Why hand-sewn?

[GTRMAN]

Those likely weren't the kilts we know today. The kilts that were worn in the fields were great kilts and belted plaids. Both were just pieces of cloth that were pleated each time before being worn.

Absolutely.. But, as I said, isn't the practicality the tradition of the kilt? Especially with the phillabeg(sp?).

I'm sure the first tailored kilts were also made for every-day use. It just prevented the owner from taking the time to pleat it every time he put it on. Again, practicality comes into play.

[Colin]

Absolutely.. But, as I said, isn't the practicality the tradition of the kilt? Especially with the phillabeg(sp?).

I'm sure the first tailored kilts were also made for every-day use. It just prevented the owner from taking the time to pleat it every time he put it on. Again, practicality comes into play.

For practicality, the machine sewn will suit you just fine. If being part of a proud and honorable tradition is something of interest, go for the trained handsewn kiltmaker. Personally the diffence between machine sewn and handsewn was very little, but I figured if I was throwing $500+ down on a kilt, I wanted the better of the two (for me).

Just for clarification what do you mean by machine sewn? Are you talking about Scottish made tartan kilts from the same vendors that offer the handsewns, or are you talking about companies like USA Kilts, Stillwater, Utilikilts, etc?

[GTRMAN]

Just for clarification what do you mean by machine sewn? Are you talking about Scottish made tartan kilts from the same vendors that offer the handsewns, or are you talking about companies like USA Kilts, Stillwater, Utilikilts, etc?

All of the above.. I believe Utilikits and Amerikilts, as well as all of the other "contemporary models", as being the modern children of the Scottish Belted Plaid.. It has changed... for practical reasons..

Afterall, A kilt is a "Pleated, knee-length, wrap-around skirt worn by men that is USUALLY made of a tartan material"..

[davedove]

Absolutely.. But, as I said, isn't the practicality the tradition of the kilt? Especially with the phillabeg(sp?).

I'm sure the first tailored kilts were also made for every-day use. It just prevented the owner from taking the time to pleat it every time he put it on. Again, practicality comes into play.

I do wear my hand sewn casually as well as dressed up. I've worn it for formal nights on a cruise and with a tshirt at the beer festival. So, I would say that the hand sewns are practical. Now, that being said, I wouldn't wear it where I knew it was going to get messed up.

[macwilkin]

All of the above.. I believe Utilikits and Amerikilts, as well as all of the other "contemporary models", as being the modern children of the Scottish Belted Plaid.. It has changed... for practical reasons..

Afterall, A kilt is a "Pleated, knee-length, wrap-around skirt worn by men that is USUALLY made of a tartan material"..

Didn't the founder of Utilikilts, though, say something to the effect that he never based the Utilikilt on a traditional Scottish kilt? Hopefully someone will help me out on this, but I seem to remember reading this somewhere.

I would argue that Steve and Rocky's kilts are more "modern children" to the traditional kilt based on traditional designs.

Bottom line: I think your desire for practicality is a good thing, and I salute you for it. But what is "practical" to one may be different to another. Mutual respect for different opinions is always a good thing to strive for.

T.

[Colin]

All of the above.. I believe Utilikits and Amerikilts, as well as all of the other "contemporary models", as being the modern children of the Scottish Belted Plaid.. It has changed... for practical reasons..

Afterall, A kilt is a "Pleated, knee-length, wrap-around skirt worn by men that is USUALLY made of a tartan material"..

I assumed by your initial post that you were asking about a Scottish made traditional kilt, and the value of handsewn or machinesewn. Most Scottish kilt makers offer both options.

I wasn't thinking this was yet another "why is your kilt better than mine?" type post between modern kilt wearers and traditionalists.

The only way to compare the two styles of kilts is to own one of each as they have have their place. We have several members that own UKs, FKs, SKs, SWKs, USAkilts, as well as traditional kilts. Why do we never see those members starting these silly comparisons? I have newer style kilts from Bear, a traditional Scottish made wool kilt, and I am craving a Dress model FK. I think each has it's place.

If you genuinely wanted to know why traditional wool kilts cost twice the price of a contemporary style kilt...buy one. You will know why within the first five minutes.

I do get really tired of both sides asking for respect for their kilt choice and than not showing the same courtesy to the people they asked for the respect from. It's all really silly.

[RockyR]

For one thing, in kiltmaking, the stitching of the fell can (and should!) look invisible with a handsewn, something that's impossible with a machine sewn garment. The pulling and skewing that comes with properly shaping a kilt can't really be done while using a machine. It would at least take the same amount of time and probably be more difficult with a machine.

I have to disagree with you there. You CAN machine sew a kilt (a mojority of it anyway) so that you don't see any stitches and taper it properly... When we sew our Premiers, we sew the pleats INSIDE OUT so that none of the stitches show. It's just takes a lot of time and pinning to get each pleat right. If you TOPSTITCH a kilt (like we do with our other models), you CAN see the stitching.

As per a discussion I had with Barb Tewksbury a couple weeks ago... it takes her about 20 hours or so to hand sew an 8 yard kilt. It takes us about the same ammount of time to machine and hand sew it so that you don't see any stitches.

[Schultz]

Rocky,

I stand corrected then. However, you are the only kiltmaker I've ever come across who machine sews pleats like that and, as you said, it takes quite some time to do so.

As for practicality, I wear my hand sewn (as in sewn by MY own hand) Stuart of Bute to do just about everything in, much to the chagrin of my mother who is constantly asking me "Aren't you afraid of messing it up?". I've changed a tire in it, pulled weeds in it, etc.

People wear clothes for a variety of reasons and practicality is just one of them. Do you not pick out certain clothes for their color, pattern, slogan emblazoned on it, what have you? I don't espouse the idea that form must follow function, because function (aka practicality) is a form of its own.

If you're feeling masochistic, wade through any of the writings of Claude Levi-Strauss on structualism, or, better yet, look for "In Small Things Forgotten" by Jim Deetz. Before reading Deetz, I was a die hard processualist (form follows function) archaeology student, who, I must confess, didn't "get" Levi-Strauss because I was reading a translation from an already dense French. Deetz opened my eyes to a whole new world and one that I've carried over into my everyday life, especially in the how and why of clothing.

But I digress. So long as those of us who prefer a handsewn garment from a trained professional don't look down on those who prefer a machine sewn one, who cares? I've been through this time and time again with fanatic homebrewers who are so in love with real ale that they can practically look with scorn on a fellow who just might like a pint of Budweiser every now and again (such as myself). Arrogance is the enemy here, not who sews your kilt and how!

[GTRMAN]

Didn't the founder of Utilikilts, though, say something to the effect that he never based the Utilikilt on a traditional Scottish kilt? Hopefully someone will help me out on this, but I seem to remember reading this somewhere.

I would argue that Steve and Rocky's kilts are more "modern children" to the traditional kilt based on traditional designs.

Bottom line: I think your desire for practicality is a good thing, and I salute you for it. But what is "practical" to one may be different to another. Mutual respect for different opinions is always a good thing to strive for.

T.

Even if his "invention" is not consciously based on the Scottish kilt, the similarties cannot be denied. Convergent evolution, maybe?

Mutual respect? ABSOLUTELY!!!
I just had questions and thought this would be an interesting topic of conversation for a Friday!!!

[Barb T]

Rocky is the only person I've met who can machine sew the pleats of a kilt and have it look as good as a hand sewn one. It's a personal preference on his part, because I gather he doesn't like to hand sew. But, honestly, you'd never know by looking at his premier kilts that the pleats are machine sewn, because he sews them from the inside and he is meticulous. It is truly an art. And, it takes him as long to make a kilt that way as it does for me to do one by hand, as he just pointed out. That's reflected in the price - a premier kilt from Rocky costs exactly what a hand-sewn kilt from me costs - $450 to 600 depending on the tartan. No surprise there. The materials are the same, and the labor is the same.

_Most_ machine-sewn kilts are quickies - top-stitched and without the typical interior construction that many of you earlier in this thread point to as being the hallmark of a trad kilt. Trad kilts are bomb-proof and will hold their shape forever if you don't wad them up in a ball when they're damp. They actually don't have to be babied, although the cost makes people want to baby them!

And "certified in Scotland" as a kiltmaker is something very new (within the last 10 years) and invented by the Keith School largely as advertising to make their kiltmakers more special than the rest of us. Pardon my cynicism, but it grates a bit when the only way to be "certified" is to purchase training at their school. To my knowledge, this is not a government thing, nor is it in the tradition of kiltmaking. That's my understanding, anyway - if I am in error in this, please let me know.

Barb