Ponderings of an ancient Scot.

[macwilkin]

Let me throw a small, yet honest curve at you.

I am 99% positive the reason the US State tartans aren't more widely worn is b/c of PRICE (and some, aesthetics). I say this b/c I've seen it time after time after time in my shop. Someone comes in with a picture of the Pennsylvania State Tartan and asks for a kilt. I tell them the price of an 'standard' tartan kilt and what the Special Weave Pennsylvania State Tartan will cost and they choose the former.

There is only 1 mill, to the best of my knowledge, that produces ANY stock state tartans... and only California and Texas. The other 48 states (at least the ones that have tartans) get left out b/c of smaller population or whatever. That leaves the potential kilt wearer with 1 option... Special Weave which is about 20% or more ABOVE the higher priced kilts we offer.

Also, I've seen the collection of US State tartans on Matt's website. Some are very nice, others are just plain hideous (I wouldn't wear it even if it WAS my state tartan).

If the mills (or even 1 mill) would produce a range of US State Tartans (much like they did with the Irish County tartans), I'm sure that there would be LOADS of takers here in the states. Until that time, they will all be special weave and they will all take a back seat to 'lower priced' wool tartans like clans and many Universals.

I do like the idea... now we just have to get the mill(s) convinced that there's a MARKET for such tartans here in the US.

Spot on, Rocky. Look at the availability of some of the Canadian provincial and the Maple Leaf tartan -- they are popular and readily available. In fact, when I first read this thread, I thought of the Nova Scotia tartan, one of the first tartans designed outside of Scotland in the 1950s.

The Tartan was designed for an agricultural fair exhibit on weaving in NS, and the organisers didn't want to favour one clan tartan for another, so they came up with their own -- and it stuck.

Since then, the NS tartan has made its way across the pond -- it is worn by the Coldstream Pipe Band:

http://www.coldstreampipeband.co.uk/history.htm

Note that there really isn't a connection with the tartan for the band; they evidently just liked it.

T.

[McMurdo]

Some interesting reading here Jock thanks for starting this one up. I daresay I'm a wee bit different than some on the forum, as my connections to the old country are rather strong, both parents having been born there. Nonetheless I am a Canadian, and proud to be one, I therefore have a Maple Leaf tartan to celebrate that. My wife is from the great state of North Carolina I therefore also have the Carolina tartan, though I originally got that one as I really did like the colours.

I think in 100 years time it would be nice to see the kilt more excepted by the general population; however I think you will still see just as many Black Watch and Royal Stewart kilts as you see today for example. There are of course many lovely tartans that are not Clan Tartans however as others have said many people who want to wear a kilt in the first place are looking for that clan connection tenuous or not. It is my belief that kilt wearers whether they have a clan connection or not will continue this trend and wear clan tartans, of course some will wear both clan and district or universal tartans and really what is wrong with that when there are over 4000 registered tartans and more being designed everyday? Most Scots I've talked to are only too happy to have you wear their tartan.

Now to the question of special weaves, to me the cost of a special weave was not a concern at all in fact getting the DC Daglish cloth for the Royal Naval Association kilt was no more expensive than any other kilt I own, perhaps dealing directly with the kilt maker was the reason. I think if someone truly wants a specific tartan then the special weave cost will not deter them in the least, it may cause them to save a wee bit longer but that's all.

[MacLowlife]

I know it has already been mentioned, but I think the distinction between 1) the tartan as a sign of affiliation and 2) wearing a tartan KILT should not be overlooked. If you wander around the world, or the worldwide web, you will see plenty of offerings in tartan specifically intended to signify affiliation that do not really have much to do with kilt wearing. (ribbons, bar napkins, shirts, trousers, dinner jackets, etc.) Obviously, people do buy those items and wear or use them specifically to show some connection, usually to a clan, but also to a district, county, branch of service, etc. Others just like the color.

Something that I have to remind myself of is that this site is for kilt wearers. We are already a special group, in whatever sense you choose to define "special". We have already cleaved to the kilt, which makes us different from a large number of people- in fact, we have not merely cleaved to the kilt, we have chosen to read and discuss kilt topics.

I will admit now that I also wear trousers from time to time ( sad to admit, more often than the Kilt), but I do not think I remember having visited a single trouser discussion site. I would imagine your own experience is at least similar, regardless of how often you wear p*nts. SO, we have to acknowledge the iconic aspects of the kilt. I expect those aspects will only be exaggerated over the coming years.

You don't have to be thin to wear lycra, as a trip to the seashore or the wholesale club will show you. More and more people are turning to knitted garments because they are cheaper to make and will "fit" more people. Lycra wearing in 2010, as opposed to 1910, for example, shows an exponential increase. When those theoretical people Jock has conjured up get onto the bus ( STILL no Jet Paks, sorry...) their kilts will be brushing up against a forest of lycra-clad legs, tummies and woefully unattractive backsides. If I am wrong, you are welcome to dig me up and sue me.

But, despite the subtle evolution of the outside world's mistaken choice of bifurcated dress, the kilt will continue to evoke tradition and Scotland and individualism. And I predict that the majority of the people who chose to wear it will do so with an eye towards Scotland, even if it is sometimes a winking eye. Whether they hold to the Highlander's devotion to a single tartan or the Mod American's credo of Anything Goes remains to be seen, but chances are, they will still have to answer The Question from time to time.

[Sammac]

WOW! Thanks Jock, love these discussions. It is threads like this that give me pause to read, think and learn. I don't know how many different tartans I will end up wearing, but for me it will be with a family connection for the most part. I have already decided that my first kilt will be one that I wear for only special occasions, being an 8yd handsewn, so now I am looking at another in my family tartan to be worn more often. And thanks to everyelse for making this so interesting.

[Scotus]

I think with some, like myself, who only wear the kilt because of a connection with Scotland and a clan, there wouldn't be much of a point in wearing a non-Scottish tartan. I have a kilt because of a pride of being connected to a particular clan, and when I wear the kilt I am reminded of that. If I wore a kilt that is new and local, I'd only be reminded slightly of my connection to Scotland in a general way. Yes, the connection is now distant, but memories are long. This is only my opinion, but your question is a good one.

[billmcc]

In my experience, non-clan tartans are becoming increasingly popular. However, as Rocky mentioned, the popularity of other types of tartans is hampered by higher prices and lack of availability. Consequently, the readily available clan tartans are being treated by many as generic tartans.

[Smayniac]

This is an amazing thread, I was never tempted to post before reading throught as I frequently am; each post made me want to read more. All of my current kilts are either universal tartans or solids, I have a piece of fabric in the queue that has clan affiliation, but my connection to it is literary and professional, I've said it elsewhere: I am not Scottish.

I wear a kilt because I want to. Scooby and I wear solid kilts because we have the technology, time and access to materials to make them. When I first started wearing a kilt, I thought my highest wish was for a nice Black Watch, I have since found many other things to want(isn't that nice). Some of those things I'll never have, some I may.

As some of you say, there's something about a tartan kilt that sets it apart from an otherwise identical solid color garment. I identify myself as a Californian, but have no particular interest in the California Tartan, my thoughts on Black Watch have changed; I still want some of my kilts in tartan and I'm still thinking about what tartans I feel connected to.

Bob

[Ozark Ridge Rider]

Jock,

Great discussion. Lots of interesting points of view.

It seems as people mature, they begin too look at roots and, thankfully, modern technology has aided their search tremendously (as long as they exercise care).

In my own case, the kilt is a measure of respect I can show to generations long gone. I love my Murray of Atholl kilt. If my family connection was to a tartan I disliked, I would probably still wear it.

In the fair wife's case, she has almost all Scottish heritage. So many clans that I tease her that if she cuts herself she bleeds plaid. As a Scott, she has lots of choices, at least 12. She chooses a couple, to wear proudly and with respect.

On this side of the pond, I would not look for the tradition and respect idea to go away very soon.

Dan

[dfmacliam]

Thanks Jock for another thought provoking thread.. I am enjoying reading the many replies... I understand your perspective is due to your experience, living in the rural Highlands where the significance of wearing ones clan tartan is different than that of many others on the forum... It's because of threads like this, we can share our thoughts and help those who need some assistance in their own kilt wearing experiences.

[Galician]

I think that I'm slightly representative of what Jock brought up in starting this thread.

I am not Scottish in any form. I wound up wearing a kilt because I liked the look. I actually made the move to get one, however, only when I learned that there was a New York City tartan, which had a lot of meaning to me on various levels and learned of a Celtic line in my family.

I have since found a couple of tartans which I have liked, like the Maple Leaf and Highland Granite. Am I moving in the direction Jock suggests?