I would like to submit a proposal to the membership

[Carlo]

In this discussion I have arrived at a point where I'm not sure if my limited english is good enough to express my thoughts accurately.

I think that we are only discussing about the definition of traditional because that is the only section most of our members do really care about. It is the one section that actual emotions are poured into (as the brilliant Definition and Guide by Nathan and CMcG shows).

Not that long ago there was a discussion if Steve is dressed traditional or modern. Doesn't that show, that the definition of modern as we use it is just as much a circular definition? After all it is more or less saying, that modern is UTKilts and tartan kilts that are not worn with the traditional style in mind.
I've not seen anyone complaining about that, even with it beeing as much saying "I know it when I see it".

What we can do is stay with what we have now, it doesn't work that bad (apart from the fact that the tartan place should be used for tartan questions), or we can follow the path of:

...

Historical Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing the kilt from a bygone era—whether accurate, theatrical, or anachronistic. Everything from great kilts to uniforms goes here.

Traditional Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing the kilt as Highland attire that have been passed down from generation to generation and remain in contemporary use. Everything from casual to formal in a kilt, if worn in time-honoured ways, goes here.

Modern Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing kilts as everyday clothing, street wear, or fashion that privilege personal interpretation. Everything from utility kilts to tartan kilts worn in new ways goes here.

There will always be blurred lines because the Traditional dress per definition is Modern as it is still worn today.

I hope you were able to follow me, if not, sorry.

[MinusHD]

Passions run deep, so no one should be surprised that there is a lot of disagreement between what is modern vs. what is traditional. Yes, there are clear differences at each end of the spectrum, but as traditional and contemporary styles converge it's is not so clear... so we now have discussion about "contemporary traditional" attire. I realize I'm just repeating the obvious. As a newer XMTS member it's been a great discussion to follow, but it always ends up with the lines more blurred, or more knit-picky tweaking of words and definitions... and not a whole lot of consensus.

What gets less attention is the boundary between "Historical" and Traditional" Is it a specific date or year (like 1782, or early 1600's)? Please pardon my ignorance if this has been determined already. I'm just unaware. Can someone's current style of highland dress be both "traditional" AND "historical"? If so, would anyone admit it? Then could that mean it is also "contemporary" at the same time?

In the photo below (sorry for the poor cell phone quality) I'm wearing what I would describe as "Modern Street Wear" or "Modern Kilt Wear". However, I'm also wearing some "traditional" items as part of my wardrobe:

• 8 yard wool tartan kilt with a kilt pin (it may have slipped a little… hard to tell, but I try to at least start out with the selvedge at mid-knee)
• Day Sporran (yes, I’m wearing a day sporran at night – I only have one presently)
• Tan Hose (a little hard to see… perhaps worn a little high – if so, just call it a rookie mistake and accept my apology)
• Flashes (hard to see)
• Kilt belt/buckle
• My black shirt is not a traditional color (personal flair encouraged?), but it is a buttoned-front “dress shirt”, sleeves rolled up due to the heat)
• No sgain dubh
• No head cover
• Then there are those paratrooper boots - not traditional, but their fellow foot-protecting cousins, hiking boots, might have been acceptable to some traditionalists.

Before I get slammed here, remember that I don't consider my appearance to be very traditional, but to some it might not be that far off. If I wore dress shoes or hikers and a white shirt I might almost be mistaken for a traditionalist dressed in a casual yet contemporary style for a summer night's musical performance. Maybe not... but if you think this is anywhere near the brink of being acceptable for a traditional (yet contemporary) casual outfit, what specifically disqualifies it (besides any typical newbie errors)? And how offensive are the disqualifiers? Do we need to develop a THCD point system to judge each item (or lack thereof) and rate the overall traditional-ness of the outfit? Yes, I'm joking. Now, If you don’t think my outfit remotely fits in with any kind of “traditional” form of highland casual dress, that’s OK. I was going for a modern casual look, but I like to include some traditional elements.

I think several people have touched on this, and have done so more eloquently, but “traditional attire” seems to encompass a broad range of styles with some basic guidelines that also allow for personal flair and evolution. Even the newly documented “Current General Conventions of THCD” at the most conservative end of the traditional spectrum allow for some variation and personal expression. AND not all modern/contemporary kilt wearers are wearing tee shirts and sandals with an X-Kilt, Alt.Kilt, Sport Kilt, Freedom Kilt… or the quintessential modern American scapegoat, a Utilikilt. Some do wear “modern” kilts for Modern Street Wear. Some wear “traditional” kilts for Modern Street Wear. And while I wouldn't expect to see a canvas utility style kilt dressed up with a bounty of formal highland accessories for a wedding, it’s not uncommon for someone to include several elements of traditional highland dress to wear in a more modern style. Some own and wear multiple styles of kilts to be worn in both traditional and non-traditional manners. Even if I’m not trying to look as traditional as the next guy the lines are blurred. Perhaps partially-traditional really means non-traditional. I guess a line has to be drawn somewhere, but XMTS has proven that difficult to do.

So… all that to get to this… Does the name of your (or my) specific kilt attire forum really matter? Do we really need such specific wording in the forum names to ensure nobody mistakenly posts an “almost-traditional” dress question in the “hard-core-traditional” forum? Does the site dictate where I post, or do I? The lines are blurred, so I’m not sure more exclusive forums with very specific titles are a great answer. I think the direction Steve was moving in his original post was a great idea. Could his suggested forum names be tweaked? Maybe, but I don’t have any better suggestions myself. I think the concept is to group members' posts a little more inclusively based on our own general styles of dress, and not necessarily based on our kilts being tartan or not... or who is the epitome of THCD. I know that idea is not popular with everyone.

But here's how it would work... If you feel like you’re somewhere in the traditional camp, post in the traditional forum and hopefully you’ll be accepted to discuss the finder points of TCHD and all that is closely related to it. You might accidentally find out that you’d be better off in the modern forum, even if you’re wearing a tartan tank. Maybe you'll discover that your posts should be divided between the traditional and modern forums because sometimes your casual kilt apparel isn't quite traditional enough for you to be considered a tried and true traditionalist 100% of the time. Maybe the opposite is true.
If you’re fully committed to the historical accuracy of your ancient highland dress replicas for research, ren-faires or reenactments, you'll know where to go. Just understand that most people will consider that to be a “costume”. Don’t be offended by that; it’s just a description, not a judgment. And don’t be upset when Braveheart posts his comical Halloween photo. There won’t be many of those anyway, so roll with it and enjoy the humor. Who knows… you might be able to give him some encouraging pointers to help improve his costume for next year. And wouldn't that be cool?

Or we can keep segmenting the forums into: Trad; Semi Trad; Sort-of Trad; Pseudo Trad; Not-so Trad // Tartan Mod; Partially Mod; Mostly Mod; Uber Mod; Not-even-a-Kilt Mod... and so on... With sticky posts like "10 Looks for 10 People who Can't Agree on Anything". Yep, I'm joking again...

I will continue to find benefit in all of the XMTS forums, no matter what they are called. Maybe the blurred lines can be good, and maybe they can help us all learn a thing or two.

I appreciate all the other members’ insightful contributions to this thread. I very much enjoy reading everyone’s perspectives, even if some our views differ in the end. Thanks!

[Grizzly]

In this discussion I have arrived at a point where I'm not sure if my limited english is good enough to express my thoughts accurately.

I think that we are only discussing about the definition of traditional because that is the only section most of our members do really care about. It is the one section that actual emotions are poured into (as the brilliant Definition and Guide by Nathan and CMcG shows).

Not that long ago there was a discussion if Steve is dressed traditional or modern. Doesn't that show, that the definition of modern as we use it is just as much a circular definition? After all it is more or less saying, that modern is UTKilts and tartan kilts that are not worn with the traditional style in mind.
I've not seen anyone complaining about that, even with it beeing as much saying "I know it when I see it".

What we can do is stay with what we have now, it doesn't work that bad (apart from the fact that the tartan place should be used for tartan questions), or we can follow the path of:

There will always be blurred lines because the Traditional dress per definition is Modern as it is still worn today.

I hope you were able to follow me, if not, sorry.

Absolutely no apology needed Carlo, there are English people who have less of a grasp or command of the English language than you, whereas i understand you perfectly. Well said.

[creagdhubh]

I will continue to find benefit in all of the XMTS forums, no matter what they are called. Maybe the blurred lines can be good, and maybe they can help us all learn a thing or two.

I appreciate all the other members’ insightful contributions to this thread. I very much enjoy reading everyone’s perspectives, even if some our views differ in the end. Thanks!

And this is precisely what makes this forum (and the rabble) so wonderfully unique.

[Nathan]

What gets less attention is the boundary between "Historical" and Traditional" Is it a specific date or year (like 1782, or early 1600's)? Please pardon my ignorance if this has been determined already. I'm just unaware. Can someone's current style of highland dress be both "traditional" AND "historical"? If so, would anyone admit it? Then could that mean it is also "contemporary" at the same time?

The dividing line between traditional and historic is not a date but whether the item or style has fallen out of use by tradition bearers. In the early 20th Century, plaids and dirks were considered traditional by most for evening wear. Nowadays they are considered by many to be historic. Obviously there is grey area as older people dress how they learned to when they were young and younger people discard things they perceive to be over the top or old fashioned. There is consensus that great kilts and flint lock pistols are historic attire but there is not consensus around plaids and hair sporrans for example. Some feel they have crossed the line into historic and others think they are splendid.

This is also complicated by the fact that fashion in general is going through a vintage craze where movements like steam punk, new gentleman and chap hop are reviving the 19th Century aesthetic. Since Highland fashion moves slower than Saxon fashion, this resurgence of classic style may save some styles that were heading toward historic before they cross the line into the dustbin of history.

Once something falls out of use and the tradition is broken, to wear it becomes an exercise in anachronism and a historic costume. There are times when this is appropriate but it is not the same as traditional clothing.

In the photo below (sorry for the poor cell phone quality) I'm wearing what I would describe as "Modern Street Wear" or "Modern Kilt Wear". However, I'm also wearing some "traditional" items as part of my wardrobe:

• 8 yard wool tartan kilt with a kilt pin (it may have slipped a little… hard to tell, but I try to at least start out with the selvedge at mid-knee)
• Day Sporran (yes, I’m wearing a day sporran at night – I only have one presently)
• Tan Hose (a little hard to see… perhaps worn a little high – if so, just call it a rookie mistake and accept my apology)
• Flashes (hard to see)
• Kilt belt/buckle
• My black shirt is not a traditional color (personal flair encouraged?), but it is a buttoned-front “dress shirt”, sleeves rolled up due to the heat)
• No sgain dubh
• No head cover
• Then there are those paratrooper boots - not traditional, but their fellow foot-protecting cousins, hiking boots, might have been acceptable to some traditionalists.

Before I get slammed here, remember that I don't consider my appearance to be very traditional, but to some it might not be that far off. If I wore dress shoes or hikers and a white shirt I might almost be mistaken for a traditionalist dressed in a casual yet contemporary style for a summer night's musical performance. Maybe not... but if you're think this is anywhere near the brink of being acceptable for a traditional (yet contemporary) casual outfit, what specifically disqualifies it (besides any typical newbie errors)? And how offensive are the disqualifiers? Do we need to develop a THCD point system to judge each item (or lack thereof) and rate the overall traditional-ness of the outfit? Yes, I'm joking. Now, If you don’t think my outfit remotely fits in with any kind of “traditional” form of highland casual dress, that’s OK. I was going for a modern casual look, but I like to include some traditional elements.

I think you achieved the look you were going for and your look would be regarded as traditional by some and not by others. You are right that the dark shirt and paratrooper boots would be less common in most traditional contexts, but, that being said, the lack of sgian dubh and bonnet are not a problem at all.

I have been labeled as a traditionalist here but I would wear an outfit like that on stage for sure. I respect tradition but tradition is not static. If people of our generation dress like that in the Highlands, the look will be viewed as traditional eventually. If they don't it won't. What we do abroad doesn't determine what is traditional Highland attire.

I think several people have touched on this, and have done so more eloquently, but “traditional attire” seems to encompass a broad range of styles with some basic guidelines that also allow for personal flair and evolution. Even the newly documented “Current General Conventions of THCD” at the most conservative end of the traditional spectrum allow for some variation and personal expression. AND not all modern/contemporary kilt wearers are wearing tee shirts and sandals with an X-Kilt, Alt.Kilt, Sport Kilt, Freedom Kilt… or the quintessential modern American scapegoat, a Utilikilt. Some do wear “modern” kilts for Modern Street Wear. Some wear “traditional” kilts for Modern Street Wear. And while I wouldn't expect to see a canvas utility style kilt dressed up with a bounty of formal highland accessories for a wedding, it’s not uncommon for someone to include several elements of traditional highland dress to wear in a more modern style. Some own and wear multiple styles of kilts to be worn in both traditional and non-traditional manners. Even if I’m not trying to look as traditional as the next guy the lines are blurred. Perhaps partially-traditional really means non-traditional. I guess a line has to be drawn somewhere, but XMTS has proven that difficult to do.

So… all that to get to this… Does the name of your (or my) specific kilt attire forum really matter? Do we really need such specific wording in the forum names to ensure nobody mistakenly posts an “almost-traditional” dress question in the “hard-core-traditional” forum? Does the site dictate where I post, or do I? The lines are blurred, so I’m not sure more exclusive forums with very specific titles are a great answer. I think the direction Steve was moving in his original post was a great idea. Could his suggested forum names be tweaked? Maybe, but I don’t have any better suggestions myself. I think the concept was is to group member posts a little more inclusively based on our own general styles of dress, and not necessarily based on our kilts being tartan or not... or who is the epitome of THCD. I know that idea is not popular with everyone.

But here's how it would work... If you feel like you’re somewhere in the traditional camp, post in the traditional forum and hopefully you’ll be accepted to discuss the finder points of TCHD and all that is closely related to it. You might accidentally find out that you’d be better off in the modern forum, even if you’re wearing a tartan tank. Maybe you'll discover that your posts should be divided between the traditional and modern forums because sometimes your casual kilt apparel isn't quite traditional enough for you to be considered a tried and true traditionalist 100% of the time. Maybe the opposite is true.
If you’re fully committed to the historical accuracy of your ancient highland dress replicas for research, ren-faires or reenactments, you'll know where to go. Just understand that most people will consider that to be a “costume”. Don’t be offended by that; it’s just a description, not a judgment. And don’t be upset when Braveheart posts his comical Halloween photo. There won’t be many of those anyway, so roll with it and enjoy the humor. Who knows… you might be able to give him some encouraging pointers to help improve his costume for next year. And wouldn't that be cool?

Or we can keep segmenting the forums into: Trad; Semi Trad; Sort-of Trad; Pseudo Trad; Not-so Trad // Tartan Mod; Partially Mod; Mostly Mod; Uber Mod; Not-even-a-Kilt Mod... and so on... With sticky posts like "10 Looks for 10 People who Can't Agree on Anything". Yep, I'm joking again...

I will continue to find benefit in all of the XMTS forums, no matter what they are called. Maybe the blurred lines can be good, and maybe they can help us all learn a thing or two.

I appreciate all the other members’ insightful contributions to this thread. I very much enjoy reading everyone’s perspectives, even if some our views differ in the end. Thanks!

Traditional outfits are by definition both historic and contemporary. Many of their elements have their roots in previous generations but they are still contemporary or modern because they have not fallen out of use.

Confused? Think about a business suit. It's modern but you can find a photo of someone wearing something very similar from 100 years ago.

Your points are well made. I think the sub forums clarify how someone wants a pic post to be perceived. If someone posts an almost traditional photo in the traditional forum and asks for feedback, my response would be different than if they posted it in the contemporary forum.

In the former, I'd tell them what they could tweak to take it from almost to all the way traditional. In the latter, I'd judge the look on purely aesthetic grounds about whether I think the person looked well put together regardless of traditional views.

That's where the true value of the different sub-forums comes out.

[CMcG]

... I was going for a modern casual look, but I like to include some traditional elements.
...

I think you achieved your style goal quite nicely

As for the sub-forums, clarity of structure provides a framework that facilitates discussion. In the open sections of the forum, such as General Kilt Talk, it can be necessary to preface everything one writes with a disclaimer, apology, and statement of perspective. This helps to promote civil discussion amongst people with very different points of view on kilts, but it can also be quite tedious. It can then be a relief to post something, without all the preamble, in a narrower style sub-forum where the regulars all understand the context and will respond in kind.

I agree that there is overlap and grey area between Historical, Traditional, and Modern. Some people's style is very clearly one way, but other people switch between styles and/or dress in a way that is neither here nor there. That's all cool! That's also why we have the catch-all General area, as well many other niche sub-fora where people can just posts pics or discuss a specific accessory

[Lyle1]

As you know, I'm an Engineer. I deal best with facts and numbers. I don't do well with words that are not clearly defined.

Good of you to confess! (lol) Many Engineers that I know have the same problem. Regretfully, some spend more time than is warranted trying to figure out the ultimate solution, when all that is needed is a workable solution for the exact problem at hand, delivered within an acceptable deadline, even if that solution is not ever going to be nominated for an award or end world hunger. No solution will resolve everything; there will always be a new variation on any theme.

I'm not sure that we need to revise the categories. Most of us know where to find the information or discussions that we are looking for, and what areas do not interest us. Personally, I am one of those members goes to the new messages first. I rarely browse by category, but I know that some members do.

Some of the proposals for revising the list of categories make more sense to me than others, but semantics is an issue in almost every list, and, since language is fluid, always will be. You can spend the next year defining the categories, and still not avoid confusion about where to post.

What does it matter if some of the current categories have more posts than others? Some people have more to say on a matter, and, in fairness, some matters simply seem to prompt more responses.

If you really feel that revising the categories will improve the forum, then you should make the changes. However, while I am usually impressed with many of the new features in major software revisions, I usually find a lot of changes that only make familiar and often used features harder to access.

[MinusHD]

I'm not sure that we need to revise the categories. Most of us know where to find the information or discussions that we are looking for, and what areas do not interest us. Personally, I am one of those members goes to the new messages first. I rarely browse by category, but I know that some members do.

Jumping in on this again... It always breaks down to semantics. And you're right - we aren't in desperate need of change. It's functioning fine, and we're pretty familiar with how everything works. I think any heartburn, on either side of the Traditional/non-Traditional continuum, is with the current forums under the "Kilt Styles and example of How They Can Be Worn" section being grouped with focus on types of kilts... how our kilts are designed/made:

• Historically Made Kilts and How to Wear Them
• Traditionally Made Kilts and How to Wear Them
• Contemporarily Made Kilts and How to Wear Them

I believe Steve's original suggestions were just intended to re-align the existing categories to focus on the styles of dress... how we wear our kilts, what look(s) we are trying to achieve:

• Historical and Costume Wear
• Highland Event Wear
• Modern Street Wear

I suppose we could debate the best forum names for the next millennium. I understand the traditionalists hesitancy to be grouped under "Highland Event Wear" since people commonly wear Utilikilts and Sport Kilts (etc.) to Celtic festivals and Highland games. But as I mentioned before, I wear a traditionally made kilt in a non-traditional/contemporary fashion. Consequently my style doesn't really fit into the current THCD-leaning "Traditionally Made Kilts and How to Wear Them" discussions, nor is my kilt one of contemporary design. Traditional tartan kilts are quite versatile, you know!

Maybe a "THCD" forum is too narrow. Perhaps "Traditional Highland Wear" would appease those opposed to a "Highland Event Wear" label... but there's that word again: "traditional".

Regardless, I still think organizing the forums around general styles of dress would be more helpful than organizing by types of kilts. It's renaming what's already there and none of the threads have to be moved so it wouldn't be difficult to go back find something (unless there's a lot involved in changing a few forum names). Hopefully that wouldn't make any existing features more difficult to access. For seasoned XMTS members it's a minor inconvenience to remember that your usual forum has a new name. For members who don't have a good forum to call home it might become a better overall experience. For future members it might be easier to find the right place to get involved in the discussion. What else would be different (from a technical or user experience perspective) if any of these changes were actually made?

[Nathan]

There's that word again, traditional. That's right. There should be room for people to discuss the traditional approach to wearing this traditional garment.

I also think there needs to be space to discuss wearing a traditionally made kilt in non-traditional ways but not at the expense of having a place where people seeking information on how to respect the tradition can find it.

I go back to my original "approaches" suggestion as amended by CMcG as the ideal remedy.

[ratspike]

Historical Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing the kilt from a bygone era—whether accurate, theatrical, or anachronistic. Everything from great kilts to uniforms goes here.

Traditional Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing the kilt as Highland attire that have been passed down from generation to generation and remain in contemporary use. Everything from casual to formal in a kilt, if worn in time-honoured ways, goes here.

Modern Kilt Wear: This section is for discussing approaches to wearing kilts as everyday clothing, street wear, or fashion that privilege personal interpretation. Everything from utility kilts to tartan kilts worn in new ways goes here.

Of all the suggestions we've had so far, this is the one I like the best. It's simple. It's to the point. IMO it's made very clear what sort of posts go where. Nothing is ever going to be perfect on an interweb forum, sometimes posts will end up in the wrong place, and not everyone looks at the section where something was posted before replying. I still believe that getting overly complicated and over thinking the new section names and definitions is unnecessary.

I hope that once this is finally settled and implemented that it'll help to close the divide that's reared it's ugly head. I'm not honestly sure how real it is, or if some of us are just perceiving it as being a bigger deal than it actually is. In any case, I hope we're able to get over it and move past it. We're all here because we enjoy wearing, looking at pictures of, and talking about kilts. Nobody should need to be concerned that there won't be an appropriate section to discuss the way they prefer to wear theirs.