End of the Road

I have to say that it's the end of the road for the Circumstantial Times, at least for the foreseeable future. It was my first blog, and although I've never been such a regular poster, I hope those who read them have enjoyed them half as much as I enjoyed writing them. Alas, the site is being mothballed. Learning a new language is difficult enough without continuing to write a blog, and the stresses of an intensive language course have taken their toll over here, much as working for the marketing company did this time last year.

I leave you with a word cloud of what's been posted; the word "Swedish" is very prominent.

The Economist, Scotland and how to alienate an entire country

Anyone that doesn't agree that the Economist has a chip on it's shoulder regarding Scotland should read this weeks issue. In my humble opinion there have been numerous articles portraying Scotland in a negative light, which, were at times both incredibly ignorant and unbelievably predictable. Nevertheless, I had always put this down to a particular editorial stance regarding the current Scottish government, which unfortunately, is less than unusual in the British press at the moment. See Al-Megrahi et al. However an article in this weeks paper really goes beyond the pale by defaming the entire population of Scotland.

My attention was garnered immediately through the use of the title "Scotland and Sir Walter Scott: Sham country, but not sham bard" although one could say that this was for all the wrong reasons. The majority of the article is fairly well written and reviews a book which I have not read, so neither am I in position to consider it's contents, nor am I particularly interested. For me Sir Walter Scott has always seemed somewhat overated, and the author of this particular article doesn't seem to have heard of quality over quantity since he spends almost an entire paragraph detailing how many books Scott wrote in his lifetime. However it is the last paragraph with which I shall concern myself here, as it, beyond all reasonable doubt, exhibits the anti-Scottish sentiment expressed within this particular newspaper. That's right I said beyond all reasonable doubt, we can leave any not proven verdicts for the High Court to deliver.

The writer begins this paragraph by lambasting Scott's critics who said that his Ivanhoe-esque-romanticised-tartan-picture-postcard of Scott-land may be fake, but continues "so is the new-nationalist, Burns-burnished alternative, a nation forged of feel-hard-done-by Braveheart movies, Celtic lettering on tawdry signs and synthetic rage at ancient clearances." It begins predictably by slogging the current Scottish government and anyone who voted for them. Then advances on anyone who might appreciate Burns, over a whisky, on Hogmanay even. For Auld Lang Syne indeed. Nonetheless, don't ask me to defend the Braveheart comment. Mel Gibson probably deserves everything he gets for that.

However the author then moves to suggest that Gaelic is some kind of lesser language. That to have dual language signage is some kind of weakness and that the signs make us look cheap. Unfortunately the idea that Gaelic was something to be ashamed of was all to common a view, as a result of which there were less than 60,000 speakers of the language at the turn of this century. As an article from the Scottish American Journal in 1868 suggested "the preliminary indispensables for acquiring Gaelic are... catching a chronic bronchitis, having one nostril hermetically sealed up, and submitting to a dislocation of the jaw." I did think that such views were in the past, sadly they are not.

That is not to say that I support the idea of Gaelic road signs everywhere, such road signs in Edinburgh are, in my opinion, ironic to say the least. This is not a place to argue whether Edinburgh takes it name from Dun Eidyn, gaelic for fort on the slope, or Edwin's Burgh, named for King Edwin of Northumbria, a speaker of Old English. Nevertheless there do remain siginificant areas within the Borders and, and also the Northern Isles, where dual language signs are not appropriate since the etymology of the place names is not Gaelic in origin or history. Indeed, the status of Norn, the Norse dialect spoken at one time in both the Orkney and Shetland Islands, as an extinct language provides a lesson to temper the ignorance of those who see Gaelic as unimportant. For a large proportion of both the country and the population, Gaelic is a part of our history.

Indeed it is for this exact reason, remembering our history, why we continue to learn and speak of the Highland clearances which drove millions of Scots from our shores or into forced poverty in the Glasgow slums. An event which I think, still bears a causal link to some of the societal problems we face today, granted there is no-one left to blame. To say that continuing to speak of what was an incredibly dark passage in Scottish history is fake is therefore incredulous. The truth is we all need to remember our history and thus learn from our mistakes. Indeed forgetting ones history is not a mark of wisdom for precisely this reason. The author finishes his article with a quote from Edwin Muir, who apparently "called Scott a genius." That is now beyond the point, the fact is, the editorial stance of the Economist in alienating an entire country, isn't.

Death of a Salesman

One may have noticed that I appeared to have taken a leave of absence from my blog; a sabbatical if you will. Equally, you may not have, but a quick glance to the bar on the right will show you that this is my first post since October of last year.

The reason for this 6 month gap in my writing can be answered very simply. It's no coincidence that I started a new job in that very same month of October, and it's no coincidence that I find myself writing again now. You see, I have the time to write again, and what a liberty it is, because I no longer work there (there, being business to business sales for an events company.)

The reasons why I chose to move on are many. Most importantly I saw the opportunity of new horizons. When I started working in the company, I had envisioned myself earning a great deal more commission than I actually did. Not to say that I wasn't good at it or that I didn't work hard enough. Quite to the contrary, I consistently worked harder that almost anyone in my division, and I think it is also safe to say that I sold better than most. Indeed I was offered the option to take up my position again; as my former sales director said, should I ever wish to "dip my toes" again.

However, the fact remains that I did not take home enough each month to justify the hours that I found myself working each week, which were considerable, mainly due to the fact that my base salary was very basic, and the sales commission was not generous enough to make the job competitive. Indeed it was so uncompetitive, as to make it more worthwhile for me to leave the job market entirely for a year, study Swedish full time, and further a career as a Swedish lawyer. In short there were too many pockets before mine.

Nevertheless that is not to say that I view the time there as wasted. Quite the contrary, I feel that the work offered me a great deal in terms of experience and confidence that only working with senior level decision makers can provide. But alas, that ship has run it's course; like the proverbial Willy Loman, there has been a death of a salesman, but in his stead was born a student in intensivsvenska för akademiker, and very happy he is.