Padraig Pearse

brianthebard wrote: »

That poster begins with the statement 'we all know pearse was a peadarast and fancies young boys' is that supposed to be some sort of source? We expect better in this history forum tbh. I have never read anything by a serious historian suggesting that he had paedophilic tendencies and tbh I think there has been an incredible amount of slander aimed at him, one critic going as far as to suggest necrophiliac tendencies. At this stage he has been accused of almost every sexual deviancy you can think of except perhaps beastiality, but you never know maybe someone is working on a phd involving this. Anyways long story short put up a link to an actual historian or critic with credentials that backs up your argument or stop posting on this topic.

brianthebard wrote: »

This is a calm discussion. And calm discussion starts with sources, when you're discussing history at least. Instead of looking at that p.ie thread and going what a nut you seem to think that because people deny something that has no evidence means we collectively have something to hide or are overly defensive about? As I said Pearse has been accused of every sort of sexual deviancy and its just a tired argument that has little or no evidence provided for it, so I'm sorry if I'm overly defensive in requiring sources but I feel its warranted.

Joyce saw Ireland’s past as a roadblock to progress

Joyce was on the opposite side of the spectrum; he saw the Celtic revival as a sham and did not align himself with the likes of Yeats and Synge. Interestingly, Joyce actually attempted to learn the Irish language himself but did not complete the task. He enrolled in a class taught by Padraig Pearse[2] and, after hearing Pearse belittle English as a language, Joyce dropped out (Golway 213). Joyce and Yeats both felt it was important for the Irish to assemble a clearer sense of identity, but disagreed on how to do it: “What Parnell had tried to do politically, with the help of the Fenians, Joyce envisaged himself as doing in art, with the very minor help of shadowy forerunners like James Clarence Mangan and in despite of the fake Celticism of W. B. Yeats, Synge and company” (Deane xxxv). “Fake Celticism” is a scathing indictment to be sure and this denunciation returns to politics. Joyce shunned “all the established versions of cultural nationalism” and thus it is no wonder he dismissed Yeats as reflecting something false (Deane xix). To Joyce, Yeats echoed the type of intense patriotism he wanted to escape. Stephen Dedalus’ chums and schoolmates parrot republican rhetoric back and forth to one another day after day and he tires of hearing the constant squabbling. Correspondingly, Joyce wanted to see the Irish define their identity as more than an oppressed people fighting for independence.

http://sarasmichaelcollinssite.com/mcessay1.htm

MarchDub wrote: »

I can't help but add that the Ireland of Joyce is a mystery to all - including himself. Joyce - for all that he was clearly a genius, and I greatly admire Ulysses - was an emotional roller coaster with a very complex attitude to Ireland.

Gavrilo Princip and Patrick Pearse: Nationalism, Patriotism and Rebellion : A Comparison - Patrick Pearse Serbian History

Like Gavrilo Princip, Patrick Henry or Padraic/Padraig Pearse/MacPiarais (1879-1916) resorted to violence and rebellion/insurrection to achieve the goals of Irish nationalism. Princip and Pearse were motivated by the same ideals, nationalism and independence/sovereignty for their respective nationality/ethnic groups

http://www.srpskoblago.org/books-articles/gavrilo-princip-and-patrick-pearse-nationalism-patriotism-and-rebellion-a-comparison/page-4

In Patrick Pearse and the Politics of Redemption, Sean Farrell Moran examined the role that Patrick Pearse played in the Easter Rising of 1916 in Ireland. The "uprising" began on May 1, 1916, at the General Post Office in Dublin when an Irish republican leader brandished a gun declaring the independence of the Irish Republic. British troops then attacked the "rebels" with guns and artillery. The "insurrection" lasted for a week until finally put down by British military forces which included Irish veterans from the Western front in France. Approximately 450 "rebels" were killed and 2,000 were interned. The British troops suffered casualties of 100 killed or wounded in the conflict. Patrick Pearse was a central figure in the uprising. First, Moran noted that "historians of Ireland widely regard Dublin's Easter Rising of 1916 as the most important event in modern Irish political history" and that Patrick Pearse "was the most important figure of the Easter Rising." Historians of Ireland have not made Pearse or the Rising very "comprehensible" and Pearse remains "enigmatic" because Irish historiography has been "conventional in approach" and "conservative in tone". Moran faulted 'the literature on Pearse" because it has failed to "draw critical connections between Pearse and the historical event." Historians have not shown how an individual such as Pearse could come to play the role he did in the Rising. Historians have not used "innovative methodological approaches". Moran then examined the historical literature on Pearse and the Rising and concluded that it has "by and large...failed" because a conventional, rationalistic historical approach is inadequate to explain Pearse and the Rising. The rationalistic approach assumes rationality when in fact Pearse was motivated by irrationality. Instead, Moran applies a psychological analysis of Pearse and of the Irish nationalist tradition by exploring and examining in depth both Pearse's childhood and life and the ancient Irish national myths. For only by examining these aspects can one gain an understanding of the notions of self-immolation, of blood sacrifice, redemptive violence, for Pearse clearly understood the suicidal and futile nature of the Rising, but which he saw as a symbolic act of redemption, a "blood offering" in the name of Irish nationalism. Moreover, Pearse's martyrdom was not a futile and meaningless act but was a calculated and thought-out action that was part of a longer Irish tradition of martyrdom. For Pearse and those who would follow him, his martyrdom had meaning and impacted Irish history and nationalism. Furthermore, Moran argued that Pearse was in a sense merely expressing a "sentiment of his age", the idea that national and personal redemption could be achieved through violence and death. Rupert Brooke and Charles Peguy were discussed, who like Pearse, saw a similar need for redemption in a suicidal act.
Moran pointed out the irony of Pearse's suicidal act when he compares the Rising to the Great War, World War I, which was a suicidal act of redemption on a massive scale. It is estimated that between 5 and 10 million people died in the Great War. Verdun became a tragic symbol of the waste of young life, an offensive launched not to achieve any tangible military objective, but to bleed France white. In the process, hundreds of thousands died needlessly. There is an old Roman saying attributed to Horace that guided the combatants on all sides during the Great War, which loosely translated, is as follows: It is sweet and noble to die for one's country. Seen in this broader context, Pearse's act is rendered more comprehensible. Pearse lived in a time when patriotic nationalism was at its zenith, when Theodor Herzl founded Zionism, when the Balkans erupted in the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, when Bosnia was in turmoil, and when the nationalities problem consumed the Habsburg Empire. Indeed, the act that precipitated the Great War, World War I, was very similar to Pearse's act, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914 by a Bosnian Serb "nationalist", Gavrilo Princip, who was a member of the Young Bosnia Movement. The assassination occurred on June 28, St. Vitus' Day, or Serbian Vidov Dan, Kosovo Day, the date commemorating the epic battle of Kosovo in 1389. So like Pearse, Princip too was guided by redemptive violence as a blood sacrifice for the assassination was clearly as futile and suicidal as Pearse's act was. Princip too was guided by a nationalist mythology of redemption, of sacrifice for a nation and people. So seen in this broader context, Pearse and the Rising can be seen in proper perspective.
Patrick Pearse was born on November 10, 1879 in Dublin, the son of an English father and Irish mother. In "The Making of a National Hero", Moran detailed Pearse's childhood and formative years and his family and social relationships. Diaries, Pearse's unfinished autobiography, reminiscences of friends and associates, Pearse's own writings, plays, articles, poems, and essays were examined in depth. Pearse emerges as a human being and we are able to see what motivated and inspired him. Clearly, Pearse was a product of his age, of his time, and of his environment. He became a militant Irish nationalist, took up the cause of Irish national identity, became immersed in Gaelic language, culture, and history. But we also see the inconsistencies and the wavering and the lack of commitment to a single, unified ideology as Pearse struggles to find his role and function.
In "The State of Ireland", Moran examined the political climate of Ireland at the turn of the century by examining the key Irish nationalist parties and movements, the literary societies, the Gaelic League, and the Celtic Revival in Ireland. Irish independence was clearly the key issue of Irish politics of Pearse's time and for generations before. The constantly evolving Home Rule debate continued unabated. The emergence and growth of Sinn Fein and the Irish Revolutionary Brotherhood (IRB) are examined and discussed. Pearse was a member of the IRB. This chapter presents the political climate in which Pearse lived. It was a climate of volatility and of violence and of opposition to England.
The next chapter examined the "politics of redemption" by a "psychodynamic" analysis of the tradition of violence in Irish history. Moran maintained that to sacrifice themselves for a cause wholeheartedly required "a concept of the nation" that had psychological depth and meaning for the individual, that abstract and theological considerations were not enough. Ernest Jones' analysis of Ireland as an "island home" is presented. Seeing Ireland as a feminine figure who has been violated demanded redemptive violence and sacrifice. This identification was reinforced by Irish Catholicism, by Irish poetry, and by Irish mythology from the Tain. The Young Ireland Movement continued this identification through poetry which relied on a Gaelic past. The ancient myth of Cuchulainn is crucial in Irish national mythology because of its theme of transcending death through sacrifice for the nation. In a nation that had a history of being conquered and of rebellion, such a myth was all-important. This tradition was similar to the Kosovo epic tradition in Serbian history, folklore, and poetry and the martyrdom of Prince Lazar and Milos Obilic. Like Gavrilo Princip, Patrick Pearse was immersed in an epic/heroic history of self-immolation or suicide to redeem his people and nation from defeat and oppression. The Young Ireland Movement had much in common with the Young Bosnia Movement which in turn was based on the Young Italy Movement. The 18th century was one of nationalism. Both Princip and Pearse were the embodiments of this nationalist tradition. Moreover, the 19th century saw much violence in Ireland which inspired a poetry of sacrifice and a tradition of symbolic violence and death, indeed, an "eroticization of death". This chapter is important in showing the roots of Irish nationalism, of the peculiar Irish mindset regarding national independence. Moran has chosen the right material, the mythological sources of Irish nationalism and the poetic works which most eloquently evoked it.
Next Pearse's career as a journalist and school teacher were examined. Pearse was clearly talented as a writer, but was not a major literary figure. He was what might be termed a minor writer. Pearse wrote plays and short stories for children and nationalist articles, mainly on Gaelic language and culture. He found his true strength to be in speaking where he made his key contribution. Politically, Pearse was considered "naive" and "ignorant". Pearse's commitment to violence and death as redemptive acts transformed his thinking and vision for Irish nationalism. His vision became clear, unwavering, and committed. He gradually became accepted by the IRB, who were looking for someone who was articulate and single-mindedly committed to the cause of Irish independence. Pearse stated: "Ireland unfree shall never be at peace." The stage was now set for the Rising. Moran offers an analysis of why Pearse changed as he did. Pearse never married and had few close social contacts outside of his family. He thus had no object for his psychic energy. Thus, he sublimated his energy in Irish nationalism, and in the Rising. This material is important in showing the motivations behind Pearse's actions.
In the chapter on the Rising itself, Pearse's own writings and poetic works are quoted and examined to show the thought processes of Pearse just before the Rising. This is an excellent method of elucidating the motivations behind the Rising. Here, however, some of the weaknesses of the analysis emerge. For instance, who was Roger Casement and what was the relationship of Germany to the Irish independence movement? Was there a long history of German involvement, or was it only during the Great War, was it merely a sham or was a German invasion plausible? At this point, the broader political context of the Rising is not fully developed. Casement and the German involvement is only sketched out. What was Pearse's involvement with Casement if any? Here, a more in- depth political discussion is needed. Moreover, we are not told of the broader implications for the nationalist movement and its members? What happened to Clarke? What happened to the IRB and Sinn Fein?
The final chapter is on the European "revolt against reason" typified by the Great War itself. Moran explained that the Rising was not the result of a rational process, but resulted from "deep-seated psychological and emotional conflicts" which emerged after the failure of constitutional initiatives. The Rising was a "revolt against modernity", which England represented; it was a revolt against reason. At a time when thousands of Europeans were dying daily on the battlefields of the Somme, at Verdun, Pearse's sacrifice does not seem so inexplicable. It was an age when people actually believed that violence and death, which war is, would lead to national salvation and rebirth. It was a throwback to a much earlier time, to a mythic notion of the nation. It is noble and sweet to die for one's country. Pearse was not alone in seeking salvation through sacrifice and death. The entire age was consumed by the same desire.
The style of the narrative is flawless. The writing is lucid, clear, and uncluttered. Only what was needed is said and nothing more. There are no diversions. The narrative is direct and the flow is unrelenting and consistent throughout. The lucidity and clarity impart a tremendous power to the narrative. Because there are no diversions, there are no interruptions and the text is very readable. The book is well written and

well edited.

Mairin1978 wrote: »

A sense of humor? That's interesting. I always got the impression that Pearse was impervious to jokes. He took himself way too seriously.

sensibleken wrote: »

I dunno. I thought taking over a post office to get rid of british rule was pretty funny

i kid, i kid, quit throwing stuff already

Mairin1978 wrote: »

A sense of humor? That's interesting. I always got the impression that Pearse was impervious to jokes. He took himself way too seriously.

Mairin1978 wrote: »

I wasn't his idea to dress up in a dress. It was his evil big sister Wow-wow who did it to him (and Willie).

Mairin1978 wrote: »

Wow-wow was Pat's older sister Margaret. She was a very domineering presence in his life, always bending him to her will. I imagine, she did that to the boys when they were entering puberty (if Pearse had ever gone through it).

Mairin1978 wrote: »

Wow-wow was Pat's older sister Margaret. She was a very domineering presence in his life, always bending him to her will. I imagine, she did that to the boys when they were entering puberty (if Pearse had ever gone through it).

CDfm wrote: »

So there is no reference for it.I am not saying it did not happen but there are a lot of myths about Patrick Pearse.

On his older sister, in what way did she dominate him and play a significant role in his life as an adult ? Significant events ?

If anything, he dominated Willie ?

On Pearse -you have to reference because there is so much conjecture and speculation.

Morlar wrote: »

Please, not this hypothetical impossible to prove revisionist psychobabble ****e again.

Morlar wrote: »

I think you will have to do better than 'Some psychologists suggest' in order to prove that assertion. Otherwise it is revisionist drivel.

Morlar wrote: »

Can I ask is there a reason for the suspicions you raise here, that there was some kind of an ulterior motive in his relationship, or that it was somehow just for show ?

Mairin1978 wrote: »

If you have the documentation to negate everything that Moran and Dudley Edwards have suggested, by all means, be my guest and write a separate book. As far as I know, there are no sources on Pearse that haven't been tapped into.

CDfm wrote: »

But rumours are not facts and we already know on the basis of this thread alone that Dudley Edwards and probably Moran as well and many other biographers have missed out huge chunks of Patrick Pearses life -which are readily available.I found them.

Just cos its in a book does not make it true.