1916 Proclamation was read out at Tara before GPO

by Cael Tue Feb 12, 2008 20:00

It would be interesting to know who read out the Proclamation at Tara and on what date.

by Sceptic Wed Feb 13, 2008 09:20

“Does anyone have any more information about this?”

The thing about the proclamation being read out at Tara sounds like utter nonsense though it’s the kind of thing gullible republican fantasists would believe. Also it is doubtful if there would have been bulldozers available to sit in front of in Arthur Griffith’s time. That tale is also nonsense.

by Engineer Wed Feb 13, 2008 15:34

From my knowledge of Dr. Brendan Myers, it is unlikely that he would have introduced false information in one of his lectures.

Research shows that it was the Blade that was invented 1904 and in 1910 the blade was attached to a road steam engine.

So there might well have been an early version of Bulldozers in Ireland circa 1916

by Cael Thu Feb 14, 2008 16:08

If you go to Tara you will easily see the amount of damage done. I think its very likely there were some kind of primitive bulldozers in use.
Fortunately, the protestors managed to stop the destruction - on that occasion.

by Provisional Government Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:38

The Proclamation was signed and printed on Easter Sunday 1916. Are we supposed to believe that - in the middle of all the countermanding orders, and trying to get the Rising back on again for Easter Monday - they sent someone to run up the Hill of Tara and read it? To whom were they going to read it, exactly? The fairies? Not alone is there no evidence for the claim, there's no sense to it.
I think the professor has been too eager to believe something he overheard, in the hope that it will boost his case. The case itself, the need to protect Tara and our heritage from those who would destroy it, is a compelling one, and has no need of invented myths such as this.

by C Fri Feb 15, 2008 12:19

I echoe the words of the above writer.

Also I dont see how it is that hard to believe that someone was sent out to read it at Tara! Messengers ran up and down the country , in and out of dangerous territory, through gunfire and more to deliver communications and orders so why not send someone to Tara to read out such an important document! I would. Considering Tara's history , the Rebellion of 1798, Daniel O Connell's Oratory, the above named scholars in previous contribution etc , it makes perfect sense!

by Jacqueline Fallon Fri Feb 15, 2008 20:09

It would not surprise me at all if Pádraig Mac Piarais ordered some poor créatúr up to Tara to read out the 1916 Proclamation to: the pagan gods, the mythical Celtic warrior, Cú Chulainn, the ghosts of all the High Kings & Chieftains of Ancient Ireland, na Daoine Sídhe, the citizens of the Saol Eile, indeed the Queen of Keening, the Bean Sí herself, might have put in an ominous appearance! After reading all his short stories and Mise Éire among others, I have come to the conclusion that he was a deeply romantic poet, and patriotic Irishman who harboured deep romantic notions of his beloved Éire and its citizens and was quite alone in this way of thinking, and whilst I admire him deeply a miniscule part of mo cheann is inclined to think from reading some of his work that ‘he was away with the fairies’ himself, with his romanticisation of the ordinary Irish people (on the literary side of things, John Millington Synge, in my view, portrayed a much more realistic depiction of the everyday hardships of Irish citizens back then, spiced-up with wit and black humour that is so classically Irish).

Unlike Pádraig Mac Piarais, I could not see some of the more practical warriors such as by way of example, and in no particular order: James Connolly, Michael Collins, Thomas Clarke and Éamon de Valera ordering some unfortunate person on a pointless mission up to Tara to read the 1916 Proclamation aloud to the mythical people - I can just imagine the sort of response he would get from them at such a ‘military move’! But yes, I can perfectly understand how Pádraig Mac Piarais would see this as a symbolic gesture - i.e. the reclaiming of the four provinces of Ireland for the Irish people under a different form of high kingship.

Extract from Mise Éire le Pádraig Mac Piarais (Dia go deo leis):

“Mór mo náire mo chlann féin a díol a máthair.”

(great my shame, my own children that sold their mother )

W.B. Yeats should have wrote: Romantic Ireland’s dead and gone, it is with ‘Pearse’ in the grave.

by Cael Fri Feb 15, 2008 20:35

The Easter Rising was as much about awakening the spirit of the Irish people as anything else. Going to the spiritual heart of Ireland to read out the Proclamation would make perfect sense. It is hardly an accident that the Fianna Fail gombeens and their dig-out chums want to cover Tara in concrete. They could have chosen another route for their motorway, but they wanted to bury the spirituality of the Irish people under a load of concrete to make us into mere soulless factors of production who see everything in euro.

by Sceptic Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:41

Cael this demonstrates that you have an overly starry-eyed view of both 1916 and Tara. The Irish people were already “awoken” on the nationalist side with Parnellism and the Gaelic revival since the 1880s and on the unionist side by the Ulster Crisis climaxing in 1912. 1916 was the work of a very small minority faction who were not prepared to let the constitutional process work through and who simply ignored the Ulster problem altogether.

by NobodyInParticular Sat Feb 16, 2008 13:27

it's "delusions" septic!

The majority of irish people were asleep then.
And they are still asleep today.

shell / tara / shannon / political_corruption / loss of local industry / 3rd world infrastructure
/ celtic tiger billions blown / health service / chad / EU treaty / articles 2&3 / etc etc

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............

by Carmel Sat Feb 16, 2008 17:49

Tara not only symbolises the spirituality of the Irish but to read out the Proclamation there in 1916 would also have been about Sovereignity. Thus making Brendan Myers even more believable.

And yes, the Irish people are still asleep. What's it going to take?

C

by Tomás Sun Feb 17, 2008 20:01

I can't think of the name of the IRA O/C that read out the 1916 Proclamation at Tara on Easter Monday, but it's the same IRA O/C that went up to the hill of Tara at the start of the Civil War and proclaimed himself High-King in an effort to unite the pro and anti Treaty sides of the Republican Movement. He was O/C of Meath or Westmeath I think. About 2,000 IRA men went the his inauguration ceremony for the High-Kingship. Eamonn mac Thomáis used to have the outfit he was inaugurated as High King in and he donated it to the Costume Museum (or something like that) in Dublin. I'll dig up the name of the O/C somewhere.

by Barry - 32 csm Mon Feb 18, 2008 07:31

" I have come to the conclusion that he was a deeply romantic poet, and patriotic Irishman who harboured deep romantic notions of his beloved Éire and its citizens and was quite alone in this way of thinking, and whilst I admire him deeply a miniscule part of mo cheann is inclined to think from reading some of his work that ‘he was away with the fairies’ himself, with his romanticisation of the ordinary Irish people (on the literary side of things, John Millington Synge, in my view, portrayed a much more realistic depiction of the everyday hardships of Irish citizens back then, spiced-up with wit and black humour that is so classically Irish)."

Im sorry Ms Fallon , it seems you have fallen victim to the Pearse myth as promoted by Mr Devalera and Padraigs mother whom he recruited to the side of Fianna Fail around ten years after the event . Its a sterilised mystic caricature of some priest-type plaster saint figure with his dreamy head in the clouds that Mr Devalera sought to promote . As you admit you have only read some of his work , Ill assume its the few lines of romantic poetry the state deems agreeable for distribution , intertwined with the narrative of Mr William Butler yeats , who played no part whatsoever in the events of 1916 yet managed to write himself into the narrative by the mid 1920s
.
A very different persona is revealed for example in Irish historian Sean Cronins seminal work " The McGarrity Papers" , which is an historical account of amazing accuracy and insight given that its based solely upon the contents of personal correspondence between Pearse and many others , and by many others talking about Pearse in turn to their associates . From the horses mouth as it where . Lets not forget Mr Pearse was a senior member of a clandestine paramilitary organisation involved in everything from sabotage to arms smuggling to assassination . He was given that job by very serious and dangerous people , veteran insurgents , assassins , dynamiters and terrorists who after much consideration reckoned he had the backbone to get the business done in Ireland . The rebellion was not his idea , the decision was taken almost ten years prior to 1916 and he was chosen after much consideration by very hard headed , hard bitten and experienced individuals as the man to get it done . That task is not given to a dreamer isolated from reality .
His task was to have that paramilitary group infiltrate the most senior positions of many outwardly respectable organisations whilst simultaneously planning a bloody insurrection and insurgency intended to go much further than the events which transpired on easter week . The manouverings , deceptions , stand offs , betrayals and deceit involved on all sides where not the work of some lofty dreamer but a very practical and determined man , a very dangerous subversive , who was very serious at what he was about . He was locked in a head to head battle for many years with the sharks of the bourgeouis nationalist party , business leaders and politicians out to utilise a volunteer movement for their own ends whilst he was simultanously trying to infiltrate it and other organisations for his secret paramilitary groups ends . It was very serious stuff and pearses correspondence was very candid about the difficulties involved and he seemed very well aware of the treachery ingrained within Irish psyches .
Furthermore his addresses such as " The sovereign People " and " The Murder Machine" are based on very coherent and structured ideas and analyses , revolutionary documents worthy of serious and determined intellect .

""Unlike Pádraig Mac Piarais, I could not see some of the more practical warriors such as by way of example, and in no particular order: James Connolly, Michael Collins, Thomas Clarke and Éamon de Valera ordering some unfortunate person on a pointless mission up to Tara to read the 1916 Proclamation aloud to the mythical people - I can just imagine the sort of response he would get from them at such a ‘military move’! But yes, I can perfectly understand how Pádraig Mac Piarais would see this as a symbolic gesture - i.e. the reclaiming of the four provinces of Ireland for the Irish people under a different form of high kingship.""

Im afraid this just conjecture and has no basis other than a skewed notion of a myth promoted by a confessional state that needed to have another national saint to confer upon it some posthumous legitimacy in light of its failure to secure national sovereignty . Pearses writings , analyses and work was very much dumbed down , simply because the state itself was Britians vision of Irelands future and his analyses stood in complete contradiction to it in practice , in existence and especially in spirit and ethos .
The assumption that Pearse was an inpractical man is simply not borne out by either historical fact or account .

If someone was indeed ordered to go to Tara it would have been to make a political point of national sovereignty . Kingship had nothing remotely to do with any vision Pearse sought to promote , which was the primacy of the sovereignty of the Irish people and their inalienable right to nationhood .

"It is , in fact, true that the repositories of the Irish tradition , as well as the spiritual tradition of nationality as the kindred tradition of stubborn physical resistance to England have been the great , splendid, faithful common people - that dumb multitudinous throng which sorrowed through the penal night, which bled in 98, which starved in the Famine , and which is here still - what is left of it - unbought and unterrified . Let no man be mistaken as to who will be Lord in Ireland when Ireland is free . The people will be Lord and master”

No kings or fairies there Im afraid .

""Extract from Mise Éire le Pádraig Mac Piarais (Dia go deo leis):

“Mór mo náire mo chlann féin a díol a máthair.”

(great my shame, my own children that sold their mother )""

That was cheifly in response to the toe curling scenes of national degeneracy during King Georges gala visit to his Irish province and what seemed like the entire population welcoming him enthusiastically in a sea of red white and blue , bowing , scraping and curtseying . It also throws into question your previous assertion of his "deep romantic notions of his beloved Éire and its citizens " . His poetry was simply propaganda as a means to have them adopt a more dignified view and sense of themselves , to remind them they had the potential to be much better than the state they had sunk into. Because most definitely we as a people were extremely undignified and possessed hardly any sense of either national nor class consciousness when it came to the crunch . And in 1914 it most certainly did , as it had done furing the royal visit which preceded the first world war also.

Personally I prefer Pearses analyses from the soveriegn people to his poetry .

“ The nations Sovereignty extends not only to all the men and women of the nation but to all the material possessions of the nation , the nations soil and all its resources , all its wealth and all wealth producing processes within in the nation . In other words no private right to property is good against the public right and welfare of the nation” .

ysee now why you dont get taught this stuff in school .

"W.B. Yeats should have wrote: Romantic Ireland’s dead and gone, it is with ‘Pearse’ in the grave."

WB Yeats was most likely hiding under the bed in 1916 shocked and appalled . Asides from being born in Ireland and being able to write half decent poetry he had very little in common with Padraig Pearse .

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/77853

by Jacqueline Fallon Mon Feb 18, 2008 13:46

Chuig: Barry of the 32CSM,

I have not fallen victim to the ‘Pearse myth’ as you put it - I draw my own conclusions based on all of the short stories I’ve read, to take a few examples: Íosagán, Eoghainín na nÉan, An Dearg-Daol, An Bhean Chaointe, Na Bóithre, and some of his poetry, which are to me very revealing of the sensitive, romantic and spiritual mind of the person who wrote them - I would regard those as admirable characteristics in moderation, but would not be a fan of romantic and sentimental stories (but I’m surprised to find them emanate from a ‘great’ military mind, in most military organisations such expressions of sensitivity and displays of sentimentality would be mocked at, put down and annihilated or the person kicked to the side and declared unsuitable for military action - I think you would agree Barry as you seem to fit the military mould perfectly yourself as you’re partial to the hard headed and hard bitten people, the serious fucking ‘terrorists’(??) who just get the ‘job’ fucking done!). The fact that he was the author of such sensitive stories suggests to me he was not a hard bitten, hard headed man in his way of thinking and was not a natural born militant and would not himself have ever chosen a military career - only for he was driven to do so by his all-consuming idealism. Public speeches are pure propaganda and I would not regard them as having any deep insight into his individual character, nor would I rely on the hearsay of others, but the topics and the stories he chose to write away from the glare of the political/military spheres, reveal a lot more about him as an individual.

I am not commenting on whether he was a good/bad military commander, I am not qualified to do so, as I do not possess your military qualifications or experience and cannot compete with you in this sphere, as I would be shot down in an instant. I am a working class woman, a ‘commoner’, and member of the ‘dumb multitudinous’ (I hope those were not Pearse’s choice of words, they are disgracefully patronising and reveal an arrogance customary of the middle/upper classes to the majority of the Irish population).

My original commentary was solely an attempt to distinguish who, in my opinion, amongst the Irish patriots would have ordered someone on the mission to Tara to read the Proclamation and Pearse stood out among the others as someone who would do so, as he took an avid interest in Tara and the High Kings of Ireland and the fairy world/saol eile (contrary to your intellectual opinion), and he was well read on various mythical legends, such as that of Cú Chulainn and had an avid interest in ancient Irish folk tales - unlike yourself, Barry, he was not so dismissive of the fairies nor the High Kings of Ireland, although I was not suggesting he wanted to bring back the high kingship, I was using it as a metaphor (no wonder you don’t like poetry) to indicate Ireland’s wish to be: governed by its own people, to be completely independent again both culturally and politically, as it had been in the days of the King of Ireland, Brian Boru’s time, and before the British military invasion of 1169.

Pádraig Mac Piarais was an idealist who needed and relied on his dreams to spur him on to write and fight with such passion as he did, but it is blatantly obvious to me and should be to everyone living in the real world (without having to state it, it being the bleedin obvious) that he acted on those dreams - he fought and died for his dream of a politically and culturally independent Ireland after all!

In conclusion, the personal view of a ‘commoner’ such as myself is that: the 1916 Proclamation been read out on the Hill of Tara was a waste of bloody time, as it would have been too small a gathering (of one corporeal form). I do not see the point in reading a public announcement out when there is no members of the general public present to announce it to. Sin a bhfuil!

p.s. I do not support any political party in Leinster House - you assume too much, Barry

by Sceptic Mon Feb 18, 2008 20:46

Ms. Fallon is actually a good writer and is pretty correct in her assessment of Pearse. He had a good public profile and could be a good speaker and thus was put to the forefront. He would have had a softer and more favourable image than many of the others around.

Connolly alone of the 1916 leaders had prior military experience. Pearse was a complete military naïf along with the rest of them.

The dismissal of Yeats by Barry as a “half decent poet” is ludicrous – any scholar regards him as a world class poet and one who was very deeply involved in Irish affairs all of his life.

by sceptic corrector Mon Feb 18, 2008 21:20

he received army officer training at Stoneyhurst college in England.

or let us remember - John Mac Bride who though ignorant of the rising before hand & not a member of the IVF had served in the Irish Transvaal Boer regiment as an officer & offered his services to Thomas MacDonagh and was then appointed second-in-command at the Jacob's factory.

Jayzhus Sceptic. not a single comment you offer has any fact. It's all crap. It's not even like your crap helps commentators hone points. You're not contributing in a postive way.

by Barry - 32 csm Tue Feb 19, 2008 00:32

William Butler Yeats had no involvement in anything to do with 1916 or the insurgency which followed it , or the political organisations which accompanied the insurgency . He wrote a poem praising1916 in the mid 1920s , about 4 years after British troops withdrew from most of southern Ireland and it was then safe to do so without becoming a badly thought of person by the authorities . He asked a question in his little poem " did those words of mine send out men the english shot ?" to which the only conceivable answer could be " No Mr Yeats , they did not . Please stop trying to write yourself into the historical narrative of those events with your little poems long after the fact ."

In response to Ms Fallon . I didnt acuse her of being aligned with any political party in Leinster House at all . I pointed out the myth promoted by certain parties in Leinster House was the commonly accepted one by Irish society as a whole . I agree she is a good writer and was not having a dig at her personally . Simply trying to correct what I believe to be a common misconception due to an historically incorrect and flawed iconography being utilised by politicians who have dominated the political scene for almost 80 years . And an education system which naturally enough was unable to discuss Pearses critique of Irelands education systems when that critique itself railed against such an education system .
Pearses short stories (unlike his political analyses on issues such as sovereignty and the need for a radical overhaul of the education system) are just fiction , propaganda of a sort which was aimed at combatting the mentality of empire common and very widespread in Ireland and Irish subjugation to it . To show them they had heroes of ther own , a heroic tradition of their own and it was better and more dignified to identify with that than be thrilled by Lord Symington -Smythes latest expedition to outer Bongo land to civilise the natives and other tales of derring do which were the staple news diet of the day . The Victorian version of the celeb culture we are encouraged to aspire to in todays society .

Because just like those natives which Victorian england was happily conquering with much Irish physical assistance , Irish people had long been encouraged to believe by the colonialists , by their schools , teachers by thier priests politicians and businessmen that their native traditions and culture were backward and worthless . And if that was all backward and worthless so were the inferior people who had produced that inferior culture . Of no historical , intellectual or cultural merit at all and that it was simply natural that British rule was in fact civilising them . Ireland had largely accepted all this and was aspiring to be the Victorian ideal , Pearse was enagaged in a project which was a cultural struggle as well as a military , political , social and economic one . His poetry and fiction alluding to a more dignified national character were but one aspect of the work he was engaged in .
In the sovereign people he clearly outlined all the fronts on which the liberation struggle must be fought - the intellectual and democratic front in his reference to Tone , the cultural front in reference to Davis , the social and economic front in his reference to Fintan Lalor and "the more virile of the labour organsiations ", and on the physical force front in his reference to Mitchell and the Fenians . Whilst Connolly argued that if you hoist the green flag over Dublin castle in the morning unless you change the economic system you will still be ruled by England he was correct . And Pearse took this further by stating unless you replace the Anglo centric cultural values of Ireland and the education system which instils those values and replace them with a radically different one you will also be ruled by England and the sytem England placed in this country . Pearse referred to that education system as " the murder machine" , a system with the specific intent of crushing and killing the spirit of children and to turn them into the crushed unquestioning subjects who knew their place on the ladder from childhood which the colonial and capitalist system required to function .
Both Pearse and Connolly were deeply moved by Lawlors conviction

"Not to repeal the Union, then, but the conquest - not to disturb and dismantle the empire , but to abolish it forever. Not to resume or restore an old constitution, but to found a new nation and to raise up a free people , and strong as well as free, and secure as well as strong , based on a peasantry rooted like rocks in the soil of their land”

The fact is that most Irish people naturally regarded their rulers as their betters . Pearse took the opposite view and tried to instill in the people a self belief , that they were not just every bit as good but indeed better people than those who ruled them . And this was not a belief he devloped in isolation to the people but from personal experience .

Prior to involvement in any clandestine enterprise Pearse was simply an academic . As part of his work he stayed in the connemara gaeltacht in order to study the language and traditional customs and folklore . During this visit Queen Victoria was on holiday in Ireland and came to Mayo for the scenery . Pearse personally witnessed the monarchs touring car , with no bodyguards or police escort in an area in which Victorian rule had been guilty of a holocaust , a genocidal death toll , mass evictions, horrific brutality and cold inhumanity , becoming stuck in a muddy pothole . He then witnessed the local people , men and women , rushing to the monarchs aid from the fields . Coats and shawls were put under the wheels of the car while Irish natives pushed and shunted setting the car free and off it trundled . Without so much as a wave or a thankyou . The cars occupants who had remained inside simply stared ahead impassively and drove off . Leaving the natives standing there open mouthed and confused and ashamed , covered in mud with their few clothes ruined . This made him deeply angry , particularly as his time there had brought him into personal contact with the ghost villages and famine roads to nowhere . The splendour of the stately homes alongside the misery of the people . And the hidden culture of the people , which he regarded as intrinsically , morally and intellectually superior to the foreign culture which had been put in its place . He took the view that the people who had helped the monarch were simply better human beings than the occupants in the car . They had been instinctively chivalrous whilst their rulers were simply ignorant pigs . Except they didnt believe it themselves . He viewed it as essential to have them believe that , because without self belief they could never determine their own futures and live in a dignified manner .
An opportunity then arose when Queen Victorias host , a relative of Ruth Dudley Edwards decided to stage a week long exhibition of the wonders of the British empire and culture in his Mayo stately home . The natives were enocuraged to come and gawk at Zulu shields , British military , cultural and economic superiority and be proued of their place in this great empire .
Pearse decided to challenge this and instead encouraged the local people to put on an exhibition of Irish culture in a local farm house on the same week . And all week long instead of zulu spears and tribal head dresses the natives put on their own entertainement ,from music , singing , dancing and storytelling from the ancient oral tradition which went well into the night . Young and old were encouraged to attend and participate and make it their own thing . And by the time that week was over the locals had seen their own largely hidden traditions and culture successfully compete with that which was considered superior . Dudley Edwards exhibition was a flop , tthe locals exhibition a success and was talked about enthusiastically for a long time afterwards . Pearse had encouraged them simply to look to themselves to find their dignity as a people . Thats what his poetry and short stories were about , the lessons of personal experience .

As regards Ms Fallons resorting to expletives , which baffles me , and speculating on whether Ive a military background Im sorry to disappoint but I dont and most likely never will have . Pearses reference to a "dumb multitudinous throng" refers to a dispossessed people who were without a voice , not a stupid people in an american sense . I also didnt claim Padraig Pearse possessed any great military mindset , simply that he was regarded as a capable , practical and strong minded individual by very serious revolutionaries who gave him the job of organising a rebellion . They did not make that choice on the basis of Pearses short stories and poems but on a much more rounded appreciation of his character which it is clear Ms Fallon does not possess , having only read his short stories and poems which were just fiction at the end of the day and not a political analyses . The actual non fiction work of Pearse provides a much better insight into the mans motivations and political outlook on the world and what was necessary to be done in order to have a revolution , not just in the military sense but in the cultural , democratic , social and economic sense also . It was on that basis he was the man chosen by the IRB leadership to ensure a revolution took place .

I think Ms Fallon has taken my rebuttal of the Pearse myth as promoted by the Irish state , which places no value on the actual politics he promoted and concentrates only upon his works of fiction , as an attack on her personally . I can assure her it wasnt intended to be and apologise if she arrived at that conclusion erronuously . I myself am only an ordinary working class person attempting to correct the myths of capitalist post colonial society as best I can when not toiling in my non unionised shit-hole of a factory for a pittance.

by Sceptic Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:02

Because Yates took no part in 1916 or the politics which followed it does not mean he has to be dismissed. Making 1916 the criteria for everything is very narrow minded and leads to absurd grudging statements like he was a "half decent poet".

by Caobhin Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:55

Add his Blueshirt sympathies to non-participation in the events of 1916-23 and you have a very good case for dismissing his attempt to write himself into the historical narrative.

by Benno Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:58

Besides, he believed in the fairies and wrote a few lyrics about them.

by Sceptic Tue Feb 19, 2008 17:21

Yeats did speak out for southern Protestants in the 1920s - I suppose that makes him a "blueshirt" in some people's eyes. However there was a respectable case to be made against excessive clericalism back then. Yates was undeniably a very important figure throughout several decades of Irish history and letters. It is churlish to deny that on the grounds that his militant nationalists credentials were insufficient for some. But the problem is with them and not Yates. His artistic and humanist sensibility repelled him from the killing around 1916 even if his romantic side lauded the motives of some of those who participated. Remember there were very strong nationalists like McNeill and Hobson who also disapproved of the rising and others like The O’Rahilly who only joined in when it began. Joyce had even less to do with 1916 or nationalism than Yates so I suppose he is also an apostate in republican eyes?

by Cael - Sinn Féin Poblachtach Tue Feb 19, 2008 18:38

Im wondering why a topic on Tara is focusing negative comment on Yeats? After all, Yeats did what most of us are failing to do today - he went out and put his own body in the way of the lunatics who wanted to destroy Tara - not only that, he and his Anglo-Irish comrades succeeded in saving Tara for future generations. Will we?

by Barry - 32 csm Tue Feb 19, 2008 19:46

therefore he is perfectly entitled to write a poem asking whether his support for the preservation of Tara encouraged other people to support the preservation of Tara .
However in a situation where 1916 had become highly fashionable after the fact and assocaiton with it did wonders for ones public profile and political career ( He was appointed a senator by the free staetrs) he attempted to write himself into the narrative of those events , by claiming hed been the inspiration to peoples participation in those events . He was talking balls . But successful balls . As a result he is associated ever since in the public mind with the events of 1916 .

He was also a fecking Blueshirt and penned their fascist marching songs . He praised Mussolinis rise to power and was also a member of the Eugenics society . He believed in selective breeding . Eugenics is one of the founding basis of Nazism , perhaps its most distatseful even moreso than its trampling of democracy . Some of his poetry certainly needs to be re-evaluated in light of this . And he only distanced himself from the blueshirts when they began making appeals to the masses . He despised the masses and democracy and believed well bred eugenic supermen , natural born leaders , were necessary to control society .

and he wrote about fairies , while pearse wrote about the masses , praised the masses and called for democracy for the masses . And died in persuit of it .

by Sceptic Tue Feb 19, 2008 22:28

For all that Yeats was a world class poet. Pearse was a mediocrity as a poet in comparison.

by gargle Tue Feb 19, 2008 22:55

If you want to make such utterly trite comparisons you need to find some type of analytic approach to quality & poetry "Sceptic". Or would you prefer consider mediocrity? How many Yeats poems from the same period of Pearse's lifespan or chronological reality are considered better to the point of a single title being remembered & passed in erudite bar-stool chitchat? Or how many of such works are considered part of the canon of Irish literature? Oh, you'll be talking dramatic poetry - will you?

QED.
I've my eye on you.

by Jacqueline Fallon Tue Feb 19, 2008 23:08

“Dumb multitudinous throng" refers to a dispossessed people who were without a voice, not a stupid people”

Barry,

Thank you for the clarification of the above ill chosen words by Pádraig Mac Piarais and for your very detailed explanatory contribution. Pearse was a great defender of the ordinary people as depicted in his short stories, but, unfortunately, he was also a Barrister, and as a consequence of this, he would be inclined to slip into using pompous words to impress and confuse.

In my opinion, W. B. Yeats was a brilliant poet and I have read all his poetry. Yeats’s main goal was to create a literature that was distinctively Irish and he achieved this. He did marvellous work travelling around the four provinces of Ireland collecting various Irish stories and customs from villagers and gathered a grand collection of fairy and folktales from the local people and thus preserved and recorded many Irish stories and customs, old Gaelic songs, for example, the renowned “Down by the Sally Gardens”, and old Gaelic poetry and thus saved them all from extinction.

Mr. Yeats did take an active interest in nationalist politics in his youth and was heavily influenced by such distinguished people as the great Fenian Leader, John O’Leary and Maud Gonne. He did set alight a nationalistic sentiment in some people by his public speeches and by the establishment of our national theatre, The Abbey Theatre, which showcased very nationalistic plays such as, ‘Cathleen Ní Houlihan’ which starred Maud Gonne, and others from great Irish playwrights such as John Millington Synge and Seán O’Casey. He even joined the IRB for a brief time, but it is suspected he only joined to impress the militant minded Maud Gonne (he was too late, Gonne had grown weary of his concentration on literary matters and took off instead with Major John McBride). He never claimed to have any involvement in the 1916 Rising and at that particular time, he had grown to dislike the revolutionaries which is why he wrote ‘A Terrible Beauty is Born’.

Yeats contribution to Irish literature is immense and his literary works a source of pride to many Irish people at home and abroad. He worked tirelessly to assemble a great collection of Irish literature and should be respected for this achievement alone.

I have to admit that there are many aspects of Yeats’s character I greatly dislike - his attitude to the 1916 Rebellion being one of them - and Barry has touched on nearly all of the others.

Ending on an entirely different note, I really wish that person would come back with the name of the IRA person who read out the 1916 Proclamation on the Hill of Tara, it would be interesting to know the facts - please come back soon with a name and not have us all tormented with suspense.

by Ron Colbert Tue Feb 19, 2008 23:26

Don't forget another W.B. Yeat's contribution: the writing of an anthem for the Blueshirts-a fascist organization.

by Sceptic Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:38

It wasn’t me who began the comparison between Yates and Pearse as poets and I was only stating the blunt if obvious reality. Yates has a distinguished place in the overall canon of English literature and that is not the case with Pearse. But I was not trying to be provocative in saying that. Unlike some who feel a need to denigrate Yates I see no need to denigrate Pearse though there are valid criticism that can be made of him especially his romantic view of bloodshed as opposed to the rather stark reality of it when he saw it first hand finally. Yates as a man had some very odd if not uncommon ideas for his day. Eugenics only became very unfashionable when the Nazis actually did it – it was not uncommon in intellectual circles for it to have a following in the 19th century. For example the reformer Havelock Ellis was an enthusiast and so was H.G. Wells if I recall right. Also there was absolutely nothing wrong in his being appointed by as a senator by the Free State Government in the 1920s. Why should there be except to rather tribally and sectarian minded irredentists. Really some of this dark republican stuff is more than tribal and even cultist. Why cannot we acknowledge the distinctive contributions of various leading people without denigrating them because they were not enthusiastic enough about 1916? For instance Jim Larkin and Horace Plunkett could be dismissed on the same grounds. Moreover some of the people you dismiss as” blueshirts” were active in 1916. Michael Collins, Desmond Fitzgerald and WT Cosgrave were at the centre of events during the Easter Rising and Kevin O’Higgins tried to participate from Kildare.

by Michael Martin Wed Feb 20, 2008 13:07

William Butler Yeats was a strong individualist and not a collectivist. His dislike for collectivist politics forced him to distance himself from Irish Nationalists and the Fascist Blueshirts alike.

by Ron Colbert Wed Feb 20, 2008 15:57

"Yeats was as near to being a Fascist as the condition of his own country permitted. His unstinting admiration had gone to Kevin O'Higgins....and he linked his admiration explicitly to his rejoicing at the rise of Fascism in Europe, and this at the very beginning within a few weeks of the March on Rome.
Ten years later after Hitler had moved to the centre of the political stage in Europe, Yeats was still trying to create a movement in Ireland which would be overtly Fascist in language, costume, behaviour and intent. He turned his back on the movement when it began to fail, not before"- Jonathon Allison in Yeat's Political Identities, 1996.

The Irish Fascist movement, the Blueshirts, failed because of the opposition of Irish republicanism. And it was only when it failed that Yeats 'distanced' himself from it.

(The Irish Times was an admirer of Mussolini and in an editorial of March 4, 1933 praised Hitler because he was anti-Bolshevik.)

These facts about Irish Fascism and about the Irish Times may make some people uncomfortable, and they should.

by Cael Wed Feb 20, 2008 19:12

I think it is very foolish to judge an artist's work by their personal or political lives. All that leads to is situations like where a plodding fool like Mary Hannifen is talking about taking the work of Cathel O'Searcaigh off the Leaving Cert.

by Sceptic Wed Feb 20, 2008 19:43

None of this is very relevant. Many intellectuals have pretty daft ideas. They are often detached from real world experience and inhabit ivory towers in libraries, cafes and universities. They also dismiss traditional sources of learning and insight and in so doing substitute their own ideas which have not been reality tested or latch on to other half baked and untested ideas. This does not detract from Yates’s status as a poet or his efforts at developing the national arts scene and the like. The ideas of Pol Pot can be traced back to European intellectuals, no doubt some of them high-minded.

As for the ACA (Blueshirts) they were not really fascists in any nazi sense of the word but were riding of wave of sentiment and fashion for uniformed organisations that attracted many followers in the very disordered and chaotic inter war years. Mussolini had a wide following internationally in his early years. His was undemocratic but he promoted vigour, national self respect and honour. People were motivated by him and he got things done. It was only when he started his wars that he lost favour. He was never really anti Semitic in sharp contrast to Hitler. They way the ACA saw it the IRA already had their militias, complete with uniforms, berets, standards etc and the certain veterans of the Civil War were dismayed when Dev began releasing the IRA from jail after his assumption of office. Moreover the IRA was anti clerical. These men had fought the IRA to defend the fledgling State – they began to organize themselves as a counter force but in demonstrations not in the form of a real militia. In the event Dev acted against both the IRA and the Blueshirts and the threat fizzled out. To that extent the ACA served a purpose. Unlike the ACA the IRA went on to some fairly serious killing in later years and their leadership really did collaborate with the Nazis. Wiser minds in Cumman na nGael did the State a service by absorbing the ACA into itself thus ameliorating them and giving them a legitimate and peaceful political outlet.

by Cael Wed Feb 20, 2008 19:49

Well, whatever you might say about Poets etc. one thing you can say for sure is that Bertie and Fianna Fail are traitors to this nation. No sane person would think of bulldozing Tara, even if the Proclamation hadnt been read out there.

by Barry Wed Feb 20, 2008 20:02

im not btrying to be picky but the word dumb didnt come into common usage as a term for being stupid untill americanisms became common in our everyday language . In the era in which Pearse used the term it was perfectly understood to mean voiceless .

WB Yeats was also a member of the Eugenics society , a filty racist outfit . He was a dirty fascist

and why does that ass sceptic insist on deliberately misspelling Yeats as Yates throughout his posts ?

by Lismullin Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:57

News of digger and chainsaw gang near Souterrain at Lismullin.
Urgent callout for people, experts, media.

by Cael Sun Feb 24, 2008 22:50

Actually, the situation today is quite like that of Yeats and Co. Then the British Isrealites were trying to find the Arc of the Covenant under Tara, and today Fianna Fáil are trying to find a pot of Gombeen Gold under it.

by Carol Tully - Local Interest Sun Mar 27, 2016 01:54

The even 100 years ago to read the proclamation on the Hill of Tara was planned to happen but never did, I think because not enough people were there but this even will now take place on Easter Monday as Padraig Pearse wanted 100 years later see here for details http://www.comhaltasnavan.com/cce-easter-monday-event-h...more/

by Earl of Thomond Sun Mar 27, 2016 08:59

The Hill of Tara is the seat of the royal Gaelic kings whose authority was usurped by foreign invaders. Until the restoration of that ancient monarchy, Tara should be left alone and not contaminated by modernist republican propaganda readings. Harpists in the Carolan tradition are welcome - and comely maidens singing royal songs.