Just to twist the tiger's tail....

[Katia]

But specific to the kilt, I hope that we would all agree an ankle-length pleated skirt which matches all the other criteria of a kilt except for its ridiculous length is not a kilt. Or would you say that it IS a kilt, just for a person who is 10 feet tall?

Ill-fitting is one thing. Intent to be worn outside the parameters of what is recognisable as a kilt is something else.

And yet...

And, can you blame someone who doesn't know better that they are wearing it outside the parameters, even if the way they are wearing it is intentional (because they think it's correct)? I assume that is not the situation we're talking about?

[Steve Ashton]

Just to be clear -

It has never been my intent to be difficult.

It is just that I was always taught to be precise in the language I used. And when the written word is the medium of communication, as here on X Marks, precision becomes especially vital.

This is why I have always stressed that we should not use a word or phrase that we cannot define.
Or that we cannot agree on its meaning.

This idea became especially important to this forum, about 10 years ago, when the phrase "Family Friendly" was added to our rules. A rule that our Forum Moderators would be expected to enforce.
No one could give a definition of the phrase other than "I'll know it when I see it". And this always left the enforcement of the rule open to individual interpretation which, on occasion, lead to abuse.

This goes along with –
If we use terms like "Right", "Proper", or "Correct", when referring to things like Tartans or a kilt, then the opposite must also be true. That there would also be a "Wrong", "Improper", or "Incorrect" Tartan or kilt.

Using the term "Traditional", when referencing a kilt, is another case of imprecise language.
A case of not being able to define what is meant. Or at least not being able to come to an agreement of what is meant.

It has always been my contention that over the past 150 years there have been about as many different kilts as there have been kilt makers. Each one trying to find a way to have their product stand apart from the rest.
If we speak of kilt made only before 1960, I have personally seen at least 7 different ways to fold fabric into pleats. There are examples of kilts that are pleated all the way around. I have seen many ways to fasten a kilt on. I have seen kilts made from fabrics woven from Silk and wool still in the grease. Tartans, Tweeds, solid colors. Twill weaves and plain weaves. I have seen hand stitched kilts and machine stitched kilts. I have seen kilts worn high on the torso and kilts worn lower than blue jeans. I have seen short and long kilts. And yet each one has been called or advertised as “The Traditional kilt”. Heck, even today the Pakistani kilts are advertised as “Traditional Scottish kilts”.

On X Marks we have agreed to use Merriam Webster’s Dictionary for the definitions of words used on the forum.
It is good practice to be able to quote a dictionary or to be able to give written or pictorial examples. i.e. ”This photo shows what defines a kilt and this photo shows what would not fit within the definition.”

The problem that we have always had on X Marks is agreeing on a definition of the words “Traditional” and “kilt”. No one has, so far, been able to give an example, that more than three or four agree on, of what would, and what would not, be the definition of these two words.

Like the phrase “Family Friendly”, the words “Traditional” and “Kilt” have always depended on individual interpretation.

Who is going to be the arbiter of all this individual interpretation?

I could, of course, mandate what words or what definitions would be used on X Marks. But you will notice that I don’t.

All I have ever asked is, that if we use a word, that we use one that we can define.

[Jock Scot]

Therein lies our .....all of us....problem Steve. We cannot define or measure tradition, we cannot measure perceptions, we cannot measure items made in the past by eye with not a measurement to be had, often the skills of the past are lost, the reasons of the actions of the past are often lost too and even written History by those who actually witnessed the event or thing are bedevilled by bias and misunderstanding.

So yes, there is no doubt that in this modern world we can measure this that or the other to a minuscule fraction of an inch. But you cannot measure perceptions and that is what we are dealing with here and by those “measures”, I and others have no difficulty in identifying the difference between a kilt and a proper kilt at a blink of an eye.

And yes! Sometimes perceptions are wrong, but then, so are measurements on occasion.

[Scotlad45]

And yet...

And, can you blame someone who doesn't know better that they are wearing it outside the parameters, even if the way they are wearing it is intentional (because they think it's correct)? I assume that is not the situation we're talking about?

I would suggest, given the modern era of information available, as well as the guidance for measurements offered by essentially all kilt makers, that anyone wearing a mid thigh or mid calf "kilt" is doing so not of ignorance, but by conscious choice...

[Jock Scot]

I would suggest, given the modern era of information available, as well as the guidance for measurements offered by essentially all kilt makers, that anyone wearing a mid thigh or mid calf "kilt" is doing so not of ignorance, but by conscious choice...

Hummmm. Not necessarily, I would suggest.

[Steve Ashton]

This issue has been a sticking point as long as this forum has existed. (Even well before I became the owner) I don't see anything in this thread that is helping to resolve it. Perhaps the members here will never be able to resolve it.

It just sticks in my craw how some people use some words like they are sacred and yet can't even agree on what the word means. I guess It comes down to being an insider or not. Like being a member of an exclusive club. I guess its the implication that no one, not born and bred in Scotland, currently living above the Highland line, has the innate ability to know what a proper, traditional kilt is.

Oh well, I have said my piece. I have tried to find a way for this forum to resolve this issue. I have offered terms that can be defined such as "An Iconic Kilt". We all can agree on what an Icon is. Its in the dictionary. We can all agree that a kilt and Tartan are the iconic symbols of Scotland and know exactly what is meant by the term.

Right now what I am seeing is called circular definitions. Using a word to define the same word.

We can define, and even agree on, what a Utility Kilt is, what a Pub Kilt is, what a Casual Kilt is. We can define these in very specific terms and even give examples of what does and does not fit the definitions.

But alas, I'm just an outlander. So I will step out of this discussion before it becomes even more muddled and perhaps causes more rancor.

[Jock Scot]

Steve.

Have you read post 15 on this thread? Just wondering. No reply required as I fully understand the need to de-escalate the discussion.

[FossilHunter]

Using Richard’s definition based on their first appearance in the 1800s, wouldn’t this make a simple definition of a traditional kilt?

“A tailored wool garment worn at or above the natural waist and at or above the knees with pleats in the back and double aprons in the front.”

It seems to offer a range of options for how it is worn as well as variations in pleating, fasteners, and internal construction. It covers the range of traditional heights and lengths seen among civilian and regimental kilts.

I think a definition can be applied based on the documented pictorial history of kilts. Certainly all kilts were similar in make, if perhaps not identical, until just a few decades ago.

[Theowulf]

It seems that things frozen in time, unaltered by fashion or use, become truly obsolete, and disappear. How sad would that be?

[McMurdo]

I think we may be making mountains from molehills here. The definition from Websters is fairly simple and easy to follow. Here is a link to it

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dict...earch-dict-box

Is it simple? Yes, but that I think is the point. Of course this forum is here discuss the minutia of the kilt and all it's accoutrement so discussion such as this do pop up from time to time. Every kilt maker does things their way so we can not define the Traditional kilt by the process of how it's made unless we use the simplest terms such as a traditional kilt is generally hand sewn form tartan or tweed. I know it is not definitive however I do not think we shall ever get to definitive sadly as everyone here has their own ideas and opinions on the matter.