Crockett and Scots Humour...
To read Crockett without understanding Scots Humour (a particular brand!) is to miss a huge percentage of what he's writing about. From his own day to now, this lack of understanding (sometimes deliberate) has been behind much of the criticism of his writing. So how to define Scots Humour? You can google it and find a plethora of opinions. But to understand what Crockett meant by Scots humour, the best thing to do is to read what he said about it. (Do this before you read his fiction and you'll find your reading experience substantially enhanced)
Crockett first gave a lecture on Scots Language and Humour in the autumn of 1894 at various venues. The Scotsman wrote an extensive review in November 1894. The article was then published in 'The Contemporary Review' 1895. It occasioned quite some ire amongst the English literary elite (especially the likes of W.E.Henley who from then on became an adversary).
A decade later Crockett included another version of it in his non-fiction work Raiderland. There is an argument (quite longwinded and subtle) to say that it was Crockett's writings on Scots Language and Humour which were at least as instrumental in the reception he got in literary quarters as the actual fiction he wrote. That argument need not concern the modern reader (though it is partly responsible for why you may never have heard of Crockett!). But a finer understanding of Crockett's particular version of Scots Humour can explain many questions. If you're really interested you can even compare the two versions, and draw conclusions about what elements were changed and why between 1894 and 1904. The articles are long and freely available to download from the links above, so I will say no more here, but leave you to your own exploration and conclusions.
Below is an excerpt to whet your appetite:
WHAT WE SAY THERE, AND HOW WE SAY IT
No one can pass even a short space of time among the people of our Galloway countryside without being made aware, in ways pleasant and the reverse, of the great amount of popular humour ever bubbling up from the heart of the common people. It is to them the salt of intercourse, the grease on the dragging axles of their life. Not often does it reach the stage of being expressed in literary form. It is lost in the stir of farm-byres, in the cheerful talk of ingle-nooks. You can hear it being windily exchanged in the greetings of shepherds crying the one to the other across the valleys. It finds way in the observations of passing ploughmen as they meet on the way to the mill, and kirk, and market.
For example, an artist is busy at his easel by the wayside. A rustic is looking over his shoulder in the manner of the free and independent Scot. A brother rustic is in a field near by with his hands in his pockets. He is not sure whether it is worthwhile to take the trouble to mount the dyke, for the uncertain pleasure of looking at a mere picture. ‘What is he doing, Jock?’ asks he in the field of his better-situated mate. ‘Drawin' wi' pent!’ returns Jock, over his shoulder. ‘Is't bonny?’ again asks the son of toil in the field. ‘Ocht but Bonny!’ comes back the prompt and decided answer of the critic. Of consideration for the artist's feelings there is not a trace. (It was that admirable Galloway artist and our good friend Mr W.S.M’George A.R.S.A) Yet both of these rustics will appreciatively relate the incident on coming in from the field and washing themselves, concluding with this rider: ‘An' he didna look ower weel pleased, I can tell ye! Did he, Jock?’
This great body of popular humour first found its way into the channels of our historic literature mainly in the form of ballads and songs—often very free in taste and broad in expression, because they were struck from the rustic heart, and accordingly smelt of the farmyard, where common things are called by their common names.
Crockett first gave a lecture on Scots Language and Humour in the autumn of 1894 at various venues. The Scotsman wrote an extensive review in November 1894. The article was then published in 'The Contemporary Review' 1895. It occasioned quite some ire amongst the English literary elite (especially the likes of W.E.Henley who from then on became an adversary).
A decade later Crockett included another version of it in his non-fiction work Raiderland. There is an argument (quite longwinded and subtle) to say that it was Crockett's writings on Scots Language and Humour which were at least as instrumental in the reception he got in literary quarters as the actual fiction he wrote. That argument need not concern the modern reader (though it is partly responsible for why you may never have heard of Crockett!). But a finer understanding of Crockett's particular version of Scots Humour can explain many questions. If you're really interested you can even compare the two versions, and draw conclusions about what elements were changed and why between 1894 and 1904. The articles are long and freely available to download from the links above, so I will say no more here, but leave you to your own exploration and conclusions.
Below is an excerpt to whet your appetite:
WHAT WE SAY THERE, AND HOW WE SAY IT
No one can pass even a short space of time among the people of our Galloway countryside without being made aware, in ways pleasant and the reverse, of the great amount of popular humour ever bubbling up from the heart of the common people. It is to them the salt of intercourse, the grease on the dragging axles of their life. Not often does it reach the stage of being expressed in literary form. It is lost in the stir of farm-byres, in the cheerful talk of ingle-nooks. You can hear it being windily exchanged in the greetings of shepherds crying the one to the other across the valleys. It finds way in the observations of passing ploughmen as they meet on the way to the mill, and kirk, and market.
For example, an artist is busy at his easel by the wayside. A rustic is looking over his shoulder in the manner of the free and independent Scot. A brother rustic is in a field near by with his hands in his pockets. He is not sure whether it is worthwhile to take the trouble to mount the dyke, for the uncertain pleasure of looking at a mere picture. ‘What is he doing, Jock?’ asks he in the field of his better-situated mate. ‘Drawin' wi' pent!’ returns Jock, over his shoulder. ‘Is't bonny?’ again asks the son of toil in the field. ‘Ocht but Bonny!’ comes back the prompt and decided answer of the critic. Of consideration for the artist's feelings there is not a trace. (It was that admirable Galloway artist and our good friend Mr W.S.M’George A.R.S.A) Yet both of these rustics will appreciatively relate the incident on coming in from the field and washing themselves, concluding with this rider: ‘An' he didna look ower weel pleased, I can tell ye! Did he, Jock?’
This great body of popular humour first found its way into the channels of our historic literature mainly in the form of ballads and songs—often very free in taste and broad in expression, because they were struck from the rustic heart, and accordingly smelt of the farmyard, where common things are called by their common names.