Tradition vs. Orthodoxy

[Bugbear]

I'm sorry, tripleblessed, it was just another very small point that kept bothering me in the back of my mind. Looks like it didn't go over so well...

[CMcG]

And one other hair to split... Though I'm willing to admit I might be wrong.

I think it might be possible to argue that the use and adaptation of cotton/denim/canvas to make lower-half, casual and rugged work clothing is a tradition. Particularly the use of these materiel's in homemade garments, as relating to the X-kilt, extending back to farmers having homemade, denim overalls, etc.

However, I would distinguish this as being a tradition relating to the fabric and it's use, rather than to the wearing of the kilt. Perhaps this is a source of emotional confusion on the topic?

The use of heavy fabrics like denim and canvas for work wear has been around long enough to be a tradition. Using that material for a working kilt references that tradition... but the fact that it is used in a kilt, rather than p@nts, is definitely not traditional work wear nor is it THCD.

You're very right though that the mixing of traditional and modern has been known to cause some confusion in Xmarks discussions. Take a different example, like PV kilts. One could have an eight yard, hand sewn, clan tartan kilt made in PV and it would look very traditional. The material, however, is not traditional.

So what do you call a traditionally constructed PV kilt? From an orthodox point of view, it might always be "incorrect" because a "true" kilt is made from worsted wool. If it is worn with a tee shirt and flip flops, one can easily say it is modern.

But what if this PV kilt is to be worn with all the appropriate THCD accoutrements? For the purpose of discussing the traditional way of wearing such a kilt, one might want to post over in the Traditional Highland Dress sub-forum. Hopefully the hardcore traditionalists would let the PV issue slide, even though it isn't a traditional fabric...

[Cowher]

Just a question that I think might be pertinent to the conversation. When did kilts start to be made out of PV fabric?
----------
Traditional is alive. As a person ages and features slowly change you may look back to a photo taken 10 20 or 30 years ago and think "my goodness look how OLD I have become!". It's the same of a tradition or traditional clothing yet the life span of a tradition is much much longer than the life span of a human or any (fleshly) living creature. Therefor the change is very slow. It may have not changed much in your life time but I promise you it is changing.

On the subject of the box pleated kilt. Much like my family recipes, things of times past may come to light. Documents, paintings, pictures, and actual items show that in the past kilt "recipe" box pleated kilts were part of the mixture. Also like a recipe someone will whip up a batch of ------- or make a box pleated kilt and say "wow this is great"... Part of a tradition was revived. It's still traditional. My Great Great Grandmother used to put brown sugar and cinnamon in cookies she made that are traditional cookies to our family. My mom used white sugar and no cinnamon when we found the old recipes we made them with brown sugar and cinnamon. It's was incredible how much better they were. So now we make it how it used to be made. It didn't stop being our family cookies it didn't stop being traditional. Hundreds of years old and still changing.

[Bugbear]

The use of heavy fabrics like denim and canvas for work wear has been around long enough to be a tradition. Using that material for a working kilt references that tradition... but the fact that it is used in a kilt, rather than p@nts, is definitely not traditional work wear nor is it THCD.

You're very right though that the mixing of traditional and modern has been known to cause some confusion in Xmarks discussions. Take a different example, like PV kilts. One could have an eight yard, hand sewn, clan tartan kilt made in PV and it would look very traditional. The material, however, is not traditional.

So what do you call a traditionally constructed PV kilt? From an orthodox point of view, it might always be "incorrect" because a "true" kilt is made from worsted wool. If it is worn with a tee shirt and flip flops, one can easily say it is modern.

But what if this PV kilt is to be worn with all the appropriate THCD accoutrements? For the purpose of discussing the traditional way of wearing such a kilt, one might want to post over in the Traditional Highland Dress sub-forum. Hopefully the hardcore traditionalists would let the PV issue slide, even though it isn't a traditional fabric...

A Plutonic kilt form?

Casual clothing too. I've just been thinking of all the things I have seen people turn denim into... and going back quite a long while.

I've been looking at this as a complex tradition being comprised of basic traditions brought together in a functioning system; kind of like memes or what have you. Change the system enough, and it becomes something new, but still might have some of the basic traditions. I don't think the new system should end up in the traditional forum, but some of that more or less depends on who in the traditional forum is doing the selecting, I guess.

We might be kind of looking at it in a similar way.

[MacBean]

Tradition evolves, and evolution is often punctuated rather than gradual, if I'm up-to-date with current understandings of nature. Someone thinks up a way to make kilts with pockets and if folks take to it, presto: modern becomes tradition. I suspect the evolution from the old-fashioned plaids to a sewn kilt happened quickly and were quickly accepted.

and this leads me to an idea for a new thread!

[Bugbear]

Tradition evolves, and evolution is often punctuated rather than gradual, if I'm up-to-date with current understandings of nature. Someone thinks up a way to make kilts with pockets and if folks take to it, presto: modern becomes tradition. I suspect the evolution from the old-fashioned plaids to a sewn kilt happened quickly and were quickly accepted.

and this leads me to an idea for a new thread!

"Punctuated equilibrium" is Stephen Jay Gould's contribution. Richard Dawkins acknowledges the phenomenon, but questions the emphases as a driver of evolution and adaptation. There is also a long standing concept of "co-evolution," as well as a concept of symbiotic relationships (Lynn Margulis) as player in evolution. Dawkins prefers to think of symbiotic relationships as mutual parasitism forming "evolutionarily stable strategies;" Dawkins, Extended Phenotype. All of these concepts can be applied to a meme theory of traditions, I suspect.
And yes, this line of thinking was a tradition handed down to me by a part of my family. * Edit: a somewhat opposite tradition was handed down by the other part of the family; I've done what I can with what I was given. *

However, I am trying very hard to keep in mind that is probably not the sense in which the term "evolution" is being used here.
* Edit: in light of the direction this thread may be heading, my comments and citations are exclusively toward the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution and meme theory, and not any other side-issues or topics these authors (Gould, Dawkins, and Margulis) have discussed.

[Mike_Oettle]

Getting in very late on this argument, the originally quoted text that laid down the law about what tradition and orthodoxy were struck me as being very authoritarian in a style typical of a certain type of academic philosopher.
People like this are very fond of laying down the law in an abstract manner, and care little about the wider ramifications of their usage.
His use of orthodoxy might conform in some ways to certain dictionary definitions, but it is highly negative when used as a blunt instrument – and since philosophers are fond of using blunt instruments when they discuss matters of religious belief, it could be grossly misused in characterising such belief as being irrelevant.
But my opinion has little bearing on kilt-wearing.
The OP does have a point where he distinguishes between a living tradition of kilt-wearing and a rigid orthodoxy where innovation is condemned, or at least frowned upon.
Regards,
Mike

[Chirs]

I was wondering how long it would be before religion entered into this discussion.

Understanding that religion per se is not a permitted topic I steer clear of it. However, it may be interesting to note a phenomenon occurring within the Roman Catholic Church globally that may shed some light on the intended meaning (and help to assure those who are of a religious bent that no disrespect was ever being offered).

For some years now the Vatican has concerned itself with how it might update itself - i.e. keep itself relevant, in their words - without losing their essence. They have been looking at ways to alter their orthodoxy to keep their tradition alive. If a person wanted to use religion and the religious use of terms as a referent for this discussion they would find that the church is in agreement with the intention of the way I read the original text.

[DWFII]

Mammals evolved from fish but that doesn't mean they are the same species or can mate or that human beings are really just Traditional Trout.

[Mark Stephenson]

Re: "Mammals evolved from fish but that doesn't mean they are the same species or can mate or that human beings are really just Traditional Trout."

Gee... I don't know about that... I dated a girl in college who was a pretty cold fish! <trin>
__________________