Object Study - The Kilt as Diasporic Object

Matthew Smith/997309693

DTS403H1-S: Diasporic Lives of Objects

More Than a Scottish Skirt: The Kilt as a Diasporic Object

Prof. Ken MacDonald

April. 6th, 2011

  

Object as memory. Object as history. Object as belonging. Object as identity. All of these concepts were touched upon during these past 4 months in this course; all of them are central to the purpose of this paper. These concepts and more like them are the cornerstone of understanding how diasporic life is shaped by the objects which are engaged with by those in the diaspora. Likewise they also help illuminate how those diasporic objects themselves are shaped by engagement with the diasporic individual or group. The cultural significance an item holds is one of the key definers of how those within a diaspora, those looking in from the outside, as well as those from the homeland view an object, and impart significance and meaning not only on the object itself, but on the interaction between individual and object. It is this relationship which can be seen exemplified in the kilt. As an object, the kilt exists as a cultural signifier. But to relegate it to just this function would be to woefully underestimate the significance of the object for those who call it their own. The inherent and underlying significance of an object for those in the diaspora is linked to a sense of memory, but what this memory entails is as individual in meaning as a person’s family history is in uniqueness. As Tolia-Kelly asserts, “solid materials are charged with memories that activate common connections to pre-migratory landscapes and environments.” (Tolia-Kelly) What this all means for the studying of an object and its relationship with a particular group is difficult to sum up, especially considering the newness of diasporic studies as a discipline. In terms of this paper though, the aforementioned concepts provide the stepping stones to help formulate a discussion which revolves around what the kilt as a diasporic object means. That is, what does this item say about the Scottish, Irish, and British who interact with the kilt not just abroad and in the diasporas, but also in their homeland; as well what does this object say about these groups to those on the outside of any cultural affiliation.

        As such, the purpose of this paper is not to be completely focused on the descriptive aspects of the kilt as an object, but more so on the analytic aspects of the interaction between object and human. Some description is required of course to foster a greater understanding of the nature of the kilt as material object, and to explain its historical and cultural significance. This information will be used to further build an analytical framework, from which the discussion of the kilt as a diasporic object intertwined with history, memory, identity, and culture can unfold. This paper will first delve into the history and materiality of the kilt as an object of cultural significance. In detailing this history the hope is it will help locate the kilt as an object with inherent meaning, lending itself to the exploration of object meaning and if this meaning differs amongst those in the diaspora. From here, the work of several scholars who detail the nature of diasporic objects will be discussed to further illuminate the way in which diasporic groups interact with objects, including Stephanie Rains’ Celtic Kitsch: Irish-America and Irish Material Culture, Material Culture in Modern Scotland by Murray Pittock, and Karen Schamberger et al. with Living In A Material World: Object Biography and Transnational Lives. The paper will finish up with a discussion surrounding the future of object study in terms of diasporic communities, and how object relations are as fluid as any other relationship an individual may have. The hope is that by the end of this paper it will have spoken to the nature of the relationship between diaspora and object, not as an owner/owned one, but rather as a mutually experienced relationship of meaning, both imparting, exerting, and manipulating a multitude of meanings upon one another. The role of the kilt as diasporic object is one which this paper will speak to as fluid, unique compared to the homeland, and in some ways amalgamated with the greater North American ethos of materiality and kitsch.
       To start off it should be explained why the kilt was chosen as the object of study for this paper. As an individual of mixed heritage, it was quite difficult to pick an object which had significance not only for this writer, but one which could extend beyond the personal into society at large. Having several different races and ethnicities to choose from the veritable grab-bag I call my heritage, it became clear after doing some research that the kilt represented a very important and unique object in terms of my family line and for others who have made diasporic journeys from the British Isles to other destinations around the globe. Like was mentioned, being able to pull an object from a background comprised of Afro-Caribbean (Guyana), Indian, Portuguese, Irish, Welsh, and Norwegian, would create a rather interesting study on how objects from different backgrounds are imparted with specific meaning, but the decision to focus on the kilt was as much a personal decision to keep the scope and focus of this paper as keen as possible, while at the same time exploring an area of my heritage which may not be readily apparent to those who look at my appearance. Although the ways in which persons of mixed backgrounds interact with objects, and how cultural objects are given possibly different meanings for those with mixed backgrounds could provide a very interesting area for future study. This is especially true as mixed-race people are becoming more and more prevalent in society, and how this creates a whole new dynamic of object relations. Do mixed-race individuals actively choose to engage with objects, such as the kilt for example, in relation to how they identify themselves, giving more importance to certain objects over objects from their other heritages? An interesting area to focus future thought on, but this writer has digressed enough. As such, delving into the history of the kilt provides an interesting starting point for the purposes of setting up the latter portion of this paper.      
        While many may think the kilt is one of those objects with a history which is pretty much common knowledge, it actually presents a rather interesting case of cultural misinformation in regards to its origin. The kilt itself is undoubtedly most commonly associated with the Scottish, existing as a cultural signifier of their heritage. This however is not necessarily an erroneous view of the kilt, but rather a misinformed one as the kilt has a much wider cultural significance than that. The forbearer of the kilt was a full body garment often referred to as a plaid, which while being made out of plaid (what we would refer to tartan as), looked nothing like the modern kilt which is worn to this day. The originator of the kilt resembled much more a coat of sorts; save the fact that the bottom of the garment formed a skirt (Trover-Roper). The modern kilt as we know it came into being sometime in the 18^th century, surprisingly not by Scottish hands, but rather by the hands of an Englishman as a garment for both labourers and the everyday man (Trover-Roper). Immediately one questions how an invention by an Englishman could come to be regarded as one of Scotland’s most ancient traditions. Of course when one discusses the origins of many objects which have come to be regarded as culturally significant, they can often times be found to have origins outside of the culture which they have come to represent. This would of course appear to be the case with the kilt. Arguments could be raised that the modern kilt, or philibeg (felie beg) as it is also known, was just an evolutionary step from the older garb worn by the Highland Scots, one which just so happened to arise at the hands of Thomas Rawlinson, an Englishman. Would this lessen the cultural significance of the kilt? Doubtful, but it is an interesting caveat to the history of the kilt as a Scottish cultural object. What it would appear, as Zuelow puts forward,  “from August 1822 forward, Highland clothing – both tartan designs and the kilt itself –were intimately associated with memory of Highland heroics and Scottish national pride, even if the  knee-length, skirt-like kilt and clan-specific tartans were a recent invention.” (Zuelow) Regardless of who was responsible for the invention of the modern kilt, it became one of if not the most commonly associated cultural definer of the Scottish. 
        The production of a kilt is another interesting area in which one can see the cultural significance of the object come to the forefront of public discourse. The kilt is a multi-layered garment, which involves the use of several different types of fabric, as is shown in the illustration above (fig.1). The various parts which make up a kilt can vary, and depending on the fabric, parts, and accessories used, add yet another level of meaning to the kilt as a cultural object (Clifford). Based on the amount, type and cost of fabric used in the production of the kilt, one can witness the social status of the wearer being put on display for the rest of society to see. Much like modern clothing is branded in order to convey a sense of social status, so was the kilt used in the same fashion. Comparing a kilt which cost $1000 to produce to one which cost $100 would be the equivalent of comparing a Roots bag with a Chanel one. But probably the most prevalent signifier with which we can see the relationship between object and owner is in the tartan or pattern of the cloth which the kilt is made out of. The tartan is quite possibly the single most identifying aspect of the kilt. The tartan, or more easily referred to as the pattern of the kilt, in its simplicity conveyed a veritable buffet of cultural, social, and historical meanings. The use of the tartan to convey clan allegiance is one of the front runners in terms of meaning, but with this comes many other implied associations. By associating one’s self with a specific clan through the wearing a specific tartan, an individual wearing a kilt would also be expressing their heritage, home town, social status, and overall identity to the rest of society. In Scotland alone there exist hundreds of individual tartans, each conveying a unique message about the wearer (Milne). By choosing the tartan, an individual is associating themselves with a meaning, a memory, and a heritage which extends well beyond the moment and it is this association which makes the kilt such an interesting object to study as Colin Milton agrees in Modern Scottish Historical Fiction (Milton). 
       This is where the rather varied nature of the kilt as a cultural object can be seen, as the tartan extends beyond the Scottish national perspective to include several other cultures. For instance I have grandparents of both Welsh and Irish heritage. Both of these cultures have come to have their own tartans, which of course like the Scottish, are used to convey many different meanings. While these tartans are not nearly as numerous in number as the Scottish ones, the significance of the kilt as a cultural object is not lessened. For Example, my Grandfather who was born in Cork, Ireland could wear the tartan of his home town to show his sense of belonging.
 This particular tartan, as shown to the left (fig. 2), differs from the Welsh tartan shown to the right, which my Grandmother could wear as a Welsh national (fig. 3).While these tartans are generally used to signify a belonging to a certain region, the fact that an object could be as varied in meaning as the kilt is represents one of the most interesting aspects of studying objects as cultural items. Likewise, one could have a custom made kilt with a custom tartan for a particular event. Having a special kilt and tartan made for a wedding is not unheard of, with individuals both home and in diaspora sending away for a custom made kilt, as my grandfather did for his wedding to my grandmother. While this particular kilt was lost in my grandfather’s recent move to Aurora, the fact remains that the meaning and significance of a kilt could be as varied as the amount of tartans themselves.
       One final aspect of the kilt as an object to discuss before moving the discussion to focus on the diasporic aspects of the kilt as an object, is the specific gendered nature of the kilt. The kilt presents a rather unique case to study for an article of clothing as a cultural object, as it has specific gendered connotations inherent in its wearing. Of course the kilt was originally most commonly considered to be an article of clothing worn by men. This as it would seem was not an issue during much of the kilts life, save a few instances. It would appear that the oddity of men wearing what most other cultures would refer to as a skirt only came to be an issue when its wearing occurred in other places unfamiliar with the kilt as a cultural object. Undoubtedly one can see this most evident in the wearing of kilts by those living in diasporas. The fact that it resembles a skirt automatically brings up gendered stereotypes, mainly associating the kilt with a feminine inclination. However, as Heather Streets puts forward, “the wearing of the kilt – with its feminine associations reinforced rather than detracted from this masculine imagery” (Streets).  This of course was a more classic view of the kilt, and today its wearing can sometimes be the subject of ridicule by those who are not familiar with the history of the garment.        
        Let us then move the discussion to the outside as it were into the diasporic. As far as the diasporic spreading of those who would call the kilt a cultural object is concerned, North America presents probably the most valuable geographical area to study the ways in which the Scottish, Irish, and British have come to engage with the kilt in a diasporic setting. This is where we can see some of the theoretical concepts discussed in the course this past semester in action. As the kilt is a definer of information about an individual back in the home country, so can it be in the diaspora. What we see occurring though is a possible lessening in certain meanings when it comes to the wearing of the kilt, as it is not considered to be ‘normal’ article of clothing in North American society. In this way the kilt would appear to have been placed into the category of novelty to some. It is very rare to see an individual casually walking around wearing a kilt as an everyday piece of clothing; this is even in a ‘multicultural’ haven like Toronto. If this is witnessed though, it is often times in the form of some kind of social spectacle. There is a guy who plays the bagpipes on the corner of Queen and University downtown who would have provided a good interview for just this case, but unfortunately he was never around when an interview would have worked. But as he illustrates, the kilt has become a piece of costume almost as far as those who are not part of the diaspora, but also for those in it. The kilt is almost always exclusively seen at larger events, such as cultural fairs, highland games, weddings, funerals, and so on. In these situations, one can view the kilt as a piece of costumed dress, relegated to events in which the culture of the kilt is to be put on display. But the meaning of the kilt as an everyday social signifier seems to have not translated over when brought abroad by those in diaspora. Sentimental attachment to a kilt may in fact exist, as it like many other diasporic objects, has an identity itself and is not just given an identity by the owner. This is an important area of discussion when it comes to the study of diasporic objects, as while society tends to give objects meaning in terms of their human relationships, it is also important to recognize that objects may in fact have inherent meanings which extend beyond what the owner or onlooker perceives it to have. Schamberger et al. delve into just this aspect of object study and contend that objects exist not just as an embodiment or trigger for memory, but more broadly for the embodiment of the knowledge and personal experiences of those who interact with it (Schamberger). This of course means that the kilts themselves have agency, memory and knowledge, which if not properly interacted with can be lost or misunderstood; this of course is one of the greatest problems facing the kilt as a cultural object in diasporas.          
       The material culture of North America is something which stands in opposition it would appear, to the formation of cultural identity for those in diasporas. This is not to say that material culture is inherently a hindrance to the formation of identity and cultural awareness through the consumption of objects, but rather that it can be a hindrance for those in diasporas when their culture becomes a thing of spectacle or novelty. This is an issue which is discussed thoroughly in Stephanie Rains’ article on Celtic kitsch. The article chronicles how the material culture of one group can become the novelty of another, with the Irish culture in this case representing the novelty (Rains). The use of cultural items, images, and notions to illicit a sense of togetherness amongst not only those in the diaspora, but also those living outside of it is one element of material culture which operates to define culture to a wider audience. This of course brings about the issue of authenticity when it comes to diasporic cultural items. Are kilts made for the consumption of tourist for example, less authentic than those made 50 years ago? 100? 200? Are these ‘originals’ placed on a different cultural level than one’s made for mass consumption. While a kilt which belonged to an individual’s great, great-grandfather will undoubtedly hold more meaning to the individual who now owns it, is there an inherent culture to a kilt which was mass produced as kitsch. I would argue yes, but what that kilt is ‘saying’ will of course have a completely different meaning. There will be no real history attached to it. No story of being passed down generation through generation, and most importantly possibly no real cultural relevance other than being an article of clothing from a specific culture. This of course would then bring up the issue of originality or authenticity vs. production and individual meaning. 
       While there may not be as much ‘history’ with the kilt bought at the souvenir shop, the meaning that object has for the individual who bought it, whether they are part of the Scottish diaspora or not, would surely negate any claims of novelty or kitsch; unless of course that is how the individual truly views the object. What this all means then, is through the association between those in the diaspora and material cultural both in the homeland and in the host country, certain objects such as the kilt come to typify how the Scottish see themselves. This of course should be taken on an individualistic basis and not as a blanket statement, but with material culture it can most times be readily apparent the appropriation of culture in order to meet the consumptive material demands of a society; especially speaking of Western society. As Murray Pittock sums up, “Scottish material culture has a major role in influencing how Scots see themselves and how the world sees them…it is too popular, too powerful, influential and deep-seated to be dismissed as a ‘Scotch myth’ (Pittock). It could be argued however, that it is in fact this ‘Scotch myth” which keeps the culture alive amongst those living in the diaspora, as a bond of sorts exists linking them to a distant, possibly long forgotten and never seen homeland. The kilt then would represent a tangible piece of this myth, allowing the owner to feel as if they are a part of a culture much larger than themselves, even if they have never set foot in the homeland of their heritage.      
      Throughout this paper, the notions of memory, identity, belonging, and culture have all been discussed, but how these concepts function in relationship to the kilt as a diasporic object presents the most interesting concept of study. By delving briefly into the historical beginnings of the modern kilt, the hope is that it became clear how the foundations of one of the most recognizable cultural objects came to be. With its inception as an article of clothing, the kilt came to represent a sense of Scottish heritage for those Scots living in Scotland as well as in the diaspora, but also to those observers on the outside of Scottish culture it can to typify how the Scots were seen. It is this dynamic which gives us the ability to study how an object can be given different meanings by its owners as well as observers, and how these spatial, geographical, and cultural differences impact these meanings. The issue of authenticity for those living in diasporic communities seems to be an issue when it comes to the consumption of material objects as a way to assert a cultural identity and ties to a distant homeland. The ways in which those in the diaspora engage with objects, in the case of this paper the kilt, helps to illustrate how individuals can give meaning and importance to objects which hold some form of cultural significance to them. This is also a way in which those in the diaspora can attempt to negate any outside forces from lessening the cultural significance of an object. Unfortunately this is not always the case, and as was shown through the discussion on kitsch and material culture, diasporic objects can in some cases be relegated to the arena of novelty. As such the hope is that this paper has spoken to the nature of the kilt as a diasporic object as being fluid and individual in meaning, different from the meaning those from the homeland as well as outside observers ascribe to it, and has come to be entangled with Western society’s notions of kitsch and materiality.   

Works Cited

Milne, Norman. Scottish Culture and Traditions. London: Paragon Publishing, 2010.

Milton, Colin. "Modern Scottish Historical Fiction." Brown, Ian. The Edinburgh History of Scottish Literature. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007. 114-129.

Pittock, Murray. "Material Culture in Modern Scotland." Brown, Ian. The Edinburgh History of Scottish Literature. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007. 64-69.

Rains, Stephanie. "Celtic Kitsch: Irish-America and Irish Material Culture." Circa (2004): 52-57.

Schamberger, Karen. "Living In A Material World: Object Biography and Transnational Lives." (n.d.): 275-297.

Streets, Heather. Martial Race. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004.

Tolia-Kelly, Divya. "Locating processes of identification: studying the precipitates of re-memory through artifacts in the British Asian home." Royal Geography Society (2004): 314-329.

Trover-Roper, Hugh. "The Highland Tradition of Scotland." Hobsbawm, Eric and Ranger Terence. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: The Press Syndicate of The University of Cambridge, 1983. 15-42.

Zuelow, Eric. "'Kilts Versus Breeches': The Royal Visit, Tourism and Scottish National Memory." Journeys (2006): 33-53.