would you define this a kilt?

[Nighthawk]

It looks to me like it is not a wrapped garment; that is there are no lapped aprons in the front, which for me would take it out of the kilt class and into the general mug classification. BTW, just as an esthetic judgement, why would you care? To my eye (and I do wear contemporary kilts on occasion) it just looks ugly.

Geoff Withnell

That was my thought, as well. I wouldn't wear it personally. It doesn't look like a kilt to my eyes. But as stated- if you can pull it off (Hamish could! ) then go for it!

***EDIT*** I also am a modern kilt wearer, and am in fact wearing my Amerikilt right now.

[Geoff Withnell]

Ron Weasley from Harry Potter wearing a leather "full length kilt" Hmmmmm. It somehow looses the Cool factor even if it is leather. For the record: I KNOW it is not Ron Weasley... (just the image coming to mind when I saw him. The Girl?--NICE!)

BACK TO THE QUESTION AT HAND:::

It sort of fits with the post-apocalyptic idea. The line was called, "Return Of The Thunderdome." In a world where Mad Max is king, this is a kilt. BTW. There is a line drawing of this garment on the bottom right corner of the images provided. It has both apron and pleats.

Not a wrap garment o not a kilt? hmmm. I do recall some "modern" kilt designers building their kilts now with standard pant style buttons ans zippers. ... I'm jus sayin' ... It's not for me, but I wouldn't fault a guy for wearing it if he chose.

To my eye, the line drawing shows a a flat front, but nothing (to me at least) that indicates any overlapping aprons. I use as a minimum definition of a kilt as pleats in back and wrapped overlapping aprons (emphasis on the plural) in front. By this, not a kilt. As far as whether it looks good or not, that is a matter of taste, not definition.

Geoff Withnell