Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Joan Allen
Subject: Re: the wind that shakes the barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think there are two separate issues here. The question of accuracy is =
fairly straight forward. Creative licence notwithstanding, film makers =
who are intent upon producing historical representations (and indeed use =
the claim to authenticity to sell their films to the viewing public...) =
should avoid inventing/distorting the facts. Perhaps if they consulted =
the historians more they would not make such regular fools of =
themselves...
=20
As to the question of whether films about the Irish question present =
directors and screenplay writers with particular challenges, it would be =
difficult to find one film in the genre that has not created =
controversy. By turns, directors have been accused of being too =
partisan, or not partisan enough. The political climate at the time is =
often a significant factor too. And so it has proved with 'The Wind that =
Shakes the Barley'. I found it gripping but quite difficult to sit =
through. What does anyone else think?
=20
=20
Dr Joan Allen
Lecturer in Modern British History
Armstrong Building
University of Newcastle
NE1 7RU
Tel 0191 222 6701
=20
Secretary, Society for the Study of Labour History
www.sslh.org.uk/

________________________________

From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List on behalf of Steven Mccabe
Sent: Mon 04/12/2006 15:32
To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [IR-D] the wind that shakes the barley



A DVD copy of the film was passed onto me a few weeks ago which, to my
shame, I have yet to find time to watch. However, the question that I
would ask is whether there is a 'problem' for filmmakers in dealing with
matters that concern politics in Ireland; most especially contemporary
(i.e. after 1969). It seems that they are tempted to take liberties in
presenting a story that is 'entertaining' and 'simple'. For example, in
the miscarriage of justice film, In the name of the father, some real
howlers were employed. This is reprehensible as the director, Jim
Sheridan, is Irish.

Also, I wonder if anyone has ever read the PhD thesis (or any other
work) by Patrick Magee who, during his prison sentence for the 1984
Brighton bombing studied the representation of republicans in films and
literature? Incidentally, I believe that since leaving prison he has
eschewed violence as the means by which to achieve political change and,
admirably is now directly involved in reconciliation initiatives (he met
the daughter of one of the victims of the Brighton bomb).

Steven =20

Dr. Steven McCabe
Senior Lecturer (and UCE UCU Chair)
Faculty of Law, Humanities, Development and Society
University of Central England in Birmingham
B42 2SU

( 0121 331 5178
6 0121 331 5172
* steve.mccabe[at]uce.ac.uk








=20
=20


-----Original Message-----
From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List [mailto:IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
Behalf Of Peter Hart
Sent: 04 December 2006 14:17
To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [IR-D] the wind that shakes the barley

I haven't seen the film but, for what it's worth, I think Brian Hanley's
review in History Ireland is the most interesting piece I've seen so
far. Their
new site may need subs, not sure.

As a general comment on both films, it's always worth remembering that
film is inherently distorting of fact and incapable of dealing with
detail. Critical historians seem to forget this - we have to cut the
makers some slack if they aim at any sort of plot and pace etc.
Probably
the only way to solve the problem would be a small film based entirely
on
fictional characters, aimed at evoking experience. Big agendas of any
kind never work - so I suspect the Wind, with all its political points
to make,
is problematic just as Collins was. Collins also suffered from its
focus on a real person - when do bio films ever work as history? Mind
you, the Treaty, with B Gleeson's great performance, is a terrific
recreation.

My nomination for the story to base the great revolutionary film on,
would
be Frank O'Connor's Guests of the Nation. This is also, along with
O'Casey's plough and the Stars, the best thing ever written about the
period. For God's sake, though, no Colin or Cillian.

Peter Hart

On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Gillespie, Michael wrote:

> Dear Friends,
>
>
>
> When Michael Collins was released, some critics pointed out historical
> inaccuracies and anachronisms. I have heard no such charges brought
> against The Wind That Shakes the Barley, and I not a sufficiently well
> versed historian to spot them on my own. Can anyone comment on the
> accuracy of the film?
>
>
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> Michael Patrick Gillespie
>
> Louise Edna Goeden Professor of English
>
> Marquette University
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Liam Clarke
Subject: Re: the wind that shakes the barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear friends

Loach has in the past been accused of 'lecturing' audiences: of
producing a kind of 'Soviet art' which is enriches the political soul
(in the right left wing way) of pushing messages in the guise of filmed
drama: surely the third issue is how good a movie it is? As movies go, I
thought the language stilted and unconvincing and swithed off: but the
photography was often startling

Liam (Clarke) =20

-----Original Message-----
From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List [mailto:IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
Behalf Of Joan Allen
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 5:08 PM
To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [IR-D] the wind that shakes the barley

I think there are two separate issues here. The question of accuracy is
fairly straight forward. Creative licence notwithstanding, film makers
who are intent upon producing historical representations (and indeed use
the claim to authenticity to sell their films to the viewing public...)
should avoid inventing/distorting the facts. Perhaps if they consulted
the historians more they would not make such regular fools of
themselves...
=20
As to the question of whether films about the Irish question present
directors and screenplay writers with particular challenges, it would be
difficult to find one film in the genre that has not created
controversy. By turns, directors have been accused of being too
partisan, or not partisan enough. The political climate at the time is
often a significant factor too. And so it has proved with 'The Wind that
Shakes the Barley'. I found it gripping but quite difficult to sit
through. What does anyone else think?
=20
=20
Dr Joan Allen
Lecturer in Modern British History
Armstrong Building
University of Newcastle
NE1 7RU
Tel 0191 222 6701
=20
Secretary, Society for the Study of Labour History www.sslh.org.uk/

________________________________

From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List on behalf of Steven Mccabe
Sent: Mon 04/12/2006 15:32
To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [IR-D] the wind that shakes the barley



A DVD copy of the film was passed onto me a few weeks ago which, to my
shame, I have yet to find time to watch. However, the question that I
would ask is whether there is a 'problem' for filmmakers in dealing with
matters that concern politics in Ireland; most especially contemporary
(i.e. after 1969). It seems that they are tempted to take liberties in
presenting a story that is 'entertaining' and 'simple'. For example, in
the miscarriage of justice film, In the name of the father, some real
howlers were employed. This is reprehensible as the director, Jim
Sheridan, is Irish.

Also, I wonder if anyone has ever read the PhD thesis (or any other
work) by Patrick Magee who, during his prison sentence for the 1984
Brighton bombing studied the representation of republicans in films and
literature? Incidentally, I believe that since leaving prison he has
eschewed violence as the means by which to achieve political change and,
admirably is now directly involved in reconciliation initiatives (he met
the daughter of one of the victims of the Brighton bomb).

Steven =20

Dr. Steven McCabe
Senior Lecturer (and UCE UCU Chair)
Faculty of Law, Humanities, Development and Society University of
Central England in Birmingham
B42 2SU

( 0121 331 5178
6 0121 331 5172
* steve.mccabe[at]uce.ac.uk








=20
=20


-----Original Message-----
From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List [mailto:IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
Behalf Of Peter Hart
Sent: 04 December 2006 14:17
To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [IR-D] the wind that shakes the barley

I haven't seen the film but, for what it's worth, I think Brian Hanley's
review in History Ireland is the most interesting piece I've seen so
far. Their new site may need subs, not sure.

As a general comment on both films, it's always worth remembering that
film is inherently distorting of fact and incapable of dealing with
detail. Critical historians seem to forget this - we have to cut the
makers some slack if they aim at any sort of plot and pace etc.
Probably
the only way to solve the problem would be a small film based entirely
on fictional characters, aimed at evoking experience. Big agendas of
any kind never work - so I suspect the Wind, with all its political
points to make, is problematic just as Collins was. Collins also
suffered from its focus on a real person - when do bio films ever work
as history? Mind you, the Treaty, with B Gleeson's great performance,
is a terrific recreation.

My nomination for the story to base the great revolutionary film on,
would be Frank O'Connor's Guests of the Nation. This is also, along
with O'Casey's plough and the Stars, the best thing ever written about
the period. For God's sake, though, no Colin or Cillian.

Peter Hart

On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Gillespie, Michael wrote:

> Dear Friends,
>
>
>
> When Michael Collins was released, some critics pointed out historical

> inaccuracies and anachronisms. I have heard no such charges brought=20
> against The Wind That Shakes the Barley, and I not a sufficiently well

> versed historian to spot them on my own. Can anyone comment on the=20
> accuracy of the film?
>
>
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> Michael Patrick Gillespie
>
> Louise Edna Goeden Professor of English
>
> Marquette University
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Russell Murray
Subject: The Wind That Shakes The Barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

As someone who broadly shares Ken Loach's political ideology, I found a
lot to like in "The Wind..". For example, the discussion scene in the
schoolroom (?). The episode concerning the Republican Court session was
particularly good, not least for its depiction of the role of women in the
Rewpublican movement.

On the other hand, I found the treatment of IRA violence unacceptably
sanitised. For example, in the scene where the hero shoots two informers
at pointblank range there was no sign of blood afterwards on either body.
I know that Hollywood nowadays can be excessively graphic in this respect,
and that the point of the scene was the impact of the shootings on the
hero, but ...

However, for me the worst point of the film was the ambush of the Tan
convoy. Even writing this I can feel my blood pressure rising at the
memory of one of the most disgusting scenes of any film I've seen. Not
because of any depiction of violence but because of a deliberate
directorial decision to romanticise and decontextualise violence.

For those who have not yet seen "The Wind ...", the scene opens looking
down a misty country lane in the early morning. We hear men singing a
folk song, then out of the mist comes a band of IRA men beatifully
photographed as they stride towards us in their trench coats and
bandoliers. Because of the cinematography and stylisation this was a far
more seductive image of the IRA than any contemporary black and white
photographs. I felt I was being manipulated to accept a mythology. Loach
was criticised in reviews of "The Wind..." for the words he put into the
mouths of his characters, but as in any influential film the images are
far more powerful.

Then at the end of the scene we are not shown the Tan dead - indeed the
IRA commander actually orders his men NOT to look at their bodies and the
camera obeys too. There are no consequences to violence in this view.

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Tony Morgan
Organization: APU
Subject: Re: The Wind That Shakes The Barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: Tony Morgan

I was impressed by the film, and thought it one of Loach's best. I agree
that the analysis by Brian Hanley in History Ireland (Vol. 14 No. 5) is a
useful one. However, the film raised an issue to which it barely gave any
attention - the situation of the Royal Irish Constabulary. As an article by
Ferghal McGarry in the most recent History Ireland (Vol. 14 No. 6)points
out, 'During the War of Independence, the RIC was placed under intense
pressure by the republican movement, which identified the policeman as its
principal enemy'.Obviously, Loach is more interested in the colonial
liberation from the British, and rightly pinpoints the role of the Tans,
but 442 policemen were directly killed by political violence in the years
1919-1922, the largest number (96) in Cork where the film is set, - almost
all of them Irish, Catholic - and as McGarry reminds us, 'most, therefore,
were nationalists'. The IRA correctly decided it could defeat this force, if
unable to defeat the British Army. Following the settlement, at least 1,436
were pressured into exile, along with their families'. Such a fate did not
befall the Guardia Civil after Franco's death, the Stasi after the fall of
the Berlin Wall, or the South African police after the ending of apartheid.
I wonder if this skeleton will ever crawl out of the cupboard?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Murray"
To:
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 6:48 PM
Subject: [IR-D] The Wind That Shakes The Barley


> As someone who broadly shares Ken Loach's political ideology, I found a
> lot to like in "The Wind..". For example, the discussion scene in the
> schoolroom (?). The episode concerning the Republican Court session was
> particularly good, not least for its depiction of the role of women in the
> Rewpublican movement.
>
> On the other hand, I found the treatment of IRA violence unacceptably
> sanitised. For example, in the scene where the hero shoots two informers
> at pointblank range there was no sign of blood afterwards on either body.
> I know that Hollywood nowadays can be excessively graphic in this respect,
> and that the point of the scene was the impact of the shootings on the
> hero, but ...
>
> However, for me the worst point of the film was the ambush of the Tan
> convoy. Even writing this I can feel my blood pressure rising at the
> memory of one of the most disgusting scenes of any film I've seen. Not
> because of any depiction of violence but because of a deliberate
> directorial decision to romanticise and decontextualise violence.
>
> For those who have not yet seen "The Wind ...", the scene opens looking
> down a misty country lane in the early morning. We hear men singing a
> folk song, then out of the mist comes a band of IRA men beatifully
> photographed as they stride towards us in their trench coats and
> bandoliers. Because of the cinematography and stylisation this was a far
> more seductive image of the IRA than any contemporary black and white
> photographs. I felt I was being manipulated to accept a mythology. Loach
> was criticised in reviews of "The Wind..." for the words he put into the
> mouths of his characters, but as in any influential film the images are
> far more powerful.
>
> Then at the end of the scene we are not shown the Tan dead - indeed the
> IRA commander actually orders his men NOT to look at their bodies and the
> camera obeys too. There are no consequences to violence in this view.
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: "MacEinri, Piaras"
Subject: Re: The Wind That Shakes The Barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Good points:

(1) our immediate next door neighbour, Orla Fitzgerald, is the female lead.
I thought she was very terrific, but I'm probably biased towards one of our
neighbours' children.

(2) Terrific scenery - West Cork at its best

(3) Real accents; people do indeed speak like that (how on earth can any
foreign audience follow?)

(4) I thought the psychological effects of what a person's decision to use
violence does to them personally, and the way it hardens and brutalises
them, was well rendered and could not, in my opinion, be described as
pro-violence or pro-IRA

(5) I also thought the debate in which the pros and cons of signing the
Treaty or not was extremely well done and balanced.

Bad points

(1) all of the Brits were cardboard cyphers, who do a lot of shouting and
roaring and generally dastardly things

(2) The train driver character, spouting Connolly in the farmlands of West
Cork, was altogether incredible to me

(3) They don't play hurling in that part of West Cork - there is no land
flat enough!

(4) I agree with the point made by Russell Murray about the ambush

(5) I found the republican court scene, and the role assigned to women in
it, not very credible . The myths about the role of women during the War of
Independence remind me of the 1970s, when trendy lefties like myself tried
to argue that the Brehon Laws were more feminist than the later British
ones. Doesn't really stand up to close inspection!

That said, it's a good movie and so what if the characters are a bit
cardboard and the facts somewhat deformed? We've had cowboys and Indians,
and Japs and Huns v. Brave Boys for decades. It's fiction. There are some
excellent performances and more than a few grains of psyschological truth at
least. Generally it's well made and rolls along at a good pace. In the end
of the day though, it is a rather British (albeit well-disposed, Marxist,
British) view of the Irish conflict.

Chill out and have a look.

best

Piaras

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: "Murray, Edmundo"
Subject: Re: The Wind that Shakes the Barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just to add some contextual (and rather anecdotic) information to this
thread, I have seen this film in a rainy Saturday at a village cinema of
the Swiss Fribourg canton. Although the place was extremely small, it
was amazing to see so many people queuing outside the cinema. A typical
French- and German-speaking young crowd, the type one expects to find at
Gladiator or Terminator or Batman, and certainly most of them lacking
the English language skills to follow this film.

In addition to watch the film I tried to follow the reactions of the
public. In spite of the incredibly poor translations in the subtitles
(French and German), it was evident that the crowd was paying close
attention to the screen and was transported by the story. This was
especially true during some peaks of emotion, but the most significant
one was during the sermon when Damien (was that his name?) stands
against the priest and then leaves the church. At that time the applauds
were quite noisy and not a few in the public were shouting... against
the priest. This is remarkable taking into account the strong
traditionalist Catholic background in Fribourg.=20

Everything Irish, Irish religion in particular, has a special interest
here. And Ken Loach's film seems to be very accurately aimed at this
target group.

Edmundo Murray

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: "Anthony McNicholas."
Subject: Re: The Wind that Shakes the Barley
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear all,
All the points people have made about the difficulty of film portraying c=
omplex
realities are well made. Ken Loach=92s take on the war of independence is=
not
surprising, because he is political film maker but also because he is a B=
ritish
film maker and the audience he would have had in mind (or perhaps more
accurately one of the audiences) was a British one. To my mind it was tal=
king
very much about current as well as past wars, and doing so very eloquentl=
y. The
opening scene where there is a raid, with all the accompanying swearing,
bullying etc., reminded me very much (and maybe it=92s because I=92m a me=
dia
scholar), of news reports of British raids in Basra in the current war in=
Iraq.
I don=92t know has Ken Loach talked about this but as soon as I saw this =
scene I
was reminded of shots of soldiers kicking in a garden door and forcing th=
e men
of the house to their knees and telling them in English to =91look to the=
front=92
and when one, because he either couldn=92t understand or he was worried a=
bout
what was happening to his family or whatever, was reluctant to do it, bei=
ng
screamed at again in English to =91look to the fucking front=92, as if th=
at would
make the instruction clearer. How strange are the ways of liberation.

anthony



Dr. Anthony McNicholas
Communication and Media Research Institute
University of Westminster
0118 948 6164 (BBC Written Archive Centre)
07751 062 735 (m)
020 8995 6625 (h)


Quoting Elizabeth Malcolm :

> I have seen the film, and I have also this year published a book
> about the RIC. I share Tony Morgan's concerns that the film took the
> 'easy' course of largely depicting the war as Irish guerrillas
> fighting British mercenaries. So the war became an anti-colonial one
> - what used to be called in nationalist historiography the 'Tan War'.
> I'm an admirer of Loach's films, but depicting what happened during
> 1919-21, at least in the south, as simply Irish versus British is a
> travesty of history.
>
> Statistics in this case don't lie, and they alone demonstrate that
> the war was not solely Irish v Brits. The Tans and Auxiliaries didn't
> begin arriving in Ireland until March 1920 and in total, up to the
> truce in July 1921, they numbered about 5,000. The Irish police, who
> were over 70 per cent Catholic and largely nationalist, bore the
> brunt of the conflict, and there were around 11,000 of them .
>
> The film avoids all the hard questions, and especially of why so many
> Irish nationalists supported the British regime against Irish
> republicanism. Historians have been struggling with such questions
> for quite some time. I agree with Peter Hart that you can't expect a
> commercial film to provide an accurate representation of very complex
> political issues. Nevertheless, I came out of the film feeling
> saddened that such a politically sensitive and humane film maker as
> Loach couldn't get beyond a simple 'us and them' reading of the war.
>
> In my book - hope this doesn't sound too self serving! - I quote from
> letters I received about 15 years ago from around 200 policemen,
> their children and grandchildren. I found their accounts of being on
> the losing side in a war for independence, and yet being Irish,
> Catholic and sometimes staunchly nationalist, very revealing, and
> often deeply moving. You can of course reject them as 'traitors' and
> 'collaborators', which they were called at the time, but I'd hoped
> we'd gotten beyond that by now. Unfortunately, Loach's film does not
> contribute to a more nuanced and inclusive reading of the Irish War
> of Independence. Indeed, it seems to me to be reactionary
> contribution to the debate.
>
> Elizabeth Malcolm
>
> --
> Professor Elizabeth Malcolm * Gerry Higgins Chair of Irish Studies
> Department of History * University of Melbourne * Victoria 3010 * AUSTR=
ALIA
> Phone: +61-3-8344 3924 * Fax: +61-3-8344 7894 * Email:
> e.malcolm[at]unimelb.edu.au
> Website: http://www.history.unimelb.edu.au/irish/index.htm
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Elizabeth Malcolm
Subject: The Wind that Shakes the Barley
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

I have seen the film, and I have also this year published a book
about the RIC. I share Tony Morgan's concerns that the film took the
'easy' course of largely depicting the war as Irish guerrillas
fighting British mercenaries. So the war became an anti-colonial one
- what used to be called in nationalist historiography the 'Tan War'.
I'm an admirer of Loach's films, but depicting what happened during
1919-21, at least in the south, as simply Irish versus British is a
travesty of history.

Statistics in this case don't lie, and they alone demonstrate that
the war was not solely Irish v Brits. The Tans and Auxiliaries didn't
begin arriving in Ireland until March 1920 and in total, up to the
truce in July 1921, they numbered about 5,000. The Irish police, who
were over 70 per cent Catholic and largely nationalist, bore the
brunt of the conflict, and there were around 11,000 of them .

The film avoids all the hard questions, and especially of why so many
Irish nationalists supported the British regime against Irish
republicanism. Historians have been struggling with such questions
for quite some time. I agree with Peter Hart that you can't expect a
commercial film to provide an accurate representation of very complex
political issues. Nevertheless, I came out of the film feeling
saddened that such a politically sensitive and humane film maker as
Loach couldn't get beyond a simple 'us and them' reading of the war.

In my book - hope this doesn't sound too self serving! - I quote from
letters I received about 15 years ago from around 200 policemen,
their children and grandchildren. I found their accounts of being on
the losing side in a war for independence, and yet being Irish,
Catholic and sometimes staunchly nationalist, very revealing, and
often deeply moving. You can of course reject them as 'traitors' and
'collaborators', which they were called at the time, but I'd hoped
we'd gotten beyond that by now. Unfortunately, Loach's film does not
contribute to a more nuanced and inclusive reading of the Irish War
of Independence. Indeed, it seems to me to be reactionary
contribution to the debate.

Elizabeth Malcolm

--
Professor Elizabeth Malcolm * Gerry Higgins Chair of Irish Studies
Department of History * University of Melbourne * Victoria 3010 * AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61-3-8344 3924 * Fax: +61-3-8344 7894 * Email: e.malcolm[at]unimelb.edu.au
Website: http://www.history.unimelb.edu.au/irish/index.htm

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: CFP, Image,
Identity and Culture in Narrative and Documentary Cinema, Cork
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Forwarded on behalf of...

Organisers: Email Addresses
Daniel Deasy dlsdeasy[at]gmail.com
Aoife Healy aoife_healy[at]yahoo.co.uk
Deborah Mellamphy dmellamphy[at]yahoo.com
Stefano Odorico maximo3[at]yahoo.it
Sarah-May O=92Sullivan sarahmayosullivan[at]o2.ie
Nicole Sigl nicole_sigl[at]yahoo.de


________________________________________
Subject: Image, Identity and Culture in Narrative and Documentary Cinema

Image, Identity and Culture in Narrative and Documentary Cinema
=A0
Visual and narrative strategies in the representation of culture and
identity
=A0
=A0A Postgraduate Film Studies Symposium
March 30th/ 31st 2007
University College Cork, Ireland
=A0
CALL FOR PAPERS
=A0
Abstracts are invited for a film studies symposium on aspects of
contemporary narrative and documentary film. The nature of the cinematic
medium grants filmmakers a power to portray cultures and to reflect
identities through the audiovisual image. How is cinema used as an =
effective
tool of investigation to represent certain realities, and certain
identities, to domestic and international audiences?
=A0
Areas of investigation might include:
=A0
-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Representations of masculinity/femininity
-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Body and gender
-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Liminal identities
-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Race and ethnicity; regional, national, =
trans-national identities
-=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Philosophy in, and of film =96 philosophical =
reflections on the
medium & aspects of the medium
=A0
Confirmed Key Note Speaker:
=A0
Professor Stella Bruzzi, University of Warwick (author of New =
Documentary,
Bringing Up Daddy: Fatherhood and Masculinity in Postwar Hollywood)
=A0
Organisers:=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0 =A0Email Addresses
Daniel =
Deasy=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0 dlsdeasy[at]gmail.com
Aoife =
Healy=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0=A0 aoife_healy[at]yahoo.co.uk
Deborah Mellamphy=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =
dmellamphy[at]yahoo.com
Stefano Odorico=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =
maximo3[at]yahoo.it
Sarah-May O=92Sullivan=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =
sarahmayosullivan[at]o2.ie
Nicole =
Sigl=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 nicole_sigl[at]yahoo.de
=A0
More information, including details of key note speakers, venues etc. =
will
shortly be available at http://www.ucc.ie/filmstudies/pgsymposium.html
=A0
Please send abstracts (250/300words) for proposed 20 minute paper, and a
short biography, to the organisers at=A0 nicole_sigl[at]yahoo.de=A0 and
sarahmayosullivan[at]o2.ie by Wednesday Jan 24th 2007.=20
=A0

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Paul O'Leary
Subject: The Wind That SHakes the Barley
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anthony makes an important point about the audience(s) that Ken Loach was
addressing in the film. It is also worth noting a rather strange type of
'critical' reaction to the film when it won its award at Cannes, but before
it was distributed in Britain. A whole range of newspaper columnists in the
London-based right-wing press denounced the film before they had the
opportunity to watch it (some boasted that they did not need to) on the
grounds that it trashed the memory of the British Empire. If one fits this
into a broader political trajectory of such commentators, it becomes clear
that one of their other great obsessions is the relationship between the US
and UK in contemporary politics and the recent, and ongoing, debate on the
lessons that the US can learn from Britain's experience of empire. Niall
Ferguson's contentious interpretation of the history of the British Empire
has become the core text for such commentators, who see the relationship in
inflated classical references such as 'Britain is Greece to America's Rome'.
Ferguson's work on empire is as much about George Bush as it is about Cecil
Rhodes.



So by providing a view of Britain's armed forces operating in Ireland in
ways that undermine hallowed images of honourable and decent interventions
in foreign parts, Ken Loach attacks the very core of how right wing
commentators and historians interpret the world around them today. In this
sense it is a profoundly British film and speaks to contemporary concerns in
British politics. His film is as much about Iraq as it is about Ireland.
Aren't most, if not all, films about historical events and historical
characters more illuminating about the society that produce them than their
ostensible subjects? But then the same could be said of more scholarly
approaches to history.



Paul O'Leary

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Peter Hart
Subject: Re: The Wind That SHakes the Barley
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Am I wrong, or has this discussion attracted the highest number of
individial responses in recent memory? Very interesting comments but also
interesting that it takes a film to draw all of us out in this way. It's
certainly not the most intense discussion, mind you (and thank God), but
still.

My response to what Joan is saying is that she's absolutely right but that
the huge danger with movies is that for some reason they're much more
powerful than texts or arguments. Especially emotion-laden action movies.
I usually find them impossible to argue against - try defending Dev after
your students have watched "Michael Collins'! So they're a double-edged
sword in teaching terms.

Actually, the worst in my experience was 'Braveheart', which used to get a
lot of students interested in Irish history for some reason - because of
the anti-Brit thing I guess, although odd that it didn't seem to produce
much interest in Scottish studies as far as I know.

'The Treaty' is the best film by far for actual accuracy and insight but
both I and others have found it hard to keep students interested - a bunch
of guys in a room arguing about constitutional arrangements. Canadians in
particular have learned that this is not a fun thing to do! But it shows
how limited film really is in getting any rigorous or complex discusion
going.

The other thing I've found is that, with films, you often have to spend so
long explaining how exactly the film was inaccurate or what was left out
(always the key factor of course, as has already been said here re. the
RIC) that there isn't much time left over for anything else.

So, the best thing to show a class on 20C Irish history? Father Ted, of
course.

Peter

At 04:49 PM 05/12/2006 -0000, you wrote:
>Of course, flawed films have the advantage of being great for teaching.
>At the very least it is guaranteed to prod students in to an energetic
>discussion.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
>>[mailto:IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Paul O'Leary
>>Sent: 05 December 2006 14:06
>>To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>>Subject: [IR-D] The Wind That SHakes the Barley
>>
>>Anthony makes an important point about the audience(s) that
>>Ken Loach was addressing in the film. It is also worth noting
>>a rather strange type of 'critical' reaction to the film when
>>it won its award at Cannes, but before it was distributed in
>>Britain. A whole range of newspaper columnists in the
>>London-based right-wing press denounced the film before they
>>had the opportunity to watch it (some boasted that they did
>>not need to) on the grounds that it trashed the memory of the
>>British Empire. If one fits this into a broader political
>>trajectory of such commentators, it becomes clear that one of
>>their other great obsessions is the relationship between the
>>US and UK in contemporary politics and the recent, and
>>ongoing, debate on the lessons that the US can learn from
>>Britain's experience of empire. Niall Ferguson's contentious
>>interpretation of the history of the British Empire has become
>>the core text for such commentators, who see the relationship
>>in inflated classical references such as 'Britain is Greece to
>>America's Rome'.
>>Ferguson's work on empire is as much about George Bush as it
>>is about Cecil Rhodes.
>>
>>
>>
>>So by providing a view of Britain's armed forces operating in
>>Ireland in ways that undermine hallowed images of honourable
>>and decent interventions in foreign parts, Ken Loach attacks
>>the very core of how right wing commentators and historians
>>interpret the world around them today. In this sense it is a
>>profoundly British film and speaks to contemporary concerns in
>>British politics. His film is as much about Iraq as it is
>>about Ireland.
>>Aren't most, if not all, films about historical events and
>>historical characters more illuminating about the society that
>>produce them than their ostensible subjects? But then the same
>>could be said of more scholarly approaches to history.
>>
>>
>>
>>Paul O'Leary
>>
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Joan Allen
Subject: Re: The Wind That SHakes the Barley
In-Reply-To: A
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Of course, flawed films have the advantage of being great for teaching.
At the very least it is guaranteed to prod students in to an energetic
discussion.=20

>-----Original Message-----
>From: The Irish Diaspora Studies List=20
>[mailto:IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Paul O'Leary
>Sent: 05 December 2006 14:06
>To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>Subject: [IR-D] The Wind That SHakes the Barley
>
>Anthony makes an important point about the audience(s) that=20
>Ken Loach was addressing in the film. It is also worth noting=20
>a rather strange type of 'critical' reaction to the film when=20
>it won its award at Cannes, but before it was distributed in=20
>Britain. A whole range of newspaper columnists in the=20
>London-based right-wing press denounced the film before they=20
>had the opportunity to watch it (some boasted that they did=20
>not need to) on the grounds that it trashed the memory of the=20
>British Empire. If one fits this into a broader political=20
>trajectory of such commentators, it becomes clear that one of=20
>their other great obsessions is the relationship between the=20
>US and UK in contemporary politics and the recent, and=20
>ongoing, debate on the lessons that the US can learn from=20
>Britain's experience of empire. Niall Ferguson's contentious=20
>interpretation of the history of the British Empire has become=20
>the core text for such commentators, who see the relationship=20
>in inflated classical references such as 'Britain is Greece to=20
>America's Rome'.
>Ferguson's work on empire is as much about George Bush as it=20
>is about Cecil Rhodes.
>
>=20
>
>So by providing a view of Britain's armed forces operating in=20
>Ireland in ways that undermine hallowed images of honourable=20
>and decent interventions in foreign parts, Ken Loach attacks=20
>the very core of how right wing commentators and historians=20
>interpret the world around them today. In this sense it is a=20
>profoundly British film and speaks to contemporary concerns in=20
>British politics. His film is as much about Iraq as it is=20
>about Ireland.
>Aren't most, if not all, films about historical events and=20
>historical characters more illuminating about the society that=20
>produce them than their ostensible subjects? But then the same=20
>could be said of more scholarly approaches to history.
>
>=20
>
>Paul O'Leary
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: Article, THE PRO-AXIS UNDERGROUND IN IRELAND, 1939-1942
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

publication
Historical Journal - London

ISSN
0018-246X electronic: 1469-5103

publisher
Cambridge University Press

year - volume - issue - page
2006 - 49 - 4 - 1155

pages
1155

article


THE PRO-AXIS UNDERGROUND IN IRELAND, 1939-1942

DOUGLAS, R. M.


abstract


During the first half of the Second World War, a network of secretive
ultra-right movements emerged in Ireland for the purpose of assisting the
Axis cause. These groups had little contact with fascist organizations
overseas, but rather were indigenous expressions of discontent with the
perceived failure of Irish liberal democracy to address the country's
political and economic problems. Numerically weak, poorly led, and
ideologically unsophisticated, the pro-Axis underground made little progress
in its subversive activities and was kept in check by the security services.
Nonetheless, evidence suggests that a considerable number of Irishmen and
women on both sides of the Border shared its underlying objective of
aligning Ireland with what they regarded as an emerging post-democratic
world order.

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: Article, Menstrual Blood as a Weapon of Resistance
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

publication
International Feminist Journal of Politics

ISSN
1461-6742 electronic: 1468-4470

publisher
Routledge - Part of Taylor and Francis

year - volume - issue - page
2006 - 8 - 4 - 535

pages
535


article


Menstrual Blood as a Weapon of Resistance

O'Keefe, Theresa


abstract


This paper examines how women in the North of Ireland used menstrual blood
as a means of resisting the state. It explores the central role that
menstrual blood and menstruation have played throughout the conflict - both
as an instrument of war and as a weapon of resistance for female political
prisoners. Various arms of the state used menstruation as a means of control
over republican women. But women also used menstrual blood to challenge and
to resist such attempts by the state. This article suggests that the use of
menstrual blood in resisting the state is an act so subversive that it
effectively disrupted staunchly entrenched gender norms in Northern Irish
society prior to the height of the conflict. This in turn provoked the rise
of a distinct form of feminism rooted within the republican movement.

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: Article,
'Common sense' and 'governmentality': local government in
southeastern Ireland, 1850-1922
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This article is in the current free sample issue of
The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
at
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/

P.O'S.

The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Volume 12 Issue 1 Page 109 - March 2006
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9655.2006.00283.x
Volume 12 Issue 1


'Common sense' and 'governmentality': local government in southeastern
Ireland, 1850-1922
Marilyn Silverman1 & P.H. Gulliver1

Early paradigms in political anthropology identified formal government
councils as a subject for cross-cultural comparison (structural
functionalism) or as a political resource for goal-orientated actors
(transactionalism). Recent concerns with power and regulation can also
profit from a focus on local-level government councils by using them to
explore the conceptual and empirical linkages between 'common sense' and
'governmentality'. In this article, as a point of entry, we highlight a key
moment in the history of Britain's colonial and hegemonic project in
Ireland, namely the orderly administrative transition from colony to state
which occurred in Ireland after 1919. By constructing a historical narrative
of a local government council in the southeast after 1850, and of its
material and discursive bases, we show how the actions and ideologies of
elite farmers were implicated in this orderly administrative transition and,
therefore, how the concepts of governmentality, hegemony, and common sense
might be linked.

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Carmel McCaffrey
Subject: Re: Tea Drinking and the Irish
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As a point of interest from a literary source - one of the rituals that
/Ulysses/ begins with is the ritual of making tea. Joyce puts it into
the intro scenes of both Stephen and Bloom: "scald the teapot' yells
Molly - an important instruction.

Carmel

Jim McAuley wrote:
> Hi Paddy - this has come to me from another list - I can't really help and I was wondering if anyone on your list could offer some ideas?
>
> As always,
>
> Thanks
>
> JIM
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sociological Association of Ireland, on behalf of Perry Share
> Sent: Wed 12/6/2006 15:10
> To: SAI-IRISH-STUDIES[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject:
>
> Dear Irish Studies list
>
> Apologies for any cross-posting
>
> I have been approached by a student here in Sligo who is doing a 4th year thesis on the role of tea-drinking in residential care
> Even though I am pretty familiar with the work on the sociology of food, I am stymied on the topic of tea!
> Does anybody know of any work that examines the social aspects of tea-drinking?
> Given its ubiquity in Irish, British and Australasian cultures, it is remarkable that there doesn't seem to be anything
> (I suspect Japanese, Chinese and Indian tea-drinking is - shall we say - another cup of tea!)
> Or, more likely, there is material out there, and I don't know about it!
> Any help gratefully received :-)
>
> Dr Perry Share
> Head of Special Projects
> Institute of Technology, Sligo
> G1002 Business Innovation Centre
> IT Sligo
> phone: (071) 9137216
> fax: (071) 9144500
>
>
> ---
> This transmission is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you receive it in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and remove it from your system. If the content of this e-mail does not relate to the business of the University of Huddersfield, then we do not endorse it and will accept no liability.
>
> .
>
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: Article, KILLING AND BLOODY SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 1920
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On a train of thought...

I have been conducting some of my end of year round-ups...

And thought that this article by Anne Dolan might offer some background =
to
recent IR-D discussion.

P.O'S.


The Historical Journal (2006), 49: 789-810 Cambridge University Press=20
Copyright =A9 2006 Cambridge University Press
doi:10.1017/S0018246X06005516
Published online by Cambridge University Press 01 Sep 2006


KILLING AND BLOODY SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 1920

ANNE DOLAN a1 c1=20
a1 Trinity College, Dublin

Abstract

21 November 1920 began with the killing of fourteen men in their flats,
boarding houses, and hotel rooms in Dublin. The Irish Republican Army =
(IRA)
alleged that they were British spies. That afternoon British forces
retaliated by firing on a crowd of supporters at a Gaelic football match =
in
Croke Park, killing twelve and injuring sixty. The day quickly became =
known
as Bloody Sunday. Much has been made of the afternoon=92s events. The
shootings in Croke Park have acquired legendary status. Concern with the
morning=92s killing has been largely limited to whether or not the dead =
men
were the spies the IRA said they were. There has been little or no
consideration of the men who did the killing. This article is based on
largely unused interviews and statements made by the IRA men involved in
this and many of the other days that came to constitute the guerrilla =
war
fought against the British forces in Ireland from January 1919 until =
July
1921. This morning=92s killings are a chilling example of much of what =
passed
for combat during this struggle. Bloody Sunday morning is used here as a
means to explore how generally young and untrained IRA men killed and =
how
this type of killing affected their lives.

Correspondence:=20
c1 Department of History, School of Histories and Humanities, Trinity
College, Dublin, Dublin 2 adolan[at]tcd.ie

OPENING PARAS...
Lieutenant Frank Teeling shot a man on 27 March 1923. Admittedly, in the
closing weeks of the Irish civil war this was not an unusual thing for a
Free State soldier to do. But the man Frank Teeling shot was not a
republican. William Johnson was a member of the Citizens=92 Defence =
Force and
he was shot because he brought a bag of tomatoes into the bar at the =
Theatre
Royal.1 Frank Teeling was drunk, drunk to the point of being served =
nothing
stronger than ginger beer. For some reason he took exception to the
tomatoes; he threw them on the ground; guns were drawn and Johnson was =
dead.
At his trial Teeling claimed he had acted in self-defence. The jury
concurred with the judge that =91through drink he had allowed his mind =
to be
dethroned=92, found him guilty of manslaughter instead of murder, and
recommended mercy =91on account of the state of his mind=92.2 Teeling =
was jailed
for eighteen months.3

It may be enough to put all this down to a heady combination of drink,
revolvers and the stress of civil war. But there was a little more to
Teeling=92s case than met the eyes of the judge and jury at his speedily
expedited trial. Eight days before the shooting, the Department of =
Finance
had made out a cheque for =A3250 to Lieutenant Frank Teeling.4 It had =
done so
because the National Army wanted Teeling to disappear. He had, in the
commander-in-chief=92s opinion, been =91publicly misconducting=92 =
himself,
=91bringing serious discredit on us=92. It was thought best to send him =
to
Australia with =A3500 and to convince him that it would be a =
particularly bad
idea ever to come back.5 Though it halved the grant, the Executive =
Council
heartily approved of the plan. It was even gracious enough to suggest =
that
given the condition of the labour market in Australia another =
destination
should be considered.6 This was transportation Free State style. Though =
one
can wonder about Teeling=92s fate if he had cashed the cheque and gone, =
about
the life that William Johnson never got to lead because Teeling stayed,
there is something more fascinating still about the offer itself. In =
March
1923 there seemed little shortage of soldiers =91publicly =
misconducting=92
themselves, yet few were presented with the prospect of a new life =
abroad
with =A3250 in hand. Teeling was considered an exceptional case because =
every
member of the Executive Council was well aware of what was termed =91his =
past
services to the state=92.7 They all knew what Frank Teeling had done, =
what he
had suffered for Ireland; they all knew that on 21 November 1920 he had
stood with four other men at the bottom of a British soldier=92s bed and =
shot
him until he was dead.

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Patrick O'Sullivan
Subject: Article, THE GLOBAL REVOLT OF 1968 AND NORTHERN IRELAND
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

And I think that this article will interest a number of IR-D members -
indeed might even illumine their own experiences...

P.O'S.

The Historical Journal (2006), 49: 851-875 Cambridge University Press
Copyright C 2006 Cambridge University Press
doi:10.1017/S0018246X06005541
Published online by Cambridge University Press 01 Sep 2006


THE GLOBAL REVOLT OF 1968 AND NORTHERN IRELAND

SIMON PRINCE a1 c1
a1 Lady Margaret Hall, University of Oxford

Abstract

The year 1968 witnessed a global revolt against imperialism, capitalism, and
bureaucracy. It was not-as has long been claimed-the start of a cultural
revolution that produced greater personal freedom, but the end of the
post-war attempt to define a new left. This reinterpretation of '68 as a
global revolt rather than the the baby-boom generation's coming-of-age party
is based upon recent research at the local level. An examination of
Ireland's radical left during the 'long '68' is an important contribution to
this work, as it was significant as well as small. Contact at congresses and
through the media with other leftists enabled Northern Ireland's
'sixty-eighters' to conceive of themselves as part of an imagined community
of global revolt. They shared similar goals and tactics. Like their comrades
on the continent and across the Atlantic, the region's sixty-eighters tried
to attract attention and support by provoking the authorities into an
overreaction. In a country dominated by the sectarian divide, however,
clashes between Catholic protesters and Protestant police officers were
always more likely to lead to communal conflict than class struggle. The
Troubles is perhaps the most tragic outcome of the interaction of global and
local politics that occurred during '68.

Correspondence:
c1 Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford OX2 6QA simon_prince[at]talk21.com

OPENING PARAS...
In 1988, the street protests staged in Western cities during 1968 were
commemorated as the post-war generation's coming of age.1 When they reached
maturity, the baby boomers had supposedly found themselves in conflict with
an adult world where conservative values and institutions had not kept pace
with economic modernization.2 Sixty-eight was presented as the beginning of
a cultural revolution that had delivered personal freedom. This view was
championed by the handful of former activists who had established themselves
as spokesmen for the '68 generation.3 By the thirtieth anniversary,
historians had begun to challenge this dominant reading. The media's
favourite sixty-eighters had retrospectively claimed that the movement's
ultra-left rhetoric should be ignored: activists resorted to outdated
Marxist terminology to describe the fledgling struggle for individual
autonomy as nothing else was available. Historians have preferred to
research the political language of '68 for themselves rather than rely upon
the self-appointed translators.4 As the fortieth anniversary nears, this
approach has led to what is becoming the new consensus on '68. Examining
speeches, pamphlets, and news-sheets written in the late 1960s, it becomes
obvious that political change mattered more than experimenting with new
lifestyles. Sixty-eighters were not turning away from politics in the
pursuit of pleasure: isolated individuals found happiness in collective
action. They believed that they were part of a global struggle to
emancipate, not the individual from outdated ways of living, but humanity
from imperialism, capitalism, and bureaucracy. Instead of a fleeting
festival of liberation, '68 emerges as the culmination of the post-war
revision of Marxism and socialism as a whole.

The experience of Ireland's radical left lends itself well to a case study
of this 'long '68'. Although it encompassed groups based in the emigrant
community in Britain as well as the island's two partitioned states,
Ireland's radical left was significantly smaller than its counterparts in
France, West Germany, Italy, and the United States. Tracing the development
of Ireland's would-be revolutionaries from the middle of the 1950s till the
end of the 1960s is therefore more manageable than that of their continental
and American comrades. It also requires covering ground that has been
neglected by previous studies of Northern Ireland on the eve of the
Troubles. The intensity of this conflict has encouraged the assumption that
communal violence was inevitable. The creation of a Protestant-dominated
state with a sizeable Catholic minority in the years following the First
World War did not solve the Irish question so much as rephrase the problem.
According to the official story, when the first generation of Catholics to
benefit from the education reforms of the mid-1940s came of age in the late
1960s, the minority population started to protest in the streets against the
injustices of the Protestant supremacist state.5 Northern Ireland had a
civil rights generation, not a '68 generation. Indeed, Roy Foster's history
of modern Ireland warns against making 'analogies with student movements' of
the late 1960s. The 'absence of a distinct youth culture in Ulster society'
has led Foster and others to conclude that Northern Ireland was not part of
the international festival of liberation and therefore not part of '68.6

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: "Ruth-Ann M. Harris"
Subject: Re: Tea Drinking and the Irish
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

You might look at poetry for some evidence. Jane Gray's book, _Spinning
the Threads of Uneven Development_, published by Lexington Books last
year has interesting references to the role of tea drinking, as well as
poetry referring to the custom.
Ruth-Ann Harris
Boston College


Jim McAuley wrote:
> Perry's e-mail is share.perry[at]ITSLIGO.IE
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim McAuley
> Sent: Wed 12/6/2006 15:14
> To: IR-D[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Tea Drinking and the Irish
>
> Hi Paddy - this has come to me from another list - I can't really help and I was wondering if anyone on your list could offer some ideas?
>
> As always,
>
> Thanks
>
> JIM
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sociological Association of Ireland, on behalf of Perry Share
> Sent: Wed 12/6/2006 15:10
> To: SAI-IRISH-STUDIES[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject:
>
> Dear Irish Studies list
>
> Apologies for any cross-posting
>
> I have been approached by a student here in Sligo who is doing a 4th year thesis on the role of tea-drinking in residential care
> Even though I am pretty familiar with the work on the sociology of food, I am stymied on the topic of tea!
> Does anybody know of any work that examines the social aspects of tea-drinking?
> Given its ubiquity in Irish, British and Australasian cultures, it is remarkable that there doesn't seem to be anything
> (I suspect Japanese, Chinese and Indian tea-drinking is - shall we say - another cup of tea!)
> Or, more likely, there is material out there, and I don't know about it!
> Any help gratefully received :-)
>
> Dr Perry Share
> Head of Special Projects
> Institute of Technology, Sligo
> G1002 Business Innovation Centre
> IT Sligo
> phone: (071) 9137216
> fax: (071) 9144500
>
>
>
> ---
> This transmission is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you receive it in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and remove it from your system. If the content of this e-mail does not relate to the business of the University of Huddersfield, then we do not endorse it and will accept no liability.
>

Sender: The Irish Diaspora Studies List
From: Jim McAuley
Subject: Tea Drinking and the Irish
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Paddy - this has come to me from another list - I can't really help =
and I was wondering if anyone on your list could offer some ideas?

As always,

Thanks

JIM


-----Original Message-----
From: Sociological Association of Ireland, on behalf of Perry Share
Sent: Wed 12/6/2006 15:10
To: SAI-IRISH-STUDIES[at]JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject:=20
=20
Dear Irish Studies list
=20
Apologies for any cross-posting
=20
I have been approached by a student here in Sligo who is doing a 4th =
year thesis on the role of tea-drinking in residential care
Even though I am pretty familiar with the work on the sociology of food, =
I am stymied on the topic of tea!
Does anybody know of any work that examines the social aspects of =
tea-drinking?
Given its ubiquity in Irish, British and Australasian cultures, it is =
remarkable that there doesn't seem to be anything
(I suspect Japanese, Chinese and Indian tea-drinking is - shall we say - =
another cup of tea!)
Or, more likely, there is material out there, and I don't know about it!
Any help gratefully received :-)
=20
Dr Perry Share
Head of Special Projects
Institute of Technology, Sligo
G1002 Business Innovation Centre
IT Sligo
phone: (071) 9137216
fax: (071) 9144500


---
This transmission is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you =
receive it in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and remove =
it from your system. If the content of this e-mail does not relate to =
the business of the University of Huddersfield, then we do not endorse =
it and will accept no liability.