Stephenson: The Ettrick Shepherd 79 



the Ettrick Shepherd, is a burlesque of Hogg, not the man 

 himself. 



Hogg's treatment of this use of his name was curious. At 

 times he took it as a good joke, at times it annoyed him im- 

 mensely. The popularity it gave him and the flattery it con- 

 tained ministered to his sense of vanity. Certain it is that 

 he allowed the articles to appear month after month and made 

 no protest. Yet Hogg was no drunkard and one can easily 

 justify his anger over some of the debauches in which he is 

 made to figure. March 28, 1828, Hogg writes to Blackwood 

 as follows : 



I am exceedingly disgusted with the last beastly Nodes, and as it is 

 manifest that the old business of mocking and ridicule is again begin- 

 ning, I have been earnestly advised by several of my best and dearest 

 friends to let you hear from me in a way to which I have a great aver- 

 sion. But if I do, believe me, it shall be free of all malice, and merely to 

 clear my character of sentiments and actions which I detest, and which 

 have proved highly detrimental to me. 



Scott was evidently not one of the friends who advised Hogg 

 to adopt a rash behaviour, as the following letter shows : 



My dear Hogg: — I am very sorry to observe from the tenor of your 

 letter that you have permitted the caricature in Blackwood's Magazine to 

 sit so near your feelings, though I am not surprised that it should have 

 given pain to Mrs. Hogg. Amends, or if you please revenge, is a natural 

 wish of human nature when it receives these sorts of provocation, but in 

 general it cannot be gratified without entailing much worse consequences 

 than could possibly flow from the first injury. No human being who has 

 common sense can possibly think otherwise of you than he did before — , 

 after reading all the tirades of extravagant ridicule with which the article 

 is filled. It is plain to me that the writer of the article neither thought 

 of you as he has expressed himself, nor expected or desired the reader to 

 do so. He only wished to give you momentary pain, and were I you I 

 would not let him see that in this he has succeeded. To answer such an 

 article seriously would be fighting with a shadow and throwing stones 

 at moonshine. If a man says that I am guilty of some particular fact, 

 I would vindicate myself if I could; but if he caricatures my person 

 and depreciates my talents, I would content myself with thinking that 

 the world will judge of my exterior and of my powers of composition by 

 the evidence of their own eyes and of my works. I cannot as a lawyer 

 and a friend advise you to go to law. A defense would be certainly set 

 up upon the Chaldee MS., and upon many passages in your own account 

 of your own life, and your complaint of personality would be met with 

 the proverb that "He who plays at bowls must meet with rubbers." As 

 to knocking out of brains, that is talking no how; if you would knock 

 any brains into a bookseller you would have my consent, but not to knock 

 out any part of the portion with which heaven has endowed them. 



