Burns night

[Semiomniscient]

I have seen many of you have attended Burns night Supper in the recent weeks and I wonder what does that mean to you. Is this just a social event for you or are you doing it to celebrate the poet's life and his influence on Scotland.

I am not going to lie and say that I go to the annual supper because of Burns. I go to the dinner because it is an annual social event and it is also a fund raiser. Although I doubt that I will continue my involvement in the future years as I no longer believe in that fund raiser any more. I also don't read poetry because I don't understand them.

As a teacher of the English language, and one of Scottish ancestry, I must say that I actually like Burns--but I do enjoy the general Scottishness of the event. I should say that I like Burns' poetry rather... I find him as a man to be pretty base--but I'm a moralist prude I suppose. (I was disappointed when he was dubbed the "greatest Scot of all time".) Nevertheless, he was a poetic genius and I love the lyrics and verses he wrote. I LOVE giving the Address to the Haggis every year and I've tried my best to make it different and more exciting every year that I've done it.

I'm afraid at our Burns Night, there is not enough of his poetry recited--the past two years my father and I tend to be the only ones who've done anything actually honoring the Bard with reference to his works. But at least it's a heck of a lot more interesting than the St. Andrew's Dinner that's given every year. That's a total snooze fest and I have only gone when I was specifically invited to receive some sort of award/scholarship. But I digress...
Burns isn't that hard to understand for me, but I enjoy translating languages and I have a degree in English. So I'm not the typical person. But I think someone mentioned that people these days don't stop long enough to read and enjoy poetry... Burns Night is a good night to do that, but the problem is that so often, the readers stumble desperately over the language and haven't a clue as to what they're saying. A lot of it is about performance... tell them what the poem is saying and then recite the poem with gusto and panache!

[macwilkin]

As a teacher of the English language, and one of Scottish ancestry, I must say that I actually like Burns--but I do enjoy the general Scottishness of the event. I should say that I like Burns' poetry rather... I find him as a man to be pretty base--but I'm a moralist prude I suppose. (I was disappointed when he was dubbed the "greatest Scot of all time".)

People obsess far too much about the bawdy works of Burns, INMHO. Burns was most deserving of that title, at least in my viewpoint, because of the very fact that he is celebrated the world over some 250 years after his death, and for the fact that Burns was so important in collecting the folk songs and music of Scotland at a time when it was quite unfashionable to be "Scottish".

In that regard, he is very similar to fellow folklorists such as Alan Lomax, Vance Randolph and Hamish Henderson, and deserving of the honour. Even his collection of the bawdy stuff, The Merry Muses of Caledonia, is important in that regard -- and besides, it's just darn fun to read at a gents-only Burns Supper.

Of course, being a Pisskie, I do not have the Calvinist hang-ups that James has. Just kidding, James! :mrgreen:

T.

[Semiomniscient]

People obsess far too much about the bawdy works of Burns, INMHO. Burns was most deserving of that title, at least in my viewpoint, because of the very fact that he is celebrated the world over some 250 years after his death, and for the fact that Burns was so important in collecting the folk songs and music of Scotland at a time when it was quite unfashionable to be "Scottish".

In that regard, he is very similar to fellow folklorists such as Alan Lomax, Vance Randolph and Hamish Henderson, and deserving of the honour. Even his collection of the bawdy stuff, The Merry Muses of Caledonia, is important in that regard -- and besides, it's just darn fun to read at a gents-only Burns Supper.

Of course, being a Pisskie, I do not have the Calvinist hang-ups that James has. Just kidding, James! :mrgreen:

T.

Yes, well... even as a Calvinist, I don't think John Knox was that friendly of a guy either. I think Robert Burns did an absolutely great thing for Scotland in terms of literature and especially culture. I think Napoleon was one of the most excellent tyrants of history. But I don't think I would have gotten along with him. Robert Burns would at least have been a friendly guy to have a beer with. But I don't see him as a sort of role model upon which I would idealize a "hero". But alas, so what?

[macwilkin]

Yes, well... even as a Calvinist, I don't think John Knox was that friendly of a guy either. I think Robert Burns did an absolutely great thing for Scotland in terms of literature and especially culture. I think Napoleon was one of the most excellent tyrants of history. But I don't think I would have gotten along with him. Robert Burns would at least have been a friendly guy to have a beer with. But I don't see him as a sort of role model upon which I would idealize a "hero". But alas, so what?

If you idolize Burns, then you're missing the whole point -- Burns was an ordinary man with an extraordinary talent. He was by no means perfect, as none of us are, and yet that's what makes him the "greatest Scot" (which isn't necessarily synonymous with "hero", btw) to me -- Instead of a general, a monarch or what-have-you, Scotland chose a farmer who was able to capture universal human emotions into song and story. I think that says a lot for Scotland.

T.

[Semiomniscient]

If you idolize Burns, then you're missing the whole point -- Burns was an ordinary man with an extraordinary talent. He was by no means perfect, as none of us are, and yet that's what makes him the "greatest Scot" (which isn't necessarily synonymous with "hero", btw) to me -- Instead of a general, a monarch or what-have-you, Scotland chose a farmer who was able to capture universal human emotions into song and story. I think that says a lot for Scotland.

T.

Sure it does. I don't really know why one should dub someone the "greatest" anything. It doesn't do much good... but sure, I see your point.

[macwilkin]

Sure it does. I don't really know why one should dub someone the "greatest" anything. It doesn't do much good... but sure, I see your point.

I can agree with that..."the greatest" title and a $1.95 will buy you a cup of coffee. Burns didn't need the title -- the very fact that his words are still with us today, and are sung and recited at Burns Nights the world o'er already made him the greatest Scot.

T.

[Ozark Ridge Rider]

If you idolize Burns, then you're missing the whole point -- Burns was an ordinary man with an extraordinary talent. He was by no means perfect, as none of us are, and yet that's what makes him the "greatest Scot" (which isn't necessarily synonymous with "hero", btw) to me -- Instead of a general, a monarch or what-have-you, Scotland chose a farmer who was able to capture universal human emotions into song and story. I think that says a lot for Scotland.

T.

What he said

[Raphael]

If you idolize Burns, then you're missing the whole point -- Burns was an ordinary man with an extraordinary talent. He was by no means perfect, as none of us are, and yet that's what makes him the "greatest Scot" (which isn't necessarily synonymous with "hero", btw) to me -- Instead of a general, a monarch or what-have-you, Scotland chose a farmer who was able to capture universal human emotions into song and story. I think that says a lot for Scotland.

T.

OMG! I agree with you 100%.