Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Nelson's Pillar - 46th anniversary

1246789

Comments

  • #92
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    I was not around in 1966 but the underlined point makes me wonder a couple of things and I wouldnt be fully convinced of it, for one thing it is quite a sweeping statement. For example was there more appreciation of our heritage and culture in 1966 than now. Take Irish music that now traverses the globe, in the 1960's Davey Arthur and the Fureys, and the Dubliners were beginning the process of popularising Irish music to a wider audience both abroad and in Ireland.
    Another relevant point in regard of this is the proximity of events. In 1966 there was a generation of people alive who could remember Ireland being ruled by Britain. I think this would leave an impact. That we are now a further distance away from this means that people look at history differently. What I disagree on is how this difference is described, I would not consider that someone in the 1960's was 'prouder' than I am or loved their country more than I do simply because they were from a different era. Furthermore, at this remove from events such as WWI Irishmen and women seem to be more capable of embracing the memories of people of the time more openly than before.

    Well that’s my opinion – and the thread is full of opinion as per the OP’s original direction which has not been modified in any way or re-directed to stick to historical facts, so I put that in there as one of mine. But it is not nevertheless if I may say, an opinion based on air – it is an observation of mine based on what I have seen evolve since 1966 when we openly and I again say, proudly, celebrated 1916 in many ways that honoured the event. There was a much stronger strong sense of self love and political achievement of independence which frankly, I don’t experience now. Like Pedroeibar said, we even renamed many of the railway stations in Dublin – Amiens St became Connolly, Westland Row became Pearce. I personally can’t image that happening now – we usually nowadays stick exclusively to Irish writers and authors [or musicians as you yourself point to], - safer it seems, less to explain.

    The Garden of Remembrance was opened in 1966 on the spot where the Volunteers had originally been formed and where many of the leaders of the 1916 Rising were held after their surrender. Sacred space. These days we can’t even get the house on Moore Street where they surrendered kept safe for our inheritance. Just go by there and look at the state of it. It’s a national disgrace.

    From 1972 the Government shunned celebrating the 1916 Rising – running away from it all? - and in 1991 when the 75th anniversary came around there was a furtive attempt at celebrating and not celebrating all at once but only after pressure was brought to bear about it by citizens who wanted the date marked in some official way. I think the ceremony took about 15 mins at the GPO - VERY different from 1966.

    Robert Ballagh says about our meagre attempts to celebrate important national anniversaries:
    When I read in the paper the statement by the Taoiseach that the Government intended restoring the military parade in Dublin to commemorate the ninetieth anniversary of the Easter Rising, I found myself unable to prevent a wry smile forming on my face; you see, I still retained clear memories of the remarkable experiences of those brave souls who dared commemorate the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Rising just fifteen years before.

    In early 1990, a group of concerned citizens, aware that the government seemed determined to ignore the anniversary, decided to take steps to insure that the event would be properly celebrated. I decided to sign up to this initiative which took as its title ‘Reclaim the Spirit of Easter’. My own reasons for taking this action were both personal and complex. For many years I found myself dismayed by an intellectual atmosphere that had been allowed to develop that appeared to me to be driven by a kind of self-loathing. Certainly, as a reaction to the conflict in the North, many southern politicians and ‘thinkers’ constructed a whole new way of seeing Ireland and the Irish! There was a time when Unionism was seen as a bullying, discriminating, and occasionally violent force, which, with British support, oppressed the nationalist people in the North. Now, however, nationalists were portrayed as negative, uncooperative and recalcitrant while hard line unionists were lionized by a sycophantic Dublin media. In this scenario, the British played the role of a benevolent and frustrated neighbour attempting to separate two feuding delinquents. This process of self delusion, once begun, led to some quite startling conclusions.
    So it seems to me who lived through those years that there is a major difference between, back then, the lead up to 1966, and the lead up to 2016. There is an air of caution, even reticence and apologetics about it all. And it has little or nothing to do with proximity to the event - look at the endless memorials to the Somme, Poppy Day, the Normandy invasions etc. - and I was in the US in 1976 for their 200 year anniversary of independence and it was not by any means a furtive dimly remembered affair in any way.


  • #93
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    MarchDub wrote: »
    Well that’s my opinion – and the thread is full of opinion as per the OP’s original direction which has not been modified in any way or re-directed to stick to historical facts, so I put that in there as one of mine. But it is not nevertheless if I may say, an opinion based on air – it is an observation of mine based on what I have seen evolve since 1966 when we openly and I again say, proudly, celebrated 1916 in many ways that honoured the event. There was a much stronger strong sense of self love and political achievement of independence which frankly, I don’t experience now.

    People celebrated 1798 200 year anniversary in low key manner but it is less known. I expect that alot more will be done to celebrate the centenary of 1916. It was a feature of last years presidential campaign that the successful candidate would be in position for the 2016 celebrations. These celebrations will require a collective decision by Irish people. This to is my opinion but I would expect that the choice will be to have a widely celebrated date that will both respect opposing views but mostly remember correctly the heroes who knowingly made a 'blood sacrifice' believing correctly that this would bring their aims closer.
    MarchDub wrote: »
    it is an observation of mine based on what I have seen evolve since 1966 when we openly and I again say, proudly, celebrated 1916 in many ways that honoured the event.
    Why do you think people are less willing to celebrate proudly now? Have the troubles negatively influenced our history?


  • #94
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    From todays Irish times some more fuel on this:
    “As we prepare to commemorate the enactment of Home Rule in 1914, the sacrifices by Irish soldiers in the Great War, and the deaths in and after rebellion of Easter 1916, the content of Fr Shaw’s essay is as relevant, and probably as controversial, today, as it was 46 years ago, when it was first offered for publication,” said Mr Bruton.

    In his analysis of the physical force tradition of Irish nationalism Fr Shaw quoted extensively from the writings of Patrick Pearse and questioned Pearse’s identification of nationalism with holiness, his hatred of England, and his glorification of death and violence.

    “All commemorations serve an educational purpose for the future. It is important that such sentiments as these not be glorified in 2016, and that their consequences be fairly assessed. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0321/1224313641525.html
    He is advocating restrained celebrations.


  • #95
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    People celebrated 1798 200 year anniversary in low key manner but it is less known.

    But the pivotal fact is that 1798 did not lead to the establishment of an independent Ireland. 1916 was the moment of Proclamation, the start of our War of Independence and shortly after the establishment of Dail Eireann.
    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    Why do you think people are less willing to celebrate proudly now? Have the troubles negatively influenced our history?

    Well, the historic record is the historic record and that doesn't change - what we do with it is the question - celebrate/acknowledge it or not? - and more to the point being made.


  • #96
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    MarchDub wrote: »
    Well, the historic record is the historic record - what we do with it is the question - celebrate/acknowledge it or not? - and more to the point being made.

    Fact are facts of course. But it is possible for these celebrations to gain associations that turn some people off them. I think this has happened and it is very regretable.

    You have experience of the 1960's so I would ask (respectfully if you don't mind) if Irish involvement in WWI was celebrated moreso then (50 years after) than now? The reason I ask is that I get the impression that the WWI heroes in this context may be the mirror opposite to those of 1916 and war of independence.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    Fact are facts of course. But it is possible for these celebrations to gain associations that turn some people off them. I think this has happened and it is very regretable.

    You have experience of the 1960's so I would ask (respectfully if you don't mind) if Irish involvement in WWI was celebrated moreso then (50 years after) than now? The reason I ask is that I get the impression that the WWI heroes in this context may be the mirror opposite to those of 1916 and war of independence.

    Well WWI wasn't celebrated - that is correct. Personally I don't get why we would even now celebrate a war that we didn't officially particpate in - and most of Ireland went berserk even at the idea of conscription for same. The General Strike in April 1918 in protest to conscription was a huge success by Irish labour, indicating little public support in Ireland for the war.

    But I also wouldn't call the Irish men of WWI the mirror opposite to 1916 by any means because that would not be a true and fair picture. The issue of WWI participation is very complex in itself. The Volunteers originally formed in 1913 to fight for Irish freedom - and organised against the Unionists who were by then gun running into the North. Many, many of those Irishmen who fought in WWI were volunteers who were responding to Redmond's call - Irish nationalists who believed that they were helping Irish Independence, and some of them returned after WWI and then joined the IRA. BTW I was glad to hear Diarmaid Ferriter pointing this out in the RTE coverage when the Queen came over and they had that ceremony at Islandbridge. [Fair dues to that little Lady though - I much appreciated what she did at the Garden of Remembrance.]

    Not all volunteers joined the IRA though on return to Ireland after WWI. Another complex piece. I had two relatives in WWI but they just returned home to Dublin and wanted nothing more to do with any army [can't say I blame them] - but they would certainly not have considered that they were fighting for the Empire. Far from it. It was their way of fighting for Irish freedom as they understood it.

    Now, I know this was not the whole picture covering every situation, but I just want to point out that it gets really complex when we have to consider why men did what they did at the time. And we do have to try to understand this from the history of the time and not overlay one set of misconceptions with another as we may be now doing.


  • #98
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    On a point of interest and slightly lighter note, a new musical “1916 The Musical” has been written and the principals behind it are working towards a launch in Boston (website says 2012 but this may be aspirational) before coming to Dublin for the centenary in 2016.

    Reading the website, the musical is based on a concept by a 2nd generation Irishman and involves musicians and lyricists with track records in other successful musical productions such as “Les Miserables”. So, it is a substantial piece of work backed up with all the right artistic connections from the world of stage musicals.

    An unlikely setting for a musical, you might think ..... but perhaps not! It has key ingredients of previous successful musicals - a love story that crosses the cultural divide, set in the context of a major historic conflict.

    Extracts from the website:

    "1916, is a new, epic musical; a love story set in Dublin during The Rising of the same year".

    "At the heart of the story, our heroine, Bridie, falls in love with a British soldier; maybe he is her way out, her ticket to England, but Bridie’s brother, Ciáran, is determined to fight for the freedom of the nation. Ireland’s sovereignty has been held under the British heel for 900 years, and after decades of famine and depression, the population has been depleted by hunger and is now leaving in hordes, mostly emigrating to the USA.

    In 2011, there are 80 million Irish around the world; 4 million of them live in Ireland".

    Today’s Irish Times article makes the point about not glorifying the negative physical force connotations associated the rising. At the same time, there is something to celebrate in 2016 and “1916 The Musical” just might be one of the ways of doing it, in a constructive and positive manner for a large audience.

    I think it fair to say that most people would agree that we should not glorify physical force. But at the same time, 1916 is part of our history that should be remembered. Just how to do this in a balanced manner – holding up a mirror to our past – looking at it in the context of a personal story (even, if fictitious, for dramatic purposes), without causing offence to people from either nationalist or unionist tradition, is a difficult thing to do.

    I, for one, hope it is successful.

    Link to website: http://www.1916themusical.com/


  • #99
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    I heard something about a project involving James Connolly Heron ?


  • #100
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    CDfm wrote: »
    I heard something about a project involving James Connolly Heron ?

    As far as I know, this is a separate project to "1916 The Musical" - but I expect both projects would be somewhat complementary.


  • #101
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Interesting content & perspective from John Bruton, not least because although I’d not heard of Fr. Shaw before (:o ) I paraphrased some of his views in my earlier posts. Fr. Shaw’s comments would have gone down like a lead balloon in 1966.
    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    You have experience of the 1960's so I would ask (respectfully if you don't mind) if Irish involvement in WWI was celebrated moreso then (50 years after) than now?
    In my circle during the sixties there was no talk of Irish soldiers in WWI, not that it was hushed up, rather it never was a topic. WW2 was not specifically mentioned either, but if it came up it was because many of us had parents/uncles who saw service. Our Civil War – the topic was suppressed, never mentioned and any question was discouraged. In school Irish history stopped at 1916.
    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    Why do you think people are less willing to celebrate proudly now? Have the troubles negatively influenced our history?
    I believe that ‘The Troubles’ have influenced our view of history – particularly those in the North. I recall Burntollet and the student anger in Dublin; the fury at that and the subsequent antics of the RIC & the B Specials, the tacit support for the IRA (initially) that then turned to ambivalence due to the way in which successive British governments made a total pigs ear of reading the situation in Ireland and alienating many who by that time had no love for the IRA. I remember the burning of the British Embassy – I was overseas at that time – and Lord Kilbracken returning his medals and renouncing British citizenship after Bloody Sunday.
    By 1991 and the 75th anniversary of 1916 there was a growing feeling that the IRA had not only taken possession of the Rising’s history, they also had hijacked the Irish language. People in the ‘South’ were sick and tired of the ‘North’ and were happy to ignore the entire event. It also did a huge disservice to the Irish language as many gaelgoirs were (or perceived to be) of a bigoted Republican leaning. I was living abroad at that time and on visits home remember my father railing about political ineptitude and cowardice, and the need to reclaim our heritage.
    CDfm wrote: »
    Interesting that you pick two acts one would not associate with political songs but folk music. An puc ar buile , great craic that.
    Most of the traditional Irish music at the time the Pillar was destroyed was not political, it was a turn-off – the pianothump of Kilfenora Ceile Band and Dinjoe variety, Abbey Tavern stuff in Howth for the tourists. Although the folk revival did start in the early 1960’s, apart from the Dubliners & the Clancy Bros it was tiny, and did not get going until the late 1960’s – the music scene of O’Donohues in Merrion Row, the Swamp in Rathmines, Slattereys in Capel St, Dowlings in Prosperous, etc., all date to that time. O’Riada and Ceoltoiri Chualann were the main musical impetus. The Chieftains third album came out in 70 or 71(?) and that firmly settled trad in the public eye. Few trad supporters had any time for The Wolfe Tones – regarded them as too commercially ‘political’ and never went to hear them play in either the Embankment in Tallaght or Bill Fuller’s place in Raheny (both viewed as very IRA pubs at the time) . Even the Dubliners dropped their ‘rebel’ songs in the sixties because of the Northern ‘Troubles’. An Puc ar Buile was made famous by Sean O’Se - it is on the one of the early O’Riada albums I think.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    CDfm wrote: »
    I heard something about a project involving James Connolly Heron ?

    Seeing as how you mentioned James Connolly Heron - here he is giving a tour of the 1916 sites around the GPO. Interesting about Enda, before he became Taoiseach.





  • #103
    thecommietommy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 564 ✭✭✭thecommietommy


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    I’ve absolutely no issues with any nation being proud of its heroes; it’s a perfectly normal sentiment and rational within reasonable boundaries. Where I do have a problem and what I wrote about earlier is the self-congratulatory pride and the type of fervent patriotism that are particularly evident in some sectors of Irish society, (and as you mention in England and the USA). By this I mean the ‘my country right or wrong’ attitude that I regard as downright stupid. A US naval man, Decatur, came out with that bit of jingoism and Nelson shared the stupidity,when he said ‘you must consider every man your enemy who speaks ill of your king and hate a Frenchman as you hate the devil’.
    The Irish may have been ‘a prouder people’ in the 1960’s, but they were a lot simpler, less informed, less questioning and more subservient to both Church and State.
    And who says Conor Cruise O'Brien is dead !!!!
    Personally, I’m glad we have moved on. I never mentioned the mea culpa or perception attitude you describe. I am proud of being Irish, not in your face proud, but quietly, confidently so. I decry those who hold that denying the so-called heroism or their interpretation of some events in our past makes me less Irish. That is not denial, that is maturity. Heroism is in the eye of the beholder, the problem arises when, to ‘establish a narrative that meets our own national needs and gives us our own self respect, the facts are bent to suit a particular need and anyone who does not kow-tow or bend the knee is accused of being unpatriotic and ‘denying our own’ as you state.
    No questioning the ' heroism ' of Nelson and co naturally !!! No, we're all supposed to ignore the crinimal aspect of imperialism and the megalomaniacs who enforced it and anyone who does not kow-tow or bend the knee to such beliefs doesn't have " maturity " of course :D
    I never said that the talk of replacing Nelson was an act of hatred. Re-read my post.
    Let's not get into some pedantic wordplay, quite clearly by the tone of your post that's what you implied.
    Your interpretation of Hyde’s speech is somewhat specious; his discourse was on the influence of imported ideas, dress and literature in particular, rather than de-anglicizing Ireland of its statues. I fully agree with him on several topics and all one has to do is look at the organic fertilizer dross that is shown nightly on RTE to see that some of his views still hold good. However, he was part of the Pegeen Mike bainin & crios syndrome that turned thousands away from the language with Jimin Maire Thadgh and Peig. I can understand why people who have been shot at dislike those who were on the other side of the trigger. That does not make them a ‘bloody fine generation’ ; those I met, a few, not many, were mainly simple men who like many in a time of strife were useful, used and expendable. Most returned to the land, where they were at ease. The lucky ones ended as perennial Captains in the army and were retired early. A few rose to greater things: MJ Costelloe was one, Joe McGrath another, although his tactics on tax avoidance and role of the Sweepstakes are nationalistically questionable and hardly heroic.
    Well since McGrath shared the values of British establishment's ' heros ' i.e. total greed and indifference and believed everyone should be used and expendable, maybe you'd like to have seen a statue raised in his honour also ?
    As citizens we have a duty to know our history. I never said that the awareness leads to malevolence or hatred. What I said was some people need to justify their notion of ‘patriotism’ with fervent hatred of a former ruling power. Use of emotive language, acts of vandalism and concomitant blather are what drive people away from our heritage. Some of the most visited sites in foreign cities are its colonial artefacts. Imagine the tourist draw the Pillar would have in Dublin today. Our past is ourselves, it should be incorporated, whole, entire, good and bad, and accepted for what it is. Cleansing it to suit self-decided patriotic needs is neither helpful nor historical. Doing so with explosives and no political mandate is, as I said earlier, vandalism
    Jayus you'd think we were talking about the Effiel tower or something :rolleyes: I'm sure the tourist numbers dropped by 10,000's after it :rolleyes: They'd be better off bringing the price down on drink in Temple Bar would have more effect on tourist numbers that a monument to a British imperialist.

    And since you mentioned no political mandate, since when did the likes of Nelson and the British establishment ever care about a political mandate ?


  • #104
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    thecommietommy wrote: »
    And who says Conor Cruise O'Brien is dead !!!!


    No questioning the ' heroism ' of Nelson and co naturally !!! No, we're all supposed to ignore the crinimal aspect of imperialism and the megalomaniacs who enforced it and anyone who does not kow-tow or bend the knee to such beliefs doesn't have " maturity " of course :D


    Let's not get into some pedantic wordplay, quite clearly by the tone of your post that's what you implied.


    Well since McGrath shared the values of British establishment's ' heros ' i.e. total greed and indifference and believed everyone should be used and expendable, maybe you'd like to have seen a statue raised in his honour also ?

    Jayus you'd think we were talking about the Effiel tower or something :rolleyes: I'm sure the tourist numbers dropped by 10,000's after it :rolleyes: They'd be better off bringing the price down on drink in Temple Bar would have more effect on tourist numbers that a monument to a British imperialist.

    And since you mentioned no political mandate, since when did the likes of Nelson and the British establishment ever care about a political mandate ?

    Not worth a reply. Uninformed, unsupported, politically prejudiced, drivel.


  • #105
    thecommietommy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 564 ✭✭✭thecommietommy


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Not worth a reply. Uninformed, unsupported, politically prejudiced, drivel.
    Ah no, just one of the unsophisticated, uncouth Irish masses - and proud of it.

    pos_624441g2.jpg


  • #106
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    Well I know this thread has gone many times in the direction of opinion – and opinion is just that, it will tend to clash without any resolution. So with that in mind I would have a very different opinion and objection to the people of 1966 being described as particularly ‘simple’ as regards politics or economics. I mean in such a way that made them fundamentally or uniquely different from contemporary times. To me the present generation that bought – pun intended - into the Celtic Tiger years , boom without end and the housing bubble, –[especially the ‘Ireland is different’ brigade who failed to understand bubbles have histories too with the same narrative ALWAYS accompanying the ‘faith’ since the Tulip bubble days]. Simple minded faith indeed.

    Then there was the NO vote to Lisbon - until we were all told by higher powers we got it wrong, go back and do it right this time. And then, obediently it seemed, chastised even, many did just as they were told – none of this sounds to me like something that future generations will call enlightened, sophisticated behaviour. I mean IMO it doesn’t sound to me like the type of behaviour that allows us to look back in a superior manner and dismiss previous generations as ‘simple’.


  • #107
    Continuity Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭Continuity Wolfe Tone


    I was at a talk recently by Ulster Unionist party member Jeffrey Dudgeon and he was asked about 1916 commemorations and he pretty much said he didn't care what form they took. And he was quick to point out countless commemorations take place every week across the six counties, and indeed all of Ireland, for various figures, IRA or otherwise etc etc and the world hasn't ended.

    This "maturity" spiel sickens me. As Irish people we have a right, and dare I say it a duty to honor and remember those who paid the ultimate price for Irish freedom. Other countries have no problems celebrating the actions of their patriots and those self loathing cowards who would have us ashamed of our past, who label the honoring of patriots or celebration of their deeds as something which is "not mature", should, and will be by those who have faith and confidence in themselves, ignored.


  • #108
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

    This "maturity" spiel sickens me.

    + 1 and 'Amen' to that -


  • #109
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Continuity Wolfe Tone :D

    Just love the user name .


  • #110
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    thecommietommy wrote: »
    Jayus you'd think we were talking about the Effiel tower or something :rolleyes: I'm sure the tourist numbers dropped by 10,000's after it :rolleyes: They'd be better off bringing the price down on drink in Temple Bar would have more effect on tourist numbers that a monument to a British imperialist.

    :D This gave me a laugh anyway- never thought of the Pillar competing with Tour Eiffel - Maybe it was the influence of those Huguenots you mentioned on another thread?


  • #111
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    MarchDub wrote: »
    :D This gave me a laugh anyway- never thought of the Pillar competing with Tour Eiffel - Maybe it was the influence of those Huguenots you mentioned on another thread?

    The spire does it for some people.

    There is no accounting for taste.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    CDfm wrote: »
    The spire does it for some people.

    There is no accounting for taste.

    But I suppose far less of a tourist attraction it seems - i.e you can't climb up the spire to an overlook like the Pillar and Eiffel...

    Not that I think the Pillar compared to Tour Eiffel ...just to be clear!


  • #113
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    MarchDub wrote: »
    But I suppose far less of a tourist attraction it seems - i.e you can't climb up the spire to an overlook like the Pillar and Eiffel...

    Not that I think the Pillar compared to Tour Eiffel ...just to be clear!

    Well Nelson didn't design Nelson's Pillar and, Eiffel didn't design the Eiffel Tower, it was Morris Koechlin.


  • #114
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    CDfm wrote: »
    Well Nelson didn't design Nelson's Pillar and, Eiffel didn't design the Eiffel Tower, it was Morris Koechlin.

    Not sure where you're going with this?

    I was referring to their separate roles as tourist attractions ....where Commietommie's comment came in.

    I mean Parnell didn't design his monument either ...or O'Connell his....??


  • #115
    Continuity Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭Continuity Wolfe Tone


    Last week I was in Dublin with an exchange student and he asked me about some of the statues and the history of O'Connell Street. We decided to walk up it and look at all the statues in turn.

    I told him about the O’Connell Monument and pointed out the bullet hole in the angels breast and the fasces.

    I told him about William Smith O’Brien, how he was sentenced to be hung drawn and quartered and how his statue was erected only 20 odd years after this. I told him about his exile and eventual return.

    Sir John Gray's statue was next, I know little of the man but I told what I knew, a nationalist MP famous for his efforts in securing a water supply.

    The next statue was that of the great James Larkin, one of my personal favorites on the street with the inscriptions of poetry. I told him about the 1913 lockout and the foundation of the Irish Citizens Army. This was a nice introduction to the GPO and it's significance in Irish history.

    Following a tale about great Irish patriots like Pearse my friend was positively brimming with anticipation to find out what the next monument stood for, the one which towered over all others and repeatedly caught his eye as we walked up the street. He enthusiastically asked who it was dedicated to, what this giant monument stood for. I didn't know what to say, it stands for nothing, the only thing it can could possibly commemorate, and unintentionally at that, is the 'electric gate' Celtic Tiger era where people were obsessed with possessions and wanted shiny things merely for the sake of it. It's out of place, it's a meaningless, pointless waste of space. All the other statues have significance, stand for something or someone and have an interesting, positive story. I was ashamed to be honest. All the other statues etc are a reminder of Irelands past struggles, fight against oppression or are in memory of great people who made their mark in other fields. Thats not to say the pillar was better, it wasn't.

    That massive disappointment was followed by Fr Theobald Mathew's statue. A great man he was too, and I told my friend about "the pledge" and how nearly half of Ireland's population has taken it at one point before the famine. He thought this was fascinating especially given the unfortunate Irish stereotype.

    We then proceeded up the street to the Sacred Heart encased in glass, a nice curiosity placed there by Dublins Taxi drivers.

    Finally we reached the Parnell monument and we talked about the man himself and his significance.

    No Man has a right to fix the
    Boundary to the march of a nation
    No man has a right
    To say to his country
    Thus far shat thou
    Go and no further
    We have never
    Attempted to fix
    The ne-plus-ultra
    To the progress of
    Ireland’s nationhood
    And we never shall

    I'd recommend taking a walk down the street and look at all the statues. When you do you will see clearly how out of place the Spire is. Nelsons Pillar was an out of place reminder of British colonialism and I think that the Spire is also an out of place reminder of a (thankfully) bygone era, in it's case the Celtic Tiger era and it's shameful excesses and waste. Tear it down.


  • #116
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    Sir John Gray's statue was next, I know little of the man but I told what I knew, a nationalist MP famous for his efforts in securing a water supply.

    He owned and ran the Freeman's Journal newspaper which turned much more nationalist under his ownership and which became the primary newspaper in Ireland that supported Parnell and Home Rule for Ireland.


  • #117
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    MarchDub wrote: »
    Not sure where you're going with this?

    I was referring to their separate roles as tourist attractions ....where Commietommie's comment came in.

    Maureen O'Sullivan from Roscommon would have been my compromise choice as you have comprehensively rejected Jayne Mansfield in the past

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdhBRRkNvts


    I mean Parnell didn't design his monument either ...or O'Connell his....??

    But you can't get up on Parnell's or O'Connell's monument's.


  • #118
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    OK- so theres 2 problems:

    1. people dont like the spire.
    2. people didnt like the statue of Nelson.

    Now I think I could bring my training into this and come up with a combination of both. This would involve the re-erection of Nelsons statue with the spire going through his heart. Maybe we could put a few other 'enemies' on the spire (spike) also to give it more historic appeal???

    I think it could work?


  • #119
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    I think this thread is seriously going off the rails....


  • #120
    Continuity Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭Continuity Wolfe Tone


    I think a statue of Constance Markievicz would have fitted in well and been a deserving memorial to a great Irish woman. Womens role in Irish history is often forgotten.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    MarchDub wrote: »
    I think this thread is seriously going off the rails....

    Yes- Tangents onto tangents, I am guilty and will go read the charter!!!


Advertisement