"The Functionlessness of Scotland', Edwin Muir; Edwin Muir and Hugh MacDiarmid

Over eighty years ago, Edwin Muir wrote a short article for Free Man, in response to a letter from Christopher Grieve (Hugh MacDiarmid) asking him to write something about the function of Scotland in the modern world.

Muir decided that it was a topic worth exploring. He felt that Scotland was a 'hypothetical unit', like other units "which remain in a condition of unchanging suspended potentiality (which fail to achieve a crystallisation and create a central organ), and these remain in a sort of limbo, half within the world of life and half outside it: a melancholy, unsatisfied, blindly aspiring state which romanticism is always ready to exploit, and for which the only cure is an active realism. Scotland is at present one of these hypothetical units...Scotland has not become a real part of England, nor has it succeeded in remaining a separate and independent entity. That is its problem...Into this semi-vacuum the population of Scotland are born, imaginary citizens of an imaginary country...the only remedy for this state of things is either for the whole Scottish people to become English, or for Scotland to become a nation. The first has proved impossible."

Muir concludes by  saying that "All the evil of the world seems to be becoming more and more supernational and sub-national...There are two main streams in the development of civilisation at present. One is the direction of supernationalism; the other is that of nationalism...It is possible to fight for either ideal from the highest motives. But every one must make a choice, one way or the other".

Remember, Muir was writing this in the early 1930's. The article is included in "Edwin Muir, Uncollected Scottish Criticism", edited and introduced by Andrew Noble (1982). I am not clear whether Muir's article was published in February 1931, or February 1933. I have seen both dates cited.

I don't think Edwin Muir was a Scottish nationalist, certainly not like Hugh MacDiarmid.

Personally, I would not like to see the break-up of the United Kingdom. One of my great-grandfathers was a Midlothian Scot, but he lived much of his life in London and Bath. MacDiarmid would not have had much interest in his ideals, or his way of life; Muir would have been more tolerant and sympathetic, I feel.

But as Muir says, "Every one must make a choice, one way or the other". A perpetual state of limbo is not in anyone's interest. In many respects, Muir's argument is badly dated, Scotland has a vibrant culture and identity of its own, and it is far from being a "hypothetical unit" or an "imaginary country". When I was involved with the nearly year-long Scotland in Sweden project, the impact of Scotland's rich culture was felt throughout Sweden and beyond.

In my experience, we function pretty damn well together!

*****

An alternative point of view: Hugh MacDiarmid on moderation and extremism; in full flight at the Oxford Union, 1964 (audio recording).

Scottish Lit writes (http://scottishlit.wordpress.com/) that "Unfortunately there appears to be no video footage of MacDiarmid speaking at the Oxford Union. However, thanks to brothermalcolm.net a full audio recording of the debate is available... MacDiarmid supported the motion that 'extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice, moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue'.

http://scottishlit.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/the-defence-of-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-justice-hugh-macdiarmid-at-the-oxford-union-with-malcolm-x/

YouTube version

YouGov poll

A result of MacDiarmid's slow-burning nationalism?

"...Slow but surely heat until
You catch my flame against your will
And the mureburn tak's the hill".

(From Why I Became a Scots Nationalist, Hugh MacDiarmid)

"The Anglophiles are on the run"

(From At the Grave of William Livingston, Hugh MacDiarmid)