Why do Scots not wear the Kilt?

[cavscout]

I know that's a rather blanket statement but nothing was on TV tonight so I popped in Rob Roy. My wife who is about the biggest Anti-Kilt person in the world asked if they still wear kilts in Scotland. I told her not really. Her response was, "so if kilts are so great, why don't they still wear them." Of course I can't speak for eveyone in Scotland :rolleyes: so I said "You might have to ask them." :rolleyes:

So my question is, why have kilts been allowed to drift into more of a ceremonial garb in the country it represents? I've read the posts that if you see someone in Scotland wearing a kilt they are American, and that even the youth of Scotland laugh about kilts. I'm not trying to pick a fight or judge anything, merely wanting to understand better so I''m asking the question. It's sad to imagine that an American is what a kilt in Scotland is associated with.

Of course this isn't indicative of everyone in Scotland but I get the impression that kilts are far from normal in Scotland. I'd love to hear from our Scots members and even those who have visited Scotland enough to understand the cultural tides in Scotland.

[Mithral]

I too, would like to hear more about this.

The way I understand it is that a lot of Scots do wear them for formal events, but not so much as an everyday article of clothing.
Though I have also heard that is beginning to change, much like it has in the U.S.

[bangkok kilt]

Eagerly anticipating some firsthand info on this one as well.

[James]

There are many opinions on this one-but!

To recently it was regarded as a highland/clan garment, and many a lowlander would scorn to wear such garb, as it was the preserve of the savage highlander. Whilst even for a highlander it was considered unsuitable wear below the Highland Line. After all Burns would never have worn the kilt.

Allied to this the view that the kilt was only for a clansman wearing his own tartan.

Too whilst the upper classes could afford a kilt, it was beyond the purse of the average working man. Nor is it ideally suited to many working activities-mining, shipbuilding being examples.

The continuing influence of proscription.

A desire of people to appear clad as with the mainstream of Europe, as opposed to wearing some archaic local garb. See this today around the world where local dress is being swamped by 'jeans & Tshirts'.

Too akin to the white tie, what was once day to day wear became special occasion wear.

Today we cannot deny that in part the resurgance of the kilt is due to relative affluence, so people can afford one; and such things like the www which show those interested in wearing the kilt that they are not alone. Too the urge of today for people to cleave to their roots, be those roots real or imagined. Look at the proliferation of clans today, many of famil;es that not so long ago would have derided any suggestion of a highland connection.

I probably wear the kilt today bcause so many years ago my father thought not of Scotland, but of pride in clan: hence getting me my first one when I was very young - so much so that I'm not sure how many years I've worn one-at least 60 plus. Having said that there were times when say as a youth, where I dressed as did my contemporaries-only wearing the kilt for clan occasions.

James

[Pour1Malt]

guid question...

mai answer must involve a bit of history an politics... an a bit o' England bashing probably tae...

so ai will apologise up front if ai offend any o oor guid English brothers....

first, the things James said are richt....

second... lets clarify a few facts.... Kilt wearin IS changin in Scotland jus as it is in 'merica.... many (an ai think maist) Scots will an do wear a kilt to weddings... many will wear a kilt tae a funeral... a large percentage o Scots who gae tae Scotland rugby and/or fitba matches wear kilts tae the matches... (dae a search fair 'Tartan Army')... thot actually gaes fur a' Scotland sport... (there was an entire hockey team in kilts a' ma local pub a month ago celebrating the retirement of a player)...many Scots wear kilt oot on Hogmany and again oan New Years day... the kilt IS becoming prefered dress for special occasions and Scottish national pride....

third... anytime there is attempted genocide o a race o people (Native Americans, come tae mind) it will hae a lastin impact... an so it is wi kilts an almaist a' things Scottish... the attempted genocide o the Scots and the Scots way o life, by the English, is still wi' us...

fourth... 50-100 years ago England was oan top o the world... Scotland was a conquered country (still is for the maist part)... an society in general was less sensitive to sterotypes and discrimination... look at the images 50-100 years ago o Scots (arr "Scotch" as we were called) Scots an a' things Scottish were ridiculed .... openly, publicly ridiculed and sterotyped by the English... an by some Scots tae.... (same happened in 'merica wi African 'mericans)...

as a result... many Scots arr imbarrassed tae be Scots.... an try very hard tae be either English or 'Merican in their dress, actions, music, and so on.... naybuddy wants tae be identified wi a negative sterotype.... especially young people... so there hae been many generations o Scots that shun bagpipes, haggis, tartan, kilts, gaelic, an the lot...

as ai said above... it IS changin.... Scotland is gettin it's national pride back and along wi that- things like kilts arr becoming positive images tae...

modern kiltmakers... some celebs... an sites like this... arr truely helping Scots hae pride in their history an national dress... but it will tak years tae undo the damage caused in the past...

sooo... there's mai twa pence oan the subject....


:rolleyes:

[Mike1]

P1M has the benefit of being able to understand Scotland, both from within and from outwith. This is one of the reasons that I once suggested trying to spend some forum time educating ourselves about a country and a people that, while quite like we North Americans are also quite different.

Apples and oranges are both fruits, but to understand all there is to know of one provides very little background on the other. North America is not Alba, either.

One of the things I have noticed is that there are a lot of Scots that do see the history and heritage in the kilt. But not in the small kilt that we are so familiar with, rather the belted plaid. Suddenly, the convenience of strapping a kilt on is not part of the equation.

Also, we have to understand the relative wealth of the U.S., when trying to understand individuals of other countries and cultures. While we often fail to see it, by comiparison we are very well off. A pal of mine in Scotland loves the kilt and when a special occasion arises, he borrows one from a friend. He cannot afford a kilt of his own. (He cannot understand why we are raising the stink we are about $3.00/gallon gasoline, when petrol is running near a pound/litre.) Don't take this to mean that Scots are poverty-stricken, however the extra 'splash cash' you might be using to buy kilt number umpty-eleventeenth is not typical either.

This might strike a nerve with some here, but you are going to find that most Scots are not into the 'tartan of the day' kilt-wearing, either. They wear their own tartan, because it is their own. As for the contemporary, solid kilts? Those are typically viewed as costume wear and not considered to be kilts at all. The popularity of that style kilt has yet to make its way across.

Another answer I've heard from some of my pals, when asked about not wearing a kilt is why we are not wearing tri-corn hats and homespun shirts. And this is really a valid question, if approached the same way the relative lack of kilts in Scotland is approached. How many of us wore a tri-corn, a homespun shirt and buckled shoes to work, yesterday? Nobody? Whatsamatter, do you no care about your heritage? Are you willing to let a part of American history die out among us? Can you no remember who you are and whence you came? You are willing to identify with Scotland's history, yet you ignore your own?!?

And before you inform me that you do wear historical garb when participating with your re-enactment group, let me remind you that means you are celebrating history through your garb on special occasions only.

This goes back to a discussion we once had about 'clan' membership. North Americans embrace their 'clan' memberships, which are really no more than paid memberships into a society that celebrates the history of a given family. I wear a Lamont tartan, to celebrate and recognize my ancestors. But is it really necessary? I am who I am, no tartan needed. I am who I am, no membership card required. I think you will find that most Scots feel the same way. While fiercely proud of their families, they see no need to wear a physical representation of who they are, each and every day. So they reserve that for special times and occasions, so as to not lose the sense of pride that anyone gains whilst wearing their family's tartan. Once again, if you look back to the question of why kilts are not part of the daily wear in Scotland, how many of us wore garments with our names emblazoned on them to work yesterday? What?!? Are you no proud of who you are? Do you choose to mask your identity from the rest of the world?

Many Scots have learned that the kilt is considered to be dress-wear, rather than everyday. How many of you wore a tuxedo to work, yesterday? Didn't care to look your best, or what?

Do you begin to see that there are multiple reasons that the kilt is not standard, everyday wear in some parts of Scotland? There is not one, simple reason to be given. And until you take the time to learn about Scotland, her history and her rich culture, most of those reasons are going to remain a mystery.

[bronzewhaler82]

First off I'd like to start by saying I was born in England but consider myself British. As far as I'm concerned Scotland, Wales, England etc are all part of one nation. May I remind you that 200 years ago the Scottish people themselves agreed to join Great Britain. No-one forced them. I've never understood the 'us and them' attitude some British people have :confused:

I haven't been offended by your post Pour1malt but I'm going to challenge a few of your statements.

Describing the English treatment of the Scots all those hundreds of years ago as 'Genocide' is a poor choice of words. Genocide is mass murder and the attempted obliteration of an entire race. I've read myself that the treatment of Scottish people during the English 'occupation' wasn't very good but to suggest 'genocide' is absurd. If you want to read about Genocide look what Hitler did to the Jews and Poles etc

I suppose some Scots are still bitter about what happened hundreds of years ago :rolleyes: but most don't have any issues with it. Most people are sensible enough to move on. A couple of my friends are Scots and they've never had any problem with the fact i'm English or vice versa.

Scotland is not a 'conquered' country, its a United one

I cringe at the idea that Kilts are a primarily Scottish thing, after all Northumberland in England has its own Tartan and kilt wearing tradition (hardly the action of a nation trying to 'ridicule and stereotype' scots)

I've never heard a Scot say they're embarrased to be a Scot and as for blaming the English for Scots not wearing kilts. Come on! Scots just follow fashion and want to blend in with the rest of the world like normal people, just because they don't parade around the streets wearing Kilts and munching haggis whilst playing the bagpipes doesn't mean they're ashamed of what they are.

Theres my two pennies worth

P.S I like your Post Mike1 very inciteful

Rule Britannia!!

[Blu (Ontario)]

Clear, succinct, answers to an oft asked question. Excellent thread!

[Pour1Malt]

excellent additions Mike- thanks...

bronzewhaler82- ai'm glad you weren't offended an ai hope this willnae offend ya either...

but yur answer is typical of many English folk ai've met... frankly- ya just dinnae get it.... same as when a caucasian 'merican disnae understand whit the African 'mericans arr so pissed aff aboot.... I'm no sayin yur a bad person- arr thick -arr anything like thot at a'... (in fact ai'd be happy tae chat wi ya over a dram) ...
ai'm jus saying ya dinnae understand....

when we were in Oban last year an English couple was oan a boat wi us an a bunch o other Scots... an at her hotel they were flying flags fraim all over the world... but nay Union Flag... she was quite confused and offended that they were nae flying the Union Flag.... she just didnae understand.... maist Scots ai know do no see themselves as part of Britain and do no consider themselves to be in a Union wi' England....

ai ha ainly see a Union Flag flying in Scotland ( oan other than a government building) twice.... ya see St Andrews an Rampant Lions everwhere- but nay Union Flags....

as fur 'genocide' it is defined as " The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group." it does no hae tae bae 'mass murder'....
fraim the reading ai've done 'genocide' is an appropriate word... there was an planned attempt to outlaw everything 'Scottish" including the Scots language... the land was given tae English landlords... Scots were murdered regularly and there was an attempt to 'breed' them oot.... certainly it was not as effective as what the Nazi's did (which is why ai did no mention the Nazi's) but it was as effective as whit happened tae the Native 'mericans....

I suppose some Scots are still bitter about what happened hundreds of years ago :rolleyes: but most don't have any issues with it. ...

weel... we obviously hang oot wi' different groups o' Scots.... ai havnae met a single Scot wi' "no issues" over whit happened tae the Scots....

slainte!

[James]

Sadly this is moving into very murky waters, and from reality to revisionist thinking: an example of which would be the slave trade which would not have existed if native Africans not been selling their fellows into slavery-as is still happening. This is not to condone the slave trade, but to put another slant on the received wisdom of today.

Just as it is too easy to forget that as many Scots fought on the Hanovarian side at Culloden, as did for the Jacobite cause. Asking too how many actions attributed to the English were in fact carried out by Scots?

Whilst what happened in Scotland was no different to what happened in England at the time of the enclosures. Or what about the ravishing of Britain by William The Bastard, or what happened in the Civil War, where he consequences of purely English battles were as nasty as anything that happened in Scotland.

Too the Act of Union was necessitated by the fiscal collapse of Scotland, and we must not forget that today many English are complaining about what they see as the unfair financial burden imposed upon them by Scotland.

Now I'm not trying to be an apologist for England-just pointing out that bad things have happened to, and in, all countries throughout history, and will continue to do so.

On the other side of the coin look at the many Scots who found fame and fortune in England: how today a largely Scots Cabinet though based in England rules Britain: and shock horror was responsible for the merging of the Highland Regiments.

This brings me to the main problem that Scotland has today, and that is its perception of itself as being a victim: for as long as that perception persists, and it is a perception: then Scotland has no way to go but down.

However if Scotland has the guts to emulate its many famous and very successful sons and daughters, and shakes off that victim status, there will be no stopping it-be that in Europe, or around the world.

The choice is ours: and it is possible that the spread of Highland culture as evidenced by this board is evidence that Scotland is starting to hold up its head again.

Sorry if I've trampled on a few toes, but the whole matter is much more complex than Scotland Good-England Bad, or vice versa.

Maybe it is a subject we should avoid on this board, for as ever there is animosity twixt Highlands and Lowlands, and the Borders are something else again.

James