods colours to make. You get a knife in your sock too!

Day event - business dress
Saxon- blue or grey suit- single or double breasted. Your choice of shirt and tie. Shoe colour usually dictated by suit colour.

Highland- Your choice of shirt/tie as above. A riot of tweeds and baratheas in a standard jacket, but your jacket can have nearly any 'cut' to it you please (it can even be made from an old Saxon jacket). Waistcoat, SURE. Hose as above, or go Argyll/diced. Sporrans as above.

Day event - formal
Saxon - Morning jacket (no option to speak of)
Highland - see above entry for business dress, less tweed, shift buttons to chrome or gold instead of bone/leather.

Evening event - formal
Saxon - black or white tie tux. A few minor options for cut of tux, shirts and possibly tie or waistcoat colour (for black tie only). A very few options for shoes.

Highland - 3 or 4 main choices for doublets as well as Argyll jackets or PCs. MULTIPLE material options (velvet, barathea, standard wool) and colour choices (nearly any). Choice of tie (black) or jabot. Possible waistcoat choices to match your kilt, basic black, red or to match your jacket. Still have the riot of colour options for hose and garters, as well as the numerous patterning possibilities. You do lose the leather colour choice for the most part here- nearly always black.

IF it's a really formal white tie 'do' you might even wear a dirk! That can only happen in Saxon dress if you're a member of a certain few knightly orders (or a ren-fester sorry, I couldn't resist!)


IMO there are so many options it can make your head spin, if you really sit down and think about it. I don't really know why people get peeved about "the rules", as there are WAAAAY many more for non-highland dress.

I think that in many cases, Saxon dressers have internalized their rules (having grown up with them) and don't really see them as rules, just "what's done". Having someone inform them what is appropriate for Highland wear just irks.

Although it DOES beg the question for those who are so irked, WHY, if you ARE so irked by "the rules", are you dwelling in the "Traditional Highland Dress" forum?