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
Nelson's Pillar - 46th anniversary
Options
Comments
-
-
My point exactly.
How did those who did access the explosives. I wouldn't even know where to buy fireworks.
As kids we used to make homemade bombs out of a mix of <-snip-> (the former was a readily available <-snip->, sold over the counter. :eek:0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »As kids we used to make homemade bombs out of a mix of <-snip-> (the former was a readily available <-snip->, sold over the counter. :eek:
Not to be a killjoy but I would rather that we didn't have such "home-made recipes" on the forum.0 -
Not to be a killjoy but I would rather that we didn't have such "home-made recipes" on the forum.
Not to be pedantic, but it was not a recipie, it did not give quantities or the method. Nor is the main ingredient I mentioned available today, it was taken off years ago, because of kids like me;)0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Pike in the Thatch wrote: »What evidence do you have to back your claim that the IRA carried this out?
I would rather not go there, if you don't mind, as all we would be doing is semantics and splitting infinitives.
No prob here with Nelson being removed from his perch per se.0 -
I would rather not go there, if you don't mind, as all we would be doing is semantics and splitting infinitives.
No prob here with Nelson being removed from his perch per se.
Why not? If you are going to make a claim should you not back it up? If we want to deal with the history of it, surely a major part of it is who blew it up?
You say it's the IRA, I'd like to see some evidence as if your claim is true it is actually quite significant and of interest to those who have a historical interest in the the IRA/troubles.0 -
-
Let’s not engage in an unproductive circular argument about who did or didn’t plant the bomb in the pillar.
According to Wikipedia link (now works – click http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Pillar), it was a group of former IRA people. I’m no forensic lawyer or historian, doubt if any other posters are either, so why not leave that issue open for posterity to decide, as that’s not the original point of this thread.
I’m more interested in how people feel about the spire and, more importantly, how best we can commemorate the 100th anniversary of 1916 in a positive way that can be of benefit to everyone on the islands of Ireland and Britain.
What we need now, is solutions to today’s real problems – can we just leave recriminations, the blame game and negativity behind and focus on how to build on the past to make a better future.
We can’t do much about the past except learn from it.
So, how about some positive ideas – in the areas of culture (cross-border and here), tourism, etc. or is that too much to ask?0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »As kids we used to make homemade bombs out of a mix of <-snip-> (the former was a readily available <-snip->, sold over the counter. :eek:Not to be a killjoy but I would rather that we didn't have such "home-made recipes" on the forum.
( Now Tommy is the one who gets the slap on the wrist for criticising the mods !!!!! )0 -
Advertisement
-
thecommietommy wrote: »Well hopefully you can be more of a killjoy more often and do something about obvious trolling, baiting and deliberately dragging the subject off topic the above poster intends on doing in the thread.
( Now Tommy is the one who gets the slap on the wrist for criticising the mods !!!!! )
You want a slap on the wrist?
In future Tommy should refrain from commenting in this manner.
Accusing another poster of trolling, baiting, etc. is a form of abuse and not allowed. If you have a problem with a post you should report it. If you have reported a post and no action has been taken by a moderator then it is most likely that on consideration it was deemed that the reported post did not require action. You may disagree with this but this should be by PM, not in a thread where it is off topic. The infraction is for abuse of another poster by the way (the comment about 'obvious trolling, baiting' being aimed at quoted poster).
Please heed this warning and if you require more on this you are welcome to do so by PM. Any future posts on this are liable to be deleted. It would be good if all could follow the OP's direction which is repeated a few posts back.
Moderator0 -
golfwallah wrote: »Let’s not engage in an unproductive circular argument about who did or didn’t plant the bomb in the pillar.
According to Wikipedia link (now works – click http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Pillar), it was a group of former IRA people. I’m no forensic lawyer or historian, doubt if any other posters are either, so why not leave that issue open for posterity to decide, as that’s not the original point of this thread.
I’m more interested in how people feel about the spire and, more importantly, how best we can commemorate the 100th anniversary of 1916 in a positive way that can be of benefit to everyone on the islands of Ireland and Britain.
What we need now, is solutions to today’s real problems – can we just leave recriminations, the blame game and negativity behind and focus on how to build on the past to make a better future.
We can’t do much about the past except learn from it.
So, how about some positive ideas – in the areas of culture (cross-border and here), tourism, etc. or is that too much to ask?
It's not so much the blame game or whatever, but the significance of the IRA denying they did this, but they actually did, would be quite significant given the nature of IRA statements and their methods before the troubles.0 -
Pike in the Thatch wrote: »It's not so much the blame game or whatever, but the significance of the IRA denying they did this, but they actually did, would be quite significant given the nature of IRA statements and their methods before the troubles.
If you want to put down your sequence of events, people and sources then I am interested.
Anyway, history is about uncovering facts and that inevitably happens and then we interpret them & the Spire is not going away0 -
MOD SNIP>
Infraction for ignoring previous warning. I am trying not to issue a ban to you but if you keep ignoring warnings that will follow.
As per advice in post 72.
EDIT> Moderator0 -
nice photo of the remains of the pillar the day after
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland/6966397633/in/photostream
Good view of the pillar and the news headline.
There can't be too many English Admirals who have stood as a character witness for an Irish rebel on trial for treason.0 -
johnny_doyle wrote: »
There can't be too many English Admirals who have stood as a character witness for an Irish rebel on trial for treason.
Edward Despard & his Plot. Nelson also gave evidence in favour of another Irishman, a former shipmate, Capt. McNamara at his Old Bailey trial for manslaughter following a duel.0 -
golfwallah wrote: »is the spire that eventually replaced it any better as a city centre landmark?
Yes. Anything which does not colonise public space in this city to glorify the mass murderers who fought for the Brtish Empire and its inherent fanaticism, racism and supremacy is an improvement. Obviously.
Let the British honour their warmongers/"heroes" in their own country.0 -
Rebelheart wrote: »Yes. Anything which does not colonise public space in this city to glorify the mass murderers who fought for the Brtish Empire and its inherent fanaticism, racism and supremacy is an improvement. Obviously.
Let the British honour their warmongers/"heroes" in their own country.
Could the pilar not have been seen as a relic from times gone by, a sign of what Ireland achieved by gaining independence. Your view could be construed as overly negative to the Irish disposition- not very appropriate on St. Patricks day.0 -
Rebelheart wrote: »Yes. Anything which does not colonise public space in this city to glorify the mass murderers who fought for the Brtish Empire and its inherent fanaticism, racism and supremacy is an improvement. Obviously.
For the most part I agree with you - and former colonies have for the most part taken down anything be it statues or titles that 'honours' or glorifies the departed colonial presence. In the case of the Pillar, I have said that Nelson's statue ought to have gone, and this was pretty much a general feeling in Dublin at the time. But the Pillar could have been allowed to stand with a more appropriate top for the recently independent Ireland.
I don't personally agree with any sentiment that says we have to be kowtowingly apologetic about our past in any way. Or be in any way concerned about addressing the past based on how we might 'appear' to anyone in order to not be - God forbid - considered antagonistic or whatever. That's not supposed to be the concern of history -Rebelheart wrote: »Let the British honour their warmongers/"heroes" in their own country.
And that's a good point - yes, of course they are free to do this and do indeed honour their own. As the Americans have dotted their land with their heroes. It seems incredible in Ireland we still struggle apologetically over those who fought and died for our independence.0 -
IRebelheart wrote: »Yes. Anything which does not colonise public space in this city to glorify the mass murderers who fought for the Brtish Empire and its inherent fanaticism, racism and supremacy is an improvement. Obviously.
Let the British honour their warmongers/"heroes" in their own country.
I wouldn't put Nelson in the "mass murderer" bracket.0 -
Advertisement
-
Rebelheart wrote: »Yes. Anything which does not colonise public space in this city to glorify the mass murderers who fought for the Brtish Empire and its inherent fanaticism, racism and supremacy is an improvement. Obviously........... and former colonies have for the most part taken down anything be it statues or titles that 'honours' or glorifies the departed colonial presence. In the case of the Pillar, I have said that Nelson's statue ought to have gone, and this was pretty much a general feeling in Dublin at the time. But the Pillar could have been allowed to stand with a more appropriate top for the recently independent Ireland....................... It seems incredible in Ireland we still struggle apologetically over those who fought and died for our independence.
I disagree. There are statues of Queen Victoria and prominent Victorians in Singapore, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur and in other former colonies. Several roads in those cities and in India are named after colonila rulers. People there see them for what they are – reminders of times past and a link with history. The debates over what to do with Dublin's Victoria statue are worthy of a Monty Python sketch.
There was an outbreak of fervent ‘patriotism’ in the lead-up to the 1916 commemoration in 1966, every school history class had a project. Talk of ‘doing something about the pillar’ was common, but I have no recollection of a wish to get rid of it, although some did want the statue to go. We struggle with our past because (a) too many people are unable to come to terms with it; (b) some of the past and its people are simply not worth celebrating; and (c) our civil war did not help to foster fond memories. As for public recognition, all the main railway stations were renamed in 1966, and many new roads/housing estates were named for dead Irish people from the 1930’s onwards.
It is both a sign of national immaturity and sad that some people need to justify their notion of ‘patriotism’ with fervent hatred of a former ruling power. Most of their actions are wanton vandalism, such as the destruction of the cast iron drinking fountain on Dun Laoghaire seafront. Cromwell and many of our so-called ‘patriots’ have much in common, except he confined himself to iconography in churches.0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »
I disagree. There are statues of Queen Victoria and prominent Victorians in Singapore, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur and in other former colonies. Several roads in those cities and in India are named after colonila rulers. People there see them for what they are – reminders of times past and a link with history. The debates over what to do with Dublin's Victoria statue are worthy of a Monty Python sketch.
There was an outbreak of fervent ‘patriotism’ in the lead-up to the 1916 commemoration in 1966, every school history class had a project. Talk of ‘doing something about the pillar’ was common, but I have no recollection of a wish to get rid of it, although some did want the statue to go. We struggle with our past because (a) too many people are unable to come to terms with it; (b) some of the past and its people are simply not worth celebrating; and (c) our civil war did not help to foster fond memories. As for public recognition, all the main railway stations were renamed in 1966, and many new roads/housing estates were named for dead Irish people from the 1930’s onwards.
It is both a sign of national immaturity and sad that some people need to justify their notion of ‘patriotism’ with fervent hatred of a former ruling power. Most of their actions are wanton vandalism, such as the destruction of the cast iron drinking fountain on Dun Laoghaire seafront. Cromwell and many of our so-called ‘patriots’ have much in common, except he confined himself to iconography in churches.
Yes, well I think we will have to disagree because I too was around in the build up to 1966 - and I didn’t see it at all the way you do. We were a prouder people then – and we loved ourselves much better. I personally think it is good and healthy for a people, a nation, any nation, to be proud of its heroes and celebrate them openly without having to worry about ‘how we might be perceived’ or what ‘others might think of us’ and all the other mea culpla narratives that developed in the 1970s and remain with us today. I lived in England and the USA for long periods and always actually felt envious at the way they celebrated their own pasts, their heroes, unashamedly and proudly. But in Ireland we are faced with the old, and if I may say, now jaded ‘maturity’ argument – that somehow we are not ‘mature’ enough if we are not deprecating ourselves and denying our own – dare I say it – heroic past [yes, sorry but we did have heroes]. Since when does ‘maturity’ mean self denial or having to defend any attempt to establish a narrative that meets our own national needs and gives us our own self respect?
The talk of replacing Nelson and other colonial statues WERE NOT acts of hated – and I disagree entirely with your thesis that somehow elevating our own culture and putting aside the colonial one is a mark of hatred or ‘immaturity’. One does not automatically mean the other and it is false logic to suggest so. It was all part of what Douglas Hyde described in his Necessity for De-Anglicising Ireland in 1892. The point being that we had to de-anglicise in order to gain and establish our own sense of identity - and I agree entirely with Hyde on that point. But further to that the generation that lived through the war of independence, the black and tan murdering gangs, the curfews, the random house raids, the undemocratic outlawing of the 1918 election results, the raw brutality of the British presence, were entirely entitled as far as I am concerned to take down reminders of those days and celebrate ourselves and our achievements. In fact IMO it was a necessary part of the transition to nationhood and self respect. I knew many of them and they were a bloody fine generation and I will never change my opinion on that.
Who cares what the streets are called in Singapore or Hong Kong or where they stick Victoria … maybe they are the ones with maladjusted perspectives. Now there's a thought. Ours was a badly broken relationship - be done with it, throw out the pictures. Move on, yes. But an awareness of the historic past, being informed about the past, admitting the atrocities of the Colonial period and proudly establishing our own identity does not at all ipso facto lead to malevolence and hatred – and it is immature to think or suggest so. But I’ve been hearing this for over 40 years now - that we have to deny our very reality, our own track record, our own gallant heroes - and all it has given us is a bloodless, formless culture without very much self respect.0 -
Yes, well I think we will have to disagree because I too was around in the build up to 1966 - and I didn’t see it at all the way you do. We were a prouder people then – and we loved ourselves much better. I personally think it is good and healthy for a people, a nation, any nation, to be proud of its heroes and celebrate them openly without having to worry about ‘how we might be perceived’ or what ‘others might think of us’ and all the other mea culpla narratives that developed in the 1970s and remain with us today. I lived in England and the USA for long periods and always actually felt envious at the way they celebrated their own pasts, their heroes, unashamedly and proudly. But in Ireland we are faced with the old, and if I may say, now jaded ‘maturity’ argument – that somehow we are not ‘mature’ enough if we are not deprecating ourselves and denying our own – dare I say it – heroic past [yes, sorry but we did have heroes]. Since when does ‘maturity’ mean self denial or having to defend any attempt to establish a narrative that meets our own national needs and gives us our own self respect?
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. 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.The talk of replacing Nelson and other colonial statues WERE NOT acts of hated – and I disagree entirely with your thesis that somehow elevating our own culture and putting aside the colonial one is a mark of hatred or ‘immaturity’. One does not automatically mean the other and it is false logic to suggest so. It was all part of what Douglas Hyde described in his Necessity for De-Anglicising Ireland in 1892. The point being that we had to de-anglicise in order to gain and establish our own sense of identity - and I agree entirely with Hyde on that point. But further to that the generation that lived through the war of independence, the black and tan murdering gangs, the curfews, the random house raids, the undemocratic outlawing of the 1918 election results, the raw brutality of the British presence, were entirely entitled as far as I am concerned to take down reminders of those days and celebrate ourselves and our achievements. In fact IMO it was a necessary part of the transition to nationhood and self respect. I knew many of them and they were a bloody fine generation and I will never change my opinion on that.Who cares what the streets are called in Singapore or Hong Kong or where they stick Victoria … maybe they are the ones with maladjusted perspectives. Now there's a thought. Ours was a badly broken relationship - be done with it, throw out the pictures. Move on, yes. But an awareness of the historic past, being informed about the past, admitting the atrocities of the Colonial period and proudly establishing our own identity does not at all ipso facto lead to malevolence and hatred – and it is immature to think or suggest so. But I’ve been hearing this for over 40 years now - that we have to deny our very reality, our own track record, our own gallant heroes - and all it has given us is a bloodless, formless culture without very much self respect.0 -
I am intrigued that the bombing of the pillar is being described as patriotic ?
Can someone explain the value system.
Wasn't NI Premier O'Neill making overtunes to Lemass & Co. 1966 was around the corner. We were trying to join the EU with the British.
What context are we talking about here .0 -
I am intrigued that the bombing of the pillar is being described as patriotic ?
Who is talking about the bombing in this way? Certainly not me. I am referring singularly to the talk and the fact of displacement of the older iconography with new iconography. IMO a perfectly rational and healthy thing for an emerging nation to do. I have alredy said that the Pillar itself should have been allowed to stand. Far better than what replaced it.
I am also objecting to the use of the word 'maturity' in the context it is being used and have expressed that - and my opinion on that remains.0 -
johnny_doyle wrote: »nice photo of the remains of the pillar the day after
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland/6966397633/in/photostream
Good view of the pillar and the news headline.
Ditto - I already posted that photo in post #17 above and ref the headline - with the fact that the IRA immediately dissociated itself from it all.0 -
I think it is good that Nelson's Pillar was destroyed. Although I think it would have been much better had his statute been taken down by the government and replaced by an Irish patriot say such as Wolfe Tone or Robert Emmet who were Irish patriots of the same time as Nelson.0
-
.....
I too was around in the build up to 1966 - and I didn’t see it at all the way you do. We were a prouder people then – and we loved ourselves much better. I personally think it is good and healthy for a people, a nation, any nation, to be proud of its heroes and celebrate them openly without having to worry about ‘how we might be perceived’ or what ‘others might think of us’ and all the other mea culpla narratives that developed in the 1970s and remain with us today.
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.0 -
Ditto - I already posted that photo in post #17 above and ref the headline - with the fact that the IRA immediately dissociated itself from it all.
indeed.
Quite a few nice images of and from the Pillar floating around Flickr from the NLI collection.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland/5786212550/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland/5785633295/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland/6817741408/
Pathe News video of the Army at work etc
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/nelson-pillar-remains-demolished-aka-nelson-pillar0 -
Advertisement
-
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.
Interesting that you pick two acts one would not associate with political songs but folk music.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.
They were old men like my grandfather and pedro's and whose ideologies were democratic.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.
I don't know. My grandfather grew up in an area where some people lived mud huts and in real third world conditions.
I certainly think the recent neutrality debate put up concepts that showed some remove from that reality or did I miss something.
An puc ar buile , great craic that.0
Advertisement