Why so many great Irish writers?

Denerick

We've produced a huge number of talented wordsmiths over the years. Our golden age was the Celtic twilight era, when writers like Yeats, Bernard Shaw, Joyce and Synge were in their prime.

Is there anything particularly special about us? Its interesting to note that quite a few of our great writers hailed from the aristocratic class, and that the early 20th century was their great decline - hence there were any number of themes an anxious and depressed social class could find to write about.

Declan Kiberd wrote an excellent book examining Anglo Irish Literature, it is called 'Inventing Ireland'. His chapter on Douglas Hyde and 'Deanglicisation' is particularly relevant to this.

So was it a culture desperately fighting back against perceived Imperial suppression? Or was it merely one of those unaccountable generational shifts, when all the correct social tornadoes converged to produce a golden generation of Irish talent?

celtanu

Interesting question.

I have often wondered this myself. I think the 'class' and economic situation of the poets is an important point. They would've been afforded the time and opportunity to observe, even peruse, society and it's institutions, peoples, and places. The ground too was certainly a fertile one, as you suggest - issues at the heart of humanity were on constant display.

Thinking critically about the Irish, the Irish pysche, and their special talents would be incomplete without consideration of their long relationship with alcohol. Is alcohol the fuel that powered a generation of literal creativity to the limit? did alcohol throw the Irish of the lateral tracks and allow the men of comfortable means to become luminaries to the world; a world where 'prohibition' was on the rise. OR, perhaps the Irish happen to like alcohol for the same reason they like poetry, and that without the booze we'd be publishing a lot more? The order of causality is not clear; personally alcohol boosts my vocabulary and creativity but it does nothing for my publishing :-)

Eliot Rosewater

Perhaps because Ireland is such a crap place?! James Joyce rebelled against Irish culture and moved to France, as did Samuel Beckett I believe (and he started writing in French). Most of John McGahern's work is critical of Irish culture. Flann O'Brien takes the constant piss out of the country, though he's clearly less critical and more jovial than McGahern.

Then we have the rake of "Irish" writers who are actually Anglo-Irish/Protestant and thus members of the group of people that nationalists like to moan about constantly; hence, I am disinclined to really call them Irish. Oliver Goldsmith, John Synge and Jonathan Swift go here, as does Oscar Wilde, I believe.

/rant :pac:

Mr Cawley

Romantic Ireland's dead and gone

Denerick

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

ry, though he's clearly less critical and more jovial than McGahern.

Then we have the rake of "Irish" writers who are actually Anglo-Irish/Protestant and thus members of the group of people that nationalists like to moan about constantly; hence, I am disinclined to really call them Irish. Oliver Goldsmith, John Synge and Jonathan Swift go here, as does Oscar Wilde, I believe.

/rant :pac:

Ahhh... Not fair and not nice!

Swift for example was a proud Irishman. The problem was that he hated everything about the place. But Swift hated everything, so we shouldn't take that personally.

John Synge cared passionately about the western peasant, and his controversial play was an earnest attempt to eulogise the problems inherent in that society... hence the backlash.

Oscar Wilde was also aware of his Irishness, and it was an important part of his identity. He even had a deathbed conversion to mother church, don't you know!

Other Protestant writers such as Yeats, and even Douglas Hyde cared passionately about Ireland and her welfare.

You are right about the high numbers of Irish writers who didn't actually live in Ireland.

Eliot Rosewater

Denerick wrote: »

He even had a deathbed conversion to mother church, don't you know!

I do; I found out 10 minutes ago when "researching" my rant on Wikipedia!

I was kind of joking really. Now if you tried to use the fact that there have been lots of Irish writers for nationalistic purposes I would take exception, because there is a grain of truth to what I said.

What I said about Ireland being a "crap place" may be true. As in, there's lots to write about what with out backward culture and out relationship with the UK etc.

fontanalis

Mr Cawley wrote: »

Romantic Ireland's dead and gone

It actually existed??

Eliot Rosewater

fontanalis wrote: »

It actually existed??

Everything appears romantic when you're looking backwards.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Eliot Rosewater

As I said before, it's quite embarrassing.

donegalfella gave me a link to a Senate debate on censorship: http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/S/0027/S.0027.194211180006.html

There are some interesting comments there. Sir John Keane (proposer of the motion that the Irish public have lost confidence in the censorship board) says

I am sorry that I have left my list [of censored books] behind me, but I remember many of the names. There were Shaw, Eric Linklater, Morgan, Hugh Walpole, Somerset Maugham, and a leading American writer, Ernest Hemingway. In addition to those, there were, I think, all the modern Irish writers— Kate O'Brien, Frank O'Connor, Seán Ó Faoláin, Liam O Flaherty and even —would you believe it?—Austin Clark —who, I believe, is recognised by the Church as one of the outstanding poets. There is not a modern Irish writer I can think of that is not on the list. It is especially hard on the Irish writers, as their circulation is, of course, mainly in the country.

Mr. Goulding, opposing, comes out with a few jems.

There is no doubt whatever about it, it does not matter how great literature is supposed to be, it should not be allowed, if it is subversive of religion and morals.

No respect whatever should be paid to a writer's fame as a writer of good English prose. I hold the Censorship Board is quite justified in banning a book if it contains one passage subversive of Christianity or morality.

Just previous to his remarks above, Sir Keane had said that there were 1600 books banned at that time (1942), which amounted to 3 books banned per week since the act came into effect. I wonder is there a list of books that were banned then available?

The current list of banned publications is here: http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Publications_censorship

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mathepac

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It bypassed Ireland completely. Serialised over 3 years in an American magazine originally, printed and published in book form in Paris, it's probably as much Franco-American literature as Anglo-Irish.

jackthelad321

I do think Ireland has produced some great writers, and continue to with John Banville and the late John Magahern. I want to include Joseph O' Neill in here but he's as English or Turkish as he is Irish. And let's not forget Cicila Ahern.

The Irish writing quesion has always facinated me. It was the first thing I realised Ireland excelled at. The prodestant writers thing, as mentioned in this thread, may be a touch irrelevant. As the country was going through the struggles to achieve independence etc. prodestants played a great part in that too. The nationalists always prided thmselves in being able to reason and form alliances with Prodestants. It was a considerable part of their movement and the united Ireland.

Aside from the volumes that can be written about the prod/ catholic issue, I think the landscape and the nature of Irish people did, and continue to, encourage writers to expressive themselves through words. It's just a part of our culture. I doubt if we'll ever have as celebrated a group of writers as the yeats, Joyce and shaw variety, but we may have writers who are every bit as good.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Denerick

Nobody ever said that 1930s Ireland was an easy time for creative minds. Its one of the reasons why one of my favourite writers, Patrick Kavanagh, was such an obnoxious ass of a drunkard. He actually wrote a great poem about Irish mediocrity and the 'pandering poet'. I'll see if I can root it up.

mathepac

Denerick wrote: »

... Its one of the reasons why one of my favourite writers, Patrick Kavanagh, was such an obnoxious ass of a drunkard. ...

As a child of 1950's / 1960's Dublin I can attest to the fact that poor Paddy could be every bit as obnoxious an ass in his sober senses as he was drunk. Sorry Paddy, but sure what did we know?

Ar Dheis Dé go raibh a anam

WinstonSmith

I find this conversation very interesting. I do, however, feel that several points ought to be made clear. Firstly the conversation started on a faulty premise: Whilst the past has created many great Irish writers, the Celtic Twilight phase probably resulting in the greatest amount at any one time, there have always been and still are many great Irish writers. To claim, therefore, that they are a result of the Aristocratic, Big-House tradition as the original post implies is mis-leading since the aristocracy dies away in Ireland with the War of Independence and yet the amount of great Irish writers continued to be abnormally high.
Secondly, with regards to the notion of 'Romantic Ireland's dead and gone', it is worth pointing out that Terence Brown has a new book out, which has a chapter on Yeats. In this chapter he argues that whilst Yeats fervently believed at the time that Romantic Ireland was indeed dead and gone, Easter 1916 and its refrain should be read as a partner poem to September 1913, namely that if Romantic Ireland was dead and gone, it was resurrected by the leaders of the Easter Rising, hence, "a terrible beauty is born".
Finally, with regards people suggesting that Ireland's culture is now "backwards", it ought to be suggested that such a description comes from a neo-colonialist perspective: Since Ireland has its own culture independent of England, it must be other and therefore backwards. I would suggest that Ireland's culture is not backwards at all, but in fact is fantastic.

Denerick

Interesting.

The reason I pin point the pre War of Independence era is because there seemed to be a creative tension in the air, unalike other decades. This was also the years of the Abbey theatre, the Gaelic Revival, the rise of the GAA, Irish Irelanderism, and advanced Republicans were increasingly influential in literary and social circles. Yeats, for example, was a member of the Young Ireland Club (Along with Hyde, Maud Gonne, and many others) whose great member was John O'Leary (Yes, that O'Leary), a former member of the IRB supreme Council.

As for the big house tradition, my reasoning stems from people like Lady Gregory. Anglo Irish Literature revolved around a close clique of people, who were mainly Protestant and aristocratic. And let us not forget Somerville and Ross, who seem to me to be the epitome of genteel aristocracy. (They were also Lesbians, but thats less relevant)

Post 1930, most of our newer writers were Catholic and disenchanted.

WinstonSmith

Denerick wrote: »

Interesting.

The reason I pin point the pre War of Independence era is because there seemed to be a creative tension in the air, unalike other decades. This was also the years of the Abbey theatre, the Gaelic Revival, the rise of the GAA, Irish Irelanderism, and advanced Republicans were increasingly influential in literary and social circles. Yeats, for example, was a member of the Young Ireland Club (Along with Hyde, Maud Gonne, and many others) whose great member was John O'Leary (Yes, that O'Leary), a former member of the IRB supreme Council.

As for the big house tradition, my reasoning stems from people like Lady Gregory. Anglo Irish Literature revolved around a close clique of people, who were mainly Protestant and aristocratic. And let us not forget Somerville and Ross, who seem to me to be the epitome of genteel aristocracy. (They were also Lesbians, but thats less relevant)

Post 1930, most of our newer writers were Catholic and disenchanted.

Ok but you haven't really accounted for there being great Irish writers in the absence of the Aristocracy. In fact, by suggesting that they were Catholic and disenchanted seems to go the other way. Granted, a Swift or Yeats only come along every couple of hundred years, but the greatness of Heaney, Longley et al surely parallel the likes of George Moore et al. If they aren't even greater? Yet these were not people who were members of an aristocracy, and would probably both take offence at being described as either Catholic or disenfranchised. So what possible reasons does that leave us for Ireland producing the amount that it has and does?

Denerick

I was only making the point that a lot of Irish writers from that epoch (That is why it is called 'Anglo Irish Literature', after all) were from the aristocratic tradition. Longley and Heaney are quite a bit into the future

P.S- And Longley is a presbyterian by the way :P

fontanalis

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

As I said before, it's quite embarrassing.

donegalfella gave me a link to a Senate debate on censorship: http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/S/0027/S.0027.194211180006.html

There are some interesting comments there. Sir John Keane (proposer of the motion that the Irish public have lost confidence in the censorship board) says

I am sorry that I have left my list [of censored books] behind me, but I remember many of the names. There were Shaw, Eric Linklater, Morgan, Hugh Walpole, Somerset Maugham, and a leading American writer, Ernest Hemingway. In addition to those, there were, I think, all the modern Irish writers— Kate O'Brien, Frank O'Connor, Seán Ó Faoláin, Liam O Flaherty and even —would you believe it?—Austin Clark —who, I believe, is recognised by the Church as one of the outstanding poets. There is not a modern Irish writer I can think of that is not on the list. It is especially hard on the Irish writers, as their circulation is, of course, mainly in the country.

Mr. Goulding, opposing, comes out with a few jems.

There is no doubt whatever about it, it does not matter how great literature is supposed to be, it should not be allowed, if it is subversive of religion and morals.

No respect whatever should be paid to a writer's fame as a writer of good English prose. I hold the Censorship Board is quite justified in banning a book if it contains one passage subversive of Christianity or morality.

Just previous to his remarks above, Sir Keane had said that there were 1600 books banned at that time (1942), which amounted to 3 books banned per week since the act came into effect. I wonder is there a list of books that were banned then available?

The current list of banned publications is here: http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Publications_censorship

Down with this sort of thing indeed!

WinstonSmith

Denerick wrote: »

I was only making the point that a lot of Irish writers from that epoch (That is why it is called 'Anglo Irish Literature', after all) were from the aristocratic tradition. Longley and Heaney are quite a bit into the future

P.S- And Longley is a presbyterian by the way :P

O ok. I thought you were attempting to explain the thread title. Your answer therefore suffices.

P.S. Longley is no longer a presbyterian by the way :P

MarchDub

Just to put this discussion within the context of the time - censorship of publications was common throughout the world for a very long time lasting well into the twentieth century. The UK Parliament grappled with the issue in 1959 with the Obscene Publications Act of 1959 followed by the Obscene Publications Act 1964.

Quote:

The Obscene Publications Act 1959 (c. 66) is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom that significantly reformed the law related to obscenity. Prior to the passage of the Act, the law on publishing obscene materials was governed by the common law case of R v Hickin which had no exceptions for artistic merit or the public good. During the 1950s, the Society Of Authors formed a committee to recommend reform of the existing law, submitting a draft bill to the Home Office in February 1955. After several failed attempts to push a bill through Parliament, a committee finally succeeded in creating a viable bill, which was introduced to Parliament by Roy Jenkins and given the Royal Assent on 29 July 1959, coming into force on 29 August 1959 as the Obscene Publications Act 1959. With the committee consisting of both censors and reformers, the actual reform of the law was limited, with several extensions to police powers included in the final version.

The Act created a new offence for publishing obscene material, repealing the common law offence of obscene libel which was previously used, and also allowed Justices of the Peace to issue warrants allowing the police to seize such materials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscene_Publications_Act_1959

Separately the blasphemy acts were also in force. Oscar Wilde's play Salome was banned for years from the London stage under this.

MarchDub

Denerick wrote: »

Nobody ever said that 1930s Ireland was an easy time for creative minds. Its one of the reasons why one of my favourite writers, Patrick Kavanagh, was such an obnoxious ass of a drunkard. He actually wrote a great poem about Irish mediocrity and the 'pandering poet'. I'll see if I can root it up.

Are you thinking of Kavanagh's The Paddiad [1949]? Fantastic poem -

'A great renaissance is under way'
You can hear the devil say
As into our pub comes a new arrival,
A man who looks the conventional devil:
This is Paddy Conscience, this
Is Stephen Dedalus,
This is Yeats who ranted to
Knave and fool before he knew
This is Sean O'Casey saying,
Fare thee well to Inishfallen.
He stands on the perimeter of the crowd
Half drunk to show that he's not proud
But willing given half a chance
To play the game with any dunce;...

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

onlyrocknroll

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Perhaps because Ireland is such a crap place?! James Joyce rebelled against Irish culture and moved to France, as did Samuel Beckett I believe (and he started writing in French). Most of John McGahern's work is critical of Irish culture. Flann O'Brien takes the constant piss out of the country, though he's clearly less critical and more jovial than McGahern.

Then we have the rake of "Irish" writers who are actually Anglo-Irish/Protestant and thus members of the group of people that nationalists like to moan about constantly; hence, I am disinclined to really call them Irish. Oliver Goldsmith, John Synge and Jonathan Swift go here, as does Oscar Wilde, I believe.

/rant :pac:

Whoa, "Irish" Protestants certainly are Irish. Wilde was quite nationalistic (at times) and his mother was a committed nationalist. Other Irish protestant writers that you didn't mention were vehemently nationalist and even republican: Sean O'Casey was a member of the Irish Citizen's Army and Yeats declined a knighthood.

If you're disinclined to call them Irish, what nationality do you consider them to be. Obviously Ulster Unionism would be different, but southern protestants do regard themselves as fully Irish, not qualified or hyphenated 'Irish'. Are English Catholics Hiberno-English? (Even within Unionism their is a belief among some adherents that Irishness is a subset of Britishness so that these are not mutually exclusive terms.)

On a lesser point I think that you oversimplified the relationship between many of the writers in your first paragraph and Ireland. McGahern has written lovingly about Ireland, in That They May Face the Rising Sun., Ulysses is very much a celebration of Dublin, and even Flann O'Brien loved and wrote in the Irish language which was one of the few things that he seemed to respect or every write positively about.

Denerick

MarchDub wrote: »

Are you thinking of Kavanagh's The Paddiad [1949]? Fantastic poem -

'A great renaissance is under way'
You can hear the devil say
As into our pub comes a new arrival,
A man who looks the conventional devil:
This is Paddy Conscience, this
Is Stephen Dedalus,
This is Yeats who ranted to
Knave and fool before he knew
This is Sean O'Casey saying,
Fare thee well to Inishfallen.
He stands on the perimeter of the crowd
Half drunk to show that he's not proud
But willing given half a chance
To play the game with any dunce;...

Thanks! Thats the poem I was on about alright...

Eliot Rosewater

onlyrocknroll wrote: »

Whoa, "Irish" Protestants certainly are Irish...

My post was inappropriate in the context of this thread and, as such, has been taken up wrongly. My post was more a hypothetical reaction to a nationalist using Ireland's literary history as a boosting point for their ideology. Obviously the OP Denerick wasn't attempting this kind of thing at all.

I certainly think Irish Protestants are Irish, if they think so too. In fact, if anyone lives here or has links to this country and wants to be called Irish then I would respect that. But to many nationalists, protestants aren't really Irish. And so my point was that a nationalist claiming Ireland was great by virtue of the literary works of Swift etal would be completely hypocritical. I wasn't really clear though.


To be honest, I blame Denerick for all this. He was spreading anti-1916 propaganda in the Politics forum, which had me in a bit of a anti-nationalist mood when I wrote that first post.

Denerick

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

To be honest, I blame Denerick for all this. He was spreading anti-1916 propaganda in the Politics forum, which had me in a bit of a anti-nationalist mood when I wrote that first post.

Trolling Republicans is fun.

onlyrocknroll

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

My post was inappropriate in the context of this thread and, as such, has been taken up wrongly. My post was more a hypothetical reaction to a nationalist using Ireland's literary history as a boosting point for their ideology. Obviously the OP Denerick wasn't attempting this kind of thing at all.

I certainly think Irish Protestants are Irish, if they think so too. In fact, if anyone lives here or has links to this country and wants to be called Irish then I would respect that. But to many nationalists, protestants aren't really Irish. And so my point was that a nationalist claiming Ireland was great by virtue of the literary works of Swift etal would be completely hypocritical. I wasn't really clear though.


To be honest, I blame Denerick for all this. He was spreading anti-1916 propaganda in the Politics forum, which had me in a bit of a anti-nationalist mood when I wrote that first post.

Yeah , reading it again I guess I misinterpreted your post, I should have paid more intention to your inverted commas on "Irish". Apologies.

Eliot Rosewater

Ahh, no bother, it was my fault really!

Pittens

Ireland's censorship was far more zealous and far-reaching than that of almost any other Western nation. It amounted to a veritable war against modern culture and ideas, and gave us the international reputation of being an insular, provincial, anti-intellectual backwater

That depends on the definition of "Western". !942 ( this high tide of Irish book censorship) was a fairly popular time for book banning, and indeed, burning in many countries that are now considered Western.

Pittens

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

All of those should be unbanned ( although I assume that the law is either not invoked, or the books mostly out of print).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.