Reflections on Remembrance – avoiding disharmony or transforming relationships? #JHISS

JHISS remembrance panel at an angleThis afternoon’s panel on Reflections on Remembrance took stock of how the decade of centenaries were being marked across the island of Ireland. Peter Osborne chaired the panel, held as part of the week long John Hewitt International Summer School in the Market Place Theatre, Armagh. Largely driven by audience questions and comments, Peter opened the discussion by asking:

Are we just getting through these years and the contention without too much disharmony, or are we creating something new and transforming relationships on this island?

John Concannon has directed the Irish Government’s events remembering 1916 and stressed the dialogue that had taken place with interested groups in the run up to building the programme. During the discussion he spoke about the decision to send two Irish Army officers into each school to talk about the symbolism of the Irish flag, with its Green, White (peace) and Orange (not Gold).

Jeffrey Donaldson chairs the Northern Ireland WW1 Centenary Committee. He saw a need to remember WW1 events across communities and pointed to “shared experiences of remembering” and singled out the Battle of Jutland memorial event for Irish sailors as an example. While the Somme can be seen – or is used – as an “Ulster Protestant” piece of history, the Lagan Valley MP said “it isn’t”. Somme commemorations will remember the sacrifice from regiments across all four provinces of Ireland. He reflected on the Irish history and his Irishness, admitting that during the Troubles he would have shied away from that part of his identity. Conversations happen today which would have been very unlikely five or ten years ago. And the change is ongoing. While the next set of contentious commemorations won’t be until 2021, he said that the learning has to continue in the meantime.

JHISS remembrance panel from back wideTom Hartley was “hit” by the complexity and layers behind events in history. He said that “our 1916 programme” had sought from the start to be open; to reach out; to include unionist and loyalist history, voices and perspectives; and to be information not propaganda. “When we don’t engage with the past we risk our future” said the former Belfast Sinn Féin councillor. However, he warned that history often throws up surprises and we should “engage our emotional anchors” to avoid being dragged off course. He agreed that history has been “abused” and “treated as simple narratives”: a shared understanding of history could help build a shared future.

Ruth Dudley Edwards was interested – and has written about – the personalities behind the history. She noted the remarkable level of agreement on the panel, despite many robust exchanges in the past. The reflective tone was kept up during nearly all of the panel. While some people were alarmed in the run up to 2016, she hasn’t encountered the expected hostility. She pointed to education – including within republicanism – and felt that Martin McGuinness was genuine when he laid a wreath before the Somme commemoration. She looked back at the Irish stamps issued in 1966 and contrasted them with the much more measured set issued this year that better addressed the complexity of the events in 1916. She said that while much is made of the friendliness between former paramilitaries, the role of “the cops” shouldn’t be forgotten and noted that their legacy was under attack.

Fifty six minutes into the discussion there was a discussion about whether “David Ervine’s kind of leadership” was missing from unionism today. Jeffrey Donaldson agreed that there was a gap, and commented on the difficulties in getting the UVF to move forward. [Sam McBride unpacked those comments in an article in the News Letter.]

, , , , , ,

  • Gopher

    The 6th century history student in me is quite sure that it is just plain History rather than Loyalist, Unionist or Republican History. Histories are only specific to a nation, era or facet, the good ones anyway for spatial considerations or technical detail. Gibbon was not trying proffer an ideology nor was he trying to encourage mythological beliefs in Decline and Fall. The events of 1916 are very well documented and any individual is free to form his own opinion in splendid isolation from these purveyors of historical superstitions with their comfort blankets. I hope no public money was wasted on this tripe.

  • I suspect that the 6th century history student within many of our politicians has been less strong than your inner student – perhaps more on the level of the vice Chancellor’s.

    That’s why it’s important that the public debate moves on, and events like this can be an important part of that process. It really matters that politicians and leaders publicly acknowledge that history is more complex than the parties have sometimes let on.

    The province as a whole needs to get in touch with its inner 6th century history student. Selective and separate memories have done great harm.

Join us for the Slugger End of Year Review Show, Wed 14th Dec 2016
Get your tickets