New Texas Tartan

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I noticed in my inbox this morning a new tartan for the Lone Star State has been added to the National Register. In fact, it is called the Texas Lone Star tartan. Details here:
http://www.tartanregister.gov.uk/tar...aspx?ref=10726



I have to say, my first thought was that this is just the kind of tartan that is not needed. I know that sounds harsh, but here is what I mean by that.

First, this is a tartan for an American state which already has a tartan (the Texas Bluebonnet tartan). The Texas Bluebonnet tartan was formally adopted by the State Legislature in 1989. And it is widely worn and recognized as the state tartan by many individuals and Scottish heritage groups within the state. In other words, it has both legal authority and common usage in its favor. So why introduce a competing state tartan to muddy the waters when there is already a legitimate tartan for the state?

Moreover, the designer in this case has fallen into the common trap of obvious color symbolism that I think adversely affects the design of many modern district tartans, especially state tartans. The designer has looked to the flag of Texas for color inspiration -- this is not necessarily a bad thing. However, the colors of the Texas flag are... drum roll... red, white and blue!

Those colors are held in common not only with the US flag itself, but also many of the other state flags including Wyoming, Tennessee, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Mississippi, Hawaii, Georgia, Colorado, and Arkansas. When you add in the states whose flags use two of those colors (either red/white or blue/white) that's virtually all of them. Making reference to the colors of a state flag in a tartan loses its significance, in my opinion, when the colors are so common. How many red, white and blue American tartans do we really need?

I note that this tartan was designed by the owner of a celtic shop in Texas and is available exclusively through that shop. It is categorized, correctly, as a Fashion tartan. I wish the owner of the shop much success in selling this tartan, but I hope the marketing for it does not try to downplay in any way the legitimacy or the use of the Texas Bluebonnet tartan.

[macwilkin]

I noticed in my inbox this morning a new tartan for the Lone Star State has been added to the National Register. In fact, it is called the Texas Lone Star tartan. Details here:
http://www.tartanregister.gov.uk/tar...aspx?ref=10726



I have to say, my first thought was that this is just the kind of tartan that is not needed. I know that sounds harsh, but here is what I mean by that.

First, this is a tartan for an American state which already has a tartan (the Texas Bluebonnet tartan). The Texas Bluebonnet tartan was formally adopted by the State Legislature in 1989. And it is widely worn and recognized as the state tartan by many individuals and Scottish heritage groups within the state. In other words, it has both legal authority and common usage in its favor. So why introduce a competing state tartan to muddy the waters when there is already a legitimate tartan for the state?

Moreover, the designer in this case has fallen into the common trap of obvious color symbolism that I think adversely affects the design of many modern district tartans, especially state tartans. The designer has looked to the flag of Texas for color inspiration -- this is not necessarily a bad thing. However, the colors of the Texas flag are... drum roll... red, white and blue!

Those colors are held in common not only with the US flag itself, but also many of the other state flags including Wyoming, Tennessee, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Mississippi, Hawaii, Georgia, Colorado, and Arkansas. When you add in the states whose flags use two of those colors (either red/white or blue/white) that's virtually all of them. Making reference to the colors of a state flag in a tartan loses its significance, in my opinion, when the colors are so common. How many red, white and blue American tartans do we really need?

I note that this tartan was designed by the owner of a celtic shop in Texas and is available exclusively through that shop. It is categorized, correctly, as a Fashion tartan. I wish the owner of the shop much success in selling this tartan, but I hope the marketing for it does not try to downplay in any way the legitimacy or the use of the Texas Bluebonnet tartan.

Matt,

When I first saw it come "across the wires" this morning, I was reminded of John Cumming's American tartan:

http://www.tartans.scotland.net/tart...an_id=1872.htm

T.

[Cynthia]

I must admit, this design does nothing for me. I prefer the Texas Bluebonnet Tartan. Thanks for letting us know, though!

[Riverkilt]

Dang...my parents eyeballs may have looked like when I was conceived one cold winter's night in Fort Worth...but no way folks. I'm with the Texas Bluebonnet too....and not just because I already have a kilt in that tartan...

Maybe the colors are supposed to represent the Mexicano heritage of Texas....FIESTA!!

[Tobus]

I pretty much agree, Matt. I'm not a huge fan of the Bluebonnet tartan, as I'm not overly fond of the colour scheme, but it is indeed our official tartan and this new one is just superfluous and unnecessary. And I, too, have grown weary of the constant efforts to use colours as symbols in tartan designs. Not to disrespect those who value such symbolism, but I think it's just a tad corny. As Jock Scot is fond of saying on various subjects, "there's a danger that they may be overthinking it." I'd rather just see a visually pleasing tartan without complicating it with too many details or hidden meanings.

I'm familiar with Things Celtic, as they show up at most of the Highland Games and Celtic festivals around here. I think I've even met the lady in question. She has a fairly well established business and a decent reputation. I can't really blame her for wanting to create a tartan that might appeal to her fellow Texans which might give her business a boost. It's not like she's the only one doing it. But, with that said, I think I'll pass on the tartan.

I was curious about the yellow lines. She put them in there because of the yellow fringe on the flag in her school auditorium? Gee, that's meaningful...

[castledangerous]

Nothing, in my opinion, makes a tartan more appealing and universal then adding "gold for fringing on a flag on the stage of [the designer's] school auditorium".

[RockyR]

I'm torn on the issue...

On the one side, yes, there is a state tartan already. The issue is, THAT state tartan (Texas Blue Bonnet) is controlled by 1 entity in TX as well (store named Scotland Forever who are very nice folks in their own right). So if you, as a store owner, don't have access to your state tartan based on copyright issues, what would you do other than create your own (competing) state tartan?

Agreed that some color symbolism in tartans can get a bit corny, but having designed a few tartans myself, I pose this question: Which is "cornier", creating a tartan based on colors that may mean something to the intended buyer / wearer OR designing / naming a tartan and for the explanation of colors adding "A design I thought was pretty, so that's the one I chose"? In order for people to "connect" with a tartan, there has to be some meaning other than "it looks pretty" or just b/c someone NAMED it something.

All that being said, I agree with Matt on the fact that all states have "red white and blue" in their flags and that would be very limiting in making up state tartan colors. As well, I'm not a fan of this particular design, though from a business perspective, I do understand why she did it. I just give the design itself a 'miss'.

[opositive]

my first impression was... gee, that looks an awful lot like royal stewart.

[Tobus]

On the one side, yes, there is a state tartan already. The issue is, THAT state tartan (Texas Blue Bonnet) is controlled by 1 entity in TX as well (store named Scotland Forever who are very nice folks in their own right). So if you, as a store owner, don't have access to your state tartan based on copyright issues, what would you do other than create your own (competing) state tartan?

Well that's certainly interesting. I hadn't heard that before, or hadn't been paying attention. Are you saying that our official state tartan is only able to be purchased through one company? I didn't see any restrictions on it in the tartan registry. That does indeed change the nature of the issue.

Agreed that some color symbolism in tartans can get a bit corny, but having designed a few tartans myself, I pose this question: Which is "cornier", creating a tartan based on colors that may mean something to the intended buyer / wearer OR designing / naming a tartan and for the explanation of colors adding "A design I thought was pretty, so that's the one I chose"? In order for people to "connect" with a tartan, there has to be some meaning other than "it looks pretty" or just b/c someone NAMED it something.

But all the authentic traditional Scottish clan tartans were basically created that way, weren't they? Someone picked a sett because they liked the way it looked, and then someone else (in most cases) randomly assigned it to the clans. Now they have huge significance, not because of the meanings of the colours, but because of their adoption by a group and the subsequent association with that group.

I would agree that creating a new tartan and hoping to make it achieve that level of significance is more difficult today without that history behind it, but I don't think the majority of people are picking their tartans based on colour symbolism. There's no doubt that you have authoritative experience in designing and marketing tartans, and I certainly don't mean to challenge that experience, but as a consumer, I can't think of anyone who said to himself, "oh wow - that tartan has red for bravery, so I must have it!" It seems to me that people buy tartans because they either like the colour scheme because it looks good, or they want to associate with the group it represents. In other words, what makes a tartan design popular is either its visual appeal or its adoption by a group. Assigning philosophical significance to the different colours of the tartan seems to be more important to the designer than it is to the consumer. Obvious exceptions would be school colours or other tartans where the colours already have significance, and the tartan is designed around them.

That being the case, I would think the first step in making a new tartan popular is making it look good. When the members of an organisation adopt it or take to wearing it as their own, then the identity component starts to kick in. But if a tartan starts off ugly and never gains approval by the group it's supposed to represent, it will go nowhere.

Just food for thought, and hopefully an interesting conversation on the subject!

[ShaunMaxwell]

When I first saw the Texas Bluebonnet tartan, I thought "Oh, I'll have to get a kilt in that tartan." But once I saw a couple in person, I decided that overall impression was a bit soft, almost feminine, as it's very muted and overwhelmingly blue. I mean no offense to anyone who owns one. That's just my opinion. I wouldn't mind an alternate tartan, but this definitely isn't the one!