kilt trumps accessories?

[WillieMacG]

I hate to say it, but, I believe there are some Kilt wearers who still think of it as being more of a "costume."

[Nighthawk]

You know what? The only accessory that I find to be an absolute must at anything other than the most formal of occasions is a waistcoat. Otherwise, I agree- simple can be very elegant!

I think it's not that the kilt trumps the accessories, but that an understated look of style trumps an overdone costume. Less is more, so to speak.

Too many people seem to want to make it a grandiose set of plumage, but I'm really starting to like the look of simplicity with style. I think with most people, this is a function of how long they've been wearing it.

I think it's more of a function of how comfortable you are in your own skin. I've gone places wearing kilt, nice hose, garters, plain shoes, and Iron Maiden t shirt and been told I'm the best-dressed person in attendance. There are people who wear suits and look like they were shoe-horned into them! Even when the clothes fit well and are appropriate, if you don't have the self-confidence to pull those clothes off, then you just look out of place! Just my 2pence...

[Geoff Withnell]

You know what? The only accessory that I find to be an absolute must at anything other than the most formal of occasions is a waistcoat. Otherwise, I agree- simple can be very elegant!

<snippage>

I...

The only accessory I find necessary is to have a beautiful woman on my arm. And then if I goof up my outfit, no one notices!

[Spartan Tartan]

I'm a fan of the understated. Wear it well and with confidence and you'll look great.

[Tobus]

I think it's more of a function of how comfortable you are in your own skin.

Or how comfortable and confident you are in your clothes. If you look like you're wearing something that you've never worn before and you're not used to how it feels or moves, it will come across as awkward and wrong to everyone else. Feeling naturally at home in a kilt, learning how to move and sit, are functions of experience and can make even a plain unadorned outfit look better than those who are gussied up and look like they're stiff and miserable.

[Dale Seago]

Yesterday I attended the wedding of two of the black belts in my dojo. It was held outdoors at the bride's parents' home on a northern California ranch. Dress was casual and the weather was very warm; most of the men were wearing slacks and open-neck short-sleeved shirts. So I made a point of trying to match that "level of attire", though I was the only one kilted.

There's a pic in this album. I also had along a black lambskin kilt jacket (not seen here), but didn't wear it until later at the (outdoor) dinner when it was getting cool.

[Mike_Oettle]

Bill Henry makes a valid point about the cassock being everyday clothing – and I would argue that properly speaking, it requires that no clothing be worn underneath.
While many clerics wear their cassocks in church, but not on the street, I recall a rule at our synods that clergy should wear cassocks during synod session – which ought to suggest that they should not wear trousers as well!
On the other hand, a chasuble is not the same as a cassock, and is rarely seen on the streets (except in processions).

Dale, your picture shows that you were very well dressed indeed, and must have put those trouser wearers to shame!
Regards,
Mike

[Father Bill]

And yes, actually I do have a gold cope. I wore it for Easter. Only. The reason the cassock is generally worn over the other street clothinhg (and you are absolutely right in defining it that way) is so that we can have something comfortable to wear home after the service. Now, in the summer . . . .

[Father Bill]

While this is a KILT discussion board, the last comment I'll make on the cassock is that while you are historically correct, appropriate vestiture will depend on climate, custom, denominational practice, and the preferences of the supervising body - be that diocese, presbetery or council.

What I do is to wear it over trousers (or kilt, I suppose) and clerical shirt because that is the practice in my diocese. My cassock requires the shirt because the collar doesn't fit into the cassock, and it is customary in this area. That means that I'm doing what my colleagues do, and we are thereby somewhat uniform.

[FatherWilliam57]

And, like a kilt, it depends on if the cassock is actually wool or some other, lighter material. Also if it is half-lining, full-lining, or no lining at all. You could also "loose the shirt" by getting a cassock rabat from ALMY (think of it as a "dog collar dickey"). Other than that, I say nothing more about what is worn under my cassock...must preserve the mystique, eh?

We now return you to your previously scheduled thread...