Monday 1 August 2016

Anniversaries and the Dangers of Fetishising the Past

If I scratch past the facade or, in most cases, my own ignorance, every city on the planet probably has a fascinating history. All the architecture, parks and monuments, are no doubt overflowing with tales of heroics, cowardice, war, peace, culture and art. Berlin however, has no facade, as a result of a series of historical events, Berlin is overflowing with architecture, parks and monuments that it has no choice but to wear in plain sight, exposed for all to see. It's odd when you think about it; the majority of European cities are filled with monuments to a glorious past - regardless of how glorious that past may actually have been. Berlin is filled with monuments to its darkest hours.



Front and centre of the city's tourist district sits the Brandenburg Gate, one of the few non-shame inducing monuments in the city. Yet, not fifty yards from this, one can find the sobering columns of the holocaust memorial, the muted black structure in memory of the homosexuals sent to the camps, and the fountain for the Roma. All of this, lies in plain sight of the Reichstag, with its resplendent glass dome.The dome is of course symbolic, it is a promise of accountability and transparency to the German people but it also reminds the members of the Reichstag that they do not need to look far to see were political folly can lead them. There are a generation of Germans who can never repay the debts that they carry. Yet it should be noted that we are three or four generations down the line from that them and the monuments show no sign of disappearing, being moved on or being replaced. Looking back and focusing on what it got wrong, would appear to be how Germany plans to continue its assessment of its past.

I grew up in the British education system; from primary through secondary to my eventual degree from Stirling University, my view of history was shaped by Britain's view of itself. Perhaps it's the relatively recent, victorious contributions to the two World Wars but there can't be many people who have more warped view of themselves historically than the Brits. Approximately 500,000 people never returned to the shores of the United Kingdom after World War II and over 1,000,0000 never made it back following the armistice of 1918. How is this celebrated? There is the sobering and beautiful tributes every November 11th but this is largely overshadowed by the endless parade of flag-waving, cheering and chants, "two world wars, one world cup!". It is easy and correct to point out that those who fell during the second world war were fighting a worthy battle but the same can never be said of those who fell during the first. Over 1,000,000 family members never came home because some aristocrats failed to properly grasp the changing realities of the preceding decades; quick, pass me my flag. 

We can take Britain's approach to the two world wars and pretty much apply it to all aspects of its history. Countries weren't invaded and colonised, they were discovered. That the sun never set on the Empire is something that was still chimed as reason for celebration even when I was in primary school, the ramifications of that red-coated presence were never explored. Thankfully though, that is changing; Britain is arguably leading the way in the revisionist history academics but it's possible it's come too late. Some people aren't quite ready to accept that the real war was in the east and even fewer are willing to accept that the invasion of Poland wasn't the quite the catalyst for Britain's entry to the war than has previously been claimed. Instead the image of "Great" Britain continues to be emphasised and celebrated but quite what justified the "Great" part, is very much open to interpretation. Spitfires are used on political flyers for the British National Party and refugees from war torn countries are described as "swarms". This from the country that once held off the Nazi jackboot and took in Jewish families fleeing oppression. No, apparently the "Great" part was just that they happened to be on the winning side.



This year Ireland celebrates the centenary of the 1916 rising; the execution of the leaders of this rising would be the catalyst for popular nationalism to take hold in Ireland. It's important that a country commemorates it's important anniversaries and for a country as young as Ireland it's a great opportunity to forge and reinforce some sense of national character. The truly important part though is that the centenary is explored fully, for it came with just as many negatives for the country as positives. 

One can list and debate the various events of history until the sun sets but consider these two points. Prior to the outbreak of World War I the Home Rule Party had secured a separate parliament in Dublin for the whole of Ireland. It would remain under British jurisdiction but it would have considerable autonomy; not unlike Scotland in the current union. This is obviously far from ideal but it would have been a stepping stone none the less. Importantly though it was a political victory won by Irishmen, it was not some begrudged gift from Westminster (although I imagine there were a good number who weren't happy about it) and it applied to the island as a whole. The second the rebels marched into the GPO, regardless of their intent, the island could not be united under a movement that would have them or those who followed in their lead at it's helm. As the first shells landed on O'Connell Street, the actions of the rebels had placed the gun front and centre of Irish politics, a position it would not yield for a long time. The second is the wording of their declaration, pronounced from the steps of the GPO on the first day of their ill-fated rising. Over the years a lot of attention has been given to the "cherishing of all the children of the nation equally", but we tend to skip over how they sought help in the rising from their "gallant allies in Europe". These "allies" who were mowing down hundreds of their fellow countrymen indiscriminately with machine guns in the fields of France.

Historical events and what they come to represent are very different things and for all I know, they should be. It was heartwarming and fantastic to see so many children so interested in the country's history. But if this momentum isn't built upon and developed then it risks becoming some lone firework on an otherwise uneventful night. For a true understanding of ourselves as Irish people, both north and south of the border we need to give the same time and attention to what would come next. The division of the country, the swapping of oppression from London, for oppression from Rome and most importantly, the Civil War of 1922 and 1923. We are as much who we are at our ugliest, as we are at our best. 



The alternative is what I'll call the original British model, wherein everything we've done is  great and we wind up the victim of our own follies. As an island we've done so much to be proud of, the term "punching above our weight" is such an understatement that it's use could be considered almost satire. Yet, how good can our great achievements be if we keep them next to our worst moments?

No comments:

Post a Comment