Traditional Patches, Repairs, and Mends

[CMcG]

Back to the thread, "Jocking" a bonnet seems to be expected, so there is an example of something looking too new, not being quite right in Highland attire. Wondered if it extended to any other items?

I feel like when someone's civilian Highland attire is too new it can look "off" in several ways, depending on how the outfit is put together. In some cases it can look like a rental or package deal from a retailer, in other cases it can look a bit like a uniform, or worse, like a costume.

It isn't quite clear to me if having things well broken-in is a tradition, an aesthetic, or something else. I have observed that even folks who could theoretically afford to have all new stuff (clan chiefs, dukes, etc), tend to continue to use older items. These could be hand-me-downs from kilted family, heirlooms, or simply well-used items they themselves purchased long ago.

Could this be an embodiment of the oft-quoted Scottish virtue of thrift? The only items of kit I've inherited were my dad's horsehair sporran and kilt pin, but most of the rest of my kilts and accessories are still second hand because I can't afford new

[Bugbear]

I suspect, CMcG, this comes from childhood learning in the traditional, Scottish/Highland milieu; including personal, not historical, photographs of Highland attire, perhaps of family members. A time back, Jock discussed the childhood game his family made of picking out who was and was not dressed well in Highland attire: the subtle details etc.
Something similar could possibly take place when someone is first exposed to, and deciding to wear Highland attire, but that could, of course, also be a disaster if first exposed to the rental wear or certain celebrity icons.

[MacLowlife]

I think most cultures have a prejudice in favor of experience and I believe the easiest proof is the tendency to favor "broken in" over "too new". Look at all of the money people spend on "pre-washed" , "antiqued", "destroyed" etc.

[Bugbear]

I think most cultures have a prejudice in favor of experience and I believe the easiest proof is the tendency to favor "broken in" over "too new". Look at all of the money people spend on "pre-washed" , "antiqued", "destroyed" etc.

Yes, predigested clothing…

And now that I think about it, there are weathered and ancient tartans or color schemes, along with antiqued chrome cantles. I haven't heard of new kilts being sold with pre-chewed holes and such, though.
I assume all this is viewed as fake fashion to a traditionalist, except the color schemes in some cases, perhaps.

[Tobus]

I think most cultures have a prejudice in favor of experience and I believe the easiest proof is the tendency to favor "broken in" over "too new". Look at all of the money people spend on "pre-washed" , "antiqued", "destroyed" etc.

Yes, I believe you're right. Wearing brand-new out-of-the-box clothing can tend to make one look as if they're new to the scene, where a set of clothing that's well worn (but still in serviceable condition) lends them an air of "been there, done that". It's one of those subtle psychological things that goes a long way in credibility.

Artificially aging or distressing an item of clothing for this purpose is taking it a little far, though. I would almost venture to say that it's mostly an American phenomenon; the result of a culture that wants immediate gratification and instantaneous respect without necessarily going through the process of earning it the old-fashioned way. I've known bikers, for example, who purchase brand new leather jackets or boots, and go to great lengths to make them look worn-in and dirty so they'll fit in with the old-school biker crowd instead of standing out as a newbie. I've seen shooting enthusiasts take a brand-new wood rifle stock and beat on it with a chain to give it a distressed, well-used look so they can look like they've seen a lot of action with it. It's really quite comical to see the lengths that some people will go to build credibility via artificial wear on their equipment.

At any rate, speaking of the old brass MOD cantles, I personally like to see them restored to a fresh, bright condition and put on a new sporran body. And I think this is what most people are doing. It sort of gives them a new life and a new purpose, and it's great to see the interesting combinations that people are coming up with. I would think that trying to age it or make it look original would be silly, as it's pretty obvious to anyone in-the-know that it isn't the original sporran that goes with the cantle.

Lastly, speaking of patches and repairs, I'm still curious about the elbow patches seen on Invercauld's jacket (this photo pilfered from Kyle's thread on the Clan Farquharson Gathering). Is this truly a repair, or were they added for decoration/protection?

[artificer]

There have been some threads dealing with rebuilding a sporran around an antique cantle. That would probably fall under the subject of this thread.
So, should the new sporran pouch be artificially antiqued to appear more congruous with the cantle; perhaps attempting to imitate a historical style contemporary to the era of the cantle?

I have done a number of re-baggings for both truly antique pieces as well as ex-MoD pieces, some of the antique cantles have had bags which quite obviously weren't original, but later replacements.
Leather will "break in" and wear far faster than any metal, so it seems a bit silly to shorten it's lifespan (which could easily be 100 years) by artificially wearing it.

Also, just like "shabby chic" furniture has a fake quality from it's artificial wear vs a real antique piece that has been worn over time, artificially distressed leather always has a fake quality about it.
Wear happens with use, and there are very few people (IMO) who are skilled at actually being able to map where that use would take place.

I think fake wear also detracts from the "personalization" of a piece. If the leather darkens and polishes up where your hand always rests- that's cool. There is a comfort to gentle, graceful wear.
My favorite chair has hard leather arms, the areas where my left elbow and right hand rest are much darker and smoother than the rest of the leather, but it's MINE. It's where MY elbow is placed as I hold a book, and where MY hand sits as I ponder something.

No artificial wear can capture a person's habits like that.

I think it is probably useful to make the pouch in a way as consistent as possible with the original design, but I think that antiquing it is unnecessary- maybe gilding the lily a little. I suppose it depends on the material, but I would think most cantles, even old or historical ones would have been kept polished as much as possible. Granted, one might allow some patination- and I think silver usually looks better with a little shading in the nooks and crannies- but I think the best course would be to polish your cantle at the same time as you are replacing the bag. Maybe let them age a little afterwards, but try to start them out at the same (renewed) state of spiff.

Perhaps others disagree?

I think a lot depends on the cantle in question.


On this piece there were some very deep scratches that I buffed a bit, but I didn't polish it all the way up.

On the below VERY old piece I didn't polish it at all, just did some straightening of the cantle itself where it had suffered some traumatic event in it's past.

Before:


After:


Losing a wonderful worn patina on an antique piece to me is sad. Plus, brass will just tarnish again quickly anyway.
If a piece has been continually polished over time I wouldn't have a problem with buffing it up again- but a piece with age and a soft patina on it is wonderful.

MoD cantles are a different thing all-together. I have no problem with these being polished up nice and bright.




ith:

[Bugbear]

As a contrast to Highland attire, does this "too new-ness" not quite looking right extend to suits and business outfits?

[Tobus]

As a contrast to Highland attire, does this "too new-ness" not quite looking right extend to suits and business outfits?

I would say no. The business world is an entirely different animal. At least with clothing, it is. The really high-powered business world seems to follow modern fashion trends, where nothing gets worn long enough to show any wear and tear. Anything of classic origin reflects on its owner as being slow, out of date, and obsolete.

But once you step away from business, perhaps there is something to be said for 'character' in one's clothing. The Duke of Rothesay's shoes are a good example.

[MacLowlife]

I would say no. The business world is an entirely different animal. At least with clothing, it is. The really high-powered business world seems to follow modern fashion trends, where nothing gets worn long enough to show any wear and tear. Anything of classic origin reflects on its owner as being slow, out of date, and obsolete.

But once you step away from business, perhaps there is something to be said for 'character' in one's clothing. The Duke of Rothesay's shoes are a good example.

I think there are some places- and situations- where older is better. Somewhere between age 40 and 50, many suit wearing men recognize that they have lived through a full cycle of lapel width, and probably some other fashion trends. If you are lucky enough to have bought very good quality the first time and even luckier, you are still the same size, you may be able to pull out those vintage gems and impress your juniors with how much better things were in the old days. However, I agree with Tobus, many of the hotshots seem to pride themselves on having no history and nothing old enough to have come around again. And patches on your dress clothes tend to be embarrassing anytime.

I think there are geographical pockets where other factors than money and its display still are considered important. I may be wrong, but I think those places are mostly in the (North American ) East and the South, maybe because people in those places have "outgrown" money as the ultimate yardstick or maybe because they have had to manage without it for long periods of time.


But think of this distinction: If the average guy you work with were offered the choice of a pristine 50 year old luxury car or a brand new luxury car, which do you think he would choose? Technological advances may have made that an imperfect analogy, but it is the best I can offer. Hand work is very difficult to eclipse, no matter what the product. And here is one more point in favor of the old stuff- If you start with a new thing, a year later it is a year old and "used". If you start with a 50 year old thing, a year later it is 51 years old, which isn't much different from 50 years old.

[MacLowlife]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPeuIgoiq4A

Why I went back and edited to say North American!