Dear Tradionalists - That's what is called deluting the concept

[cryptoman]

Hello folks, I recently found a thread about the sense or nonesense in terms of pleats as a symbol for the kilt.

In short: The question came up, why not removing the pleats and calling it a kilt for the so called evolution?

My arguments:

- the kilt is a historical grown garment with keltic heritage and not just a fashion garment
- the pleats offer extra freedom of movement and aircondition
- the pleats look good and the swish and drape is unique
- there are already light weight variants availabled
- the shape and number of the pleats and the kilt material isn't specified, room for inovation

Here is the thread: http://www.skirtcafe.org/forums/view...128527#p128527

Dear tradionalists if ya thought the Utilikilt would delute the concept, you are probably wrong, the skirt wairing hipsters try to do it, luckily in their imagination.

The pleats are there for a reason, they look good and the kilt is a historical grown garment, not just fashionable. The main points.

Where are my bagpipes and regimental kilts? I need a break from this nonesense.

[OC Richard]

A cool word there, deluted, and suitably cryptic! I take it to mean being watered-down and deceived at the same time

Anyhow to me if you remove the pleats it isn't a "kilt" any more, because doesn't the word "kilt" mean pleat or gather?

[English Bloke]

If it hasn't got any pleats, then it isn't a Kilt. People can call it a Kilt, in fact people can call it what they like... But it still isn't a Kilt.

Not sure what the original article says. The site you linked to has crashed.


Skirt...


Kilt, Skirt, Kilt.

See? It's easy!

[cryptoman]

If it hasn't got any pleats, then it isn't a Kilt. People can call it a Kilt, in fact people can call it what they like... But it still isn't a Kilt.

Not sure what the original article says. The site you linked to has crashed.


Skirt...


Kilt, Skirt, Kilt.

See? It's easy!

Might be the laggy server they use. More often than not I experience the same while trying to access.

It was like "We redefine it and call it evolution because male fashion evolves and there is no need to tie a garment to old geezers from the cold north."

[Grizzly]

I vote for the one in the middle............what? It's not a poll? Foiled again.

[adempsey10]

But it is ALSO a fashion garment and as such the fashion side of kilt wearing will cause variations in the appearance and style of the kilt. If a kilt maker decides to 'innovate' his kilt by dropping the pleats it might still be a kilt, whether your opinion says otherwise or not. The same way the model T is still considered a car. If you want to be a traditionalist, wear the traditional garb the traditional way. What happens on the 'fashion' side of kilt wearing shouldn't be of any concern to you since a tradition, by definition, is impervious to fashion trends.

There's also no need for name calling: "skirt wearing hipsters" It doesn't promote positive bonds between members. I'm proud of being a skirt wearing hipster. Now, excuse me while I go find my wayfarers.

[creagdhubh]

If it hasn't got any pleats, then it isn't a Kilt. People can call it a Kilt, in fact people can call it what they like... But it still isn't a Kilt.

Not sure what the original article says. The site you linked to has crashed.


Skirt...


Kilt, Skirt, Kilt.

See? It's easy!

Agreed. It is rather easy isn't it, John? And your visual examples help reinforce this notion.

[LitTrog]

If Ford decided to reintroduce the Model T, it could make those alonside the new Mustangs and still be considered an automobile manufacturer. If a kiltmaker decided to...innovate(?) and produce unpleated skirts, he/she would no longer be a kiltmaker. A kilt, by definition, has pleats. I have no problem with some dude wearing a skirt--my only issue would be if he tried insisting it was a kilt. I'd give him a dictionary and a sad shake of my head.

Of course, the fasion world and I are no longer on speaking terms, so I am probably missing the artful, edgy, devastatingly profound nuance.

[Hopper250]

If it hasn't got any pleats, then it isn't a Kilt. People can call it a Kilt, in fact people can call it what they like... But it still isn't a Kilt.



Kilt, Skirt, Kilt.

See? It's easy!

She might be wearing a Kilt though since it does appear to have pleats in the back.

[cryptoman]

But it is ALSO a fashion garment and as such the fashion side of kilt wearing will cause variations in the appearance and style of the kilt. If a kilt maker decides to 'innovate' his kilt by dropping the pleats it might still be a kilt, whether your opinion says otherwise or not. The same way the model T is still considered a car. If you want to be a traditionalist, wear the traditional garb the traditional way. What happens on the 'fashion' side of kilt wearing shouldn't be of any concern to you since a tradition, by definition, is impervious to fashion trends.

There's also no need for name calling: "skirt wearing hipsters" It doesn't promote positive bonds between members. I'm proud of being a skirt wearing hipster. Now, excuse me while I go find my wayfarers.

Nope that was a Model T without wheels and you cannot seperate all historical bonds of a garment because history and evolution are insaperable, so the anything-goes-fashion-excuse is a bit akward. Evolution means something grows and contemporary kilts are kilts by definition and accepted as such. A kilt without pleats is not a kilt in the same way a Model T is not a car without wheels. You can delute your coffee all you want but someone has to drink it. In fact, you can call a skirt all you want, throw history overboard for being so called "fashionable" but if it has no impact on the evolution of a garment, no one buys into it. ;)

I'd say there is no need for whining over nothing, cause you are a man and not a mouse. I was refering to the anything-goes skirt wearer on another forum.

I don't want to be a traditionalist, I just cannot wait for the day someone calls a pair of jeans a kilt.