Traditonal vs. Historical

[BBNC]

While this may be true, I am hoping -- praying, really -- that the leisure suit remains dead.

Can we all agree on that one? ;)

I'm with you on that! I never got caught up in the leisure suit thing.

[AFS1970]

I like Rocky's definitions and Matt's definitions, although I see that there may need some adjustment.

I only own two Kilts (I know that makes me seem positively unkilted to many here) one is an 8 yard wool and the other a 4 yard PV. Both are in tartan. One fastens with buckles and the other with velcro. Both have belt loops. Both are tartan. I would consider them both traditional because and neither historical because when I think of words like modern or contemporary used with kilts, I tend to think of utilikils and their ilk. I would have a hard time spotting the PV kilt in a crowd as would most people. I have worn them both in formal settings with my PC. I only have a shoulder plaid for the tank, yet both can be worn formally.

[rmccool]

I only own two Kilts (I know that makes me seem positively unkilted to many here) one is an 8 yard wool and the other a 4 yard PV. Both are in tartan. One fastens with buckles and the other with velcro. Both have belt loops. Both are tartan. I would consider them both traditional because and neither historical because when I think of words like modern or contemporary used with kilts, I tend to think of utilikils and their ilk. I would have a hard time spotting the PV kilt in a crowd as would most people. I have worn them both in formal settings with my PC. I only have a shoulder plaid for the tank, yet both can be worn formally.

.

Interestingly, I've done business with both Rocky and Matt, and am very favorably impressed by both of them.

Personally, I find the semi-traditional kilts from USA Kilts to be very "traditional," in that they are made from tartan fabric, knife pleated, fastened with straps, made to measure (i.e. tailored), and appear to all but the most experienced or knowledgeable to be indistinguishable from a wool kilt. They differ from a tank in some ways - they are made of PV, not wool, are of a medium weight fabric, and use a bit less of that fabric - but folks I meet on the street never know the difference.

The box pleated style that Matt specializes in isn't exactly common, even in comparison to knife pleated kilts (which are themselves not overly plentiful on the average city street), but I think it's quite within the realm of "traditional" kilts. As others have noted, box pleating never quite went entirely out of fashion, and it's definitely experiencing something of a renaissance these days.

I think there's room for some variation within the realm of "traditional." On the other hand, my Tactical Duty Kilts are definitely in the "contemporary" and "non-traditional" categories.

Finally, as much as I think they look grand, I'll have to grant that the belted plaid has probably moved well into the realm of "historical." Where I differ from some others is that I don't think that historic clothing is off limits for modern, non-reenactment wear. For example, I'm currently saving some pennies for a reproduction vest (waistcoat) from the 1880s era... not because I do reenactments (or steampunk), but because I think it will work quite well with some of my modern attire. I think the same applies to a belted plaid. The key is to wear a historical item (e.g., waistcoat or plaid) with otherwise conservative/traditional clothing, in a way that doesn't overtly clash. When you start adding multiple historical elements to traditional clothing, you quickly cross the line into "costume," but when properly done, adding a historical element here or there is simply a matter of personal fashion choice.

[Sir Didymous]

.

Interestingly, I've done business with both Rocky and Matt, and am very favorably impressed by both of them.

Personally, I find the semi-traditional kilts from USA Kilts to be very "traditional," in that they are made from tartan fabric, knife pleated, fastened with straps, made to measure (i.e. tailored), and appear to all but the most experienced or knowledgeable to be indistinguishable from a wool kilt. They differ from a tank in some ways - they are made of PV, not wool, are of a medium weight fabric, and use a bit less of that fabric - but folks I meet on the street never know the difference.

The box pleated style that Matt specializes in isn't exactly common, even in comparison to knife pleated kilts (which are themselves not overly plentiful on the average city street), but I think it's quite within the realm of "traditional" kilts. As others have noted, box pleating never quite went entirely out of fashion, and it's definitely experiencing something of a renaissance these days.

I think there's room for some variation within the realm of "traditional." On the other hand, my Tactical Duty Kilts are definitely in the "contemporary" and "non-traditional" categories.

Finally, as much as I think they look grand, I'll have to grant that the belted plaid has probably moved well into the realm of "historical." Where I differ from some others is that I don't think that historic clothing is off limits for modern, non-reenactment wear. For example, I'm currently saving some pennies for a reproduction vest (waistcoat) from the 1880s era... not because I do reenactments (or steampunk), but because I think it will work quite well with some of my modern attire. I think the same applies to a belted plaid. The key is to wear a historical item (e.g., waistcoat or plaid) with otherwise conservative/traditional clothing, in a way that doesn't overtly clash. When you start adding multiple historical elements to traditional clothing, you quickly cross the line into "costume," but when properly done, adding a historical element here or there is simply a matter of personal fashion choice.

Now this having been said, I wonder about these combinations. In the first picture I am wearing a great kilt with what could feasibly be considered traditional attire. (I look terribly rumpled from putting it on in a hurry for my wife's school related photo shoot.) I'm not entirely convinced that should be considered costumey.

In this next image our church was having some slightly more formal festivities so I dressed it up a bit with a jabot and due to the weather I switched the jacket for a fancier waist coat (Which was in the 1770's style). I used the day plaid to finish it up a bit, but I wouldn't be offended if it were defined as more historical in spite of the traditional (in the modern sense) kilt.

[Dale Seago]

Now this having been said, I wonder about these combinations. In the first picture I am wearing a great kilt with what could feasibly be considered traditional attire. (I look terribly rumpled from putting it on in a hurry for my wife's school related photo shoot.) I'm not entirely convinced that should be considered costumey.

In this next image our church was having some slightly more formal festivities so I dressed it up a bit with a jabot and due to the weather I switched the jacket for a fancier waist coat (Which was in the 1770's style). I used the day plaid to finish it up a bit, but I wouldn't be offended if it were defined as more historical in spite of the traditional (in the modern sense) kilt.

I'm not sure what those should properly be called, but I can say I like the look. I've done things rather like that myself with a great kilt/feileadh mor, though not for many years. Here is a more "casual" example than yours above from December of '99, in Japan at my martial art teacher's birthday party:






And with the party well underway, beside my teacher, having shed the bonnet and wool jumper and acquired a wine-spill on my shirt:

[MacCathmhaoil]

Where do the loved by some dislike by others (myself included!) "fly plaids" fit?

[rmccool]

Now this having been said, I wonder about these combinations. In the first picture I am wearing a great kilt with what could feasibly be considered traditional attire. (I look terribly rumpled from putting it on in a hurry for my wife's school related photo shoot.) I'm not entirely convinced that should be considered costumey.

I agree with you; it isn't. While your waistcoat also has a bit of a historic look, I don't think that you look like you're wearing a costume. A little retro, perhaps, but I like the look. On the other hand, if you added an older style bonnet, or a belt with a dirk, most folks would probably think that you were doing reenactment (or had a very, very out of date wardrobe ). The older bonnet styles look great - Matt, for example, wears one to very good effect - but combining one with a plaid tends to emphasize the historic look of both.

I didn't mean to imply in my earlier post that anything more than one historic element automatically makes a look "costumey;" it's what the elements are, and how obtrusive they are in relation to the more modern / currently fashionable portions of one's clothing. I certainly don't think that wearing a plaid with otherwise "modern traditional" clothing creates a "costumey" effect (though some would disagree). If you'd chosen too add a Jacobite shirt to the ensemble, however, the effect would be very different...

In this next image our church was having some slightly more formal festivities so I dressed it up a bit with a jabot and due to the weather I switched the jacket for a fancier waist coat (Which was in the 1770's style). I used the day plaid to finish it up a bit, but I wouldn't be offended if it were defined as more historical in spite of the traditional (in the modern sense) kilt.

Again, I agree. This look is certainly more historical than the first. It's quite handsome, just not contemporary. In fact, you look like you might be portraying a 19th century Scottish parson.

I'm not sure what those should properly be called, but I can say I like the look. I've done things rather like that myself with a great kilt/feileadh mor, though not for many years. Here is a more "casual" example than yours above from December of '99, in Japan at my martial art teacher's birthday party:

Dale, thanks for illustrating why I don't believe that wearing the belted plaid automatically makes one look particularly "historic," though the garment itself no doubt is. You look quite sharp and contemporary. Not "blue jeans" casual, nor overly formal, but much like a man who's ready for a hike through the heather - or to celebrate an honored teacher's birthday. I envy your sense of style.

[rmccool]

Where do the loved by some dislike by others (myself included!) "fly plaids" fit?

On pipers in uniform?

Or were you referring to those wee plaids worn by flies?

[Hopper250]

On pipers in uniform?

Or were you referring to those wee plaids worn by flies?

I honestly did five different searches to get a pic of a fly wearing a kilt. There are none according to google.

[Steve Ashton]

At one time, we here on X Marks, sort of, kinda, maybe, agreed that when referencing kilts we would use some dates to give some sense to these terms.

We said that kilts and accessories that were developed and worn prior to the Reign of Edward VII (1901-1910) could be considered Historical.
Kilts and accessories developed and worn in a style that arose during and after the Edwardian period could be seen as Traditional.
Those things that have developed after the 1970's would and could be looked at as Modern.
(please notice that these style do not give an end date. Historical and Traditional, while we can give an approx. date of when they started are and can still be worn today.)

For example - The Great Kilt could be seen as Historical.
The Prince Charlie Coatee which was developed at about the same time as the Tuxedo (circa 1930's) could be seen as Traditional.
The Low-rise kilts and the utility style kilts could be seen as Modern.

Kilts made with Box Pleats are seen in all these periods so we would need to have further criteria. If the Box Pleat kilt is "pleated to nothing", and utilizes ties/pins or fasteners other than straps & buckles it would fit more in the Historical.
A box pleated kilt with full rise, stabilizer & interfacing, and pleated to Sett or Stripe would fit into the Traditional definition.
A box pleated kilt made with Poly/Cotton fabric, built to be worn at low rise, and/or constructed more like blue jeans would fit best in the Modern era.

Bonnets are similar. The 'blue bonnet' with its larger size would be more Historical while the Balmoral type of bonnet would be seen more as Traditional if we use the date of development as the criteria.

Ecru hose and flat caps with a kilt would be seen as acceptable in the Modern style.

Much of what is, here, called THCD could be seen as Traditional using this idea because much of that style was developed in the early years of the 20th century. While THCD looks as antiquated and 'costumey" as Historical, when viewed with modern eyes, it would be Traditional none the less.

The fly plaid would fit squarely in the Tradition style as it was developed during the Edwardian period to emulate an earlier (Historical) look.

The idea we were trying to get across was "What period are you trying to emulate".

I know that this does not fit exactly with some of the definitions given earlier in this thread but it does work fairly well when we specify that it would apply to kilts and kilt accessories.

Not suggesting that this should be adopted kilt wide but food for thought. I hope this helps.