[Tetley]

One question that arises from the excellent article on the kilt by Matt, Todd and others and that is when does something become traditional?

The definition of the word from the Latin is to hand over or pass on but it would be interesting to find out what xmarkers think about kilt tradition.

One could say, for example, that since Irish Pipe bands have been wearing saffron kilt since the beginning of the 1900s or so, that perhaps this could now be regarded as traditional. Yes, I know that not all Irish bands wear saffron, I'm using this as an example.

Still, the question is an interesting one.

Ideas anyone?

Mark

[M. A. C. Newsome]

One problem with words like "traditional" is that they will mean different things to different people.

If one uses "traditional" to mean, "what I learned from my father and grandfather," then one could correctly say that only an 8 yard knife pleated kilt is a "traditional" kilt.

If one uses "traditional" to mean something more akin to "as practiced in the past," then one could correctly say that a 4 yard box pleated kilt is quite "traditional!"

And so you could have two people arguing over what style of kilt is more "traditional" than the other, and both would be correct!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I think that when one is referring to Highland attire one has to differentiate between style of dress, and the occasions when certain modes of dress are customarily worn. It is this fusion, in my opinion, than creates what some may characterize as "tradition".

So, when attending a wedding in Highland attire the expected mode of dress would be kilt and sporran, tweed jacket, hose, white shirt and tie.

Likewise, when attending a tartan ball the expected mode of dress would be a doublet or coatee, dress shirt and tie or jabot, kilt and dress sporran, and dark or tartan hose.

Now both of the above occasions suggest what is "traditionally" worn, but without addressing the style of the apparel, which could be anything from very conservative to something off the catwalks of Edinburgh (if such exist!). Which leads me to the point of this posting:

I believe that "events" are easier to categorize as "traditional" than attire-- "We traditionally celebrate Burns' Night on the first Saturday in February, and we customarily wear black tie to the dinner." sums it up nicely.

As far as the antiquity of Highland attire is concerned, by and large the clothing worn today is hardly changed from what was worn in 1900, and certainly it is virtually the same as that worn in 1930-- as is most men's attire. In my opinion one is headed down the wrong path if one looks to pipe bands or Highland regiments when discussing customary civilian attire; uniforms are just that-- uniforms-- and no variation in dress is allowed, unlike civilian attire.

[Jock Scot]

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

I think that when one is referring to Highland attire one has to differentiate between style of dress, and the occasions when certain modes of dress are customarily worn. It is this fusion, in my opinion, than creates what some may characterize as "tradition".

So, when attending a wedding in Highland attire the expected mode of dress would be kilt and sporran, tweed jacket, hose, white shirt and tie.

Likewise, when attending a tartan ball the expected mode of dress would be a doublet or coatee, dress shirt and tie or jabot, kilt and dress sporran, and dark or tartan hose.

Now both of the above occasions suggest what is "traditionally" worn, but without addressing the style of the apparel, which could be anything from very conservative to something off the catwalks of Edinburgh (if such exist!). Which leads me to the point of this posting:

I believe that "events" are easier to categorize as "traditional" than attire-- "We traditionally celebrate Burns' Night on the first Saturday in February, and we customarily wear black tie to the dinner." sums it up nicely.

As far as the antiquity of Highland attire is concerned, by and large the clothing worn today is hardly changed from what was worn in 1900, and certainly it is virtually the same as that worn in 1930-- as is most men's attire. In my opinion one is headed down the wrong path if one looks to pipe bands or Highland regiments when discussing customary civilian attire; uniforms are just that-- uniforms-- and no variation in dress is allowed, unlike civilian attire.

That sums up the whole thing perfectly.

[McClef]

That song Tradition from Fiddler on the Roof keeps going through my head now!

Also thoughts of "where is it written?" from Yentl.

Customs and expectations are indeed based upon traditions that have been handed down but it is healthy for them to be challenged from time to time.

[DamnthePants]

It has always been a tenet of mine that we must not become a slave to Tradition.

Things become traditions because they happen over and over again. As long as we WANT to do something that is traditional, or it otherwise goes on, not harming anything, it can exist. It is when Tradition interferes with modern life, or we have a desier to attempt to establish something new, that we must not find ourselves saying, "But I cant, because it is tradition to..."; and then fail to do what we desire.

We make Traditions. Traditions do not make us.

[Radge]

[QUOTE=McClef;858091]That song Tradition from Fiddler on the Roof keeps going through my head now!

Also thoughts of "where is it written?" from Yentl.


Hebrew/Caledonian traditions come together thanks to the Rabbi at the link below..


http://www.jewishtartan.com/

[Chas]

Originally Posted by DamnthePants

It has always been a tenet of mine that we must not become a slave to Tradition.

Things become traditions because they happen over and over again. As long as we WANT to do something that is traditional, or it otherwise goes on, not harming anything, it can exist. It is when Tradition interferes with modern life, or we have a desier to attempt to establish something new, that we must not find ourselves saying, "But I cant, because it is tradition to..."; and then fail to do what we desire.

We make Traditions. Traditions do not make us.

I have no desire to be insulting or deliberately antagonistic, but there is nothing in what you have written with which I can agree. In fact, I would go as far as to say that it is all wrong.

Traditions exist only because they are of benefit to the majority of the people involved in that activity. That activity might be living in a certain country, or being part of a family, or following a particular profession or sport, or one of the many other things to which people align themselves i.e. kilt wearing.

People are, by their very nature, creatures of habit. It is how we learn to survive, first as children and then as adults. Our religions and our laws are only traditions that have been codified. Good manners and respect are only traditions.

Change for the sake of change, has never in the whole of human history, benefited anyone. Anarchy is the outcome.

Traditions do not make us.

Of course they do. We are all hand crafted by the traditions that have been in place since the day we were born. I think you have broken your tenet every day of your life and that is no bad thing.

Regards

Chas

[Lyle1]

Originally Posted by Chas

Traditions exist only because they are of benefit to the majority of the people involved in that activity. That activity might be living in a certain country, or being part of a family, or following a particular profession or sport, or one of the many other things to which people align themselves i.e. kilt wearing.



Of course they do. We are all hand crafted by the traditions that have been in place since the day we were born. I think you have broken your tenet every day of your life and that is no bad thing.

Regards

Chas

Traditions are not bad, but I cannot agree with that they only exist when they benefit the majority.

Who benefits when tradition dictates the color of one's shoes or sporran or by being told what to wear for every occasion? Maybe the people who make and sell shoes, or maybe the socioeconomic class can afford the prescribed fashions and thus function on a higher social plain than those who cannot.

Are we handcrafted by the traditions that were in place since the day we were born? Many social traditions that limited the rights of minorities were happily embraced when I was a child have been largely, and I think, rightfully, rejected.

Traditions can provide a guideline for how we live our lives, but I think each of us has the right, and even, a responsibility to reject some traditions that for whatever reason, we find unacceptable.


The American poet, Ralph Waldo Emerson, expressed it better than I do:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

[MacLowlife]

The good news is, no country or government will be rent asunder by our differing views on tradition, what constitutes it, and what significance it ought to have. I sincerely hope nobody's life is significantly troubled by it, or even anyone's day derailed.

We read these posts, we comment, we seek to dislodge, we seek community. Why else are we here?

I would like to say at this point that little changes because of these discussions, but I do not think that is true. I think people begin to form opinions they never put into words before. Sometimes people learn things, even learn that previous ideas may be wrong. Sometimes we simply read for those we agree with, sometimes we read to see what new folly some reliable jackass has come up with.

Arguably, XMarkers have traditions of our own- a welcoming spirit, a practice of inquiry, even a habit of courtesy in our disagreement. Some of those traditions get ignored, some get upgraded, some remain unchanged.

I would reckon that a tradition can easily be defined as something that has been done since before you were around, or since before the reach of your knowledge. Thus, the Beatles might be called traditional and the Frosty the Snowman special with Burl Ives might be considered a Christmas Tradition.


Or maybe not.

Folk music often includes songs or music that are called "traditional" as in "we don't know who wrote this one," but clearly somebody did. Somebody wrote every one of them. And sometimes the lack of knowledge is caused by things other than the passage of time.

But returning to the implied topic, Tradition in Kilts, I would note the oft celebrated Scots tradition of independence. Less loyal folk might even go so far as to call it cantankerousness. If you start with independent people, allow for local variation, rule out absolute uniformity, consider the different means and circumstances of the wearers, and you may find it difficult to cite one prefect example of tradition. You may be able to show something typical or common or even prevalent, but I would suggest the factors above will always make a single standard of traditional highland dress difficult to define, much less practice or enforce.
Vive la difference, as they traditionally say across the channel.