POLL-Do you want this tartan?

[biblemonkey]

It is not that I or anyone else here seeks to name their tartan the ONLY Christian tartan. As I have said, the idea that have been kicking around is based on the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed and would be based on visuals (colors/threads) that would represent the various parts of said creeds. As these creeds are accepted by a majority of Christian denominations as containing the basics tenaments of Chritianity I could use them and name it the Apostolic Tartan or something else to avoid a dispute. If the problem really lies in the name and not in the project itself then I do not see the problem. The purpose is still the same. Design and register a tartan that most Christians of most denominations would be able to get behind on at least a Theological level without the discomfort that some (like myself) would have in wearing a saint based or other organization based tartan.

As to the issue that seems to unnerve some that they would be committing to buy something they have not seen yet? I have stated, very specifically that no one is asking for money right now if ever. IF it is designed and IF fellow Christians like it enough to get some cloth, who would be willing to say yes to going in on me with the registry/weaving/kilt making costs? Remember that only applies IF any design we come up with looks like something you find attractive. If it is as ugly as the day is long I wouldn't want it either. This is just feeling the water to see if I want to take the plunge. If someone else thinks they might want to go for a swim later then just let me know.

As to the design, I have already stated that I would be working with the posting threads and polls here to choose color, thread, etc. and put it to a vote at every stage. We have enough Christians here from enough varying traditions that I think we could at least make a pretty good stab at getting something the majority would be comfortable with.

[Tobus]

While I think I understand your viewpoint fairly well, and agree that it's a valid and likely common one, I have to disagree.


Tartans have only existed as symbols with names for a couple hundred years, on the whole; on the other hand, tartan, as a symbol characteristic of Highland Scottish culture, has existed five to ten times as long. And during most of that time, tartan design and weaving was seen as a creative art form. I argue that renewed interest in designing tartans is actually reviving tartan and returning it to its deep roots, just as our kilt wearing is reviving use of the kilt as day-to-day clothing.

Just my thoughts.

Hi Ryan,

I don't disagree with any of that. But I think we're talking about apples and oranges. Yes, tartan has existed for a really long time, and it's a fairly recent convention for it to have any symbolism that ties it to a group. I don't really have any issues with the weaving or wearing of multitudes of interesting tartans for their beauty. That, as you said, is the oldest tradition in wearing tartan: because you like the way it looks. I have a closet full of "plaid" flannel shirts that I bought simply for that reason. I love the colours and patterns of them, even though (as far as I know) the patterns have no name, and no association with any particular group.

What I am not fond of (and I get the impression that others feel this way too) is the idea of designing a tartan specifically for its symbolism. In other words, it's one thing to say, "Hey, I was playing on my loom and came up with this lovely tartan; I think I shall start wearing it!", but it's another thing entirely to say, "I belong to a group of people and I think we need a tartan of our own, so let's design one specifically for the purpose of being our identifier." The former is as old as tartan itself, but the latter seems to be a modern hijacking of Scottish tradition which evolved around the clans.

That's what I meant about the meaningful tartans being the clan ones and the older original setts. Their advent as being symbols of clan affiliation, despite the somewhat fraudulent nature of certain book-writers of the 19th century and their ilk, was an evolution of tartan-wearing in its original context. At this point, though, it has become a long-standing and renowned tradition in Scottish (Highland) culture. I respect it for what it is. But at what point does it get out of hand? A couple dozen well-known tartans which identify historic clans is one thing, but when we get untold thousands of tartans, all of which are supposed to be meaningful, it seems to (as I said previously) muddy the waters. An over-proliferation of symbolism tends to make the symbolism itself meaningless.

Of course, that's just my opinion, and it doesn't stop anyone from doing what they want. I would never be so presumptuous as to tell someone they should not do what they want. I was merely explaining my own thoughts to biblemonkey.

Either way, I think a vote nay should be sufficient to answer the intended poll and the extra criticism of the motivation and purpose of the kilt could be left out—it’s counter-productive to all things kilt

To be fair, he did ask the question to all of us. I can only assume that if he didn't want our opinions, he wouldn't have asked. If it were me having asked the rabble whether they thought something was a good idea, I would appreciate knowing why they thought it was good or bad, rather than a simple impersonal "yes" or "no". No one here seems to be trying to be mean about it; it's all constructive criticism, I think.

[chrisupyonder]

I voted... Neat idea, but I would not buy it.


Chris.

[biblemonkey]

Actually this is the original question,

The question I put to you is not whether you think this is a good idea or if you have any design ideas, but if it was created and it looked good would you commit to buying the custom tartan and having a kilt made as our fellow xmarkers did with the cthulu tartan? Or is this a neat idea but you would not invest in it?

I do appreciatte the different takes on it, however and in the interest of open discussion and keeping the ebb and flow of thought and creativity going I haven't said anything. The discussion has indeed been mostly constructive.

In answer to the over-proliferation of tartan I would say that we passed that point a while back. Just look at the register.

As far as the meaning of tartan goes, the most meaningful tartan is the one that means the most to you when you wear it. Only those who identify with that tartan typically care when they see you in it. It is a way to express to folks something deeply personal and have that instant connection to others who connect with it but, if asked, it gives you the oppotunity to share a part of yourself with another person and THAT is alot of what tartan does. One more or one less tartan won't make alot of difference but the personal connection one would have to any new design is what is really important. Whether it is in memoriam of a lost loved one, the joining of two families, or pride in your heritage, tartan only has as much meaning as the wearer or viewer wants to impart to it.

[Burly Brute]

Hi Ryan,

I don't disagree with any of that. But I think we're talking about apples and oranges. Yes, tartan has existed for a really long time, and it's a fairly recent convention for it to have any symbolism that ties it to a group. I don't really have any issues with the weaving or wearing of multitudes of interesting tartans for their beauty. That, as you said, is the oldest tradition in wearing tartan: because you like the way it looks. I have a closet full of "plaid" flannel shirts that I bought simply for that reason. I love the colours and patterns of them, even though (as far as I know) the patterns have no name, and no association with any particular group.

What I am not fond of (and I get the impression that others feel this way too) is the idea of designing a tartan specifically for its symbolism. In other words, it's one thing to say, "Hey, I was playing on my loom and came up with this lovely tartan; I think I shall start wearing it!", but it's another thing entirely to say, "I belong to a group of people and I think we need a tartan of our own, so let's design one specifically for the purpose of being our identifier." The former is as old as tartan itself, but the latter seems to be a modern hijacking of Scottish tradition which evolved around the clans.

That's what I meant about the meaningful tartans being the clan ones and the older original setts. Their advent as being symbols of clan affiliation, despite the somewhat fraudulent nature of certain book-writers of the 19th century and their ilk, was an evolution of tartan-wearing in its original context. At this point, though, it has become a long-standing and renowned tradition in Scottish (Highland) culture. I respect it for what it is. But at what point does it get out of hand? A couple dozen well-known tartans which identify historic clans is one thing, but when we get untold thousands of tartans, all of which are supposed to be meaningful, it seems to (as I said previously) muddy the waters. An over-proliferation of symbolism tends to make the symbolism itself meaningless.

Of course, that's just my opinion, and it doesn't stop anyone from doing what they want. I would never be so presumptuous as to tell someone they should not do what they want. I was merely explaining my own thoughts to biblemonkey.


To be fair, he did ask the question to all of us. I can only assume that if he didn't want our opinions, he wouldn't have asked. If it were me having asked the rabble whether they thought something was a good idea, I would appreciate knowing why they thought it was good or bad, rather than a simple impersonal "yes" or "no". No one here seems to be trying to be mean about it; it's all constructive criticism, I think.

Tobus,

I think Biblemonkey answered us both, and I hope my tone didn’t come across as overzealous or anything like that, sometimes I should elaborate more (but am too lazy to do so) and so I can see why you came to the conclusion you did on interpreting what I said.

To all,

I would like to say, however, how awesome it is and to praise everyone who has been a part of this discussion for not allowing it to get shut down due to some outlandish commenting! Ha. Anyhow, may the force be with you all…

-BB

[OC Richard]

"Where a tartan is named for a formal company or organisation, giving the impression of an association with it, by use of the official title or commonly used nickname, then the application must be accompanied by a letter of authority from a prominent office-bearer in the appropriate body e.g. the Chief Executive."

I've puzzled over this a couple times, and still I don't see what this quote has to do with the topic.

Christians do not comprise a "formal company or organisation".

The Roman Catholic Church, yes. The United Methodist Church, yes. Christians as a whole, no.

Personally, I think that The Isle of Skye tartan makes a good Church tartan, containing as it does liturgical colours such as purple, green, and white (well, a very light grey!) Whether it's Ordinary Time or no, I'm good to go! All it lacks is the rose of Gaudete Sunday.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Personally, I think that The Isle of Skye tartan makes a good Church tartan, containing as it does liturgical colours such as purple, green, and white (well, a very light grey!) Whether it's Ordinary Time or no, I'm good to go! All it lacks is the rose of Gaudete Sunday.

But Richard, what would you wear on Pentecost or Palm Sunday?

[Paul Henry]

"Where a tartan is named for a formal company or organisation, giving the impression of an association with it, by use of the official title or commonly used nickname, then the application must be accompanied by a letter of authority from a prominent office-bearer in the appropriate body e.g. the Chief Executive."

I've puzzled over this a couple times, and still I don't see what this quote has to do with the topic.

Christians do not comprise a "formal company or organisation".

The Roman Catholic Church, yes. The United Methodist Church, yes. Christians as a whole, no.......snip

perhaps you are thinking over it too hard , but you make exactly the point(that was made all those posts ago) that there is no one authority, so that no-one could decide that it would be a "Christian" tartan, it would always remain a personal/club one, and as others have intimated perhaps also a little presumptious.....

[davidlpope]

But yes, designing, naming, and registering a generalized "Christian" tartan almost seems... presumptuous, come to think of it.

***.

[Meggers]

Biblemonkey,

I think that, as long as this tartan has this special religious value for you, then it has done its job whether others agree with its colors, design, etc. Even if it is a personal tartan, religion itself is personal and is a personal relationship with God, so if you make a tartan and it represents your faith, then the job was done and was successful. Whether anyone else wants to wear it too will be up to others.

I think, regardless, if you wear it and feel good in it and feel proud to tell others that the tartan represents your creativity in representing your path with God, then the job was successful.