Upon the Irish Shore
BY BRIAN INGLIS `B LACKGUARD, bully, drunkard, liar,' Bernard Shaw wrote fifty-odd years ago, 'foulmouth, flatterer, beggar, backbiter, venal functionary, corrupt judge, envious friend, vindictive opponent, unparalleled political traitor: all these your Irishman may be. just as he may be a gentleman (a species extinct in England, and nobody a penny the worse); but he is never quite the hysterical, nonsense-crammed, fact- proof, truth-terrified, unballasted sport of all the bogey panics and all the silly enthusiasms that now calls itself "God's Englishman."' Characteristically Shaw was trying to puncture the then prevalent English misconception of the Irishman as an irresponsible, lovable, feckless, charming, indolent fellow, not to be taken seriously—except when, led astray by agitators or priests, he had to be disciplined. Shaw was wasting his ink. The stage-Irishman concept lingered here; and it lingers still. In many ways the English know less about Ireland than they did fifty years ago.
One reason for this ignorance is clear. Irish politicians no longer make pests of themselves in the Commons, and the only recent large-scale invasion of the Lords was for the Coronation, attended by a remarkable covey of backbogsmen. But there is another reason; less obvious. The Irish have changed. Even in appearance : Sir Harold Nicolson has described in the Spectator the way the Irish face has altered in his lifetime; what Frank O'Connor described as the Goldsmith upper-lip 'like a shutter,' once the caricaturist's standby, is now rarely seen. The Irish, too, are much more prosperous; UN statisticians say that they eat more per head than any other people in the world. And thirty-five years of self-government have transformed the social climate.
r. The English tourist, absorbed with rod or gun, may not notice the old order changing; and it is not surprising that the English at home are unaware of it. The newspapers tell them only of the eccentricities on the periphery of Irish life, tales of violence or bigotry or farce—raids on barracks, books banned, leprechauns, the Rape of Berthe Morisot. 'The Irish ! What can you expect!'
But the Irish are not like that. They have settled down to a stable, almost too stable, existence. The Nationalist flood has receded—leaving, it is true, a few hotheads flailing about, aping their forefathers and making nuisances of themselves, but carrying no weight in the public mind. The activities of the Censorship Board, ridiculous though they are, are hardly more ridiculous than the Lord Chamberlain's here. Of bigotry, the surprise is that there has been so little, considering the repressive record of the Protestant Ascendancy in Irish history; and when it shows up, it is often the fault (as Pcadar O'Donnell has put it) of a laity-ridden priesthood rather than a priest- ridden laity. The recent ban on the Observer may have been the work of timorous distributors, not of Church or State; and a nasty bit of lobbying by University College, Dublin, concerning State scholarships, appears to have arisen not out of bigotry, but from that rancorous academic envy which so often is to be found in Senior Common Rooms (even the Irish Catholic, not normally given to brooding over the wrongs of the Protestant minority, has felt called upon to protest about it).
To prevent the growth of this sort of unpleasantness, as Professor Williams suggests in his article, the need is for a More courageous public opinion in Ireland; and this would be assisted by a better-informed public opinion here• To think of the Irish as if they were still figures out of The Irish R.M. is like thinking of the English in terms pf Three Alen in a Boat. The comic element is dwindling, even among those politicians who used to take themselves too seriously, some to the extent of infuriating international gatherings with lectures—earning Ireland the nickname at Strasbourg of 'The cry-baby of the Western World.' For obvious reasons, the articles in 'this Spectator Irish number, though their intention is to disperse some of the fog, cannot provide a comprehensive survey. Some well-worn controversies are neglected; the future of the Irish language• for example, and of Partition—though it shOuld be realised that a notable change of heart has been taking place on the subject of North and South. The Irish Association, which for years has been striving to promote cultural, economic, and social relations between the two, at long last finds itself swim• ming with the tide; on both sides of the border suspicion and hostility are giving way to a recognition of the need for functional and social contacts.
On balance, too, these articles provide a city, rather than a country, survey—thereby reflecting recent trends. Economic development in Ireland since 1921 has been mainly in industry• Agriculture has languished : the total volume of farm produc- tion is barely higher now than in 1900; in spite of some co-operative ventures, marketing methods are prehistoric; exports, except of grass-fed livestock, are small.
Where the Irish have forged ahead, surprisingly, is in the running of State business enterprises. Nationalisation Was adopted there from economic necessity rather than from political dogma; the results have been heartening. One of the pioneers in the field of State corporations was the Electricity Supply Board; the Peat Board has now a world reputation in its field—as has Aer Lingus; and 'several other smaller State-sponsored industries have flourished alongside private enterprise, the two working together effectively to dispel the notion that the Irish are incorrigibly unbusinesslike. It is this Ireland—the Ireland looking outwards to British, US, and world markets for trade, for tourists, for readers, and for audiences—that these articles survey.
Previous page
