To Wear A Tartan.

[Panache]

James,

While I certainly value heritage and tradition, the line of thinking you are pursuing is a very exclusive rather than inclusive one. At some point do we suggest that only those with Scottish heritage are the only ones to wear tartan at all? It is a Scottish garment after all. Why should those who can’t claim Scot blood wear something they do not have a traditional tie to? How much Scottish blood do you need to be then to claim to be a Scot? I am far more Dutch , Dane and German than Scot. Should I really have the right to wear my clan colors? I haven’t joined the Red Tower (Galbraith Clan Association). Do I truly have the right to the Galbraith tartan?

The concept of the tartan, taking many different colors of thread and weaving them together to create a strong and harmonious fabric is a wonderful symbol of unity. Many individuals coming together to form something greater than themselves, each contributing to the whole. The idea of “clan” can include blood, marriage, and friendship. From what I gathered going through the clan tents at my first Highland Games, the clans welcome those who take their colors in friendship and respect. . Military tartans (though maybe not officially recognized), District, State, and National tartans can be worn with the same pride that one feels for family tartans. These are clans! Not by blood, but by choice and pride in the community these individuals have formed. There was a recent thread where someone was asking about a “Gay Pride” tartan. Why should that be worn with any less respect than any other tartan. Perhaps to that individual this is his clan.

Ultimately we are talking about here is just some bright thread here. A small patch of cloth. In itself meaningless. When we take that cloth and invest meaning in it, it becomes something more. When we carry it with respect and honor what it represents, then it becomes special. Be it a banner, a flag, or a kilt; it is how we treat it that determines if it is appropriate we carry it.

Lastly our forum is for kilts, all types of kilts. Have you ever considered that Utilikilts and the other modern kilts are so popular because there are people out there who really think the idea of a kilt is great but are wary of all the intricacies of clan and heritage? By choosing a modern variant they enter the world of kilts without fear of causing offense by wearing the wrong tartan or wearing the right one poorly. They can decide if they like wearing a pleated male skirt without investing upwards of $1000 for a proper outfit.

Respect for the past is important, may I also suggest that respect for the here and now is just as important.

Sincerely

[Caradoc]

But James has called those of us who don't share his opinion all but ignoramuses.

On the plus side, his posts have led to me to find the "Ignore" list available on the User CP page.

[MacSimoin]

James,

As it is food for thought, I appreciate posts like yours even if I find I'm not in 100% agreement (no harm in that).

I often seem to be the odd man out when it comes to such things as to whom can wear this or that tartan, and without doubt my approach contradicts some of the experts, and will annoy those who look to the right to wear what they like. So I have decided to offer a fuller explanation of the reasoning behind my thinking.

This is most appreciated. I've read some of your other posts but declined to respond based on my not fully understanding your views. Now that I have a better grasp on where you're 'coming from', I'm mildly surprised to find that our collective views on kilt wearing are not at all too dissimilar.

Now to another point, why do so many newcomers to wearing the male skirt, look to the kilt: rather than say the sarong, fustanella, maybe the lava-lava: after all would the Utilikilt be any less a male garment if it was called The Utilisarong?

AND..

...or are you looking to destroy the very heritage you are seeking to claim?

I place the above quotes back-to-back because they appear related (to me). My own opinion? Skirting the skirt issue (no pun intended), I personally feel pockets belong on pants (trousers, trews etc) and not on kilts; so, you'll never see me wearing a Utilikilt (or anything like it). I know that offends a lot of Utilikilt wearers (and the like) but honestly, I'm not concerned if my opinion is offensive. Your views (or others) may differ but I can't be bothered to be offended by someone who doesn't agree with my own opinions. There's just not enough time or space in my life for me to get worked up over it. If you choose to wear kilts with pockets (or whatever else you may find), that's your own business; plainly speaking, I won't berate you over your choice and I won't offer you unsolicited kilt wearing 'advice' (as some here often do). Long story short: I choose not to wear such garments; it's as simple as that.

...Having written that, I do think the increase in kilt wearing is a good thing for many reasons, and certainly I support newcomers to what some see as a movement.

I agree; an increase in kilt wearing is pleasing to my mind (for a lot of reasons) and I wholeheartedly encourage interested people I meet to 'get kilted'. I've often said that the kilt is as versatile a garment as any; it's manly, comfortable, and looks damn good.

I also support the development of new tartans, be they district, American State, or whatever...

As someone who's designed a newer tartan (Fitzsimmons), I appreciate your comment here. Thank you.

So I would suggest that all kilt wearers should ignore the ‘anything goes’ idea, and wear a tartan with which they have a genuine connection: be that of family, State, district, arm of service/regiment or whatever. This way we would all be preserving our heritage, and oddly enough make the wearing of the tartan more interesting, for there would be a reason for our wearing this or that tartan: not just a case of liking the pretty colours.

Adding to my previous response (above), honoring my heritage was my own personal goal in designing the Fitzsimmons tartan. Specifically, and personally, the tartan honors my own great-great grandfather Andrew Fitzsimmons; as the only one of his family to survive the Great Famine, he emigrated to America in 1852 (at the age of 16) and well, here I stand. I wholly appreciate his being (as my Grandmother has said in the past), "a fierce and fearless Irishman". To spell it out, he (Andrew) is the reason a Fitzsimmons tartan even exists; as such, the tartan preserves my heritage, something both good and honorable.

However I do think that the principle should be then ordering a kilt, to look for one with which there is a genuine link, be it of clan or whatever. Failing that there is a long tradition of plain kilts, an entirely honourable option.

I totally agree with this assessment and feel it ties in with Matt's own viewpoints.

...the above has nothing at all to do with academics, rules and the like: it is to do with the heart and the blood...

As I have no Scottish tartan kilts (at this time), I can still agree with this. My next tartan kilt will (hopefully) be the Mitchell (in honor of my great-great grandmother Phoebe, Andrew's wife); her parents were from Ireland (her father a Mitchell, mother a Wilson) and to those who feel or say I can't honor my heritage by wearing a tartan associated with a feminine bloodline, well, I won't dignify that with a response.

Thanks for the insightful post, James.

[Woodsheal]

How many here, who were never in the Marines, would presume to wear the USMC "Leatherneck" tartan? After all, it's a gorgeous sett, and makes a fine looking kilt.
Well, I sure as hell wouldn't presume to wear it, nor the New York Fire Dep't, Seaforth Highlanders, and the Citadel Military Academy's tartans either!

And that's the point James is trying to make in regard to Highland Clan tartans, my friends. No, there are no rules and regulations regarding who can wear what tartans; the "regulating" must come from within the individual....

[Streetcar]

James, despite the comments from some of you detractors, I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to explain the reasoning behind your point of view. As a result, I think I better understand why some people feel so strongly about tartan association.
My personal opinion on the matter remains unchanged - but I'm surprised to find that my opinion does not stray terribly far from yours. (For what it's worth, I can trace back to a specific family and clan. I doubt you will find any of it in Burkes Peerage, but my family knows it's there.)
The tartan I've chosen is my link to that clan, and intended as a tribute to my Scottish Ancestors.
But I do not claim membership in the clan - nor do I anticipate seeking it. I can only hope that those who do claim strong blood ties to a clan are not terribly offended if I offer the same salute - without a "formalized" blood tie.

James, thank you again for so clearly stating the position!

[davedove]

How many here, who were never in the Marines, would presume to wear the USMC "Leatherneck" tartan? After all, it's a gorgeous sett, and makes a fine looking kilt.
Well, I sure as hell wouldn't presume to wear it, nor the New York Fire Dep't, Seaforth Highlanders, and the Citadel Military Academy's tartans either!

And that's the point James is trying to make in regard to Highland Clan tartans, my friends. No, there are no rules and regulations regarding who can wear what tartans; the "regulating" must come from within the individual....

I'm not quite that exclusive. For instance, I don't have any connection to the USMC, so I wouldn't wear the Leatherneck tartan. I think the problem we are generally having here though, is defining a "connection".

For instance, I would think it entirely appropriate for someone who was never in the Marines to wear the Leatherneck in honor of his father, who served a full career in the Marines.

For another example, I am considering getting a tartan in the Colqohoun (spelling?) tartan to honor my ancestor, a Cahoon, who was the first Scot in the American colonies way back when. Is this enough of a connection for some folks?

There are some folks who get a tartan just because they like the pattern, but I'm betting most like to have some connection. For some people, that means fulfilling requirements X,Y, and Z. For others, that means ancestor A hundreds of years ago was from Scotland.

For James, that means drawing the requirement line one place. For others, especially those not from a kilt wearing tradition, the line is drawn elsewhere.

[Woodsheal]

So I would suggest that all kilt wearers should ignore the ‘anything goes’ idea, and wear a tartan with which they have a genuine connection: be that of family, State, district, arm of service/regiment or whatever. This way we would all be preserving our heritage, and oddly enough make the wearing of the tartan more interesting, for there would be a reason for our wearing this or that tartan: not just a case of liking the pretty colours.

That's all James is suggesting: choose a tartan for which you have some "connection" - and ancestors should definitely count! - as opposed to how you might pick out a plaid flannel shirt because you like the pattern....

[ronstew]

I would think it entirely appropriate for someone who was never in the Marines to wear the Leatherneck in honor of his father, who served a full career in the Marines.

I wouldn't.

[Rob Wright]

Kilts are not part of all scottish family traditions, my clan the Douglas's are lowlanders and like most clans did not adopt a tartan until the early 1800's.

There will always be people who do not know anything about the tartan that they wear but most will make the effort to know a little about the tartan.

I agree with Rex ,we are all individuals and we all have different priorities, considering how much the concept of freedom we espouse on this board for one to claim their priorities are the most important is arrogant.

Rob

[cavscout]

I think Matt and James are hitting at the same issue, only from different sides of the plate.

I have a very difficult time putting such a complex thought into words so I will try to use an example and hopefully I'll get the point across.

When one of my children does something we view as ethically wrong, we not only instruct them that it is wrong but also try to educate them in judgement to prevent them making the same laps of judgement in the future and in another situation. This education is based on facts or foundational beliefs.

The way it appears to me is that James wants to tell people they can't wear a tartan without a link because that's how it's done. That's not true.

Matt is telling people while you can wear any tartan, it is wise to have a link to it.

Sorry, I don't think I communicated that very well but maybe it might help someone.

As a former Marine I can communicate this story,

I have a friend who was at Parris Island for a short time but was discharged for some medical reason. She officially was never a Marine but to this day if you ask her she will tell you she was a Marine. This is not a big deal as she is not trying to utilize this credintial to obtain a benefit or coerse a response based on that. Now if she were trying to do something that would be contrary to one of my beliefs and support it with being a Marine, I'd have to call her to task.

If she wants to call herself a Marine, fine, as long as it doesn't detract from the heritage.

One other issue on using the Corps as a comparrison, the difference with a Clan tartan and the Corps is that the honor that comes from being a Marine is earned by the individual realised by his/her own achievment. A Clan tartan is effected only by who you were born to, adopted by, or changed your name to or claim relation with.

Thanks for listening to these random thoughts.