Critique my summer kilt wear

[Nick the DSM]

Well, it ain't traditional, but in the modern sense- it's a smarter way to dress in the heat we have over here.

[Mael Coluim]

I have to say, no that is not a traditional kilt look, it is in the wrong sub-forum and I will say why.

The overall impression is just too far from the traditional look, sensible maybe, traditional it is not.

In detail. T shirts are not traditional in any way, with the kilt, and T shirts with logos on, well, just push the overall impression way beyond traditional. I personally would have had no problem with say a long sleeved tattersall shirt with the sleeves rolled up and open collar.

I am sorry, whilst I can understand not wearing a belt in hot climes, when combined with the overall impression it is just too casual. I suppose it is my upbringing coming to the fore here, where a belt is required when not wearing a waist coat.

The non traditional sporran now catches my eye and added to the overall impression just helps it move away from the traditional look. You are at least wearing a sporran though!

I find the lack of hose, of the required length too, whilst no doubt is very sensible in the circumstances is not helpful to the overall look. I can quite see that removing ones shoes and hose(still wearing the kilt!)for a gentle paddle with the children is quite acceptable, but about town so to speak, well, no.

Sandals? Well again, sensible no doubt, but hardly traditional.

Well you did ask!

Thank you, Jock! Yes, I want the opinions.

[Mael Coluim]

Well, it ain't traditional, but in the modern sense- it's a smarter way to dress in the heat we have over here.

I think there are many here in the US, who do. The kilt switches out shorts which most wear for casual everyday summer wear here. So, if the kilt is a tradtonal kilt wearing it this way is it appropriate for the the traditonal subforum or does it now need to be placed in the modern kilt subforum?

[CMcG]

I would agree that the kilt, tee-shirt, sandals look is not traditional.

It seems to me that, no matter how traditional the kilt itself may be, if the rest of the outfit makes a departure from tradition it belongs in the modern sub-forum. The first picture was pushing the boundaries (nylon sporran, pv kilt, chukkas, straw hat) but seems to have remained within the general tolerance of tradition. To my eye, even the first picture was a bit of a borderline case and so I was very interested to read the responses from our respected Auld Crabbits...

[Jock Scot]

I would agree that the kilt, tee-shirt, sandals look is not traditional.

It seems to me that, no matter how traditional the kilt itself may be, if the rest of the outfit makes a departure from tradition it belongs in the modern sub-forum. The first picture was pushing the boundaries (nylon sporran, pv kilt, chukkas, straw hat) but seems to have remained within the general tolerance of tradition. To my eye, even the first picture was a bit of a borderline case and so I was very interested to read the responses from our respected Auld Crabbits...

Yes, you are quite right the first picture example is probably pushing at the boundaries, but I think we do have to accept that the traditional look is not "carved in stone" and given the circumstances of the weather the "spirit" of tradition is there. Admittedly the outfit would stand out like a sore thumb in the Scottish Highlands, nevertheless whichever side of the fence the outfit is placed, by any of us, it still is well put together to suit the conditions.

I have to say I would not recognise a PV kilt from a picture(I have not knowingly seen one in real life either) and well yes, I would have preferred a leather sporran. I do think that style of straw hat---a panama is another option----works well with the kilt look in the circumstances. The shoes? Yes OK, a marginal decision but scrapes in on the circumstance criteria.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Like the legendary Mr. Benjamin Guggenheim, and his faithful-unto-death valet Mr. Victor Giglio, both of whom went down on the Titanic, I prefer to dress for the occasion, if not necessarily the circumstances surrounding that occasion.

The simple facts are that it is a lot warmer in the USA than Scotland -- New York City is on the same approximate latitude as Madrid, Spain -- and Scottish Games (as they tend to be called over here) are casual affairs. As a result standards of dress are different because levels of comfort vary from person to person. --What's the old saw? Ah yes, "There's no such thing as bad weather, only inappropriate attire."

On a hot day the sight of bare legs and sandals under a kilt don't really bother me (bare legs under a kilt that comes to below the knee are another matter) even though it's something I personally wouldn't do. The same holds true for tee-shirts; there are other shirts, equally comfortable, that can be worn with the kilt which, in my opinion, are far more in keeping with Highland attire when the wearing of a jacket and tie would be considered undesirable.

So, like Misters Guggenheim and Giglio, I would prefer to face the possible unpleasantness of the day appropriately dressed for the occasion, if not the circumstances surrounding that occasion.

After all, it's not as if we have to hop into lifeboats and paddle like hell to get away from a sinking ship.

[ThistleDown]

Could we say, then, that it is not the kilt but the overall look that moves the second pic from the traditional? Perhaps that despite the fact it may be becoming more common in the US, it has not achieved "traditional" because it has not been passed down and become a norm? Whereas the first one is just a variation on what has been worn by Highlanders in warm climes for generations?

[MacLowlife]

If she was born around 1900 or earlier, Granny would say "where are your socks?" and "Why are you wearing your undershirt?" or something like that. I may sound like I am whining, but I am always a little confused by the apparent theory that goes like this:

I recognize a tee shirt may not be appropriate for this outtfit, but if I wear a tee shirt that REFERS to this outfit, I may be able to squeak by.


Or, put less logically, a T shirt that "matches" the rest of the outfit by means of its illustration transcends its inherent informality.

This just doesn't really make sense. At least not in the case of traditional civilian highland dress. Sure, it makes good sense if you want to be comfortable in the summer heat, but traditional highland dress was not designed for the summer heat.

But please MC, don't worry. I think it is fine to dress like the second photo, but Traditional it ain't.

And whilst I am in full Crabbit mode, I'd like to holler a little more about the "tradition" of military shirts as civilian (warm weather) kilt accessories. Epaulets, flapped pockets, name badges, this is indeed a slippery slope. What's next, spats with your Tevas?

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I think there are many here in the US, who do. The kilt switches out shorts which most wear for casual everyday summer wear here. So, if the kilt is a tradtonal kilt, wearing it this way, is it appropriate for the the traditonal subforum or does it now need to be placed in the modern kilt subforum?

Good question, to which I don't think there is a ready answer. As I stated above, I prefer to dress as is appropriate for the occasion rather than the circumstances (like hot weather or over-heated rooms) that may be encountered.

I think that there are degrees of casual dress, and that it is almost impossible to draw a line that says "this is no longer Highland traditional attire". As I see it, there are seven levels of Highland attire:

1) fig leaf;
2) kilt (fig leaf optional at this point);
3) sporran;
4) shirt;
5) socks;
6) shoes;
7) jacket & tie.

Starting at #7 and working back to #1, how much can be eliminated before it ceases to be "traditional" Highland attire (or one is arrested for being "too casual)? Or is it still traditional, and one merely hasn't dressed their best for the occasion?

As McLowlife has so succinctly put it, "What would granny say?"

[Mark Stephenson]

And whilst I am in full Crabbit mode, I'd like to holler a little more about the "tradition" of military shirts as civilian (warm weather) kilt accessories. Epaulets, flapped pockets, name badges, this is indeed a slippery slope. What's next, spats with your Tevas?[/QUOTE]
Well, I suppose it's all a matter of individual preference. I think a well pressed military shirt (with or without one's ribbons) looks just fine - at least for those of us on this side of the pond. I'm a veteran, and on certain occasions will wear my ribbons on a USAF shirt (e.g., at a highland event this past Memorial Day weekend). I think properly done, one can honor both his highland heritage as well as his military service. But, regardless of any meaning that may be attached to a military shirt, I maintain that a well pressed military shirt and tie can go very well with a kilt. I'm curious about what other veterans think.