It could be supposed from all the above posts that the attraction which Burns offers is that he can seem to be all things to all men, and then be claimed to be an outstanding example of whatever it is. As witness the oft repeated claims by various groups that he was a socialist, a supporter of the French Revolution, a patriotic Briton, a supporter of the Jacobite cause, a committed Freemason, a defender of the true faith (whichever one you select...), a satirical attacker of organised religion, a women's libber, a died-in-the-wool bachelor (even when he was married).... you name it. This despite the evidence that he just did what looked like a good idea at the time, and then usually had to apologise for it afterwards so that he didn't upset too many powerful enemies.

What is true about Burns is that, in much of his better work, he reflected the feelings of the ordinary man, whether he was simply getting by in the everyday struggle to survive, or was caught up in the changing values and pressures of the times. Small wonder he was so popular in his own time. Let's face it, he'd been there, done that, and he had the gift of making the listener or reader think about the background to the words and apply it to their own experience. Trainee surveyor, farmer, militiaman, Excise officer, poet, writer, lover, husband, father; he was a man of the people and a product not only of his time, but of the history of his nation.

I don't think you can reasonably compare Burns to Shakespeare except in one area alone. Their target audience was generally so different that comparisons just don't work. The Shakespearean plays tell a range of stories for the stage. These were aimed to entertain the Elizabethan common folk (as well as the nobility) in ways that Burns never intended, but the Shakespeare sonnets at least can be said to be beautiful poetry certainly on par with the "english language" work of Burns. When Burns wrote in the scots dialects I would suggest he was writing for a very definite and very different audience indeed, and while the english peasant or lower class of his time would appreciate much of the sentiment, the language was aimed fair and square at the people Burns knew. His great talent was in making his kind of people think about life.

On the subject of the Burns Supper cult, and having been involved in presenting entertainment for an intimate "Nicht wi' Burns" Dinner on Saturday gone (much the same material the third year running, but we do avoid the usual done-to-death run-of-the-mill stuff and try to get the audience interested in his life as well as his work), it never ceases to amaze me how many people downunder want to claim to be scots, or descended from the scots. There were more kilts and sporrans in evidence than a Black Watch re-union. We performers looked downright villainous in our version of the great belted plaid, but at least we knew we were just pandering to the uneducated and played it for laughs! We were paid a compliment by the president of the local Caledonia Society, immaculately dressed in Argyle jacket, sporran, kilt, hose, skean-dhu and buckled shoes that it was great to hear the work of Burns in a scottish accent. Not one of his group actually spoke the tongue. Which makes me wonder just how much of the meaning they got out of the poetry and the song lyrics.......... must be the melody and the rhythm of the thing.