The Craftsman versus the Industrial Complex

[Java]

Well, on the subjects that I'm cynical about, I come by that honestly too.
And I will confess, I've been beat up by the kilt police, and called a cross-dresser by so many people on so many forums that I loose track of who has and who hasn't. My appologies if I've confused you with someone else.

I seem to be having a conversation about how everything made with methods or materials invented since the industrial revolution is crap and that buying any of it somehow damages one's soul. I must admit that finding out that I'm having it someone I apparently have so much in common with baffles me somewhat. I believe our basic disagreement was the whole "gateway" thing. I believe that in many cases a $95 Amerikilt will lead to a $130 USA kilt, will lead to a $160 Alt.kilt, to a Freedom Kilt, and so on until it leads to a "real" kilt bought by someone who wouldn't have considered saving up and spending that kind of money to start. Wearing the less expensive kilts having caused him to change his monetary priorities.
I have a tendency to spend around $100 on a pair of dress shoes. They last me about a year. I buy them because as you say, a $30 pair that last 3 months is more expensive than a $100 pair that last 12 months. I'm sure a $500 pair would work out to be even less expensive in the long run, but one has to draw the line somewhere, and for shoes, I choose to draw it at $100. For a kilt, I have just bumped that line up from $100 to $150. Little by little, priorities change.....

Have Fun,
Tom

editted to add; Oh, and Rocky, I'm working, writing for tomorrow morning. So I'm inside on the computer anyway......

[Moski]

I'm not sure if I should be shocked or angry at what I'm having trouble Not calling an elitist attitude. I keep seeing the assertion that most of the products made since the industrial revolution are worthless and I'm too dumb to see it or that I am not qualified to discern what quality is. Nor am I able to appreciate quality as I've surrounded myself with worthless child labor knockoffs in my ignorance. The shoe example is outrageous in that, of all the people I know, only a very few attorneys come close to that price foe shoes. For the great majority of people that's not even in the realm of reasonableness. Its a wasteful extravagance. Then to nearly berate someone because their priorities preclude such an expense and slag them off for it is beyond the pale.

[DWFII]

I'm not sure ...

I'm not surprised. I suspect you don't have any idea what I've said.

Posts like this seem to come out of nowhere--no quotes...offending or otherwise...no references to actual words or concepts, no speaking to the actual discussion. Just "feelings."

There is a good discussion here...with little or no hostility or vitriol being generated...I'd prefer to keep it that way.

[RockyR]

I'm not surprised. I suspect you don't have any idea what I've said.

Posts like this seem to come out of nowhere--no quotes...offending or otherwise...no references to actual words or concepts, no speaking to the actual discussion. Just "feelings."

There is a good discussion here...with little or no hostility or vitriol being generated...I'd prefer to keep it that way.

With all due respect, and to point back at your quote about being on a public forum...

If you can't stand someone disagreeing with you, or offering opinion you might not like, you probably ought to steer clear of forums in general.

You had to realize that taking the stance you did, in the public manner you did, on the forum you did, would raise some (dare I say many) hackles. Yes, you and I are carrying on a civil discussion about the (off) topic at hand, but you must have realized that many would take offense to such statements. It's like hitting a bee-hive with a stick, then being suprised the bees are angry.

Inflections, 'meanings', 'intentions' etc can't always be surmised through written text on a forum. Some people will assign attributes to your comments which you may not have intened. Even if not explicitly stated, others may have thought you meant something. Based on the comments in this discussion, I can see how a 'short leap' could have been made.

[DWFII]

With all due respect, and to point back at your quote about being on a public forum... You had to realize that taking the stance you did, in the public manner you did, on the forum you did, would raise some (dare I say many) hackles. Yes, you and I are carrying on a civil discussion about the (off) topic at hand, but you must have realized that many would take offense to such statements.

OK...what does that signify? That I'm wrong? Or that some people are out of their comfort zone? Might it be that some are having to think a little deeper about some of these issues? I know I am.

And what should I do about it? Not express my opinion? Seems to me that way "the terrorists win."

I don't think that I am being disparaging to anyone. I am trying not to be impatient with people who don't read posts like they themselves would want theirs read.

I'm in the same position as everyone else here. There are people disagreeing with me. There are even people making cogent points countering mine. Shall I take offense? Shall I start characterizing their remarks as "elitist" or as "slag"(ging)?

I don't think I am doing that...I hope I am not doing that.

If people don't accuse me of calling them "cross-dressers" when I have not, I don't really have any problem with their disagreeing with me.

Do I have an opinion that is uncommon here...not part of the general mind set? Yes and no. I like and admire kilts ...tartan kilts worn with respect for the traditions of the Scottish Highlands...as much as anyone else.

And I am tolerant of all the rest--that seems to me to be unusual right there. I'd wear a 16 ounce PV kilt...in a heartbeat.

"Kilt police" indeed!

As for being "off-topic" let me ask your opinion...how does or how should a real time discussion go...in real life, I mean? Does the conversation build off of itself? One comment leading to another comment, slightly divergent; one subject inspiring another? Or does one of the participants jump up saying "we can't talk about that--it's off topic?" Yes, we're off topic. I'll move on if everybody else will.

[RockyR]

OK...what does that signify? That I'm wrong? Or that some people are out of their comfort zone? Might it be that some are having to think a little deeper about some of these issues? I know I am.

And what should I do about it? Not express my opinion? Seems to me that way "the terrorists win."

To the Casual reader on a somewhat modest income, stating that $100 (retail) shoes are poor quality and that only shoes in the $1000 + category are real quality can come across as insulting (especially if you thought your $150 shoes WERE good quality) and somewhat 'eliteist' (even if that wasn't the intention).

Once someone has an opinion that someone else's beliefs / views are eliteist, it's tough to come back from that and read their future posts with anything other than that 'slant', even if that wasn't the person's intentions to start with. You can (as can we all) GLADLY express our opinions. We just have to be cognisent of how that opinon is perceived.

I don't think that I am being disparaging to anyone. I am trying not to be impatient with people who don't read posts like they themselves would want theirs read.

SNIP...

And I am tolerant of all the rest--that seems to me to be unusual right there. I'd wear a 16 ounce PV kilt...in a heartbeat.

"Kilt police" indeed!

This last bit is my editing, but is an example of my comments above. Stating that you're 'tolerant' of all the rest, can be seen as 'eliteist' even if that wasn't your intention. If other members here who wear casual kilts said that they 'tolerated' traditional kilt wearers, it promotes an 'us vs. them' mentality, which is not generally very good on a community trying to foster friendships.

Just my $.02.

[CMcG]

To the Casual reader on a somewhat modest income, stating that $100 (retail) shoes are poor quality and that only shoes in the $1000 + category are real quality can come across as insulting (especially if you thought your $150 shoes WERE good quality) and somewhat 'eliteist' (even if that wasn't the intention).
<snip>

I'm not insulted by the elitism, but read that sort of statement as patently false. I've had Ðoc Martens shoes and Blundstone boots that cost around $150 and have lasted ten years or more. Seems like good quality to me and, at the very least, not disposable.

Similarly, I have read reports about Rocky's inexpensive casual kilts being quite durable. There were even some pictures of one surviving the Warrior Dash and still looking good (after washing of course).

Affordable can be a synonym for cheap, but cheap doesn't necessarily mean poor quality. Sometimes it just means good value.

[Java]

DWFII; Let's slow down a minute. I did't say you were the kilt police. I just said that I had run into them a lot, then I appologized for mistaking you for one. After having a discussion with you, I am sure that you and I will be able to disagree, without any ill will. I consider an Amerlkilt to be a "real" kilt, and if you don't, I'm sure we will be able to agree to disagree. Most "traditionalists" on these forums would agree to disagree with me on this point. But there are many who can't. They are so deeply offended by the thought of anyone dressed in a less than orthodox way and calling it a kilt, that they simply can't agree to disagree. These are the kilt police. They enforce their law by belittling, name calling, and insulting, and generally trying to drive away anyone who would dare call anything but a bespoke 16 oz wool kilt a kilt. Anyone that dares defend himself when called a cross-dressing deviant is accused of "traditionalist bashing"

Again, I'm not accusing you of any of this. I've appologized for that. I'm simply debating the existence of the "kilt police"

At this point it seems to be "dogpile on DWFII" time in here. If anything in this post sounds at all like an insult to you, please point it out, as it is probably just unfortunate wording on my part.

Have Fun,
Tom

[DWFII]

DWFII; Let's slow down a minute. I did't say you were the kilt police. I just said that I had run into them a lot, then I appologized for mistaking you for one. After having a discussion with you, I am sure that you and I will be able to disagree, without any ill will. I consider an Amerlkilt to be a "real" kilt, and if you don't, I'm sure we will be able to agree to disagree. Most "traditionalists" on these forums would agree to disagree with me on this point. But there are many who can't. They are so deeply offended by the thought of anyone dressed in a less than orthodox way and calling it a kilt, that they simply can't agree to disagree. These are the kilt police. They enforce their law by belittling, name calling, and insulting, and generally trying to drive away anyone who would dare call anything but a bespoke 16 oz wool kilt a kilt. Anyone that dares defend himself when called a cross-dressing deviant is accused of "traditionalist bashing"

Again, I'm not accusing you of any of this. I've appologized for that. I'm simply debating the existence of the "kilt police"

At this point it seems to be "dogpile on DWFII" time in here. If anything in this post sounds at all like an insult to you, please point it out, as it is probably just unfortunate wording on my part.

Have Fun,
Tom

OK...reset. No harm, no foul.

And no worries about insulting me. I may occasionally get impatient or come back at you as sharply as I suspect you have come at me...but I am not so thin skinned that I take insult at any and every disagreement.


PS...I said in my reply to Rocky...with regard to "Off Topic" that I was willing to move on if everybody else was.

???!! Are we Off Topic yet?

[Moski]

I'm not surprised. I suspect you don't have any idea what I've said.

Posts like this seem to come out of nowhere--no quotes...offending or otherwise...no references to actual words or concepts, no speaking to the actual discussion. Just "feelings."

There is a good discussion here...with little or no hostility or vitriol being generated...I'd prefer to keep it that way.

I was trying to be non-confrontational and speaking broadly.

I do know that things made in a factory...or from a mentality that buys into all the priorities of a factory...reduce our sense of connection. The products themselves almost universally have a sterile quality about them that is devoid of authenticity. And how could they not be? It's all copies, clones and ticky-tacky

What is that other than your "feelings" about "factory" goods. And I'm not looking to "make a connection" with my shoes, kilt or skivvies, nor am I looking for some level of "authenticity", whatever that means to you.

I don't know that everything made since the Industrial Revolution is crap.

I read the above to mean that Most if it is in your opinion.

I'm looking to wear something that is practical, fits into the place I've determined it should in my finances, that is to say affordable by my reckoning, and fits my life. I'm sure you make a wonderful product that anyone who can afford them would cherish. But affordable is not "an excuse" or a synonym for cheap (low quality). For those of us using the word referring to our own purchasing power it actually means what it says.


Oh yeah. The "Kilt Police" aren't real so they cant enforce anything. It's a term used for very real people who take it upon themselves to people who they think are dressed wrong, be it a style that offends their sensibilities or is "simply not done", material that "just isn't an acceptable substitute", or equating anything less than top of the range with junk (kind of an insult to several kiltmakers here who do make that "junk") , or simply beneath what they consider an acceptable standard.