Republican News · Thursday 7 May 1998

[An Phoblacht]

Tiresome threesome's tome

Between War and Peace
The Political Future of Northern Ireland
By Bew, Patterson, Teague
Published by Lawrence and Wishart

I recently spoke to a group of European youth workers at the Sinn Fein Youth office in the Short Strand. The theme of the discussion was ``Sinn Fein, the peace process and young people'' At the close of the debate one French delegate commented on how optimistic I had been in my analysis of the present political situation, and despite some short term reservations, my certainty that the conflict would come to an end sooner rather than later.

The surprise of the delegate was partly if not wholly the result of who they had been speaking to a little earlier. They had the great misfortune to have visited Queen's University as their first stop, and the even greater misfortune to have had to listen to Paul Bew, of the Department of Politics.

Every time I read Bew's commentary on contemporary Irish politics I get the impression of a man who is rapidly losing his intelligence. From left wing critic of nationalist and republician political history, Bew, along with his colleagues Patterson and Gibbon, gave rise to the label Orange Marxism.

However, as the years have passed the Marxism has been eclipsed, and left only a hint of liberalism attached to the now standard unionism with a small ``u''.

Hardly surprising that Bew now rubs shoulders with the likes of Auther Aughey and Graham Gudgen in the infamous Unionist think tank, the Cadogan group. So it will come as no surprise either that Bew's most recent offering along with Henry Patterson and economist Paul Teague did absolutely nothing to change my cynical view of Belfast's most tiresome academics.

The book is bland, predictable, uninspiring and not worth the paper it's printed on. If you do happen to be given a copy of this book, by someone who doesn't like you very much, I advise you to return it to its authors with a voluntary contribution to their retirement fund. It is very rare that I would advise readers to avoid any publication no matter how much I didn't like it. But this book is the exception to the rule. You would honestly learn more by headbutting a shotput.

By Eoin O Broin


A bit of the Other


Book Review: Postmodernism and The Other: The New Imperialism of Western Culture by Ziauddin Sardar Published by Pluto Press.

Reading a paper on Shakespearean drama in some learned journal or other by the literary theorist Terence Hawkes recently, I came upon the classic phrase ``the alterity of the scopic field''. After pondering this for a while, it occurred on me that he what might actually mean was ``the weird things the audience can see happening on the stage''. `Alterity' and `scopic field', together with `othernesss' and `discontinuity', are key words in Post-Modernist theory, as is the concept of `identity'. The problem is that they can also seem like self-indulgent, elitist, incomprehensible, jargon.

This can alienate (another good post-modernist term) the reader who, like me in the case of the Terence Hawkes essay, is liable to sling the book across the room in preference to reading any further.

This is a shame because Post-Modernism has been the single most influential cultural theory over the past 30 years or so and is actually quite useful to Irish republicanism. For example, it holds that there are no universal truths, that moral values are relative, that the concept of `human nature' is a myth and that individuals and social groups construct identities for themselves contingent on their geographical, historical and economic place in the world.

`Other' is the term given by Post-Modernism to those who have historically been marginalised, dispossessed, demonised, disenfranchised, silenced. This includes colonised people, women, homosexuals and the impoverished, all of whom have traditionally been judged on how well - or how poorly - they conform to prevailing western values.

Although this book cannot resist falling into the jargon trap, is useful to those with an interest in cultural and literary theory and its applications. The first chapter gives a coherent breakdown of the basic tenets of Post-Modernism, charting its emergence as a reaction to Modernism but also showing its links with it.

At the risk of over-simplifying a complex philosophical and intellectual argument, where Sardar parts company with Post-Modernist theory, is in his contention that, in practice, it is actually the closely guarded preserve of the very same white, male, middle-class, European, intellectual elite whose values it claims to question and subvert. While they presume to

provide a voice for the Other, those Others, particularly the poor, are too busy simply trying to survive to care about historical contingency or identity. The very concept of the Other is now being used to reimpose another, but equally imperalist, set of western values on non-western, non-christrian cultures. It's an interesting thesis and worth the somewhat heavy-going reading involved. Incidentally, this is one of few books I have read on this subject which does not, to its eternal credit, pre-suppose a total understanding of the theory on the part of its readers. I recommend it particularly for cultural studies, history and English undergraduates.

BY FERN LANE


Chuckle by degrees

Wasting by degrees
By Conor Bowman
Published by Ashfield Press
Price: £9.99

This is an easy going little rites-of-passage yarn about a young Dublin lad, Dixton Larkin, who `escapes' to Cambridge University to avoid the twin banes of his life, a domineering profoundly Catholic aunt who he lives with and the curse of the drinking classes: work.

Although the theme is far from original and is plagued by thumbnail characterisation, Bowman has a relaxed style and an inventive turn of phrase which rescues this book from mediocrity.

There are a number of scenes which are real gems including the time that Larkin's Belfast friend, Johnny Pepper, tries to join the University's rifle association.

All in all, not a classic tale but certainly one to raise a few chuckles.

By Eoin O'Tuama


From Shelley to Dolly

Clone: The Road To Dolly And The Path Ahead
By Gina Kolata
Published by Penguin
Price £15.99

Gina Kolata is an unashamed and uncompromising advocate of the chemical and biotechnology industries. This would be fine if she worked as a lobbyist for corporate industry, but she doesn't. Kolata, we are told by her publicists, is an award winning science writer with the New York Times.

Those of you who see the mainstream media as advocates and apologists for our material world and the capitalists who construct it daily will not be concerned about this. Sadly not enough of us are that enlightened. Many of us believe the media stands for truth, honesty and justice, that it's role in society is to inform, educate and entertain, that its job is to report news and produce balanced essays and analyses.

Not only does the mainstream media not do this, it is first to condemn others who would take a biased, imbalanced, advocacy approach. The New York Times is such a publication. It stands on the high moral ground and cries wolf everytime the integrity of journalism is soiled by those who would present a view that does not reflect the wonder of our material world.

Kolata, who has worked for the New York Times for more than a decade, fits right in.

Now in collaboration with Penguin she has produced an apologist tome for the scientists who want to emulate Herr Frankenstein - disguising it as a scientific thriller. First the book, then the movie. Spielberg has probably already bought the rights, Crichton is probably doing the screenplay right now.

Isn't it strange though, how these mainstream publishers can find the funds and resources to publish a book like Clone: The Road to Dolly and the Path Ahead (which promotes without question the inexorable march of technology) but can't find the money to publish honest and factual books about the folly of our dependence on a materialist world. Are we being brainwashed, you ask? Wait for the movie!

What is also sad is that people will read this book and come to believe that science and technology is capable of anything - when in reality all it has really achieved throughout history is chaos and destruction. This is not Star Trek, this is terra firma. Mary Shelley said all there needed to be said about biotechnology in 1812. Kolata has added nothing new. A terrible waste of good trees. And Frankenstein is a lot more entertaining.

BY ROBERT ALLEN


Contents Page for this Issue
Reply to: Republican News