Max, to respond for now only about Cairns Craig's _The Modern Scots Novel:
Narrative And The National Imagination_, here's a relevant URL:
http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/intelligent-mr-toad/html/profharvie/articles/reviews/revcraig.pdf
It's Christopher Harvie's review-comparison (for 'Scottish Affairs') of CC's
book with J. Derrick McClure's _Language, Poetry and Nationhood_.
Harvie's review, in part, faults CC's book for "identifying a tendency in
the modern Scots novel to plunge through a 'thin' history to mythology via
anthropology or psychology: or, alternatively, to proceed with action
rather than reflection, in an existential manner."
Harvie believes that's all "good, gutsy stuff" from Craig, but that "the
worrying thing is that history's marginal role is secured in Cairns Craig's
account by the eviction of historians, or at least those proferring evidence
which might disrupt it."
He follows his important point with fine examples you may well wish to read.
Then he turns to J. Derrick McClure's _Language, Poetry and Nationhood_
[forgive the strange formatting it's turned out to have!]:
"Derrick McClure's *Language, Poetry and Nationhood*, by contrast, has a
relatively
modest aim: to show the linguistic inputs into Scots poetry since conscious
revivalism began late in Victoria's reign and (more generally) to link these
to the
campaigns for national culture and self-government. But it ends in a much
wider
field: examining the evolution of Scots as something multi-facetted,
experimental
and avant-garde. Although circling round the central figure of MacDiarmid,
McClure
stresses the inventiveness of contemporaries and disciples, and the degree
to which
exploration of the peculiar registers of Scots has given access to European
traditions
neglected by the Anglophone mainstream. McClure's command of the vernacular
makes for an elegantly-produced, knowledgeable book, and though there are
some
odd omissions - nothing on Hamish Henderson and the folk revival; nothing on
that
gallus fechter William Neill, though he appears in the acknowledgements –
this will
be an essential work on twentieth century Scots poetry."
Responses to your fascinating information in a later email when I've more
time,
Judy
2008/9/1 Max Richards <[log in to unmask]>
> Judy, I didn't know CCraig had such a book out.
>
> I remember when something by him appeared in Stand, ages ago, and I thought
> pungent prose like that bespeaks a good mind.
> I hope academia hasn't ruined him.
>
> Me, I stumbled on a big long survey of scot lit by Robert Crawford last
> month,
> which I should have known about.
>
> Scotland's Books (Penguin)
>
> Mad of me to do this, but I am reading it from cover to cover, slowly, full
> of
> enjoyment, admiration, and anticipation for the reading it points to.
>
> (Have just got as far as McDiarmid, on whom he is both generous and
> discriminating. My Auckland teacher Tom Crawford, an old lefty, took me to
> Biggar to the cottage the Grieves had ended up in, with whisky for him and
> chocolates for her, and they were lovely to meet, circa 1965. Crawford in
> Aberdeen took up Boswell scholarship and enjoyed sojourning at Yale.)
>
> Also Scotland's Books got me out acquiring Crawford and Imlah's Penguin Bk
> of Sc
> Verse, which is a necessary companion to Crawford's new survey.
>
> With a name like Barbour, Douglas, a person ought to have been in Scottish
> things from birth.
>
> As for vernacular, yes, Jon's rewrite of Shaks is a reminder of how folk do
> seem
> mostly to talk. An Aussie version would be similar.
>
> Max in Melbourne
>
> Quoting Judy Prince <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> > Fascinating, Max.
> > I've just ordered (amazon.com) Cairns Craig's _The Modern Scottish
> Novel_.
> >
> > BTW, isn't Douglas Barbour's specialty Scottish Literature? With
> > references, suggestions, opinions and reviews from Robin Hamilton, you,
> and
> > Douglas, I might get a good creative background for, as you call it, the
> > 'folk with a rich vernacular' (nicely put).
> >
> > You, of course, are sitting on a lovely time-bomb of Source: Tom
> Crawford.
> > I've too many questions to ask you about what you learned from him and
> what
> > you know of his life and works!
> >
> > But imagine, Max, that I've just asked those questions. What are your
> > answers?
> >
> > Nyn's appreciative close
> >
> > 2008/8/31 Max Richards <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> > > That you move from elizabethan language-creativity to scots, Judy,
> feels
> > > right.
> > >
> > > Writers need a folk behind them with a rich vernacular.
> > >
> > > And LGGibbons' recent editor, Tom Crawford, taught me this in Auckland
> > > circa
> > > 1962 about the time of his big Burns book.
> > >
> > > I visited old Tom in Aberdeen maybe twelve years ago, but having then
> lost
> > > touch
> > > with him, presume he has died without my hearing.
> > >
> > > I was lucky to have him as a teacher and guide.
> > >
> > > Max
> > >
> > > Quoting Judy Prince <[log in to unmask]>:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for giving my word a sanctioned life, Max. Surely, I was
> thinking
> > > of
> > > > the last of the 3 definitions you've found. <g>
> > > > In fact, I just wrote a word that "felt" like what those many 'thee',
> > > 'thy',
> > > > 'thou' words did to my head. BTW, I've actually met and spoken with
> > > > old-time Quakers who used the words, which were the familiar form of
> > > "you"
> > > > (as many English folk will know already, but many Americans do not).
> > > > My desire to make up a word, or change nouns to verbs, and so on, was
> > > first
> > > > brought on by reading Shakespeare as an adult---long after having
> been
> > > > forced in school to read and understand those plays from age 13.
> > > >
> > > > One of the delightful shocks of reading the plays again years later
> was
> > > > seeing that the playwright was far more creative, as were other
> writers
> > > in
> > > > that "stretching English language" Elizabethan period, as compared
> with
> > > now.
> > > > Their writings, especially Shakespeare's of course, made our clever
> > > modern
> > > > poems comparatively staid, rut-laid.
> > > >
> > > > Recently, I've begun Lewis Grassic Gibbon's trilogy,_A Scots Quair
> > > (meaning
> > > > "book"). It confirms my feeling that not knowing the meaning of a
> word
> > > or a
> > > > few words can ring bells and send up associations rather more
> thrilling
> > > than
> > > > a run of known words. Here's a bit from the Prelude ("The Unfurrowed
> > > > Field") of Gibbon's first novel of the trilogy, _Sunset Song_:
> > > >
> > > > "But even so he was gey slow to get on with the courting and just
> hung
> > > > around Kirsty like a futret round a trap with a bit meat in it, not
> sure
> > > if
> > > > the meat was worth the risk; and the time was getting on and faith!
> > > > something drastic would have to be done. So one night after they had
> all
> > > > had supper in the kitchen and old Sinclair had up and nodded to
> Kirsty
> > > and
> > > > said 'Ah well, I'll away to my bed. You'll not be long in making for
> > > yours,
> > > > Kirsty?' And Kirsty said 'No', and gave her mother a sly bit look,
> and
> > > off
> > > > the old mistress went up to her room and then Kirsty began fleering
> and
> > > > flirting with Chae and he was a man warm enough and they were alone
> > > > together................." (p 11, edited and introduced by Tom
> Crawford,
> > > > Canongate Classics, Canongate Books Ltd, Edinburgh, 1996)
> > > >
> > > > Not so many "unknowns" (to non-Scots) in this selection, but it's one
> I
> > > > enjoyed for Gibbon's style and the subject.
> > > >
> > > > zyxxxow me
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > This email was sent from Netspace Webmail: http://www.netspace.net.au
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> This email was sent from Netspace Webmail: http://www.netspace.net.au
>
