Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland: Recollections of the Future (Memory Politics and Transitional Justice) 3031476743, 9783031476747

Table of contents :
Preface
Acknowledgements
Contents
Abbreviations
1 Introduction Collective Remembering and the Power of Commemoration
Framing the Past in (Northern) Ireland
Conclusions
References
2 Engaging the Present Through the Past
Collective Memory and the Fall of a State
The Pliable Nature of Remembering and Forgetting
Legacy, Narratives and Collective Memory
Relevance to Northern Ireland
Hosting Recall and Memory
Making Sense of the Social and Political World
Remembering and the Burden of the Past
Conclusions
References
3 Identity, Commemoration, Remembering and Forgetting
Collective Memory and Historical Approaches
Narratives of Belonging
Stereotyping Memory
(Re)Presenting the Past
Commemoration and Memorialisation
Using Memory
Collective Memory and Social Identity
Memory Gaps and Constructed Amnesia
Using Collective Memory
Collective Memory in the Public Arena
Conclusions
References
4 The Active Use of Narratives in Collective Memory
(Auto)Biography and Individual Recall
Memories of the Present
Memories of the Future
The Social Context of Recall
Engaging Past Ghosts
Memory and Meaning
Using Collective Memory
Problematic Collective Memory
Symbolism and Commemoration
Making Sense of the Commemorative Past
Commemorative Discourses and Narratives
Living and Lived Memory
Framing and Transmitting Collective Memory
The Struggle for Memory Dominance
(Re)Imagining the Past
Conclusions
References
5 Imagined Communities and Community Imaginations
The Boundaries of Community
Mobilising Memory Through Community
Mobilising Community Through Memory
Memory and the Symbolic Community
Narrative Communities
Communities of Memory
Community and the Collective Past
Conflict Communities
Collective Memory as a Connector
Framing and Bonding Communities
Conclusions
References
6 Localised Narratives and the Construction of Community Myths
Identity Narratives of Loyalism and Republicanism
Aspirational Memories
Recalling and Retelling the Past
Using Myth and Memory: The Cú Chulainn Saga
Cú Chulainn in Republican Narratives
Cú Chulainn in Loyalist Narratives
Collective Memory and the Cú Chulainn Myth
Localised Narratives and Memories
Competing Narratives and Understandings
Republican Memories and Narratives
Loyalist Memorial
The Contest for Memories
Feeding Macro Narratives
Republican Collective Memory
Regrouping Republican Memories
Orange Narratives and Collective Memory
Conclusions
References
7 Popular Cultures, Memory Performance and Using Memory
Performing Memory
Inscribed Memory
Public Involvement in Memory
Popular Memory: Murals and the Past
Inscribing Popular Memory Through Performance
Commemoration Practices and Places
Identity Transmission Through Popular Culture
The Past in Song and Story
Formal Education and Collective Memory
Conclusions
References
8 Transnational Memories and Generational Change
Globalising Memory
Emigration and Expanding Memory
Ownership of Memories Beyond Ireland
Loyalism and Identity Abroad
Ireland’s Heritage and the Past
Using Memories Beyond Ireland
Controversial and Divided Memory
Remembering the Black and Tans
Recalling and Making Memories Through Museums
Agnostic and Official Museums
Committed Museums
Living Museums
Women Commemoration and Memory
Public Remembrance
Conclusions
References
9 Legacy, Victimhood and the Possibility of Change
Who Are the Victims?
The Morals of Remembering
Memory, Victimhood and Entitlement
Legacy of Conflict Memory
Ownership of Memories
Dealing With the Past
Drawing a Line Under the Past?
How Do Generations Remember?
Reformulating Generational Memory
What Do Generations Remember?
Post-Conflict Communities and Memory
Questioning Narratives
Conclusions
References
10 Collective Memory, Narrative, Politics and Identity in Northern Ireland: Some Conclusions
The Roles of Collective Memory and Narrative
The Legacy of Cultural Memory
Cultural Memory Wars
Everyday Collective Memories
Recalling the Future in Northern Ireland
References
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

MEMORY POLITICS AND TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE

Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland Recollections of the Future James W. McAuley

Memory Politics and Transitional Justice

Series Editors Jasna Dragovic-Soso, Goldsmiths University of London, London, UK Jelena Subotic, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA Tsveta Petrova, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Editorial Board Paige Arthur, New York University, New York, USA Alejandro Baer, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA Orli Fridman, Singidunum University, Belgrade, Serbia Carol Gluck, Columbia University, New York, USA Katherine Hite, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, USA Alexander Karn, Colgate University, Hamilton, USA Jan Kubik, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, USA Bronwyn Leebaw, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA Jan-Werner Müller, Princeton University, Princeton, USA Jeffrey Olick, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA Kathy L. Powers, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA Joanna Quinn, Western University, London, ON, Canada Jeremy Sarkin, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa Leslie Vinjamuri, SOAS University of London, London, UK Sarah E. Wagner, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

The interdisciplinary fields of Memory Studies and Transitional Justice have largely developed in parallel to one another despite both focusing on efforts of societies to confront and (re—)appropriate their past. While scholars working on memory have come mostly from historical, literary, sociological, or anthropological traditions, transitional justice has attracted primarily scholarship from political science and the law. This series bridges this divide: it promotes work that combines a deep understanding of the contexts that have allowed for injustice to occur with an analysis of how legacies of such injustice in political and historical memory influence contemporary projects of redress, acknowledgment, or new cycles of denial. The titles in the series are of interest not only to academics and students but also practitioners in the related fields. The Memory Politics and Transitional Justice series promotes critical dialogue among different theoretical and methodological approaches and among scholarship on different regions. The editors welcome submissions from a variety of disciplines—including political science, history, sociology, anthropology, and cultural studies—that confront critical questions at the intersection of memory politics and transitional justice in national, comparative, and global perspective. This series is indexed in Scopus. Memory Politics and Transitional Justice Book Series (Palgrave) Co-editors: Jasna Dragovic-Soso (Goldsmiths, University of London), Jelena Subotic (Georgia State University), Tsveta Petrova (Columbia University) Editorial Board Paige Arthur, New York University Center on International Cooperation Alejandro Baer, University of Minnesota Orli Fridman, Singidunum University Belgrade Carol Gluck, Columbia University Katherine Hite, Vassar College Alexander Karn, Colgate University Jan Kubik, Rutgers University and School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London Bronwyn Leebaw, University of California, Riverside Jan-Werner Müller, Princeton University Jeffrey Olick, University of Virginia Kathy L. Powers, University of New Mexico Joanna Quinn, Western University Jeremy Sarkin, University of South Africa Leslie Vinjamuri, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London Sarah E. Wagner, George Washington University

James W. McAuley

Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland Recollections of the Future

Revised and expanded for the English edition. 2021

James W. McAuley Emeritus Professor of Political Sociology and Irish Studies University of Huddersfield Huddersfield, UK

ISSN 2731-3840 ISSN 2731-3859 (electronic) Memory Politics and Transitional Justice ISBN 978-3-031-47674-7 ISBN 978-3-031-47675-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: The mural shown is by Ed Hicks (commissioned by Seedhead Arts) located on the Newtownards Road, Belfast This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Paper in this product is recyclable.

Preface

We both know what memories can bring They bring diamonds and rust. Joan Baez (from the album Diamonds and Rust )

For many years I have conducted interviews and held conversations, both for work and out of personal interest, with individuals and representatives of different political organisations and groupings in Northern Ireland. During these exchanges, I have heard many competing arguments and have been presented with often dramatically differing perspectives concerning the nature of politics and society. Two themes that have regularly emerged, however, surround how we should best understand the past and how collective memory is used in the construction and representation of both Self and group identity. How people engage collectively to understand the past has been a constant refrain in many of these interviews, alongside the ways people in which these understandings of history are used to formulate contemporary political responses to current issues. Some interviews have sought to deal directly with the experiences and memories at the individual level, but often they have inevitably brought to the fore the competing interpretations of a collective past upon which they draw. It was often to these collective memories to which people turned for guidance and explanations of broader social and political circumstances and events. This fortified a continuing curiosity on my part surrounding the differing ways in which people see their past, how v

vi

PREFACE

collective memory is produced and presented and the uses to which it is put. This book is an attempt to fulfil my curiosity (and hopefully the readers) about the roles played by memory in constructing politics and identity, through exploring in depth many of the issues touched on above. I wish to place on record my sincere thanks to all those who have shared their time, resources and thoughts with me over the years. As always, the blame for any weakness or omissions rests entirely with the author. Huddersfield, UK

James W. McAuley

Acknowledgements

why some people be mad at me sometimes they ask me to remember but they want me to remember their memories and i keep on remembering mine. Lucille Clifton (1936–2010)

I have never considered the production of a book to be a solitary affair. There are many people who deserve acknowledgement and my thanks for helping bring this to print. They range from those who have provided direct and obvious support, including publishers, reviewers and colleagues who have helped me formulate ideas, alongside others, who while largely lurking in the background, always seemed to appear when needed. Those in both groups have provided much succour and encouragement and my thanks to all for their assistance in whatever form it was given. My appreciation as always goes to those who offered amiable distractions during my time writing this book: to chat; to go for a walk; to consider the latest publication; join me in watching my beloved Huddersfield Town; to drink coffee; to consume lunch; or a pint as needed. Those involved are too numerous to mention by name but let me assure those concerned that all the diversions were most welcome and very much appreciated.

vii

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Much of this book was completed during the lockdown years of the COVID-19 pandemic, and sadly much of the above became extremely tangential to the everyday life of myself and everyone else at least in its face-to-face form. My thanks to all who kept in touch during this time. Like many others I discovered the wonders of Zoom, which became so central to the lives of many during this era. I used it for many things, to socialise, conduct lectures, attend work meetings and birthday parties, meet new family members and regrettably say farewell to others as it became embedded in everyday life. My sanity was kept reasonably intact by involvement in online quizzes. I especially wish to acknowledge the parts played by two very old friends, David Major and Philip McIlfatrick and my reacquaintance after several decades with Robert Kelly. We participated in regular quiz events, allowing me to fully display my lack of knowledge of the 1970s progressive music scene, although I do feel that I held my own on questions about the New Seekers and Hawkwind! Stephanie’s courtyard also became a highly enjoyable part of my life during this period and evenings spent there will last long in my memory, as will listening to Jonnie Walker on Sunday afternoons. In retrospect it was important to me to demonstrate there was life beyond the confines of the house and the screen. I consider myself very lucky that Colin Jackson and Alan McCully have been friends for over four decades, from undergraduates through to retirement! We have witnessed and sometimes participated in many of the events referenced in this book. I share very fond memories with them and our ability to recall and recant the past is a thing of splendour, even if regrettably such face-to-face occasions are all too few nowadays. Some of the stories we tell may in some vague incomprehensible way even connect to actual occurrences, although I continue to have my doubts, especially if they involve an oval-shaped ball on Saturday afternoons long, long ago. Graham Spencer, Neil Ferguson, Catarina Kinnvall, Paul NesbittLarking and Molly Andrews continue to stimulate my thinking and to make me laugh in equal measure. It is a wonderful combination and to be in their company is always good for the brain and the soul. I also wish to thank Máire Braniff, Tom Hennessey, Sophie Whiting and Jon Tonge for the collegiality they have displayed during our collective work in recent years. Most importantly thanks to all for the many enjoyable times along the way, long may we persist in shooting that poisoned arrow!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ix

Several colleagues at the University of Huddersfield also played their part, particularly Kirsty Thomson for all the help and support she has provided to me over many years, for which I offer my sincerest gratitude. Thanks also to Andy Mycock and a special mention to Pete Woodcock for helping with that form every year! My heartfelt gratitude goes to Shaun McDaid, Catherine McGlynn and Gráinne McMahon for their friendship and for brightening much of my day-to-day working life. Let’s remember the good times and that little bit of the Ramsden building that will be forever Ireland! We were finally overtaken by a higher education system that privileged KPIs and targets over tutelage and learning and a university management willing to concede principle and humanity to the values of neo-liberalism and the ravages of the bottom-line economics. Finally, for always keeping life interesting and worthwhile my heartfelt thanks go to Stephanie, Rowan and Charlotte, who have continued to provide sources of glorious distraction, bewilderment, encouragement and inspiration that they can barely imagine.

Contents

1

Introduction: Collective Remembering and the Power of Commemoration Framing the Past in (Northern) Ireland Conclusions References

1 11 18 18

2

Engaging the Present Through the Past Collective Memory and the Fall of a State The Pliable Nature of Remembering and Forgetting Legacy, Narratives and Collective Memory Relevance to Northern Ireland Hosting Recall and Memory Making Sense of the Social and Political World Remembering and the Burden of the Past Conclusions References

25 26 29 32 34 36 37 40 42 43

3

Identity, Commemoration, Remembering and Forgetting Collective Memory and Historical Approaches Narratives of Belonging Stereotyping Memory (Re)Presenting the Past Commemoration and Memorialisation Using Memory

49 52 53 56 57 58 60

xi

xii

CONTENTS

Collective Memory and Social Identity Memory Gaps and Constructed Amnesia Using Collective Memory Collective Memory in the Public Arena Conclusions References

62 64 65 67 68 69

4

The Active Use of Narratives in Collective Memory (Auto)Biography and Individual Recall Memories of the Present Memories of the Future The Social Context of Recall Engaging Past Ghosts Memory and Meaning Using Collective Memory Problematic Collective Memory Symbolism and Commemoration Making Sense of the Commemorative Past Commemorative Discourses and Narratives Living and Lived Memory Framing and Transmitting Collective Memory The Struggle for Memory Dominance (Re)Imagining the Past Conclusions References

77 78 83 84 85 87 88 90 91 92 93 95 96 98 99 101 103 104

5

Imagined Communities and Community Imaginations The Boundaries of Community Mobilising Memory Through Community Mobilising Community Through Memory Memory and the Symbolic Community Narrative Communities Communities of Memory Community and the Collective Past Conflict Communities Collective Memory as a Connector Framing and Bonding Communities Conclusions References

111 112 113 115 116 116 118 119 120 121 121 123 124

CONTENTS

6

7

8

xiii

Localised Narratives and the Construction of Community Myths Identity Narratives of Loyalism and Republicanism Aspirational Memories Recalling and Retelling the Past Using Myth and Memory: The Cú Chulainn Saga Cú Chulainn in Republican Narratives Cú Chulainn in Loyalist Narratives Collective Memory and the Cú Chulainn Myth Localised Narratives and Memories Competing Narratives and Understandings Republican Memories and Narratives Loyalist Memorial The Contest for Memories Feeding Macro Narratives Republican Collective Memory Regrouping Republican Memories Orange Narratives and Collective Memory Conclusions References

127 128 130 130 131 132 133 133 134 134 136 137 137 138 140 143 146 148 149

Popular Cultures, Memory Performance and Using Memory Performing Memory Inscribed Memory Public Involvement in Memory Popular Memory: Murals and the Past Inscribing Popular Memory Through Performance Commemoration Practices and Places Identity Transmission Through Popular Culture The Past in Song and Story Formal Education and Collective Memory Conclusions References

155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 162 163 165 165

Transnational Memories and Generational Change Globalising Memory Emigration and Expanding Memory Ownership of Memories Beyond Ireland Loyalism and Identity Abroad

171 173 173 175 176

xiv

CONTENTS

Ireland’s Heritage and the Past Using Memories Beyond Ireland Controversial and Divided Memory Remembering the Black and Tans Recalling and Making Memories Through Museums Agnostic and Official Museums Committed Museums Living Museums Women Commemoration and Memory Public Remembrance Conclusions References

177 178 180 180 181 182 182 184 185 186 186 187

9

Legacy, Victimhood and the Possibility of Change Who Are the Victims? The Morals of Remembering Memory, Victimhood and Entitlement Legacy of Conflict Memory Ownership of Memories Dealing With the Past Drawing a Line Under the Past? How Do Generations Remember? Reformulating Generational Memory What Do Generations Remember? Post-Conflict Communities and Memory Questioning Narratives Conclusions References

193 194 197 198 199 200 201 203 205 205 206 207 209 210 211

10

Collective Memory, Narrative, Politics and Identity in Northern Ireland: Some Conclusions The Roles of Collective Memory and Narrative The Legacy of Cultural Memory Cultural Memory Wars Everyday Collective Memories Recalling the Future in Northern Ireland References

217 220 221 222 223 224 226

Bibliography

229

Index

273

Abbreviations

ANZAC AP/RN BBC BLM CGP DUP EBHCS FICT GFA HTR IRA NDNA NICRA NUPRG OFDFM PIRA RIC RSF RUC SHA TUV UDA USSR UVF

Australian and New Zealand Army Corps An Phoblacht/Republican News British Broadcasting Corporation Black Lives Matter movement Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland Democratic Unionist Party East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition report Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement Healing Through Remembering Project/Report Irish Republican Army New Decade New Approach Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association New Ulster Political Research Group Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister Provisional Irish Republican Army Royal Irish Constabulary Republican Sinn Féin Royal Ulster Constabulary Stormont House Agreement Traditional Unionist Voice Ulster Defence Association Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Ulster Volunteer Force

xv

CHAPTER 1

Introduction Collective Remembering and the Power of Commemoration

Memories are not objective images of past perceptions, even less of a past reality. They are subjective, highly selective reconstructions, dependent on the situation in which they are recalled. Remembering is an act of assembling available data that takes place in the present. Versions of the past change with every recall, in accordance with the changed present situation. Astrid Erll (2011) Memory in Culture.

In his book, The Invention of Memory, Simon Loftus traces the history of his Irish family over some eight generations, from the sixteenth to the late twentieth century. In the opening chapter, he recounts how his interest in past events was initially sparked by the multitude of family tales and stories that were told to him as a child. These stories helped form a large personal scrapbook that was full of partial and one-sided memories, which were to provide a guiding narrative of his family’s involvement in some major political issues and events in Irish history. This narrative was formed through stories within which the memory of certain events was maintained and remembered, while other points of reference, sometimes carrying equal importance and were simply forgotten. One conclusion Loftus arrives at is that in Ireland the: ‘contrast between private and public memory is particularly acute in a country © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_1

1

2

J. W. MCAULEY

where all history rushes towards myth’. He highlights how and why some things are recorded and some forgotten, through: ‘the merging of fact with fiction’ (Loftus 2013: 2–3). In so doing he highlights the gaps that appear between individual experience, history and collective memory (Kenny 1999), some of which will be explored in this book. Although this book is a very different work from that of Loftus, it also seeks to interrogate the concept of memory and its application in Irish politics and society. It does so by examining the main social and political functions played by remembering and the narratives constructed around this. It will become clear that there is no simple or straightforward understanding of memory, remembering or recall. Rather, recollections of the past reveal differing forms of remembrance, memorialisation and commemoration that directly influence culture, structures and political direction, both in present-day society and in the future (Prager 2000). For the lives of many in Ireland, commemoration and memorialisation are common parts of life. Representations and the ways in which narratives of the past are used make a difference in the focus and direction of everyday life. This becomes even more relevant in post-conflict Northern Ireland, where the reproduction of the past and its related narratives carry significance for contemporary politics and society (Lundy and McGovern 2001; Walker 2000). Everyday references to the past abound in social narratives and references from history retain a centrality in people’s political consciousness and thinking often going to structure current political debates and directly influence the future (De Saint-Laurent 2017). It is possible to regard these narratives as: ‘a way of understanding one’s own and others’ actions’, organising and connecting events and ‘seeing the consequences of actions and events over time’ (Chase 2005: 656). Such narratives are clearly bounded by and intertwined with issues of collective memory. Everyday political disputes and quarrels often surround recall of the happenings of yesteryear and beliefs about how society should best deal with its past. Underlying these debates are competing perspectives surrounding the causes of conflict that go to structure many of the narratives surrounding Northern Ireland as a postconflict society. Much everyday discourse emerges from the politics of remembering and materialises, in part at least, in prolonged disagreements over the causes for conflict and the possibility of resolution. This is revisited and reworked through the various displays of public commemoration and shared memorialisation that feature widely throughout this book. This may result in reconciliation and a bringing

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

3

together of society, but most often it produces senses of the past that result in the reopening of barely healed wounds, engendering new forms of conflict, or in some cases the representation of very old grievances in new forms. In Northern Ireland, active recall of the past is most often used in ways that reinforce difference and divisions and sometimes animosity and enmity between groups holding different senses of belonging. Direct reference to what has gone before is often used to erect or to reinforce ethno-political, national or sectarian political frontiers. These boundaries are secured and reinforced by political narratives that are employed in a partial and jaundiced way, supporting one group’s interests to the disadvantage of others. In turn this creates the source for new confrontations surrounding the allocation of blame for previous events. Feelings of guilt, retribution and victimhood all manifest in the present. Competing interpretations of the past constantly remain with us and are used by many to allude to and assess the everyday politics of belonging. Belonging in this sense involves that which is experienced through both physical and symbolic boundaries and the actual narratives contained within. This sense of belonging reflects the attachment of the individual to social groups and collectives (Yuval-Davis 2004, 2006). The groupings that form are based on shared values and attitudes and find expression through emotional attachments to specific places and social practices. Such narratives of identity and belonging are connected candidly by recall and remembering, which manifest through commemoration and the social, emotional and political responses raised by the identification of key events in the past. It is at the interface between memory and identity where competing interpretations are found. This book explores how and to what extent these recollections and narratives of the past become socially significant for the present and how this is influenced by collective memory to influence and manoeuvre perspectives on the future. Why and how do individuals look towards certain memories and recalls of the past to structure contemporary understandings and guide the future? What determines that events deemed worthy of recall are often governed by those who are doing the remembering and the reasons they have for doing it? The display and performance of memory takes several forms, mostly involving highly specific spectacles of partial readings of history and incidents in the past.

4

J. W. MCAULEY

Remembering is used for different purposes by differing groups. Recall and remembering are utilised on the one hand, to emphasise, reinvigorate or develop old tensions and on the other, to reduce or downgrade existing social and political tensions. The former is most often done by interpreting and highlighting past grievances, or sometimes by creating points of reference that are commonly understood as a continuation of historical events. The latter functions through processes of forgetting or at least not bringing to the fore certain events from the past. This in turn often gives rise to political organisation and mobilisation motivated by the need to explicitly remember, or sometimes to forget, selective events in the past (Irwin-Zarecka 1994). Collective memory has a central role in configuring social identity and in giving expression to identifiable readings of the past. These views are frequently used as routine even superficial and banal points of everyday social orientation and political deployment (Skey and Antonsich 2017). They demand a much more nuanced and detailed approach to make their meaning fully understood. In considering this, the book focuses on how various forms of recall and remembering are encountered in the everyday setting and used to shape and give meaning to those living within republican and loyalist communities, giving rise to analogous narratives within these communities. This book sets out in some detail the role of collective memory and how republicans and loyalists use recall to construct divergent meanings of reality and past and present, resulting in differing senses of identity and belonging. It examines the narratives that arise, and the functions played by those processes of commemoration and memorialisation and in the interpretation and organisation of social and political life. It further considers, not just the shape and form of contemporary narratives, but also how these are used to orientate and mobilise various groupings and social movements in Northern Ireland. Examples are presented of how those who identify with republicanism loyalism use the past to explain the contemporary and sought-after futures. Although they do not feature as prominently in this book as some others, it is important not to lose sight of those drawing on differing frames of reference and memories beyond those of loyalists and republicans. Amongst these are those active in the women’s movement, the labour movement, those organising around LGBTQ+ issues and others orientating around the so-called centre ground of Northern Ireland’s politics. In exploring these competing uses of memory, we necessarily

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

5

engage with its different cultural formations and the use of narratives, texts, songs stories and commemorative monuments to produce, underpin and reinforce the competing interpretations of the past rooted in the memory cultures of Northern Irish society. These frame understandings of the past, producing narratives to explain, not only a group’s history, but also the essence of that collectives sense of being and belonging. Memory, or more accurately remembering, remains a crucial component in creating and replicating these views and in the reproduction of the narratives that transmit them. This includes not only the ways in which memory connects with everyday life and the present; but also, a deeper-rooted set of collective memories, connecting important events, which are recalled and commemorated to reinforce the existence of a specific group. All of this goes to emphasise continuity in directly linking the history of a person or family to a community or group, or even a nation. Importantly, such collective memories are not available in any ovenready form, providing a detailed, accurate and detailed recollection of historical events. Rather, past events are drawn in differing ways, often rather eclectically, to produce extremely partisan recall and reconstruct of the past in the present. People mostly remember or forget in the context of the wider social and political circumstances in which they find themselves. Moreover, recall and remembering are used in ways that try to bring influence on social issues, or support contemporary political demands, enforcing sectional interests. Considerations of the functions of collective memory have led to a growing awareness of its importance in understanding how society is organised and structured. This has seen a zealous expansion of interest and research in the area, resulting in what has become known as the memory boom. The appropriateness of the term remains open to some debate, but what is indisputable is the colossal expansion in literature and writings surrounding collective memory over the past thirty or so years (Berliner 2005; Simine 2013; Winter 2001, 2006). There is a wide range of theoretical approaches seeking to explain what collective memory is and its main functions. These are summarised by Páez et al. (2016) as: (a) helping to define the group and providing a sense of continuity over time; (b) defining group norms and values; (c) advancing cohesion amongst the group; (d) defining the aims and goals of the group in relation to others; (e) legitimising the standing and behaviour of the group;

6

J. W. MCAULEY

(f) mobilising the group and finally (g) affecting the psychological state of group members. Beyond notions of how and why such memories are constructed, there are also important deliberations surrounding how collective memories are congealed within identifiable cohorts and then passed on from one generation to the next. In considering this, the book will ponder on how collective memories are formed within certain communities in Northern Ireland. It then outlines and analyses how recall is used to create, or reinforce, group identities and political standpoints. This book utilises a multidisciplinary approach engaging with a broad matrix of approaches including social psychology, social anthropology and micro- and macrosociology (Cahill 1998; Roberts 2006) to consider the main roles played by collective memory in structuring and determining political values and social attitudes that manifest in the everyday (Brown 2012; Middleton and Brown 2005; Van Dyke and Alcock 2003). Commemoration plays a central part in these processes of memorialisation. One role in which it proves highly effective is in promoting cohesion and unity within a chosen group (Frost and Laing 2013; Kansteiner 2002; Zerubavel 1997, 2003). In exploring this the book also draws directly on the concepts of narrative (Andrews 2007; László 2008; Loseke 2019), framing (Goffman 1974; Benford and Snow 2000) and to some extent, content-analysis (Riessman 2008; Weaver 2007). This is used to explore how certain events collectively significant and shape understandings (Wagoner and Brescó 2016), cultural symbolism and representation involved (Liu and Hilton 2005), both of those within the group and in their relationships with others (see material in Friberg et al. 2007). Additionally, it is important to highlight the role played by memory actors and how their actions in the present give meaning to the past. Both loyalist and republican memory actors make that certain events are remembered in the everyday to be made meaningful, while others are pushed to the margins of recall or forgotten. Mostly, this process takes the form of reducing the complexities of the past to simple narratives, icons and images. These in turn are supported by representative narratives, symbolism and stories presented as common to the entire group (Bell 2003; Bodnar 1992; Middleton and Brown 2005; Roediger and Werstch 2008). Such narratives are meaningful in organising, structuring and interpreting social and political life (Andrews 1991, 2013; Andrews et al. 2000; Riessman 2008). These processes shape memory and identity through the recognition of a particular shared past.

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

7

Of crucial importance in generating meaning from the past is the involvement of memory agents and how they utilise interpretative and discursive practices (Strömbom 2013, 2014). People are never merely passive consumers, but by introducing people to a collective past that identifies and binds the group a valid and viable social identity is ensured. Memory is constantly made, remade and then harnessed for political purposes. The outcome of such negotiations holds major significance for the construction of narrative and the perpetuation of senses of identity (Bauman 2004). People reflect directly on these narratives of collective memory to explain their social circumstances and everyday life (Lawler 2008). This provides a powerful tool for naming and framing political relationships and to engage cultural networks with symbolism to project a: ‘socially articulated and socially maintained “reality of the past”’ (Irwin-Zarecka 1994: 54). How particular events are interpreted and how these understandings are passed on from generation to generation hold significance for the everyday lives of people in Northern Ireland. One illustration of this can be found in the emotional responses to identity and the expression of feelings of belonging that manifest across groups and collectives at community, or even national levels (Crawford et al. 1992). Many of the debates generated around collective memory carry emotional weight and hold political significance in the lives of individuals (Scheff 1994). Interpretations of collective memory are constantly drawn upon to justify personal political positions and to legitimise mobilisation social forces to support these interpretations. This becomes especially significant when we consider how such views are reproduced in subsequent generations and the level of willingness of the next generation to reaffirm and adopt the views of the previous. It goes without saying that those in contemporary age groups were not alive to participate, witness or even hear directly from those involved in the original events commemorated today. It is by drawing on collective memory that core ideas and knowledge are passed on. This often takes the form of deeply established and sometimes highly elaborate community stories and representations surrounding events such as the Battle of the Boyne in 1690, the rebellion of the United Irishmen in 1798, the Easter Rising of 1916 or the Battle of the Somme in that same year. The use of recall and remembering is also applicable to many happenings of the ‘Troubles’ (Graham and Whelan 2007). This term is now commonly used to describe the low-grade civil war in

8

J. W. MCAULEY

which Northern Ireland was embroiled between 1966 and 1998 during which time over 3600 people lost their lives and another 50,000 were injured. All this occurred in a region with an estimated population of 1.5 million and a land mass smaller than Yorkshire (Cairns and Darby 1998; McKittrick et al. 2007). An estimated 115,000 people lost a relative during the Troubles and few people, even if they rejected the legitimacy of those engaged in violence were unaffected by or did not have had some involvement in the Troubles, heard tales of happenings during this period, or be unaware of the place resulting narratives stories play in determining the nature of society in Northern Ireland. Stories are told and retold, offering a variety of perspectives and narratives. These do describe reality, nor is that their function, rather they are used to reinforce senses of belonging and expressions of identity performed to the audience (Brewer et al. 2000). Hence, narrations of the past involve identity building and through such processes: ‘individuals construct past events and actions in personal narratives to claim identities and construct lives’ (Riessman 1993: 2). What is learnt about such past events and people’s engagement with this learning remains of vital importance in the construction of contemporary identities and communities. The meaning of such events is readily transmitted across different cohorts and generations. As David Cooper explains, dates from the past are: ‘all too keenly remembered’ becoming the focus for everyday conversations and discussions as they are: ‘sharply etched into the consciousness of the people who live in Northern Ireland’ (Cooper 2001: 67). Distinct understandings of key events are expressed in the public arena through, for example, displays, posters, parades, murals and memorials all of which are designed and organised to commemorate chosen events and to convey political and social messages. Recall and remembering crisscross society, place and time. One example is found in parading (McQuaid 2017) and the public display of politicised symbolism that has been established in Irish society since at least the 1660s (Kelly 2000). The public display of memory, articulated, for example, by Orange Order parades, or by an Easter Rising commemoration march, function to directly present a unified narrative for the in-group (Brown 2017). As do the many memorials that include tributes to paramilitaries killed throughout the Troubles and various historical figures that are seen as central to the senses of identity in Ireland (Rolston 2010). Collective memory smooths out differing internal views in ways that go to simplify and flatten out competing interpretations by the wider

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

9

community, to present a viable and understandable story of past events. It is the form and detail of these presentations and the active performance of such events, that go to reinforce explanations and understandings by highlighting continuities and connections with what has gone before. Broad practices of recall and remembering can perform several crucial roles in continuing or mediating conflict in societies. As Brady Wagoner argues: ‘the past becomes a tool for creating change or stability as well as promoting or inhibiting conflicts’ (Wagoner 2014: 189). Recall and remembrance can reinforce differences, but the same social forces are also capable of highlighting similarities. Collective memory can galvanise and bring individuals together, providing the basis for peaceful relations; but it can also force groups apart, heightening frames tensions and divisions. As what follows demonstrates many are all too willing to formulate their political ideas and often base their actions by drawing on biased and narrowly formed understandings of what has gone before, most often to serve contemporary political goals and needs. Much of the spotlight of this book falls not only on how memory and collective memory are understood and presented, but how the perceptions of memory are used within the prevailing identity constructs of unionist/loyalist and nationalist/republican collectives. It is impossible for anyone to grow up or reside in Northern Ireland without being aware of much of the narrative and symbolism outlined above. That does not mean that all groupings draw on these dominant understandings and interpretations of the past in the same way or to the same extent. There are those whose construction of belonging and identity and their relationship with loyalism and unionism or nationalism or republicanism is largely oppositional. Examples of this can be found within those whose sense of belonging and self-identifying finds outlet as members of the gay community, as peace activists, with women’s groups or those involved in the trade union or green movements. It can also be found to some extent amongst those who associate with the political middle ground of politics in Northern Ireland. Social identity does not draw on exclusive classifications or singular categories but rather is an expression of simultaneously experienced feelings of belonging and collective expressions of the Self (Cairns, Lewis, Mumcu and Waddell 1988). Further, the projected memories of the group represent the recollections of individuals, expressed within a distinct social context and exerting influence across a range of different social and political settings. Hence, for Schudson: ‘there is no such thing

10

J. W. MCAULEY

as individual memory at all’ because all information that we draw on to explain the past is: ‘distributed across social institutions and cultural artifacts’ (Schudson 1995: 346–347). At times this means engagement with wider aspects involving the construction of collective identity concerning, for example, ethnicity, class, gender, nationality and sexuality, or the intersectionality between them (Crenshaw 2019). Collective identities and memories are shaped in part by the recognition of common experience and framed by expressions of a shared sense of cultural meaning and belonging. Jeffrey Olick suggests the following core relationships between culture and collective memory. The first rests on an individualistic perspective, which regards: ‘culture as a subjective category of meanings contained in people’s minds’. The second is a collectivist understanding, which sees: ‘culture as patterns of publicly available symbols objectified in society’ (Olick 1999: 336). The ability to project narratives of shared stories and experiences remains central to the development of the collective memory of a group, the cultural interpretation of which is readily apparent in the building of communities, culture and identity (Wagner-Pacifici and Schwartz 1991). One area explored in what follows is the various forms of the political and social movements resulting from these constructions and especially the differing functions and roles played by competing social representations of the past on senses of identity and belonging (Brewer 2001; Páez et al. 2016). This book further examines how memories of key events are constructed to develop an overall narrative that then passed on from one generation to the next. This presents collective encounters and knowledge as a core part of a group’s identity and solidifies their understandings of the past (Hobsbawm and Ranger 1983). Sometimes, the memorialisation and commemoration of events may take the form of performance (Spangler 2009), or a more physical form of remembrance, for example, through the production of monuments and memorials (Wertsch 2002). Working across both capacious and specific concepts this book explores how reconstructions of the past are in and find expression through, narratives and discourses of the past and how they bear directly on contemporary politics. It is through such reference points that groups both create and draw on knowledge that projects a form of knowledge that may be used to maintain cohesion within distinct community interpretations.

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

11

Framing the Past in (Northern) Ireland It was Maurice Halbwachs who first pointed out that: ‘no memory is possible outside frameworks used by people living in society to determine and retrieve their recollections’ (Halbwachs 1992: 43). In Northern Ireland, most recollections are drawn upon in ways that concede no accommodation to those who hold differing perspectives on the past and seek to preserve core senses of belonging. The state of Northern Ireland has been in existence for just over a century. During that time much of the past is contested and events and issues referenced in political narratives that long pre-date the existence of Northern Ireland itself. Further, there has been much questioning of the legitimacy of the state’s existence, drawing on competing versions of the past and conflicting political understandings of Ireland’s history. The following section is by no means meant to represent a potted history of Ireland, but rather to provide a very brief outline of some of the major events to which people often refer in their constructions of the past and which are in the cycle of memory construction. What follows provides an outline to some of the major events that are drawn upon as key points of reference by political and social movements in constructing their understanding of the past and the significance of how such events are remembered and commemorated. Any starting point chosen to review the past in Ireland is contentious and somewhat open to challenge, but I begin with some of the most significant events from the seventeenth century up to and including the partition of Ireland in 1921. The period following the Protestant Reformation saw several failed attempts by the English to bring Gaelic Catholic Ireland directly under their control. A new strategy was therefore devised by the English, involving the dispossession of the native Irish and colonisation of the country by settlers through what has become known as the ‘plantation’. Resistance by the native population was widespread if sometimes disorganised and uncoordinated. Rebellion became almost endemic in Irish society. This matrix of planter, Gael, colonist and colonised and power relationships both within and between the two islands largely determined the nature of politics and society within Ireland and between Ireland and Britain thereafter. The next two centuries provided many core events that have become reference points and are still seen to be worthy of relevance today. The seventeenth century witnessed a series of largely unsuccessful risings and

12

J. W. MCAULEY

rebellions by the dispossessed Irish. One insurrection in 1641 saw many of the settler population killed, around Drogheda and Portadown, providing a focal point of remembrance for some Protestants ever since and quickly establishing itself as a political legend and myth (Liechty and Clegg 2001). This phase of native risings and insurrections lasted for the best part of a decade, and it was only with the arrival of Oliver Cromwell in 1649 that Catholic resistance was brutally crushed. This (re)conquest of the native Irish was in turn to give many Catholics a basis for communal memories that justified their politics and proved every bit as strong and long-lasting, as those for Protestants of 1641 (Darcy 2020). With the accession of James II in 1685 and his more favourable and somewhat flexible attitude towards the Catholic Irish, the possibility for change arose. James was, however, quickly overthrown in the Glorious Revolution; a largely bloodless coup (outside Ireland) led by the Dutch Prince William and was exiled to France. Assured of European Catholic support James returned with an army to conquer Ireland before taking the English Crown. The forces of William and James cashed in a series of skirmishes before they met in full engagement in two of the great events of seventeenth-century Ireland; the Siege of Derry and the Battle of the Boyne. Remembrance and commemoration surrounding both the Siege of Derry and the Battle of the Boyne have become centrepieces for many from a Protestant/unionist background. The recall of these events providing cultural meaning for members of the Loyal Orders, (commonly, understood as the Orange Order, the Royal Black Preceptory and the Apprentice Boys of Derry) and others from a Protestant/Unionist/ British background, and all these organisations are deeply involved in the commemoration of these events present, for example, materially in the annual burning of a figure of Lundy, the Governor of Londonderry during the early stages of the Siege of Derry, or visually, in the banners carried by many Orange Order Lodges often representing various scenes from the past. There were many other events of political significance during the eighteenth century, not least of which, was the changed sense of identity amongst some Protestants, who had come to see themselves, not as colonists or representatives of an outpost of the English in Ireland, but as a key part of the Irish nation itself. The dynamics of the period climaxed in 1782 with legislative independence from England. Under the leadership of Henry Grattan Ireland now had an embryonic form of devolved

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

13

government with a recognised parliament in Ireland and England, albeit both under the authority of the Crown. Grattan’s Parliament proved too weak and too unrepresentative to bring about any real change. Although by the 1790s most of the existing penal laws had been repealed, the parliament never really got to grips with other issues, the most concerning of which involved the escalating sectarian violence in rural areas. This was becoming widespread and pervasive as Catholics, through organisations such as the Defenders and Protestants, by way of organisations such as the Peep O’Day Boys, coordinated self-defence and in support of common economic interests. It was in this context that witnessed the foundation in 1795 of the Orange Order at the height of overt sectarian division and increasing confrontation between Catholics and Protestants. The political motivation and social stimulus provided by the French Revolution were reflected in the development of the United Irish Society and the emergence of a radical vein in Irish politics. Formed in Belfast and led by Theobald Wolfe Tone, a Protestant Lawyer, the United Irishmen emphasised individual and political liberty for all and that Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter should unite to break the political link with England. In 1798 a rebellion designed to further these ideals saw sizable risings in parts of Wexford, Antrim and Down. Overall, the rising was badly planned, organised and heavily infiltrated by informers. Added to this the promised assistance from the French arrived too late to have any meaningful impact on events. Overall, the rebellion was a disaster, but the events surrounding the United Irishmen and the disillusionment brought about by the mistiming of the French have become central to narratives of republicanism. By the beginning of the nineteenth century Belfast was a rapidly expanding and industrialising city, drawing many people from its immediate hinterland of Ulster in search of employment. These migrants brought much of sectarianism that dictated social relationships in the rural areas of Ireland. Orange Order Parades, in particular, became a particular focus for widespread disorder between Catholics and Protestants. Belfast found itself subject to almost continual sectarian confrontations and rioting, resulting in increased physical separation and segregation between the communities as they sought internal reinforcement of their sense of social and political identity and protection against the Other. In subsequent years, politics became dominated by the issue of Home Rule for Ireland. Indeed, William Gladstone’s entire political tenure as

14

J. W. MCAULEY

British prime minister was persistently dogged by the issue. When Gladstone converted to the virtues of Home Rule it looked as if his major political foe, Charles Stewart Parnell would succeed in his main aims, but it was not to be. Just as in 1886 attempts to legislate for Home Rule failed in 1893; Gladstone’s Bill succeeded in winning support in the House of Commons but was rejected by the Lords. It was to be another twenty years before the politics of the situation overtly re-emerged, in the shape of a Third Home Rule Bill, by which time the political dynamics had changed considerably and Britain stood on the verge of a World War. Ulster opposition to Home Rule was organised and led by James Craig and Edward Carson. It took on a meaningful manifestation when on 28 September 1913, over half a million people signed a Solemn League and Covenant that pledged to resist Home Rule by all possible means. The movement was given further substance with the formation of the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) as unionists began to organise militarily against any perceived attempts to coerce them into breaking the link. When the UVF acquired some 20,000 operational weapons along with several million rounds of ammunition and with the Irish Volunteers also armed with weapons from the Kaiser’s Germany, the possibility of civil war began to seem real (Bowman 2007). The picture was dramatically altered by the outbreak of World War One. It saw the Third Home Rule Bill suspended for the duration and many nationalists joined the British Army (later this was something forgotten by many, sometimes unconsciously, sometimes deliberately so). While Irishmen joined in numbers it was the 36th Ulster Division that has proved most significant in terms of commemoration and the collective memory surrounding them has been brought to the fore of a section of Ulster loyalists and unionists. The Division was mainly comprised of former members of the UVF, and was essentially a Pals Brigade drawn from the tightly knit working-class Protestant districts of Belfast and its rural townlands. They saw action at the battle of the Somme, which lasted some five months (1 July–18 November 1916) during that time British forces suffered appalling losses (Macdonald 1983). On the first day of the battle, alone the Ulster Division lost some 2000 men, that have become central to loyalist memory (Graham and Shirlow 2002; McAuley 2016). Even though Grayson (2010) has provided convincing evidence to the contrary the populist memories and myths surrounding the Somme have fallen almost exclusively under the ownership of the Protestant/unionist/loyalist community. Indeed, the Somme

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

15

has become one of the most inscribed and profound set of memories held within Ulster loyalism (Officer 2001; Switzer 2007, 2013). The carnage sustained presented for the Empire has become a core foundation myth and a central part of the formation of Ulster/British identity (Officer and Walker 2003). These constructed memories of the sacrifice of the Ulster Division later undergoing a reconstruction and reinterpretation to provide the underlying ethos for the loyalist paramilitary group of the same name that emerged in 1966 (Brown 2007; Edwards 2021). Within three months of the Somme, Irish republicanism was also engaged in a series of events that were to provide its own sense of underpinning myth and provide the basis for a distinct sense of collective memory of the same year 1916. During Easter Week, a small coterie of armed rebels, led by Patrick Pearse and James Connolly, organised an uprising in Dublin. They claimed legitimacy for their actions from the past and directly through ‘Ireland’s dead generations’ (Foy and Barton 2011; McGarry 2011, 2016). The military action they undertook was quickly suppressed by overwhelming British forces, that dealt harshly with the leaders of the rebellion, most of whom were quickly executed. Public support for the rebellion was limited, but the subsequent treatment of prisoners involved in the rising appears to have turned many opinions in favour of the rebels. These political and social forces manifested in Sinn Féin’s emergence as a serious political and electoral entity. They swept to victory in the 1918 election, routing the opposition and winning around three-quarters of the seats, although it won little support in Ulster. Much to the consternation of unionists the parliament advanced by Sinn Féin met in January 1919. This was accompanied by a growing systematic attack on Crown forces, police officers and informers by the Irish Republican Army (IRA). The main British response took the form of direct suppression of the insurgents, mainly through the importation of a force of auxiliaries, formally the Auxiliary Division of the RIC (ADRIC), but which universally became known as the Black and Tans because of their uniform, a mixture of RIC (green) and British Army (tan) surplus. As they engaged the IRA in a series of direct confrontations their abrasive and callous treatment of the civilian population, marked by reprisals and counter-reprisals earned them a fearsome reputation and they increasingly became loathed by the Irish. This was yet another period that became deeply engrained in the popular memory and political consciousness of Irish republicanism.

16

J. W. MCAULEY

Lloyd George sought to bring about some movement by introducing the Government of Ireland Act 1920 designed to bring about two parliaments in the country, one in Southern Ireland and one in the North. Both institutions were to have equal powers, but Westminster was to keep responsibility for foreign affairs, taxation and defence. Importantly, the Northern state was to comprise only six of Ulster’s traditional nine counties. Northern unionists, largely initially sceptical and deeply suspicious of the prime minister’s intentions welcomed partition with open arms and set about organising the elections held in May 1921, in which they won 40 of the 52 seats available (the remainder taken by Nationalists and Sinn Féin). In June of that year, King George V travelled to Belfast for a state opening of the new parliament as the new state of Northern Ireland formally came into existence. But none of this held much sway with nationalists, who still strongly promoted their allegiance to the idea of an Irish Republic. The summer of 1922 ushered in another bloody phase in Ireland as civil war broke out between those forces that regarded the Anglo-Irish Treaty as a betrayal of the ideals of an Irish Republic and those pro-Treaty forces, who were prepared to accept the deal and were supportive of a Provisional government. The pro-Agreement forces eventually claimed victory but it was an unsatisfactory conclusion for many and largely brought about by a sense of fatigue after almost three years of civil war, rather than any ideological coming together of opposing political forces. The memories of events at this time were to structure politics in the Republic of Ireland for many years that followed the effects are still seen today. At its inception, the Irish Free State consisted of 26 counties with fiscal and domestic autonomy, but it retained Dominion status within the British Empire. Many placed their hope in that part of the treaty which provided for a Boundary Commission and the belief that the border could change in line with wider economic and social desires. It was four years before the Commission reported, by which time both Northern and Southern states stayed within the existing framework. Most nationalists and republicans, however, continued to believe that the existence of any Northern state would be short lived because of what they saw as its inherent contradictions and unstable social base, while many unionists also had major concerns about the validity of the new state. The unstable and volatile nature of both embryonic states was apparent. Political confrontation, bloodshed and inter-communal conflict

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

17

became the midwives to further division and partition. In the area that became Northern Ireland the two years beginning June 1920 saw 428 people killed and 1766 wounded. In 1922 alone, 232 were killed and around 1000 were wounded (Darby 1983). Such events forged the beginning of long-standing attitudes and memories that subsequently became inscribed within both communities. The importance of these inscribed collective memories to the structure of society was apparent on the eve of the conflict and subsequently became central in the ways in which events were understood and reacted to in many nationalist areas (Prince 2011). Over a century later, the collective memory of these events outlined above remains well formulated and intense, it still retains the ability to mobilise and structure responses in the two largest ideological blocs in Northern Ireland and on both sides of the Irish border. One outcome is the organisation of both formal and informal commemorations of the ‘decade of centenaries’ (Belfast City Council no date), some institutionalised, others at a more populist level. Tommy McKearney, who joined the Provisional IRA (PIRA), makes clear how the process of collective memory was established amongst sections of the nationalist population. In reference to the period of conflict emerging after 1968 he says, the: ‘1920s had been a particularly awful time when hundreds had been killed and the memory of those terrifying days was fixed in the mind of every Belfast Catholic’ (McKearney 2011: 47). As we shall see this mechanism of providing explanations of contemporary events by reference to the past is commonplace. There are many other examples of how apparitions of the past have stalked Ireland, so much so that the concepts of collective memory, social conflict and political division are often seen to be indivisible. John Darby’s phrase that: ‘dates are fixed like beacons in the folklore and mythology of Irishmen’ seems fitting (Darby 1983:13). Remembering, acts of remembrance and representations of the past have become crucial vehicles in both defining and reproducing identities and legitimising social and political divisions (Olick 1999). Although there are exceptions, people in Ireland largely recall past deeds as a means of carrying on long-standing conflicts and sometimes bitter animosities. The liberal Northern Irish Protestant, John Robb, who served as a member of the Seanad Éireann, makes clear the longevity of such notions, suggesting that memories such as the: ‘Flight of the Earls, the Cromwellian rampage, the Williamite wars of the seventeenth century became bitter wounds in the consciousness of the Catholic people’, while

18

J. W. MCAULEY

recalling the: ‘1641 Rising and the 1690 Jacobean threat’ brought about Protestant folk memories that still result in profound concerns for their survival in the future (Robb 1992: 65). Such collective memories are central in establishing and confirming senses of identity, belonging and community, forged by drawing on the events such as those outlined above, alongside many others. One way to regard collective memory is to see it as those: ‘representations of the past in the minds of members of a community that contribute to a community’s sense of identity’ (Manier and Hirst 2008: 253). Few of the events recalled prove controversial for the in-group, community or those seeking to build collective solidarity. The meaning and importance given to events, however, is often controversial and strongly contested by other groupings, whose sense of belonging is oppositional and equally strongly held (Reicher and Hopkins 2001: 131–150).

Conclusions This chapter has highlighted some of the major ways that collective memory interacts with and provides scaffolding for contemporary constructions of social and political identity in Northern Ireland. The material that follows is orientated and organised around the four central concepts that emerge, those of identity, narrative, memory and community. These form major sites of contention and competition and a focus through the engagement with some of the major understandings and perspectives regarding collective memory. Collective memory is used as a focal point to bring together those with broadly held beliefs, values and narratives. Through drawing on collective memories people locate and enhance core senses of Self and belonging. As we shall see, this demonstrates not just in how the past is recalled and remembered, but also the ways in which this gives meaning to the present and predictions for the future. The broader context of the ways in which collective memory is constructed and engaged with will be discussed in some detail in what follows.

References Andrews, M. (1991) Lifetimes of Commitment: Aging, Politics, Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

19

Andrews, M. (2007) Shaping History: Narratives of Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andrews, M. (2013) Narrative Imagination and Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Andrews, M., Squire, C. and Sclater, S. D. (2000) (Eds.) Lines of Narrative: Psychosocial Perspectives. London: Routledge. Bauman, Z. (2004) Identity. Cambridge: Polity. Bell, D. S. A. (2003) ‘Mythscapes, Memory, Mythology and National Identity’. British Journal of Sociology, 54 (1): 63–81. Benford, R. D. and Snow, D. A. (2000) ‘Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment’. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 611–639. Berliner, D. C. (2005) The Abuses of Memory: Reflections on the Memory Boom in Anthropology. Anthropological Quarterly, 78 (1): 197–211. Bodnar, J. (1992) Remaking America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bowman, T. (2007) Carson’s Army: The Ulster Volunteer Force. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Brewer, M. B. (2001) ‘Social Identities and Social Representations: A Question of Priority?’. In K. Deaux and G. Philogéne (Eds.) Representations of the Social. Oxford: Blackwell, 305–311. Brewer, M. B., Wendi L. G. and Cynthia L. P. (2000) ‘Social Exclusion and Selective Memory: How the Need to Belong Influences Memory for Social Events’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26: 483–96. Brown, K. (2007) ‘“Our Father Organisation”: The Cult of the Somme and the Unionist “Golden Age” in Modern Ulster Loyalist Commemoration’. The Round Table, 96 (393): 707–723. Brown, K. (2012) ‘“What Was It Like to Live through a Day”: Transitional Justice and the Memory of the Everyday in a Divided Society’. The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 6: 444–466. Brown, K. (2017) ‘Political Commemoration. The Inclusion Dynamics of “Partisan Commemoration”’. Political Settlements Programme Consortium, Research Briefing. Edinburgh: PSRP. Cahill, S. E. (1998) Inside Social Life: Readings in Sociological Psychology and Microsociology. Los Angeles, California: Roxbury Publishing. Cairns, E. and Darby, J. (1998) ‘The Conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, Consequences and Controls’. American Psychologist, 53 (7): 754–760. Cairns, E., Lewis, A., Mumcu, O. and Waddell, N. (1988) ‘Memories of Recent Ethnic Conflict and Their Relationship to Social Identity’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 4 (1): 13–22. Chase, S. E. (2005) ‘Narrative Inquiry: Multiple Lenses, Approaches, Voices’. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage, 651–679.

20

J. W. MCAULEY

Cooper, D. (2001) ‘On the Twelfth of July in the Morning ... Or the Man Who Mistook his Sash for a Hat’. Folk Music Journal, 8: 67–89. Crawford, J., Kippax, S., Onyx, J., Gault, U. and Benton, P. (1992) Emotion and Gender: Constructing Meaning from Memory. London: Sage. Crenshaw, K. (2019) On Intersectionality: Essential Writings. New York: The New Press. Darcy, E. (2020) ‘The Social Memory of Oliver Cromwell in Ireland, c.1660s– c.1730s’. In R. G. Martyn Bennett and S. Spurlock (Eds.) Cromwell and Ireland: New Perspectives. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Darby, J. (1983) ‘The Historical Background’. In Northern Ireland: The Background to the Conflict. Belfast: Appletree Press, 13–31. De Saint-Laurent, C. (2017) ‘Memory Acts: A Theory for the Study of Collective Memory in Everyday Life’. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 31 (2): 148– 162. Edwards, A. (2021) ‘The Ulster Volunteer Force and Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland’. In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 115–124. Erll, A. (2011) Memory in Culture (translated by Sara B. Young). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Foy, M. and Barton, B. (2011) The Easter Rising. London: History Press. Friberg, H., Nordin, I. R. and Pedersen, L. Y. (2007) (Eds.) Recovered Memory: Irish Representations of Past and Present. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Frost, W. and Laing, J. (2013) Commemorative Events: Memory, Identity, Conflict. London: Routledge. Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Graham, B. and Whelan, Y. (2007) ‘The Legacies of the Dead: commemorating the Troubles in Northern Ireland’. In Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24 (3): 476–495. Graham, B. and Shirlow, P. (2002) ‘The Battle of the Somme in Ulster Memory and Identity’. Political Geography, 21: 881–904. Grayson, R. S. (2010) Belfast Boys: How Unionists and Nationalists Fought and Died Together in the First World War. London: Bloomsbury. Halbwachs, M. (1992 [1941, 1952, 1925]) On Collective Memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hobsbawm, E. and Ranger, T. (1983) (Eds.) The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Irwin-Zarecka, I. (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

21

Kansteiner, W. (2002) ‘Finding Meaning in Memory: A Methodological Critique of Collective Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 41: 179–197. Kelly, J. (2000) ‘The Emergence of Political Parading, 1660–1800’. In T. G. Fraser (Ed.) The Irish Parading Tradition, 9–27. Kenny, M. G. (1999) ‘A Place for Memory: The Interface between Individual and Collective History’. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 41: 420–437. László, J. (2008) The Science of Stories: An Introduction to Narrative Psychology. London: Rotledge. Lawler, S. (2008) Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge: Polity. Liechty, J. and Clegg, C. (2001) Moving Beyond Sectarianism: Religion, Conflict and Recocilliation in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Columba Press. Liu, J. H. and Hilton, D. J. (2005) ‘How the Past Weighs on the Present: Social Representations of History and their Role in Identity Politics’. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44: 537–556. Loftus, S. (2013) The Invention of Memory. An Irish Family Scrapbook, 1560– 1934. London: Daunt Books. Loseke, D. R. (2019) Narrative Productions of Meanings: Exploring the Work of Stories in Social Life. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Lundy, P. and McGovern, M. (2001) ‘The Politics of Memory in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. Peace Review, 13 (1): 27–33. Macdonald, L. (1983) Somme. London: Michael Joseph. Manier, D. and Hirst, W. (2008) ‘A Cognitive Taxonomy of Collective Memories’. In A. Brill and A. Nunning (Eds.) Media and Cultural Memory. Berlin: de Gruyer, 253–262. McAuley, J. W. (2016) ‘Memory and Belonging in Ulster Loyalist Identity’. Irish Political Studies, 31 (1): 122–138. McGarry, F. (2011) Rebels. Voices from the Easter Rising. Dublin: Penguin Ireland. McGarry, F. (2016) The Rising: Ireland: Easter 1916. Oxford University Press. McKearney, T. (2011) The Provisional IRA. From Insurrection to Parliament. London: Pluto. McKittrick, D., Kelters, S. Feeney, B. Thornton, C. and McVea, D. (2007) Lost Lives. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing. McQuaid, S. D. (2017) ‘Parading Memory and Remembering Conflict: Collective Memory in Transition to Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 30: 23–41. Middleton, D. and Brown, S. D. (2005) The Social Psychology of Experience: Studies in Remembering and Forgetting. London: Sage. Officer, D. (2001) ‘“For God and For Ulster”: The Ulsterman on the Somme’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 160–183.

22

J. W. MCAULEY

Officer, D. and Walker, G. (2003) ‘Protestant Ulster: Ethno-History, Memory and Contemporary Prospects’. National Identities, 2 (3): 293–307. Olick, J. K. (1999) ‘Collective Memory: The Two Cultures’. Sociological Theory, 17: 333–348. Páez, D., Bobowik, M., De Guissmé, L., Liu, J. H., Licata, L. (2016) ‘Collective Memory and Social Representations of History’. In G. Lo Monaco, S. Delouvée and P. Rateu (Eds.) Social Representations: Theories, Methods and Applications. Brussels, Belgium: De Boeck, 539–552. Prager, J. (2000) Presenting the Past: Sociology and the Psychoanalysis of Misremembering. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Prince, S. (2011) ‘Narrative and the Start of the Northern Irish Troubles: Ireland Revolutionary Tradition in Comparative Perspective’. Journal of British Studies, 50 (4): 941–964. Reicher, S. and Hopkins, N. (2001) Self and Nation. London: Sage. Riessman, C. K. (1993) Narrative Analysis. London: Sage. Riessman, C. K. (2008) Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. London: Sage. Robb, J. (1992) ‘A Divided. Community: The Effect of Cultural Divisions’. In J. Lundy and A. Mac Póilin (Eds.) Styles of Belonging: The Cultural Identities of Ulster. Belfast: Lagan Press, 63–77. Roberts, B. (2006) Micro Social Theory. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Roediger, H. L. and Wertsch, J. V. (2008) ‘Creating a New Discipline of Memory Studies’. Memory Studies, 1 (1): 9–22. Rolston, B. (2010) ‘“Trying to Reach the Future through the Past”: Murals and Memory in Northern Ireland’. Crime and Culture, 6 (3): 285–307. Scheff, T. (1994) ‘Emotions and Identity: A Theory of Ethnic Nationalism’. In C. Cailoun (Ed.) Social Theory and the Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Schudson, M. (1995) ‘Dynamics of Distortion in Collective Memory’. In D. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion: How Minds, Brains and Societies Reconstruct the Past. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 346–364. Simine, S. A. (2013) ‘Memory Boom, Memory Wars and Memory Crises’. In Mediating Memory in the Museum: Trauma, Empathy, Nostalgia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Skey, M. and Antonsich, M. (2017) (Eds.) Everyday Nationhood: Theorising Culture, Identity and Belonging after Banal Nationalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Spangler, M. (2009) ‘Performing “the Troubles”: Murals and the Spectacle of Commemoration at Free Derry Corner’. In S. Brady and F. Walsh (Eds.) Crossroads: Performance Studies and Irish Culture. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 100–113. Strömbom, L. (2013) Israeli Identity, Thick Recognition and Conflict Transformation. Palgrave Macmillan.

1

INTRODUCTION COLLECTIVE REMEMBERING …

23

Strömbom, L. (2014) ‘Thick Recognition: Advancing Theory on Identity Change in Intractable Conflicts’. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 20 (1): 168–191. Switzer, C. (2007) Unionists and Great War Commemoration in the North of Ireland, 1914–1939. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Switzer, C. (2013) Ulster, Ireland and the Somme: War Memorials and Battlefield Pilgrimages. Dublin: The History Press Ireland. Van Dyke, R. and Alcock, S. (2003) ‘Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction’. In R. Van Dyke and S. Alcock (Eds.) Archaeologies of Memory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1–14. Wagner-Pacifici, R. and Schwartz, B. (1991) ‘The Vietnam Veteran’s Memory: Commemorating a Difficult Past’. The American Journal of Sociology, 97: 376–420. Wagoner, B. (2014) ‘A Sociocultural Approach to Peace and Conflict’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 20: 187–190. Wagoner, B. and Brescó, I. (2016) ‘Conflict and Memory: The Past in the Present’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22 (1): 3–4. Walker, B. (2000) Past and Present. History, Identity and Politics in Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Weaver, D. (2007) ‘Thought on Agenda Setting, Framing and Priming’. Journal of Communication, 57 (1): 142–147. Wertsch, J. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, J. (2001) ‘The Generation of Memory: Reflections on the “Memory Boom” in Contemporary Historical Studies’. Canadian Military History, 10 (3): 57–66. Winter J. (2006) ‘Notes on the Memory Boom’. In D. Bell (Ed.) Memory, Trauma and World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Yuval-Davis, N. (2004) ‘Borders, Boundaries and the Politics of Belonging’. In S. May, T. Modood and J. Squire (Eds.) Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 214–230. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006) ‘Belonging and the Politics of Belonging’. Patterns of Prejudice, 40 (3): 197–214. Zerubavel, E. (1997) ‘Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past’. Qualitative Sociology, 19 (3): 283–314. Zerubavel, E. (2003) Time Maps: Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

CHAPTER 2

Engaging the Present Through the Past

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived and dishonest - but the myth - persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the clichés of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. John F. Kennedy, Commencement Address at Yale University, 11 June 1962.

The weight of the above remarks by the US President John F. Kennedy made well over half a century ago, still resonates today. Interest in issues surrounding conflicting and deeply contested constructions of the past, the formation of long-standing cultural stories and their relevance to the political ideas and social structures of society in the present, are all but universal. Such concerns are far from restricted by time or space and are certainly not confined to Northern Ireland. This chapter considers the breadth of the social processes under review in the rest of the book. It sets collective memory within wider comparative frameworks, including processes of myth making and the use of collective memories by memory entrepreneurs, the state and others.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_2

25

26

J. W. MCAULEY

Collective Memory and the Fall of a State These processes stretch far beyond Ireland and the political memory of Irish events. A good illustration can be found in Orlando Figes’ book, The Whisperers (2008), which deals with the major social and political effects on individual and family life caused by the memory of the great Stalinist purges in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Part of the reason for Stalin’s administration of a campaign of physical and psychological terror, was the attempt by him and his closest supporters, to guarantee absolute power by eliminating anyone they believed capable of mounting a coherent opposition, or that in any way could be seen to question Stalin’s authority. The Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army, (the Red Army) and especially the secret police of the People’s Commissariat for State Security, and slightly later the Committee for State Security (KGB) were profoundly involved in quelling anyone defined by the state as a dissident. Many who expressed alternative social or political perspectives or offered alternative lifestyles found themselves branded as enemies of the state and sentenced to life in labour camps or were confined to state mental institutions. Underpinning these purges was the attempt to impose a specific understanding of history and the notion that a particular construction of the past was to have a direct bearing on the new reality of Soviet citizenship. One focus for Figes (2008, 2017) is not just the undeniable use of naked force and brutality by the Soviet state, but also the effects this had in imposing communist ideology on the formation of cultural boundaries and collective memory within the USSR. In a society structured by the legitimisation of official censorship, forgetting and the suppression of those elements not dovetailing with the dominant values of the regime, the patterns of socialisation revealed an induction into a highly secretive and intimate world. Consequently, the only safe means of transmitting counter values and memories was informally, often by way of anecdotes, gossip, jokes and subtle codes and ciphers at the localised level. All of these became essential to the construction and preservation of collective memories outside of that deemed legitimate by the state. As a result, most people were subdued in everyday life, talking only in hushed tones (the ‘whisperers’ in Figes’ title), their lives subjugated by fear and in direct apprehension of the actions of the state itself. This was mostly done to protect self or loved ones, in some cases, there was a personal advantage to be gained by

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

27

informing the authorities about individuals. Often this was actively acted upon by rank-and-file Communist Party members keen to enhance their credentials with the state and progress in the Party (Fitzpatrick 2000, 2015). The ideological outpourings and the political direction of the Soviet state became so ubiquitous and so authoritarian that many survived only by living double and often hidden lives (Rittersporn 1991). Few Soviet citizens were prepared to disobey or even be seen to overtly question the basic tenets of a political organisation projected by the state. The consequences of this were likely to be severe as the regime was reinforced and directly orientated through the functioning of the KGB, the military and other tools of the Party (Figes 2017; Lovell 2009). These organisations were central to exploiting and manoeuvring the past to their own end and that of the state by the reworking of memory and commemoration to the advantage of the system. Much of the formal history of the state was underpinned by the state education system (Garagozov 2008). The overbearing narrative and symbolic presentation of the past by the Soviet state found widespread expression in the numerous monuments and statues dedicated to those deemed to be heroes of Marxism and founders of the revolution, such as Karl Marx, Fredrick Engels, Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin. Common understandings of the past manifested in monuments and statues and were projected in huge realistic art representations of enthusiastic workers, posing in rigorously optimistic pictures of Soviet life. All were designed to indicate the commitment and willingness of the masses to meet the ideology and practical goals of the state and became a familiar part of the physical and social landscape. The representations of a communist state dedicated to the proletarian cause alongside a reciprocated, dedicated commitment on the part of workers to that same state proved central in its representations, both in projecting the face of Soviet communism to the world and in promoting the internal values of the USSR (Ponton 1994: 17–76; Shearman 2015). This dominant notion, that loyalty to class should have primacy over all other senses of identity became paramount (Pipes 2003). The physical representation of this chosen set of collective memories played a decisive part in the building and preservation of social identities, not just in the USSR but also across the Eastern bloc (Schopflin 1993). Although there was some degree of thawing upon Stalin’s death with the succession

28

J. W. MCAULEY

of Nikita Khrushchev, optimism was short lived. Any notion of political progression evaporated with the promotion of Leonid Brezhnev to leader in October 1964 and his doctrine and foreign policy that the Soviet Union should intervene, including militarily in all counties where socialist rule was seen to be under threat (Sakwa 2019). The situation changed dramatically in the early 1990s, as the internal reforms were introduced and guided by President Mikhail Gorbachev. These restructurings spiralled out of the state’s political and social control, eventually leading to the break-up and fall of the Soviet Union and those affiliated regimes across eastern Europe (Plokhy 2014). One consequence of this fall of empire was widespread altercations and confrontations over the ownership and form of the past, leading in many cases to a populist reinterpretation and the rewriting of previous events. This found expression in a variety of ways that ranged from street performances to the replacement of school history textbooks. In part, this concerned endeavours to reclaim the dominant communist views and discourses of the past and to recreate them, encompassing what Brossat et al. (1990) term regained memory. The major question facing those formerly under Soviet control was how to come to terms with the history of previous regime and the now largely rejected era by reconstructing and expressing collective memories of a new history and differing sense of the past (Crampton 1994; Hosking 1990). Most of the twenty-seven former communist states that fell under the remit of the USSR have witnessed the destruction of major commemorative monuments and the tearing down of memorial sites across the former Soviet domains in central and eastern Europe is commonplace (Deacon et al. 1992). This resulted in the draining away of political power of the pre-existing symbolism and meaning from many public depictions and symbols of Communism (Brundy 2013). Existing iconic murals, paintings and monuments were relegated, designated as having relevance only to the past and most often confined to the category of heritage (Forest and Johnson 2011). This was part of a broader process, whereby the myths, narratives and representations that dominated the communist era were steadily replaced by newer ones and the commemorations of the Communist era were abandoned and their memorials torn down or replaced. Ideologically, these including the promotion of democratic traditions, strong ideological and moral opposition to communism and broadly sought to promote the post-Soviet era (Tileag˘a 2018). Core understandings and projections

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

29

of the past were represented within the framework of a new history with the demonisation of the Communist system being paramount. At its core was a fundamental rewriting of collective memory and the deliberate elimination and forgetting of much of the previously existing symbolism of Communism. This reformulation of the past is used as the focus in constructing counter-narratives to new nations. An example was found in April 2015 when the Ukraine parliament outlawed the public display of all Soviet symbols and monuments, partly to marginalise Communist history from their society, reconstruct communal memories and bring to the fore that which had been deliberately forgotten under the Soviets. There are many other illustrations of the use of such symbolism, for example, in Memento Park in Hungary, Skopje 2014 Park in Macedonia, Grutas Park in Lithuania or Museum of the Great Patriotic War in Kyiv, the Museum of Terror in Budapest, the National Museum of Georgia in Tbilisi, or in the Polish state-sponsored Institute of National Remembrance, which is dedicated to preserving the memory of the losses experienced by Poles during World War II are all prime examples. Elsewhere, the states of Latvia and Estonia established ‘Museums of Soviet Occupation’; institutions aimed directly at framing the past within the framework of post-Communism and aimed at perpetuating the demonisation of the Soviet era from the history of those countries.

The Pliable Nature of Remembering and Forgetting The broad issues raised here surround the malleability of collective memory. In the case of Soviet Communism, it also brings to the fore the enforcement of a particular set of collective memories and forgetting (Burke 1989). This brought to the fore subsequent challenges and revisions to the collective memory of the Soviet era. The attempts to recover and reconstruct memories both within and beyond the Soviet regime are worthy of note. Memories are revived and revised, constructed and reconstructed and then rewritten and represented in these circumstances. Anna Reid reminds us that the words under the memorial to the siege of Leningrad read: ‘No one is forgotten, nothing is forgotten’ (Reid 2012: 406). Such a notion is highly questionable, especially considering that various groups attempt to control, and in many cases to rewrite, the past, seems an almost universal phenomenon in society. We must also

30

J. W. MCAULEY

consider therefore Kundera’s suggestion that: ‘the struggle against power is the struggle against forgetting’ (Kundera 1999: 3). Collective memories are capable not only of highlighting and bringing into sharp relief selected events but also of erasing (or at least dramatically downplaying) the significance of other events. Oppositional and minority groups often preserve their own memories of the past that can offer dramatically different accounts and stories to the dominant projections of history. It is the dominant group that most often retains the ability to determine what is remembered and thus embedded in mainstream ideas and narratives. The formation of counternarratives and their longevity has proved highly significant in mobilising popular opinion and in harnessing those views that lead to new, previously obscured, marginalised or forgotten senses of memory and identity. Both structural and cultural factors can precipitate changes in symbolism or modifications in existing images to reflect different emphasis on what is, or what is not, to be remembered. This re-reading and in many cases rewriting of history of heralds’ new forms of social consciousness and political action. The demise and break-up of the USSR led to the uncovering and re-emergence of deep-rooted sets of memories. In the Soviet case this dynamic revealed a double-edged process (Shearman 2015). On the one hand, aided and fortified processes of building a new civil society. On the other hand, many suppressed memories once released, highlight social variance and bring to the fore difference manifesting in conflicts revolving around ethnicity in, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova as deepening nationalist narratives reconstructed and reevaluated history through memory to present the reborn notions of nationhood (Kaufman 2001; Petersen 2002). There was widespread re-depiction and re-presentation of those national and ethnic groups memories that had been forced to repress under the Soviet system. Many of the newer nations were redefined in the context of creating a culture that looked West to try to establish social and cultural distance from the former Soviet Union and all that it stood for. This often meant (re)presenting ideas and images of nation and nationhood. Following its break-up widespread tensions, conflicts and sometimes violent confrontations manifested in the fragmentation and societal collapse across much of the former Soviet bloc (Fowkes 2002). The whole of eastern Europe became: ‘littered with ethnic groups who identify themselves with bordering nation states and oppose the authority within which they

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

31

reside’ (Hayes and McAllister 2013: 66). One clear example of this dissolution was found in Yugoslavia, which became embroiled in ethnic conflict which alongside various independence struggles, eventually precipitated the wars that led to the bloody breakup of the state (Lampe 1996; Thompson 1992). It is useful to consider the shifting position of commemoration in Soviet society in the broader context. Monuments erected to heroes of communism and those playing the most prominent of places were very much in vogue throughout the Soviet era. Other major events and individuals throughout that period were ignored, forgotten, maginalised, or even written out of history entirely. They could be true of even those of ultimate status in Soviet society. Thus, in 1961, following directions from the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the embalmed body of Stalin was removed from the mausoleum where his remains had rested and the Soviet population awoke to an edition of Pravda featuring a picture of the front of the building with the name of Stalin erased (Jones 2013). The recent past of post-Soviet Russia provides an able demonstration of how those memories previously fore fronted and resulting in largescale memorialisation and commemoration are far from constant or static. Rather, they are dependent on wider politics and circumstances. The politics of memory in the post-USSR era reflect, in part, the complexities surrounding the incompleteness of societal transformation. The struggle between competing social forces and those placing different values and emphasis on the importance of various historic dates in the past is clearly manifest in events of commemoration and memorialisation ever since. Post-Soviet societies offer clear examples of how new realities are constructed through reference to sets of memories, which are subsequently used to support and promote a new set of social or political values and realities within a given state. This reality, of course, includes the reremembering of some past events and the deliberate reconstruction of other memories. The above illustrates how memory can be understood as a living entity, defined by those processes which involve the construction of everyday social and political relationships, mediated through communal identities and expressed through distinct discourses and narratives. In part this involves the positive projection of a group’s memories and the undermining of others. That conflict over the ownership and interpretation of these memories continues. It was witnessed in events, at the end of 2021, for example,

32

J. W. MCAULEY

when Memorial an established research and human rights organisation was closed and dissolved, having been deemed to be an enemy of the Russian state. Memorial had concentrated on documenting the years of Soviet State terror and the names of those killed under Stalin’s reign and in some cases commemorating them using small plaques in the building where they had lived those people arrested and taken away. This provoked expressions of indignation from the Kremlin, which had set about promoting a new narrative of revisionist Russia history and a virtual amnesia concerning the Stalin years, expressed through the non-production and even destruction of memories of the period. The active involvement with constructions of the past and its memorialisation has relevance to existing power structures, political groupings and organisations. There are also examples of collectives and individuals engaged in the deliberate misrepresentation of aspects or gaps in understandings of the past. These are both consciously and unconsciously (re)created and directly linked to memorialisation and commemoration. The level of recall by both the individual and the group and practices of remembering and forgetting are deeply interwoven.

Legacy, Narratives and Collective Memory There are many other illustrations of this. Spanish society, for example, is still trying to deal with the legacy and collective memory of General Francisco Franco, over 40 years after his death. Franco led the nationalist side in the civil war of 1936–1939 in a struggle against the democratic forces of the republic, which left over half a million dead. Having established a far-right dictatorship, Franco oversaw a brutal regime of terror, underpinned by state control over the media and the formal education system (Mitchell 1982). But he could also call on populist support, especially from the religious and wealthy sections of society, alongside those who were ideologically committed and those siding most who simply had sided with the nationalist forces during the civil war (Tremlett 2021). The emotions arising from the years of the Franco dictatorship have cast extended shadows over Spanish society. While Germany and Italy underwent overt periods of denazification that questioned and challenged the existing collective memory formations, Spain never undertook such a process (Rose 2014). Indeed, it was not until the early 1980s, following an amnesty law pardoning all crimes carried out in the Franco-era, that Spanish society began to move away from his direct influence (Casanova

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

33

2016; Viejo-Rose 2011). In 2007 in the face of conservative opposition Spain passed its ‘Historical Memory’ law promoting the removal of street names, symbols and emblems of the Franco period (Bresco de Luna 2019). Attention has moved in recent years to the Basilica in the valley of the fallen where the remains of Franco were interned (Hepworth 2014). After many years of debate, conflict and legal challenge, in October 2019 Franco’s remains were exhumed in a private ceremony and reburied beside his late wife. The Basilica converted into one dedicated to memory and reconciliation, the then Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, suggesting that: ‘modern Spain is the product of forgiveness, but it can’t be the product of forgetfulness’ (BBC 2019). Both post-Soviet and post-Franco societies give clear indications of how changing political priorities and legitimacy can be attached directly to the commemoration of historical moments. Important also is how these are attached to the process of remembering and forgetting which will feature prominently in this book. A more recent example of the use of memory in formulating political ideas and dynamics can be found in the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. The origins of BLM rest as far back as 2013, but it came to prominence on the international stage in 2020, with growing worldwide protests and demonstrations following the murder of George Floyd by an on-duty Minnesota police officer. The event unleashed the foundations for a worldwide social movement calling for social justice and actively promoting alternative readings of the past, giving prominence to the experience of black people from the days of slavery onwards. One way in which BLM manifested, both the USA and the UK, was to focus on those memorial statues dedicated to people who had made their fortunes through the slave trade, or who had a part in the subsequent subjugation of black people. Many were torn down by protestors in mass demonstrations, for example, in the UK at a protest held in Bristol, where a statue of the seventeen-century slave trader Edward Colston was toppled, or in Richmond, Virginia, where a statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis met a similar fate. Part of the broad campaign directly challenged the politics of memory and memorialisation and questioned the links that had been constructed between the past and the present. In the struggle to dominate societal ideas, neither those forces demanding the recall of events, nor the eradication of others can claim total victory. Part of the contestation around BLM draws attention to how the collective memory of selected major

34

J. W. MCAULEY

events is constructed and passed on, not just through formal education and public discourse, but also through cultural artefacts and the commemoration of individuals and events in street names, public holidays and the like. It is through these means that later generations absorb, or reject, the dominant narrative which includes selected events that reinforce the knowledge of their everyday lives. It is these patterns of the passing on of collective memories, seen for example, in the BLM campaign seeking to disrupt and to counter those dominant narratives of the past that by in large exclude minority voices. Issues and debates surrounding the social construction of divisive representations of politics and society exist in many societies, including Northern Ireland. Ownership of the narratives surrounding and explaining events of the past has become core in developing both the consciousness and political motivation of individuals and groups (Novick 1999).

Relevance to Northern Ireland In Northern Ireland, many draw on a shared knowledge of the past, built up across different epochs of time and assembled through exposure to a consistent set of symbolism and constant set of narratives (Brown and Mac Ginty 2003; Bryan 2015; Bryan and Gillespie 2000; Bryan and McIntosh 2005). These narratives draw on collective remembering to structure meaning in the present, through (re)presentations of the past. The formation of competing understandings and the formulation of conflicting identities, which remain at the core of the problem. This rests on knowledge obtained and transferred across generations that are constantly narrated and articulated to give the group senses of belonging and place alongside feelings of continuity and consistency (Bryan et al. 2010). While much of the overt conflict ended with the Good Friday Agreement, it has largely been replaced by a fractious standoff surrounding identity politics and underpinned by a state of social and political distrust that sometimes manifests in sporadic episodes of political violence. The nature of conflict in Northern Irish society has undoubtedly changed and the site of conflict has moved away from a low-grade civil war, some have gone as far as to claim that this has been replaced by a partypolitical standoff and differing cultural interpretations underpinned by diametrically oppositional narratives of the past.

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

35

These dichotomous views and the replication of divisive understandings of the past structure the boundaries of the conflict itself, characterising contemporary political and social relations in Northern Ireland. Thus, there are continual debates surrounding how to account for the past and the best way to deal with the legacy of issues that arise. Underpinning these are questions as to who can legitimately represent the group, who can claim victimhood status and whether such people can be deemed as deserving of reparations. Rebecca Graff-McRae (2010) highlights the underlying assumptions of opposition in commemoration. As she points out, in Northern Ireland the commemoration of events important to maintaining a sense of identity and belonging in one community, most often reinforces divisions, leading to an increased sense of enmity and conflictual relationships with the Other. In part, this is determined by how people distinguish collective memory and then use it to frame and regulate politics, to construct a moral position and to remember and commemorate a divisive past. The processes involved in recall and remembering, alongside those of forgetting of the past and deliberate amnesia are far from straightforward (Connerton 2008; Obradovi´c 2017). Questions surrounding what and how earlier periods are depicted or symbolised and the ways in which events in the past are featured or neglected are central to this book. Explanations surrounding why and how certain events are readily recalled and recorded, while the remembering of other incidents is highly challenged, or seemingly deliberately forgotten, is central to much that follows. In seeking to provide answers to this and other questions, this book considers how the past is constructed, reconstructed, understood and commemorated and then looks at how ideas surrounding this are harnessed, mobilised and used in the present. Remembering fulfils several crucial social functions. Memory is capable of and may be used, to connecting and uniting people, whether it is through group recollections and stories of the past or those based at the individual or family level. Often this is engrained in the experiences of everyday life, but sometimes even grander recollections are reflected in the significance attached to happenings and notable events in the past.

36

J. W. MCAULEY

Hosting Recall and Memory People are effectively linked through collective memories and common understandings, which unify, or at least smooth out competing interpretations of the past. The significance of this determines the specific identity and representation of individuals within groups, community and even the nation. It follows, therefore, that this book also considers how and by whom such recollections are created and the means by which they are embedded and reproduced in sections of society. Various groups fulfil the role of memory hosts, including both state and non-state actors, memory entrepreneurs, family groupings, local communities and ethnic groups. These are often drawn upon and harnessed by memory hosts who actively promote distinct memories and their commemoration for their cause. Sense of memory is of course multi-layered, and it is possible to distinguish different levels of memory involving the taking of key events from individual or collective past memory and connecting such events directly to living events and the present through commemoration and the construction of myth. This provides the platform for both intergenerational and transnational transmission of these memories, within which commemoration plays a central role. In Northern Ireland (as elsewhere) commemoration events are: ‘staged so that society may remember and reflect upon past occurrences and their relationship to today’ (Frost and Laing 2013: 1). The active engagement with chosen events performs several functions, but primary amongst these is the ability to recognise people as carriers of memory and through which they actively make understandings of the past. These memory hosts have important roles to play in the shaping of commemorations, selecting and promoting those symbolic and semiotic resources deemed necessary. They are capable of prioritising and resourcing certain commemorative practices and directing commemorative narratives. Collective memory retains an ability to make events from a chosen past seem highly significant and directly connected to the present (Spiegel 2002). Such collective memories are promoted as worthy of securing and preserving by those self-identifying as loyalist or republican. Overall, fears of a weakened collective identity give rise to expressions of collective memory, most notably through memorial and commemorative practices. These often become the focus for the positive projections of the self-images of the group and the reinforcement of group identity. Collective memory draws on that part of the past which is deemed

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

37

to still be alive, or that which can be made live within the conscience of the group. It is memory hosts that facilitate the organisation, coordination and projection of memories within the group. Those who host memories are referred to in differing ways by various writers, including as memory workers (Irwin-Zarecka 1994), memory agents (VinitzkySeroussi 2002), commemorative agents (Schwartz and Schuman 2005) and moral entrepreneurs (Wagner-Pacifici and Schwartz 1991). All these contributions consider albeit in different ways how collective memories are continually and constantly fashioned, refashioned, constructed and reconstructed. There are further considerations around how memories and commemorative narratives are constructed, adjusted, fine-tuned and then embedded in the public sphere. Many memories become central reference points in individual lives and in collective remembering, constantly used to express a sense of identity and the collective values of the group. The production of memories and subsequently the struggle for their ownership remains core to the formation of social identity by constructing a coherent sense of meaning and belonging in the present. Memory is communicated through its presentation in easily accessible, commonplace and common-sense narratives. These narratives are often transmitted through recognisable symbolism to ensure coherence and commitment amongst the group. Such representations are found, for example, in official records, popular cultures, stories, sculptures, school curricula, badges, posters, theatrical presentations, street art and theatre, local history groups, community celebrations, public and private commemorations, the print and electronic media, film and DVD, blogs and other streaming media on the internet (see for example, material in Gillespie 2007; Murphy et al. 2001). Alongside other social media and public art, body tattoos, gravestones, murals, paintings, souvenirs and photographs and even death notices or obituaries, all go to communicate collective understandings of the past (Fowler 2007; Levinson 1998; Smyth, 2017; Viggiani 2014).

Making Sense of the Social and Political World The collective memories that emerge are reinforced by those narratives that actively build upon senses of identity and recall of what has gone before. These narratives are made usable, grounding the past in the lived experience, symbolism and representations. They substantiate bonds that

38

J. W. MCAULEY

are seen to exist across a common past, through to the present and often onwards towards an often-prescribed future. Continuous exposure to a limited range of narratives and symbolism allows individuals to make sense of issues and to reinforce the collective memory and identity of the group. People most easily recall that with which they are familiar, or perhaps more accurately that which is made familiar to them. This can find expression through both material objects and symbolism, seen for example, in the tradition of political wall murals, which mark an expression of both memory and as a territorial marker of belonging. As we have seen such symbolism, in enforcing and maintaining collective identity is most often displayed in the public arena, but it is not confined to that domain. Lucy Bryson and Clem McCartney (1994) cite Belinda Loftus when she identifies how symbolism can be found in various locations, for example: … in the framed copies of the proclamation of the Irish Republic at Easter 1916, the political posters, badges and greetings cards, the hand crafted emblems made by republican internees, the paintings, calendar photographs of wild Irish scenery, the illustrated books celebrating Ireland’s national identity and the highly emblematic covers used to enclose records of republican songs and traditional Irish music. (Bryson and McCartney 1994: 73)

Collective memory has a profound role in communities through building notions of Self and the Other and in highlighting understandings of continuity within that community. The sense of the collective within these communities is bonded through people finding what they see as an appropriate narrative (often that which is directly presented to them). Often this is accompanied by the reconstruction of what has gone before which is presented in a highly accessible and believable way. Such understandings connect and construct communities through common readings of the past, not only for the individual but also for the ensemble. This does not mean that the past is read in a uniform manner. People, of course, comprehend their everyday circumstances at different levels and in the context of diverse circumstances, they interpret and interact with the past in various ways. First, in the present, through the circumstances of everyday lives and how they perceive and interpret political and social issues; second, through the interactions with the past, both conceptually and materially and third, through their future visions, even if sometimes

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

39

this is an idealised notion, it is still capable of driving people in act and deed. It is important to realise that this process of remembering is not passive and that individuals are far from inactive or mere bystanders in these processes. In formulating distinctive senses of belonging, identity is made, constructed, reconstructed and reinforced through the continuous reformatting and representation of memories. Within this template of collective experiences, memories are made, remembered and often deliberately remade through the commemoration of events by individuals and groups. Certain occurrences or sequences of events are forgotten, subject to a form of collective amnesia because they do not fit with dominant readings of the contemporary issues of the day. Other events are brought to the fore, to be recalled in ways suiting contemporary social and political circumstances. Drawing on collective memories and symbolism in particular ways enables people to assemble and structure communal understandings and interpretations of the past. These form the basis for affiliations that are used to mutually interpret the social circumstances in which people find themselves that in turn reinforce the central elements of communal and political identity. Collective memory is also responsible for and rests upon, widely held shared values that go towards defining, connecting and promoting the social values and norms of the group (Pickering and Keightley 2013). This is by no means limited to individual experiences of the past, but rather includes representations symbolised by memorial and commemorative practices (Schwartz 1982). This incorporates an imagined and constructed past and the production of collective cultural memories and narratives, reflected through texts, images and commemorative monuments all designated to recall historical events. These memory narratives are always directly influenced by specific social and political agendas (Gillis 1994; Tint 2010). These processes are subject to a continuing struggle between competing narratives aimed at legitimising perspectives and actions in the present. These tussles have in part, been recognised in the attempt to formulate policy. Witness recent official reports, such as the New Decade New Approach (NDNA), the ‘Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition’ (FICT) report of December 2021, (following commitments made under the Stormont House and Fresh Start Agreements) and the establishment of a statutory Office of Identity and Cultural Expression have

40

J. W. MCAULEY

all to some extent focused on the major constructions of narrative and identity formation in Northern Ireland. While understandings of the past can and do, vary, some events are always given more prominence than others. Sometimes details of the past are altered to suit present political demands and stabilise senses of identity. These are transmitted by easily understood versions of the past conveying complex narratives in easily understood ways. Thus, certain collective recollections have come to the fore in the so-called decade of commemorations in Ireland, including the signing of the Ulster Covenant; the formation of the UVF; the Dublin Lockout; the foundation of the Irish Volunteers; the First World War; the Easter Rising; the formation of the First Dáil (the national representative Assembly); the War of Independence; the signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty; the partition of Ireland; the rise of the women’s suffrage movement in Ireland and the founding of the Northern Ireland parliament and the Irish Free State. This sequence of events incorporates a series of highly significant political, social and culturally noteworthy dates. Over a century on, after several periods of physical confrontations and most recently following a partially successful peace process, the political future of Northern Ireland remains challenged resting on different views and contested narratives of the past. Michael D. Higgins, the then President of Ireland, suggested that everyone in Ireland is ensnared by its collective past (Belfast Telegraph 9 March 2021). Much of this construction of the past rests in the hands of those who take responsibility for interpreting the past events and harnessing the political and social forces mobilised by competing memories of Ireland’s often vicious and divided past (Higgins 2016).

Remembering and the Burden of the Past This is propagated and elongated by the professed need to commemorate and remember the past, culminating in the characterisation by some of Irish society as now one being afflicted with ‘commemoration fever’ (News Letter 21 November 2021). This theme is taken up by Máire Braniff and Sarah McDowell (2012) who suggest that in the current period, Northern Irish politics and society are beginning to: ‘choke under the burden of its past’. This point is broadly supported by the journalist Henry McDonald in claiming that:

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

41

A spectre is haunting Northern Ireland. The spectre of memorialism. The ghosts of the Troubles seem to appear around every corner and at every mini-memorial garden in cockpit areas such as north and west Belfast.

He continues: The memorials dotted around the Falls, Shankill, Shore and Andersonstown Road are dedicated solely to masked men and women, toting big guns or standing solemnly to attention. The paramilitary fallen have become immortalised in commemorative plaques on the walls near where they were gunned down or captured. And there is hardly a week without some commemoration, large and small, involving middle- to late- aged greying men who gather to remember some dead comrade or other. (McDonald 2004)

One way that these memories are used is to encompass the lived experience of many. This often features direct and active contestation both within and between different collectives for ownership of the past. What follows focuses primarily (though not exclusively) on the major collectives of loyalism and republicanism that express their lived identities through different readings and projections of the past. In so doing it will highlight the resultant senses of belonging, alongside the internal differences, political stances and expectations for the future for those identifying with these creeds. While collective remembering always involves personal recollections and the recall of experiences of individuals, it also involves more than this. People are positioned and bonded within groups and by a common culture and sense of identity. Moreover, this identity is expressed through distinct narratives and, in particular, the forms of recall and symbolism employed to give an understanding of the past. Much of the subsequent material in this book considers the ownership of memory and how these memories are made living and real to people. It also considers the shifting social and political backgrounds and the competing definitions of identity that arise around victims and victimhood and the ongoing challenges to the ownership of commemorating the past. Collective memories do not act as some form of a prophylactic, preserving an accurate recall of bygone events and actions. Rather, they represent various understandings and interpretations of the past, which are always subject to competing understandings and current interpretations. These adopt political symbolism and frameworks central to divisive

42

J. W. MCAULEY

interpretations that are mobilised and presented to meet contemporary demands. Collective memory is always constructed in relation to other individuals, groups, collectives and the social relationships between them. Set alongside constant exposure to narratives of the past, as well as to highly visible physical manifestations of commemoration, there are a multitude of ways of everyday ways that people across Northern Ireland are reminded of community histories and dominant communal interpretations of events. In recognising the importance of collective memory and its centrality to wider social and political processes, Jeffrey Olick highlights four major weaknesses in most existing studies of collective memory, these are that many treat: memory as singular (every society has one collective memory, the collective memory of the group), as mimetic (either memory directly represents the past or it is a fiction deployed for present purposes), as independent of other social processes (either memory causes other variables or is caused by them) and, most important, as a tangible thing (the memory) rather than as a process (remembering). (Olick 2007: 5)

Conclusions Contemporary Northern Ireland is characterised, some would say plagued, by the unsettling and seemingly relentless presence of the past. As one well-known journalist put it almost all are living with ghosts. He further described Northern Ireland as a society that: ‘remembers everything and that repeats too much’ (Rowan 2022). This book seeks to engage with the collective nature of that remembering examining how these memories are interpreted and used. Many people in Northern Ireland cherish and cultivate deeply held and exclusive views of their past that draw on memory narratives to answer important questions in their life and for the community to which they belong. Many of these questions concern what people and communities recall and what they don’t; why some individuals remember events from yesteryear in detail, even if they haven’t directly experienced them and yet forget other events in which they may have been involved, are core to understanding senses of belonging and identity. Memory actors invest resources in promoting and reinforcing the recall of sets of memories and

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

43

readings of the past that are often central in the construction of political perspectives. This chapter outlined some examples of how collective memory has been harnessed and used by different groups in various societies. These range from the construction of group and national senses of identity to those of local and community-based groups. Witness the rise of the BLM movement, or societal or political changes that have resulted in dramatically changed attitudes to the past experienced in post-communist countries, or Spain as well as Northern Ireland. These provide clear evidence that remembering, far from being an individual act is guided and framed by the communal. Political power and context can directly influence the form and content of collective memories and symbolism presented through commemoration. The remainder of the book considers how these manifests in Northern Irish society and beyond.

References BBC News. (2019) ‘Franco Exhumation: Spanish Dictator’s Remains Moved’. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50164806; accessed 22 July. Braniff, M., McDowell, S. and Byrne, J. (2012) ‘Violence, Space and Memory in the New Northern Ireland’. Open Democracy, 14 December. Bresco de Luna, I. (2019) ‘Between the Unbearable Weight and Lightness of the Past. Banal Silence in Spain’s Post-dictatorship Memory Politics’. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 53 (1): 44–62. Brossat, A., Combe, S., Potel, J. and Szurek, J. (1990) ‘Introduction’. In A. Brossat, S. Combe, J. Potel and J. Szurek (Eds.) A I’ Est: la mémoire retrouvée. Paris: La Decouverte, 11–35. Brown, K. and Mac Ginty, R. (2003) ‘Public Attitudes toward Partisan and Neutral Symbols in Post-agreement Northern Ireland’. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 10 (1): 83–108. Brundy, Y. M. (2013) ‘Myths and National Identity Choices in Post-communist Russia’. In G. Bouchard (Ed.) National Myths: Constructed Pasts, Contested Presents. London: Routledge. Bryan, D. (2015) ‘Parades, Flags, Carnivals and Riots: Space, Contestation and Transformation in Northern Ireland’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 21 (4): 565–573. Bryan, D. and Gillespie, G. (2000) Transforming Conflict: Flags and Emblems. Institute of Irish Studies, Queen’s University, Belfast.

44

J. W. MCAULEY

Bryan, D. and McIntosh, G. (2005) ‘Symbols and Identity in “New” Northern Ireland’. In Paul Carmichael et al (Eds.) Devolution and Constitutional Change in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Bryan, D., Stevenson C., Gillespie G. and Bell, J. (2010) Public Display of Flags and Emblems in Northern Ireland 2006–2009. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Bryson, L. and McCartney, C. (1994) Clashing Symbols. A Report on the Use of Flags, Anthems and Other National Symbols in Northern Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: The Institute of Irish Studies. Burke, P. (1989) ‘History as Social Memory’. In T. Butler (Ed.) Memory: History, Culture and the Mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Casanova, J. (2016) ‘Disremembering Francoism: What is at Stake in Spain’s Memory Wars?’. In H. Graham (Ed.) Interrogating Francoism: History and Dictatorship in Twentieth-Century Spain. London: Bloomsbury, 203–222. Connerton, P. (2008) ‘Seven Types of Forgetting’. Memory Studies 1 (1): 59–71. Crampton, R. J. (1994) Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century—And after. London: Routledge. Deacon, B., Castle-Kanerova, M., Manning, N., Millard, F., Orosz, E., Szalai, J. and Vidinova, A. (1992) The New Eastern Europe: Social Policy, Past, Present and Future. London: Sage. Figes, O. (2008) The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin’s Russia. London: Penguin. Figes, O. (2017) A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution—Centenary Edition. London: Bodley Head. Fitzpatrick, S. (2000) Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fitzpatrick, S. (2015) Stalin’s Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Forest, B. and Johnson, J (2011) ‘Monumental Politics: Regime Type and Public Memory in Post-communist States’. Post-Soviet Affairs, 27 (3): 269–288. Fowkes, B. (2002) Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-communist World. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Fowler, B. (2007) The Obituary as Collective Memory. London: Routledge. Frost, W. and Laing, J. (2013) Commemorative Events: Memory, Identity, Conflict. London: Routledge. Garagozov, R. (2008) ‘Characteristics of Collective Memory, Ethnic Conflicts, Historiography and the “Politics of Memory”: Characteristics of Historical Accounts and “Forms” of Collective Memory’. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 46 (2): 58–95. Gillespie, G. (2007) Troubled Images. The Northern Ireland Troubles and Peace Process 1968–2007. Newtownards: Colourpoint Books.

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

45

Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Graff-McRae, R. (2010) Remembering and Forgetting 1916: Commemoration and Conflict in Post-peace Process Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Hayes, B. C. and McAllister, I. (2013) Conflict to Peace: Politics and Society in Northern Ireland Over Half a Century. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Hepworth, A. (2014) ‘Site of Memory and Dismemory: The Valley of the Fallen in Spain’. Journal of Genocide Research, 16 (4): 463–485. Higgins, M. D. (2016) When Ideas Matter. Speeches for an Ethical Republic. London: Head of Zeus. Hosking, G. (1990) The Awakening of the Soviet Union. Cambridge MA: Mandarin. Irwin-Zarecka, I. (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Jones, P. (2013) Myth, Memory, Trauma: Rethinking the Stalinist Past in the Soviet Union, 1953–1970. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. Kaufman, S. J. (2001) Modern Hatreds. The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Kundera, M. (1999) The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. London: Harper Collins. Lampe, J. R. (1996) Yugoslavia as History: Twice there was a Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Levinson, S. (1998) Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Lovell, S. (2009) The Soviet Union: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McDonald, H. (2004) ‘Remember the Horrors’. The Guardian, 22 August. Mitchell, D. (1982) The Spanish Civil War. London: Granada. Murphy, Y. et al (2001) (Eds.) Troubled Images: Posters and Images of the Northern Ireland Conflict from the Linen Hall Library Belfast. Belfast: Linen Hall Library. Novick, P. 1999. The Holocaust in American Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Obradovi´c, S. (2017) ‘Whose Memory and Why?: A Commentary on Power and the Construction of Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 208–216. Olick, J. K. (2007) The Politics of Regret: On Collective Memory and Historical Responsibility. London: Routledge. Petersen, R. D. (2002) Understanding Ethnic Violence: Fear, Hatred and Resentment in Twentieth-Century Eastern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

46

J. W. MCAULEY

Pickering, M. and Keightley. (2013) ‘Communities of Memory and the Problem of Transmission’. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (1): 115–131. Pipes, R. (2003) Communism: A History of the Intellectual and Political Movement. London: Phoenix Press. Plokhy, S. (2014) The Last Empire: The Final Days of the Soviet Union. London: Oneworld Publications. Ponton, G. (1994) The Soviet Era. Soviet Politics from Lenin to Yeltsin. Oxford: Blackwell. Rainey, M. (2022) ‘Widespread Support for Dame Arlene Foster after “Up the Ra” Selfie Incident’. Belfast News Letter, 21 November. Reid, A. (2012) Leningrad: Tragedy of a City Under Siege, 1941–1944. London: Bloomsbury. Rittersporn, G. (1991) Stalinist Simplifications and Soviet Complications. London: Harwood Academic. Rose, D. V. (2014) Reconstructing Spain: Cultural Heritage and Memory after Civil War. London: Sussex Academic Press. Rowan, B. (2022) Living with Ghosts: The Inside Story From a ‘Troubles’ Mind. Newbridge: Merrion Press. Sakwa, R. (2019) ‘Politics in Russia’. In R. Sakwa, E. Henry Hale and S. White (Eds.) Developments in Russian Politics. London: Red Globe Press. Schopflin, G. (1993) Politics in Eastern Europe. Oxford: Blackwell. Schwartz, B. (1982) ‘The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory’. Social Forces, 61: 375–402. Schwartz, B. and Schuman, H. (2005) ‘History, Commemoration and Belief: Abraham Lincoln in American Memory, 1945–2001’. American Sociological Review, 70: 183–203. Shearman, P. (2015) Rethinking Soviet Communism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Smyth, J. (2017) ‘Milltown Cemetery and the Politics of Remembrance’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 165–178. Spiegel, G. M. (2002) ‘Memory and History: Liturgical Time and Historical Time’. History and Theory, 41 (2): 149–162. Thompson, M. (1992) A Paper House: The Ending of Yugoslavia. London: Vintage. Tileag˘a, C. (2018) Representing Communism after the Fall. Discourse Memory and Historical Redress. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmilllan. Tint, B. (2010) ‘History, Memory and Intractable Conflict’. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27 (3): 239–254. Tremlett, G. (2021) The International Brigades. Fascism, Freedom and the Spanish Civil War. London: Bloomsbury.

2

ENGAGING THE PRESENT THROUGH THE PAST

47

Viejo-Rose, D. (2011) Reconstructing Spain: Cultural Heritage and Memory after Civil War. Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press. Viggiani, E. (2014) Talking Stones: The Politics of Memorialisation in Post-conflict Northern Ireland. Oxford: Berghahn Books. Vinitzky-Seroussi, V. (2002) ‘Commemorating a Difficult Past: Yitzhak Rabin’s Memorials’. American Sociological Review, 67 (1): 30–51. Wagner-Pacifici, R. and Schwartz, B. (1991) ‘The Vietnam Veteran’s Memory: Commemorating a Difficult Past’. The American Journal of Sociology, 97: 376–420.

CHAPTER 3

Identity, Commemoration, Remembering and Forgetting

(M)emory is widely called upon to legitimate identity because the core meaning of any individual or group identity is seen as sustained by remembering. Memory, as a collective belief in some vision of the past as being ‘the true’ one in a specific moment of the group’s life, is assumed to be the essential anchor of particularistic identities. Barbara A. Mistzal (2003) Theories of Social Remembering.

A strong sense of collective identity rests on the ability to see Self and the community to which one belongs as having a coherent and stable past, a secure present and a viable and practicable future. Central to the formation of this identity is a coalescing of narratives through the storytelling and the recalling of versions of happenings of the past. Many of these narratives revolve around largely oppositional and mutually excluding stories that find distinct and divisive expressions through the social and political movements that find expression through loyalism and republicanism. Individuals actively reinforce their social identities through narratives and by individuals: ‘know who they are through the stories they tell about themselves and others’ (Friedman 1998: 8–9) in recalling the past. It is often by drawing on collective memory that the resulting narratives emerge, and the unity of social identity is forged (Blokland 2005). These © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_3

49

50

J. W. MCAULEY

narratives are not merely about recalling tales from the past, but also the construction and reproduction of present social reality and in some cases the projection of what is seen as the most viable future for the collective or group (Fentress and Wickham 1992; Thompson 1988). As identified in the previous chapter crucial to understanding and interpreting the past are those memory agents who manipulate and reconstruct discrete ways of remembering and forgetting. Hence, memory agents are capable of approving, rebuffing or even ignoring those long-established narratives presented as ways of understanding the past (Bryan and Connolly 2009). It is in this way that collective memory is utilised, not just to explain and validate certain understandings of the past, but in Northern Ireland memory is also utilised to provide the blueprints to justify the very nature of the conflict itself. Memory is further used to legitimise the actions and narratives of various groups involved. As Paul Connerton (1989) further points out, in conflict situations, memory rarely if ever takes an objective form, rather, is it constructed and reproduced to serve the partisan needs of various sections of society at any given time. The resulting highly skewed readings offer biased understandings, which are reinforced by recall and remembering that re-emphasise dichotomous views of the past. These are promoted by loyalism and republicanism and reflected directly in the competing interpretations on public display and in the private arena. This is reinforced in the variety of ways by the remembering takes place, or perhaps more accurately, the remembering that is promoted and allowed to take place. The strength of both loyalist and republican senses of identity benefit from recalling events in particular ways. Both use the past in different ways to explain the root causes of conflict, the politics arising from it, and to justify or invalidate the roles played by certain individual groups becomes central to that identity (Cairns and Darby 1998). These clashing perspectives have clear implications for the broader structures of society and become core to how individuals see their position in relation to the state and civil society. During the Troubles, for example, paramilitary groups within their respective communities often sought to justify their strategies and tactics by promoting narratives that dovetailed with commonly held understandings of the past. This manifested in the self-projection by loyalist groups as community and constitutional defenders (Bruce 1992; McAuley 2010, 2021) and republican groupings that regarded themselves as being engaged in part of an 800-year-old

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

51

struggle of Irish resistance against overseas oppression (English 2003, 2006). Hence, the ways in which one reads the past are imbued with significant meaning and draws on existing collective memory to construct and convey messages to the collective about, not only who they were, but also who they have become and the direction of feasible future developments for the group. Some memories are constantly revived or renewed through narrative. Often these are revitalised through the telling and retelling of stories. Others are so pushed to the margins that they fade totally from the popular consciousness, due to lack of interest or reproducing such narratives because they are not seen to serve current political needs. Those memories that do remain prominent positions provide the foundation for the building of stereotypes of one’s own group to the detriment of the Other. As we shall see, groups in Northern Ireland hold in common with many other arenas of conflict, little understanding or empathy towards any validity or authenticity in the beliefs or actions of those deemed to be the Other. For many of those involved in the sum-zero game of politics and identity formation, any level of meaningful engagement with the Other is simply to delegitimise one’s own perspective and undermine the core of identity of the group. We have witnessed this in the post-Brexit period, when amidst increased calls for a United Ireland, unionists and loyalists simply refused to engage for fear that involvement with the issue would bring legitimacy to it (McAuley 2022). Commemoration continually brings forward issues involving ideological and cultural space, contested within a matrix of collective memory, narrative, commemoration and belonging. The meaning of collective memories is thus drawn from an entangled past to give them specific understandings and political direction. Through this process, it is determined which events are to be deemed important in maintaining cohesion and group identity. Further, these processes decide what is to be passed on to the next generation, to ensure a continuity of central group ideas, values and goals. Important here, is the degree to which the next generation becomes involved with, or rejects, an exclusive, highly divisive and often sectarianised narrative of the past (Hancock 2014, 2019; Morrow 2019; Muldoon 2004).

52

J. W. MCAULEY

Collective Memory and Historical Approaches Many of the narratives and the recall of collective memories encountered become transnational and in part this chapter seeks to identify those filters adding to, or subtracting from, their original symbolism and meaning. At several points in the book, we encounter gaps between those who seek knowledge of the past as it happened, largely the approach of historians and those who construct the past through the context of what is remembered, mainly the approach taken by those working within the broad frame of memory studies. For some, the material introduced in this book may well fall clearly within the former of these categories as the natural remit of history and it is this approach that best fulfils a proper understanding of the past. Even though they sometimes draw on the same material, there are clearly tensions between those interpretations favouring memory and those histories. Formal and professional history is still largely located within an investigative framework of the repository of factual-based evidence. The focus largely remains on producing an objective analysis of the past (Lowenthal 1985). Those approaching the past from the perspective of memory studies largely work within a matrix that encompasses a series of recollections, feelings and beliefs about past events, focusing more on how such events are understood in the present (Gibson 2004) and considering how considerations of the past are felt emotionally by individuals and groups. While memory sometimes engages with history it does so in ways that largely privilege contemporary interests and consequences over those of the past (Kansteiner 2002). Some writers (for example, Crane 1997; Nerone 1989; Samuel 1994) have challenged major splits between memory and history suggesting the relationship is more fluid than others suggest. There remain complicated intellectual disputes and academic distinctions between the approaches of history and collective memory (Eyerman 2004; Fabian 2007; Rasmussen 2002). These divergences emerge partly because history, remembering, recall, memorialisation and commemoration, all draw on the same resources and similar material. These do so from differing (some would say irreconcilable) starting points and inherent perspectives (Kansteiner and Fogu 2006). The interchange or conceptual overlaps between the two groups remain limited (Confino 1997; Winter 2009).

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

53

Narratives of Belonging Much of the remainder of this book features debates and arguments concerning senses of the past and belonging derived from collective memory and reproduced through narrative. The use of narrative is central to most human interactions and relationships and the means by which an affiliation to a particular group is constructed and fortified. Nigel Hunt expresses this forcibly when he says: Without narrative we cannot understand either the personal or social world. … humans are essentially storytellers and we have a whole range of stories that we use, stories that we tell our families, stories for our friends, stories for our professional lives and stories we tell ourselves. (Hunt 2011: 197)

In Northern Ireland, it is possible to consider the social and political influence of narrative at least two levels. First, the stories and narratives provide a sense of coherence to a person’s life course. Second, at the collective level, narratives can best be understood as those: ‘social constructions that coherently interrelate a sequence of historical and current events; they are accounts of a community’s collective experiences, embodied in its belief system and represent the collectives symbolically constructed shared identity’ (Bruner 1990: 76). All communities comprise people with similar senses of identity, or identities and a comparable sense of a common belonging. They construct their senses of belonging through reference to a commonly understood and interpreted past, drawing directly on those narratives to which groups attach the greatest significance. Within the bounded collectives of loyalism and republicanism, the telling of and listening to stories and the transmission of ideas are both everyday and constant. It is through exchanges with others and consistent exposure to symbolism that people’s lives are shaped, made real and confirmed. One of the essential processes marked out by narrative is the ways through which people learn to structure their lives and situate themselves within broader social structures (Andrews 2007, 2013; Gergen 2005). Thus, stories are used to socialise individuals into broader social and political attitudes and beliefs (Gergen and Gergen 1984, 1986). Northern Ireland is no exception to this. As elsewhere, narratives carry memories forward from one historical period to the next, and both

54

J. W. MCAULEY

loyalists and republicans present fundamental reasons for the conflict, presenting these through seemingly rational, if often contradictory, narratives. Recurring themes are constructed and connected through chosen points and places in the past and these are used to project the influence and outcomes of these events forward to the present. Moreover, these narratives provide group members with a coherent account of the circumstances in which they find themselves. Narratives carry much weight in a group’s self-portrayal, by conveying deep senses of belonging helping to organise the chaotic social and political lives of many into a meaningful sense of belonging. Such narratives centre on shared experiences, commonality and collective memories that go towards constructing comprehensible and coherent senses of identity. As Stuart Hall indicates, it is possible to understand social identity as: ‘the different ways we are positioned by and position ourselves within the narrative of the past’. He goes on to say that cultural identity: ‘is a matter of becoming as well as of being. It belongs to the future as much as to the past’ (Hall 1993: 394). The senses of being and belonging expressed rest on a commonality of understandings and a mutually agreed set of interpretations of the past (Hall 2011). Sometimes, this cultural identity is constructed through reference to differing sets of historical events and sometimes the same event recalled and interpreted in different ways. Crucial here is the availability of and attachment to those different understandings and interpretations of the past offered from within the broad nationalist and republican and unionist and loyalist traditions. It is through active engagement with these differing interpretations of the past that people give meaning to contemporary events and issues. The use of collective memories by identifiable groups means the justification of current and future political actions, through the adoption of certain narratives and discursive strategies. This in turn contributes to the construction of extremely positive images of the Self and community. This sense of belonging results in the desire to uphold and reproduce specific senses of memory and knowledge of the past. This is underpinned by the production of highly accessible, if often simplified, accounts of what has gone before. These present a form of uncontested everyday knowledge, a common-sense reading that is buttressed by a common sense and intricate understanding of who and what constitutes the group. Loyalism and republicanism draw on distinct narratives to provide coherent senses of identity and belief to reproduce stories that enforce ideas about themselves and their senses of place and belonging. The

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

55

notion of belonging can also be constructed through various actions by memory actors and agents in effectively disseminating understandings of the past across all those who identify with the group, going to strengthen a sense of community. Indeed, there is some evidence that people who do not feel part of either of Northern Ireland’s main communities express a reduced sense of belonging and attachment to their neighbourhood (Devine 2021; Devine and Schubotz 2019). Individuals and groups are socialised into understandings of the past that is deemed to be acceptable to the group and most likely to further its goals and visions. This includes what should be remembered and what is forgotten to give them a stronger sense of solidarity and belonging within the group. Individual recollections and recall are not of course, chronologically ordered or presented sequentially, rather they are cluttered, partial and somewhat shambolic in nature. Moreover, individuals draw on memories of their own experiences and these imaginations occur within a framework that moves back and forward across time, between conflict and post-conflict society and across altered political circumstances (Hayward and McManus 2020). While identity may at one level centre on individual experience, it is always mediated by the frameworks of dominant cultural memory and political discourses that surround it. Collective memories are one way through which a given community represents what it regards as the most essential interpretations of the past to that community. In this way, individuals learn from the past experiences and can relate this awareness to contemporary circumstances. These shared collective memories are stored in an array of cultural symbols and objects, ranging from historical monuments to museums, providing a mechanism within which the values and norms of the group can be stored. These provide a common resource for reinforcing the values, norms and senses of belonging to the group and conveying these to new members. Memory actors help order and structure memories to bring them in line with broader collective understandings. The recall of collective memories in particular ways can invoke strong emotional responses and narratives that indicate increased feelings of mistrust towards the Other (Bar-Tal 1998, 2007). Much of this narrative refers to those events of the past (and most recently during the decade of centenaries) that still preoccupy contemporary society and are promoted by memory actors and leaders within the community. The role of memory actors goes to further

56

J. W. MCAULEY

legitimise those who are deemed to act and speak with authority within the community.

Stereotyping Memory The development of these senses of belonging often sees the development of collective emotional responses that are also important in aligning cohesiveness and solidary across the group (Kemper 1990; Smith and Mackie 2015). This provides fertile ground for the construction of difference, emphasising social and political variance and the presentation of the Other. This becomes meaningful in the organisation of everyday life and through expressions of Self (Ferguson 2009; Lawler 2008). Shared memories and collective understandings of the past are central in the construction of core categories of belonging to identify an understanding of those seen to be within the group and those classified as the Other (Bar-Tal 2003). Anger, distrust and fear are common emotions expressed in processes of bonding and in cementing one’s own group views and attitudes towards the rival group. The categories of insider and outsider and the boundaries between them are further utilised to distinguish between one’s own community and Other communities. In times of overt violent conflict, the Other are increasingly perceived and presented as menacing and dangerous, threatening the basic existence of the in-group. Moreover, it is those who constitute the ‘them’ and the Other that are seen as responsible for ongoing violent acts, for there can be no justification (Baumeister and Butz 2005; Ferguson and McAuley 2017). The senses of sectarian difference find expression though negative and divisive expressions towards group classified as the Other. This sometimes results in conflict and violent acts towards those defined as the Other, giving primacy to the group to which one belongs to the detriment of those defined as outsiders (Bar-Tal 2001; Paez et al. 1997; Paez and Liu 2011). When, for example, during the Troubles someone was killed or arrested the emotional responses could be seen to operate within broad cultural frameworks shared collectively by members and was often dependent on which side the victim was seen to be on. These senses of difference and division are deeply engrained across Northern Irish society. Memory plays a central role in classifying subjects and the senses of difference identified and deeply embedded collective memories remain a major social force in defining the Us and the

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

57

Other in Northern Irish society. The notions and discourses of division are reinforced through public displays and those commemorations that emotionally reinforce and designate blame, defining victims and the place of victimhood within the broad context of social identity. Further, commemorations, memorials and community celebrations all go to periodically renew and revitalise senses of belonging and identity through exposure and repetition to certain perspectives of the past. Much of the social organisation around this rests on understandings and representations concerning the legitimacy and justness of the beliefs held by one’s own group and the positive images of Self that accompany this. Alongside this, emphasis is placed on the shortcomings of the Other, their characteristics and often the futility of their politics and immoral nature of their ultimate objectives (Bar-Tal and Antebi 1992; Vollhardt 2012). Such variances were deepened and intensified by exposure to the extended conflict and protracted violence experienced during the Troubles (Cairns and Darby 1998; Nicholson 2017). Part of the way that in-group solidarity and senses of community belonging are constructed is through active processes of selfinterpretation, reinforced by common memory and interpretations of the past. It is these taken-for-granted aspects of everyday knowledge that provide members of the group with senses of ontological security. It is through processes of continual reinterpretation that both individual and collective experiences are configured to form common cultural meanings and belongings. Reference to understandings of the past and collective memory that form deep attachments, deeming that which is considered legitimate to remember and what that is deemed worthy to forget.

(Re)Presenting the Past The formation of such divided senses of belonging, draws, in part at least, on processes of stereotyping that serve to categorise and scapegoat and to construct those deemed to be the Other (Pickering 2001). These distinct senses of the past also provide the group with justification for their own beliefs and actions in the present. Central to this preservation of a collective past is the presentation and transmission of sets of ideas, values and norms, which are accepted across the generations. Hence, the narratives presented by individuals are never constructed solely from personal experiences or individual memories. Rather, understandings are always related to and draw upon and are positioned within wider social frameworks.

58

J. W. MCAULEY

Cohesive narratives establish and confirm a group’s self-identity through emphasising enduring connections with the group’s past. Narratives, commemoration and memorialisation can be understood as providing an organisational structure within which to frame subsequent social interactions. Narratives provide both the language and boundaries for what is remembered, excluded or forgotten. This represents a broader theme whereby people engage with narratives, to: ‘make decisions about which aspects of them to appropriate and which to repudiate’ (Hammack 2011: 313). These often project the populist memory and the everyday stories that surround remembrance. These are formulated and used by a variety of groups to support contemporary political thinking and positions. Part of this process involves the production of an everyday expression of social reality that rests on a matrix of collective memory, identity, narratives and commemoration. Within these local narratives, the repetition of certain norms and values points to a clear continuity linking the past to the local and back again through, for example, the creation and presentation of popular culture. Such narratives establish a sense of identity through the attempt to establish continuity not just with a constructed past, but more importantly, with a desirable and seemingly obtainable future. It is within the bounded communities of loyalism and republicanism, commemoration and narrative acts are used to maintain the cohesion of the group, often reinforcing existing divisions and senses of animosity and detachment. Collective memory and narrative give meaning to social identity at the macro- and micro-levels (Schwartz 2001, 2007; Schwartz and Schuman 2005). These also act as a prism through which subsequent generations learn their past and their place in society (Schumann and Scott 1989).

Commemoration and Memorialisation As in other contested societies in Northern Ireland narrative practices are passed on across generations, to emphasise senses of continuity with their past, often through processes of memorialisation and commemoration. Acts of commemoration and memorialisation are central to the community calendar, seen, for example, in the remembrance of the H-Block hunger strikes (when ten republican prisoners starved themselves to death in a political confrontational with the British state), or the celebration

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

59

of the Battle of the Boyne. They are also represented through the evergrowing number of localised community commemorations, such as those found around the Siege of Derry in 1688, or those commemorations surrounding the anniversary of Internment in 1971. These events contribute to a growing importance of the past in strengthening senses of identity and belonging expressed through acts of remembering and commemoration. These events lifted memory from the past to the present as: ‘extraordinary events which embody our deepest and most fundamental values’ (Schwartz 1982: 377). Participation in commemorative events is guided by distinct narratives, that go to enrich and reinforce senses of belonging and identity. In the main, community members look to these dominant and pre-existing narratives to order and bring meaning to everyday social life. Further, group members often readily accept cultural patterns and forms that are passed on as: ‘an unquestioned and unquestionable guide in all situations which normally occur within the social world’ (Schütz 1964: 49). Thus, individual and collective memories are reinforced with the group supporting and reinforcing such views. By creating and recreating shared cultural experiences, the meaning and feelings within the community are formed and these are sustained through the cultural identity that is generated. In Northern Ireland it is also through such processes that social and ethno-political sectarian divisions are made real, drawing on commonly understood, normalised recollections of past. Within loyalism and republicanism these explanations set about rationalising the past, usually by confirming and sometimes, although much less often, challenging existing narratives. The social relations surrounding the past and their representations are constantly changing and evolving. Underlying these narratives is the interrogation of the ways in which a dominant notion of collective memory proposes a certain version of the past and to how this perception is reinforced both by those engaged in it and by projecting that version of history as the truth, often built the remembrance of key events. Additionally, narratives are used to assemble various renditions of what has gone before through which people are presented with frameworks within which to think and discuss past and present and the links between them. These narratives interlock with the past, marking out the continuities in Irish history to further increase feelings of belonging and to provide emotional sanctuary and a location for those involved. Hence, the creation of guidelines as to what can and cannot be said about the

60

J. W. MCAULEY

past, and how it can be said. It also outlines who has the legitimacy to discuss the past; who can be seen to have the authenticity to talk about who can represent the past in the contemporary.

Using Memory The past is constantly being exposed to different interpretations, narratives and representations that offer differing explanations to individuals, groups and communities. Paul Ricoeur (1984) suggests that to be of consequence, narratives must be structured in ways that bring order and meaning to a world in a state of instability. It is through collective memory that ideas are regrouped and reorganised. Recalling selected pasts in particular ways presents such events as the basis by which to authenticate and justify certain memories, but in many cases to validate them and the future activities of the group. Of central importance here are those who are seen as having the legitimacy, or not, to remember the past. In Northern Ireland, memory entrepreneurs compete to be seen as the authentic conveyors of narrative include, former combatants, victim groups, politicians, everyday citizens, commemorative organisers, community representatives, the producers of local media, news sheets writers of books and pamphlets and others, involved in storytelling. In other words, memory is made accessible by presenting as living and vibrant, and its performance must be given a focus through, for example, the symbolism found in parades, street theatre and commemorative displays. How symbolism is used will be considered in some detail throughout the book, but clear examples can be witnessed within the Protestant, unionist and loyalist community during the Orange Order marching season (roughly from April to August each year). Representation and symbolism also feature prominently in those parades organised within the republican community tradition (Higgins 2012), most prominently at Easter each year in commemorations of the Rebellion of 1916. In both cases these are large-scale and cross-generational events, overtly designed to transmit views and understandings of the past much more widely across society. These semi-formal set-piece commemorations can be placed alongside the seemingly ever-growing number of informal or ad-hoc community events, involving marches, street theatre, enactments and other memorial and anniversary events displayed at both the local and national levels.

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

61

Such events are now firmly positioned on the community calendar, to become part of everyday culture. These occasions represent a potent mix of collective memory, politics, symbolism, identity expression and provocation, expressed in the everyday. Central is the use of parading and symbolic displays as a means of communicating the past and illustrating its relevance to the present. This provides many of the cultural resources in the battleground that perpetuates continuing ethno-political sectarian division. The differing interpretations and presentations of memory remain at the core of continued conflict. These forefront common-sense assumptions and everyday understandings orientate and mobilise social and political actions (Melucci 1995). The constructions and their use are multiple, and the types of activity seen as legitimate are bounded. The transmission of ideas may be brash, for example, through parading and public demonstrations or it may be understated, muted, or perhaps even unconscious in form. Sometimes it may take place through the everyday in conversations or other forms of everyday interactions, sometimes with engagement with the set pieces deemed to represent events of the past. All collective memory remains open to reinterpretation in its telling, retelling and appropriation through the adoption of competing narratives surrounding the selection of past events. There is a continual jostling between differing expositions of the past and the vying for the dominance of certain narratives of remembrance giving prominence of memory to certain events that become central to the story told. The determination of this goes a long way in legitimising views of the past, serving not only to validate the views of groups, but also to justify a group reactions and behaviour to contemporary political circumstances and to give them validity and relevance. There are several interrelated narratives to consider in the framing of social and political identity and the specific constructions of loyalism and republicanism, the construction of which, as ethno-political identity markers rest on heavily competing understandings of the past. Ian McBride (2017) points directly to how competing interpretations and the subsequent social and political organisation around these have been a constant response to the national question in Ireland. The ways in which certain historical events are specifically recalled or forgotten carry distinct political consequences (Beiner 2018).

62

J. W. MCAULEY

Collective Memory and Social Identity The concepts of collective memory and social identity are closely linked, so much so they are at times all but inseparable. John Gillis (1994) suggests that at the core of what is remembered is the identity one assumes. It is also possible to suggest this relationship operates in the reverse manner, that central to identity is that which is remembered. Within this set of relationships, commemorative events are seen as especially powerful in creating group cohesion and fostering solidarity amongst members (Gapps 2003; Turner 2006). Collective memory underpins, confirms and fortifies social identity, it justifies current social and political interpretations and the subsequent actions arising from it. These processes are both fluid and flexible and the senses of belonging created are not fixed. The formation of identity narratives and the memories it draws on are always subject to some level of distortion to meet the political needs and purposes of the present. Sometimes these influences imply or even unconsciously promote events in the past that should be remembered, while others are omitted or conveniently forgotten (Hunt 2011: 197–198). Narratives are developed and structured through constant interaction with other people carrying similar discourses and collective memory fashioned by interactions between people and groups operating within specific political and social circumstances. As Gillis puts it, memories are constantly revised in order to fit contemporary collective needs and expressions of identities. He goes on to suggest that memories are: ‘embedded in complex class, gender and power relations that determine what is remembered (or forgotten), by whom and for what end’ (Gillis 1994: 3). People, in part at least, seek to define and express their identity by directly aligning with various ideal types, such as being a parent, or a factory worker, or a care worker, or belonging to a particular social class, a rugby player, gay, middle aged, a homemaker, British, Irish or any combination of these. It is through groups that people relate directly to key constructs, involving given narratives or events that go to form or reinforce notions of identity and of Self. In turn this is reinforced by the behaviour and symbolism of such groups, allowing people to affiliate directly in identifiable ways as loyalists or republicans and to draw on diverse sources available to construct those senses of social identity that

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

63

are fundamental to the self-definition and group membership (Bar-Tal 1998; David and Bar-Tal 2009). Thus, sustained remembering and the determination of what is to be remembered goes towards defining the group’s identity. The differing cultural and social memories find expression across ethnic, religious, gender, civic and class realities. Like memory, the construction of identity is always relational, with social difference and political position established by reference to competing social groups and symbolism. These different identities were separated and widened by over three decades of open and overt conflict, during which time senses of self and identity became narrowed and notions of belonging were compressed and then buttressed by subsequent actions and reactions. Loyalist and republican identity are both secured in part through drawing on the collective memories, narratives and commemorations of the chosen community, with an equally powerful disregarding of the other, all of which were underpinned by the construction of sectarian social relations. These ideas will be revisited at several points throughout the book, but for the moment it is important to understand memory and identity as mutually constructed in a reciprocal relationship (Ryan 2010). It is within the broad structure outlined those individuals in Northern Ireland interpret and organise their social lives. Memory, commemoration and commemorative events are central to making sense of the complexities of everyday life. Marianne Hirsch has written directly concerning the communication of memory from one generation to another and the notion of ‘post-memory’. Hirsch explains this as: ‘the relationship of the second generation to powerful, often traumatic, experiences that preceded their births (are) transmitted to them so deeply as to constitute memories in their own right’ (Hirsch 2008: 103). Young people remember directly reflecting their parent’s experiences. Their memories are often understood as authoritative and expressed through constantly repeated narratives and symbolism. The recall of these experiences and interpretations steadily infiltrates the consciousness of the next generation to determine understandings (Shirlow, Tonge, McAuley and McGlynn 2012). Further, individuals do not need to have directly experienced the past to play an important role in shaping social and political identities and attitudes to it. The social relationships of young people may in part include continuing sectarian attitudes that may be attributed to the influence of both family and community. Moreover, as Ferguson and Halliday (2020)

64

J. W. MCAULEY

suggest, it is under the influence of post-memory that notions of unresolved issues surrounding the conflict, alongside views of past traumas and understandings of the conflict are passed on down the generations.

Memory Gaps and Constructed Amnesia It is also necessary to introduce some discussion around the roles played by forgetting. Whether by design, neglect or sometimes through deliberate amnesia certain events and periods are marginalised or forgotten (Stone and Hirst 2014). Further, Sari Biklen (2004), in recognising the complex problematic of memory, points out there is always confusion and gaps in memory in the recall of events. Hence, forgetting play also plays a central role in helping construct shared views and understandings within a community and we shall address each directly in this book. The importance of forgetting was first pointed to by Ernst Renan, who in considering the construction of national identity, pointed to how these draws on a: ‘rich legacy of memories’, but it also rested on an awareness: ‘that they have forgotten some things’ (Renan [1882] 1990: 11). More recently, collective forgetting has been defined as the: ‘outcome of society’s needs to eliminate segments of its social memory which are interfering with the society’s present functions’ (Misztal 2010b: 30). Through these processes community members learn what it is desirable and necessary to remember and as part of the same process what it is acceptable for them to forget (Zerubavel 1994, 1995). Viewed in this way forgetting can be thought of as an effective tool for constructing identity and maintaining power. Forgetting, for example, involves the exclusion from most populist accounts of Northern Ireland’s working-class and socialist traditions (Devlin 1981; Munck and Rolston 1987) or the actions and prominence of women in the political arena (McDowell 2008; Faulkner-Byrne, Bell and McCready 2023). Individuals, groups, community, or even nations and everything within their frame of reference can be excluded. Some experiences are forgotten, perhaps deliberately so, or pushed to the far regions of what is retained and preserved. Memories never completely vanish, nor are they entirely absent from collective recollection. Forgetting is a central element in constructing memory. Writing historical narratives involves eliminating certain components of the past. Individuals selectively remember, misremember, disremember and exclude alternative views, that might provide the basis for countering

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

65

their own discourse and existing narratives. Indeed, it has been suggested that the processes involved in forgetting are as complex as those for remembering, involving the deconstruction or reconstruction of existing meanings and values and the importantly the delegitimation of existing histories and memories (Rieff 2016a, b). Memories forwarded by certain groups, especially the non-dominant ones are readily ignored or marginalised, often to be forgotten. Acts of forgetting in this sense are central to remembering and recall. There is little or no guarantee that an event from the past deemed to be of importance today, will continue to hold that significance in the future, although many of the events in Northern Ireland seem to have great longevity. Likewise, marginal events that have been forgotten can resurface, or be brought to the fore, by memory entrepreneurs (see below). Past events are never completely forgotten or erased from group memory, sometimes this support and strengthen group identities, at others they may run counter to existing accounts, or be in competition with those official accounts promoted by the state, as discussed below.

Using Collective Memory Collective memory is also important because of its ability to muster and marshall individuals and groups. People mobilise remembrance politically, by drawing directly on collective understandings of the past, deploying the past strategically by manipulation of memory by certain groups to legitimise their actions within the collective consciousness of a community (Verovšek 2016). There are many examples of such events and occurrences in Northern Ireland’s past that groupings seek to highlight in the popular consciousness, and we shall consider two of these; events surrounding killings in Ballymurphy in 1971 and Claudy in 1972. On 31 July 1972 three car bombs exploded in the County Londonderry village of Claudy, killing nine civilians and wounding many others. Those responsible for planting the bombs seemingly had attempted to pass on a warning but the telephone call failed (the exchange being out of order due to a previous bombing). The gaze quickly turned towards the PIRA who immediately issued a denial of any involvement, and no one has ever been charged for the attack. Responsibility for the entire happenings remains highly disputed and unresolved. A Police Ombudsman report in 2010 questioned the role of the police, the state and the Catholic Church in reporting the bombing.

66

J. W. MCAULEY

Much of that what has happened subsequently has been driven by the relatives of those killed aimed at producing accounts that bring memories to the fore. This has not involved an agreed detailed factual account of the bombing, (many recognise this as impossible), but rather the focus falls on how collective memories generated around these events and how this may be used to influence specific versions of the past and political present. The families, friends and relations of those killed have struggled to keep memories surrounding Claudy alive, particularly those memories that have proved contested or run directly in the face of the dominant official memories. Community memories have been projected by relatives and local victims’ groups which have supported the families in a range of projects all designed at bringing their collective memories to the fore through, for example, the production a memorial statue in the town. Another example surrounds events in Ballymurphy during 9–11 August 1971, when ten civilians were shot dead by members of the British Army. The immediate background saw the introduction of internment (detainment without trial and aimed almost exclusively at the nationalist population) by Northern Ireland’s Prime Minister Brian Faulkner, the strategy seen to counter sectarian violence and the growth of the paramilitaries. The operation (Demetrius) largely backfired, in the four days following the launch of internment, some 25 people died amidst widespread street violence and disorder (McCleery 2015). Ten of these deaths occurred in and around the Ballymurphy area in the west of the city in five separate incidents. The recall and memory of this have been cloaked in controversy and struggles over ownership in the decades since. Initially, all those killed were portrayed as republican gunmen, and British Army accounts maintained that soldiers fired only on identified targets that were offering a threat to them. The finding of a one-day inquest into the deaths in 1972 recorded open verdicts and the British Army version of the past seemed destined to become the ‘official’ one written into the history books. The official accounts were immediately rejected by the acquaintances of those killed, who maintained they were unarmed innocent civilians and: ‘few outsiders seemed to remember or care about what the locals called the Ballymurphy massacre’ (Carroll 2018). In response, the family and supporters of those killed worked to bring their version and memories of the past to the fore. They actively set about presenting their narrative and articulating an alternative version of events to that of the state. Much

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

67

of this was driven by the Ballymurphy Massacre Committee campaign. It, for example, created a commemorative trail tracing and linking the sites of the killings and organised a ‘March for Truth’ placing crosses at each point along the trail where a killing occurred. In a later event these crosses were replaced with plaques and followed this a series of murals were added to the trail. The intent of those involved was to develop a particular set of cultural memories. Written and spoken narratives were formulated around an understanding that readings of the past could be altered by commemoration and the presentation of collective remembering of the past that openly challenges the narrative of the State. Moreover, part of this restructuring of collective memory involved bringing onto the agenda much that was not already in the public domain. In 2011, this resulted in Northern Ireland’s attorney general ordering a new inquest into the deaths. It began in September 2018 and, after more than two years of hearings, the coroner delivered her verdict stating that: ‘all of the deceased in the series of inquests were entirely innocent of any wrongdoing on the day in question’ (BBC 2021). Collective memories surrounding the events in Claudy and Ballymurphy in 1971 are examples of the constant struggle to bring marginalised collective memories forward and locate them in public consciousness and discourse.

Collective Memory in the Public Arena Collective memories may be shared, for example, through localised rituals, symbolism, cultural artefacts and narratives through which group members understand their political world and social position. There are several means of collective memory transmission, we encounter in this book, for example, through museums or song or popular culture. Such dominant narratives are sometimes reproduced by the state in formal education, teaching and school textbooks. It is common in societies that have been engaged in long-term conflict that the dominant collective memory is shared through a closely corresponding public memory. The resulting narrative is most often expressed through, for example, public institutions and official representations, although like much else in Northern Ireland, this is contested. These groups present views that challenge the dominant and/or official constructs of the past. Often, they are responsible for the mobilisation

68

J. W. MCAULEY

of groups intervening directly in contemporary political concerns, sometimes the mobilisation is around long existing concerns represented or represented in new or different ways. The interpretation and projection of chosen collective memories remain central in distinguishing between one’s own group and that of others. In consolidating in-group cohesion by strengthening conflictual myths and symbols, this helps people categorise their social world into the cultural and political dichotomy of us and them (Ferguson and McAuley 2017). None of what has been said is to suggest that loyalist or republican group narratives are understood uniformly, interpreted consistently or may be read in a monophonic tone. Nor is to suggest that individuals in Northern Ireland (or anywhere else) do not have social agency. Members of any group can and do, differ in their understandings of the past and its influence on their views on the present. Nor does this imply that there aren’t other constructs of the past on offer, or that identification as a nationalist and republican or unionist and loyalist represent the only viable option.

Conclusions This chapter has illustrated how people and collectives draw on memories in different ways to recall or bring about different associations and to evoke diverse emotional and political responses that reinforce senses of identity. The communities are never totally separate, rather they are intertwined in terms of both everyday interactions and the pool of resources on which they draw. The memories of those people affiliated with a particular understanding of past events are never identical or uniform. This helps illustrate how people consider the past, recognising that people are sometimes restricted in the memories on which they are allowed to draw. Both official and unofficial commemorations and memorials go to constantly stimulate memories and remind individuals and groups of their core senses of belonging and identity (Devine-Wright 2001). In looking at the role and functions of commemoration both republicanism and loyalism display four prominent (if mirrored) themes. The first refers to violence and/or confrontations between the groups, resulting in victory, or sometimes and much less commonly, glorious and honourable defeat. A second theme focuses on those fallen members of the in-group, who are seen as having died for their cause. Third, there is a theme surrounding great figures and prominent individuals that have in some way furthered

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

69

the goals of the group. Fourth, a theme that projects the underlying morality of what the group stands for and conversely the illegitimacy of the position of others. The remainder of this book will engage directly with these themes. Northern Ireland is a place bristling with sites of memory and overflowing with commemoration and symbolism, some official, many not. How people relate to and decode these symbols and what they then do with this needs to be set within the interwoven influences of community, narrative, identity, political organisation, popular memory and popular culture, social identities, communal politics, group categorisation and differentiation. In so doing we continually return to three reinforcing refrains: first, the definition, form and roles of collective memory; second, the enacting and mobilisation of this collective past, through discourses, practices and artefacts and third, a consideration of how collective memories are drawn upon and used to both unify and separate groups of people, most notably in Northern Ireland those classifying themselves as nationalists or republicans and unionists or loyalists. In considering the construction of identity across both loyalism and republicanism, it is possible to outline five central aspects that are central. First, identity is defined both through community membership by the everyday and by life experiences. Second, membership can be built around cultural engagement, aligning with what is familiar and rejecting that which is seen as different. Third, community identity is defined through a learnt understanding of where a community stands, how they have got to the place they are in and where they are going. Fourth, multimembership, where people distil all the various forms of identity into one overarching identity, whether it be republicanism or loyalism. Fifth, people can define their social identity in terms of local and global relationships, where membership is constructed through negotiating ways of belonging in relation to broader discourses and experiences.

References Andrews, M. (2007) Shaping History: Narratives of Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andrews, M. (2013) Narrative Imagination and Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bar-Tal, D. (1998) ‘Societal Beliefs in Times of Intractable Conflict: The Israeli Case’. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 9 (1): 22–50.

70

J. W. MCAULEY

Bar-Tal, D. (2001) ‘Why Does Fear Override Hope in Societies Engulfed by Intractable Conflict, as It Does in Israeli Society’. Political Psychology, 23 (3): 601–627. Bar-Tal, D. (2003) ‘Collective Memory of Physical Violence: Its Contribution to the Culture of Violence’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 77–93. Bar-Tal, D. (2007) ‘Sociopsychological Foundations of Intractable Conflicts’. American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1430–1453. Bar-Tal, D. and Antebi, D. (1992) ‘Siege Mentality in Israel’. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16: 251–275. Baumeister, R. F. and Butz, D. A. (2005) ‘Roots of Hate, Violence and Evil’. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Psychology of Hate. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 87–102. BBC News. (2021) ‘Ballymurphy Inquest: Coroner Finds 10 Victims were Innocent’. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-569 86784; accessed 3 November. Beiner, G. (2018) Forgetful Remembrance: Social Forgetting and Vernacular Historiography of a Rebellion in Ulster. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Biklen, S. K. (2004) ‘Trouble on Memory Lane: Adults and Self-retrospection in Researching Youth’. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (5): 715–730. Blokland, T. (2005) ‘Memory Magic: How a Working-Class Neighbourhood Became an Imagined Community and Class Started to Matter when it Lost its Base’. In F. Devine, M. Savage, J. Scott and R. Crompton (Eds.) Rethinking Class. Culture, Identities and Lifestyles. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 123– 138. Bruce, S. (1992) The Red Hand: Protestant Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bruner, J. (1990) Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bryan, D. and Connolly, S. (2009) ‘Identity, Social Action and Public Space: Defining Civic Space in Belfast’. In M. Wetherell (Ed.) Theorizing Identities and Social Action. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 220–236. Cairns, E. and Darby, J. (1998) ‘The Conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, Consequences and Controls’. American Psychologist, 53 (7): 754–760. Carroll, R. (2018) ‘“Decades of Deceit”: Ballymurphy Killings Inquest Opens in Belfast’. The Guardian, 11 November. Confino, A. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1386–1403. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crane, S. A. (1997) ‘Writing the Individual Back into Collective Memory’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1372–1385.

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

71

David, O. and Bar-Tal, D. (2009) ‘A Sociopsychological Conception of Collective Identity: The Case of National Identity as an Example’. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13 (4): 354–379. Devine, P. (2021) ‘Changing Identities in Northern Ireland’. ARK Research Update, 138. Devine, P. and Schubotz, D. (2019) ‘A Sense of Belonging’. ARK Research Update, 126. Devine-Wright, P. (2001) ‘History and Identity in Northern Ireland: An Exploratory Investigation of the Role of Historical Commemorations in Contexts of Intergroup Conflict’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 7 (4): 297–315. Devlin, P. (1981) Yes We Have No Bananas: Outdoor Relief in Belfast 1920–1939. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. English, R. (2003) Armed Struggle. A History of the IRA. Basingstoke: Macmillan. English, R. (2006) Irish Freedom. The History of Nationalism in Ireland. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Eyerman, R. (2004) ‘The Past in the Present: Culture and the Transmission of Memory’. Acta Sociologica, 47 (2): 159–169. Fabian, J. (2007) Memory Against Culture: Arguments and Reminders. Duke University Press. Faulkner-Byrne, L., Bell, J. and McCready, P. (2023) ‘“Remember the Women”: Memory-Making within Loyalism’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 165–182. Fentress, J. and Wickham, C. (1992) Social Memory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ferguson, H. (2009) Self-Identity and Everyday Life. London: Routledge. Ferguson, N. and Halliday, D. (2020) ‘Collective Memory and the Legacy of the Troubles: Territoriality, Identity, and Victimhood in Northern Ireland’. In J. R. Vollhardt (Ed.) The Social Psychology of Collective Victimhood. Oxford: Oxford Academic, 56–74. Ferguson, N. and McAuley, J. W. (2017) ‘Ulster Loyalist Accounts of Armed Mobilization, Demobilization and Decommissioning’. In L. Bosi and G. De Fazio (Eds.) The Troubles in Northern Ireland and Theories of Social Movements. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 111–128. Friedman, S. S. (1998) Mappings: Feminism and the Cultural Geographies of Encounter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gapps, S. (2003) ‘Authenticity Matters: Historical Re-enactment and Australian Attitudes to the Past’. Australian Cultural History, 22: 105–116. Gergen, K. (2005) ‘Narrative, Moral Identity and Historical Consciousness: A Social Constructionist Account’. In J. Sträub (Ed.) Narration, Identity and Historical Consciousness. New York: Bergham Books, 99–119.

72

J. W. MCAULEY

Gergen, K. J. and Gergen, M. M. (1984) ‘The Social Construction of Narrative Accounts’. In K. J. Gergen and M. M. Gergen (Eds.) Historical Social Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum, 173–190. Gergen, K. J. and Gergen, M. M. (1986) ‘Narrative Form and the Construction of Psychological Science’. In T. Sarbin (Ed.) Narrative Psychology: The Storied Nature of Human Conduct. New York: Praeger, 22–44. Gibson, J. L. (2004) Overcoming Apartheid: Can Truth Reconcile a Divided Nation? New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Hall, S. (1993) ‘Culture, Community, Nation’. Cultural Studies, 7 (3): 349–363. Hall, S. (2011) ‘Introduction: Who Needs Identity?’. In S. Hall and P. du Gay (Eds.) Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage. Hammack, P. (2011) ‘Narrative and the Politics of Meaning’. Narrative Inquiry, 21: 311–318. Hancock, L. E. (2014) ‘Narratives of Identity in the Northern Ireland Troubles’. Peace and Change, 39 (4): 443–467. Hancock, L. E. (2019) ‘Narratives of Commemoration Identity, Memory and Conflict on Northern Ireland 1916–2016’. Peace and Change, 44 (2): 244– 265. Hayward, K. and McManus, C. (2020) ‘Northern Ireland: Society and Culture’. In The Routledge Handbook of British Politics and Society. London: Routledge, 304–317. Higgins, R. (2012) Transforming 1916: Meaning, Memory and the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Easter Rising. Cork: Cork University Press. Hirsch, M. (2008) ‘The Generation of Postmemory’. Poetics Today, 29 (1): 103– 128. Hunt, N. C. (2011) Memory, War and Trauma. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kansteiner, W. (2002) ‘Finding Meaning in Memory: A Methodological Critique of Collective Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 41: 179–197. Kansteiner, W. and Fogu, C. (2006) The Politics of Memory in Postwar Europe. Durham NC: Duke University Press. Kemper, T. D. (1990) ‘Themes and Variations in the Sociology of Emotions’. Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions, 3–23. Lawler, S. (2008) Identity: Sociological perspectives. Cambridge: Polity. Lowenthal, D. (1985) The Past Is a Foreign Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McAuley, J. W. (2010) Ulster’s Last Stand? Reconstructing Unionism after the Peace Process. Dublin: Irish Academic Press.

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

73

McAuley, J. W. (2021) ‘Loyalist Collective Memory, Perspectives of the Somme and Divided History’. In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 95–114. McAuley, J. W. (2022) ‘Changing Cultures and Identity? Politics in Post-brexit Northern Ireland’. In P. Carmichael and G. Holfer (Eds.) Unions, Break-Ups and Special Relationships. Postfach: WVY, 175–188. McBride, I. (2017) ‘The Truth about the Troubles’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 9–43. McCleery, M. J. (2015) Operation Demetrius and Its Aftermath: A New History of the Use of Internment without Trial in Northern Ireland 1971–1975. Manchester: Manchester University Press. McDowell, S. (2008) ‘Commemorating Dead “Men”: Gendering the Past and Present in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. Gender, Place and Culture, 15 (4): 335–354. Melucci, A. (1995) ‘The Process of Collective Identity’. In H. Johnston and B. Klandermans (Eds.) Social Movements and Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 41–63. Mistzal, B. A. (2003) Theories of Social Remembering. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Misztal, B. (2010b) ‘Narrative’s Reliance on Memory: The Case for and Interdisciplinary Exchange between Memory and Narrative Studies’. Life Writings, 7 (1): 83–97. Morrow, D. (2019) Sectarianism in Northern Ireland: A Review. Sir George Quigley Foundation. Belfast: Ulster University. Muldoon, O. T. (2004) ‘Children of the Troubles: The impact of Political Violence in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Social Issues, 60 (3): 453–468. Munck, R. and Rolston, B. (1987) Belfast in the Thirties. An Oral History. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Nerone, J. (1989) ‘Professional History and Social History’. Communication, 11 (2): 89–104. Nicholson, C. (2017) ‘The Role of Collective Memory in Protracted Conflict’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 217–233. Paez, D. R. and Liu, J. H. (2011) ‘Collective Memory of Conflicts’. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.) Frontiers of Social Psychology. Intergroup Conflicts and their Resolution: A Social Psychological Perspective. Hove: Psychology Press, 105–124. Paez, D., Pennebaker, J. W. and Rim, B. (1997) Collective Memory of Political Events. New York: Psychology Press. Pickering, M. (2001) Stereotyping: The Politics of Representation. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

74

J. W. MCAULEY

Rasmussen, S. (2002) ‘The Uses of Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 113–129. Renan, E. (1990 [1882]) ‘What Is a Nation?’. In H. K. Bhabha (Ed.) Nation and Narration. London: Routledge. Ricoeur, P. (1984) Time and Narrative, Volume 1 (translated by K. Mclaughlin and Pellauer). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rieff, D. (2016a) In Praise of Forgetting: Historical Memory and Its Ironies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Rieff, D. (2016b) ‘The Cult of Memory: When History Does More Harm Than Good’. The Guardian, 2 March. Ryan, L. (2010) ‘Memory, Power and Resistance: The Anatomy of a Tripartite Relationship’. Memory Studies, 4: 154 Samuel, R. (1994) Theatres of Memory Past and Present in Contemporary Culture. London: Verso. Schumann, H. and Scott, J. (1989) ‘Generations and Collective Memories’. American Sociological Review, 54: 359–381. Schütz, A. (1964) Studies in Social Theory: Collected Papers II . The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Schwartz, B. (1982) ‘The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory’. Social Forces, 61: 375–402. Schwartz, B. (2001) ‘Commemorative Objects’. In N. Smelser and P. B. Baltes (Eds.) Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2267–2272. Schwartz, B. (2007) ‘Collective Memory’. In G. Ritzer (Ed.) Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Sociology. Oxford: Blackwell, 588–590. Schwartz, B. and Schuman, H. (2005) ‘History, Commemoration and Belief: Abraham Lincoln in American Memory, 1945–2001’. American Sociological Review, 70: 183–203. Shirlow, P., Tonge, J., McAuley, J. W., McGlynn, C. (2012) Abandoning Historical Conflict? Former Political Prisoners and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Smith, E. R. and Mackie, D. M. (2015) ‘Dynamics of Group-Based Emotions: Insights from Intergroup Emotions Theory’. Emotion Review, 7 (4): 349– 354. Stone, C. B. and Hirst, W. (2014) ‘Induced Forgetting to Form a Collective Memory’. Memory, 7 (3): 286–296. Thompson, P. (1988) The Voices of the Past: Oral History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Turner, B. S. (2006) Vulnerability and Human Rights. Pennsylvania: Penn State University.

3

IDENTITY, COMMEMORATION, REMEMBERING …

75

Verovšek. (2016) ‘Collective Memory, Politics and the Influence of the Past: The Politics of Memory as a Research Paradigm’. Politics, Groups and Identities, 7 (3): 529–543. Vollhardt, J. R. (2012) ‘Interpreting Rights and Duties after Mass Violence’. Culture and Psychology, 18 (1): 133–145. Wertsch, J. (2009) ‘Collective Memory’. In P. Boyer and J. V. Wertsch (Eds.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 117– 137. Zerubavel, Y. (1994) ‘The Death of Memory and the Memory of Death: Masada and the Holocaust as Historical Metaphors’. Representations, 26: 72–100. Zerubavel, Y. (1995) Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

CHAPTER 4

The Active Use of Narratives in Collective Memory

Memorial knowledge consists of forgetting as well as recalling, of selecting, distilling and transforming the past to make it accommodate needs of the present. It is a collaborative enterprise, for we use other people’s memories to confirm or elaborate our own and link our personal past with collective history. C. Vann Woodward (1987)

The previous chapters have outlined some of the main discussions around the concept of collective memory and attempt to highlight everyday use. This chapter develops some of these ideas and considers how, in actively engaging in the conceptual landscape, people frame and structure the politics of the society in which they live. It engages with understandings surrounding memory narratives and how these have become a refrain central to social and political life of Northern Ireland. Further, the chapter highlights how narratives use of collective memory to access and interpret senses of personal, social, political and cultural identity. All memories are at some level personal and in its most constricted sense, memory can be seen as an individual’s ability to preserve cognitively core aspects of past experiences. This recall of events is lodged in the mind, to be accessed at some point in the future through the mechanisms © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_4

77

78

J. W. MCAULEY

of recall and recollection. At this level, the things that we remember are always different and we as individuals, recall diverse events and matters for different concerns. Remembering for individuals ranges from a simple recollection of the name of a seldom seen favourite auntie, to recalling a state of emotion, heightened by certain events, through to remembering where you left your office keys at work, the date of an important event in history, or perhaps even your partner’s birthday. It is possible to identify several variances in approaching an understanding of memory and collective memory. The classical position regards memory in straightforward terms as the individual recall of those past experiences that are confined within personal memory. Understood in this way memory broadly refers to the ability to recollect events or facts through processes of encoding, storing, retaining and then subsequently retrieving this stored information. Underlying this perspective is the assumption that the major goal of remembering is to retrieve stored items as quickly and accurately as possible. This gives rise to those classifications of memory most prominent within psychology that include episodic, semantic and personalised (Michaelian 2016). In broad terms, episodic remembering is usually understood as that memory characteristically conveying a sense of reliving the past (Tulving 1972; Tulving and Craik 2000). Semantic memory concerns the general information of the past we possess, regardless of personal knowledge, while episodic memory has to do with the events of own experiences, throughout the life course. It thus depends on the recollection of information that we have acquired in the past, without and implication that individuals remember occasions or events in acquiring such knowledge (Nienass and Poole 2011).

(Auto)Biography and Individual Recall In contrast episodic memory draws on the unique recollections of an individual concerning specific events in the past. Beyond the traditional terrain for psychology in studying the cognitive processes, episodic recall is fundamental to constructing the life history of an individual and their narrative of the past. In some cases, this presents as autobiographical memory, characterised by an individual’s written recollection and the personal interpretation of the experiences in the person’s life (Goodson 2015). Autobiography provides strictly selected recollections of the past

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

79

filtered through memories that project personal identity (Schuman and Corning 2014). In popular terms, much of this is encompassed within autobiographies and individual life histories, recalling stories, which can be thought of as a steppingstone between individual conceptions of memory and more contextualised and socio-political interpretations of memory. Some are more successful in presenting this in a coherent way than others, many autobiographical works fail to provide any sort of narrative link to assess the individual in terms of continuity of the present, past and future. All autobiographical remembering represents a complex mix of recollections, document retrieval and reference to community and historical memories. Autobiographical memory has several functions including, the personal, for example, reflecting on past private events in order to better understand oneself and the social, for example, developing cohesion and group identity through sharing (Alea and Bluck 2003). Such writings provide a guide to the main intentions and motivations of an individual and the notion of Self is narrated through the distinct identity of a community (McAdams 1993). We can think of autobiographical memory as the presentation of episodic memory and the telling and retelling of major turning points in life that emerge within the framework of sociocultural models (Fivush and Nelson 2004; Nelson and Fivush 2004). While it is likely that the importance given by individuals to events and phases of their life course within their biography will change over time, only on very rare occasions, do autobiographic works move beyond this episodic approach to reveal dramatic changes in fundamental beliefs or individual ideology. Even more rare are those autobiographies that show the author as having weaknesses or present a self-critical analysis of the author’s attitudes, broad thinking and political evaluations across time. Even rarer are those autobiographies that represent notions of the Self that fundamentally challenge the core values and contemporary beliefs of the individual (Thorne and McLean 2003). In Ireland, the broad vista of politics has always operated within a frame of Ulster unionism and Irish nationalism and the divisions and competition between them. Part of the expression of these involves constructing a narrative around life stories (biography). This can be seen in the many biographies clearly aimed at an internal political audience that seeks to reinforce a defined community and sense of belonging, whereby:

80

J. W. MCAULEY

Identity itself takes the form of a story, complete with setting, scenes, character, plot and theme. In late adolescence and young adulthood, people living in modern societies begin to reconstruct the personal past, perceive the present and anticipate the future in terms of an internalized and evolving self-story, an integrative narrative of self that provides modern life with some modicum of psychosocial unity and purpose. (McAdams 2001: 101)

McAdams sets autobiography within the context of the (re)construction of Self and focuses on how individuals mediate their own past through narratives placing them within existing cultural frames. The construction of life stories goes far beyond the assembling of historical facts. Individuals selectively choose from a selected past to build stories and recall incidents to present (sometimes extremely imaginatively) a constructed past and portray this in a particular frame to the audience. Autobiographies are representations of life stories, constructed by individuals to give their lives particular meaning. To be effective autobiography must also be seen to reflect wider cultural values and norms, alongside implicit and explicit notions about national identity, gender, class and ethnicity at any given time. Moreover, what is being recalled must always be read in the broader historical and cultural context. While such works often seek to differentiate the individual, they can also be understood as identifying cultural frameworks within which these individuals act (McAdams 2001: 101). An example of this can be found in many of the writings of former Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams. In Beyond the Dawn (1996), for example, he recalls his life events within the broad cultural framework of providing legitimacy for the direction of the republican movement and his involvement in it (Hopkins 2021). This can be seen in his construction of memory involving his long-term family involvement in the Irish republican cause. The following account is given of his grandparents: The Hannaways were always republicans and members of each generation found themselves crossing the tracks of the preceding one as the struggle against injustice continued. My Grand-aunt Mary was an active member of Cumann na mBan, the women’s IRA. … Alfie’s brother Liam was in D Company of the IRA, as were members of the Adam’s family and he remained a very active republican right up until his death. (Adams 1996: 27)

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

81

Adam’s construction of his autobiographical memory plays important roles in the assertion and reaffirmation of both his personal and political identity. Broadly this projects him as the model Irish republican (Hopkins 2018). In reviewing much of Adam’s writings, his current beliefs and goals directly influence his recall and an appraisal of his former self, both in ideas and action (Adams 2003a, b). Through his views of the self and presentation of just what he remembers (and forgets) about his past are directly influenced by the ways he seeks to project episodes in his life in the context of his later politics. When people seek to project themselves in writing through time, it is most often to create a sense of coherence in their ideas and to project a largely favourable view of themselves. It is in this context that Adam’s recall of past circumstances and motivations should be seen. The stories presented by Adams offer narrative lines organised within a distinct social and cultural framework, which largely displays the development of Irish republicanism as inseparable from his own life history and his engagement in some of the core events and social relations and huge set pieces of the republican movement. Part of Adam’s motivation is undoubtedly to allow his autobiography to portray him as representative of an ideal type of republican (Hopkins 2018, 2021). Adams sets his own experience with a broad republican history and draws on key reference points within the chronology of republicanism, crossing and compressing events across time, ranging from the 1916 Rising through to the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement (GFA) of 1998, which are given coherence and presented as advances in republican struggle, within which Adams is seen to play a crucial part. There are broader examples of socialisation patterns experienced within the nationalist/republican community. The writer, Danielle McLaughlin who has moved far beyond the ideological confines of the community of her youth recalls how in, she grew up in a home where she was presented on a regular basis with a ‘myriad’ of rebel songs, including: ‘Come Out Ye Black and Tans’, ‘A Nation Once Again’, ‘Some Say the Devil is Dead’, ‘Follow Me Up to Carlow’ (all traditional republican songs) showing how deeply engrained such cultural memories are in part of the community, even in the banal sense. She further relates how a version of the ‘Men Behind the Wire’ (a modern-day republican song) was poorly received when she sang it at school, demonstrating cultural opposition values to the nature of contemporary republicanism, while engaging with the IRA of the past at the level of cultural memory.

82

J. W. MCAULEY

These patterns of collective learning are by no means confined to those from an Irish nationalist/republican background. There are several (auto)biographies that highlight the experience of those growing up in loyalist communities that can be found in the (auto)biographies of leading loyalist figures such as David Ervine (Sinnerton 2002), Billy Hutchinson (Hutchinson with Mulvenna 2020), Johnny Adair (Lister and Jordan 2003), William ‘Plum’ Smith (2014), Gusty Spence (Garland 2001), Michael Stone (2003) and Alistair Little (2009). Taken together they show similar patterns of socialisation and collective learning, exhibiting the tendency to draw on collective memories and the construction of the Other. Taken together these also reveal the fragmentation and separation of Northern Ireland society. Hutchinson encapsulates much of this situation when he describes his local district at the very outset of the Troubles as follows: ‘in the febrile streets of West Belfast, every perceived threat to the constitutional aspirations of either community was like a painful welt that quickly scarred and remained part of the collective psyche’ (Hutchinson 2020: 14). That mentality draws heavily on collective memories of past wrongdoings against the loyalist community and the belief of that Northern Ireland’s Catholic population contained many untrustworthy, views deeply engrained in the collective memory of loyalism. These views were consistently reproduced, more so as the society crumbled under rising levels of political violence and people were socialised into a society based on discord and organised around the politics disharmony. Not everyone exposed to the strong socialising forces and the narratives of republicanism and loyalism go down those political paths and individuals and there are incidents of individuals from such backgrounds expressing autonomy and agency. In the post-conflict period this is also partly reflected in the large number of autobiographies that deal with growing up during the conflict. Most reveal the intensity of the forces of socialisation and the depth of collective memory. They also reveal the capacity of individuals to resist the reproduction of dominant forms of cultural values of sectarianism. Taken together they reveal memories of growing up and living in a sectarianised society in which overt violence was an everyday occurrence. It is worth noting that these experiences, while in part individual and unique are also collective and shared with others. Further, during the life cycle people exhibit the ability to change and develop, but this is often bounded by

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

83

the strength of dominant collective values, norms and mores within the group.

Memories of the Present Collective cultural memory can be located within the context of even broader sets of social arrangements, intertwined as it is within wider social structures, statuses, institutions, values, norms, organisations and groups and reproduced through ideas, material artefacts language, beliefs and customs. Drawing on collective memories in particular ways helps reinforce and legitimise certain behaviour as acceptable (or unacceptable). This is used to create the footing for the formulation of a more agreed, perhaps sometime even hegemonic consciousness, that goes not only to constructing a given past, but also to forward narratives about present situation and visions of the future. The forging of links between a common past, present aspirations and a common future binds members together members and gives them a broad orientation and direction. This provides a central orientation towards any given situation and an adjustment and tendency of thought towards conflict and especially those narratives and images concerning the ingroup’s views of the rival. These narratives reflect members’ involvement, understandings and experiences. The conflict narrative of Northern Ireland is underwritten through collective memories which in turn sustain that narrative. Such narratives carry forward those themes which reinforce divisive interpretations of the past and disconnected identities. Such themes are celebrated within republican and loyalist communities as each seeks to venerate their sense of identity through energetic but mutually exclusive commemorations. Take for example, across loyalism the traditional 11th of July Bonfires, or 12th July demonstrations (commemorating the Victory of Williamite forces at the Boyne in 1690), or within the republican community, the large annual marches that commemorate the introduction of internment in 1971, or those demonstrations dedicated to the memory of the republican hunger strikes of the early 1980s.

84

J. W. MCAULEY

Memories of the Future Demonstrations and street performances have become much more prominent and much more public in recent years (Antick 2018). Each of these acts is used to inscribe senses of collective identity and set against the other, recalling events and divisions in the past and recreating and representing them in the present and foreseeable future. How should we interpret this notion of how individual memories are inscribed within social frameworks to give them social and political meaning. One writer who has rightfully earned prominence in any discussion of collective memory is Maurice Halbwachs (1877–1945). A former pupil of Emile Durkheim (1915), he drew directly on much of his mentor’s understanding of the workings of social world, to consider how individuals come together to express a group mind. Halbwachs’ pioneering work opened important lines of inquiry still recognised by most contemporary writers on the subject. Most openly credit him as responsible for establishing and developing collective memory as a cohesive concept (Mistzal 2003; Olick 1999, 2008). Events from the past are chosen and importantly: ‘it is in society that people normally acquire their memories’ (Halbwachs [1952] 1992: 38). Collective memory is reliant upon those social groups to which individual belong and how emerging memories are recognised, recalled and localised. In further distinguishing between autobiographical (personal), collective (shared) and historical (official) memory, Halbwachs (1992) goes on to claim that in remembering, that it is impossible to remove one’s own memories from the dominant collective memories of the time. As George Herbert Mead (1956: 329) put it, there cannot be a past: ‘independent of all presents’. Further, while all experiences belong to the past they are continually reproduced in the present, providing the conduit between the actual past and the stories told about it. Developing this idea Zerubavel suggests that in accessing the past: ‘we actually remember much of what we do only as members of particular communities’ (Zerubavel 2003: 3). Collective memories are used to review and rewrite senses of history that legitimise views of the Self and the community to which individuals feel they belong. Jan Assmann (2011) emphasises the central position of culture in commemoration and remembrance, suggesting that individual memories must be looked at through the lens of social relations in the dimensions of the personal, social and cultural, embedded within cultural symbols such as texts,

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

85

images and rituals. In similar ways, Aleida Assmann (1995, 2008) argues that long-term memories are created through culture investment in, for example, writings, images, bodily practices, commemorative places and monuments and museums to support political and social identity. The process of forgetting and remembering takes place within preexisting cultural frames of memory which, to some extent, determine how and what we remember (Huyssen 1995, 2000). As far back as 1932, Bartlett suggested that society was engaged in a ‘war of the ghosts’ in trying to understand how and why people selected some political memories while ignoring others. This notion is partially developed by Homi Bhabha who suggests that recall involves the pulling together of a disjoined past to make some sense of a disturbed present (Bhabha 2015). When individuals draw on memories, they recall personal events and experiences, but these are linked to the wider social and cultural practices that frame the social world (Brockmeier 2002a, b). Memory recall never takes place in a void and memories and cannot be regarded as remote in isolation from its broader social and political context. Further, individuals are prompted to remember certain events and likewise occasioned to forget or marginalise others. It is the social context that often provides the impulse for people to recall the social circumstances in which events happened and then to replay such memories in discrete social settings. Thus, individual and collective remembering are essentially linked.

The Social Context of Recall The past can therefore only be fully understood if we consider it in its social context. Collective memory reveals how individuals see themselves, the sense of Self and the ways relationships are constructed with other individuals and groups and the wider social world. Meanings from the past are constructed as socially and historically relevant, creating forms of knowledge that are culturally specific and that allow for collective understanding. Rather than directly reflecting reality, understandings of belonging and identity are shaped through communal taken-for-granted beliefs (Haug 1987, 1992, 1997). Ricoeur puts this straightforwardly when he claims that to remember, we need others. He argues: ‘not only is the type of memory we possess not derivable in any fashion from experience in the first person singular, in fact the order of derivation is the other way around’ (Ricoeur 2004: 120).

86

J. W. MCAULEY

Experiences must be set in their social context and historical narratives are produced and collective memory understood in terms of a reciprocal relationship between remembering and forgetting (Baddley 1989). Collective memory works by focusing on an understanding that contextualises memory recall within social, collective and narrative aspects, rather than within the individual mind (Wagoner and Brescó 2016; Boyer and Wertsch 2009). Memories are often objectified through old photographs, letters, family heirlooms and so on. These are often sustained and developed through conversations within the family, as past events are jointly recalled, developed and rememorised between family members (Billig 1997). Derek Edwards and David Middleton (1986) and Middleton and Edwards (1990) develop this understanding of collective remembering locating their work in how families trace their own and community history through everyday discussions. Such narratives are based on many occasions around events portrayed in family photographs. In reviewing family photograph albums with their young children, for example, elders actively recall not only important events from their own past, but also notions of collective memory for the children to absorb and repeat. A good example of this can be found within the Orange tradition where a particular worldview is systematically passed on across generations, reinforced by photographs of parents, largely fathers, grandfathers and even great grandfathers at Orange events and parades in the past. Indeed, as has been pointed out such photographs of multi-generation family groups are given prominence in Orange Order publications linking generations and memory in a meaningful way and through a disenable narrative (McAuley et al. 2011). These narrative claims about memory do not appear out of the blue, rather in many cases, they should be considered within a distinct social and political context (Edwards and Potter 1992; Potter and Wetherell 1990). Michael Billig supports this perspective by saying: The social activity of remembering is not tied to the recall of directly experienced stimuli for we can and continually do, claim to remember events at which we were not personally present.

He continues:

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

87

Thus, a present generation can ‘remember’ a previous generation’s sacrifice. Such memories can be passed across time. (Billig 1997: 42)

This may be readily seen in events surrounding the memorialisation and commemoration of both the events at the Somme and Easter 1916 by loyalists and republicans, respectively (Aughey 1991; Bearton 1997; Beiner 2007; Boyce 1996; Collins 2012; Longley 1991, 2001). This social aspect of memory is further illustrated by the argument that the major differences that typically exist around remembering, are between differing social cohorts, rather than simply between individuals, bringing to prominence the intersubjective and commonly shared aspects of collective memory (Zerubavel 1997).

Engaging Past Ghosts Socially constructed narratives and language are used to tell stories and have a central role in bringing structure and order to the lives of people (Crossley 2000a, b). These narratives are used to recount the past, engaging people with storytelling through which are given a notion of their relative position of the group in it (Andrews 2000, 2007). The engagement with ghosts of the past and the acceptance of certain views and memories as authentic and genuine defines membership of the group, while at the same time also actively excluding those deemed not to be members. In an important sense, remembrance can always be thought of as social because all memories only exist in relationship to what is recalled and is shared with others. As already indicated, this largely occurs using narrative, symbolism and presentation through cultural events. As indicated above, these events can only be properly understood if we appreciate the wider social and political contexts in which they are remembered. All forms of recall occur within a distinct social context and gain significance in a distinct cultural setting (Schudson 1989). While personal memories and acts of remembering are always present collective memory can be seen as a combination of these personal pasts drawn into solidarity within a distinct social context and then used to directly influence the social and political (Fentress and Wickham 1992). This perspective is added to by Barbara Misztal who suggests that the study of memory is:

88

J. W. MCAULEY

primarily concerned with the social aspects of remembering and the results of this social experience - that is, the representation of the past in a whole set of ideas, knowledges, cultural practices, rituals and monuments through which people express their attitudes to the past and which construct their relation to the past. (Misztal 2003: 6)

Whether through the construction of Self (Ricoeur 1991), the imagined community (Anderson 1983), the ethnic group (Roudometof 2002) or even the nation (Hobsbawm 1990) feelings of belonging and identity find clear expression through narrative (Kraus 2006). It is through discussion and debate around current narratives that people learn ways to engage with and recognise memories structuring the past presented to them (Hunt 2013). The existence of a distinguishable narrative is crucial in relating the past to the present through familiar discourses and a believable set of narratives. Narrative structures (re)produce shared memories that go to solidifying group identity through constructing senses of tradition and heritage. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (1983) remind us that much of what is thought of as tradition and long-standing is invented and the use of seemingly deep symbolism and myth surrounding the past rests almost entirely on constructed memory. Often these are reinforced through those social acts of memory that manifest in physical places of commemoration and memorial. It is therefore possible to see many forms of commemoration as connected more directly to ritual and the building of shared experiences in communities that memorialising actual events of the past.

Memory and Meaning Such commemorations centre directly on the overt remembrance and commemoration of those spaces (both ideological and physical) that have been inscribed with deep meaning. It enables people to define a sense of who they are, what they believe and their sense of community belonging. Individuals and groups make sense of community through their interaction with others, through material remembrance and cultures of space and place. Collective memory retains its relevance here, because group memory is always bolstered by the plethora of commemorations and monuments, making it living and pertinent to the everyday lives of many people (Zerubavel 1994).

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

89

The central meaning for the construction of group identity, namely: ‘a sense of sameness over time, is sustained by remembering and what is remembered is defined by the assumed identity’ (Gillis 1994: 3). The performance of collective memory and the clash of identities are played out in public space. Witness, the reproductive commemorations of the 1916 rebellion across republicanism, or the commemorations of the role of the 36th Ulster Division at the Somme within the loyalist community referred to above. There are a multitude of collective social frameworks, institutions, commemorative places and memorial objects through which people are encouraged to remember and recall in particular ways. While recognising this is difficult terrain, much of the remainder of this book considers how collective memory works in constructing identity and community and how it manifests by way of formulating community myths, narratives and expressions of identity at the sub-state level of loyalist and republican politics. The study of collective memory occurs within a broad matrix of social life, that considers how people negotiate senses of belonging and their place within the wider cultures of families, groups, communities and even nations (Burke 2019). In Northern Ireland, as elsewhere, the ways in which people engaged with fluctuating memory can, but interpretations of the past continue to have very real consequences for individuals and the formation of social identities. It is possible to consider collective memory as incorporating several major sub-categories (Nets-Zehngut 2013; Nets-Zehngut and Bar-Tal 2014). First, popular memory that defines those representations of the past commonly held by members of a group. These may include different modes of popular culture such as films, books recordings and so on, which often determine narratives and populist reactions to events and political dynamics. Second, there is what may be termed official memory, manifesting in those representations projected by institutions, for example, by state-sanctioned educational textbooks or government-sanctioned exhibitions. Third, autobiographical memory, which can be thought of in constructing collective memory, understood as a primary source for recording the political direction and motivation of those directly involved in events. Fourth, we may consider historical memory, those images of the past constructed by professional academics and sometimes independent scholars. Fifth, we have those cultural memories, outlined by reportage and articles dealing with the past and the roles played by memorials, buildings and monuments.

90

J. W. MCAULEY

Using Collective Memory Collective memory has its foundations in those communal beliefs and narratives, that communicate mutual and everyday understandings of those identifying as loyalists or republicans. It is through commonly understood discourses and frequently referenced symbolism, performances and signs, that meanings of the past are developed, structured and then passed on. Collective memory utilises common language, terminology, experience and narrative to reinforce familiar senses of belonging and to construct and reinforce the core unity and identity of the group. Such collective memories are derived directly by the group by commonly accepted discourse, traditions and rituals (although these need not necessarily be long established) and often through a shared culture and narrative including foundational myths, songs prose and stories. These provide a clear understanding to the group about its past and how these feed into its present and projections of the future (Kansteiner 2002; Wertsch 2008). People never offer understandings of the past located entirely in the models outlined above. Rather, people are much more likely to dip into various parts of these to construct group considerations of the past. Collective memory is never a unitary phenomenon, either conceptually, in its interpretation, or in the way it is used. As Andreas Huyssen suggests: ‘memory is one of those elusive topics … as soon as we try to define it, it starts slipping and sliding, eluding attempts to grasp it either culturally, sociologically, or scientifically’ (Huyssen 2003: 3). The notion is often used in ways that directly overlap and incorporate several other concepts, including cultural identity, ethnicity, social identity and nationalism (Simine 2013; Winter 1995, 2006). There is little agreement concerning the understanding of collective memory is, or how it is used (Confino 1997; Olick 2008; Wertsch 2002). The proliferation of interest in collective memory, commemoration and remembrance is obvious to all and a wide range of scholars and disciplines have harnessed the term to explain a broad range of social phenomena (Harris et al. 2008). What follows does not focus on those understandings of memory that confine it to the individual or internal mental processes or as the product of the individual mind. Rather, it concentrates on memory as a socially constituted entity the consequences of which also manifest socially and politically. It further seeks to understand both remembering and forgetting as activities which lead directly to various forms of social organisation and social action.

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

91

Problematic Collective Memory People give different meanings to memories. Some see communal memory as constructed in a different manner to that presented so far. In recognising that it is not as a unified entity, several writers have questioned the usefulness of the term collective memory. Wulf Kansteiner identifies collected memories, as: ‘an aggregate of individual memories which behaves and develops just like its individual composites’ (Kansteiner 2002: 186). Hence, for some the concept of collective memory has become so muddied and problematic, that they tend to use another term, that of collected memories. Hence, those working within this paradigm have highlighted the ways in which individuals recount the importance of past events using, for example, oral histories or social surveys for their evidence. Moreover, these views put emphasis on the accumulation of socially framed individual memories and the impossibility of a single collective memory, recognising the necessity to consider the amalgamation of individual memories. By promoting the notion of social remembering, rather than collective memory, several writers (see for example, Armstrong and Crage 2006; Whitehead 2009) seek to reconstruct relationships between the individual and the collective by seeking to relocate the individual and drawing attention to the place agency plays in social memory. Such works put an emphasis on the ways in which broader social phenomena bring people to recall the past line within dominant forms of remembering. Collected memory tends to stress the significance of change and continuity across different generational cohorts (Schumann and Scott 1989; Schuman and Corning 2012). It also highlights the consequences that the recall of major events, on both the national and international stage. This often regulates the parameters within which people’s beliefs are determined and reinforced and the symbolism through which these ideas are represented in public commemoration (Vinitzky-Seroussi and Teeger 2010). For Olick the major difference between collective and collected memory is essentially the different understandings of the role of the past. He suggests one sees: ‘culture as a subjective category of meanings contained in people’s minds versus one that sees culture as patterns of publicly available symbols objectified in society’ (Olick 1999: 334).

92

J. W. MCAULEY

Symbolism and Commemoration Commemoration often involves the projection of understood and agreed markers to take on a highly symbolic form. Symbolic identity can take many different forms, but almost all involve notable levels of ritual and symbolism meaningful to the collective. This is a means of lifting from the ordinary those past events signifying the group’s most fundamental values with such memories often being symbolically selected for emphasis (Schwartz 1982). It is possible to see symbolism as the collective representation of past events through rituals of commemoration (Burke 1989). Further, it has been suggested that all forms of commemoration are: ‘purposefully selected, modified and re-appropriated to meet the political agendas and ideological frameworks concerned’ (Park 2011: 523). Bryan Turner (2006) suggests that such memory acts and commemorations don’t happen by chance, but rather are structured and organised. Moreover, none of this happens without the work of memory agents as official commemoration is always marked by the outcome of a: ‘complex relationships between central government, regional authorities, civil society associations, business people and intellectuals’ (Turner 2006: 211). Connections are made through commemorative narratives and symbolism providing reference points not just for the current, but also for future generations (Mosse 1990). Those commemorations that carry the most significance are often those constructed by memory agents and actors, who seek to retain relevancy and make collective memories alive in the everyday (Olick and Robins 1999: 80–81). It is symbolism and ritual that provide the tools for memory actors to reaffirm, or in some cases modify, or even invoke new understandings from the past (Zerubavel 1995). These associations go to endorse and reaffirm self-identity and to buttress and reinforce the group’s selfbelief (Wagner-Pacifici and Schwartz 1991). Inscribed memories become more meaningful as they become entangled in the everyday through the repetition of rituals of commemoration (Connerton 1989). These commemorative practices can take different forms and find differing modes of expression through, for example, meetings, memorials, physical monuments or even parades. Following Connerton (1989) it is possible to see commemoration as connected directly to ritual and the building of shared memories and experiences in communities. Olick further suggests that commemorative processes are a: ‘way of claiming that the past has

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

93

something to offer to the present, be it a warning or a model’ (Olick 1999: 381). Central to these processes is the production of a commemoration narrative in the form of a: ‘story about a particular past that accounts for this ritualised remembrance and provides a moral message for the group members’ (Zerubavel 1995: 6). This expression of identity draws direct links to the past, promoting commitment by (re)producing symbols of groups values and objectives (Geertz 1973: 193–233). Commemoration arouses emotion for those memories deemed to merit recall remembrance and tribute. Often this involves the perceived importance of the event to the group, or sometimes the actions of individuals foremost in presenting the goals and value of the group. This may be expressed through the deliberate manufacture of memorialising narratives that become apparent through forms of active commemoration, clear examples of which are seen in the reproduction of narratives and performances surrounding, for example, the Easter 1916 rebellion, or formation of the UVF in 1913. Not all commemorations rely on the production of, or engagement with, the grand events of Irish politics. Parallel narratives sometimes focus on small-scale and informal interactions but link to more macro narratives. In almost all cases, the symbolism involved is central to the transmission of identity and these can be broadly subdivided into different forms; linguistic (including language in written or spoken form) and non-linguistic (a physical representation of a cultural norm agreed upon by society) forms, to affirm senses of identity and belonging that find expression through the community.

Making Sense of the Commemorative Past Commemoration then represents one important way in which the community is constantly reminded of the central aspects of its identity. This is further reinforced and conveyed by the symbolism that conveys the core sentiments and values of the group. It also provides the focus for the performance of memory through which a shared identity can be developed and furthered. These acts of memory represent the attempt to foist interpretations of the past unto the group and to shape memory through commemoration, reconstruction and representation. Hence, community memories and identities are continually sustained and reinforced through narrative structures in which every commemorative act contributes: ‘to the formation of a master commemorative

94

J. W. MCAULEY

narrative that structures collective memory (and) focuses on the group’s distinct social identity’ (Zerubavel 1995: 6). In this context, Wertsch (2002, 2008) suggests collective memory and commemorative narratives represent a process rather than a product. Recall and commemoration make some sense of what has gone before, involving what may be described: ‘as a kind of collective autobiography’ (Connerton 1989: 70). Commemoration is also important to the collective as it reinforces political intentions and legitimising the core beliefs of those groups who project a distinct past that reinforces group identity. The selection of events and individuals for commemoration highlights tribulations and outrages of past, as well as advances for the group and the cause they represent. In many ways memory and identity are all but inseparable concepts. It links individuals culturally and bonds them socially through the appropriation of the group’s past into a common understanding of social world. It is through commemoration that the group seeks to reinforce memory cohesion and togetherness by the promotion of those events which they deem should never be forgotten, (or sometimes by bringing forward events which may have been). A vivid example is found annually in republican communities energetic commemoration of the H-Block hunger strikes (Hopkins 2014; O’Malley 1990). The occasion is marked by rallies, marches and parades, alongside other commemorative events and the presentation of various artefacts, including clothing, branded goods and publications. All of these are effectively promoted by memory actors to ensure a particular understanding of events of the time entered and solidified in the collective memory of Irish republicanism (see various in Porter 1998). Through active commemoration memory is used to confirm and strengthen a group’s core senses of identity, being and belonging. Active commemoration also reinforces the central aims and ambitions of the group, the grievances and animosities felt by the group and its political and social orientations. Selective collective memory is crucial to both republicanism and loyalism in building and reinforcing senses of identity and the use of memorialisation and commemoration is a core component. The formal process of commemoration takes many different forms, but often looks towards rituals to try to ensure its persistence and duration. This includes groups affirming and modifying memories of the past through commemoration narratives, which tell a story: ‘about a particular past that accounts for this ritualised remembrance and provides a moral message for the group members’ (Zerubavel 1995: 6). It is the symbolic

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

95

reproduction of significant historic events that help structure beliefs and (re)affirm a shared cultural identity. It is through active commemoration that the opportunity occurs to endorse the political community.

Commemorative Discourses and Narratives Such narratives work to constantly define the past and collective memory becomes incorporated working through commemoration and rituals to construct tradition and political myths (Rowlands 1993). For both loyalism and republicanism these processes continue to narratively (re)define the political community and those who may be included in it. Memories may be absorbed or adopted to be deemed core to group identity and to best meet the current needs of a given political community. Commemoration also takes place through discourses that make either explicit or codified references to past events. It is through these discourses that unity is deepened, and cohesion reinforced as individuals share lived experiences around the past. These experiences are continually negotiated and renegotiated as group members draw on collective memories, resulting in different mnemonic communities. It is through socialisation into such mnemonic communities that people learn to structure narratives to reproduce collective memories that fit within the predominant beliefs of the group. As such, the mnemonic practices of the group incorporate a range of activities, including celebrations, the building of commemorations and memorials and the building of stories and myths relating to memory (Olick and Robbins 1998; Zerubavel 1997). This goes to reinforce the senses of collective identity and draw directly on the narratives constructed around commemoration. Indeed, as indicated above, one major role of commemorative narrative is its centrality in constructing identity (Schwartz 1998; Zamponi 1998). Such reference points often provide the basis for the validation and legitimation of other views and can fuel and perpetuate division, or even in some cases reignite conflict in Northern Ireland. It is through these constructed narratives that: memory is articulated, transmitted and performed in ways that have direct consequences for the construction of social and senses of belonging. Groups narrate experiences according to broader, culturally available plot lines as it were: what in one later context will be a story victimhood will in another be a story of heroic resistance; what in one place will be an

96

J. W. MCAULEY

emphasis on individual struggle will in another be cast as part of a collective effort; and so on. (Fulbrook 2011: 25)

It is through these interactions, between narrative and collective memory, that both republicanism and loyalism are constantly reminded of their supposed origin and these ideas are reproduced within their respective communities. For these groups the nature and causes of the conflict and the broad stances individuals are expected to take is determined through the storytelling and the interpretation and presentation through commemoration and memorialisation, establishing senses of self and belonging. Further, it is through such narratives that individuals exchange ideas involving the construction and sharing of a common past. People tell, learn and reproduce narratives and stories and it is through these that personal and group identities are confirmed, solidified and community myths and traditions are established and reinforced (Polletta 1998). This agreed common narrative is often placed at the centre of a milieu of personal knowledge and experience. It is through such narratives that people discuss, negotiate and compete for authentic views of the past. Narrative thus plays a core role in transmitting cultural values (Fine 1999, 2001). Loyalism and republicanism draw heavily on existing narratives and then seek to build on them to reinforce community knowledge, stimulating memories for the group. In a society as socially and politically divided as Northern Ireland, where the existence of the state itself is under daily ideological (and sometimes physical) challenge, the dominant narratives of conflict, constrain and confine viewpoints. This means that only certain perspectives are seen as acceptable, defining what is acceptable to the political agenda and what is not possible in contemporary and future political arena. It is the narrative voices within which differing factions seek to dictate public and private discourses, as people and groupings align with these partisan explanations.

Living and Lived Memory It should be apparent from much of the above that narratives are central to the production and the securing of social reality in Northern Ireland. This is fashioned and then fastens individuals into positions that buttress senses of identity and those feelings of belonging based versions of the contemporary, underpinned by a process that carries forward notions of

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

97

the past, reinforced by memorialisation and commemoration. During this process, collective memory takes on major significance and carries forward into the everyday ideas and arguments surrounding the past and identity (Pennebaker and Banasik 1997; Rodriguez and Fortier 2007). Through encounters with this strand of active, living and lived memory of the past, that both loyalist and republican collectives help construct identities of Self and community and the political and social relationships with other collectives and communities (McAdam et al. 2001; Olick 2008). This gives rise to the broad constructed categories that form the basis for proclaiming and asserting differences in identity between the two main groups contesting Northern Ireland. History and differing views of the past are often drawn upon to reinforce antagonistic and oppositional viewpoints, often harnessed and reinforced by memory actors and leaders within the bonded group. All this is based on the idea that the denial by one group of the possibility that they have anything in common with the other, either in past or in contemporary circumstances. Thus, unionists and loyalists constantly seek to deny legitimacy to the beliefs and identity claims of nationalists and republicans and vice-versa. The organisation of political life along these lines means the parameters of social identity are heightened and augmented to provide further cohesion and camaraderie of the in-group while denying any relationship with the out-group. In response to the conflict, an amplified and intensified sense of social identity was also used to motivate and mobilise members and to mark out the difference to the Other. The Troubles and the continual presence of violent conflict strengthened the identification of those seeking to enforce the notion of collective identity. This saw the increased social and later physical separation of society. Members of both unionist/loyalist and nationalist/ republican community looked internally to reinforce strengthening senses of belonging and provide some sense of ontological security. As James Liu and Denis Hilton (2005) point out such views in turn often provide legitimacy to the perceived reasons for division and promote the persistence of conflict. The desire, to have something solid in place to meet an uncertain future manifests especially during times of overt conflict that come to dominate the attitudes and social identity of a group.

98

J. W. MCAULEY

Framing and Transmitting Collective Memory In these circumstances collective memory condenses narratives, shortens the temporality between key events and produces a simplified version of long and often complex narratives. Further, it (re)presents and links specific occurrences and events in the past through commemoration and memorialisation, seeking to promote and expand commitment to a cause by highlighting and using symbols to reproduce the values of the group (Geertz 1973: 193–233). Collective remembering privileges certain identity formations and contestations over an objective representation of the past to constitute a workable and usable version of the past. This in turn is used to justify and legitimise those attitudes and attitudes deemed necessary to meet the present needs of both unionists and loyalists or nationalist and republican communities. Recall of such events directly influences peoples’ behaviour and actions, especially in a society with such a non-consensual view of the past and results in conflicting representations of history. Serge Moscovici (1981, 1984) suggests that social representations of the past exist in three major forms. First, they may be hegemonic, by which it is seen that these representations assume a particular unanimity across a given society. Second, they may come in an unbound form, whereby competing versions of the past exist in different segments of the same society. These can exist in relations of relative accord. Third, we can have a polemical representation of the past. These are conflicting representations across different groups, which are in discord and conflict with each other. These representations constitute the base camp for the comprehensive and meticulous construction of identity by drawing directly on notions of collective memory to give people a sense of who they are and to underpin community solidarity. Such representations guide life decisions and everyday judgements within loyalist and republican communities. They go to structure actions and to meet challenges in the present and to project an understanding of what issues the collective might face in the further. Importantly, political forces are harnessed around and mobilised by these dynamics. In post-conflict Northern Ireland, it is highly unlikely that there will be an agreed representation of the past. Even if they draw on the same points in history, different social groups often refer to these points in the past in highly divergent and oppositional ways. Different social groups compete to characterise and manipulate the past and use this to organise and mobilise in differing ways (Verberg and

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

99

Davis 2011). The period that saw the development and growth of the civil rights movement in the late 1960s, in Northern Ireland provides a good example of this. The 50th anniversary of the onset of the conflict brought to the fore, several works reassessing its place in history, many based on the memories of those involved (Hagan 2018; O’Doherty 2020; Reynolds 2015). It has also witnessed the contestation over ownership of these memories, as discussed more fully below.

The Struggle for Memory Dominance There is no overriding sense of a unified past in Northern Ireland and certainly no single agreed narrative of the past leads to conflict and competition between groups. In the main, loyalist and unionist and nationalist and republican views compete for understandings of what has gone before to produce the largely dominant conflictual, polemical insights of the past (Cairns and Roe 2003). Other readings of history, such as those giving primacy to women, or the working class are marginalised, subject to struggle to processes of forgetting. Collective memory is used in various and sometimes contradictory ways. On the one hand, it can be seen as overtly concerned with distinguishing and preserving reference points from the past, highlighting the continuities with what has gone before, while, on the other hand, it draws on notions of altering what has gone before in order to fit present demands. The reading of history that is transmitted and absorbed becomes central, because as has been pointed out: ‘we cannot ignore its powers for myth making’ (Arthur 1987: 3) in the search of a common sense of belonging and identity. This involves engagement with chosen sets of memories in order to reemphasise, recover or rewrite the past, in order to prioritise and include or exclude, identifiable individuals or collectives and as explicit expressions of power (Arthur 2003). As many of those who have been involved in the recent phases of violent conflict pass on, Northern Ireland will become a society, in which lived experiences are used to preserve the memory of generations and reproduce existing parameters of conflict. Subsequent generations are socialised into a particular understanding of the conflict and the acceptance of differing views regarding the causes of violence and its residue (Hervieu-Leger 2000).

100

J. W. MCAULEY

One manifestation has been the development of what many see as a culture war, the growing clash between republican and loyalist readings and presentations of history, that we shall encounter directly in what follows. The notion that the past is being greened and unionism is losing out in a cultural and media struggle with Sinn Féin is commonplace. The broad feelings that the Protestant unionist experience is not understood or represented fairly in the media often are encompassed in a wider narrative concerning the political outmanoeuvring of political unionism. Within this usable past, collective memories are constructed in ways that reinforce and legitimise political beliefs and actions through reference to tradition. This will be considered in more detail in Chapter 6, but for now it is important to recognise how symbolism can act as a powerful expression of inclusion and exclusion. Multiple attitudes and values are conveyed by symbolism, representing the common acceptance of and legitimation of actions by the group. Social representations contain and can become a source of intense differences between competing groups. These reflect the stories that groups talk about and how they choose to represent themselves within these narratives. Such narratives are established and transmitted by a variety of social actors, often appealing directly to memories of a shared past golden age (Smith 1995, 1999). Narratives and collective understandings of the past are drawn on to legitimise beliefs and to reinforce actions through the remembrance of events, by a distinct linking narrative, often using perceived historical comparisons and analogies to frame the vision of a coherent past and project a current political strategy to bring about an anticipated future. These understandings of the past are given credence through those social movements and political groupings that promulgate a worldview affirming the group’s identification and motivation. It is by invoking shared memories employed to establish senses of stability and permanency across time that group identification is reinforced and strengthened. This is not to deny or even underplay agency plays in mediating memory through distinctive cultural framing. As IrwinZarecka (1994) argues, collective memory can be seen as that coherent sense of belonging and emotional states concerning the past, which is not located in individual mindsets, but rather in the shared intergenerational resources and imaginings of the group.

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

101

(Re)Imagining the Past It is worth re-emphasising those memories as projected by most social and political groups are not about an accurate recall of the past, but rather, they concern the interpretation of the past. To some degree this also involves emotional and moral feelings involved in recall. In Northern Ireland, spectres from the past are ever present in current political discourses. Such understandings are embedded, both historically and dynamically in structures of Northern Ireland society emerging from given memories of the past. Memory is used to establish social frameworks (Müller 2002), and in Northern Ireland results in the formation, maintenance and upholding of the two broad-based ethno-political movements, characterised on the one hand, by those who identify as unionist, loyalist and British and on the other, those who consider themselves nationalist, republican and Irish. These views and understandings of the past give rise to the major political categories, each grouping drawing distinctively on their own constructs, collective memories, interpretations and representations (McAuley 2016). None of this is to deny that other collective senses of identity exist, but our major concern is with the construction of the two major worldviews outlined above remain central to the creation of distinctive oppositional identities that have driven the conflict in Northern Ireland. These main groupings regard themselves as having their own and separate history, identity, politics and sense of place. The formations of loyalism and republicanism sometimes overlap with mainstream unionist and nationalist versions of the past, but even then, there is a disconnection as major events are seen through very different filters. The basis for such separation is the distinctive forms of remembering and recall that take place. Within this, both loyalism and republicanism draw heavily and directly on their own foundation myths and cultural memories to produce distinct and oppositional narratives and separate readings of the situation. These strong senses of cultural separateness, broadly expressing oppositional commitments to various and competing senses of Irishness or Britishness are readily apparent across both loyalism and republicanism. Further, these senses of difference and dissimilarity are underpinned by oppositional narratives that emphasise difference, hostility and disagreement. These are increasingly emphasised as past events are (re)interpreted through the closed, or at best semi-closed narratives of loyalism and republicanism. Such interpretations are used to consistently present the

102

J. W. MCAULEY

dangerous Other as responsible for the conflict, both currently and in the past. These constructs become ever more significant as conflict develops and deepens offering extremely limited options for the future. Patterns of community recall and remembering intensify the awareness of the aspirations of the individual and the ‘in-group’ congeals around particular sets of awareness and understandings of the past and how it relates to the present and to the Other. Conflicting beliefs about senses of belonging and difference most often manifest around the sectarian dispute. The feelings aroused sometimes become so intense that violence, is seen as a legitimate response. This results in the negative characterisation of the Other. This often intensifies, the Troubles being an example, whereby these views are used as justifications for overt violence and the continuation of conflict were strengthened by direct reference to a coherent and cohesive past as perceived continuities in the conflict were laid bare and the blame for was placed squarely at the feet of the Other. As the existing norms of civil society were split asunder by sectarianism, one result was that for most loyalists and republicans everything that went to make up their own central orientating sense of community is seen as being absent from the other community. This manifested in several ways, the most notable was the physical segregation of communities, in part at least as a response to increasing physical violence. But this was only in part of what happened, the separation was reinforced by widening cultural divisions, marking separate memories and self-generated community myths. As Paul Arthur (2003, 2007) indicates the legacy of the Troubles remains deeply engaged in the minds of many people of Northern Ireland and the ways they interpret the political circumstances they find themselves in and lived through. People, of course, do not organise and conduct their everyday lives by drawing upon a particular point in history of a singular frame of reference. Nor is their sense of social identity constructed in relation to one set of social circumstances. In contemporary post-conflict Northern Ireland many still look towards existing and predictable ideas as outlets for political expression and organisation. Communal understandings and collective interpretations reinforce expressions of deep-seeded senses of community identity and an ‘us against them’ view of the world. The engagement with this active or living past creates narratives giving expression to beliefs about what is to be done and what can be done, in the present and the future. People draw simultaneously on multiple narratives and senses of identity and as we have seen these connect to different sets of relationships

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

103

and social circumstances to give stability and coherence to their senses of identity and belonging. Narratives bring meaning to the group and frame and structure senses of both Self and community. Narrative also provides the tools to interpret the contemporary through the past and continually makes what has gone before relevant to the current self-identity of loyalism and republicanism. These reinforcing narratives legitimise attitudes and work to convey the past into the present and transport the present into the past, through contemporary beliefs, values and actions (Kearney 1997). Thus, differing ways in which memory is acted upon and the symbolism through which it is expressed have direct influence on inter- and intra-community relationships.

Conclusions This chapter has illustrated two broad approaches to collective memory. First, it can be seen as something shared through constructed stories and recall of the past. What makes it collective is the process of recalling the past together as a community. Second, collective memory can be thought of as forming a communal container of narratives and stories about past deeds and events, even though those drawing on such ideas were not present or could have had no personal experience of events. While there is a plethora of terms and definitions that manifest in a multitude of writings on collective memory, three main aspects take centre stage for much of the remainder of the book. First, the place it plays in the social construction of collectives and identity; second, its role in framing the social and the political and third, how it acts as a social motivator and political mobiliser. Within this it is possible to identify several issues that arise, including persistence and change in culture across time, alongside the conceptual limits between the notions of memory, history and different understandings of the past. The senses of social belonging created by the processes outlined above bring together a clear sense of social identity and bond these with those expressing similar self-awareness. This manifests in the development communities that draw deeply on the collective memories of loyalism and republicanism. Within these three major foci of collective memory: the family; the community and those expressing wider senses of belonging through collectives or groups, will feature prominently throughout the remainder of the book.

104

J. W. MCAULEY

References Adams, G. (1996) Before the Dawn: An Autobiography. London: Heinemann. Adams, G. (2003a) A Farther Shore: Ireland’s Long Road to Peace. New York: Random House. Adams, G. (2003b) Hope and History: Making Peace in Ireland. Dingle: Brandon. Alea, N. and Bluck, S. (2003) ‘Why Are You Telling Me That? A Conceptual Model of the Social Function of Autobiographical Memory’. Memory, 11 (2): 165–178. Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Andrews, M. (2000) ‘Text in a Changing Context: Reconstructing Lives in East Germany’. In J. Bornat, P. Chamberlayne and T. Wengraf (Eds.) The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Science: Comparative Issues and Examples. London: Routledge. Andrews, M. (2007) Shaping History: Narratives of Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Antick, P. (2018) ‘Performing Memory and Securitization in Belfast’. In V. Strukov and V. Apryshchenko (Eds.) Memory and Securitization in Contemporary Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Armstrong, E. A. and Crage, S. M. (2006) ‘Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall Myth’. American Sociological Review, 71 (5): 724–751. Arthur, P. (1987) Government and Politics of Northern Ireland. London: Longman. Arthur, P. (2003) ‘Northern Ireland’. In D. J. Whittaker (Ed.) The Terrorism Reader. London: Routledge. Arthur, P. (2007) ‘Conflict, Memory and Reconciliation’. In M. Elliott (Ed.) The Long Road to Peace in Northern Ireland: Peace Lectures from the Institute of Irish Studies at Liverpool University. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 147–156. Assmann, A. (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’ (translated by J. Czaplicka). New German Critique, 65: 47–60. Assmann, A. (2008) ‘Transformations between History and Memory’. Social Research, 75 (1): 49–72. Assmann, J. (2011) Cultural Memory and Early Civilization. Writing, Remembrance and Political Imagination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aughey, A. (1991) ‘What is Living and What is Dead in the Ideal of 1916?’. In M. Ní Dhonnchadha and T. Dorgan (Eds.) Revising the Rising. Derry: Field Day, 71–90.

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

105

Baddley, A. (1989) ‘The Psychology of Remembering and Forgetting’. In T. Butler (Ed.) Memory: History, Culture and the Mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 33–60. Beiner, G. (2007) ‘Between Trauma and Triumphalism: The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Crux of Deep Memory in Modern Ireland’. Journal of British Studies, 46: 366–389. Billig, M. (1997) ‘Discursive, Rhetorical and Ideological Messages’. In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.) The Message of Social Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell, 36–53. Boyce, D. G. (1996) ‘1916, Interpreting the Rising’. In D. G. Boyce and A. O’Day (Eds.) The Making of Modern Irish History: Revisionism and the Revisionist Controversy. London: Routledge, 163–187. Boyer, P. and Wertsch, J. V. (2009) (Eds.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brockmeier, J. (2002a) ‘Narrative and Cultural Memory’. Special Volume of Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 1–14. Brockmeier, J. (2002b) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: Narrative as Cultural Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 15–43. Burke, P. (1989) ‘History as Social Memory’. In T. Butler (Ed.) Memory: History, Culture and the Mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Burke, P. (2019) Myths, Memories and the Representations of Identities. London: Edward Everett Root. Cairns, E. and Roe, M. (2003) ‘Introduction: Why Memories in Conflict?’. In E. Cairns and M. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 3–8. Collins, J. (2012) Whose Past is it Anyway? The Ulster Covenant, the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme. Dublin: History Press. Confino, A. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1386–1403. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossley, M. L. (2000a) Introducing Narrative Psychology: Self, Trauma and the Construction of Meaning. Buckinghamshire: Open University Press. Crossley, M. L. (2000b) ‘Narrative Psychology, Trauma and the Study of Self/ Identity’. Theory and Psychology, 10 (4): 527–546. Durkheim, E. (1915) Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Macmillan. Edwards, D. and Middleton, D. (1986) ‘Joint Remembering: Constructing an Account of Shared Experience through Conversational Discourse’. Discourse processes, 9 (4): 423–459. Edwards, D. and Potter, J. (1992) Discursive Psychology. London: Sage. Fentress, J. and Wickham, C. (1992) Social Memory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

106

J. W. MCAULEY

Fine, G. A. (1999) ‘John Brown’s Body: Elites, Heroic Embodiment and the Legitimation of Political Violence’. Social Problems, 46 (2): 225–249. Fine, G. A. (2001) Difficult Reputations: Collective Memories of the Evil, Inept and Controversial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Fivush, R. and Nelson, K. (2004) ‘Culture and Language in the Emergence of Autobiographical Memory’. Psychological Science, 15 (9): 573–577. Garland, R. (2001) Gusty Spence. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Goodson, I. (2015) ‘Exploring History and Memory through Autobiographical Memory’. Historia y Memoria de la Educación, 1: 263–285. Hagan, S. (2018) ‘Northern Ireland’s Lost Moment: How the Peaceful Protests of ‘68 Escalated into Years of Bloody Conflict’. The Guardian, 22 April. Halbwachs, M. (1992 [1941, 1952, 1925]) On Collective Memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Harris, C. B., Paterson H. M. and Kemp, R. I. (2008) ‘Collaborative Recall and Collective Memory: What Happens When We Remember Together?’ Memory, 16 (3): 213–230. Haug, F. (1987) Female Sexualization: A Collective Work of Memory. London: Verso. Haug, F. (1992) Beyond Female Masochism: Memory-Work and Politics. London: Verso. Haug, F. (1997) Memory-Work as a Method of Social Science Research: A Detailed Rendering of Memory-Work Method. Available at: http://www.friggahaug.ink rit.de/documents/memorywork-researchguidei7.pdf; accessed 10 April 2022. Hobsbawm, E. (1990) Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hobsbawm, E. and Ranger, T. (1983) (Eds.) The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hopkins, S. (2014) ‘The Chronicles of Long Kesh: Provisional Irish Republican Memoirs and the Contested Memory of the Hunger Strikes’. Memory Studies, 7 (4): 425–439. Hopkins, S. (2018) ‘Bobby Sands, Martyrdom and the Politics of Irish Republican Memory’. In Q. Outram and K. Leybourn (Eds.) Secular Martyrdom in Britain and Ireland: From Peterloo to the Present. Basel: Springer International, 263–286. Hopkins, S. (2021) ‘The Memoir-Writing of Former Paramilitary Prisoners in Northern Ireland: A Politics of Reconciliation? In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 75–94.

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

107

Hunt, N. (2013) ‘Memory and Social Meaning: The Impact of Society and Culture on Traumatic Memories’. In M. Linden and K. Rutkowski (Eds.) Hurting Memories and Beneficial Forgetting: Posttraumatic Stress Disorders, Biographical Developments and Social Conflicts. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 49–57. Hutchinson, B. [with G. Mulvenna] (2020) My Life in Loyalism. Newbridge: Merrion Press. Huyssen, A. (1995) Twilight Memories: Marking Time in a Culture of Amnesia. London: Routledge. Huyssen, A. (2000) ‘Present Pasts: Media, Politics, Amnesia’. Public Culture, 12 (1): 21–38. Huyssen, A. (2003) Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Irwin-Zarecka, I. (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Kansteiner, W. (2002) ‘Finding Meaning in Memory: A Methodological Critique of Collective Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 41: 179–197. Kearney, R. (1997) Postnationalist Ireland: Politics, Culture, Philosophy. London: Routledge. Kraus, W. (2006) ‘The Narrative Negotiation of Identity and Belonging’. Narrative Inquiry, 16 (1): 103–111. Lister, D. and Jordan, H. (2003) Mad Dog. The Rise and Fall of Johnny Adair and ‘C’ Company. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing. Little, A. (with R. Scott) (2009) Give a Boy a Gun. From Killing to Peace Making. London: Darton, Lonman and Todd. Liu, J. H. and Hilton, D. J. (2005) ‘How the Past Weighs on the Present: Social Representations of History and their Role in Identity Politics’. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44: 537–556. Longley, E. (2001) ‘Northern Ireland: Commemoration, Elegy, Forgetting’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–254. Longley, E. (1991) ‘The Rising, the Somme and Irish Memory’. In M. Ní Dhonnchadha and T. Dorgan (Eds.) Revising the Rising. Derry: Field Day, 29–49. McAdams, D. (1993) The Stories We Live By: Personal Myths and the Making of the Self . New York: Guildford. McAdams, D. (2001) ‘The Psychology of Life Stories’. Review of General Psychology, 5 (2): 100–122. McAdam, D., Tarrow, S. and Tilly, C. (2001) Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McAuley, J. W. (2016) ‘Memory and Belonging in Ulster Loyalist Identity’. Irish Political Studies, 31 (1): 122–138.

108

J. W. MCAULEY

McAuley, J. W., Tonge J. and Mycock, A. (2011) Loyal to the Core? Orangeism and Britishness in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Mead, G. H. (1956) On Social Psychology. Selected Papers. Edited and with Introduction by Anselm Strauss. Chicago: Phoenix Books. Mistzal, B. A. (2003) Theories of Social Remembering. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Michaelian, K. (2016) Mental Time Travel: Episodic Memory and Our Knowledge of the Personal Past. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Moscovici, S. (1981) ‘On Social Representations’. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.) Social Cognition: Perspectives on Everyday Knowledge. London: Academic Press. Moscovici, S. (1984) ‘The Phenomenon of Social Representations’. In R. M. Farr and S. Moscovici (Eds.) Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–69. Mosse, G. (1990) Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Müller, J-W. (2002) ‘Introduction: The Power of Memory, the Memory of Power and the Power over Memory’. In Jan-Werner Müller (Ed.) Memory and Power in Post-war Europe: Studies in the Presence of the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–35. Nelson, K. and Fivush, R. (2004) The Emergence of Autobiographical Memory: A Social Cultural Developmental Theory. Psychological Review, 111 (2): 486. Nets-Zehngut, R. (2013) ‘Major Events and the Collective Memory of Conflicts’. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24 (3): 209–230. Nets-Zehngut, R. and Bar-Tal, D. (2014) ‘Transformation of the Official Memory of Conflict: A Tentative Model and the Israeli Memory of the 1948 Palestinian Exodus’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, (27): 67–91. Nienass, B. and Poole, R. (2011) ‘The Limits to Memory’. International Social Science Journal, 62: 203–204. O’Doherty, M. (2020) Fifty Years On: The Troubles and the Struggle for Change in Northern Ireland. London: Atlantic Books. O’Malley, P. (1990) Biting at the Grave: The Irish Hunger Strikes and the Politics of Despair. Boston: Beacon Press. Olick, J. K. (1999) ‘Collective Memory: The Two Cultures’. Sociological Theory, 17: 333–348. Olick, J. K. (2008) ‘“Collective Memory”: A Memoir and Prospect’. Memory Studies, 1 (1): 23–29. Olick, J. K. and Robbins, J. (1998) ‘Social Memory Studies: From Collective Memory to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices’. Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 105–140.

4

THE ACTIVE USE OF NARRATIVES IN COLLECTIVE MEMORY

109

Park, H. Y. (2011) ‘Shared National Memory as Intangible Heritage: Reimagining Two Koreas as One Nation’. Annals of Tourism Research, 38 (2): 520–539. Pennebaker, J. W. and Banasik, B. L. (1997) ‘On the Creation and Maintenance of Collective Memories: History as Social Psychology’. In J. W. Pennebaker, D. Paez and B. Rimel (Eds.) Collective Memory of Political Events: Social Psychological Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3–19. Polletta, F. (1998) ‘Contending Stories: Narrative in Social Movements’. Qualitative Sociology, 21 (4): 419–444. Porter, N. (1998) (Ed.) The Republican Ideal: Current Perspectives. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Reynolds, C. (2015) Sous les pavés ... The Troubles: Northern Ireland, France and the European Collective Memory of 1968. Bern: Peter Lang. Ricoeur, P. (1991) From Text to Action: Essays in Hermeneutics II (translated by Blamey, K. and Thompson, J. B.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Ricoeur, P. (2004) Memory, History, Forgetting (translated by K. Blamey and D. Pellauer). Chicago: Chicago University Press. Rodriguez, J. and Fortier, T. (2007) Cultural Memory: Resistance, Faith and Identity. Austin: University of Texas Press. Roudometof, V. (2002) Collective Memory, National Identity and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria and the Macedonian Question. Westport, CT: Praeger. Rowlands, M. (1993) ‘The Role of Memory in the Transmission of Culture’. World Archaeology, 25 (2): 141–151. Schudson, M. (1989) ‘The Present in the Past versus the Past in the Present’. Communication, 11: 105–113. Schumann, H. and Scott, J. (1989) ‘Generations and Collective Memories’. American Sociological Review, 54: 359–381. Schuman, H. and Corning, A. (2014) ‘Collective Memory and Autobiographical Memory: Similar But Not the Same’. Memory Studies, 7 (2): 146–160. Schwartz, B. (1982) ‘The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory’. Social Forces, 61: 375–402. Sinnerton, H. (2002) David Ervine. Uncharted Waters. Dingle: Brandon. Simine, S. A. (2013) ‘Memory Boom, Memory Wars and Memory Crises’. In Mediating Memory in the Museum: Trauma, Empathy, Nostalgia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Smith, A. D. (1995) Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press. Smith, A. D. (1999) Myths and Memories of the Nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

110

J. W. MCAULEY

Smith, W. (2014) Inside Man. Loyalists of Long Kesh—The Untold Story. Newtownards: Colourpoint. Stone, M. (2003) None Shall Divide Us. Newport: John Blake. Thorne, A. and McLean, K. C. (2003) ‘Telling Traumatic Events in Adolescence: A Study of Master Narrative Positioning’. In R. Fivush and C. A. Haden (Eds.). Connecting Culture and Memory: The Development of an Autobiographical Self . New York: Psychology Press, 169–185. Tulving, E. (1972) ‘Episodic and Semantic Memory’. In E. Tulving and W. Donaldson (Eds.) Organisation of Memory. New York: Academic Press. Tulving, E. and Craik, F. I. M. (2000) (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Turner, B. S. (2006) Vulnerability and Human Rights. Pennsylvania: Penn State University. Vann Woodward, C. (1987) ‘Review of David Lowenthal (1985) The Past Is a Foreign Country’. History and Theory, 26 (3): 346. Vinitzky-Seroussi, V. and Teeger, C. (2010) ‘Unpacking the Unspoken: Silence in Collective Memory and Forgetting’. Social Forces, 88 (3): 1103–1122. Wagner-Pacifici, R. and Schwartz, B. (1991) ‘The Vietnam Veteran’s Memory: Commemorating a Difficult Past’. The American Journal of Sociology, 97: 376–420. Wagoner, B. and Brescó, I. (2016) ‘Conflict and Memory: The Past in the Present’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22 (1): 3–4. Wertsch, J. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wertsch, J. (2008) ‘Collective Memory and Narrative Templates’. Social Research, 75 (1): 133–156. Whitehead, A. (2009) Memory. Abington: Routledge. Winter, J. (1995) Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter J. (2006) ‘Notes on the Memory Boom’. In D. Bell (Ed.) Memory, Trauma and World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Zamponi, S. (1998) ‘Of Storytellers and Master Narratives: Modernity, Memory and History in Fascist Italy’. Social Science History, 22 (4): 415–444. Zerubavel, E. (1997) ‘Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past’. Qualitative Sociology, 19 (3): 283–314. Zerubavel, E. (2003) Time Maps: Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zerubavel, Y. (1994) ‘The Death of Memory and the Memory of Death: Masada and the Holocaust as Historical Metaphors’. Representations, 26: 72–100. Zerubavel, Y. (1995) Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

CHAPTER 5

Imagined Communities and Community Imaginations

Communities … are constituted by their past. A real community is ‘a community of memory’, one that does not forget its past. In order not to forget that past, a community is involved in retelling its story … The communities of memory that tie us to the past also turn us towards the future … They carry a context of meaning that can allow us to connect our aspirations for ourselves with aspirations for a larger whole … Robert Bellah et al. (1996) Habits of the Heart.

The strength of community identity in Northern Ireland has already been a focus of this book and will feature again in what follows. It is impossible to understate the importance of the concept of community in this context. Why does the notion of community prove so central? One way to begin to understand this is through those classic understandings offered by Ferdinand Tönnies (1957) or by Robert E. Park and Ernest W. Burgess (1967). These present a view based on the ideas of a definite sense of place bounded by geography and place. As several later writers have pointed out any understanding of community based merely as a normative social formation fails to encapsulate the complexity of lived, everyday communal experience (Studdert and Walkerdine 2016). Such considerations have led Calhoun to describe a community not simply as a place of: ‘small-scale population aggregate, but a mode of relating’ (Calhoun 1998: 19). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_5

111

112

J. W. MCAULEY

This chapter builds on some of the material already encountered to further consider some aspects of these modes of relating and the ways in which memory and ideas are used to deepen and promote and support social and political identities of loyalism and republicanism. It further considers how collective memory is constructed and then communicated to formulate senses of belonging and attachment. It considers the emotions raised by collective memory and how this manifests across time amongst individuals and groups. Finally, it deliberates how collective memories are used to construct distinct communities through a shared sense of having a common past and collective fate. It is important to consider how memories are selected and why the memory of some events comes to have primacy, while other events are forgotten. Questions also arise as to why all collective memories do not seem to carry equal salience of the group; the extent to which collective memories provide an important foundation for collective action and the centrality of the notion of community to this. Collective memory draws directly on these invented traditions, imagined communities and myths to foster coherence and form community boundaries by evoking images and ideas that involve a focus on a divided past.

The Boundaries of Community One does not need to delve too far into the history of Northern Irish society to find the centrality of sectarian boundaries, demarcated not just by physical barriers but also by social and psychological constructs. The community represents a complex formation of territorial and social boundaries, involving meaning that in part arises from the symbolism upon which people hang their identity and community membership (Bauman 2001; Day 2006). Although the term community is in everyday common usage, the notion marks an extremely complex set of social relationships and what comprises a community has been subject to much academic debate (Delanty 2003; Mooney and Neal 2009). What follows frames community in relation to memory, narrative, identity and belonging. None of these should be seen as discrete categories, nor can they be taken in isolation. Rather, they are over layered and intertwined with constructing the ideological parameters and social boundaries of community. As noted above, loyalist and republican communities are demarcated and bounded in several ways. There are several core aspects to this. First, those marked out through lived everyday experience and

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

113

direct engagement with an identifiable social and cultural identity. Second, such communities find expression through an agreed understanding of who can be part of it. Third, there is the consideration of who and what comprises the collective. Fourth, community centres on what groups express as desirable in the future. Finally, the community is referenced in what follows through a relation to place. The symbols and practices around commemoration require interpretation to them meaningful to the community. Community is bounded, not just by physical space but also by social relations, including senses of place and belonging, common discursive narratives and common representatives and symbolism. In this way, symbolism is used to define and circumscribe community by drawing those parameters that mark out cultural differences through a distinct sense of history, language, rituals, religion, customs, social practices and memory (Anderson 1983; Hobsbawm 1990; Reicher and Hopkins 2001; Wertsch 2002). Cultural memories are drawn upon to maintain cohesion and coherence within the community. This can be seen in the symbolism associated with commemoration and memorialisation that are often at the core of framing senses of community (Gupta and Ferguson 1997). This understanding of cultural distinction and difference defines both inclusion and exclusion through the construction of the Other. This identifies those deemed to be inside and outside of any given community. It is through common meanings and culture and the designation of relationships between individuals, groups and communities, linked to the senses of a communal collective past the strength of community is reinforced (Cohen 2013).

Mobilising Memory Through Community The past is thus compiled, collectively commemorated and presented to support visions of a collective future. We have outlined how collective memory directly influences political ideas and mobilises political action. More precisely loyalists and republicans use recall and remembering to make sense of the past to enable the resulting identity constructions and interpretations that are meaningful to their political organisation in the present. This mobilisation may be subject to changes in new experiences and generational changes that may all call into question existing interpretations of the past. Hence, the roles played in passing on values and ideas

114

J. W. MCAULEY

across age groups are important in enabling generation change (Feindt et al. 2014). In Northern Ireland, any momentum towards changes and reconciliation between the Other has proved to be slow, at best. New understandings and readings come to clash directly with long-standing readings and established narratives. While we should not dismiss or marginalise many of the exceptions to the dominant narratives outlined in this book, most individuals in Northern Ireland continue to be born into groups that draw on two essentially opposing collective world views. These competing interpretations provide the scaffolding upon which to build the competing senses of identity that are drawn on and underpin cultural memories. Discrete cultural memories are reproduced finding expression through distinct narratives and projecting their politics and symbolism. Garth Stevenson (2004) highlights how certain remembered events are used to distinguish one group from another and to reinforce senses of belonging within the group. Such constructs are of course doubleedged; the strength of collective senses of recall by one group can, of course, raise very different and oppositional feelings by others. Moreover, these notions may well (re)kindle feelings that the oppositional group has been subject to wrongs and trauma in the past. These processes of remembering and recalling are extremely dynamic, actively engaging both individuals and groups in transmitting collective memory through the production of images, murals, stories, rituals, performances and so on. The parameters for much of this are determined through the widespread engagement with those narratives already in existence. Newer interpretations of the past are possible, but these often find themselves in direct competition with the strength and replication of current narratives of a remembered past (Schacter and Welker 2016). Importantly, many of these discussions become codified, containing oft-repeated messages and symbolism through which individuals absorb consistently repeated stories and narratives that express the relationships of the collective to the past. Such long-standing recollections become embedded in a complex interweaving of: ‘class, gender and power relations that determine what is remembered (or forgotten), by whom and for what end’ (Gillis 1994: 3) to become normalised as ways of viewing the past. Moreover, these groups often exhibit and display deep emotional attachment to memories of past events, even though many may not have had personally experienced the events to which they refer. Community identities constantly draw on imagined and re-imagined historical

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

115

constructs linking these through commemoration to provide the community with senses of belonging and stability. This offers some explanation of why and how only certain memories are perpetuated and memorialised or are at a minimum suppressed, forgotten or forever lost (Klein 2000). This is writ large as the presentation of memories of communal conflict (some of which are very recent) and the history of sectarian division are ever present in the taking forward of such memories. The construction of memory at a collective level activates and mobilise groups and sometimes whole communities. The projection of these memories is made meaningful and brought to the fore in the everyday lives of people. This orientates people’s knowledge and brings to the fore supporting narratives of allegiance that reinforce attachment to a chosen identity. It is this which provides significance in the lives of those within the group. Other narratives seek to provide and enhance senses of legitimacy within the group, emphasising the closeness of the group’s identity and how the self-esteem of the collective is reinforced through collective memory. We return, in part at least, to how individuals draw on a collective autobiography to construct their sense of Self (Connerton 1989). Collective remembrance is used to fill the gaps in personal memory and experience. All these are brought together and bonded through the distinct construction of senses of belonging the factors involved in bonding the community.

Mobilising Community Through Memory One way of understanding community is to regard it as circumscribed by what Hannah Arendt (1973, 2018) classifies as those interactions that take place within a complex labyrinth of enacted stories resulting in the creation of community myths and traditions. For Eric Hobsbawm (1983), this fills the gap left by the decline of authoritarian regimes in the latter part of the nineteenth century in the face of democratic reforms. This led to the invention of myths and traditions in an attempt to sustain order. Hobsbawm identifies three major purposes in the constructed of myths: to establish or symbolise social cohesion; to establish or legitimise power and authority; and to instil beliefs, values and conventions in the society. All this is reinforced by the reproduction of those invented traditions, group myths and symbols that distinguish between the group to which one belongs and others. The creation of myth remains central in consolidating the collective memory and cohesion of the in-group. Individuals

116

J. W. MCAULEY

are part of several memory communities at the same time, for instance, the family, friends, work colleagues and the like. Throughout a lifetime, it is perfectly feasible for a person to move in and out of different communities of memory, such as school, workplace and political party. Sometimes the understandings and beliefs of these groups overlap, but at other times interests diverge. It is particularly within conflict situations that we find the constraint of memory to coalescing, for example, those highlighting the outrages of the rival group, or the roles played by heroes of the in-group in legitimising their role in the conflict. Schwartz (1982) indicates how myth forms part of an overarching cohesive narratives that bond communities and further suggests that many of the events selected for commemoration may often appear as everyday and ordinary.

Memory and the Symbolic Community For the construction of community to effectively work around the above, the relationships between collective memories, social representations and symbolisms must be made prominent at both micro and macro levels (Bar-Tal 2014). Building on the early work of Bartlett’s and his notion of ‘schemata’ (Bartlett 1932), Moscovici (2001) projects social representations as the construction of both a social and cultural approach to remembering. Thus, community members are drawn to those representations that display the group positively, in order to preserve stability and reproduce affirmative images over time primarily through the roles played by ritual and commemoration. Symbolic resources are used to demarcate allegiance across both physical and psychological arenas, witness the numerous street murals on display across Northern Ireland. These images and other representations are amongst the key ways to convey messages in public spaces, such as public art, street theatre, musical performance and so on. These are also used to promote and reinforce the core beliefs of the group, defining its focus socially and the political direction taken. In this way, symbolic landscapes play an essential role in group identification.

Narrative Communities The symbolic landscape reflects not only how individuals frame their social world but is also highly significant in shaping that world. Symbolism works to establish and reinforce norms and to frame social and political

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

117

messages as communities are fashioned around a narrative of remembering. These narratives are born out of experiences and at the same time they also go to structure experiences (Ochs and Capps 1996, 2009). It is through these narratives that the continuation of a common past is projected, thus uniting collectives into identifiable communities (Turner et al. 1987). This occurs directly in relation to the present and provides an instrument through which people seek to revalidate their past narratives and authenticate notions of the Self and group identity (Assmann and Shortt 2012). The most common readings of the past are directly reflected in the narratives of social representations and symbolism, manifest through communal celebrations and rituals (Liu and Hilton 2005). These narratives outline common origins and describe what is seen as a common past to illuminate present experiences, touching on several important themes. First, they justify the positions taken by the group throughout the course of the conflict, including the Troubles, while disregarding any legitimacy for the other side’s objectives and ambitions. Second, is the group’s use of the social representation of collective memory to delegitimise those individuals and groups they see as oppositional, often emphasising the inhuman actions and immoral behaviour of those perceived as adversaries. This needs to be set alongside the view that the actions of people’s own groups are justified, while all responsibility for the conflict, both its origins and its continuation, is set squarely at the feet of the Other. Third, opponents are presented as posing an existential threat to the in-group’s very existence. Within perceived intractable conflict, collective memory is often used to present the in-group within positive images and narratives and to place opponents in a contradictory manner. The form and intensity of the quarrel may change over time but what remains constant is the definition of the Other as the central cause of the conflict and their role in inhibiting any settlement (Bar-Tal 2003). These themes are witnessed across many regions and areas undergoing long-term conflict both in and beyond Northern Ireland. This results in the construction of narratives that often focus on the violence undertaken by the other side and various atrocities carried out by them that are seen to demonstrate the Other’s inhuman and immoral qualities (BarTal and Hammack 2012). In direct contrast are those events that present the bravery and heroism of the ‘in-group’ in providing oppositional acts (Oren and Bar-Tal 2007).

118

J. W. MCAULEY

This can be seen directly, for example, in the various distorted and biased interpretations of the past located in the community surrounding the outbreak of the troubles in 1968 (Prince and Warner 2019). It is through these narratives that remembering is reproduced and maintained. As Connerton puts it: … a community is reminded of its identity as represented by and told in a master narrative... Its master narrative is more than a story told and reflected on; it is a cult enacted. An image of the past, even in the form of a master narrative, is conveyed and sustained by ritual performances. (Connerton 1989: 70–71)

Communities of Memory Communities are constructed by individuals each of whom possesses their unique personal experiences and recall of the past. These individuals also share collective understandings and memories. It is the choice and recall and present certain events from the past in particular ways, while ignoring or relegating others that gives much of the coherence to community narratives. Those narratives draw directly on memories present within the group and (re)presents these in line with the broad self-perception and understanding that gives strength to such narratives of belonging. Eric Ketelaar (2005) develops this notion with the following understanding: Collective identity is based on the elective processes of memory, so that a given group recognises itself through its memory of a common past. A community is a ‘community of memory’. That common past is not merely genealogical or traditional, something which you can take or leave. It is more: a moral imperative for one’s belonging to a community. The common past, sustained through time into the present, is what gives continuity, cohesion and coherence to a community. To be a community, a family, a religious community, a profession involves an embeddedness in its past and, consequently, in the memory texts through which that past is mediated. (Ketelaar 2005: 48)

Community identity is strengthened by drawing on memories to highlight senses of similarity, uniformity, unity and interdependence. Communities of memory and the narratives that sustain them are reaffirmed in group behaviour. This is reflected at many levels, from

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

119

localised through to national events, from homemade memorials to official national commemorations, from those commemorating the actions of local paramilitary to those celebrating foundation days of nations to those memorialising war and localised conflicts. Collective memory is central to reinforcing notions of the in-group and in particular ideas that they are largely the victims of conflict, rather than perpetrators. Often such constructs go to confirm the perceived evil mindless of the rival groups (Papadakis 1998). One focus for collective memory thus becomes the reinforcement of the view that it is one’s own community who have suffered the most. With some, this places special emphasis on those who have died in pursuit of a cause or been killed while being active participants in violent confrontations with others (Laitin 1995).

Community and the Collective Past The memory from a perceived common past gives meaning to the formation of collective identity bonds in the community and provides a major point of reference for political influences (Assmann and Czaplicka 1995). As we have seen above, much of this involves the invention, construction and manipulation of a common past nurtured through a shared sense of a collective past underpinned by collective remembering and, if necessary, a formulated amnesia. The reality of the past is created by active remembrance through, for example, narratives and rituals, to provide the basis for public commemorations, celebrations and anniversaries. To be successful these ideas must be effectively transmitted and conveyed to others. Core here is how the history of the conflict in Ireland is presented, interpreted and used by members of that society (Cairns and Roe 2003; Dawson 2007; Simpson 2009a, 2009b). Alongside this are considerations of how the narrative of conflict evolves, develops and possibly changes over time. Hence, for example, recalling the start of the Troubles in the late 1960s and its subsequent course by groups will change the emphasis on which such community memories are seen as central to the narrative. Indeed, these may alter in accordance with the wider political goals of the group at any given time. This is achieved through the provision of a coherent narrative that paints a meaningful and believable picture of what has happened in the past and provides a viable explanation as to why this happened (Tint 2010). Darío Paez and James Liu (2011) illustrate how narratives maintain societal understandings that underpin dominant cultural values and

120

J. W. MCAULEY

how memory keeps alive that which is seen to be most relevant to current political and social issues. The same is also true of groups and collectives, which preserve those memories that best enhance collective self-esteem. This is promoted through selected references to major institutional, national and local events that have acquired the status to become symbolic, to be remembered and commemorated by the group. Both loyalist and republican groupings encode and take forward those memories deemed to be important to their cause. By recalling selected issues, both loyalists and republicans highlight narratives that provide the yardsticks by which events are assessed and positioned within the group’s perceived history. In so doing, the arousal of feelings of community pride provides the inspiration for the commemoration and memorialisation of the chosen events.

Conflict Communities It is also possible to consider both republican and loyalist communities as being formed, solidified and bounded by their experiences of conflict and violence. Memories of both individuals and collectives concerning experiences and understandings of the Troubles, coalesce to form the source for the formation of community identity. Indeed, memory and the expression of contemporary difference, even conflict are often seen to be inseparable. One only needs to listen to the tenor of one of the populist phone-ins on BBC Radio Ulster and other local channels to hear how people often refer to the past in constructing their views and explanations of the present. Views such as those above are intensified by extended periods of violence (Weingarten 2004). In most obdurate conflicts, this involves the production of a collective master narrative that focuses on explanations of the fundamental causes and major divergences arising from the dispute. By referring to major events from the past narratives are constructed that position one’s own and rival groups in the broader society. Alongside these broad master narratives there are more specific sets concerning specific incidents and events in the conflict or the personalities involved (Auerbach 2010). We have encountered many of these in the book. It is through these partisan lenses of collective memories, that some actions are deemed legitimate and certain social relationships seen as valid, while others are considered unfounded and untenable (Somers 1992; Somers and Gibson 1994).

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

121

Collective Memory as a Connector Communities provide the framework by which individuals are socialised into those forms of memory that emphasise what should be remembered and what should be forgotten (Bellah, et al., 1996). Collective memory acts as a connector for communities and is crucial in providing a regulating frame outlining how people within the community should remember and defining what is to be remembered. These processes give a strong indication as to which parts of history are to be marginalised, ignored or excluded from the narrative which should be forced out of our story to present a creditable history to society members of the community. The supporting narrative for the above may or may not come ready-made. They can develop over time and the community beliefs that emerge provide a coherent and cohesive narrative to those who hold and support such views. To those within loyalist and republican communities, these are creditable understandings of the past used to project understandings and beliefs about the future direction of the conflict and sometimes continued existence of that community. In looking to the past for guidance as to how to interpret present conditions people use common reference points that communities provide. Communities are connected and the potency of this is reinforced by dominant narratives and a well-defined sense of identity. In this, through the linking of the understanding between past and present, collective memory informs its central position in providing ritual and meaning to everyday life.

Framing and Bonding Communities Collective memories not only frame the membership, values and norms of the community but also outline that behaviour deemed acceptable to that community (Olick and Robbins 1998). Collective memories thus act as a symbolic resource, mobilising and legitimising present and future political agendas. Such symbolism frames the matter of inclusion and exclusion of the group and a hierarchy of belonging, portraying dominant and subordinate groups in particular ways. From this point of view, collective memory manifests in the cultural symbolism and practices of individuals and groups as vehicles of memory (Confino 1997; Liu and László 2007).

122

J. W. MCAULEY

Sharing the same affiliation to social representations and senses of collective memory shapes the identity of societal members. As the conflict widened and deepened in Northern Ireland, many of the political antagonisms between groups and events of inter-communal violence only added to pre-existing exclusionary memories, communal myths and senses of the Other. Many of these events are reproduced through commemoration and the continuity and connections with the past are made blatant and overt. By actively drawing on presupposed shared memories, both republicans and loyalists locate themselves within discourses and surround themselves with identifiable narratives that support and provide evidence for their basic worldviews. Sometimes community is identified as directly aligning with the experiences of the individual and the group. It can also be seen as being bounded by a local or regional geography as well as having a much broader basis based on collective meaning and an identification with mutually understood social and political preferences. The formation of a broad imagined community can be seen in both loyalism and republicanism. These communities constantly and consistently reproduce their own version of the past through formal and informal means and social contact, including, everyday conversations and other forms of interaction such as meetings, correspondence, songs, community newsletters, prose, set piece speeches or other forms of popular cultures. This represents a complex matrix and the weave of social, cultural and political forces. The cultural expressions arising draw on multiple points of orientation, interpretations and reference points. These work at an everyday level to bind the social group and manifest in an assortment of political groupings and outlets for the expression of identity. The collective memories of both loyalism and republicanism are central to the existence and maintenance of the social relations of the relevant community. The interconnections between community, commemoration and memorialisation demonstrate how collective memory fortifies psychological and emotional barriers and strengthens the identities outlined above. This is often done by promoting a simple and single version of the past and a representation of history that is argued to be the unquestionable truth.

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

123

Conclusions Understanding the roles of collective memory in Northern Ireland raises several major themes and issues. First, how collective memory is used to justify conflict, the trajectory of the Troubles and the nature of post-conflict society. Second, how it informs broader societal beliefs and attitudes. Third, how collective memory is used to present positive images of the in-group and an adverse image of the opponent. Fourth, how collective memory is used to inform notions of victimhood and often to present one’s own group as the victim. How people remember and represent the past may be a long way from any authentic version of history. Rather than seeking some faithful version of history, people construct the reality of their past in the context of satisfying current social and political demands. The enacting of such memories combines to produce narratives through reference to common rituals, commemoration, tradition and senses of place and belonging. All this presents in a complex matrix, built up through symbolised memory and the past to support the notion that collective identity is constructed by multiple mediators of the past in a multitude of contexts. The memories passed on are harnessed collectively and used to serve the perceived needs of the group by shaping cultural identity and justifying political positions. Such memories are underpinned and determined by processes of selection and forgetting. These constitute the central mechanisms through which collective identity presents at both group and national levels. This is embedded in the imagined community through specific actions, events and narratives used to reinforce the construction of group traditions and relevant memories. This chapter has introduced several important issues surrounding the transmission of memories and how events in the past are carried forward to the contemporary to create or reinforce the relationships between memory, culture, identity, tradition and heritage. The remaining chapters will further explore these issues. It will also examine the collective within which memories are reproduced, membership criteria and how the dividing lines between the ‘in-group’ and the Other are constructed and preserved.

124

J. W. MCAULEY

References Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Auerbach, Y. (2010) ‘National Narratives in a Conflict of Identity’. In Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov (Ed.) Barriers to Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, 99–134. Arendt, H. (1973) Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harvest. Arendt, H. (2018) The Human Condition. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Assmann, A. and Shortt, L. (2012) ‘Memory and Political Change: Introduction’. In A. Assmann and L. Shortt (Eds.) Memory and Political Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–16. Assmann J. and Czaplicka, J. (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’. New German Critique, 65: 125–133. Bar-Tal, D. (2003) ‘Collective Memory of Physical Violence: Its Contribution to the Culture of Violence’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 77–93. Bar-Tal, D. (2014) ‘Collective Memory as Social Representations’. Papers on Social Representations, 23 (1): 70–96. Bar-Tal, D. and Hammack, P. L. (2012) ‘Conflict, Delegitimization and Violence’. In L. R. Tropp (Ed.) The Oxford handbook of Intergroup Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 29–52. Bartlett, F. (1932) Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bellah, R., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A. and Tipton, S. M. (1996) Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. Berkeley: University of California Press. Cairns, E. and Roe, M. (2003) ‘Introduction: Why Memories in Conflict?’. In E. Cairns and M. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 3–8. Calhoun, C. (1998) ‘Community without Propinquity Revisited: Communications Technology and the Transformation of the Urban Public Sphere’. Sociological Inquiry, 68 (3): 373–397. Cohen, A. P. (2013) Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Routledge. Confino, A. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1386–1403. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dawson, G. (2007) Making Peace with the Past? Memory, Trauma and the Irish Troubles. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Day, G. (2006) Community and Everyday Life. London: Routledge.

5

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY IMAGINATIONS

125

Delanty, G. (2003) Community. London: Routledge. Feindt, G., Krawatzek, F., Mehler, D. and Pestel, F. (2014) ‘Entangled Memory: Toward a Third Wave in Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 53: 24–44. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Gupta, A. and Ferguson, J. (1997) (Eds.) Culture, Power, Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology. Durham NC: Duke University Press. Hobsbawm, E. (1990) Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ketelaar, E. (2005) ‘Sharing: Collected Memories in Communities of Records’. Archives and Manuscripts, 33: 44–61. Klein, K. L. (2000) ‘On the Emergence of Memory in Historical Discourse’. Representations, 69 (Winter), 127–150. Laitin, D. D. (1995) ‘National Revivals and Violence’. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 36(1), 3–43. Liu, J. H. and Hilton, D. J. (2005) ‘How the Past Weighs on the Present: Social Representations of History and their Role in Identity Politics’. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44: 537–556. Liu, J. H. and László, J. (2007) ‘A Narrative Theory of History and Identity: Social Identity, Social Representations, Society, and the Individual’. In G. Moloney and I. Walker, I. (eds) Social Representations and Identity: Content, Process, and Power, 85–107. Mooney, G. and Neal, S. (2009) ‘Community: Themes and Debates’. In G. Mooney and S. Neal (Eds.) Community: Welfare, Crime and Society. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Moscovici, S. (2001) ‘Why a Theory of Social Representations?’. In K. Deaux and G. Philogéne (Eds.) Representations of the Social. Oxford: Blackwell, 8–36. Ochs, E. and Capps, L. (1996) ‘Narrating the Self’. Annual review of Anthropology, 25 (1): 19–43. Ochs, E. and Capps, L. (2009) Living Narrative: Creating Lives in Everyday Storytelling. Harvard University Press. Olick, J. K. and Robbins, J. (1998) ‘Social Memory Studies: From Collective Memory to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices’. Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 105–140. Oren, N. and Bar-Tal, D. (2007) ‘The Detrimental Dynamics of Delegitimization in Intractable Conflicts: The Israeli–Palestinian Case’. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31 (1): 111–126. Paez, D. R. and Liu, J. H. (2011) ‘Collective Memory of Conflicts’. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.) Frontiers of Social Psychology. Intergroup Conflicts and their Resolution: A Social Psychological Perspective. Hove: Psychology Press, 105–124.

126

J. W. MCAULEY

Papadakis, Y. (1998) ‘Greek Cypriot Narratives of History and Collective Identity: Nationalism as a Contested Process’. American Ethnologist, 25 (2): 149–165. Park, R. E. and Burgess, E. W. (1967) The City. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Prince, S. and Warner, G. (2019) Belfast and Derry in Revolt. A New History of the Start of the Troubles. Kildare: Irish Academic Press. Reicher, S. and Hopkins, N. (2001) Self and Nation. London: Sage. Schacter, D. L. and Welker, M. (2016) ‘Memory and Connection: Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future in Individuals, Groups and Cultures’. Memory Studies, 9 (3), 241–244. Schwartz, B. (1982) ‘The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory’. Social Forces, 61: 375–402. Simpson, K. (2009a) Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland: Critically Interpreting the Past. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Simpson, K. (2009b) Unionist Voices and the Politics of Remembering the Past in Northern Ireland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Somers, M. R. (1992) ‘Narrativity, Narrative Identity and Social Action: Rethinking English Working-Class Formation’. Social Science History, 16 (4): 591–630. Somers, M. and Gibson, G. (1994) ‘Reclaiming the Epistemological “Other”: Narrative and the Social Construction of Identity’. In C. Calhoun (Ed.) Social Theory: The Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell, 705–709. Stevenson, G. (2004) ‘The Politics of Remembrance in Irish and Quebec Nationalism’. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de science politique, 37 (4): 903–925. Studdert, D. and Walkerdine, V. (2016) ‘Being in Community: Re-Visioning Sociology’. Sociological Review, 64 (4): 613–621. Tint, B. (2010b) ‘History, Memory and Conflict Resolution: Research and Application’. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27 (4): 369–399. Tönnies, F. (1957) Community and Society (Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft). Michigan: Michigan State University Press. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D. and Wetherell, M. S. (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-categorization Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Weingarten, K. (2004) Witnessing the Effects of Political Violence in Families: Mechanisms of Intergenerational Transmission and Clinical Interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 30 (1), 45–59. Wertsch, J. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CHAPTER 6

Localised Narratives and the Construction of Community Myths

It is often said that the Irish people pay too much attention to history. This is not true. Irish people pay very little attention to history. Some Irish people do pay attention to a mixture of half-truths and folk mythology about the past. Eamonn McCann (1993) War and an Irish Town.

This chapter considers further how the notions of collective memory and narrative discussed above are used to promote specific and often much localised accounts of the past. It further discusses how these views become legitimised and in many cases routine by groups passing such ideas on across generations. It looks in detail at the position this occupies in constructing social and community identities. It further contemplates how collective memory functions to convey sets of values through normative accounts and how these are used to strengthen senses of belonging at the community or local level. None of what is written so far is in any way to suggest that people don’t possess or hold unique memories or recollections. While people are willing to share some memories, they restrict others, keeping some memories private. Not everyone recalls the same past, does so in similar ways, or engages with memories at the same level. Memory is multilayered and recall at both the individual and collective levels continually © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_6

127

128

J. W. MCAULEY

facilitated this, through processes of reinterpretation and re-evaluation through recall and remembering. Finally, the chapter will discuss the links between different levels of belonging and local and national identities.

Identity Narratives of Loyalism and Republicanism Underlying the identity narratives of loyalism and republicanism, collective remembering serves at a local level to illustrate how cultural narratives and memories are preserved. These are built upon and developed before being passed through inter- and intra-generational narratives that link notions of the past to what both individuals and the collective believe the future holds. As Yael Zerubavel suggests that every commemorative act, reproduces a: narrative, a story about a particular past that accounts for this ritualized remembrance and provides a moral message for group members … the commemorative narrative differs from the chronicle because it undergoes the process of narrativization (which) blurs the line between the real and the imagined. (Zerubavel 1995: 137)

Loyalist and republican narratives plot a distinct path through the blurred lines of the real and imagined to help structure and explain everyday lived experiences. Within this people function as both the narrators of their past and active social actors in the present (Trouillot 1995). Importantly, this addresses not just questions surrounding how the past is presented, but how and where those undertaking this narration seek to position themselves within this past (Antze and Lambek 1996). Take the following account of socialisation into the loyalist cause from Alistair Little who joined the UVF (the paramilitary group which emerged in the late 1960s that claimed direct lineage to the memory of the 1914 grouping). He describes the community he grew up in as: … steeped in the stories of Protestant heroes who were commemorated annually in the Province during the marching season. In the lead-up to that time there were always kids on the streets practising their flutes and drums and building bonfires in preparation for the celebrations (of) the victory in 1690 of the Protestant army of William III over the Catholic army of James II at the Battle of the Boyne.

He continues:

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

129

We imbibed Loyalist history with our mother’s milk. The events of the marching season not only celebrated our victorious past but shaped our sense of identity in the present (Little 2009: 22–23).

These patterns of socialisation are also reflected directly within the republican community. Shane Paul O’Doherty a former PIRA volunteer recalls in his biography how growing up as a young boy he was filled with ambition: ‘to fight and, if necessary, die for Ireland’s freedom’ and that he had little doubt in his own mind, that one day he would become a: ‘volunteer in the IRA fighting to end the age-old injustice of the British occupation in Ireland’ (O’Doherty 1993: 11). Eamon McCann recalls how growing up in a republican community: ‘One learned, quite literally at one’s mother’s knee, that Christ died for the human race and Patrick Pearce for the Irish section of it’ (McCann 1993: 65). Such narratives are directly prompted by broader societal influences, as well as by an individual’s life history, alongside the system of ideas and arguments to which they are exposed. These reflect personal experiences and circumstances, within the views collectives of which they feel a part. While people may have choices in the ways they narrate the past and the resources they draw on to do this, they are most often directly influenced by the socio-historical structures and political frameworks in which they find themselves (Rosenthal 2006). It is, for example, possible to trace how mass Orange Order commemorations and memorialisation have altered over time, from fairly low-scale localised affairs, to take on increased prominence and then major significance in the nineteenth century, to the position of eminence it still holds today for many Protestants and unionists (Roe and Cairns 2003). In a similar light, Margaret O’Callaghan (2016, 2017) and Daly and O’Callaghan (2007) outline how the nature and form of republican memory and commemorations of 1916 have altered to reflect the wider politics of the time. She notes that commemoration: ‘is just as likely to be a way of perpetuating and recalibrating division as it is likely to lead to reconciliation’ adding that ‘political parties seek to shape commemoration to reflect their image, bolster their electoral prospects and refurbish their political and cultural capital’ (O’Callaghan 2016: 2).

130

J. W. MCAULEY

Aspirational Memories Community recall allows people to: ‘recognize and localize their memories’ (Halbwachs 1992: 38). It is within these parameters that people recall and reproduce those stories with which they are familiar and encounter narratives and stories with which they are comfortable, and which seem to have some direct relevance to their lives. It is by drawing on collective understandings that the past is made meaningful and future objectives and aspirations for individuals and groups are narratively linked (Natzmer 2002; Toši´c and Palmberger 2016). It is common in Northern Ireland for groups to use near-singular narratives to explain the multiple and complex events facing them. This can readily be recognised as a central feature of both loyalist and republican communities. The nuances of social and cultural dynamics that determine the complex process of remembering and forgetting are reduced to a solitarily simplified narrative of the past. Witness the narratives that accompany the re-enactments of the signing of the Ulster Covenant, or the H-bloc hunger strikes. Both sets of re-enactments continue to draw on established narratives, while in part creating new ones by the widespread participation of individuals on the streets. These go to reinforce, replenish and restock the symbolic landscapes of the community.

Recalling and Retelling the Past One way of establishing community boundaries is through reinforcing its relationship with the past. This finds expression through communal memories, collective commemorations, celebrations, festivals of remembrance and the passing on of stories and narratives encountered within the community. These narratives are bundled together and used to communicate shared cultural values within the collective and highlight aspects of the past and remembering directly links to the theme of commemoration (Fine 1996, 1999, 2001; Zelizer 1995). This remembering sometimes takes physical form, such as monuments, murals, commemorative stones or other artefacts deemed to represent a particular set of memories and its inherent views of the past. Monuments and other physical memorials serve as durable reminders about how society should be viewed, for example, through victories and losses suffered and the sacrifices made by one’s own group, while highlighting

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

131

past malevolence of the opponent. Moreover, this form of remembering often serves as evidence for the coherence of a community, reinforcing collective memories and the continuation of divisions. All groups, of course, demonstrate bias in their presentation of remembering and this is used typically to express what are seen as the core features surrounding group identity: ‘regardless of whether they are mythological or historical’ in origin (Heller 2001: 131). This becomes a way of structuring and reinforcing community beliefs often through localising collective memory and myth and strengthening existing self-conceptions (Hutton 1993). This functions to help (re)create populist memories and myths and the meanings they project, often: ‘these myths are based on historical inaccuracies while at other times they arise from selective uses of historical events or developments’ (Walker 1996: vii). Northern Ireland is replete with both official and unofficial memorials and monuments, alongside other places of commemoration and remembering, such as museums and exhibition halls. These places of memory carry huge symbolic significance. Official memorials can involve commemoratives on a grand scale, such as found in the Cenotaph in Belfast. The memorialising process can also involve symbols of pride and belonging at the community level, such as the memorials to paramilitaries found throughout Northern Ireland (Black 2015; Hughes 2019). Both republicans and loyalists’ memory actors use the commemorative narrative in which they engage, not only to perpetuate some specific understandings through the reproduction of memory but also to enthuse identification with them. This further identifies those who may be thought of as allies and those who are seen as the enemy.

Using Myth and Memory: The Cu´ Chulainn Saga These narrative commemorations are often used to continue political struggles and perpetuate divisions. These narratives also fulfil another important function that of deepening their sense of identity and the expression of unity across the group. What follows gives a range of examples of the functioning of this in the everyday and the interpretation, presentation and use of myth as political symbolism, found in the use of the Cú Chuliann story. This is taken from ancient folklore and one of the four great Irish mythological cycles, the Táin Bó Cúailnge, The Cattle Raid of Cooley (Kinsella 1970). The focus of the story is the invasion of

132

J. W. MCAULEY

Ulster by forces led by Queen Madb of Connaught and the attempt to steal a stud bull (Donn Cúailnge). Ulster finds itself defenceless against Madb’s forces, its warriors struck down by severe period pains, as part of a spell cast upon them in revenge for their mistreatment of a pregnant woman. It is only the young Cú Chulainn who is exempt, mounting a defence that is ultimately successful, as he defeats a series of warriors in single combat, holding off the invading forces until the spell is lifted and the army of Ulster can join him. A later part of the cycle tells the story of eventual death following another confrontation with Madb’s armies. Cú Chulainn is mortally injured but before acceding to his wounds, ties himself to a pillar, so that he may die on his feet. Given his fierce reputation, none of his enemies will approach, only doing so when a raven lands on his shoulder. This image forms one of the iconic symbols in Irish political culture and has been exploited by many different groups for political purposes. This has led to the creation of two radically differing narratives surrounding. Although the Cú Chulainn is most readily associated with Irish republicanism, the central story has been adopted and adapted by both loyalists and republicans, resulting in very different representations, narratives and symbolism by each group.

Cú Chulainn in Republican Narratives Indeed, the main site of Easter Rising in 1916 in Dublin, the General Post Office today houses a commemorative statue of the slain Cú Chulainn. Its symbolism projects Cú Chulainn’s as a founding figure of republicanism, willing to martyr his life for the cause of Ireland’s independence. Thus, Cú Chulainn has frequently appeared in republican murals throughout and beyond the period of the Troubles, establishing it as central to republican iconography (Rolston 1998, 2003). Its place in the collective memory of republicanism is clear to see with Cú Chulainn projected as an Irish martyr, standing against overwhelming forces. This imagery is often used to strengthen and reinforce a collective narrative of resistance and self-sacrifice to add to the political motivation of the contemporary movement.

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

133

Cú Chulainn in Loyalist Narratives Loyalists have a different narrative, reinterpreted the Cú Chulainn not as an icon of Irishness, but the first to hold a separate Ulster identity. Their understanding of the Cú Chulainn myth is seen as part of a platform endorsing a politically independent state based on a cultural interpretation of a common Ulster identity, projected as being from a Pictish rather than Gaelic heritage (Ulster, October 1978). This interpretation was promoted by the New Ulster Political Research Group (NUPRG), which developed as the political wing of the UDA. Much of their interpretation drew heavily on the writings of Ian Adamson (1974, 1982) and his ideas were publicised at a populist level in the UDA’s house magazine Ulster throughout the 1980s. Indeed, at one point they argued that the contemporary Protestant community is descendant of the Cruthin, the original inhabitants of the Island, who were driven to Scotland by the invading Gaels and that the seventeenth-century plantation was best understood as a homecoming. By the mid-1980s and early 1990s, the UDA was seeking to directly appropriate the symbolism of Cú Chulainn as an image of Ulster’s defiance, projecting him as a hero defending Ulster from the forces of the other provinces. Loyalists sought to reclaim the Cú Chulainn myth (McAuley 1991) and to adopt it as a loyalist symbol to directly reappropriate it culturally and politically from republicanism (McAuley and McCormack 1990; Rolston 1991, 1992). By seeking to recall the Cú Chulainn myth in this way loyalists were attempting to recast and claim the dominant collective memory and to project themselves as descending from the ancient inhabitants of Ulster.

Collective Memory and the Cu´ Chulainn Myth The Cú Chulainn myth has been symbolically deployed variously by both loyalists and republicans in support of their cause. Its symbolic use supports completely opposed visions of history, culture and the future nature of society. The Cú Chulainn tale is used as one means to engage loyalists and republicans in a struggle for ideological and moral supremacy. Both seek to legitimise political claims using this myth. The iconography of Cú Chulainn may be shared by both loyalism and republicanism but is used by memory entrepreneurs and actors to produce competing ideologically charged narratives and interpretations of a mythical past.

134

J. W. MCAULEY

The appropriation of Cú Chulainn and the absorption into both loyalist and republican collective memory gives a clear example of an invented tradition as delineated by Hobsbawm and Ranger (1983). The Cú Chulainn myth illustrates how the past can be subject to several interpretations and reinterpretations over time. It also shows how individuals can engage with wider political narratives to seek to legitimise versions of the past and make them meaningful in the present. Both interpretations compete for the legitimacy of their own collective memories in direct opposition to the Other. The resulting competing narratives seek to exploit these memories for the political benefit of the collective.

Localised Narratives and Memories Not all attempts to draw on collective memories and narratives for political benefit are done so by reference to large events or existing myths. Sometimes these are highly localised in nature. One example surrounds the events that developed in inner east Belfast around the Short Strand on the evening of 27th June 1970. At the time the nationalist and republican enclave of Short Strand was bounded by the predominantly unionist and loyalist east Belfast. While extremely little is agreed about events on that night, there is general agreement that the most noteworthy of incidents surrounded widespread street violence that erupted and developed centred in and around St. Matthew’s Catholic Church. Recall of the evening’s events by the republican and loyalist communities in the area mark a clear disjunction, disconnection and oppositional views of happenings. This is compounded by conflicting memories suggesting not just a differing sequence of events but also differing motivations for the actors involved and interpretations that have been reproduced and become deeply engrained in the two main communities involved. Two competing sets of memories of the night draw on radically different understandings and symbolism to provide evidence for their version of the story.

Competing Narratives and Understandings The loyalist narrative begins early on that day at the annual Whiterock Orange Order parade in the west of the city. Sectarian tensions were high in Belfast and a highly charged atmosphere, erupted in a series of running street confrontations involving followers of the parade

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

135

and nationalist youths. The confrontations escalated throughout the day, finally descending after dark into a gun battle leaving four dead and around 30 wounded. Amidst widespread rumours of organised republican violence on the other side of the city, the loyalist view suggests that the Orange Order parade, bands and supporters came under co-ordinated attack upon their return to East Belfast; first from stone-throwing youths and then from: ‘Republican gunmen … [using] … the grounds of St. Matthew’s Chapel as their base’ (East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society 2006: 19). Republican recall of the night differs dramatically from the above account. The republican view and the place of these events in their collective memory are very different. They rest on a narrative that highlights attacks on several Catholic-owned properties in the immediate area and the burning of a parish house in the grounds of St. Matthew’s Church. In the years since June 1970, divergent memories and narratives have emerged within local loyalist and republican communities to represent almost diametrically opposing positions surrounding the origins and development of conflict that night. The collective memory within republicanism projects the Short Stand as a community under constant threat and the violence that night was started by loyalists returning from an Orange Order parade and attempts to petrol bomb St. Matthews Catholic church. These narratives position nationalist interpretations and readings as follows: … after the pogroms of 1969, the people of this Parish decided they wouldn’t suffer the same fate as other vulnerable communities across the north had. With Loyalist marches taking place across the city throughout that day and attacks on areas in the north and west of the city predictably occurring, the people of this Parish (as they had done so many times before down through the generations) battered down the hatches [and] prepared themselves for the inevitable onslaught. The people, alongside the Irish Republican Army, took to the streets in defence of the community and to hold back the descending hordes of Loyalist attackers. (Coiste Chuimhneacháin Chath Naomh Máitiú 2010)

This projection draws on a much more embedded set of collective memories. Irish republican remembrance is framed through a lens that reflects explanations of the political violence experienced in Belfast between 1920 and 22 as a ‘pogrom’ into the narrative (Lynch 2008). This narrative is developed to highlight the perceived continuities between

136

J. W. MCAULEY

the sectarian conflict of 1920–22 and 1969–70. The collective memories surrounding this are used to project a broad view of republicanism as engaged in a constant and consistent struggle against an Orange and Unionist state and the imperialist forces underpinning it (Ballymacarrett Research Group 1997). The above worldview and narratives of politics and political violence are drawn together and find representation in the commemorative stone found in Short Strand, which reads as follows (in translation from the Irish): This flagstone was erected in memory of the people of St. Matthew’s parish, who gave their time, liberty and livelihood to protect this area and its people, especially during the early period of this conflict. In the same way they followed a tradition that began in the 1920s after partition in the area of the Macarthur area of oppression, discrimination and the threat of death. They came together to ensure the safety of their own people. Some of those heroes are on the verge of death now, but their bravery and prudence still live on and we will remember their adventures forever. (An Phoblacht/Republican News 2019).

Republican Memories and Narratives Beyond this, events at St. Matthews are seen to hold even greater significance, marking the entry onto the stage of the PIRA (English 2003; Moloney 2002). The sequence of events indicated a reinvigoration of the organisation that many working-class nationalists believed had failed them during the widespread street violence of August 1969. From within the republican worldview, the events of 27 June 1970 demonstrate the defence of the Short Strand by a rearmed and reorganised PIRA against: ‘attacks by loyalist mobs, the RUC and the British Army’ (An Phoblacht , 1 July 2014). Moreover, this remains an: ‘example to republicans all over the country’, embedding the notions of a ‘risen people’ and an opening up of ‘decades of resistance’ in republican collective memory (Ó Coinn 2007).

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

137

Loyalist Memorial The narrative of loyalists concerning the violence of June 1970 in east Belfast differs dramatically from the above. It was begun by republicans who attacked the Orange Order parade and its supporters returning from the other side of the city. The communal memory suggests that the Orange Order parade fell into a meticulously prepared trap laid by local republicans. For many loyalists, the story of the events dovetails neatly into wider loyalist narratives involving a pre-meditated attack by untrustworthy nationalists, who had again raised a secretive army with the demise of the state as its central goal. This worldview is reflected directly in the words on the memorial stone erected on the Newtownards Road in east Belfast. In commemoration of the events, it reads: That night in a planned and unprovoked attack, the Provisional IRA introduced guns on to the streets of East Belfast from the sanctuary of St. Matthew’s Chapel and surrounding area. They murdered James (Jimmy) McCurrie and Robert (Ginger) Neill also wounding 28 other men, women and children.

The collective narrative within loyalism is distinct and diametrically opposed to the republican version of events. Writing over thirty years later, Peter Robinson, former DUP leader and First Minister, referring to a later shooting incident at the inner east Belfast—Short Strand interface gave the definitive loyalist perspective when he wrote: Violence emanating from Short Strand goes back several decades. Precisely thirty years before the present shootings the St. Matthew’s massacre took place when IRA gunmen rained gunfire down into the Newtownards Road, murdering three people and injuring five others. The IRA murderers positioned in the Chapel steeple shot indiscriminately at Protestants in the road below. (Robinson 2002)

The Contest for Memories The consequences of these oppositional views and competing reference points have become significant in the development of widely held local myths and community memories. It is highly unlikely there will ever be an agreed understanding or memory of the events. Indeed, republicans

138

J. W. MCAULEY

largely refer to events that night as ‘The Battle of St Matthews’, a label rejected by loyalists, who use the term ‘St. Matthews massacre’. Liam Clarke suggests the evening left the communities ‘bitterly divided’ and gave two sets of paramilitaries the lift-off they needed (Clarke 2010). The collective memories of events are now deeply engrained and used to further the ideological consciousness of both local loyalists and republicans in east Belfast and beyond. The loyalist perspective draws on a narrative of republican-instigated violence that was planned and organised unleashing an unprovoked outbreak of republican aggression. From within this version, the narrative outlined above merely points to another example of: ‘the republican propaganda that: ‘throughout the conflict in Northern Ireland has been clever, sharp, focussed and has been very successful in getting their (the republican) message across’ (East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society 2006: 3).

Feeding Macro Narratives Memories of events at St. Matthews in 1970 provide an example of how people locate themselves and others through narratives of memory and position and construct the subsequent relationships between them on the same basis (Davies and Harre 1990). Such local memories are constructed within the frame of much wider collective memories and that which is regarded as the legitimate cultural practices and reference points embedded in the everyday lives of many. Recall of the events surrounding St. Matthews must be understood through competing prisms of collective memory and narrative. These public, if competing memories are shared between individuals and the collective. Loyalists recall a well-co-ordinated and: ‘fiendish attack on the innocent population of the Lower Newtownards Road’ (Longkesh inside out 2013) launched by the PIRA on a section of the unionist and loyalist population in east Belfast (East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society no date, 2006). It is a reconfirmation tale, verifying that for many unionists and loyalists, a section of Northern Ireland’s population, namely Irish republicans and nationalists, is untrustworthy and part of the Other. It also confirmed to many unionists that their society was under direct threat, giving rise to claims that the local unit of the UVF was formed in direct response to the incident (East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society 2006).

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

139

The story from within republicanism brings to prominence the hero figure in the shape of Billy McKee, a founding member of the PIRA and its first commander in Belfast. Apparently, upon hearing what was happening McKee gathered some men and weapons together and drove to Short Strand from the other side of the city to take up position at St Matthew’s Church. An obituary in the republican press described McKee as a legend, adding that: ‘he led a heroic and legendary action to defend St Matthew’s Church in east Belfast from loyalist attack’ (Republican News 12 June 2019). Republican narrative focus on the protection of a defenceless community. This forms part of a foundation myth and a tale of coming of age and tale, placing the PIRA as central to the struggle: ‘for the very existence of a small nationalist, republican enclave which existed under the shadows of the giant cranes of the Belfast shipyard as a symbol of unionist power and domination’ (An Phoblacht 30 July 2010). Certainly, within republicanism, the events around St. Matthews are projected as a key collective memory in the development of, recruitment to and symbolism of the PIRA (White 1993). These competing narratives and sets of recalls represent the very essence of the groups. Individuals literally living on opposite sides of the same road buy into and reproduce deeply oppositional narratives of the same events. Hence, the social and political actions of many loyalists and republicans are inspired, motivated and driven not just by localised memories but by the metanarrative into which this localised narrative readily fits (Hammack 2011; Somers and Gibson 1994). As Davies and Harre (1990) suggest such narratives act as major cultural resources that serve to interpreting political meanings and events in ways that shape entire communities or societies. It is through repetition and ritual that the community is provided with a sense of continuity and cohesiveness. This is carried through the influences of commemoration, collective memory and the formation of political stories and myths. There is a constant struggle both within and by loyalists and republicans to promote their version of the past as dominant and the ‘truth’. Sometimes, as is the case with Cú Chullain outlined above there is a large reserve of symbolism and narrative to draw on. In other cases, such as that of St. Matthews this is limited, and narratives need to be built up and elaborated upon to create shared meaning through social representations. This reproduction is used by both individuals and communities to make sense of their everyday experiences by playing a part in the

140

J. W. MCAULEY

meaning-making processes at the core of both republican and loyalist identities. Community narratives are made-up of recognisable events and stories that become situated within well-trodden themes within communities. Further, these collective memories and the narratives surrounding them are capable of mobilising and producing collective action. Collective memory links past to present through a logic of continuity and continuance. Collective memory acts as a conduit through which collectives use a narrative past to forge cohesion and unity in the present. Memory is projected at a localised level to allow such ideas to dovetail into wider narratives and themes.

Republican Collective Memory For those within the republican community, the rebellion of Easter 1916 and the H-Block hunger strikes of 1981 are defining events. The memorialisation and commemoration of both are core to the construction of contemporary republican identity. On Easter Monday 1916, against the backdrop of the Great War and driven by their belief that the promised Home Rule was not going to materialise, a small cadre of committed republicans declared the Irish Republic and put in place plans to attack key targets in Dublin (Foy and Barton 2011). Although the number involved in the armed rebellion was small, for six days they managed to capture and hold several strategic locations, before eventually surrendering to the much larger and heavily armed British forces. Most of those captured were interned. The leaders of the Rising were, openly motivated by the collective memory of earlier periods such as the rising during the United Irish and Fenian eras. Many of the rebels were interned but all the organisers were tried by a British court martial and all (except Eammon De Valera) were shot by firing squad. It was a turning point, as a widespread reaction on the way the rebel leaders had been treated, more than anything else, was responsible for galvanising much of the population against the British regime on the island and subsequently led to the Irish War of Independence. Much of Sinn Féin’s contemporary politics continue to garner support and organise on the grounds of its adherence to the memory of 1916 (McDowell 2007). They make consistent reference to the men and women of the 1916 rebellion and what they sought to achieve (McGarry 2016; Grayson and McGarry 2016). The memories of 1916 are presented

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

141

to suggest the unfinished business of the past and that the goals of that time are most likely to be fulfilled by supporting the contemporary mainstream of the republican movement as represented by Provisional republicanism, which had split from the Official movement in 1969 (Mulqueen 2017; Redawek 2011). Moreover, narratives of sacrifice and martyrdom surrounding the memory of the rebellion have consistently been used to justify much more recent activities by both the PIRA and Sinn Féin. The actions of those of 1916 and the generation who engaged in the Troubles from 1969 are seen as synonymous and holding equal legitimacy. This former member of PIRA highlights the utter reverence and esteem with which republicans hold the memories of participants in the Rising of 1916 and the veneration for the Proclamation of the Irish Republic. He explains: We justified all our actions and the entire struggle on the basis of the Proclamation – sometimes elevating the sacrifice of the signatories to a hallowed act. (O’Rawe 2005: 79–80)

The recall, reforming and claiming of ownership of the past involves a different emphasis through the retelling stories and the adjusting or altering of narratives through the retelling of stories and the reconstruction of narratives. Memory entrepreneurs drawing on narratives of collective memories reproducing the values and goals of what can be called conventional republicanism, best understood as that form of republicanism, originating within the Provisional movement from the early 1970s on (Mulholland 2007; O’Donnell 2017; Smyth 2017a). A major motivation and driver of the republican movement are the collective memories associated with republican martyrs of the past and those who sacrificed and died in previous generations. The PIRA and the provisional republicanism movement in general claimed their legitimacy from the ownership of memories and its mandate from founding figures, such as Connolly and Pearse, from whom, for example, a continuous line of martyrs is drawn to the dead of the Provisional republican movement (Morrison and Gill 2017). These ideological continuities are projected within a matrix of collective memories, whereby hunger strikers of the 1980s are seen as having the same motivation and held in the same regard as those active in 1916. Thus, any historical, philosophical or cognitive differences distance between the Rebels of 1916 and 1969 generation that gave rise to Provisionalism becomes vague

142

J. W. MCAULEY

and muddied, as collective memories merge and are represented through the dominant discourses of republicanism (Brown 2023; Hopkins 2023). This broad use of collective memory and recall is made clear by Padraig O’Malley in quoting another republican source when they say: We remember the famine. We remember the Fenians. We remember 1916 and the executions. We remember the Loyalist pogroms of the twenties. We remember and are most proud of Republicans who down the years carried the torch of freedom. We remember Orange Rule. 1969, the Falls curfew, internments, the Loyalist assassinations, Brit murders. We remember … last week (O’Malley 1983: 295).

Republicanism continues to look to the recall of memories for contemporary inspiration and motivation. By identifying central events in ‘republican history’ such as the United Irish rebellion of 1798 (Collins 1999; Golway 2000; Pakenham 1969) or the 1916 Rising (Townshend 2015), or the response to the actions of the ‘Black and Tans’ (Leeson 2012; O’Brien 2017), emphasis is continually placed on interpretation of events and how such events are to be understood. The continued projection of a coherent past is used to connect members through notions of continuity with the past that is seen to attract new followers to republicanism. It is constructed through commemorations, speeches, the reproduction of foundation myths and narratives, and the repetition of phases and the projection of heroes to evoke and make direct connections. Hence, events around St. Matthew’s in 1970s, become incorporated into a meta-narrative that includes the 1916 rising and the 1981 Hunger Strikes, amongst many others. These are projected as forming linkages in an unbroken chain (GraffMcRae 2010) part of a continuous struggle for Irish freedom. A further illustration of this is found in the following announcement from a Sinn Féin spokesperson, just ahead of the 2022 Easter Commemoration rally in Stranorlar, Co. Donegal: We will also honour those who died in the cause of Irish freedom in every decade before and since 1916. Irish Unity is moving ever closer so we would encourage as many people as possible to join in the commemoration, to celebrate 1916 and promote the ideal of Irish unity and independence (Donegall Daily, 13 April 2020).

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

143

Social and political boundaries are defined through the way in which people remember and seek to articulate narratives. These narratives often depend on collective memory and are reinforced through a variety of agreed collective symbolism, myths and ideals. Hence, spokespersons are also encouraged to wear the symbolic Easter Lily on their apparel, because: It is not only a symbol of remembrance of our patriot dead but also of our enduring commitment to the cause for which they gave their lives and also a promise of a brighter future (Donegall Daily 13 April 2020).

Commemoration is thus an important public political activity for memory activists linking the republican past directly to the present through commemoration. Kris Brown and Adrian Grant (2016) highlight the rapid expansion of republican sites of memory and the ritual activity that accompanies them, noting that in recent years public monuments honouring those republicans killed ‘on active service’ have mushroomed. Further, they suggest that in some cases stories of their deaths have been re-narrated to fit with the contemporary goals of the wider Irish republican movement. Central to these relationships remains the cult of sacrifice, perhaps seen most clearly in the Irish republican movement and its political use of notions and portrayal of members as martyrs. Much of the internal legitimacy of Irish republicanism rests on the processes of memorialisation and commemoration, outlined above and throughout this book.

Regrouping Republican Memories There are understood links across selected events, expressed through the ownership of collective memories and the production of narratives of cohesion across time. It is this that provides republicanism with core notions of authenticity and coherence. As majority republicanism, largely under the leadership of Sinn Féin, engaged with the peace process, coming to accept the political changes eventually manifest in the GFA and beyond. One result of this was a rejection of the claims by Sinn Féin and the Provisional movement more generally hold the moral authority as the leader of Irish republicanism. The ownership of these narratives and collective memory of the republicanism past is claimed by Sinn Féin and the Provisional IRA.

144

J. W. MCAULEY

As Patterson (2008: 160–161) points out, Provisional republicanism continued, especially through the pages of An Phoblacht , to promote a view of the past and to commemorate with pride the actions and personalities of the PIRA campaign. The narrative of a continuous unbroken struggle upon which the actions and politics of mainstream (provisional) republicanism have been built is now directly challenged by those republicans (usually known as dissidents) who accuse them of having abandoned long-standing positions of ideology and practice and a break with the collective memory of republicanism. The origins of the so-called republican dissidents rest in the split that occurred in the republican movement following Sinn Féin’s decision at its Ard-Fheis (annual conference) to recognise the institutions of the Republic of Ireland (26-Counties). Consequently, a small group walked out of the meeting, re-organising as Republic Sinn Féin supporting the original abstentionist constitution of Sinn Féin. Subsequently, the dissidents have directly challenged any claims of legitimacy and ownership of the past that are attached to contemporary republicanism by mainstream (Provisional) Sinn Féin and projected themselves as the true inheritors of the republican past. This re-ordering of the ownership in collective memory by republicanism has seen dissident’s groups claim legitimate access to and interpretation of a line of succession that stretches back to encompass the Fenians, the Young Irelanders, Robert Emmet, Wolfe Tone and the United Irishmen. One of the leading dissident groups, Republican Sinn Féin (RSF), for example, pledged direct allegiance to the Republic declared in 1916 and regarded the original meetings of Dáil Éireann as the last legitimate sitting governments of Ireland, rejecting the legitimacy of 1921 Treaty. Dissident republicans claim that it is they who best represent the continuity of the republican vision and fulfil the collective memories of heroes and martyrs within the republican tradition. J. Bowyer Bell in his history of the PIRA suggests that for: ‘generation after generation, what Pearse and Connolly began in the name of Tone on April 24th, 1916, is an unfinished legacy’ (Bell 1972: 435–436). Dissident republicans argue that it is they who have picked up the legacy and highlight the significance of continuity in trying to establish their dominance over the republican movement. It is they who best represent an unbroken thread between the different generations of Irish republicanism, and which represent a ‘living link’ with the collective memory of the republican past, from

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

145

which groupings such as RSF and the Continuity IRA claim legitimacy (McGlinchey 2016, 2019; Whiting 2015). This in part takes the form of establishing links with the memory of those who pre-dated or rejected the provisional movement. Take this report from Sinn Féin’s in-house newspaper Soirsie (18 November 2021) on the funeral of veteran republican Dan Hoban. Republicans and friends from all over Ireland travelled to Mayo to pay their respects. Following Requiem Mass in Newport, Dan’s coffin, draped with the National Flag and flanked by a guard of honour from his comrades in Sinn Féin Poblacht and Cumann na mBan, was taken to Burrishoole Cemetery for burial. Led by a lone piper and the National Flag draped with black ribbon, Dan’s coffin was carried from the gates of the cemetery, once again flanked by the colour party. His comrades and family carried the coffin to the grave where proceedings were chaired by An Chomhairleoir Tomás Ó Curraoin (Gaillimh). … Dan was an unrepentant Republican, who spent many years in jails in the 32 Counties. He was a man of honour; he stuck to his principles and paid a heavy price for his commitment to the freedom of his country. He will be greatly missed by his family, comrades and friends.

Dissident groups now claim moral authority and ownership over most of the important legacies within republicanism (such as the 1981 hunger strike) and the inspiration of and motivation for most of the key personnel involved throughout the Troubles. The projection of attachment here is quite clear, as is the attempt to delegitimise mainstream republican memory of the past and any claim Sinn Féin makes to the ownership of and continuity with the republican past. Within republicanism, this manifests in constant struggles over the ownership of the past and to be the legitimate representatives of the soul of the republican movement. This has happened several times in the past, the provisional movement itself being formed following a split from the existing (Official) republican movement in 1969, which in part at least, involved challenging then-existing narratives, memories and interpretations within republicanism (Redawek 2011; Smyth 2017b). It is the claim to ownership of the past and the tools to remember that give much of contemporary politics its meaning and this is reflected in the reproduction of dominant narratives and discourses in both the everyday and more specific settings.

146

J. W. MCAULEY

The images and memory that come to dominate are contested and not fixed (Hearty 2017). Importantly, hence, the role of mediators and memory agents is crucial. In particular, the experiences of what people know and what knowledge has been passed on and absorbed or rejected by them. It is the claim to ownership of the past and the tools to remember that give much of contemporary politics its meaning and this is reflected in the reproduction of dominant narratives and discourses in both the everyday and more specific settings. The images and memory that come to dominate are not fixed. Importantly, hence, the role of mediators and memory agents is crucial. In particular, the experiences of what people know and what knowledge has been passed on and absorbed or rejected by them.

Orange Narratives and Collective Memory Another example of a linking to the past to contemporary senses of identity and politics is found in the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland (the Orange Order). Orange identity through narrative and icon consistently refers to a bounded past that directly links to and influences the present, witness various presentations and icons in the Orange Museum. Such memories and understandings draw directly on processes of remembering and forgetting to make direct connections with the past in framing and structuring beliefs about the present and the ways forward. While the collective memory of the Battle of the Somme is firmly established in forming loyalist identity, for Orangeism this is but one link in a long chain of commitment a sense of belonging to Britishness and political support for the British presence in Ireland. Thus, it is not uncommon to find a direct association between the battles of the seventeenth century, the experiences of the 36th Ulster Division during the Somme campaign, both the military and civilians who died in the Second World War, especially those Belfast citizens who were killed in the German air raids and those who lost their lives during the Troubles and in more recent conflicts such as those in Afghanistan or Iraq. Hence, Orangeism relates past events to the contemporary in ways that demonstrate the continuing relevance of the links that are seen to make up the group’s self-identity. Such memories connect Orangeism to the broader political collective of unionism by linking historical narratives to contemporary senses of loyalist and unionist identity. An excellent example of how identity is reinforced by memory can be found in

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

147

the tradition of banners displayed by the Orange Order, most usually displayed in the public arena on ceremonial occasions or during various parades by the organisation and most Lodges (the fundamental membership unit) have their own banner. Banners and the narratives that accompany them highlight direct links between past and present in the context of a distinct sense of historical continuity. In projecting these collective memories Orange Order banners illustrate and highlight those events seen to be of greatest significance in the Orange past. So, for example, depictions and the memorialisation of events and individuals at the Somme are commonplace on banners, as are images of troops leaving the trenches to go ‘over the top’, or those commemorating the four individuals who were awarded the Victoria Crosses in the first 48 hours of the battle (Prior and Wilson 2016; Middlebrook 2006). These narratives presented through banners bring together events that are seen to carry emotional, political and social significance. The main symbolism of these were classified by the Ulster Society under the following headings: biblical; buildings; home rule; historical personalities; reformation; royalty; the Troubles; old flags and banners; Williamite; world wars and industrial. The Belfast County Grand Orange Lodge points to a wide variety of subjects on its banners, including: biblical, historical, personalities, royalty, Williamite involvement and world wars. The norm has always been to commemorate an event, a scene or personality … Biblical depictions are fairly popular, emphasising the religious aspect of the Institution … but in the main King William III, Prince of Orange crossing the Boyne is the charismatic scene for many Lodge colours (Belfast County Grand Orange Lodge no date: 3).

Within this process of self-identification, both Orangeism and republicanism refer to a perceived common past to promote communal understandings of everyday events. The reproduction of coherent narratives allows members of each community to express distinct senses of belonging and to position themselves in the political and social world. It is by reference to collective memories that these senses of identity are strengthened. The depth of belonging evoked and the perceived continuity summoned from across the century is not lost across loyalist and republican politicians and memory agents. It is through such processes and cultural practices that people recognise their debt to the past and promote the use of such

148

J. W. MCAULEY

notions to maintain the unity and continuity within the group (Schudson 1992, 1995; Schwartz et al. 2005). Central to this construction is the selection of events from the past and the creation of a common viewpoint, interpretation and understanding around it. In this way, an identified past is made active through collective recall and production in which Order members participates. The senses of identity and belonging produced is reinforced and in turn reinforces, selfperpetuating social and political frames of reference drawing on distinct collective narratives. These collective memories thus shape and are shaped by, not just by the group itself, but rather in relationship to how they are considered the group and the broader socio-political circumstances of the time. The combination of monuments, commemoration and performance produces a sense of the past that is mapped onto the mind of individuals (Hutton 1993). In important ways, this memory map links the local to the national, the micro- to the macro- and back again. These function to provide the context for the explanation and understanding of such events (Hirsch 1995). Key events are remembered through cultural reproduction of artefacts long after the event itself and the symbolism of real and imagined events and emotions.

Conclusions The strength of cultural opposition and identities expressed by different individuals and groupings remains important to our understanding of politics and social life in Northern Ireland. There has never been a strong unified sense of belonging or a common identity in the region. Indeed, commitment to the diversity of cultures, national identities, ethnicities and traditions denotes the fragmentation of any possibility of a coherent national memory and work against the formation of any common set of memories or any overarching master narratives of memory. It is through these narratives and symbolism that memories are both explained and articulated, often taking the form of stories about the past that identify the actions of key actors and core events in which they have played a role. Collective memory provides the rationalisation for both social and political cohesion and division and influences how each community conceives of both its own identity and that of the Other. These memories do not take root or develop in a void. Rather they are recreated through commemoration, memorialisation and the cultural production of

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

149

collective experiences which are continually re-informing and impacting each other. Within this, narratives help position everyday events and experiences in much larger discursive frames. The next chapter examines how these manifests in populist forms and how this is passed on over generations.

References Adamson, I. (1974) The Cruthin: A History of the Ulster Land and People—The Ancient Kindred. Bangor: Donard Publishing Company. Adamson, I. (1982) The Identity of Ulster: The Land, the Language and the People. Belfast: Pretani Press. An Phoblacht/Republican News. (2014) ‘Belfast’s “Battle of St Matthew’s” Remembered’, 1 July. Antze, P. and Lambek, M. (1996) Tense Past: Cultural Essays in Trauma and Memory. London: Routledge. Ballymacarrett Research Group. (1997) Lagan Enclave: A History of Conflict in the Short Strand 1886–1997. No Publisher. Bell, J. B. (1972) The Secret Army: The IRA. London: Sphere. Black, R. (2015) ‘Fury after £22k Belfast War Memorial “Hijacked by UVF”’. Belfast Telegraph, 26 March. Brown, K. (2023) ‘Irish Republican Commemoration and Narratives of Legitimacy’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 97–117. Brown, K. and Grant, A. (2016) ‘A Lens Over Conflicted Memory: Surveying “Troubles” Commemoration in Northern Ireland’. Irish Political Studies, 31 (1): 139–162. Clarke, L. (2010) ‘It Takes Two Sides to Tear Apart a Myth’. Sunday Times, 13 June. Coiste Chuimhneacháin Chath Naomh Máitiú. (2010) 40th Anniversary Commemorative Events. Belfast: Battle of St. Matthews Commemorative Committee. Collins, P. (1999) ‘The Contest of Memory: The Continuing Impact of 1798 Commemoration’. Éire-Ireland, 34 (2): 28–50. Daly, M. and O’Callaghan, M. (2007) 1916 in 1966: Commemorating the Easter Rising. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. Davies B. and Harre, R. (1990) ‘Positioning: The Discursive of Selves’. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20 (1): 43–63. East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society. (No date) Murder in Ballymacarrett—The Untold Story. Belfast: EBHCS.

150

J. W. MCAULEY

East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society. (2006) Murder in Ballymacarrett— The Untold Story. Belfast: EBHCS. English, R. (2003) Armed Struggle. A History of the IRA. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Fine, G. A. (1996) ‘Reputational Entrepreneurs and the Memory of Incompetence: Melting Supporters, Partisan Warriors and Images of President Harding’. American Journal of Sociology, 101 (5): 1159–1193. Fine, G. A. (1999) ‘John Brown’s Body: Elites, Heroic Embodiment and the Legitimation of Political Violence’. Social Problems, 46 (2): 225–249. Fine, G. A. (2001) Difficult Reputations: Collective Memories of the Evil, Inept and Controversial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Foy, M. and Barton, B. (2011) The Easter Rising. London: History Press. Golway, T. (2000) For the Causes of Liberty: A Thousand Years of Ireland’s Heros. New York: Touchstone Book. Graff-McRae, R. (2010) Remembering and Forgetting 1916: Commemoration and Conflict in Post-Peace Process Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Grayson, R. S. and McGarry, F. (2016) (Eds.) Remembering 1916. The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Politics of Memory in Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Halbwachs, M. (1992 [1941, 1952, 1925]) On Collective Memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hammack, P. (2011) ‘Narrative and the Politics of Meaning’. Narrative Inquiry, 21: 311–318. Hearty, K. (2017) ‘The Malleability of Memory and Irish Republican Memory Entrepreneurship: A Case Study of the “Loughgall Martyrs”’. Ethnopolitics, 16 (2): 126–144. Heller, A. (2001) ‘Cultural Memory, Identity and Civil Society’. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 2: 139–143. Hirsch, H. (1995) Genocide and the Politics of Memory: Studying Death to Preserve Life. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Hobsbawm, E. and Ranger, T. (1983) (Eds.) The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hopkins, S. (2023) ‘Irish Republicanism and Radical Nostalgia’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 97–117. Hughes, B. (2019) ‘Loyalist Paramilitary Flags Placed on War Memorial in South Belfast’. Irish News, 6 August. Hutton, P. H. (1993) History as an Art of Memory. London: University Press of New England. Kinsella, T. (1970) The Táin Bó Cuailnge (Translated from the Irish). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

151

Leeson, D. (2012) The Black and Tans: British Police and Auxiliaries in the Irish War of Independence, 1920–1921. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Little, A. (with R. Scott) (2009) Give a Boy a Gun. From Killing to Peace Making. London: Darton, Lonman and Todd. Longkeshinsideout. (2013) ‘De-Bunking the Myth of the “Battle” of St. Matthews’. Available: http://www.longkeshinsideout.co.uk/?p=3720#more3720; downloaded 10 June 2020 Lynch, R. (2008) ‘The People’s Protectors? The Irish Republican Army and the “Belfast Pogrom,” 1920–1922’. Journal of British Studies, 47 (2): 375–391. McAuley, J. W. (1991) ‘Cuhullian with an RPG7: The Ideology and Politics of the Ulster Defence Association’. In E. Hughes (Ed.) Culture and Politics in Northern Ireland. Oxford: OUP, 44–68. McAuley J. W. and McCormack, P. J. (1990) ‘The Protestant Working Class and the State Since 1930’. In S. Hutton and P. Stewart (Eds.) Ireland’s Histories. London: Routledge, 114–128. McCann, E. (1993) War and an Irish Town—New Edition. London: Pluto Press. McDowell, S. (2007) ‘Armalite, the Ballot Box and Memorialization: Sinn Féin and the State in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. The Round Table, 96 (393): 725–738. McGarry, F. (2016) The Rising: Ireland: Easter 1916. Oxford University Press. McGlinchey, M. (2016) Unfinished Business. The Politics of ‘Dissident’ Irish Republicanism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. McGlinchey, M. (2019) Unfinished Business: The Politics of ‘Dissident’ Irish Republicanism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Middlebrook, M. (2006) The First Day on the Somme. London: Pen and Sword. Moloney, E. (2002) A Secret History of the IRA. London: Penguin. Morrison, J. F. and Gill, P. (2017) ‘Introduction: 100 Years of Irish Republican Violence’. In J. F. Morrison and P. Gill (Eds.) 100 Years of Irish Republican Violence. Abington: Routledge, 1–8. Mulholland, M. (2007) ‘Irish Republican Politics and Violence before the Peace Process, 1968–1994’. European Review of History—Revue Européenne d’Histoire, 14 (3): 397–421. Mulqueen, J. (2017) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: The Official Republican Movement, 1970–1982’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 142–164. Natzmer, C. (2002) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: Creative Expression and Reconciliation in Post-Pinochet Chile’. In J. J. Climo and M. G. Cattell (Eds.) Social Memory and History. Anthropological Perspectives, 161–179. Ó Coinn, S. (2007) The Rising of The Phoenix. Belfast: Shanway Press. O’Brien, B. (1999) The Long War. The IRA and Sinn Féin. New York: Syracuse University Press.

152

J. W. MCAULEY

O’Callaghan, M. (2016) ‘1916: Attitudes to Commemoration have Reflected the Politics of the Time’. Irish News, 20 March. O’Callaghan, M. (2017) ‘The Past Never Stands Still: Commemoration the East Rising in 1966 and 1976’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 115–141. O’Doherty, S. (1993) The Volunteer: A Former IRA Man’s True Story. London: Harper Collins. O’Donnell, R. (2017) ‘The Provisional IRA: History, Politics and Remembrance’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 44–76. O’Malley, P. (1983) The Uncivil Wars: Ireland Today. Boston: Beacon Press. O’Rawe, R. (2005) Blanketmen: An Untold Story of the H-Block Hunger Strike. Virago Press. Pakenham, T. (1969) The Year of Liberty: The Great Irish Rebellion of 1798. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Patterson, H. (2008) ‘The Republican Movement and the Legacy of the Troubles’. In I. Honohan (Ed.) Republicanism in Ireland: Confronting Theories and Traditions. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 147–163. Prior, R. and Wilson, T. (2016) The Somme. Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Redawek, K. (2011) Irish Republican Terrorism and Politics: A Comparative Study of the Official and the Provisional IRA. London: Routledge. Robinson, P. (2002) ‘Victims: The Story of Unionists “Living” at the Interface with Republican Short Strand’. DUP Insight, November. Roe, M. D. and Cairns, E. (2003) ‘Memories in Conflict: Review and a Look to the Future’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe, (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 171–180. Rolston, B. (1991) Politics and Painting: Murals and Conflict in Northern Ireland. London: Associated University Presses. Rolston, B. (1992) Drawing Support: Murals in the Northern of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Publications. Rolston, B. (1998) ‘From King Billy to Cú Chulainn: Loyalist and Republican Murals, Past, Present and Future’. Eire-Ireland, 33 (1–2): 6–28. Rolston, B. (2003) Drawing Support 3: Murals and Transition in the North of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale publications. Rosenthal, G. (2006) ‘The Narrated. Life Story: On the Interrelation between Experience, Memory and Narration’. In Narrative, Memory and Knowledge: Representations, Aesthetics, Contexts. Huddersfield: University of Huddersfield Press, 1–16. Schudson, M. (1992) Watergate in American Memory: How we Remember, Forget and Construct the Past. New York: Harper Collins.

6

LOCALISED NARRATIVES AND THE CONSTRUCTION …

153

Schudson, M. (1995) ‘Dynamics of Distortion in Collective Memory’. In D. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion: How Minds, Brains and Societies Reconstruct the Past. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 346–364. Schwartz, B., Fukuoka, K. and Takita-Ishi, S. (2005) ‘Collective Memory: Why Culture Matters’. In M. D. Jacobs and N. W. Hanrahan (Ed.) The Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Culture. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 253–271. Smyth, J. (2017a) ‘Introduction: From Popular Mythology to History and Memory’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1–8. Smyth, J. (2017b) ‘Milltown Cemetery and the Politics of Remembrance’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 165–178. Somers, M. R. (1992) ‘Narrativity, Narrative Identity and Social Action: Rethinking English Working-Class Formation’. Social Science History, 16 (4): 591–630. Toši´c, J. and Palmberger, M. (2016) ‘Introduction’. In M. Palmberger and J. Toši´c, (Eds.) Memories on the Move: Experiencing Mobility, Rethinking the Past. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–16. Townshend, C. (2015) Easter 1916: The Irish Rebellion. London: Penguin. Trouillot, M. R. (1995) Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Boston: Beacon Press. Walker, B. (1996) Dancing to History’s Tune. History, Myth and Politics in Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. White, R. W. (1993) Provisional Irish Republicans: An Oral and Interpretive History. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Whiting, S. A. (2015) Spoiling the Peace?: The Threat of Dissident Republicans to Peace in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Zelizer, B. (1995) ‘Reading the Past against the Grain: The Shape of Memory Studies’. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12: 214–240. Zerubavel, Y. (1995) Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

CHAPTER 7

Popular Cultures, Memory Performance and Using Memory

(C)ommemorating … is capable of transforming something [frozen in time] into a re-living presence, alive in the minds and bodies of its commemorations. Commemoration … exhibits its Janusian ability to look at once forward and backward: or more exactly to look ahead in looking back. Edward Casey (1987) Remembering: A Phenomenological Study.

This chapter further considers the role of collective memory in the construction and reproduction of senses of belonging and identity specifically within loyalist and republican communities. It reflects on the expressions of community, symbolism and belonging, as articulated through performance and popular culture (Spangler 2009). As demonstrated so far, memory is always generated by individuals, but it is through wider collective social relations that it becomes meaningful. Acts of remembering are constructed and recall honed, given meaning and passed on through lived experience. In broad terms, we can think of popular culture as involving those set of routines, attitudes and items that embody shared meanings, including leisure and entertainment, fashion trends and linguistic conventions. Collective memory is central to all of this, rooted in as it is in people’s justification and reflection of their actions and connected through social © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_7

155

156

J. W. MCAULEY

practices to other community members. The performance of memory occupies a prominent position in the popular imagination, activated and acted upon by communities to reinforce their identity and to guide community goals. Much popular culture output across loyalist and republican offerings is concentrated on the representation of shared and divided meanings in connection to place and reinforcement of narratives and the reinforcement of existing narratives. We have established that all rituals and commemorations are invented, as is the collective interpretation of those events that are actively selected from the past (Simpson 2009). Most derive the importance of their meaning by re-situating the past in contemporary discourse and events. Popular culture is a major means of reinventing, anchoring and projecting collective remembering and representing these everyday by engaging people with representations and presentations, taking forward ideas, values and perspectives from one generation to the next (Liu 2022). These encounters with popular culture find expression through music and song, self- and locally produced publications, poetry, cartoons, paintings, badges, figures, souvenirs, film and photographs, alongside other items, such as murals, pop-up memorials and active engagement through ceremonies, festivals and cultural artefacts offered by monuments, statues, souvenirs play a crucial role in remembering aspects of the past (Douglas et al. 1998; Legg 2019). Cultural objects are used to consolidate and solidify remembering and the ownership of events. These works of popular culture play important roles in the construction and revitalisation of memory narratives. The production of popular cultures draws on cultural memory and becomes central in constructing identity and broadly. This can be thought of as memory expressed through cultural means and cultural products expressed in popular forms that are: ‘imbued with cultural meaning’ (Sturken 1997: 3). This is often reproduced in many forms, through, for example, locally produced music or the many informal re-enactments and commemorative performances found at the heart of loyalist and republican communities.

Performing Memory Commemorative performances transmit shared values and reduce internal tensions regarding the past within the group. Symbolism encodes ceremonies and populist events memorialising and commemorating the past

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

157

that link individuals to a particular narrative that is commonly understood as a reconstruction of the past. Individuals are thus inspired to regard themselves as central to the continuance of shared values and objectives of the collective through commemoration. Groups make use of cultural forms that are stored and then transmitted (Edensor 1997, 2002). Popular culture is important at the everyday level where commemoration is used in a variety of forms to highlight and perpetuate the core beliefs of the group. This is transmitted through a whole set of cultural practices, whereby memory and memorial need individuals and groups to be active in participating in acts of remembering and commemoration (Pinkerton 2012). It is through these processes that individuals may express agency by taking representations of the past and altering them to make a better ‘fit’ with current events (Middleton and Edwards 1998). Thus, populist participation through public displays of ceremonies and commemorations comprise representation which: ‘enacts and gives social substance to the discourse of collective memory’ (Sherman 1994: 186). Gillis develops an argument, suggesting that commemoration is both political and social, involving the presentation and coordination of individual and group memories, that: ‘appear consensual when they are in fact the product of processes of intense contest, struggle’ (Gillis 1994: 5).

Inscribed Memory Inscribed memories involve those that involve frequent repetition (Connerton 1989). One illustration of the links between inscribed memory and ritual behaviour can be seen in the public displays around the funerals of paramilitary members that developed throughout the Troubles. Beyond a simple display of paramilitary strength and honouring their ‘fallen’, there were several aspects to this. During the duration of the Troubles these funerals took on a highly ritualistic form (most often mirroring conventional military organisations) including a coffin draped in a national flag (usually either the Union flag or the Irish tricolour), a guard of honour with people in paramilitary uniform and often a volley of shots fired over the coffin. These funerals were used to sustain the morale, both of paramilitary members and the immediate community. Both loyalist and republican funerals were also designed to raise community participation and awareness to position and reinforce the place of paramilitaries within the community. These groupings used the

158

J. W. MCAULEY

ceremonies that developed at funerals to amplify the messages projected by them and to encourage new recruits. Overall, memory agents used funerals not only to reflect the status of the deceased but to draw on and establish forms of collective memories and to reinforce the aims and fundamental politics of the organisation and its place within the community. As Victor Roudometof (2002) claims acts of commemoration and memorialisation are always political. These political acts have increasingly found increasing expression at the micro level, with amplified expressions of identity and communal belonging that took place during and following the Troubles. Many contemporary forms of remembering involve the ordering of collective memories, linking them directly to the everyday and common sense understandings of political life. Central here is the weight placed on understood continuities with the past, which is given meaning through presentation (Trew et al. 2009).

Public Involvement in Memory Much of this is brought to the fore by the involvement of memory actors in commemorations and memorialisation. Further, the popularity and attendance at such events and the numbers involved should not underestimated. According to Bell (2013) it is a minority of Northern Ireland’s population (around 42 per cent) that have not taken part in any form of memorialisation or commemoration of a historical event. The list of such commemorations is long and varied with, for example, Remembrance Sunday each November, the 12th of July/Battle of the Boyne and the Relief of Derry and the Closing of the Gates (before the Siege of 1688) and the Orange Order Somme commemorative parade on 1 July each year, being some of the most prominent in the traditional Unionist and loyalist calendar, while Bloody Sunday, the H-block Hunger Strikes, the Easter Rising and Anti-Internment demonstrations feature significantly with those from a nationalist or republican background. This is far from exhaustive and the prominence of certain events and popular support for them can and does vary over time, but the overall patterns are established. The recall of events can also be given prominence by the significance given to anniversaries. It is in this context that the decade of centenaries becomes most significant. Overall, both loyalists and republicans fiercely guard their historical narratives to ensure their perpetuation and that messages contained within them are not diluted or

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

159

contaminated by views from either outside or inside the group. Sometimes this is institutionalised. We have already encountered some of the ways in which key events from the past may shape a communal memory and how these processes bond the individual to the collective, emphasising the notion forwarded by Gillis (1994) that what one remembers is defined by the identities one assumes is important here.

Popular Memory: Murals and the Past These relationships may become codified through populist commemorative events that replicate those actions, ideal types and core beliefs that are seen to be of highest consequence. Murals representing the symbolism and reproducing the core ideas of both republicanism and loyalism (Traynor 2008a, 2008b) have become central to the politics of Northern Ireland (Abshire 2003). The origins and history of these murals differ between loyalism, which is part of mural painting tradition dating back for over a century and republicanism, which is much more recent in origin, perhaps only dating back to the 1981 H-bloc hunger strikes (Jarman 1996, 1998). Bill Rolston (2018) identifies some of the major symbolism appearing within loyalist murals to include: historical events within unionism; the royal family; victims; the British Empire; activists; Ulster-Scots; paramilitary volunteers; unionist culture and peace. Greg Goalwin (2013) also seeks to classify the imagery and narratives conveyed in murals, suggesting loyalist and unionist murals have tended to fall within the following main categories: those depicting historical events; the symbolic expressions of identity, mainly through the depiction of flags, coats of arms and so on and portrayals of paramilitary members. There are also common themes that have emerged within republican murals Rolston (2018), including representations of key events in the past; activists; volunteers; victims and Irish political prisoners. Beyond these themes are others including international issues; women’s rights; figures from Irish mythology; the suffering of mothers/sisters; perfidious Albion; Mother Ireland; anti-racism and various other social issues. In recognising those republican murals as somewhat more varied than the loyalist equivalent, Goalwin (2013) suggests five main themes that have emerged, including depictions of martyrs to the republican cause (especially following the hunger strikers of the 1980s); memorialising those who died in the conflict, especially those regarded as victims; links

160

J. W. MCAULEY

and synergies with other social movements; expressions of identity, especially in its symbolic form, such as flags and representations of paramilitary members and actions during the period of the conflict (which republicans usual refer to as the armed struggle). Murals perform specific and complicated social roles, not just to distinguish and demarcate political territory, but also to promote senses of belonging and reinforce identity within the group (Crowley 2011; Rolston 1992, 1995, 1998, 2003). Representations of the past presented through murals help frame contemporary understandings and shape (re)interpretations of the conflict and past violence. They also bring forward certain issues and events that may otherwise be marginalised or forgotten. For example, over the years several murals have appeared concerning the Ballymurphy massacre precisely with this in mind (Crowley 2022; Wing 2010). By focusing on key symbolic points in the past, murals convey messages and broader ideological arguments. This reveals some of the ways in which both loyalism and republicanism work to manipulate collective memory and narratives in seeking to reaffirm identity and belonging. In turn, this understanding goes to define reactions to contemporary political events and issues and to inscribe these within the community. There has been a vast reduction in the number of aggressive paramilitary murals since the signing of the GFA (Cook 2018) and some indication of a shared culture being presented, but many still reflect the overt cultural and political divisions outlined above (Rolston 2003, 2012). While there have in recent years been some attempts are reimagining the images presented (Downey and Sherry 2014; Gallagher 2015; Rolston 2012), including financial recompense to change the more militant murals (Boyd 2019; Monaghan 2016).

Inscribing Popular Memory Through Performance Active memory agents carry forward politico-cultural identities through emotional narratives. Collective memory can be inscribed into communities is through physical performance. The communication and enforcement of collective memory through enactment has increasingly become a major focus for expressing both republican and loyalist identities. Street theatre, recitals and show-piece events feature in both communities,

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

161

where memory agents promote dominant and counter-narratives, reinforcing identity and expanding senses of belonging by communicating their story to the wider public. Parades and the ritual of parading provide a crucial location for the replication of political identity, allowing individuals to remember as members of the group (see Frazer 2000). This is often aided by the rituals and artefacts, presented through parading and mass street demonstrations. Acts of remembering and commemoration can generate strong emotional responses and sometimes violence as a reaction, as contested parades or demonstrations are met with confrontational counter protests. Performance endorses and enhances the shared political assumptions of the group by symbolising in a meaningful way existing historical narratives. An example can be found that this can be found in the series of mass pageants and parades that were organised to commemorate the formation of the UVF, the signing of the Ulster Covenant and the gunrunning in 1914 loyalists imported guns and ammunition from Germany in preparation for armed resistance to Home Rule. These were attended by tens of thousands, many in period costume, carrying wooden replica rifles and accompanied by vintage vehicles. Several well-known contemporary figures within loyalism portrayed key persons of the time, such as Edward Carson (Kilpatrick 2013).

Commemoration Practices and Places Commemoration also finds expression through other forms of popular cultures. This is an ongoing, dynamic process and one that develops over time (Conway 2008). Commemorative places, those spaces inscribed with meaning, as the result of some past events provide a central focus to recollection and remembering. The past is reached through signs, symbols and the symbolical significance of space. In Northern Pierre Nora (1989) suggests that the past can be understood as those events that societies capture and arrange that might otherwise would be forgotten. He further argues that groups select certain commemorative events, while through collective amnesia they eliminate others from any representation. Hobsbawm (1990) builds on these ideas to suggest this form invented traditions to stamp identifiable norms and beliefs that insinuate and allude to a continuity of a non-existent past, creating social identity and the

162

J. W. MCAULEY

rituals and symbolism used to unite groups and communities in contemporary society. One increasingly prominent way these ideas are made real is with new communications technologies and social networking sites like Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. Such medium present new opportunities and spaces for the formation of these collective memories and the introduction of new memory agents and the right to narrate collective stories about the past (Neiger et al. 2011; Neiger 2020).

Identity Transmission Through Popular Culture One way he manifests this continuity with a constructed past manifest is in the arena of popular culture, which for our purposes can be thought of as that which is populist and emerging from negotiations between the people and authority (Guins and Cruz 2005). This takes various forms, ranging from cartoons to literature, from poetry to prose and from tattoos to loyalist and republican music and song, both recorded and in performance. Popular music and song can be approached as forms of entertainment, but they are also mechanisms for the cultural production and reproduction of politically motivated messages and the reproduction of collective memories. Writing political street ballads in Ireland during 1780–1900, Georges Denis Zimmermann suggests that many ‘songs were inspired by political events’. He goes on to say: Ireland is one of the countries where patriotic and political songs have been, for a long time, peculiarly popular and perhaps influential .... These songs, which were … not only an expression of the singer’s and the listener’s feelings or opinions but also a form of propaganda. (Zimmermann 2002: 6)

The Past in Song and Story Songs are one means by which stories and memories of key events and themes are kept alive (Hanvey 2009; Radford 2004). As John McLaughlin (2003: 1) puts it, many such songs are: ‘fiercely partisan and usually downright biased’ but remain for many the: repositories and touchstones of tradition, both reflecting and influencing politics and history. Both republicans and loyalists use music and song as a means

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

163

of overt cultural expression often highlighting the ideological and practical traits of members. They also are strong forms of bonding across and within communities. This finds expression through the availability of recordings, the production of songbooks and lyric sheets, alongside the performance of such artists in clubs and bars. Songs of past heroics and the sacrifices of previous generations are well-established. Other songs feature the experiences of the paramilitaries, including imprisonment or visiting the broad themes and the personal circumstances of those living within loyalist (Millar 2022) or republican (Millar 2017) communities. Many popular songs go to remind loyalists and republicans respectively of their own sense of the past and the sense of history and memories that accompany this. To be effective the collective memories must not only become embedded in the broad popular consciousness and discourses of loyalism and republicanism but they must also be transmitted to the wider population, thus reinforcing group identity.

Formal Education and Collective Memory Popular culture provides an ideal framework for individuals to hang their own memories and for people to engage in the broader processes of identification, re-enforcing the central values of the group. There are other ways in which knowledge of events of the past may be passed on. Young people also encounter the transmission of memory and notions of identity through the formal education system. A prime example can be found in history teaching at the school and the promotion of specific versions of the past that are given through textbooks and other resources (see the material in Psaltis et al. 2020). Often these textbooks present interpretations of the past, which although they draw on well-known points of history offer very different understandings to those commonly found at the everyday level of the loyalist or republican community. The formal teaching of history in conflictual or divided societies brings special challenges, not least of which is how to deal with those understandings of the past that raise strong emotions that are tied to ideas of collective belonging and national identity (McCully 2012). The arenas of curriculum development and the content of teaching have been open to accusations of prejudice and bias, often by the omission of certain events from the curriculum (Smith and Vaux 2003). The different ways in which

164

J. W. MCAULEY

young people come to perceive and understand the past have been highlighted by several writers (Barton 2001a, 2001b; Barton and McCully 2003, 2005; Purdue 2021). Two important chasms in the Northern Ireland history curriculum emerge, these are: first, the absence of any attempt to bring students to question the historical background of their own identities; and second, the connections between events in the past and contemporary events are at best, underdeveloped. Thus, despite evidence of many young people displaying curiosity and expressing interest about the Troubles and other controversial topics. There is further awareness by many young people of how these topics and issues affect the lives of individuals, family members and their community (Bell et al. 2010). Moreover, history textbooks: ‘tend to stop short of asking more challenging questions’ or addressing more sensitive aspects of the past’ (Kitson 2007: 149) and most often discussions around such topics are left to individual teachers to direct (McCully 2011). Another consideration is the ways in which children are learning one kind of history at school, while simultaneously learning a separate form of historical knowledge elsewhere outside the school boundaries (Kitson 2007; Magill and Hamber 2011; Magill et al. 2009). This latter sense of learning is most often associated with sectarian memories of the family and community, including parents and other relatives, murals or marches (Barton and McCully 2003, 2010) or any of the other forms of popular culture and performances discussed above. As a result, many young people learn their primary accounts of the past, not through any formal education process, but from family and community that are partisan, prejudiced and encourage sectarian views. In other words, through a process where norms, beliefs, values and attitudes are learned, rather than acquired. Moreover, there is an acute awareness of the symbolism of murals and cultural expressions that define and bind their community and an awareness of the Other that encourages sectarianism common within loyalist and republican communities (Drummond et al. 2021).

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

165

Conclusions Collective memory helps form and reinforce key reference points in the construction of the collective and the community. In so doing, senses of belonging and identity are strengthened. One way to understand collective memories is to see them as products, directly affected directly by cultural features and social structures in society. Importantly, another outcome of these processes is the marginalisation, perhaps even the quieting of competing memory narratives. In Northern Ireland, the strength of community identity remains at the core of people’s thinking. These draw on a shared tool kit of community knowledge and memory that shapes not just what people identify as part of their past but how this is likely to take shape in the future. Collective memory draws on a wide range of identifiers such as museums, films, monuments, photographs, textbooks, documentaries, the internet, images, commemorative narratives, various media output, songs, prose and so forth. Some of these have been dealt with in some detail in this chapter. Collective memory is shaped in many ways; by social institutions and by memory agents that help form, interpret and preserve senses of belonging and identity. Individuals also engage with the past in other circumstances such as through the formal education system, which often finds itself in opposition to and in competition with everyday views of the past for influence and authority.

References Abshire, J. E. (2003) ‘Northern Ireland’s Politics in Paint’. Peace Review. A Journal of Social Justice, 15 (2): 149–161. Barton, K. C. (2001a) ‘A Sociocultural Perspective on Children’s Understanding of Historical Change: Comparative Findings from Northern Ireland and the United States’. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (4): 881–913. Barton, K. C. (2001b) ‘You’d Be Wanting to Know about the Past’: Social Contexts of Children’s Historical Understanding in Northern Ireland and the USA’. Comparative Education, 37 (1): 89–106. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. (2003) ‘History Teaching and the Perpetuation of Memories: The Northern Ireland Experience’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 107–124.

166

J. W. MCAULEY

Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. W. (2005) ‘History, Identity and the School Curriculum in Northern Ireland: An Empirical Study of Secondary Students’ Ideas and Perspectives’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37 (1): 85–116. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. W. (2010) ‘“You Can form Your Own Point of View”: Internally Persuasive Discourse in Northern Ireland Students’ Encounters with History’. Teachers College Record, 112 (1): 142–181. Bell, J. (2013) For God, Ulster and Ireland? Religion, Identity and Security in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Institute for Conflict Research. Bell, J., Hansson, U. and McCaffrey, N. (2010) ‘The Troubles Aren’t History Yet’. Young People’s Understanding of the Past. Belfast: Community Relations Council. Boyd, S. (2019) ‘Post-conflict Tourism Development in Northern Ireland: Moving Beyond Murals and Dark Sites Associated with Its Past’. In R. Isaac, E. Çakmak and R. Butler (Eds.) Tourism and Hospitality in Conflict-Ridden Destinations. London: Routledge, 226–239. Cook, W. (2018) ‘Paramilitary to POP culture: The Changing Face of Belfast’s Murals’. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2YjfP4 sPMDHNVVMsR4sY85l/paramilitary-to-pop-culture-the-changing-face-ofbelfast-s-murals; downloaded 2 March 2023. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Conway, B. (2008) ‘Local Conditions, Global Environment and Transnational Discourses in Memory Work: The Case of Bloody Sunday (1972)’. Memory Studies, 1 (2): 187–209. Crowley, T. (2011) ‘The Art of Memory: The Murals of Northern Ireland and the Management of History’. Field Day Review, 7: 22–49. Crowley, T. (2022) ‘Reading Republican Murals in Northern Ireland: Archiving and Meaning-Making’. Studi Irlandesi. A Journal of Irish Studies, 12: 87–117. Douglas, R., Harte, L. and O’Hara, J. (1998) Drawing Conclusions. A Cartoon History of Anglo-Irish Relations 1978–1998. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Downey, H. and Sherry, J. (2014) ‘Modulating Mythology in a Post-traumatic Era: Murals and Re-imaging in Northern Ireland’. In J. Desmond and D. Kavanagh (Eds.) Myth and the Market. Dublin, University College Press, 281– 304. Drummond, O., Corr, M. L., Dwyer, C., McAlister, S. and Fargas-Malet, M. (2021) “It Didn’t End in 1998”. Examining the Impacts of Conflict Legacy Across Generations. Belfast: Centre for Children’s Rights. Edensor T. (1997) ‘National Identity and the Politics of Memory: Remembering Bruce and Wallace in Symbolic Space’. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15 (2): 175–194. Edensor, T. (2002) National Identity, Popular Culture and Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg.

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

167

Frazer, T. G. (2000) (Ed.) The Irish Parading Tradition. Following the Drum. Houndmills: Macmillan. Gallagher, P. (2015) ‘Belfast Paramilitary Murals: Colourful Emblems of a City’s Tortured Past to Receive Makeover’. The Independent, 22 August. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Goalwin, G. J. (2013) ‘The Art of War: Instability, Insecurity and Ideological Imagery in Northern Ireland’s Political Murals’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 26 (3): 189–215. Guins, R. and Cruz, O. (2005) Popular Culture: A Reader. London: Sage. Hanvey, B. (2009) The Oul’ Orange and Green: Songs from Republican and Loyalist Traditions in Ireland. A Troubles Archive Essay. Belfast: Arts Council of Northern Ireland. Hobsbawm, E. (1990) Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jarman, N. (1996) ‘The Ambiguities of Peace: Republican and Loyalist Ceasefire Murals’. In Causeway. Spring, 23–27. Jarman, N. (1998) ‘Painting Landscapes: The Place of Murals in the Symbolic Construction of Urban Space’. In A. Buckley (Ed.) Symbols in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies, 81–98. Kilpatrick, C. (2013) ‘18,000 Loyalists Expected for “Ulster Day” March to Commemorate UVF Formation’. Belfast Telegraph, 24 September. Kitson, A. (2007) ‘History Teaching and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland’. In E. A. Cole (Ed.) Teaching the Violent Past: History Education and Reconciliation. New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 123–155. Legg, G. (2019) Northern Ireland and the Politics of Boredom: Conflict, Capital and Culture. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Liu, J. H. (2022) Collective Remembering and the Making of Political Culture. Cambridge University Press. Magill, C., Smith, A. and Hamber, B. (2009) The Role of Education in Reconciliation. The Perspectives of Children and Young People in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Northern Ireland. Coleraine: University of Ulster. Magill, C. and Hamber, B. (2011) ‘“If They Don’t Start Listening to Us, the Future is Going to Look the Same as the Past”: Young People and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland and Bosnia and Herzegovina’. Youth & Society, 43 (2): 509–527. McCully, A. (2011) ‘The Contribution of History Teaching to Peace Building’. In G. Salomon and E. Cairns (Eds.) Handbook on Peace Education. London: Taylor and Francis, 213–223. McCully, A. (2012) ‘History Teaching, Conflict and the Legacy of the Past’. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 7(2): 145–159.

168

J. W. MCAULEY

McLaughlin, J. (2003) One Green Hill. Journeys through Irish Songs. Belfast: Beyond the Pale. Middleton, D. and Edwards, D. (1998) (Eds.) Collective Remembering. London: Sage. Millar, S. R. (2017) Irish Republican Music and (Post) colonial Schizophrenia. Popular Music and society, 40 (1): 75–88. Millar, S. R. (2022) ‘Let Us Entertain You: Paramilitary Songs and the Politics of Loyalist Cultural Production in Northern Ireland’. Race and Class, 63 (4): 9–34. Monaghan, J. (2016) ‘Belfast Scheme Offers £25,000 in Grants to Replace Paramilitary Murals’. Belfast Telegraph, 25 August. Neiger, M. (2020) ‘Theorizing Media Memory: Six Elements Defining the Role of the Media in Shaping Collective Memory in the Digital Age’. Sociology Compass, 14 (5), e12782. Neiger, M., Meyers, O. and Zandberg, E. (2011) (Eds.) On Media Memory: Collective Memory in a New Media Age. Springer. Nora, P. (1989) ‘Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Memoire’. Representations, 26: 7–25. Pinkerton, P. (2012) ‘Resisting Memory: The Politics of Memorialisation in PostConflict Northern Ireland’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 14 (1): 131–152. ˇ Psaltis, C., Carretero, M. and Cehaji´ c-Clancy, S. (2020) (Eds.) History Education and Conflict Transformation. Social Psychological Theories, History Teaching and Reconciliation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Purdue, O. (2021) ‘Troubling Pasts: Teaching Public History in Northern Ireland’. International Public History, 4 (1): 67–75. Radford, K. (2004) ‘Red, White, Blue and Orange: An Exploration of Historically Bound Allegiances through Loyalist Song’. The World of Music, 46 (1): 71–89. Rolston, B. (1992) Drawing Support: Murals in the Northern of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Publications. Rolston, B. (1995) Drawing Support 2: Murals of War and Peace. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Publications. Rolston, B. (1998) ‘From King Billy to Cú Chulainn: Loyalist and Republican Murals, Past, Present and Future’. Eire-Ireland, 33 (1–2): 6–28. Rolston, B. (2003) Drawing Support 3: Murals and Transition in the North of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale publications. Rolston, B. (2012) ‘Re-imaging: Mural Painting and the State in Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 15 (5): 447–466. Rolston, B. 2018. Women on the Walls: Representations of Women in Political Murals in Northern Ireland. Crime Media Culture 14 (3): 365–389.

7

POPULAR CULTURES, MEMORY PERFORMANCE …

169

Roudometof, V. (2002) Collective Memory, National Identity and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria and the Macedonian Question. Westport, CT: Praeger. Sherman, D. J. (1994) Art, Commerce, and the Production of Memory in France after World War I. In J. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 186–214. Simpson, K. (2009) Unionist Voices and the Politics of Remembering the Past in Northern Ireland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Smith A. and Vaux T. (2003) Education, Conflict and International Development. London: Department of International Development. Spangler, M. (2009) ‘Performing “the Troubles”: Murals and the Spectacle of Commemoration at Free Derry Corner’. In S. Brady and F. Walsh (Eds.) Crossroads: Performance Studies and Irish Culture. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 100–113. Sturken, M. (1997) Tangled Memories: The Vietnam War, the Aids Epidemic and the Politics of Remembering. Berkeley: University of California Press. Traynor, K. (2008a) Loyalist Murals of Northern Ireland. Belfast: Ashling Photography. Traynor, K. (2008b) Nationalist Murals of Northern Ireland. Belfast: Ashling Photography. Trew, K., Muldoon, O., McKeown G. and McLaughlin, K. (2009) ‘The Media and Memories of Conflict in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Children and Media, 3 (2): 185–203. Wing, L. (2010) ‘Dealing with the Past: Shared and Contested Narratives in “Post-Conflict” Northern Ireland’. Museum International, 62 (1–2): 31–36. Zimmermann G. D. (2002 [1966]) Songs of Irish Rebellion. Dublin: Four Courts Press.

CHAPTER 8

Transnational Memories and Generational Change

People remember or forget the past according to the needs and demands of the present, confirming social memory as an active and ongoing social process, which designates how the past (and often the future) is agreed and understood by an identifiable group of people. Ruth Van Dyke and Susan Alcock (2003) Archaeologies of Memory.

This chapter revisits the ways in which memories are constructed but also considers similarities and differences as to how these are represented and reproduced in both national and international settings. Because of widespread interest in Irish affairs and the Irish conflict, partly motivated by the story of long-term diaspora, these competing interpretations of the past reverberate across generations far beyond the island itself (Binks and Ferguson 2012; Coogan 2000; various in O’Sullivan (ed.) 1996). We have already encountered how memory and myth can directly influence the construction of community and senses of nationhood. Now we will consider the place of memory and the narratives loyalism or republicanism are represented within an international perspective and how they operate transnationally. The chapter also looks at the presentation of collected memories through various forms of museums and the effects of collective memory and the durability of selected memories across time and generations. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_8

171

172

J. W. MCAULEY

It is now commonplace for those considering community to emphasise the role of social networks, social capital and social ties which bind them (Putnam 2001; Siegel 2006). David Studdert and Valerie Walkerdine (2016) further point to the notion of ‘inter-relationality’ and the importance of considering migration as a key to understanding contemporary notions of community. Moreover, ideas surrounding time and temporality have also become fundamental to understanding the dynamics of community. Further, bounded communities clearly alter and are altered over time, in their social and political composition, in spatial terms and ideological and political direction. This chapter will show how localised communities link to the global and the different filters these go through beyond the localised constructions of memory that we have already encountered. It also considers some of the temporal aspects of collective memory and to what extent this may be altered by generational change. Ireland and the affairs of Irish society have long held some prominence internationally, due in part at least to the size and maturity of the Irish diaspora (Trew 2007, 2013). This in turn has created interest in the Troubles and the causes and direction of the conflict more generally (Roe 2002; Roe and Dunlap 2002; Roe et al. 2002). This interest has brought to the fore a politics filtered through the interpretations of various diasporic communities in recalling and reproducing the past (Berdún et al. 2010; Roe et al. 2002). These are not mere reproductions of existing narratives or patterns of collective memory. Rather, they often take a somewhat differing form to those found in the homeland. The development of transnational identities draws upon relationships that merge local, national and international senses of belonging, place and politics to create hybrid diasporic subjects (Braziel and Mannur 2003). It is also important here to consider the role of memory hosts in reproducing memories and presenting these through narrative and stories. It further considers the negotiation of collective memory through museums, memory tours and other places of record. It also builds on the notions of community discussed in Chapter four to consider local and global relationships and the use of collective memory in defining identity as understood as the result of a negotiation between local and globalised senses of belonging, experience and narrative.

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

173

Globalising Memory So far, we have largely discussed collective memories as constructed by the group and confined by the national state. The strong sense of the collective in Irish history and widespread emigration from the Island, have long been the subject of much populist and academic. It has been claimed that because of primordial attachments, the nation should be regarded as the only authentic container of collective memories (Levy and Sznaider 2002). As Piaras Mac Einri (2000) argues, however, it is wrong to assume that people can only identify with or feel senses of belonging to with place when they are in it. For Barbara Misztal (2010a), the force of globalisation has moved many in the world towards an internationalised, cosmopolitan and transcultural memory. This steadily overcomes national boundaries to develop an imagined universal identity beyond that of the national community. The notion of ethnicity as place-based is increasingly has been increasingly challenged. Identities constructed through the diaspora are simultaneously both global and local, encompassing both the encountered and imagined communities (Braziel and Mannur 2004). The ideas of nation and nationhood as central narratives and a major point of identification has been complicated by globalisation, multiculturalism, modern communication, ease of travel and the growing influence of transnational identification. In response several writers have introduced the notion of ‘memory on the move’ (Assman and Conrad 2010; Rigney 2018; Toši´c and Palmberger 2016). Further, there is a recognition that resulting constructs of collective memory extend senses of community beyond national boundaries. This is the focus for reconstruction of community at the localised, national and international levels.

Emigration and Expanding Memory Large-scale population movement away from Ireland is a long-term and well-recorded phenomena. Here we will consider how this relates to North America. Emigration on a notable scale first emerged during the 1600s, when around 25,000 mainly Catholics left Ireland for the Caribbean and Virginia, some on a voluntary basis, others less so. In the latter part of that century, Protestant Dissenters also began to leave in notable numbers for the New World (McAuley 1996). By the early 1700s

174

J. W. MCAULEY

Presbyterian emigration from Ulster alongside Catholic emigration from Munster was well established (Marshall 1950). This pattern of emigration continued until the early 1830s and throughout that time Protestant departures from Ireland exceeded Catholics. After that time, the pattern changed with the emigration of Catholics vastly outnumbering that of Protestants. From around 1815 to the onset of Famine in Ireland, up to one million Irish set sail for North America. Of these around half made their new homes in Canada and half in the USA. It was the Irish Famine that provided the dynamic in a dynamic increase in the rate of emigration. It reached extraordinary levels, far outstretching that of any other nation in Europe. In the decade beginning 1845, the number of Irish people arriving in the USA from Ireland reached two million (McKay 1990). The Famine is taken as forming a core part in the construction of Irish–Catholic American identity, less so for those from a Protestant background (Mark-Fitzgerald 2013). During the Irish Famine, most emigrants from Ireland came from impoverished rural backgrounds, lacked any formal education and were mainly Gaelic-speaking, the majority coming from Connaught and Munster. By contrast, the numbers migrating from Ireland’s main urban centres such as Belfast and Dublin were limited. Unlike earlier waves of Irish migrants, who largely settled in rural areas, those arriving after the 1830s and 1840s largely settled in the easternmost cities of the USA especially Philadelphia, Boston and New York. This trend continued after the Famine with many joining friends and relations already in place and throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, driven by the social structure and economy in Ireland the Irish community continued to expand in North America. It is possible to differentiate somewhat between existing settlement patterns of Catholics and Protestants. Irish Catholic emigrants congregated in certain urban centres, on the eastern seaboard, especially New York. Previous waves of largely Protestant migrants tended to disperse to the countryside and rural towns. From the early nineteenth century, the Protestant Irish (or ‘Scotch-Irish’, as they became known in North America) were a distinguishable social grouping (Leyburn 1962). The numbers migrating from Ireland underwent a significant change around the late-1920s, largely because of the introduction of quotas by the USA. By the 1930s, despite the continuance of sizable numbers mass migration from Ireland to North America (certainly in numbers involved) had all but become a thing of the past.

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

175

In Canada, where the bulk of emigration pre-dated the Famine, the majority came from Ulster settling mainly in Ontario, New Brunswick and Quebec. This carried distinct consequences for the social structure of Canadian society and as Cecil Houston and William Smith identify, these patterns of migration meant that some social and political relations were directly transferred across the Atlantic. As a result tensions and sometimes overt conflict between Orange and Green became an everyday aspect of Canadian life (Houston and Smith 1990). The 1850s and 1860s, for example, saw widespread sectarian violence erupt across the Ottawa Valley. Public life in Toronto was so strongly influenced by Orangeism, so much so that it earned the nickname ‘Little Belfast’ (McAuley and Nesbitt-Larking 2017; Smyth 2015). The different patterns of emigration were reflected in the tensions that spilt over the Canadian–USA border, in 1870 and 1871, for example, New York City found itself subject to overt political violence and sectarian confrontation driven by the Irish question (Gordon 1993).

Ownership of Memories Beyond Ireland Memories of the earlier period of population movement have distinct consequences and the legacy remains to this day and can be seen in the contemporary social structure of both Canada and the USA. North America provides a good example of how collective memories surrounding Ireland and the experiences of Irish migrants. The associated narratives and myths have become a fundamental part of Irish-American identity. They found an organisation in a wide number of organisations, ranging from the Ancient Order of Hibernians to the Boston Celtics and from the New York GAA to the Shamrock Club of Wisconsin, among many others. All went some way to define what it meant to be Irish in the USA and all drew deeply on the collective memories of Irishness to construct this. One consequence, of this understanding, can be seen in the continuing commemoration of Famine emigrants as representatives of those forced into exile to escape the worst excess of British colonial rule. The popular memory of migration associates past emigrant experiences directly, not just with economic struggle but also with the social and political. So much so that famine memorials are commonly found beyond Ireland, especially in Canada, the USA and Australia (Gray 2004).

176

J. W. MCAULEY

Diasporic communities are transformed by the societies that receive them, but in turn, these host societies are also challenged and changed by the effects of that community on existing collectives and the memories on which they are built. People who share collective memories most often share a set of cultural reference points and cultural identities and this is seen across Ulster loyalism and Irish republicanism outside the island of Ireland (Bowman-Grieve and Herron 2020; Dochartaigh 2009). In part, this occurs through what Connerton refers to as a: ‘community of interests and thoughts’ (Connerton 1989: 47) unbounded by geography or borders. This is recognised by Gillis (1994) in the suggestion that recall and commemoration have become a global feature of society and of growing international significance. Part of that legacy rests in the competition for memory surrounding emigration and what the experience has weakened, added to or altered in collective identity and memory. For Fintan O’Toole, it is important to understand Ireland as a place that is both real and remembered (O’Toole 1997, 2010). This view has become reasonably widely held, both Irish Presidents Mary Robinson and Michael D. Higgins have, for example, referred repeatedly to the experiences of the diaspora as a central part of contemporary Irish identity.

Loyalism and Identity Abroad Those Irish emigrants who did not fit within the above constructions of Irishness were largely protestant. The needs they sought to fulfil, for shelter, self-support and to access social networks mirrored those of Irish Catholics and they also drew unreservedly on the collective memories of home. These needs were fulfilled in very different ways. Moreover, the development of loyalist diasporic memory is largely restricted by the places within which those from a protestant and unionist background have settled in numbers abroad. In any meaningful terms, this is limited to areas such as the west of Scotland, Liverpool and Manchester in England and to a lesser extent Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Canada where those from this background exist(ed) in enough numbers to carry on established traditions of meeting and parading. Canada offers an example worthy of further consideration. The development of the Orange Order and its parading tradition marks a prime example of the performance of collective memory and one that belongs

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

177

to but is also outside of Ireland. In Canada, remembrance and commemoration sometimes focus on individuals from the past, such as Prime Ministers, John A. Macdonald, Sir John Abbott, Sir Mackenzie Bowell and John Diefenbaker, who were also prominent members of the Orange Order. Although they can be seen as marching alongside the memories and ghosts of another society, there are similarities across societies. As elsewhere, the foremost public expression of Orangeism in Canada is found with the 12 July demonstrations. The main tenets of Orangeism are recognisable but mediated by distance and culture, reflecting a mixture of both Canadian and Irish Orange undertones but without any political undertones. In both societies, Orange lodges provide important community hubs and the focus for social networks. They help to organise social life and points for collating and reflecting collective memories (McAuley and Nesbitt-Larking 2017). In Canada, Orange discourse, narratives and memory offer broad guidance to individuals as to how their personal, political and public lives should be conducted. These narratives include the central place of religiosity, respect for authority and a strong political, albeit largely nonparty discourse. Contemporary narratives are framed by the strength of discourses supporting the union, Britishness and the monarchy although very much expressed in the context of Canadian citizenship. Most who sign up to the Order already understand and sympathise with the longstanding Orange worldview through the conduit of strong family and friendship networks, this does not mean these processes are static.

Ireland’s Heritage and the Past The conventional understanding of public commemoration and remembrance that we have encountered is that these are contained within identifiable cognitive and physical boundaries of the community, state or nation. As we have seen sites of memory are signifiers that seek to establish and embed understanding of the past in the public, produced by both the state and non-state memory actors. This sometimes results in an: ‘interpretation of the past through an artefactual history’ (Urry 1995: 53). The focus on artefacts, historical places, relics and objects old crafts, has led to the notion of heritage as a concept to mediate memories across distance and time. In adopting this notion, Howard and Ashworth (1999) project heritage as a central theme to reflect on the reproduction and replication of events through, role-playing, singalongs and other

178

J. W. MCAULEY

group participation as a reinterpretation of the present to create a more imaginative and sometimes more acceptable past. This understanding of heritage often draws on collective memories in a somewhat different way to construct a present where elements are either incorporated or obliterated in the construction of identity through heritage. Collective memory is presented through a dynamic process drawing on a multitude of competing pasts and giving authenticity and is sanctified through the promotion of those acts promoting heritage. Often this political process operates at a national level but sometimes it can take a highly localised form. Across unionism and nationalism, both nationally and globally, memory takes on contested narrative forms that become core to the meaning-making processes, including heritage and transnationalism.

Using Memories Beyond Ireland Collective memories are not fixed and clearly in the contemporary era when information can be exchanged across the world in seconds and high-speed communications mean information can be made available to more people in more countries than ever before, has implications for the construction of memories in both national and transnational communities. This crucially involves competition and confrontations over the ownership of memories (Assmann 2008; Huyssen 2003; Wertsch 1997). The narrative disputes that emerge often involve clashes surround the interpretations given by mnemonic communities to key events (Wertsch 2002, 2007, 2009; Wertsch and Roediger 2008) and involve mnemonic resistance, to dominant descriptions of the past (Andrews 2007; Gergen 2005). This takes place at different societal levels, ranging from the localised community to the international and transnational. Commemoration of those killed in wars, for example, ranges from a specific community or a defined neighbourhood and ranges from Remembrance Day in the UK to ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) commemorations in the antipodes (Sumartojo and Wellings 2014; Thomson 2013). All draw heavily on commonly understood interpretations and representations to reinforce the past as legitimate and meaningful. The formation of social solidarity takes place through processes that bring together different memories (individual, social and collective) to form the central building blocks within the overall formation of the

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

179

distinct ethno-political identities of Ulster loyalism and Irish republicanism. Collective memories are used to frame and confine individual political identities and the understandings of how an individual relates to the wider social and political world through community. There are countless examples of local commemoration and memorialisation across both loyalism and republicanism. In this way it is by reference to collective memory that social reality is constructed and then transmitted through the conscious efforts of individuals and the groups, underpinned by notions of difference, divergence and enmity. Such notions are communicated through a series of commonsense readings and everyday understandings of commemorative processes. The collective political myths and memories that are formed promote and progress a sense of unity and coherence amongst the group. What is commemorated is highly selective because the meaning of political myth is largely structured and shaped by that commemoration. The ability to control the production of myth and memory remains elemental to the success of any claims to legitimacy and ownership of the past. Ronald Wright is clearly aware of the importance of these aspects when he argues that: ‘most history, when it has been digested by people, becomes myth’. He continues: Myth is an arrangement of the past, whether real or imagined, in patterns that resonate with a culture’s deepest values and aspirations. Myths create and reinforce archetypes so taken for granted, so seemingly axiomatic, that they go unchallenged. (Wright 1992: 5)

The strengths of these myths are reinforced by everyday popular culture such as storytelling or song, conveying key figures and events. This is especially evident within the republican tradition, in part due to its more coherent and organised diaspora and their use of universal themes, such as resistance, loss, rebellion or bravery. The relationships between tradition, symbolism, commemoration, ritual and collective memory remain dynamic, reinforced by the narrative cycle and the commemorative timetable of significant anniversaries.

180

J. W. MCAULEY

Controversial and Divided Memory From the above, it should be apparent that the form commemoration takes and its consequences are far from universal in nature. This can be seen as a ritualised celebration using selected symbols expressing group and community identity (Spillman 1997). As we have seen, to be effective memories must be made real, it must be actively performed, negotiated and assembled to create empathy with certain social and political choices. Moreover, we should recognise how these views are passed on between and across generations and that sometimes these memories are or are made contentious through the symbolism they convey. The symbolism conveyed through the practices of commemoration is defined and redefined by following those signs representing views of the past and based on the distinct sense of identity and memory. This can readily be seen in the commemoration and symbolism attached to St. Patrick’s Day and Remembrance Day, anniversaries which are largely uncontroversial in other parts of the world but which in Northern Ireland are seen as contested, many unionists and nationalists feeling aggrieved at the symbolism attached to commemorating St. Patricks Day and Remembrance Day respectively.

Remembering the Black and Tans Collective memory provides a core feature in constructing cultures of difference, which, in turn, are projected as continuous and linked directly to the present. There are many examples. Sometimes memories are contentious and brought to the fore by commemoration and anniversaries. Another example of the disputed construction of the past came to the fore when in January 2020 the Irish Government announced a planned commemorative event for the RIC and the Dublin Metropolitan Police as part of their ongoing Decades of Centenaries programme designed to mark significant events in Irish history from 1912 to 1923. Throughout the period surrounding the War of Independence the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) continued to be the focus for the IRA, both in terms of direct violence and a wide campaign of social ostracisation aimed not only at RIC members but also their friends and family (Ferriter 2020). The RIC was ill-equipped and severely short of training to meet the IRA challenge and the numbers resigning or retiring from the organisation grew steadily. In view of this shortage, Britain began a recruitment

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

181

campaign, aimed mainly at the growing number of unemployed and World War One veterans. They began arriving in Ireland in early 1920, where because of a shortage of RIC uniforms, they were issued with khaki trousers along with dark green tunics, hence their moniker of the ‘Black and Tans’ (officially known as the Royal Irish Constabulary Special Reserve). The Black and Tans largely were originally thought of to support depleted RIC units but were under-trained and were encouraged not to act as police officers and to treat republicans as they saw fit. Deployed in some of Ireland’s most troubled areas they rapidly earned a reputation for brutality and harassment of the local population, alongside ill-discipline, drunken behaviour, indiscriminate violence and extra-judicial killings, which became cemented within the collective memory of nationalist Ireland. The commemoration event was deferred, meeting with widespread opposition typified by the views of Martin Kenny of Sinn Féin: British police and military in Ireland ruled with terror for century, from the RIC with their battering rams evicting families during the Great Hunger, to the Dublin Metropolitan Police attacking and murdering poor workers during the 1913 lock out. One hundred years ago the war of Independence was raging, as the RIC and Black and Tans pillaged, murdered and burnt out communities across the country, in their attempt to enforce the rule of the British Empire.’ (Martin Kenny, cited in Leitrim Observer, 6 January 2021)

Recalling and Making Memories Through Museums One major institution responsible for the construction and preservation of collective memories is the museum. The museum occupies a central place in the reproduction of collective memory, through essentially what may be seen as the presentation of representative and sometimes highly symbolic artefacts (Schudson 1995; Wing 2010). Initially, it is important to acknowledge three types of museums. First are those museums largely devoted to the preservation of standardised or official memory, often referred to as the neutral or agnostic museums. Second, there are those museums that carry much more committed accounts of the past, often underpinned by an underlying localised ethos. Third, there

182

J. W. MCAULEY

are what may be termed as living museums. There is often a wide disconnect between these types of museums and the reasons for their existence (Crooke 2001). This can be highlighted in broad terms when we contrast the official sites containing artefact collections found in The Ulster Museum (based in Belfast), with other localised more committed museums discussed below.

Agnostic and Official Museums The Ulster Museum clearly fits directly into the agnostic category often presenting artefacts that support official accounts of the past, largely reinforcing views of historical happenings (Bull and Hansen 2016) and presenting a balanced account and seeking to ‘make sense of the past, the present and the future through collections of art, natural science and history’ (Ulster Museum 2023). The fundamental approach of those promoting a new Museum of the Troubles and Peace (Museum of the Troubles and Peace, no date) does not stay far from this approach. Within such presentations, certain items are seen as valuable and become meaningful through their display to influence political objectives and social meaning as a way of asserting of certain views of history or culture (Museums Association, no date). It is by approaching the past in this way, that the agnostic museum asserts its standing and legitimises the authority of its approach (Macdonald 2013).

Committed Museums In direct comparison to the above are those museums found in community and which often produce sites of memory collection that are highly specific and often offer distinct alternative readings to those presented by the agnostic museum. There are a growing number of examples, such as the collections of loyalist artefacts on display in the museum run by the former UVF prisoners’ organisation, EPIC, or the museum dedicated to the history of the republican movement, such as the James Connolly Museum in west Belfast. These: ‘small, independent, single-subject museums’ (Bigand 2018: 5) are largely based upon the perceived need to present competing accounts of the collective experiences and of loyalist and republicans and the development of paramilitarism within their respective community. So, for example, The Ballymac Museum collates artefacts that seek to trace local

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

183

involvement in the defence of the Crown’ dating back for over 150 years, while the Museum of Free Derry, seeks to provide a representation of: ‘the people’s story of government oppression, the struggle for civil rights, the descent into conflict, Free Derry and Bloody Sunday’ (Museum of Free Derry 2023). The Loyalist Conflict Museum in east Belfast is a clear example of one of these small-scale committed museums. This was created within a loyalist working-class community with the perspective of tracing their past as it emerged from and developed during violent conflict. The museum sets out to tell the story largely from the perspective of and the roles played by the UDA in the conflict and post-conflict eras. The museum began life as the ‘Andy Tyrie Interpretive Centre’, the long-term commander of the UDA, which still provides much of its contemporary ethos. In their own words, the Centre was created: … to enable our community, as it emerges from forty years of violent conflict, to reflect on those years and hopefully that process of reflection may give us an understanding of what actually happened to us. … The Loyalist people have not told their story yet. A story of how fathers, mothers, sons and daughters were murdered at the hands of a ruthless Irish Nationalist and at times sectarian traditional armed force, that seemed determined to push anything Protestant and British into the sea. (Andy Tyrie Interpretive Centre, no date: 2)

Another example of this type of museum can be found in the ‘Eileen Hickey Irish Republican History Museum’ (Iarsmalann na Staire Poblachtach Éireannach). This manifested in 2007, after a long campaign by Eileen Hickey, who had collected and collated many of the exhibits currently on display. Hickey was the former Officer Commanding the republican prisoners in Armagh Women’s Gaol and set out to capture: ‘the Irish struggle across all the platforms that were present during the time’ and to present these as: ‘timeless in the effect they have across generations’ (Eileen Hickey Irish Republican Museum 2023). Many of the artefacts in the museum were donated by individuals and families, some of which date back as far as the United Irishmen rebellion of 1798. It also includes much more recent exhibits, for example, a jacket worn by PIRA volunteer Máiréad Farrell while in prison and a cell door and bed removed from Armagh prison.

184

J. W. MCAULEY

Living Museums There is another, more recent way, which is responsible for the construction, preservation and reproduction of collective memory. This too is often presented as symbolic artefacts and interactions with living history. This finds expression in different ways, such as the tours offered by Black Taxi and Bus companies, walking and guided tours (Robinson and McClelland 2020) and through other organised happenings, such as living memorials, re-enactments and other displays of artefacts. Most of these are overtly based on certain events the reporting of which gives distinct versions of the Past (Belfast Political Tour, no date). Much of this can be set in the context of the rapid growth in conflict tourism experienced in post-settlement Northern Ireland (Murphy 2010). Guided walking tours have, for example, become a central feature of Belfast life and it has been suggested: ‘walking … validates the reality of the past in the present and in so doing, continually re-establishes the relation between place, story and all the beings who use the locale’ (Legat 2008: 34–35). Much of what is presented is coloured by those telling the story (Nisbett and Rapson 2020). Such narratives draw on inherent symbolism to either reinforce existing collective memories and understandings, or to question, perhaps even challenge them in some way (Skinner 2016). On the one hand, living museums can provide a level of enlightenment that can ease post-conflict relationships. On the other hand, the living museum retains the potential to keep conflicts of the past in the present to the point where constrain efforts at peace building, by sustaining and reproducing collective memory at both the cognitive and material level. Central to constructing an imagining of the Troubles is how collective memory, both loyalist and republican, identifies central historical reference points and accepted narratives. The commemoration of a particular history and identifiable paramilitary groups are deliberately generated and hence, through these processes we see the extension through living memory to emphasise the continuity of the narrative presented by the group. The physical representations of collective memory, as in museums, go to maintain the imagined community and contribute to the formation of a defined collective. These community narratives are laid bare and reinforced by local museums (often organised and run by former combatants) that typically present the past in unselfconsciously biased interpretations

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

185

of collected artefacts, typically (decommissioned) weapons used in the conflict, paramilitary uniforms, handcrafted artefacts created by prisoners and so on. Broadly, these unofficial sites offer reasons for the origins of conflict and its history that differ from official discourses and provide narratives, which consequentially carry great weight in the group’s selfportrayal. By collecting and exhibiting these local museums also serve to function as sites of memory production.

Women Commemoration and Memory Much of the landscapes of the public memorials and commemorations are dedicated to the memory of men or male paramilitaries or former combatants. Such groupings have little difficulty in making themselves heard or their views of the past readily finding public representation. The dominant narratives of the past that are commonly drawn upon generally privilege a male interpretation of the conflict and that processes of engagement with the past, through remembrance and commemoration are decidedly gendered (Ashe 2009; McDowell 2008). The past as: ‘represented, explored and symbolised on muralled walls, remembrance gardens and in commemorative events is dominated by masculine expressions of conflict’ (Faulkner-Byrne, et al. 2023: 172) and that the symbolism used draws heavily on the male warrior symbolism leaving little room for any other representations (Meyer 2000). For women across all social groupings, their memories have largely been subject to those processes that Graff-McRae terms as ‘ghosting’ (Graff-McRae 2010; see also Evershed 2018). The recall, commemoration and presentation of women’s experience surrounding the political conflict have largely been marginalised, ignored or forgotten (McAtackney 2018), especially in relation to dominant interpretations of the Troubles (McAuley and McGlynn 2011; Rooney 2008). It is possible to here see forgetting as something that is highly organised and strategic in its form, challenging the ability of women to preserve the past and to build continuity through narratives and stories about past events. One of the most common representations of women’s experiences of the Northern Irish Troubles is as victims (Gilmartin 2019). Women were, however, active across both communities in both republican and loyalist paramilitaries (Alison 2004; McEvoy 2009) in organising nonviolent mass protests to demand an end to the conflict and in formal Politics, witness the Women’s Coalition (Fearon 1999).

186

J. W. MCAULEY

Public Remembrance Many public commemorations and events: ‘leave a deep imprint on those who experience them’ (Becker 2005: 106). We have already seen how much public remembrance in Northern Ireland is politicised and many commemorative events are saturated in political meaning. These competing claims on memory continue to structure ideological space, formal and everyday politics. In part at least it is through memory and commemoration that the contemporary is fashioned by way of the past. It is through a combination of social identification, remembering and forgetting that group members are enabled to orient themselves in their social world. In a society replete with both unofficial and official memorials, monuments and places of commemoration (many of which are discussed in the book) these places of memory carry huge symbolical significance. Commemorative monuments function to help create populist memories and myths through the meanings they project, or the meanings read into them (Winter 2009, 2014). This does not occur in a straightforward or uniform way. Only certain narratives are heard and only some people and groups are ready to receive the messages that are sent. As Lucy Newby (2021) suggests there is a hierarchy of the speakable and the hearable, suggesting that it is also important to consider the broad messiness of the everyday experience of expressions of collective memory. It is commemorative memory that ties understandings of the past to contemporary representation. Importantly, as Stephen Barley and Pamela Tolbert suggest, over time the development and reinforcement of such common understandings: ‘gradually acquire the moral and ontological status of taken-for-granted facts’ (Barley and Tolbert 1997: 99). This remembrance creates a ‘taken for granted’ past, becomes rooted in everyday moral discourses and populist understandings in representing the past. These narratives enter the public domain, not as a matter of record, but rather as an: ‘active re-working of the past’ (Schudson 1995: 359) that present a prejudiced and slanted worldview.

Conclusions Central to this chapter is an expansion of some of the debates already encountered concerning struggles over the ownership of the past and the construction of community through memories. Included in this, is

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

187

a consideration of how a sense of the past is represented and how subsequent narratives exist to prop-up or counter the dominant views of the past. The commemoration and the re-enactment of those events through museums and other memory spaces are critical to shaping collective memory. Added to this the chapter also considered global and transnational identities and the position of those who have had to force their constructions of social identity and belonging onto the public agenda. We also considered how particular memories are constructed to become transnational, the struggles over ownership and how this is used to add to or subtract from the original symbolism and meaning. Some of these are media and official memory spaces, others represent much more localised forms of memorialisation that engage more directly with established narratives connecting communities within and without of Ireland to establish a set of globalised collective memories. It is the community that puts senses of belonging and the identities structured by collective memories into shared resources and commemorations that further shape people’s thinking and actions. This is made-up of a variety of memory influences and resources such as museums, films, monuments, photographs, textbooks, documentaries, symbolism, the internet, photographic images, commemorative narratives, public holidays, sites of memory, the media and so on. People (re)interpret these resources through their daily experience to (re)define meaning and their identity.

References Alison, M. (2004) ‘Women as Agents of Political Violence: Gendering Security’. Security Dialogue, 35 (4): 447–463. Andrews, M. (2007) Shaping History: Narratives of Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andy Tyrie Interpretive Centre. (no date) Building the Peace. Conflict Resolution and Transformation. No Publisher. Ashe, F. (2009) ‘From Paramilitaries to Peacemakers: The Gender Dynamics of Community-Based Restorative Justice in Northern Ireland’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 11 (2): 298–314. Assmann, A. (2008) ‘Transformations between History and Memory’. Social Research, 75 (1): 49–72. Assman, A. and Conrad, S. (2010) (Eds.) Memory in a Global Age: Discourses, Practices and Trajectories. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

188

J. W. MCAULEY

Barley, S. R. and Tolbert, P. S. (1997) ‘Institutionalisation and Structuration: Studying the Links between Action and Institution’. Organisation Studies, 18: 93−117. Becker, A. (2005) ‘Memory Gaps, Maurice Halbwachs, Memory and the Great War’. Journal of European Studies, 35: 102–113. Belfast Political Tour. (no date) ‘Conflicting Stories—The Conflict’. [Hardcopy Brochure Advertising Tour]. Belfast: www.belfastpolicaltour.com Berdún, M. M. G. et al. (2010) (Eds.) The Ethnicities Reader: Nationalism. Multiculturalism and Migration. Cambridge: Polity. Bigand, K. (2018) ‘Representing Loyalist Paramilitary Heritage in Non-museum Exhibitions—Aims, Practices and Challenges’. In E. Crooke and T. Maguire (Eds.) Heritage after Conflict Northern Ireland. London: Routledge, 1–18. Binks, E. and Ferguson, N. (2012) ‘Identities in Diaspora: Social, National and Political Identities of the Irish and Northern Irish in England’. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences, 9 (3): 298–310. Bowman-Grieve, L. and Herron, S. (2020) ‘Then and Now: Irish Republicanism and Ulster Loyalism Online’. In M. Littler and B. Lee (Eds.) Digital Extremisms. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 109–132. Braziel, J. E. and Mannur, A. (2003) (Eds.) Theorising Diaspora: A Reader. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. Braziel, J. and Mannur, A. (2004) Theorizing Diaspora: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell. Bull, A. C. and Hansen, H. L. (2016) ‘On Agnostic Memory’. Memory Studies, 9 (4): 390–404. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Coogan. T. P. (2000) Wherever Green is Worn. The Story of the Irish Diaspora. London: Hutchinson. Crooke, E. (2001) ‘Confronting a Troubled History: Which Past in Northern Ireland’s Museums?’ International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2 (7): 119– 136. Eileen Hickey Irish Republican History Museum. (2023) ‘Our Story— Visiting the Museum’. Available: http://eileenhickeymuseum.com/visit/; downloaded 14 January. Evershed, J. (2018) Ghosts of the Somme: Commemoration and Culture War in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Faulkner-Byrne, L., Bell, J. and McCready, P. (2023) ‘“Remember the Women”: Memory-Making within Loyalism’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 165–182. Fearon, K. (1999) Women’s Work. The Story of the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition. Belfast: Blackstaff Press.

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

189

Ferriter, D. (2020) ‘Black and Tans: “Half-Drunk, Whole-Mad” and One-Fifth Irish’. The Irish Times, 4 January. Gergen, K. (2005) ‘Narrative, Moral Identity and Historical Consciousness: A Social Constructionist Account’. In J. Sträub (Ed.) Narration, Identity and Historical Consciousness. New York: Bergham Books, 99–119. Gilmartin, N. (2019) ‘Gendering the “Post-conflict” Narrative in Northern Ireland’s Peace Process’. Capital and Class, 43 (1): 89–104. Gordon, M. A. (1993) The Orange Riots. Irish Political Violence in New York City, 1870 and 1871. New York: Cornell University Press. Gray, P. (2004) ‘Memory and the Commemoration of the Great Irish Famine’. In P. Gray and K. Oliver (Eds.) The Memory of Catastrophe. Manchester: Manchester University, 46–64. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Graff-McRae, R. (2010) Remembering and Forgetting 1916: Commemoration and Conflict in Post-Peace Process Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Houston, C. J. and Smith, W. J. (1990) The Sash Canada Wore: A Historical Geography of the Orange Order in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Howard, P. and Ashworth, G. (1999) (Eds.) European Heritage Planning and Management. Bristol: Intellect. Huyssen, A. (2003) Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Legat, A. (2008) ‘Walking Stories; Leaving Footprints’. In T. Ingold and J. Vergunst (Eds.) Ways of Walking: Ethnography and Practice on Foot. Padstow: Ashgate, 35–50. Levy, D. and Sznaider, N. (2002) ‘Memory Unbound: The Holocaust and the Formation of Cosmopolitan Memory’. European Journal of Social Theory, 5 (1): 87–106. Leyburn, J. G. (1962) The Scotch-Irish. A Social History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Mac Éinrí, P. (2000) ‘Introduction’. In A. Bielenberg (Ed.) The Irish Diaspora. London: Longman, 1–16. Macdonald, S. (2013) Memorylands: Heritage and Identity in Europe Today. London: Routledge. Mark-Fitzgerald, E. (2013) Commemorating the Irish Famine. Memory and the Monument. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Marshall, W. F. (1950, reprinted 2010) Ulster Sails West. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co. McAtackney, L. (2018) ‘Where Are All the Women? Public Memory, Gender and Memorialisation in Contemporary Belfast’. In E. Cooke and T. Maguire

190

J. W. MCAULEY

(Eds.) Heritage after Conflict: Northern Ireland. Abington: Routledge, 154– 172. McAuley. (1996) ‘Under a Fading Banner?: Some Northern Protestant Experiences of Emigration’. In P. O’Sullivan (Ed.) The Irish Worldwide, Volume 6. Religion and Identity. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 43–69. McAuley, J. W. and C. McGlynn (2011) ‘“Auxiliaries in the Cause”? Loyalist Women in Conflict and Post-Conflict’. In J. W. McAuley and G. Spencer (Eds.) Ulster Loyalism after the Good Friday Agreement: Politics, Processes and Futures. London: Palgrave, 132–146. McAuley, J. W. and Nesbitt-Larking, P. (2017) Contemporary Orangeism in Canada: Identity, Nationalism and Religion. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. McDowell, S. (2008) ‘Commemorating Dead “Men”: Gendering the Past and Present in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. Gender, Place and Culture, 15 (4): 335–354. McEvoy, S. (2009) ‘Loyalist Women Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland: Beginning a Feminist Conversation about Conflict Resolution’. Security Studies 18 (2): 262–286. McKay, D. (1990) Flight from Famine: The Coming of the Irish to Canada. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Meyer M. K. (2000) ‘Ulster’s Red Hand: Gender, Identity and Sectarian Conflict in Northern Ireland’. In S. Ranchard-Nilsson and M. A. Tétreault (Eds.) Women at Home in the Nation? London: Routledge, 119–142. Misztal, B. (2010a) ‘Collective Memory in a Global Age: Learning How and What to Remember’. Current Sociology, 58 (1): 24–44. Murphy, W. A. W. (2010) ‘Touring the Troubles in West Belfast: Building Peace or Reproducing Conflict?’. Peace and Change, 35 (4): 537–560. Museum of the Troubles and Peace. (no date) Museum Foundation. The Troubles and Peace. Belfast: MoTaP. Museums Association. (no date) Museums Change Lives. Northern Ireland. London: Museums Association. Museum of Free Derry. (2023) ‘Welcome to the Museum of Free Derry’. Available at: https://museumoffreederry.org; downloaded 9 February. Newby, L. (2021) ‘Troubled. Generations? (De)Constructing Narratives of Youth Experience in the Northern Ireland Conflict’. Journal of War and Culture Studies, 14 (1): 6–24. Nisbett, M. and Rapson, J. (2020) The Role of Ex-paramilitaries and Former Prisoners in Political Tourism. Political geography, 80, 102185. Ó Dochartaigh, N. (2009) ‘Reframing Online: Ulster Loyalists Imagine an American Audience’. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 16 (1): 102–127.

8

TRANSNATIONAL MEMORIES AND GENERATIONAL CHANGE

191

O’Sullivan, P. (1996) (Ed.) The Irish Worldwide, 6 Volumes. Leicester: Leicester University Press. O’Toole, F. (1997) The Lie of the Land: Irish Identities. London: Verso. O’Toole, F. (2010), Enough is Enough. London: Faber and Faber. Putnam, R. (2001) ‘Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences’. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2: 41–51. Rigney, A. (2018) ‘Remembrance as Remaking: Memories of the Nation Revisited’. Nations and Nationalism, 24 (2): 240–257. Robinson, J. S. and McClelland, A. G. (2020) ‘Troubling Places: Walking the “Troubling Remnants” of Post-conflict Space’. Area, 52: 654–662. Roe, M. D. (2002) ‘Contemporary Catholic and Protestant Irish America: Social Identities, Forgiveness, and Attitudes toward the Troubles’. Eire-Ireland, 37 (1): 153–174. Roe, M. D. and Dunlap, S. (2002) ‘Contemporary Scotch-Irish Social Identities and Attitudes toward the Troubles in Northern Ireland’. Journal of ScotchIrish Studies, 1(3): 12–36. Roe, M. D., Lenius, J. and Bennett, J. C. (2002) ‘Irish Diaspora in America: Attitudes toward Political and Social Solutions to the Conflict in Northern Ireland’. Irish Journal of Psychology, 23 (3/4): 234–258. Rooney, E. (2008) ‘Critical Reflections: Documenting Gender and Memory’. Women’s Studies International Forum, 31 (6): 457–463. Schudson, M. (1995) ‘Dynamics of Distortion in Collective Memory’. In D. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion: How Minds, Brains and Societies Reconstruct the Past. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 346–364. Siegel. (2006) Criminology. Massachusetts: Thomson: Wadsworth. Skinner, J. (2016) ‘Walking the Falls: Dark Tourism and the Significance of Movement on the Political Tour of West Belfast’. Tourism Studies, 16 (1): 23–39. Smyth, W. (2015) Toronto, the Belfast of Canada: The Orange Order and the Shaping of Municipal Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Spillman, L. (1997) Nation and Commemoration: Creating National Identities in the United States and Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Studdert, D. and Walkerdine, V. (2016) ‘Being in Community: Re-Visioning Sociology’. Sociological Review, 64 (4): 613–621. Sumartojo, S. and Wellings, B. (2014) (Eds.) Nation, Memory and Great War Commemoration: Mobilizing the Past in Europe, Australia and New Zealand. Bern: Peter Lang. Toši´c, J. and Palmberger, M. (2016) ‘Introduction’. In M. Palmberger and J. Toši´c, (Eds.) Memories on the Move: Experiencing Mobility, Rethinking the Past. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–16. Thomson, A. (2013) Anzac Memories: Living with the Legend. Clayton: Monash University Press.

192

J. W. MCAULEY

Trew, J. D. (2007) ‘Negotiating Identity and Belonging: Migration Narratives of Protestants from Northern Ireland’. Immigrants and Minorities, 25 (1): 22–48. Trew, J. D. (2013) Leaving the North. Migration and Memory, Northern Ireland 1921–2011. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Ulster Museum. (2023) ‘Discover Together’. Available: https://www.ulstermus eum.org; downloaded 12 January. Urry, J. (1995) ‘How Societies Remember the Past’. The Sociological Review, 43 (1): 45–65. Van Dyke, R. and Alcock, S. (2003) ‘Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction’. In R. Van Dyke and S. Alcock (Eds.) Archaeologies of Memory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1–14. Wertsch, J. (1997) ‘Narrative Tools of History and Identity’. Culture and Psychology, 3: 5–20. Wertsch, J. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wertsch, J. (2007) ‘Collective Memory’. In J. Valsiner and A. Rosa (Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 645–660. Wertsch, J. (2009) ‘Collective Memory’. In P. Boyer and J. V. Wertsch (Eds.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 117– 137. Wertsch, J. V. and Roediger, H. L. (2008) ‘Collective Memory: Conceptual Foundations and Theoretical Approaches’. Memory, 16 (3): 328–326. Wing, L. (2010) ‘Dealing with the Past: Shared and Contested Narratives in “Post-Conflict” Northern Ireland’. Museum International, 62 (1–2): 31–36. Winter, J. (2009) ‘Historians and Sites of Memory’. In P. Boyer and J. V. Wertsch (Ed.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 252–268. Winter, J. ([1995] 2014) Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wright, R. (1992) Home and Away. Toronto: Knopf.

CHAPTER 9

Legacy, Victimhood and the Possibility of Change

Although distortion of the past is widespread, the most common travesty is one of omission, wherein populist leaders neglect to mention the crimes committed by their own side or recollect them in such a way that evades accepting full responsibility. That politicians are so able to evoke historical arguments in these ways results from a prior failure of the society to engage in a full and frank encounter with past wrongdoings. Richard Ashby Wilson (2011) Writing History in International Criminal Trials.

This chapter considers some of the ways in which collective memory has become central to Northern Ireland politics and society. It deliberates on how individuals and groups have shifted parameters from a physical towards a more cultural form of conflict. It also considers how collective memory drawn upon in defining the categories of the victim and survivor as well as perpetrator and those less fortunate. The resulting sniping and skirmishes around the articulation of these identities have proven corrosive and divisive to politics and society in Northern Ireland. As we have seen, much of this division rests on the constant competition for the dominance of conflicting memories and interpretations of the past that differing groupings seek to bring to the fore. This book has presented evidence surrounding how the collective memory carries © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_9

193

194

J. W. MCAULEY

profound political significance, and how these understandings are established and carried forward to future generations. These ideas are mostly communicated through peer groups and across generations through the processes of commemoration and memorialisation already considered above. This chapter examines the possibility of collective remembering being used to overcome memories of past violence. It also considers briefly the culture clash regarding the position of truth, reconciliation and the past. Clashing memories permeate many aspects of politics in contemporary Northern Ireland. New social relationships have been constructed and reconstructed as the society has moved out of overt conflict and towards post-conflict relationships. The fate of those who have suffered from and those who consider themselves victims of the same conflict has moved to the centre stage of politics. Any attempt to agree just who falls within these categories has proved extremely controversial and endeavours to find any settled definition of who is a victim and who is not has been far from straightforward.

Who Are the Victims? Disputes over the meaning or ownership of the term victim remain highly problematic, socially charged and at the centre of the political agenda. As a post-conflict society, Northern Ireland shares these issues with others, such as the Basque Country (Mees 2019) or South Africa (Beinart and Dubow 2001). Nor has Northern Ireland been aided in defining the notion of victims by its recent past. Although there was some reference made to a Victims’ Commission in the GFA, there was little detail as to how it would deal with issues of victimhood. Often competing attempts to classify the term victim are directly informed by notions that draw on collective memory and are influenced by moral and political arguments (Baumann 2010). Several major approaches towards the past have subsequently developed, including public enquiries, police led-truth recovery, communitybased initiatives and broad consultations The first to deal with the past and how the Troubles should be remembered was a report by John Park (1998) that also considered the impact on both survivors and victims of the conflict. This also immediately raised debates surrounding the definition of victims that began to take shape over the conflicting claims surrounding the notion of victimhood (Jankowitz 2018a, b).

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

195

Who should be legitimately regarded as ‘real’ victims and the position of the bereaved and injured from sectarian political violence was brought into further sharp relief in a report by Sir Kenneth Bloomfield (1998). This accepted and developed the main recommendations made by Park, suggesting a broad definition of victims, to include all those who had suffered in the Troubles. This was to include members of paramilitary organisations and their families, as well as those deemed to be the victims of state, structural and organised violence. Bloomfield’s report was to be only the first of several governmentsponsored attempts to bring some influence and order to the whole area surrounding the past and commemoration. The ‘All Truth is Bitter’ report (2001) was launched after Alex Boraine visited Northern Ireland in February 1999. Drawing heavily on experiences with the Truth Commission in South Africa, Boraine suggests that there are several kinds of truth to be accessed, including factual truth; personal and or narrative truth and healing and restorative truth. It proposed broad and inclusive discussions to consider ways of examining the past and processes of remembering. The report further suggested that the South African model be considered, whereby the process of reconciliation was helped by allowing people to tell their own stories through their own narratives. This allowed both victims and perpetrators to give acknowledgement and meaning to often complex and multi-layered experiences. The Healing Through Remembering project (HTR) came into existence in early 2002 as a locally based non-governmental organisation seeking to develop a cross-community approach to memorialisation and commemoration. They drew on widespread public consultation as to how best events connected with the Troubles should be remembered. The HRT report (2002) contained several recommendations, including a process for collective storytelling and the archiving of such stories; the establishing of a day of reflection; that a network of remembering projects be established, alongside a living memorial museum and that the possibility of a process of truth recovery be investigated. This was underpinned by a belief that an agreed accommodation of the sequence and cause for events of the past could be found and that an agreed history of the Troubles could be written (Chung 2022). Much of this was recognised by the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (Kelly and Hamber 2004) in setting up a new Victims Unit, that formulated its strategy based on the: ‘Reshape, Rebuild, Achieve report’ (OFDFM 2002).

196

J. W. MCAULEY

This was followed by the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland (CGP), largely made-up of civil society and representatives from the main churches. The group sought to engage with questions of the definition of victimhood and the appropriateness of measures taken to provide compensation to victims. Amongst its proposals were several suggestions of ways to deal with the past and major matters relating to the rights and needs of victims, including the formation of a legacy commission and a truth recovery body. Perhaps the most controversial proposal forwarded by the CGP was the suggestion that financial compensation be given to all those relatives bereaved in the conflict, irrespective by way of whether they were combatants, innocent victims or bystanders. The report emphasised that any legacy process should give priority to: ‘promoting remembering across society as a means of achieving reconciliation’ (CGP 2009: 9). Much stress was placed on the notion of forgiveness and the recognition of wrongs committed by all sides in the conflict (CGP 2009: 15). The report attempted to set boundaries concerning how to view the past not in terms of allocating blame, but rather by looking to the universality of suffering and the commonality of experiences by people of Northern Ireland. Beyond this, the CGP recommendations fell under four main strands. First, addressing should fall within the broad conceptual framework of a ‘shared and reconciled future’. Second, an essential part of the process should be to review and investigate historical cases. Third, any inclusive understanding must be based on a formal process of information recovery, which was to be an integral mechanism of the overall process. Fourth, there should be a detailed examination of: ‘linked or themed cases emerging from the conflict’ (CGP 2009: 7). While recognising the need for some legal and judicial mechanisms to deal with the past, this was largely to deal with any unresolved conflictrelated crimes. It was clear that the CGP believed that any fruitful attempt to engage with the past should be in relation to a future that is recognisably different from the divisions, antagonisms and humiliations that sustained conflict. The CGP Report was shelved, overtly because of widespread pushback regarding financial compensation for victims, but also because such engagement with the past failed to gain widespread support. Cillian McGrattan and Stephen Hopkins (2017) point to other attempts to construct a viable framework that may be used to engage meaningfully with collective memory. Dr Richard Haass and Professor

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

197

Meghan O’Sullivan chaired a series of meetings with politicians and others throughout 2013. The resulting report distinguished between truth recovery based on storytelling approaches and others adopting other methods such as those in the more forensic work of the police and judiciary. Many of the principles set out by Haass/O’Sullivan were reaffirmed by the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) published in 2014. The SHA endorsed the idea of a process built on principles of equity and transparency. This was to openly address the victim’s suffering and that of survivors, largely through the information recovery. To bring this about it suggested the setting up four new legacy institutions, to progress future engagement with the past, in the shape of the Independent Commission on Information Retrieval (ICIR); the Historical Investigations Unit (HIU); the Oral History Archive (OHA); and the Implementation and Reconciliation Group (IRG).

The Morals of Remembering A broad official definition of a victim has emerged as anyone who has survived psychological or physical injury that has come about as a result of the conflict or related incidents. This includes the relatives and partners of victims, those who care for them and those forced to mourn because of the Troubles. Following Winter and Sivan (1999), it is possible to expand this definition to include non-combatants and civilians who he regards as part of the same population of victims. But any discussion concerning the definition of the victim remains problematic and politically charged informed by collective memory, influenced by moral arguments and in part follows established political lines. Senses of victimhood in Northern Ireland also have a direct influence on feelings of belonging and identity (Shnabel et al. 2012; Vollhardt 2012). This is especially true if the sense of victimhood which emerged is as the result of prejudiced or undeserved behaviours of an identified Other (Cohrs et al. 2015). This grants higher moral status to the victim group (Sullivan et al. 2012). It is the collective memory of trauma and suffering that promotes common identification and shapes future action driven by a distinct moral position and the perceived legitimacy or illegitimacy of those involved. There have been intense debates in the political and civic arenas about the legitimacy of the concept victimhood and when and when not its use is appropriate to describe sections of the Northern Irish

198

J. W. MCAULEY

population (Berastegi and Hearty 2019). The definition of victims and victimhood has acquired both comprehensive and more limited connotations (Morrissey and Smyth 2002). For some, the understanding of victimhood is widespread, almost everyone living in Northern Ireland has been touched, and ‘virtually everybody is affected’ by the Troubles (Dillenburger and Keenan 2001: 188). Around 40% of all victim support groups currently active were formed between 1971 and 1997, while the remaining came into existence following the 1998 GFA (Dillenburger 2006). Such groups highlight a certain form of remembering around the Troubles that focuses on suffering felt by individuals and commonality rather than differences and division between groups. Others, based on the belief that experiences of the Troubles have not been universal and certainly not everyone has been affected in the same way or to the same extent. This has some people to: ‘choose to describe themselves as victims based on a range of factors not strictly limited to the direct impact of the troubles on their lives’ (Cairns et al. 2003: 29). For some this is a necessary pre-condition in order to allow them to move on. Others affected by the Troubles do not like the label, claiming that being identified as such suggests an identity that freezes and sustains their experience of loss at a fixed point in time (Blustein 2014; Hamber and Wilson 2003).

Memory, Victimhood and Entitlement Given the tightness of community and the strength of reproduction of collective identity and memory, it is not surprising that many members of the broader group regard themselves as conflict victims. It is within this context that a so-called hierarchy of victims has emerged as disparate narratives have sought to prioritise and privilege one group’s suffering over another (Demirel 2021; Jankowitz 2018b). The labels victim and survivor remain subject to continued dissonance, underpinned by debate over political, academic and moral differences (Jankowitz 2018a). The experience of injustice and the willingness to identify or be identified through the label of victimhood (Passini 2011) brings widespread consequences. Narratives of victimhood are often used to legitimise violence and deflect responsibility for violence, both contemporary and in the past. These notions of victimhood and victim entitlement are directly linked to other populist political discourses surrounding entitlement and rights, which in turn draw on divided collective memories used to allocate

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

199

blame and the legitimacy of actions in the past. Definitions of victimhood have been merged with wider aspects of politics and recall, to replicate old divisions and draw directly on collective memories of the past (Morrissey and Smyth 2002). Hence, as Kulle and Hamber (2001) observed, both: ‘Loyalist and Republican paramilitaries refer to their status as victims as a context that justifies their respective recourse to armed conflict’.

Legacy of Conflict Memory Moreover, the broad context of conflict legacy attempts to build on the notion of victimhood and to agree on just who are the victims have consistently proved problematic (Jankowitz 2018a, b). This is partly because of the strength of collective community views and the differing understandings of the contours of the conflict that have become engrained directly in community understandings of conflict (Hackett and Rolston 2009). Hence, notions of gains and losses and of who is and who is not telling the truth have proved increasingly troublesome in post-conflict society. Essential to understanding the political and policy debates that have emerged are issues of legacy and competing interpretations of the past. The definitions of the victims of the conflict, their rights and debates around injustice and the harm associated have become central to contemporary political debates and the formation of social policy. The focus for such debates tends to emphasise the extent to which one’s own grouping and its politics can be seen as being just and moral allowing the presentation of Self and members of the in-group as victims. Populist representations concerning victimhood most often suggest that the conflict and suffering are something imposed by the Other group, whose cause is unjust and who are using immoral means to achieve them. Within this context, the imposition of suffering and so the responsibility for it is attributed to others, with demands for justice less about the needs of the individual and more about communal or organisational advantage. Suffering and the experiences of victims are used to reinforce victim and perpetrator narratives both of which would reflect party political and communal divisions rather than individual needs.

200

J. W. MCAULEY

Ownership of Memories Thus, concerns around memory and presentations of the past dovetail directly with contemporary political debates, especially those concerning the legitimacy and dishonesty of actions and actors in the past (Radstone 2008). Loyalists largely believe that the current peace rests on the growing acceptance of a rewritten history and the entrenchment of republican myth and memories into the mainstream. They project republicans as having been rewarded for agreeing to stop engaging in terrorism, but in public statements, they continue to imply that they had a right to use such tactics in the past. The issue of defining victimhood in terms of deserving and underserving has been the rock upon which many political advances in Northern Ireland society have floundered. This has been reflected using the notion of ‘memory wars’, which has been increasingly applied to a range of political and disputes surrounding, for example, the flying of flags, bonfires, parades and language rights. Cultural differences are entangled with collective identities to evaluate, protect or vilify the politics and emotional attachment of the Self and the Other (Durrer et al. 2020; McKnight and Schubotz 2017). Part of this directly reflects the way memory is used by both communities regarding the conflict. Most unionists still insist that the full responsibility for the violence rests not with them but directly with the republican paramilitary organisations, Sinn Féin and their associates (Lawther 2012). Moreover, many unionists point to the attempts by republicans and Sinn Féin, to establish a new historical metanarrative that shifts blame for the conflict away from the republican movement, claiming their campaign of violence came about because there was no viable political alternative (Irish Times , 25 May 2012). Further, republicans argue that their resort to violence was justified by circumstances and there was little option under a Stormont system that rested on institutional and economic discrimination, underpinned by the oppressive policing of the nationalist population by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) and then ‘occupation’ by the British Army. This narrative that the republican movement had little option other than armed resistance involves reconstructing existing, sometimes through selective amnesia, the narratives of the collective memory of republicanism, to the point where the PIRA’s campaign of ‘armed struggle’ is projected as a logical extension of a broad struggle surrounding

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

201

human rights and equality. Sometimes this is seen by the republican movement as a direct extension of the agenda promoted by the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association (NICRA) in the late 1960s. These explanations are increasingly presented as part of the public face of Sinn Féin, much to the ire of many, including unionists and many victims’ rights groups (Carroll 2022). Further, as Cillian McGrattan (2013: 76) highlights discourse surrounding equality was noticeable only by its absence in republican rhetoric during the early 1970s and 1980s (McGrattan 2013: 76), which was more focused on removing the British presence from Ireland (Bell 1990, 2000; O’Brien 1999). The contemporary republican narrative that the republican leadership of the time had no alternative but to become involved in military campaign has been explicitly and vehemently rejected not just by many of those active in the civil rights movement at the time but also by unionists, the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) and other constitutional nationalists (Bean and Hayes 2009; Hopkins 2013: 98–113).

Dealing With the Past The competition around Northern Ireland’s memory culture war is most keenly experienced in the ranks of republicanism and loyalism through their attempts to promote and legitimise a particular set of memories and perspective on the past. The determination of this legitimates views of the present often to meet political concerns. It manifests again and again in contemporary, for example, in Sinn Fein’s refusal to allow a celebratory of stone, or the lighting of Belfast City Hall to commemorate Northern Ireland’s centenary. The continuous contestation between these groups claiming to speak the truth about the conflict has led Bell (2002) to assert that in Northern Ireland the present is the past and the past is the present. Broadly, on the one hand, unionist fear is apparent in their definition of victims (see previous chapter) and in their belief that any truth process is part of the ‘greenwashing’ of the past and is being used by republicans to advance their political agenda (Scullion 2022). On the other hand, republicans are keen to expose what they see as a deliberately hidden past, including the wrongdoings of the state and collusion between the state and sections of loyalism (McGovern 2019). These cultural differences, manifest in different ways but are always the expression of the different relationships to cultural memory within the

202

J. W. MCAULEY

main communities and collectives. One example that came to prominence during late 2022 surrounds the popularity of the song ‘Celtic symphony’, written in 1987 by Brian Warfield and was brought to prominence by his band the Wolftones. Part of the chorus includes the line ‘ooh aah, up the Ra’, which is largely understood to be supportive of the PIRA and is in populist discourse often used as such. The song became mired in controversy in public discourse when the Republic of Ireland’s Women’s team were filmed in their dressing room and singing ‘ooh, aah up the Ra’ as part of their celebrations in qualifying for the World Cup. Their actions were posted on social media, bringing an almost immediate apology from the Ireland team manager for the actions of the players (Irish Times 15 October 2022). An Irish Times poll supported the proposition that people singing ‘Up the’Ra’ didn’t do so to glorify past IRA violence (Irish Times 2022b) but the controversy gained momentum when a young woman, also engaged in the chant when supposedly posing for a selfie with Dame Arlene Foster, the former DUP leader and First Minister, who was attending an awards ceremony in Belfast. The whole sequence was recorded and circulated widely. The incident drew an immediate response from across unionism regarding people’s relationship with the collective past. Jim Allister, the leader of Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV), claimed this represented: ‘a disgusting, hateful and aggressive mentality (that) Sinn Féin’s glorification of the IRA has created amongst republican youth’. While Philip Brett of the DUP, suggested a conversation was needed within nationalism and that Sinn Féin: ‘must accept that their attempt to blur the rights and wrongs of the past is perpetuating it today’ (Rainey 2022a, b). The framing and political use of cultural memories for political ends can be found within unionism as well. Take the following excerpt from a speech made by the leading Orangeman Mervyn Gibson at a rally in east Belfast also in 2022 against the Northern Ireland Protocol. The Protocol was part of the settlement arrived at by the UK government and the European Union in the accord that saw the UK leave. Part of this involved different economic arrangements for Northern Ireland than for the rest of the UK. Unionists reacted with barely disguised fury and immediately launched a series of protests and demonstrations. At one of these, Gibson forcibly argued that unionists should continue to boycott Stormont if the Protocol existed and that there should be: ‘no fudge, no ambiguity, no Irish Sea border and no foreign laws’ (News Letter 25 April 2022). Further arguing that the Protocol was part of a ‘devious, underhand and

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

203

sly’ plan to bring about an all-Ireland he suggested that unionists must not be apathetic to current dangers. In so doing he invoked the past in support, directly recalling such events as the Ulster Covenant, the gunrunning by the UVF of old and the foundation of the country in 1921 in saying: Apathy was not an option when in 1912 people signed the Covenant. Apathy was not an option when guns were landed at Larne and Donaghadee. Apathy was not an option in 1921 when Northern Ireland was founded. Apathy was not an option during the dark days of the troubles. Apathy did not secure 101 years of Northern Ireland.

In addressing the contemporary situation, the major reference points of Gibson are in the past, but he seeks to emphasise continuity with these. This process of: ‘bringing into relation different inherited pasts’ and using this to orientate groups towards a particular vision of the future (Pickering and Keightley 2013: 121) is common across both loyalism and republicanism. This is the case in both the Wolftones who strongly promote the republican version of the past and argue that memories and stories arising from this need to be told and those loyalists who equally strongly promote the notion that: ‘the Republican leopard will not change its spots’ (News Letter 25 April 2022).

Drawing a Line Under the Past? The power to label or self-define individuals or groups as victims, perpetrators or survivors, their role in the conflict and how they seek to express their identity culturally remains core to any effort to bring political settlement to Northern Ireland. There is broad recognition that the failure to properly acknowledge and interpret the Troubles, prevents reconciliation and condemns both current and future generations to further discord and division. Late 2022 saw a marked change in expectations and focus by the UK government surrounding the legacy process away

204

J. W. MCAULEY

from one based on legal procedures and justice to one centred on information gathering. This, the UK government believed offered people the best chance of obtaining some sense of accountability and justice. Hence, speaking to the ‘Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill 2022’, the then British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Brandon Lewis suggested that any existing legacy process based on justice-focused outcomes could no longer be continued because it was proving too divisive and acrimonious and that it was increasingly unlikely that current strategy would do little other than perpetuate communal divisions. The UK government’s response and attempting to bring some resolution formally projected the notion of drawing a line under the past and constructing an agreed narrative of the Troubles conflict. They offered immunity to anyone involved in past violence and an end to formal inquests. The government would continue to support information gathering and testimony from all sections of society but would not pursue those perpetrators who engaged directly in the process, whether members of republican or loyalist paramilitary groups or the British Army. The Troubles Legacy Bill would offer an effective amnesty for crimes that occurred during the period of the Troubles in exchange for a willingness to cooperate with a new truth retrieval body. Its practical meaning is that any future civil cases linked to killings during the conflict would be halted and inquests would not take place. The government proposals around legacy were universally rebuffed by most, including the political parties, victim’s groups, former paramilitaries and the Irish government, albeit from several differing perspectives. In broad terms, unionists claimed that the proposals simply failed to meet victims’ needs. In the House of Lords, the DUP Lord Dodds described the government’s position as ‘invidious’ claiming that: ‘victims had been treated abominably by the government’ in a system designed to legitimise the IRA and criminalise the state and loyalists (Black 2023; Savage 2023). Political nationalism and republicanism opposed the new direction and mechanisms for ‘dealing with the past’, raising concerns that such a scheme would prevent any enquiries into the actions of state forces and collusion with loyalist paramilitaries. Both sets of interpretations fit directly with existing memory forms and framed and indicate just how deeply these are embedded in respective communities. Legacy and the ability of groups to define the past remains highly problematic and contentious in the everyday.

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

205

How Do Generations Remember? One way to view the role of differing generations is to view these as intermediaries between individual and collective memory. It is the family that continues to be the primary source for socialisation and remains a crucial medium through which understandings of the past are passed through the generations. It is the family that passes on to children those forms of recall that are acceptable and how individuals can access that past. Family narratives and history carry no little significance in processes of transmitting values and memories through and across generations. Symbolic reproduction emphasises unity in community and family life is reproduced through both intimate family traditions, alongside wider group sentiments and understandings (Feuchtwang 2005). As identified at several points throughout this book, the family plays a vital role not just in presenting memory but also in reproducing senses of cohesion and narratives of continuity. The ability of young people to remember is often guided by the intervention of older family members through reminiscences and storytelling. Consequently, memories are often strongly influenced by recollections and the reproduction of tales that young people have heard growing up and which provide the framework for understandings. This may be seen as core in the formation of memories to subsequent generations and centrality of the family in the construction and transmission of such narratives has been established (Erll 2011; Hirsch 2008).

Reformulating Generational Memory This does not mean that young people receive these messages as empty vessels to be filled by the thoughts and beliefs of the previous generation. The transmission of values through the family results in the re-narration of existing memories through a process whereby different generations crossrefer and borrow from other generations to negotiate personal and shared pasts and senses of identity (McNicholl et al. 2019; Hirsch 2008). Several have pointed to the experiences of adolescence and early adulthood as formative in constructing later viewpoints (Corning 2010; Schuman and Corning 2012; Schuman and Scott 1989). These interpretations indicate that understandings do not necessarily remain unchanged throughout the lifecycle and the narrations of memory are: ‘constantly reformatted according to generational needs and frames

206

J. W. MCAULEY

of interpretation’ (Welzer 2010: 16). So how do generations remember? Following the work of Mannheim (1952 [1928]), several studies that link memory to generation have focused on the different historical periods that people have lived through and key events they have witnessed. Essentially these consider how narratives of the past are passed on from older to younger generations and are dependent on those who receive such ideas (Leonard 2006; Palmberger 2016). Generational identity is constructed through negotiation, accepting some existing memories, but negating and silencing others (Argenti and Schramm 2010). This is most often bounded by the needs of generations and the perspectives and interpretations of the time (Welzer 2010). In so doing, generations source, plagiarise and refer to individual and shared pasts to differentiate themselves from past generations and to assign their own identity.

What Do Generations Remember? Connerton (1989) illustrates how group memory is communicated and upheld and that different generations can be seen as transmitters or receivers of group memory. Elsewhere, Harald Welzer argues that: ‘narrations of memory are never transmitted, but rather constitute an occasion for an endless line of re-narrations that are constantly reformatted according to generational needs and frames of interpretation’ (Welzer 2010: 16). So, what role does the transmission of memory play in the construction of the community? Memory is always socially, politically and historically conditioned, shaped not only by selective recall but by the dominant values of the time (Gl˘aveanu 2017). It is through the acceptance of sharing of some collective memory and collective silencing and repressing of others that identity is constructed. Identity can be assigned to a generation. This involves taking on board a particular set of values that may involve continuity with the past or a differentiation from it. The memory positions taken by identifiable generations are closely intertwined with the memory meaning, memory making and those broad mnemonic processes identified throughout the book. Generations have a shared historical experience and express this community of perception through identifiable discursive practices (Nugin 2010; Olick 1999). No one under the age of forty can have direct experiences or memories of the Troubles. So, the transmission of values and beliefs and the modification of individual behaviour to conform with or

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

207

resist the dominant memories reproduced is crucial in understanding what is going on. Mainly, the reinforcement of the views of existing members and the incorporation of new members takes place through ‘a subtle process that usually happens rather tacitly; listening to a family member recount a shared experience, for example, implicitly teaches one what is considered memorable and what one can actually forget’ (Zerubavel 1997: 87). Within this process, collective memory plays a pivotal role in passing on cultural meaning across generations, in a process whereby the younger generation only attaches value to those activities involving: ‘tradition, family, religion and/or local identity’ and which reflect directly on the history and the contested nature of culture in Northern Ireland’ (Durrer et al. 2020: 14). This does not mean that these outlooks and processes of transmission are all enveloping or that the dominant values that individuals seek to pass on cannot be resisted or even rejected. It is also important to recognise that no two individuals even within what appear to be similar social circumstances undergo the exact experience of social learning. Individuals of the same parents living in the same house going to the same church, using the same community facilities, or are members of the same club and reading the same literature of news coverage do not necessarily hold similar perspectives on life. Not all are socialised into conflictual perspectives. A reconciliatory view of the past is well represented by the former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar who strongly promotes the notion that memory is shared, suggesting that all people both North and South, Catholic and Protestant, Unionist and Nationalist were fighting for what they believed in. It is not easy for such views to gain traction in the face of distinct memories of difference and division. The socialising forces for the next generation holding loyalist and republican worldviews are strong and reasonably consistent. Such views are reinforced by narratives of memory and are bolstered by community narratives and acts of commemoration that are in turn used to prompt specific recollections of the past through the promotion of particular and conflicting beliefs and ideas.

Post-Conflict Communities and Memory There are those amongst the Troubles generation whose experience of life in post-conflict society generates a ‘community of perception’ (Olick 1999: 339) that runs counter to the dominant formations of

208

J. W. MCAULEY

unionist and loyalist or nationalist and republican thinking. There are indicators of some movement away from the domination of unionist and loyalist or nationalist and republican collective memories suggesting some realignments taking place, with up to 40% of Northern Ireland’s electors now seeing themselves as neither unionist nor nationalist. Katy Hayward and Cathal McManus characterise those who don’t identify with either unionism or nationalism, as predominately female and from diverse religious backgrounds and age groups (Hayward and McManus 2019). There are other political groupings that directly challenge and organise to at least offer alternatives to the dominant collective memories. These are mobilised and expressed through a variety of differing narrative forms that carry forward memories forward from one epoch to another. Political identity finds expression through a variety of political parties such as Alliance, People Before Profit and the Green Party (Garry and McNicholl 2015; Tonge and Gomez 2015). These political parties of course differ in perspective and policy goals but are united in the projection of an approach that rejects the basis for political identity resting in ethnopolitical divisions. By highlighting the importance of other identities and placing emphasis on the intersectionality of gender, ecological awareness, sexuality and class position (Crenshaw 2019), they give primacy to different understanding of Northern Ireland’s past. Part of this involves a shifting of a set of memories, located in the symbolism of sectarian division and constitutional conflict to a shared social and space. Most notably this growth has been found amongst young people that have not directly experienced the Troubles. They hold different memories of the past and express different life experiences, generating their own community of perception (Olick 1999: 339). As such, this has the potential to constitute a new emergent form of social identification and identity focus, transcending prior conflict and perhaps forming the basis for a cross-community politics. Identification with Northern Irishness is most often affiliated with those who hold reconciliatory beliefs and experience greater levels of intergroup contact (Furey et al. 2017; Hayes et al. 2007). Further, the long-standing dichotomy between the national identities of British and Irish is somewhat less salient for the post-conflict generation (Belfast Telegraph 12 December 2012). Indeed, it has been suggested that the growth of identification with Northern Irishness is a social rather than a political phenomenon (Lowe and Muldoon 2004a). The emergence of this group

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

209

may also suggest a break in the patterns of socialisation and memory transference association the dominant patterns suggested above (Hayes and McAllister 2009). Post-conflict Northern Ireland has witnessed a growing phenomenon of individuals and groups seeking to place themselves outside of the main ideological and memory binary identified in this book. They occupy a legitimate third space in Northern Irish politics and society and the extent to which this group draws on different sets of collective memories or brings differing interpretations to the same events is worthy of some further consideration.

Questioning Narratives Despite much of the focus of this book not all narratives and forms of collective memory rest in the seemingly rigid and immovable identities that dominate life in Northern Ireland or those that contest the ethnopolitical conceptualisation and domination of politics. Northern Ireland is far from devoid of examples of movements based on non-constitutional politics (Gilchrist et al. 2010). Those who seek to organise the interests of people, for example, as workers, or perhaps around sexual orientation or sexual politics, rather than giving primacy to interests that rest in ethnopolitical divisions or the constitutional question may also be pointed to. These groups retain the ability to move people beyond relationships based on confrontation and the hostile symbolism of unionism and nationalism and oppositional views. Indeed, the number of people who do not identify with the main tenets of either unionism or nationalism and occupy the so-called third space in Northern Irish politics and society appears to be increasing. There are also groups that must constantly struggle to have their memories brought forward to the agenda and recognised as legitimate in the popular consciousness (Chirwa 1997). The development of social movements has been a feature of many societies and Northern Ireland is no exception. Those promoting, for example, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender politics, environmentalists, trade unionists, feminists, anti-racists and members of various peace movements have all fall had their perspectives hidden or obscured. What broadly unifies all these groups, in part at least, is the commitment to non-sectarianism and sometimes anti-sectarianism as core organising principles. Sectarian politics is seen as a central obstacle as such groups promote their central activities of, for instance, promoting sexual equality,

210

J. W. MCAULEY

or demanding further rights for workers (Nagle 2017). The everyday formation of memories and the ability to be heard through the transmission of narratives is seen as central to the establishment and circulation of identities of the third space, manifest in various public demonstrations, such as the annual Pride or May Day parades and commemorations.

Conclusions In calling for change, emerging challenges can unsettle the discourse and structure that articulates and defines Northern Ireland as a society based on competing ethno-political sectarian interests. Obviously, these individuals and groups hold a variety of narrative identities that are connected in different ways through differing social relationships and political circumstances. It is through engagement with a collective memory that individuals are provided with a narrative and script by which past experiences are rationalised and present attitudes vindicated. Thus, individual memory is reflected, and past experiences are incorporated into collective memory (Barnier and Sutton 2008). Remembering explicit events from the past gives specific meanings and importance to them. The recall of events in certain ways is often used to provide justification for the contemporary social and political positioning of one’s own group and the denunciation and rejection of those who offer opposing views. The political and social conflict that arises sometimes means that experiences of trauma and victimhood are brought to the fore and perpetuated by conflicting memorialisation of the past. The acceptance of these memories, or at least a lack of challenge to them, at the level of the collective that goes to ensure coherence and the move towards a uniformity of understanding of the past. Collective memory constantly undergoes processes of reassessment, reformatting and representation. Much of the material in this book, highlights how memory (or more accurately remembering) is an extremely active process, involving narrative acts that generate meaning in the present and project this into the future. The memory and legacy of victimhood and the politics of generational change represent crucial points in the struggle in determining not just collective memory but the entire future of Northern Ireland (see McAlister, Corr, Dwyer and Drummond 2021; McAlister, Corr, Dwyer, Drummond and Fargas-Malet 2021).

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

211

References Argenti, N. and Schramm, K. (2010) Remembering Violence: Anthropological Perspectives on Intergenerational Transmission. New York: Berghahn. Barnier, A. J. and Sutton, J (2008) ‘From Individual to Collective Memory: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives’. Memory, 16 (3): 177–182. Baumann, M. M. (2010) ‘Contested Victimhood in the Northern Irish Peace Process’. Peace Review, 22 (2): 171–177. Bean, Kevin, and Mark Hayes. (2009) ‘Sinn Féin and the New Republicanism in Ireland: Electoral Progress, Political Stasis, and Ideological Failure’. Radical History Review, 104: 126–142. Beinart, W. and Dubow, S. (2001) Segregation and Apartheid in TwentiethCentury South Africa. London: Routledge. Bell, J. B. (1990) ‘An Irish War: The IRA’s Armed Struggle, 1969–1990: Strategy as History Rules Ok’. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 1 (3): 239–265. Bell, J. B. (2000) The IRA, 1968–2000. London: Routledge. Bell, G. (2002) The Twilight of Unionism: The Crisis of Ulster Unionism and the Future of Northern Ireland. London: Verso. Berastegi, A. and Hearty, K. (2019) ‘A Context-Based Model for Framing Political Victimhood: Experiences from Northern Ireland and the Basque Country’. International Review of Victimology, 25 (1): 19–36. Black, R. (2023) ‘Victims Protest Outside NIO Calling for Controversial Legacy Bill to be Ditched’. The Independent, 24 January. Bloomfield, Sir K. (1998) We Will Remember Them. Report of the Northern Ireland Victims Commissioner. Northern Ireland: The Stationery Office. Blustein, J. M. (2014) Forgiveness and Remembrance: Remembering Wrongdoing in Personal and Public Life. Oxford Academic. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1093/acprof:oso/9780199329397.003.0006; accessed 12 December 2022. Boraine, A. (2001) “All Truth is Bitter”: A Report of the Visit of the Deputy Chairman of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to Northern Ireland. No Publisher. Cairns, E., Mallett, J., Lewis, C. and Wilson, R. (2003) Who are the Victims? Self-assessed Victimhood and the Northern Ireland Conflict. Belfast: Northern Ireland Office. Carroll, R. (2022) ‘Backlash after O’Neill Says there Was “No Alternative” to Conflict during Troubles’. The Guardian, 4 August. Chirwa, W. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and the Process of Reconciliation and Reconstruction’. Developments in Practice, 7 (4): 479–482. Chung, C. K. M. (2022) ‘Power-sharing and Memory Sharing in Northern Ireland: A Case Study of Healing through Remembering during Consociational Volatility’. British Politics, Published Online, 25 May. https://doi.org/ 10.1057/s41293-022-00209-8.

212

J. W. MCAULEY

Cohrs, J. C., McNeill, A. and Vollhardt, J. R. (2015) ‘The Two-Sided Role of Inclusive Victimhood for Intergroup Reconciliation: Evidence from Northern Ireland’. Peace and Conflict. Journal of Peace Psychology, 21 (4): 634–647. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Consultative Group on the Past. (2009) Report of the Consultative Group on the Past. Belfast: CGP. Corning A. D. (2010) ‘Emigration, Generation, and Collective Memories: The Presence of the Past for Emigrants from the Former Soviet Union’. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73 (3): 223–244. Crenshaw, K. (2019) On Intersectionality: Essential Writings. New York: The New Press. Demirel, C. (2021) ‘Re-conceptualising Competitive Victimhood in Reconciliation Processes: The Case of Northern Ireland’. Peacebuilding, 11 (1): 45–61. Dillenburger, K. and Keenan, M. (2001) ‘Islands of Pain in a Sea of Change: Behaviour Analysis and Bereavement’. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2 (2): 187–207. Dillenburger, K., Fargas, M. and Akhonzada, R. (2006) ‘Victims or Survivors? Debate about Victimhood in Northern Ireland’. The International Journal of the Humanities, 3: 222–231. Durrer, V., Kelly, G., McKnight, M. and Schubotz, D. (2020) ‘Exploring Young People’s Understanding of Culture: A Study from Northern Ireland’. Cultural Trends, 29 (1): 4–18. Erll, A. (2011) Memory in Culture (translated by Sara B. Young). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Feuchtwang, S. (2005) ‘Mythical Moments in National and Other Family Histories’. History Workshop Journal, 59 (1): 179–193. Furey, A., Donnelly, C., Hughes, J. and Blaylock, D. (2017) ‘Interpretations of National Identity in Post-conflict Northern Ireland: A Comparison of Different School Settings’. Research Papers in Education, 32 (2): 137–150. Garry, J. and McNicholl, K. (2015) ‘Understanding the “Northern Irish” Identity’. Briefing Paper Presented at the Knowledge Exchange Seminar Series. Queen’s University Belfast: KESS. Gilchrist, A., Bowles, M. and Wetherell. (2010) Identities and Social Action: Connecting Communities for a Change. London: Community Development Foundation. Gl˘aveanu, V. P. (2017) ‘Collective Memory between Stability and Change’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 255–262. Hackett, C. and Rolston, B. (2009) ‘The Burden of Memory: Victims, Storytelling and Resistance in Northern Ireland’. Memory Studies, 2 (3): 355–376.

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

213

Hamber, B. and Wilson, R. A. (2003) ‘Symbolic Closure through Memory, Repartition and Revenge in Post-conflict Societies’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Palgrave. Hayes, B. C., McAllister, I. and Dowds, L. (2007) ‘Integrated Education, Intergroup Relations, and Political Identities in Northern Ireland’. Social Problems, 54 (4): 454–482. Hayward, K. and McManus, C. (2019) ‘Neither/Nor: The Rejection of Unionist and Nationalist Identities in Post-agreement Northern Ireland’. Capital and Class, 43 (1): 139–155. Healing Through Remembering (2002) The Report of the Healing Through Remembering Project. Belfast: HTRP. Hirsch, M. (2008) ‘The Generation of Postmemory’. Poetics Today, 29 (1): 103– 128. Hopkins, S. (2013) The Politics of Memoir and the Norther Ireland Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jankowitz, S. E. (2018a) The Order of Victimhood. Violence, Hierarchy and Building Peace in Northern Ireland. Cham: Palgrave. Jankowitz, S. E. (2018b) ‘The “Hierarchy of Victims” in Northern Ireland: A Framework for Critical Analysis’. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 12 (2): 216–236. Kelly, G. and Hamber, B. (2004) A Working Definition of Reconciliation. Ulster University: Transitional Justice Institute. Kulle, D. and Hamber, B. (2001) ‘Introduction’. In B. Hamber, D. Kulle and R. Wilson (Eds.) Future Policies for the Past, Report No. 13). Belfast: Democratic Dialogue. Lawther, C. (2012) ‘Denial, Silence and the Politics of the Past: Unpicking Opposition to Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 7: 157–177. Leonard, M. (2006) ‘Teenagers Telling Sectarian Stories’. Sociology, 40 (6): 1117–1133. Lowe, R. D. and Muldoon, O. (2014a) ‘Shared National Identification in Northern Ireland: An Application of Psychological Models of Group Inclusion Post Conflict’. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 17 (5): 1–15. Mannheim, Karl. (1928/1952) ‘The Problem of Generations’. In K. Mannheim Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge & Keegan Paul, 276– 320. McAlister, S., Corr, M-L., Dwyer, C., Drummond, O. [with members of Youth Advisory Group, Ewan, J. and Harte, L.] (2021) Talking About Our Past and Present: The Impacts of Conflict Legacy. Belfast: Commission for Victims and Survivors, Queen’s University.

214

J. W. MCAULEY

McAlister, S., Corr, M.-L., Dwyer, C., Drummond, O. and Fargas-Malet, M. (2021) “It Didn’t End in 1998”. Examining the Impacts of Conflict Legacy Across Generations. Belfast: Centre for Children’s Rights, Queen’s University. McGovern, M. (2019) Counterinsurgency and Collusion in Northern Ireland. London: Pluto. McGrattan, C. (2013) Memory, Politics and Identity: Haunted by History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. McGrattan, C. and Hopkins, S. (2017) ‘Memory in Post-conflict Societies: From Contention to Integration?’. Ethnopolitics, 16 (5): 488–499. McKnight, Martina, and Dirk Schubotz. (2017) ‘Shared Future—Shared Values? Taking Stock of the Peace Process in Northern Ireland: Teenagers’ Perspectives’. Cultural Trends 26 (3): 216–232. McNicholl, K., Stevenson, C. and Garry, J. (2019) ‘How the “Northern Irish” National Identity is Understood and Used by Young People and Politicians’. Political Psychology, 40 (3): 487–505. Mees, L. (2019) The Basque Contention: Ethnicity, Politics, Violence. London: Routledge. Morrissey, M. and Smyth, M. (2002) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement. Victims, Grievance and Blame. London: Pluto Press. Nagle, J. (2017) ‘One Community, Many Faces’ Non-sectarian Social Movements and Peace-Building in Northern Ireland and Lebanon’. In L. Bosi and G. De Fazio (Eds.) The Troubles in Northern Ireland and Theories of Social Movements. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 185–201. Nugin, R. (2010) ‘Social Time as the Basis of Generational Consciousness’. Trames, 14 (4): 342–366. O’Brien, B. (1999) The Long War. The IRA and Sinn Féin. New York: Syracuse University Press. Office of the First and Deputy First Minister. (2002) Victims Unit, Progress Report, 1 April 2002 to 31 March—Reshape, Rebuild, Achieve. Belfast: OFDFM. Olick, J. K. (1999) ‘Collective Memory: The Two Cultures’. Sociological Theory, 17: 333–348. Palmberger, M. (2016) How Generations Remember: Conflicting Histories and Shared. Memories in Post-war Bosnia and Herzegovnia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Park, J. (1998) Living with the Trauma of the Troubles. Belfast: Social Services Inspectorate. Passini, S. (2011) ‘Individual Responsibilities and Moral Inclusion in an Age of Rights’. Culture and Psychology, 17(3): 281–296. Pickering, M. and Keightley. (2013) ‘Communities of Memory and the Problem of Transmission’. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (1): 115–131.

9

LEGACY, VICTIMHOOD AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE

215

Radstone, S. (2008) ‘Memory Studies: For and against’. Memory Studies 1 (1): 31–39. Rainey, M. (2022a) ‘Widespread Support for Dame Arlene Foster after “Up the Ra” Selfie Incident’. Belfast News Letter, 21 November. Rainey, M. (2022b) ‘“Up the Ra” Video Woman Called on to Apologise and Engage with IRA Victims’. Belfast News Letter, 25 November. Savage, C. (2023) ‘Families of Troubles Victims Continue Protest against Legacy Bill’. The Irish News, 23 April. Schuman, H. and Corning, A. D. (2012) ‘Generational Memory and the Critical Period: Evidence for National and World Events’. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76 (1): 1–31. Schumann, H. and Scott, J. (1989) ‘Generations and Collective Memories’. American Sociological Review, 54: 359–381. Scullion, H. (2022) ‘Our Young are Being Fed Diet of “Greenwash” about the IRA’s True Actions during the Troubles’. News Letter, 8 August. Shnabel, N., Noor, M. Halabi S. and Nadler, A. (2012) ‘When Suffering Begets Suffering: The Psychology of Competitive Victimhood between Adversarial Groups in Violent Conflicts’. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16: 351–374. Sullivan, D., Landau, M. J., Branscombe, N. R. and Rothschild, Z. K. (2012) ‘Competitive Victimhood as a Response to Accusations of Ingroup Harm Doing’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102 (4): 778–795. Tonge, J. and Gomez R. (2015) ‘Shared Identity and the End of Conflict? How Far has a Common Sense of “Northern Irishness” Replaced British or Irish Allegiances Since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement?’. Irish Political Studies, 30 (2): 276–298. Vollhardt, J. R. (2012) ‘Interpreting Rights and Duties after Mass Violence’. Culture and Psychology, 18 (1): 133–145. Welzer, H. (2010) ‘Re-narrations: How Pasts Change in Conversational Remembering’. Memory Studies, (3): 5–17. Wilson, R. A. (2011) Writing History in International Criminal Trials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, J. and Sivan, E. (1999) ‘Setting the Framework’. In War and Remembrance in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 6–40. Zerubavel, E. (1997) ‘Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past’. Qualitative Sociology, 19 (3): 283–314.

CHAPTER 10

Collective Memory, Narrative, Politics and Identity in Northern Ireland: Some Conclusions

(T)here are times when a very specific vision of the future frames the utilisation of the past. Iwona Irwin-Zarecka (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory.

This final chapter seeks to review the main approaches to collective memory encountered in this book, first through those approaches that take as their starting point the memories of individuals and communities; and second, by considering those approaches that look at collective memories and the social carriers of memory particularly through major social processes of commemoration and memorialisation. It then reviews, the extent to which these are made relevant and used in contemporary social, cultural and political practices, specific to Northern Ireland. It further considers how these go to produce senses of belonging and attachment to the past that prove instrumental in the formation of social identities, beliefs, ideologies and political expression. In so doing, this book has adopted a multidisciplinary approach to collective memory, remembering and forgetting. This draws directly on understandings from various notions and concepts from across sociology, history, psychology, anthropology and political science.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4_10

217

218

J. W. MCAULEY

Remembering and the recall of the past events, represent continuing points of orientation and alignment for all social and political groupings in Northern Ireland. Collective memory continues to exercise huge influence on individual lives, both in overt ways and sometimes in ways that are far from obvious, even to those involved. This takes place through presenting understandings of the past that draw heavily on the sets of memories to which people are exposed throughout their lives. These are used to construct particular social identities, political understandings and worldviews. Central is the consideration of how the past is formulated and disputed, silenced or promoted, navigated and transmitted. This book has therefore engaged with a variety of terminologies in trying to explain this such as collective memory, public memory, social memory, cultural memory, historical memory and even mnemonic memory. Further, it has sought to connect with notions of what collective memory is and how this understanding may be used to analyse the contemporary situation in Northern Ireland. We have also examined how commemoration and memorialisation are used, not just try to understand the world but also to organise socially and politically within it. While collective memory marks an extremely unreliable guide to the past, the representations and narratives it reproduces are central to the construction of senses of social identity and senses of belonging. Collective memory continues to be successfully harnessed to reinforce political visions and to motivate social and political movements. The various notions of memory and remembering that we have encountered have outlined some of the differing ways in which both the individual and the collective engage with the political, social and cultural representations of the past. We have encountered major ideas surrounding collective memory and remembering in at least two major ways in this book. First, it was considered in theoretical terms by considering how the past is understood conceptually in various ways to provide (sometimes directly competing) perspectives on both the present and the future. Second, memory has been considered directly as a social construct to consider how individuals use these understandings of collective memory to mobilise socially and politically. There are many ways by which both the construction and representation of the past are presented through narratives, discussions, commemorations, archives, museums, memorials, stories, monuments and other forms of public display. These understandings arise not from events frozen

10

COLLECTIVE MEMORY, NARRATIVE, POLITICS …

219

in time or conserved as an objective record, rather the spotlight most often falls on interpretation. Under the influence of the present, memory becomes malleable as the social and political circumstances of the past are constantly regenerated and subjected to different constructions and priorities. As George Boyce (2001) has pointed out, Northern Ireland has no lack of ghosts from which to construct memories and take political guidance. Most of these constructs are highly selective producing dualistic and divisive perspectives on the past. As has been demonstrated, memory is used in exclusive ways, playing an active role in the shaping, mobilisation and political direction of different groups. It is this that gives shape to experience through imaging of the past, and the construction of social and political relationships in the present and possibilities for a desirable future. Much of this rests on the continued construction of positive views of one’s own group and the negative projection of the rival group. We have encountered numerous examples of how those in Northern Ireland collaborate in recalling past events to provide cohesiveness that in turn gives direction to the collective. These collective memories are shared by group members to the point where they become truthful accounts of what has gone before. In so doing collective memory also fulfils other functions in the life of the collective, providing fundamental pillars for the establishment of identity and culture. The collective memory of violence outlined above, weighs heavily on contemporary politics through narratives highlighting antagonistic constructions of the out-group and increasing feelings of mistrust towards the Other. This emphasises some of the main emotional aspects of collective memory that often find expressions through articulations of belonging. Often the presentation of what is happening in the contemporary is presented merely as a repetition of previous phases or events. This is used to strengthen attachment across time and place, locally, nationally and internationally. The Northern Ireland state has been in existence for a little over a century. Throughout that time the strength of oppositional world views has been reproduced and become entrenched in the politics of place and belonging.

220

J. W. MCAULEY

The Roles of Collective Memory and Narrative The form and uses of collective memory remain at the core of understanding many aspects of conflict and post-conflict society. Indeed, a recognition of this perhaps holds one of the keys to unlocking the situation. As elsewhere, narratives carry remembering across time and place, from one generation to the next and back again. These memories while durable and embedded not fixed and always display a certain amount of malleability. Collective memories are at the heart of the unionism/loyalism and nationalism/republicanism groupings and remain a commonplace part of the everyday narrative and discourse of these groupings. This reliance on and the framing of politics by deep-rooted collective memories, has made it difficult for any movement towards reconciliation or compromise, underpinned as they are by frequent and antagonistic forms of commemoration. This book has further sought to interrogate some of the central roles played by remembering and forgetting by recognising the effects that memory has on identity formation and intergenerational relationships. In so doing, the book has discussed some of the major roles played by memorialisation and commemoration in a society still divided by the legacy of violent conflict. To engage with collective memory in this way is to consider how the past is brought to the present and to connect with that version of the past that is perceived and used. Collective memory has a central place in shaping political attitudes that have important implications for the prospects of peace and reconciliation. As we have seen most political groupings use commemorations to construct and reinforce (and often very skewed) versions of the past. Politicians and other memory actors link national and local narratives, using a distinct and partial reading of history that they see as working to the benefit of the group. They seek to solidify readings of the past and to convince those who listen of the legitimacy of those views. All this is constantly subject to social negotiation. This determines what can and cannot be said about the past, who has the authority to speak and what may qualify as truth. Important also here is the verification of who can be seen as having the authority to engage in such discussions, alongside who holds the mandate to take part in ongoing negotiations surrounding versions of what has gone before. Memories, sometimes

10

COLLECTIVE MEMORY, NARRATIVE, POLITICS …

221

concerning events long in the past, are rarely at the forefront of individual consciousness. Rather, they must be brought forward, encouraged, or sometimes forced to the top of people’s agenda by memory actors. Hence, one important focus for this book has been the ways in which memories are made meaningful for those self-identifying as loyalists or republicans, often through various forms of commemoration utilised by these groups. The loyalist and republican past are condensed and made more accessible and understandable. Alongside this, long and complicated histories are reduced to the recall of poignant moments in history and presented through notions of a coherent past. These prominent dates provide occasions for commemoration, narratives and speeches that re-invigorate notions of both collective memory and collective identity.

The Legacy of Cultural Memory The processes of memory mobilisation outlined above involve reinforcing certain understandings and reproduction of the past. It is this that gives meaning to contemporary circumstances and provides an orientation towards the future. In Northern Ireland, this often brings highly contentious and contested social circumstances that can give way to the terrain of symbolism and subsequent legacy wars. It is the representations of collective memory that provide broad accounts and contours of the past, rather than the detail of history (Gl˘aveanu 2017). This forms part of what Jeffrey Sluka (1996) refers to as the: ‘war of words and symbols’ through which events are recalled, replayed and reproduced, often in some detail. Some events, those seen as being of much less virtue to the broader collective, are either adjusted to bring them in line with dominant sets of memories, or in some cases are simply allowed to fade from the collective consciousness. Hence, collective memory and the representations emerge (or are brought to the fore) work to provide viable explanations and narratives that contemporary generations can draw upon. It is important to consider how drawing on communal memory in this way is used as a source of stability and cohesion in the continuing mistrust of the other community (Trademark 2011). We have encountered several examples of this, as oppositional perspectives are reproduced in wall murals, (auto)biographies and other material produced by paramilitaries and community groups. As recognised in the FICT report much of the acrimonious legacy of the past also manifests in

222

J. W. MCAULEY

the issues surrounding parades, flags and the other divisive symbolism of collective memory (FICT 2021).

Cultural Memory Wars One central feature of the clash of collective memories is the emergence of what has become commonly known as the culture wars or memory wars. This manifests, for example, in confrontations over the rewriting of history, the contestation of public space and general disagreement surrounding societal values and expressions of cultural practice. The recollections and forms of recall encountered are never fixed and readings are always open to (re)interpretation and evolving understandings. The role of collective memory in cultivating cohesion within communities through specific communal narratives and interpretations of the past remains central. Northern Ireland society has partly emerged from the bloody lowscale war which engulfed it for almost three decades, but it continues to be swathed in political discord and social division. The collective memory and commemoration culture of one ethno-political community (loyalism) both parallels and are directly countered and opposed by the other (republicanism) and the reverse. Often this is based on sets of remembering and how these are presented in the contemporary. Many sections of society in Northern Ireland remain at worst trapped, or at best, confined by collective memory. Legacy and memory directly influence the culture, traditions and identities that emerge to frame the present. Attempts to break free from these frames, or to introduce new or different ideas that challenge the existing memory hegemony are most often met with resistance and attempts to give primacy to continuity and cohesion within the group. Both loyalists and republicans continue to actively reproduce their own sites of memory, most often competing, sometimes reflecting different interpretations of the same site. These promote those artefacts seen as integral to the transmission of a particular cultural, social and political history. These sites also provide locations of contestation that are both included and excluded, through selective recall and continued silence. It is those groups that are most capable of holding on to and projecting memories that retain the greatest influence on the thinking and direction of the group. The adoption of interpretations and explanations of the past carries political consequences. As a challenge to the nationalist and

10

COLLECTIVE MEMORY, NARRATIVE, POLITICS …

223

republican viewpoint, all social relations emerge from a colonial conquest to suggest a different construction of the past. Differing understandings of the past are always dependent on which memories are drawn upon (and of course those which are excluded). There are clear political outcomes for the present and consequences for the interpretation of the past frames and the ways in which such knowledge is solidified and passed on in narratives from generation to generation. These commonplace narratives carry forward important messages and symbolism, underpinning the positioning of contemporary political standpoints.

Everyday Collective Memories Thus, everyday and banal memories are used to give rise those cultural and political beliefs and practices that mobilise people in Northern Ireland in the ways that they understand politics through reviewing and replaying the past. As indicated at several points throughout this book, remembering and recalling (alongside the corresponding notion of forgetting) have very little to do with drawing on or forming accurate views of the past. The relevance of recall to the ways in which remembering is understood and used remains core to establishing social and political relations and projecting these relationships into the future. The exchanges between collective memory and the individual define meaning and guide the experiences of individuals. By extension, the memorialisation and commemoration of these experiences become much more than personal or individual acts. The development of commemorative narratives and the active involvement and presentation of these narratives become collective activities rather than individual acts. We have seen this, for example, in the narrative commemorations surrounding St. Matthews Church in June 1970, or in the disputed narratives that have for many years surrounded the Claudy bombing, or Ballymurphy shootings, to choose but two incidents from the historical period covered throughout the book. The past can, of course, bring people together, but it can also play a major role in highlighting differences, and social division and collective memories can be used in ways that fence off any alternative interpretations of the past or its consequences. Although they remain limited there are examples of open participation in inclusive cross-community memories or commemorations. For both the loyalist and republican communities identified in this book, the main significance of collective memory remains

224

J. W. MCAULEY

its use in constructing and maintaining identity by ensuring the central cultural and political values of the group. Memories are invoked as a shield against the possible challenges of the demotion of existing cultural values of the group. The identity-driven memory narratives identified in this book coalesce the values and political perspectives of the collective. Collective memory retains its role as the foundation for perceptions of and understanding the Other. Communal memories continue to be used to legitimise and project communal fears and as the founding stone for policy. For example, the memorialisation and performances surrounding the creation of the UVF and the Easter Rising occupy identifiable spaces not only in the past but also very much in the present, displaying and reinforcing cultural separation between the respective communities.

Recalling the Future in Northern Ireland Constant references to the historical past and calls to engage with history are all but unavoidable in contemporary Northern Ireland. Whether, for example, through exposure to both formal informal political discourses, popular culture and song, or through stories of victims of the Troubles, or explanations of conflict explained in textbooks, locally produced pamphlets and news-sheets or through the internet. Individuals are constantly reminded of their position in society, plus how they should consider their past and be encouraged to learn meaningful lessons for the present and the future. In this book, we have encountered examples of both top-down and bottom-up forms of remembering and recall of the past. It has further sought to outline several ways through which memory is made active and those dynamic practices that entrepreneurs harness and use memory narratives to generate political meaning. This recall doesn’t occur in straight lines, rather it is muddled and jumbled, sometimes exposing different emotional responses at diverse times. Collective recall and its use are always contested, and as it has been demonstrated, the construction of communities is always subject to broad processes of remembering or forgetting. As Ricoeur (1984, 2004) reminds us, remembering involves much more than passively receiving and accepting existing narratives and symbolism concerning the past. One important aspect in determining the future politics Northern Ireland is the possibility for generational change. Different cohorts reveal

10

COLLECTIVE MEMORY, NARRATIVE, POLITICS …

225

different experiences of conflict, ranging from direct involvement to a largely cultural awareness. These remain highly relevant to the processes of identity formation outlined above but also to the intergenerational transmission of such values as subsequent generations continue to absorb and engage with divisive, partial, politicised and sectarianised narratives of a remembered or partially remembered past. The Troubles generation of 1968 to 1998 has come to remember certain lived experiences, even though they may not have necessarily been involved directly in these events. Community recall and the collective memory of the Troubles manifest through memorialisation, commemoration and symbolism. It is through the relationship with these that generations construct meaningful relationships to the past that help determine what people see as viable futures. The question thus becomes one surrounding the strength of existing collective memories, their use and how successful memory actors can be in making the continuance of their interpretations prominent and transmittable to future generations. Such narrative readings are embedded in public understandings of the past and within communities, the strength and potency of these narratives directly engages some and excludes others. In clarifying the understanding of collective memory and its consequences for the formation of everyday politics, it is necessary to consider how memory politics are harnessed and used by memory actors who perform to structure community relationships by corralling and mobilising the rhetoric of the past for political purposes. The past continues to permeate daily politics that is grasped by various memory agents and actors to strengthen existing senses of social identity. Memory manifests through performance and commemoration around memorials and various other sites of memory. The dynamics of memory recall have direct social and political influence not just on individuals but also on groups and the structure of social institutions, such as the family and political organisations and through collective values and cultural practices. Generational identity can be understood as being constructed through a willingness to draw upon, or reject, shared memories. Sometimes this is achieved by direct reference to a past and sometimes through collective silence or amnesia. Lessons from the past can and do change over time as certain cultural memories are adopted, recovered and brought to the fore. These processes can lead to the reinforcement of existing social solidarities or sometimes hold the potential for the formation of new identities and social formations. fields. Collective memories can entrench old social

226

J. W. MCAULEY

formations or form the basis to create new social formations between social groups, through different experiences and attachment to belonging. Memories can be drawn upon to impose major obstacles in bringing about reconciliation in divided societies and restructuring post-conflict societies. Representations of the past, especially those that maintain and strengthen group identities are long-lasting. Despite many changes in Northern Irish society in recent years evidence supporting change and the ways people view and use the past remains limited. In many cases counter-narratives and different forms of recall and remembering do not have the strength of coherence to challenge the dominance metanarratives in existence. In (Northern) Irish society counter forms of remembering and recall to those of republicanism and loyalism drawing on different and competing narratives and reference points certainly can be found. Often, however, these lack the political momentum and social dynamic to bring them to the fore, or to position themselves in direct competition with the existing dominant collective memories and views of the past. Collective memories in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere, are drawn upon and used in ways that are subjective and dependent on the situation and times in which they are recalled. Recalling the past is always orientated by political goals and wider social circumstances and concerns. Remembering and forgetting the past always involves selection and exclusion, reinforcing the thoughts of Martin Duberman when he says that: (T)he past will always remain ‘uncompleted’: we will never grasp its meaning whole, never understand its influence over our lives to the extent we might like, nor be able to free ourselves from that influence to the degree many might wish (Duberman 1969: xii).

References Boyce, D. G. (2001) ‘“No Lack of Ghosts”: Memory, Commemoration and the State in Ireland’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 245–271. Commission on Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition Report - Final Report. (2021) Belfast: OFDFM. Duberman, M. B. (1969) The Uncompleted Past. New York: Random House.

10

COLLECTIVE MEMORY, NARRATIVE, POLITICS …

227

Gl˘aveanu, V. P. (2017) ‘Collective Memory between Stability and Change’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 255–262. Irwin-Zarecka, I. (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Ricoeur, P. (1984) Time and Narrative, Volume 1 (translated by K. Mclaughlin and Pellauer). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur, P. (2004) Memory, History, Forgetting (translated by K. Blamey and D. Pellauer). Chicago: Chicago University Press. Sluka, J. (1996) Hearts and Minds. Water and Fish. London: JaI Press. Trademark (2011) Community Identities and a Shared Future for N. Ireland? Identity Exploration, Final Report, 31 March.

Bibliography

Abshire, J. E. (2003) ‘Northern Ireland’s Politics in Paint’. Peace Review. A Journal of Social Justice, 15 (2): 149–161. Adams, G. (1996) Before the Dawn: An Autobiography. London: Heinemann. Adams, G. (2003a) A Farther Shore: Ireland’s Long Road to Peace. New York: Random House. Adams, G. (2003b) Hope and History: Making Peace in Ireland. Dingle: Brandon. Adamson, I. (1974) The Cruthin: A History of the Ulster Land and People—The Ancient Kindred. Bangor: Donard Publishing Company. Adamson, I. (1982) The Identity of Ulster: The Land, the Language and the People. Belfast: Pretani Press. Alea, N. and Bluck, S. (2003) ‘Why Are You Telling Me That? A Conceptual Model of the Social Function of Autobiographical Memory’. Memory, 11 (2): 165–178. Alison, M. (2004) ‘Women as Agents of Political Violence: Gendering Security’. Security Dialogue, 35 (4): 447–463. An Phoblacht/Republican News. (2005) ‘Remembering the Risen People: The Battle of St Matthew’s and the Falls Curfew’, 30 June. An Phoblacht/Republican News. (2014) ‘Belfast’s “Battle of St Matthew’s” Remembered’, 1 July. An Phoblacht/Republican News. (2020) ‘50 Years of Uncensored News’. Issue Number 4. Anderlini, S. N. (2003) ‘The Untapped Resource: Women in Peace Negotiations’. Conflict Trends, 3: 18–22. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4

229

230

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. Andrews, M. (1991) Lifetimes of Commitment: Aging, Politics, Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andrews, M. (2000) ‘Text in a Changing Context: Reconstructing Lives in East Germany’. In J. Bornat, P. Chamberlayne and T. Wengraf (Eds.) The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Science: Comparative Issues and Examples. London: Routledge. Andrews, M. (2007) Shaping History: Narratives of Political Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andrews, M. (2013) Narrative Imagination and Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Andrews, M., Squire, C. and Sclater, S. D. (2000) (Eds.) Lines of Narrative: Psychosocial Perspectives. London: Routledge. Andy Tyrie Interpretive Centre. (no date) Building the Peace. Conflict Resolution and Transformation. No Publisher. Antick, P. (2018) ‘Performing Memory and Securitization in Belfast’. In V. Strukov and V. Apryshchenko (Eds.) Memory and Securitization in Contemporary Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Antze, P. and Lambek, M. (1996) Tense Past: Cultural Essays in Trauma and Memory. London: Routledge. Auerbach, Y. (2010) ‘National Narratives in a Conflict of Identity’. In Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov (Ed.) Barriers to Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, 99–134. Arendt, H. (1973) Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harvest. Arendt, H. (2018) The Human Condition. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Argenti, N. and Schramm, K. (2010) Remembering Violence: Anthropological Perspectives on Intergenerational Transmission. New York: Berghahn. Armstrong, E. A. and Crage, S. M. (2006) ‘Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall Myth’. American Sociological Review, 71 (5): 724–751. Arthur, P. (1987) Government and Politics of Northern Ireland. London: Longman. Arthur, P. (2003) ‘Northern Ireland’. In D. J. Whittaker (Ed.) The Terrorism Reader. London: Routledge. Arthur, P. (2007) ‘Conflict, Memory and Reconciliation’. In M. Elliott (Ed.) The Long Road to Peace in Northern Ireland: Peace Lectures from the Institute of Irish Studies at Liverpool University. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 147–156.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

231

Ashe, F. (2009) ‘From Paramilitaries to Peacemakers: The Gender Dynamics of Community-Based Restorative Justice in Northern Ireland’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 11 (2): 298–314. Assmann, A. (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’ (translated by J. Czaplicka). New German Critique, 65: 47–60. Assmann, A. (2008) ‘Transformations between History and Memory’. Social Research, 75 (1): 49–72. Assman, A. and Conrad, S. (2010) (Eds.) Memory in a Global Age: Discourses, Practices and Trajectories. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Assmann, A. and Shortt, L. (2012) ‘Memory and Political Change: Introduction’. In A. Assmann and L. Shortt (Eds.) Memory and Political Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–16. Assmann, J. (2011) Cultural Memory and Early Civilization. Writing, Remembrance and Political Imagination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Assmann J. and Czaplicka, J. (1995) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural Identity’. New German Critique, 65: 125–133. Aughey, A. (1991) ‘What is Living and What is Dead in the Ideal of 1916?’. In M. Ní Dhonnchadha and T. Dorgan (Eds.) Revising the Rising. Derry: Field Day, 71–90. Baddley, A. (1989) ‘The Psychology of Remembering and Forgetting’. In T. Butler (Ed.) Memory: History, Culture and the Mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 33–60. Ballymacarrett Research Group. (1997) Lagan Enclave: A History of Conflict in the Short Strand 1886–1997. No Publisher. Bar-Tal, D. (1998) ‘Societal Beliefs in Times of Intractable Conflict: The Israeli Case’. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 9 (1): 22–50. Bar-Tal, D. (2001) ‘Why Does Fear Override Hope in Societies Engulfed by Intractable Conflict, as It Does in Israeli Society’. Political Psychology, 23 (3): 601–627. Bar-Tal, D. (2003) ‘Collective Memory of Physical Violence: Its Contribution to the Culture of Violence’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 77–93. Bar-Tal, D. (2007) ‘Sociopsychological Foundations of Intractable Conflicts’. American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1430–1453. Bar-Tal, D. (2014) ‘Collective Memory as Social Representations’. Papers on Social Representations, 23 (1): 70–96. Bar-Tal, D. and Antebi, D. (1992) ‘Siege Mentality in Israel’. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16: 251–275. Bar-Tal, D., Chernyak-Hai, L., Schori, N. and Gundar, A. (2009) ‘A Sense of Self-perceived Collective Victimhood in Intractable Conflicts’. International Review of the Red Cross, 91 (874): 229–258.

232

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bar-Tal, D. and Hammack, P. L. (2012) ‘Conflict, Delegitimization and Violence’. In L. R. Tropp (Ed.) The Oxford handbook of Intergroup Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 29–52. Barley, S. R. and Tolbert, P. S. (1997) ‘Institutionalisation and Structuration: Studying the Links between Action and Institution’. Organisation Studies, 18: 93−117. Barnier, A. J. and Sutton, J (2008) ‘From Individual to Collective Memory: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives’. Memory, 16 (3): 177–182. Bartlett, F. (1932) Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barton, K. C. (2001a) ‘A Sociocultural Perspective on Children’s Understanding of Historical Change: Comparative Findings from Northern Ireland and the United States’. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (4): 881–913. Barton, K. C. (2001b) ‘You’d Be Wanting to Know about the Past’: Social Contexts of Children’s Historical Understanding in Northern Ireland and the USA’. Comparative Education, 37 (1): 89–106. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. (2003) ‘History Teaching and the Perpetuation of Memories: The Northern Ireland Experience’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 107–124. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. W. (2005) ‘History, Identity and the School Curriculum in Northern Ireland: An Empirical Study of Secondary Students’ Ideas and Perspectives’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37 (1): 85–116. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. W. (2010) ‘“You Can form Your Own Point of View”: Internally Persuasive Discourse in Northern Ireland Students’ Encounters with History’. Teachers College Record, 112 (1): 142–181. Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2004) Identity. Cambridge: Polity. Baumann, M. M. (2010) ‘Contested Victimhood in the Northern Irish Peace Process’. Peace Review, 22 (2): 171–177. Baumeister, R. F. and Butz, D. A. (2005) ‘Roots of Hate, Violence and Evil’. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Psychology of Hate. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 87–102. BBC News. (2019) ‘Franco Exhumation: Spanish Dictator’s Remains Moved’. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50164806; accessed 22 July. BBC News. (2021) ‘Ballymurphy Inquest: Coroner Finds 10 Victims were Innocent’. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-569 86784; accessed 3 November.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

233

BBC News 24. (2023) ‘NI Troubles: Lord Eames says Government Bill is Total Disaster’. Available: https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en& q=BBC+News+24+(2023)+%E2%80%98NI+Troubles:+Lord+Eames+says+gov ernment+bill+is+total+disaster%E2%80%99.&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8; accessed 25 January. Bean, Kevin, and Mark Hayes. (2009) ‘Sinn Féin and the New Republicanism in Ireland: Electoral Progress, Political Stasis, and Ideological Failure’. Radical History Review, 104: 126–142. Becker, A. (2005) ‘Memory Gaps, Maurice Halbwachs, Memory and the Great War’. Journal of European Studies, 35: 102–113. Beinart, W. (2002) Twentieth-Century South Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Beinart, W. and Dubow, S. (2001) Segregation and Apartheid in TwentiethCentury South Africa. London: Routledge. Beiner, G. (2007a) ‘Between Trauma and Triumphalism: The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Crux of Deep Memory in Modern Ireland’. Journal of British Studies, 46: 366–389. Beiner, G. (2018) Forgetful Remembrance: Social Forgetting and Vernacular Historiography of a Rebellion in Ulster. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Belfast City Council. (no date) ‘Decade of Centenaries. Shared History— Different Allegiances’. [Autumn Events Programme Hardcopy]. Belfast: www. belfastcity.gov.uk/centenaries Belfast County Grand Orange Lodge. (no date) Banners of Freedom. No Publisher. Belfast Political Tour. (no date) ‘Conflicting Stories—The Conflict’. [Hardcopy Brochure Advertising Tour]. Belfast: www.belfastpolicaltour.com Bell, D. S. A. (2003) ‘Mythscapes, Memory, Mythology and National Identity’. British Journal of Sociology, 54 (1): 63–81. Bell, J. (2013) For God, Ulster and Ireland? Religion, Identity and Security in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Institute for Conflict Research. Bell, J. B. (1972) The Secret Army: The IRA. London: Sphere. Bell, J. B. (1990) ‘An Irish War: The IRA’s Armed Struggle, 1969–1990: Strategy as History Rules Ok’. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 1 (3): 239–265. Bell, J. B. (2000) The IRA, 1968–2000. London: Routledge. Bell, G. (2002) The Twilight of Unionism: The Crisis of Ulster Unionism and the Future of Northern Ireland. London: Verso. Bell, J., Hansson, U. and McCaffrey, N. (2010) ‘The Troubles Aren’t History Yet’. Young People’s Understanding of the Past. Belfast: Community Relations Council. Bell, J., McCaffery, N. and Hansson, U. (2011) The Troubles Aren’t History Yet: Young People’s Understanding of the Past. Belfast: Community Relations Council.

234

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bellah, R., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A. and Tipton, S. M. (1996) Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. Berkeley: University of California Press. Benford, R. D. and Snow, D. A. (2000) ‘Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment’. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 611–639. Berastegi, A. and Hearty, K. (2019) ‘A Context-Based Model for Framing Political Victimhood: Experiences from Northern Ireland and the Basque Country’. International Review of Victimology, 25 (1): 19–36. Berdún, M. M. G. et al. (2010) (Eds.) The Ethnicities Reader: Nationalism. Multiculturalism and Migration. Cambridge: Polity. Berliner, D. C. (2005) The Abuses of Memory: Reflections on the Memory Boom in Anthropology. Anthropological Quarterly, 78 (1): 197–211. Bigand, K. (2018) ‘Representing Loyalist Paramilitary Heritage in Non-museum Exhibitions—Aims, Practices and Challenges’. In E. Crooke and T. Maguire (Eds.) Heritage after Conflict Northern Ireland. London: Routledge, 1–18. Biklen, S. K. (2004) ‘Trouble on Memory Lane: Adults and Self-retrospection in Researching Youth’. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (5): 715–730. Billig, M. (1995) Banal Nationalism. London: Sage. Billig, M. (1997) ‘Discursive, Rhetorical and Ideological Messages’. In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.) The Message of Social Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell, 36–53. Binks, E. and Ferguson, N. (2012) ‘Identities in Diaspora: Social, National and Political Identities of the Irish and Northern Irish in England’. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences, 9 (3): 298–310. Black, R. (2015) ‘Fury after £22k Belfast War Memorial “Hijacked by UVF”’. Belfast Telegraph, 26 March. Black, R. (2023) ‘Victims Protest Outside NIO Calling for Controversial Legacy Bill to be Ditched’. The Independent, 24 January. Blokland, T. (2005) ‘Memory Magic: How a Working-Class Neighbourhood Became an Imagined Community and Class Started to Matter when it Lost its Base’. In F. Devine, M. Savage, J. Scott and R. Crompton (Eds.) Rethinking Class. Culture, Identities and Lifestyles. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 123– 138. Bloomfield, K. (1988a) We Will Remember Them. Report of the Northern Ireland Victims Commissioner. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Bloomfield, K. (1988b) ‘How Should We Remember? The Work of the Northern Ireland Victims Commission’. In B. Hamber (Ed.) Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland and Societies in Transition. Derry/ Londonderry: University of Ulster and Incore. Bloomfield, Sir K. (1998) We Will Remember Them. Report of the Northern Ireland Victims Commissioner. Northern Ireland: The Stationery Office.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

235

Blustein, J. M. (2014) Forgiveness and Remembrance: Remembering Wrongdoing in Personal and Public Life. Oxford Academic. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1093/acprof:oso/9780199329397.003.0006; accessed 12 December 2022. Bodnar, J. (1992) Remaking America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Boraine, A. (2001) “All Truth is Bitter”: A Report of the Visit of the Deputy Chairman of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to Northern Ireland. No Publisher. Bowman, T. (2007) Carson’s Army: The Ulster Volunteer Force. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Bowman-Grieve, L. and Herron, S. (2020) ‘Then and Now: Irish Republicanism and Ulster Loyalism Online’. In M. Littler and B. Lee (Eds.) Digital Extremisms. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 109–132. Boyce, D. G. (1996) ‘1916, Interpreting the Rising’. In D. G. Boyce and A. O’Day (Eds.) The Making of Modern Irish History: Revisionism and the Revisionist Controversy. London: Routledge, 163–187. Boyce, D. G. (2001) ‘“No Lack of Ghosts”: Memory, Commemoration and the State in Ireland’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 245–271. Boyd, S. (2019) ‘Post-conflict Tourism Development in Northern Ireland: Moving Beyond Murals and Dark Sites Associated with Its Past’. In R. Isaac, E. Çakmak and R. Butler (Eds.) Tourism and Hospitality in Conflict-Ridden Destinations. London: Routledge, 226–239. Boyer, P. and Wertsch, J. V. (2009) (Eds.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Braniff, M. and McDowell, S. (2014) Commemoration as Conflict. Space, Memory and Identity in Peace Processes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Braniff, M., McDowell, S. and Byrne, J. (2012) ‘Violence, Space and Memory in the New Northern Ireland’. Open Democracy, 14 December. Braziel, J. E. and Mannur, A. (2003) (Eds.) Theorising Diaspora: A Reader. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. Braziel, J. and Mannur, A. (2004) Theorizing Diaspora: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell. Brearton, F. (1997) ‘Dancing unto Death: Perceptions of the Somme, the Titanic and Ulster Protestantism’. The Irish Review, 20: 89–103. Bresco de Luna, I. (2019) ‘Between the Unbearable Weight and Lightness of the Past. Banal Silence in Spain’s Post-dictatorship Memory Politics’. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 53 (1): 44–62. Brewer, M. B. (2001) ‘Social Identities and Social Representations: A Question of Priority?’. In K. Deaux and G. Philogéne (Eds.) Representations of the Social. Oxford: Blackwell, 305–311.

236

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brewer, M. B., Wendi L. G. and Cynthia L. P. (2000) ‘Social Exclusion and Selective Memory: How the Need to Belong Influences Memory for Social Events’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26: 483–496. Brockmeier, J. (2002a) ‘Narrative and Cultural Memory’. Special Volume of Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 1–14. Brockmeier, J. (2002b) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: Narrative as Cultural Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 15–43. Brossat, A., Combe, S., Potel, J. and Szurek, J. (1990) ‘Introduction’. In A. Brossat, S. Combe, J. Potel and J. Szurek (Eds.) A I’ Est: la mémoire retrouvée. Paris: La Decouverte, 11–35. Brown, K. (2007) ‘“Our Father Organisation”: The Cult of the Somme and the Unionist “Golden Age” in Modern Ulster Loyalist Commemoration’. The Round Table, 96 (393): 707–723. Brown, K. (2012) ‘“What Was It Like to Live through a Day”: Transitional Justice and the Memory of the Everyday in a Divided Society’. The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 6: 444–466. Brown, K. (2017) ‘Political Commemoration. The Inclusion Dynamics of “Partisan Commemoration”’. Political Settlements Programme Consortium, Research Briefing. Edinburgh: PSRP. Brown, K. (2023) ‘Irish Republican Commemoration and Narratives of Legitimacy’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 97–117. Brown, K. and Grant, A. (2016) ‘A Lens Over Conflicted Memory: Surveying “Troubles” Commemoration in Northern Ireland’. Irish Political Studies, 31 (1): 139–162. Brown, K. and Mac Ginty, R. (2003) ‘Public Attitudes toward Partisan and Neutral Symbols in Post-agreement Northern Ireland’. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 10 (1): 83–108. Bruce, S. (1992) The Red Hand: Protestant Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brundy, Y. M. (2013) ‘Myths and National Identity Choices in Post-communist Russia’. In G. Bouchard (Ed.) National Myths: Constructed Pasts, Contested Presents. London: Routledge. Bruner, J. (1990) Acts of Meaning. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. (2005) ‘Past and Present as Narrative Constructions’. In J. Sträub (Ed.) Narration, Identity and Historical Consciousness. New York: Bergham Books, 23–43. Bryan, D. (2015) ‘Parades, Flags, Carnivals and Riots: Space, Contestation and Transformation in Northern Ireland’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 21 (4): 565–573.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

237

Bryan, D. and Connolly, S. (2009) ‘Identity, Social Action and Public Space: Defining Civic Space in Belfast’. In M. Wetherell (Ed.) Theorizing Identities and Social Action. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 220–236. Bryan, D. and Gillespie, G. (2000) Transforming Conflict: Flags and Emblems. Institute of Irish Studies, Queen’s University, Belfast. Bryan, D. and McIntosh, G. (2005) ‘Symbols and Identity in “New” Northern Ireland’. In Paul Carmichael et al. (Eds.) Devolution and Constitutional Change in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Bryan, D., Stevenson C., Gillespie G. and Bell, J. (2010) Public Display of Flags and Emblems in Northern Ireland 2006–2009. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Bryson, L. and McCartney, C. (1994) Clashing Symbols. A Report on the Use of Flags, Anthems and Other National Symbols in Northern Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: The Institute of Irish Studies. Bull, A. C. and Hansen, H. L. (2016) ‘On Agnostic Memory’. Memory Studies, 9 (4): 390–404. Burke, P. (1989) ‘History as Social Memory’. In T. Butler (Ed.) Memory: History, Culture and the Mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Burke, P. (2019) Myths, Memories and the Representations of Identities. London: Edward Everett Root. Cahill, S. E. (1998) Inside Social Life: Readings in Sociological Psychology and Microsociology. Los Angeles, California: Roxbury Publishing. Cairns, E. and Darby, J. (1998) ‘The Conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, Consequences and Controls’. American Psychologist, 53 (7): 754–760. Cairns, E., Lewis, A., Mumcu, O. and Waddell, N. (1988) ‘Memories of Recent Ethnic Conflict and Their Relationship to Social Identity’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 4 (1): 13–22. Cairns, E., Mallett, J., Lewis, C. and Wilson, R. (2003) Who are the Victims? Self-assessed Victimhood and the Northern Ireland Conflict. Belfast: Northern Ireland Office. Cairns, E. and Roe, M. (2003) ‘Introduction: Why Memories in Conflict?’. In E. Cairns and M. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 3–8. Cairns, E. and Darby, J. (1998) ‘The Conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, Consequences and Controls’. American Psychologist, 53 (7): 754–776. Calhoun, C. (1998) ‘Community without Propinquity Revisited: Communications Technology and the Transformation of the Urban Public Sphere’. Sociological Inquiry, 68 (3): 373–397. Carroll, R. (2018) ‘“Decades of Deceit”: Ballymurphy Killings Inquest Opens in Belfast’. The Guardian, 11 November. Carroll, R. (2022) ‘Backlash after O’Neill Says there Was “No Alternative” to Conflict during Troubles’. The Guardian, 4 August.

238

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Casanova, J. (2016) ‘Disremembering Francoism: What is at Stake in Spain’s Memory Wars?’. In H. Graham (Ed.) Interrogating Francoism: History and Dictatorship in Twentieth-Century Spain. London: Bloomsbury, 203–222. Casey, E. S. (2009) Remembering: A Phenomenological Study. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Cavalli, S. (1995) ‘Patterns of Collective Memory’. Discussion Paper No. 14, Presented at Collegium Budapest, June (unpublished). Chase, S. E. (2005) ‘Narrative Inquiry: Multiple Lenses, Approaches, Voices’. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage, 651–679. Chirwa, W. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and the Process of Reconciliation and Reconstruction’. Developments in Practice, 7 (4): 479–482. Chung, C. K. M. (2022) ‘Power-sharing and Memory Sharing in Northern Ireland: A Case Study of Healing through Remembering during Consociational Volatility’. British Politics, Published Online, 25 May. https://doi.org/ 10.1057/s41293-022-00209-8. Clarke, L. (2010) ‘It Takes Two Sides to Tear Apart a Myth’. Sunday Times, 13 June. Cohen, A. P. (2013) Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Routledge. Cohrs, J. C., McNeill, A. and Vollhardt, J. R. (2015) ‘The Two-Sided Role of Inclusive Victimhood for Intergroup Reconciliation: Evidence from Northern Ireland’. Peace and Conflict. Journal of Peace Psychology, 21 (4): 634–647. Coiste Chuimhneacháin Chath Naomh Máitiú. (2010) 40th Anniversary Commemorative Events. Belfast: Battle of St. Matthews Commemorative Committee. Collins, J. (2012) Whose Past is it Anyway? The Ulster Covenant, the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme. Dublin: History Press. Collins, P. (1999) ‘The Contest of Memory: The Continuing Impact of 1798 Commemoration’. Éire-Ireland, 34 (2): 28–50. Commission on Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition Report - Final Report. (2021) Belfast: OFDFM. Confino, A. (1997) ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1386–1403. Connerton, P. (1989) How Societies Remember? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Connerton, P. (2008) ‘Seven Types of Forgetting’. Memory Studies 1 (1): 59–71. Consultative Group on the Past. (2009) Report of the Consultative Group on the Past. Belfast: CGP. Conway, B. (2003) ‘Active Remembering, Selective Forgetting and Collective Identity: The Case of Bloody Sunday’. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 3 (4): 305–323.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

239

Conway, B. (2008) ‘Local Conditions, Global Environment and Transnational Discourses in Memory Work: The Case of Bloody Sunday (1972)’. Memory Studies, 1 (2): 187–209. Coogan. T. P. (2000) Wherever Green is Worn. The Story of the Irish Diaspora. London: Hutchinson. Cook, W. (2018) ‘Paramilitary to POP culture: The Changing Face of Belfast’s Murals’. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2YjfP4 sPMDHNVVMsR4sY85l/paramilitary-to-pop-culture-the-changing-face-ofbelfast-s-murals; downloaded 2 March 2023. Cooper, D. (2001) ‘On the Twelfth of July in the Morning ... Or the Man Who Mistook his Sash for a Hat’. Folk Music Journal, 8: 67–89. Corning A. D. (2010) ‘Emigration, Generation, and Collective Memories: The Presence of the Past for Emigrants from the Former Soviet Union’. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73 (3): 223–244. Crane, S. A. (1997) ‘Writing the Individual Back into Collective Memory’. The American Historical Review, 102 (5): 1372–1385. Crampton, R. J. (1994) Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century—And after. London: Routledge. Crawford, J., Kippax, S., Onyx, J., Gault, U. and Benton, P. (1992) Emotion and Gender: Constructing Meaning from Memory. London: Sage. Crenshaw, K. (2019) On Intersectionality: Essential Writings. New York: The New Press. Crooke, E. (2001) ‘Confronting a Troubled History: Which Past in Northern Ireland’s Museums?’ International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2 (7): 119– 136. Crossley, M. L. (2000a) Introducing Narrative Psychology: Self, Trauma and the Construction of Meaning. Buckinghamshire: Open University Press. Crossley, M. L. (2000b) ‘Narrative Psychology, Trauma and the Study of Self/ Identity’. Theory and Psychology, 10 (4): 527–546. Crowley, T. (2011) ‘The Art of Memory: The Murals of Northern Ireland and the Management of History’. Field Day Review, 7: 22–49. Crowley, T. (2022) ‘Reading Republican Murals in Northern Ireland: Archiving and Meaning-Making’. Studi Irlandesi. A Journal of Irish Studies, 12: 87–117. Daly, M. and O’Callaghan, M. (2007) 1916 in 1966: Commemorating the Easter Rising. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. Darcy, E. (2020) ‘The Social Memory of Oliver Cromwell in Ireland, c.1660s– c.1730s’. In R. G. Martyn Bennett and S. Spurlock (Eds.) Cromwell and Ireland: New Perspectives. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Darby, J. (1983) ‘The Historical Background’. In Northern Ireland: The Background to the Conflict. Belfast: Appletree Press, 13–31. Darby, J. and Mac Ginty, R. (2003) Contemporary Peacemaking: Conflict, Violence and Peace Processes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

240

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Darby, P. (2009) Gaelic Games, Nationalism and the Irish Diaspora in the United States. Dublin: UCD Press. David, O. and Bar-Tal, D. (2009) ‘A Sociopsychological Conception of Collective Identity: The Case of National Identity as an Example’. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13 (4): 354–379. Davies B. and Harre, R. (1990) ‘Positioning: The Discursive of Selves’. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20 (1): 43–63. Dawson, G. (2007) Making Peace with the Past? Memory, Trauma and the Irish Troubles. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Day, G. (2006) Community and Everyday Life. London: Routledge. De Saint-Laurent, C. (2017) ‘Memory Acts: A Theory for the Study of Collective Memory in Everyday Life’. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 31 (2): 148– 162. Deacon, B., Castle-Kanerova, M., Manning, N., Millard, F., Orosz, E., Szalai, J. and Vidinova, A. (1992) The New Eastern Europe: Social Policy, Past, Present and Future. London: Sage. Delanty, G. (2003) Community. London: Routledge. Demirel, C. (2021) ‘Re-conceptualising Competitive Victimhood in Reconciliation Processes: The Case of Northern Ireland’. Peacebuilding, 11 (1): 45–61. Devine, P. (2021) ‘Changing Identities in Northern Ireland’. ARK Research Update, 138. Devine, P. and Schubotz, D. (2019) ‘A Sense of Belonging’. ARK Research Update, 126. Devine-Wright, P. (2001) ‘History and Identity in Northern Ireland: An Exploratory Investigation of the Role of Historical Commemorations in Contexts of Intergroup Conflict’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 7 (4): 297–315. Devlin, P. (1981) Yes We Have No Bananas: Outdoor Relief in Belfast 1920–1939. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Dillenburger, K., Fargas, M. and Akhonzada, R. (2006) ‘Victims or Survivors? Debate about Victimhood in Northern Ireland’. The International Journal of the Humanities, 3: 222–231. Dillenburger, K. and Keenan, M. (2001) ‘Islands of Pain in a Sea of Change: Behaviour Analysis and Bereavement’. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2 (2): 187–207. Dolan, A. (2003) ‘An Army of Our Fenian Dead: Republicanism, Monuments and Commemoration’. In F. McGarry (Ed.) Republicanism in Modern Ireland. Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 132–144. Douglas, R., Harte, L. and O’Hara, J. (1998) Drawing Conclusions. A Cartoon History of Anglo-Irish Relations 1978–1998. Belfast: Blackstaff Press.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

241

Downey, H. and Sherry, J. (2014) ‘Modulating Mythology in a Post-traumatic Era: Murals and Re-imaging in Northern Ireland’. In J. Desmond and D. Kavanagh (Eds.) Myth and the Market. Dublin, University College Press, 281– 304. Drummond, O., Corr, M. L., Dwyer, C., McAlister, S. and Fargas-Malet, M. (2021) “It Didn’t End in 1998”. Examining the Impacts of Conflict Legacy Across Generations. Belfast: Centre for Children’s Rights. Duberman, M. B. (1969) The Uncompleted Past. New York: Random House. Durkheim, E (1915) Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Macmillan. Durrer, V., Kelly, G., McKnight, M. and Schubotz, D. (2020) ‘Exploring Young People’s Understanding of Culture: A Study from Northern Ireland’. Cultural Trends, 29 (1): 4–18. East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society. (no date) Murder in Ballymacarrett—The Untold Story. Belfast: EBHCS. East Belfast Historical and Cultural Society. (2006) Murder in Ballymacarrett— The Untold Story. Belfast: EBHCS. Edensor T. (1997) ‘National Identity and the Politics of Memory: Remembering Bruce and Wallace in Symbolic Space’. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15 (2): 175–194. Edensor, T. (2002) National Identity, Popular Culture and Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg. Edwards, A. (2021) ‘The Ulster Volunteer Force and Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland’. In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 115–124. Edwards, D. and Middleton, D. (1986) ‘Joint Remembering: Constructing an Account of Shared Experience through Conversational Discourse’. Discourse processes, 9 (4): 423–459. Edwards, D. and Potter, J. (1992) Discursive Psychology. London: Sage. Eileen Hickey Irish Republican History Museum. (2023) ‘Our Story— Visiting the Museum’. Available: http://eileenhickeymuseum.com/visit/; downloaded 14 January. English, R. (2003) Armed Struggle. A History of the IRA. Basingstoke: Macmillan. English, R. (2006) Irish Freedom. The History of Nationalism in Ireland. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Erll, A. (2011) Memory in Culture (translated by Sara B. Young). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Evershed, J. (2014) ‘Beyond What Actually Happened: Loyalist Spectral Politics and the Problematic Privileging of “History” During Northern Ireland’s Decade of Centenaries’. Irish Journal of Anthropology, 17 (1): 40–45.

242

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Evershed, J. (2018) Ghosts of the Somme: Commemoration and Culture War in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Eyerman, R. (2004) ‘The Past in the Present: Culture and the Transmission of Memory’. Acta Sociologica, 47 (2): 159–169. Eyerman, R. (2019) Memory, Trauma and Identity. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Fabian, J. (2007) Memory Against Culture: Arguments and Reminders. Duke University Press. Faulkner-Byrne, L., Bell, J. and McCready, P. (2023) ‘“Remember the Women”: Memory-Making within Loyalism’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 165–182. Fearon, K. (1999) Women’s Work. The Story of the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Feindt, G., Krawatzek, F., Mehler, D. and Pestel, F. (2014) ‘Entangled Memory: Toward a Third Wave in Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 53: 24–44. Fentress, J. and Wickham, C. (1992) Social Memory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ferguson, H. (2009) Self-Identity and Everyday Life. London: Routledge. Ferguson, N. and Halliday, D. (2020) ‘Collective Memory and the Legacy of the Troubles: Territoriality, Identity, and Victimhood in Northern Ireland’. In J. R. Vollhardt (Ed.) The Social Psychology of Collective Victimhood. Oxford: Oxford Academic, 56–74. Ferguson, N. and McAuley, J. W. (2017) ‘Ulster Loyalist Accounts of Armed Mobilization, Demobilization and Decommissioning’. In L. Bosi and G. De Fazio (Eds.) The Troubles in Northern Ireland and Theories of Social Movements. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 111–128. Ferriter, D. (2020) ‘Black and Tans: “Half-Drunk, Whole-Mad” and One-Fifth Irish’. The Irish Times, 4 January. Feuchtwang, S. (2005) ‘Mythical Moments in National and Other Family Histories’. History Workshop Journal, 59 (1): 179–193. Figes, O. (2008) The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin’s Russia. London: Penguin. Figes, O. (2017) A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution—Centenary Edition. London: Bodley Head. Fine, G. A. (1996) ‘Reputational Entrepreneurs and the Memory of Incompetence: Melting Supporters, Partisan Warriors and Images of President Harding’. American Journal of Sociology, 101 (5): 1159–1193. Fine, G. A. (1999) ‘John Brown’s Body: Elites, Heroic Embodiment and the Legitimation of Political Violence’. Social Problems, 46 (2): 225–249. Fine, G. A. (2001) Difficult Reputations: Collective Memories of the Evil, Inept and Controversial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

243

09:32, 12 OCT 2016 Fitzpatrick, S. (2000) Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fitzpatrick, S. (2015) Stalin’s Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Fivush, R. and Nelson, K. (2004) ‘Culture and Language in the Emergence of Autobiographical Memory’. Psychological Science, 15 (9): 573–577. Forest, B. and Johnson, J (2011) ‘Monumental Politics: Regime Type and Public Memory in Post-communist States’. Post-Soviet Affairs, 27 (3): 269–288. Fowkes, B. (2002) Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-communist World. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Fowler, B. (2007) The Obituary as Collective Memory. London: Routledge. Foy, M. and Barton, B. (2011) The Easter Rising. London: History Press. Frazer, T. G. (2000) (Ed.) The Irish Parading Tradition. Following the Drum. Houndmills: Macmillan. Friberg, H., Nordin, I. R. and Pedersen, L. Y. (2007) (Eds.) Recovered Memory: Irish Representations of Past and Present. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Friedman, S. S. (1998) Mappings: Feminism and the Cultural Geographies of Encounter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Frost, W. and Laing, J. (2013) Commemorative Events: Memory, Identity, Conflict. London: Routledge. Furey, A., Donnelly, C., Hughes, J. and Blaylock, D. (2017) ‘Interpretations of National Identity in Post-conflict Northern Ireland: A Comparison of Different School Settings’. Research Papers in Education, 32 (2): 137–150. Gallagher, P. (2015) ‘Belfast Paramilitary Murals: Colourful Emblems of a City’s Tortured Past to Receive Makeover’. The Independent, 22 August. Gapps, S. (2003) ‘Authenticity Matters: Historical Re-enactment and Australian Attitudes to the Past’. Australian Cultural History, 22: 105–116. Garagozov, R. (2008) ‘Characteristics of Collective Memory, Ethnic Conflicts, Historiography and the “Politics of Memory”: Characteristics of Historical Accounts and “Forms” of Collective Memory’. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 46 (2): 58–95. Garland, R. (2001) Gusty Spence. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Garry, J. and McNicholl, K. (2015) ‘Understanding the “Northern Irish” Identity’. Briefing Paper Presented at the Knowledge Exchange Seminar Series. Queen’s University Belfast: KESS. Gergen, K. (2005) ‘Narrative, Moral Identity and Historical Consciousness: A Social Constructionist Account’. In J. Sträub (Ed.) Narration, Identity and Historical Consciousness. New York: Bergham Books, 99–119.

244

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gergen, K. J. and Gergen, M. M. (1984) ‘The Social Construction of Narrative Accounts’. In K. J. Gergen and M. M. Gergen (Eds.) Historical Social Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum, 173–190. Gergen, K. J. and Gergen, M. M. (1986) ‘Narrative Form and the Construction of Psychological Science’. In T. Sarbin (Ed.) Narrative Psychology: The Storied Nature of Human Conduct. New York: Praeger, 22–44. Gibson, J. L. (2004) Overcoming Apartheid: Can Truth Reconcile a Divided Nation? New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Gilchrist, A., Bowles, M. and Wetherell. (2010) Identities and Social Action: Connecting Communities for a Change. London: Community Development Foundation. Gill, G. and Angosto-Ferrandez, L. F. (2020) Symbolism and Politics. Abingdon: Routledge. Gillespie, G. (2007) Troubled Images. The Northern Ireland Troubles and Peace Process 1968–2007. Newtownards: Colourpoint Books. Gillis, J. R. (1994) ‘Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship’. In J. R. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: the Politics of National Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–12. Gilmartin, N. (2019) ‘Gendering the “Post-conflict” Narrative in Northern Ireland’s Peace Process’. Capital and Class, 43 (1): 89–104. Gl˘aveanu, V. P. (2017) ‘Collective Memory between Stability and Change’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 255–262. Goalwin, G. J. (2013) ‘The Art of War: Instability, Insecurity and Ideological Imagery in Northern Ireland’s Political Murals’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 26 (3): 189–215. Goalwin, G. J. (2019) ‘The Curious Case of Cú Chulainn: Nationalism, Culture and Meaning Making in the Contested Symbols of Northern Ireland’. Ethnicity and Nationalism, 19 (3): 307–324. Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Golway, T. (2000) For the Causes of Liberty: A Thousand Years of Ireland’s Heros. New York: Touchstone Book. Goodson, I. (2015) ‘Exploring History and Memory through Autobiographical Memory’. Historia y Memoria de la Educación, 1: 263–285. Gordon, M. A. (1993) The Orange Riots. Irish Political Violence in New York City, 1870 and 1871. New York: Cornell University Press. Graff-McRae, R. (2010) Remembering and Forgetting 1916: Commemoration and Conflict in Post-peace Process Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Graff-McRae, R. L. (2017) ‘Ghosts of Gender: Memory, Legacy and Spectrality in Northern Ireland’s Post-conflict Commemorative Politics’. Ethnopolitics, 16 (5): 500–518.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

245

Gray, P. (2004) ‘Memory and the Commemoration of the Great Irish Famine’. In P. Gray and K. Oliver (Eds.) The Memory of Catastrophe. Manchester: Manchester University, 46–64. Graham, B. and Whelan, Y. (2007) ‘The Legacies of the Dead: commemorating the Troubles in Northern Ireland’. In Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24 (3): 476–495. Graham, B. and Shirlow, P. (2002) ‘The Battle of the Somme in Ulster Memory and Identity’. Political Geography, 21: 881–904. Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland. (2012) ‘Speech Made by the Grand Master of the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, Edward Stevenson, at the Dungannon Demonstration’. GOLI Press Release, 12 July. Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland. (2013) ‘Grand Master Leads Armistice Day Tributes’. Available at: http://www.grandorangelodge.co.uk/news.aspx?id= 100413#.U-ic0yjmbfh; accessed 23 February 2014. Gray, P. (2004) ‘Memory and the Commemoration of the Great Irish Famine’. In P. Gray and K. Oliver (Eds.) The Memory of Catastrophe. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 46–64. Grayson, R. S. (2010) Belfast Boys: How Unionists and Nationalists Fought and Died Together in the First World War. London: Bloomsbury. Grayson, R. S. and McGarry, F. (2016) (Eds.) Remembering 1916. The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Politics of Memory in Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guins, R. and Cruz, O. (2005) Popular Culture: A Reader. London: Sage. Gupta, A. and Ferguson, J. (1997) (Eds.) Culture, Power, Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology. Durham NC: Duke University Press. Hackett, C. and Rolston, B. (2009) ‘The Burden of Memory: Victims, Storytelling and Resistance in Northern Ireland’. Memory Studies, 2 (3): 355–376. Hagan, S. (2018) ‘Northern Ireland’s Lost Moment: How the Peaceful Protests of ‘68 Escalated into Years of Bloody Conflict’. The Guardian, 22 April. Halbwachs, M. (1992 [1941, 1952, 1925]) On Collective Memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hall, S. (1993) ‘Culture, Community, Nation’. Cultural Studies, 7 (3): 349–363. Hall, S. (2011) ‘Introduction: Who Needs Identity?’. In S. Hall and P. du Gay (Eds.) Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage. Hamber, B. and Wilson, R. A. (2003) ‘Symbolic Closure through Memory, Repartition and Revenge in Post-conflict Societies’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Palgrave. Hammack, P. (2011) ‘Narrative and the Politics of Meaning’. Narrative Inquiry, 21: 311–318. Hancock, L. E. (2014) ‘Narratives of Identity in the Northern Ireland Troubles’. Peace and Change, 39 (4): 443–467.

246

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hancock, L. E. (2019) ‘Narratives of Commemoration Identity, Memory and Conflict on Northern Ireland 1916–2016’. Peace and Change, 44 (2): 244– 265. Hanvey, B. (2009) The Oul’ Orange and Green: Songs from Republican and Loyalist Traditions in Ireland. A Troubles Archive Essay. Belfast: Arts Council of Northern Ireland. Harris, C. B., Paterson H. M. and Kemp, R. I. (2008) ‘Collaborative Recall and Collective Memory: What Happens When We Remember Together?’ Memory, 16 (3): 213–230. Haug, F. (1987) Female Sexualization: A Collective Work of Memory. London: Verso. Haug, F. (1992) Beyond Female Masochism: Memory-Work and Politics. London: Verso. Haug, F. (1997) Memory-Work as a Method of Social Science Research: A Detailed Rendering of Memory-Work Method. Available at: http://www.friggahaug.ink rit.de/documents/memorywork-researchguidei7.pdf; accessed 10 April 2022. Hayes, B. C. and McAllister, I. (2013) Conflict to Peace: Politics and Society in Northern Ireland Over Half a Century. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Hayes, B. C., McAllister, I. and Dowds, L. (2007) ‘Integrated Education, Intergroup Relations, and Political Identities in Northern Ireland’. Social Problems, 54 (4): 454–482. Hayward, K. and McManus, C. (2019) ‘Neither/Nor: The Rejection of Unionist and Nationalist Identities in Post-agreement Northern Ireland’. Capital and Class, 43 (1): 139–155. Hayward, K. and McManus, C. (2020) ‘Northern Ireland: Society and Culture’. In The Routledge Handbook of British Politics and Society. London: Routledge, 304–317. Hazley, B. (2021) ‘The Vicissitudes of Forgetting: Military Intervention and the Memory of the Troubles in Britain’. Journal of War and Culture Studies, 14 (1): 45–69. Healing Through Remembering (2002) The Report of the Healing Through Remembering Project. Belfast: HTRP. Hearty, K. (2017) ‘The Malleability of Memory and Irish Republican Memory Entrepreneurship: A Case Study of the “Loughgall Martyrs”’. Ethnopolitics, 16 (2): 126–144. Heller, A. (2001) ‘Cultural Memory, Identity and Civil Society’. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 2: 139–143. Hepworth, A. (2014) ‘Site of Memory and Dismemory: The Valley of the Fallen in Spain’. Journal of Genocide Research, 16 (4): 463–485. Higgins, M. D. (2016) When Ideas Matter. Speeches for an Ethical Republic. London: Head of Zeus.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

247

Higgins, R. (2012) Transforming 1916: Meaning, Memory and the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Easter Rising. Cork: Cork University Press. Hirsch, H. (1995) Genocide and the Politics of Memory: Studying Death to Preserve Life. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Hirsch, M. (2008) ‘The Generation of Postmemory’. Poetics Today, 29 (1): 103– 128. Hobsbawm, E. (1990) Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hobsbawm, E. and Ranger, T. (1983) (Eds.) The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hopkins, S. (2013) The Politics of Memoir and the Norther Ireland Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hopkins, S. (2014) ‘The Chronicles of Long Kesh: Provisional Irish Republican Memoirs and the Contested Memory of the Hunger Strikes’. Memory Studies, 7 (4): 425–439. Hopkins, S. (2018) ‘Bobby Sands, Martyrdom and the Politics of Irish Republican Memory’. In Q. Outram and K. Leybourn (Eds.) Secular Martyrdom in Britain and Ireland: From Peterloo to the Present. Basel: Springer International, 263–286. Hopkins, S. (2021) ‘The Memoir-Writing of Former Paramilitary Prisoners in Northern Ireland: A Politics of Reconciliation? In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 75–94. Hopkins, S. (2023) ‘Irish Republicanism and Radical Nostalgia’. In J. W. McAuley, M. Braniff and G. Spencer (Eds.) Troubles of the Past? History, Identity and Collective Memory in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 97–117. Hosking, G. (1990) The Awakening of the Soviet Union. Cambridge MA: Mandarin. Houston, C. J. and Smith, W. J. (1990) The Sash Canada Wore: A Historical Geography of the Orange Order in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Houston, C. J. and Smyth W. J. (1981) The Sash Canada Wore: A Historical Geography of the Orange Order in Canada. Buffalo, NY: University of Toronto Press. Howard, J. A. (2000) ‘Social Psychology of Identities’. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 367–393. Howard, P. and Ashworth, G. (1999) (Eds.) European Heritage Planning and Management. Bristol: Intellect. Hughes, B. (2019) ‘Loyalist Paramilitary Flags Placed on War Memorial in South Belfast’. Irish News, 6 August.

248

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hunt, N. C. (2011) Memory, War and Trauma. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hunt, N. (2013) ‘Memory and Social Meaning: The Impact of Society and Culture on Traumatic Memories’. In M. Linden and K. Rutkowski (Eds.) Hurting Memories and Beneficial Forgetting: Posttraumatic Stress Disorders, Biographical Developments and Social Conflicts. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 49–57. Hutchinson, B. [with G. Mulvenna] (2020) My Life in Loyalism. Newbridge: Merrion Press. Hutton, P. H. (1993) History as an Art of Memory. London: University Press of New England. Huyssen, A. (1995) Twilight Memories: Marking Time in a Culture of Amnesia. London: Routledge. Huyssen, A. (2000) ‘Present Pasts: Media, Politics, Amnesia’. Public Culture, 12 (1): 21–38. Huyssen, A. (2003) Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Irish Times. (2002) ‘Adams Defends IRA Commemoration Dinner’. 13 April. Irish Times. (2022a) ‘What Does It mean to Say “Up the Ra”’. 5 October. Irish Times. (2022b) ‘People Singing Up the ’Ra don’t Mean to Glorify IRA— Poll’. 29 October. Irish Republican News. (2019) ‘Billy McKee has Died’. 12 June. Irwin-Zarecka, I. (1994) Frames of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Jankowitz, S. E. (2018a) The Order of Victimhood. Violence, Hierarchy and Building Peace in Northern Ireland. Cham: Palgrave. Jankowitz, S. E. (2018b) ‘The “Hierarchy of Victims” in Northern Ireland: A Framework for Critical Analysis’. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 12 (2): 216–236. Jarman, N. (1996) ‘The Ambiguities of Peace: Republican and Loyalist Ceasefire Murals’. In Causeway. Spring, 23–27. Jarman, N. (1998) ‘Painting Landscapes: The Place of Murals in the Symbolic Construction of Urban Space’. In A. Buckley (Ed.) Symbols in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies, 81–98. Jarman, N. (1999) Displaying Faith. Orange, Green and Trade Union Banners in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Queen’s University, The Institute of Irish Studies. Jarman, N. and O’Halloran, C. (2001) ‘Recreational Rioting: Young People, Interface Areas and Violence’. Childcare in Practice, 7 (1): 2–16. Jones, P. (2013) Myth, Memory, Trauma: Rethinking the Stalinist Past in the Soviet Union, 1953–1970. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. Kansteiner, W. (2002) ‘Finding Meaning in Memory: A Methodological Critique of Collective Memory Studies’. History and Theory, 41: 179–197.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

249

Kansteiner, W. and Fogu, C. (2006) The Politics of Memory in Postwar Europe. Durham NC: Duke University Press. Kaufman, S. J. (2001) Modern Hatreds. The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Kearney, R. (1997) Postnationalist Ireland : Politics, Culture, Philosophy. London: Routledge. Kelly, J. (2000) ‘The Emergence of Political Parading, 1660–1800’. In T. G. Fraser (Ed.) The Irish Parading Tradition, 9–27. Kelly, G. and Hamber, B. (2004) A Working Definition of Reconciliation. Ulster University: Transitional Justice Institute. Kemper, T. D. (1990) ‘Themes and Variations in the Sociology of Emotions’. Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions, 3–23. Kenny, M. G. (1999) ‘A Place for Memory: The Interface between Individual and Collective History’. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 41: 420–437. Ketelaar, E. (2005) ‘Sharing: Collected Memories in Communities of Records’. Archives and Manuscripts, 33: 44–61. Kinsella, T. (1970) The Táin Bó Cuailnge (Translated from the Irish). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kilpatrick, C. (2013) ‘18,000 Loyalists Expected for “Ulster Day” March to Commemorate UVF Formation’. Belfast Telegraph, 24 September. Kitson, A. (2007) ‘History Teaching and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland’. In E. A. Cole (Ed.) Teaching the Violent Past: History Education and Reconciliation. New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 123–155. Klein, K. L. (2000) ‘On the Emergence of Memory in Historical Discourse’. Representations, 69 (Winter), 127–150. Kraus, W. (2006) ‘The Narrative Negotiation of Identity and Belonging’. Narrative Inquiry, 16 (1): 103–111. Kulle, D. and Hamber, B. (2001) ‘Introduction’. In B. Hamber, D. Kulle and R. Wilson (Eds.) Future Policies for the Past, Report No. 13). Belfast: Democratic Dialogue. Kula, A. (2022) ‘Orange Clergyman Invokes Gunrunners and Ulster Covenant as he Denounces Protocol “Cancer”’. News Letter, 22 April. Kundera, M. (1999) The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. London: Harper Collins. Laitin, D. D. (1995) ‘National Revivals and Violence’. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 36(1), 3–43. Lampe, J. R. (1996) Yugoslavia as History: Twice there was a Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. László, J. (2008) The Science of Stories: An Introduction to Narrative Psychology. London: Rotledge.

250

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lawther, C. (2012) ‘Denial, Silence and the Politics of the Past: Unpicking Opposition to Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 7: 157–177. Lawler, S. (2008) Identity: Sociological perspectives. Cambridge: Polity. Leeson, D. (2012) The Black and Tans: British Police and Auxiliaries in the Irish War of Independence, 1920–1921. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Legat, A. (2008) ‘Walking Stories; Leaving Footprints’. In T. Ingold and J. Vergunst (Eds.) Ways of Walking: Ethnography and Practice on Foot. Padstow: Ashgate, 35–50. Legg, G. (2019) Northern Ireland and the Politics of Boredom: Conflict, Capital and Culture. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Leitrim Observer. (2020) ‘Commemorating the RIC and the Black and Tans’. 6 January. Leonard, M. (2006) ‘Teenagers Telling Sectarian Stories’. Sociology, 40 (6): 1117–1133. Levinson, S. (1998) Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Levy, D. and Sznaider, N. (2002) ‘Memory Unbound: The Holocaust and the Formation of Cosmopolitan Memory’. European Journal of Social Theory, 5 (1): 87–106. Leyburn, J. G. (1962) The Scotch-Irish. A Social History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Liechty, J. and Clegg, C. (2001) Moving Beyond Sectarianism: Religion, Conflict and Recocilliation in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Columba Press. Lister, D. and Jordan, H. (2003) Mad Dog. The Rise and Fall of Johnny Adair and ‘C’ Company. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing. Little, A. (with R. Scott) (2009) Give a Boy a Gun. From Killing to Peace Making. London: Darton, Lonman and Todd. Liu, J. H. (2022) Collective Remembering and the Making of Political Culture. Cambridge University Press. Liu, J. H. and Hilton, D. J. (2005) ‘How the Past Weighs on the Present: Social Representations of History and their Role in Identity Politics’. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44: 537–556. Liu, J. H. and László, J. (2007) ‘A Narrative Theory of History and Identity: Social Identity, Social Representations, Society, and the Individual’. In G. Moloney and I. Walker, I. (eds) Social Representations and Identity: Content, Process, and Power, 85–107. Loftus, S. (2013) The Invention of Memory. An Irish Family Scrapbook, 1560– 1934. London: Daunt Books. Longley, E. (2001) ‘Northern Ireland: Commemoration, Elegy, Forgetting’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–254.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

251

Longley, E. (1991) ‘The Rising, the Somme and Irish Memory’. In M. Ní Dhonnchadha and T. Dorgan (Eds.) Revising the Rising. Derry: Field Day, 29–49. Longkeshinsideout. (2013) ‘De-Bunking the Myth of the “Battle” of St. Matthews’. Available: http://www.longkeshinsideout.co.uk/?p=3720#more3720; downloaded 10 June 2020 Loseke, D. R. (2019) Narrative Productions of Meanings: Exploring the Work of Stories in Social Life. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Lowe, R. D. and Muldoon, O. (2014a) ‘Shared National Identification in Northern Ireland: An Application of Psychological Models of Group Inclusion Post Conflict’. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 17 (5): 1–15. Lowe, R. D. and Muldoon, O. T. (2014b) ‘Shared National Identification in Northern Ireland: An Application of Psychological Models of Group Inclusion Post Conflict’. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 17 (5): 602–616. Lowenthal, D. (1985) The Past is a Foreign Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lovell, S. (2009) The Soviet Union: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lundy, P. and McGovern, M. (2001) ‘The Politics of Memory in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. Peace Review, 13 (1): 27–33. Lynch, R. (2008) ‘The People’s Protectors? The Irish Republican Army and the “Belfast Pogrom,” 1920–1922’. Journal of British Studies, 47 (2): 375–391. Mac Éinrí, P. (2000) ‘Introduction’. In A. Bielenberg (Ed.) The Irish Diaspora. London: Longman, 1–16. Macdonald, L. (1983) Somme. London: Michael Joseph. Macdonald, S. (2013) Memorylands: Heritage and Identity in Europe Today. London: Routledge. MacRaild, D. M. (1999) Irish Migrants in Modern Britain, 1750–1922. Houndmills: Macmillan. Magill, C., Smith, A. and Hamber, B. (2009) The Role of Education in Reconciliation. The Perspectives of Children and Young People in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Northern Ireland. Coleraine: University of Ulster. Magill, C. and Hamber, B. (2011) ‘“If They Don’t Start Listening to Us, the Future is Going to Look the Same as the Past”: Young People and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland and Bosnia and Herzegovina’. Youth & Society, 43 (2): 509–527. Manier, D. and Hirst, W. (2008) ‘A Cognitive Taxonomy of Collective Memories’. In A. Brill and A. Nunning (Eds.) Media and Cultural Memory. Berlin: de Gruyer, 253–262. Mannheim, Karl. (1928/1952) ‘The Problem of Generations’. In K. Mannheim Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge & Keegan Paul, 276– 320.

252

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mark-Fitzgerald, E. (2013) Commemorating the Irish Famine. Memory and the Monument. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Marshall, W. F. (1950, reprinted 2010) Ulster Sails West. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co. McAdams, D. (1993) The Stories We Live By: Personal Myths and the Making of the Self . New York: Guildford. McAdams, D. (2001) ‘The Psychology of Life Stories’. Review of General Psychology, 5 (2): 100–122. McAdam, D., Tarrow, S. and Tilly, C. (2001) Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McAlister, S., Corr, M-L., Dwyer, C., Drummond, O. [with members of Youth Advisory Group, Ewan, J. and Harte, L.] (2021) Talking About Our Past and Present: The Impacts of Conflict Legacy. Belfast: Commission for Victims and Survivors, Queen’s University. McAlister, S., Corr, M.-L., Dwyer, C., Drummond, O. and Fargas-Malet, M. (2021) “It Didn’t End in 1998”. Examining the Impacts of Conflict Legacy Across Generations. Belfast: Centre for Children’s Rights, Queen’s University. McAtackney, L. (2018) ‘Where Are All the Women? Public Memory, Gender and Memorialisation in Contemporary Belfast’. In E. Cooke and T. Maguire (Eds.) Heritage after Conflict: Northern Ireland. Abington: Routledge, 154– 172. McAuley, J. W. (1991) ‘Cuhullian with an RPG7: The Ideology and Politics of the Ulster Defence Association’. In E. Hughes (Ed.) Culture and Politics in Northern Ireland. Oxford: OUP, 44–68. McAuley. (1996) ‘Under a Fading Banner?: Some Northern Protestant Experiences of Emigration’. In P. O’Sullivan (Ed.) The Irish Worldwide, Volume 6. Religion and Identity. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 43–69. McAuley, J. W. (2000) ‘Under an Orange Banner: Reflections on the Northern Protestant Experiences of Emigration’. In P. O’Sullivan (Ed.) Religion and Identity: The Irish World Wide, History, Heritage and Identity, 43–69. McAuley, J. W. (2004) ‘Peace and Progress? Political and Social Change Among Young Loyalists in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Social Issues, 60 (3): 541– 562. McAuley, J. W. (2010) Ulster’s Last Stand? Reconstructing Unionism after the Peace Process. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. McAuley, J. W. (2016) ‘Memory and Belonging in Ulster Loyalist Identity’. Irish Political Studies, 31 (1): 122–138. McAuley, J. W. (2017) ‘“Climbing Over Dead Brambles”: Politics and Memory within Ulster Loyalism’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 96–114.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

253

McAuley, J. W. (2021) ‘Loyalist Collective Memory, Perspectives of the Somme and Divided History’. In L. Lelourec and G. O’Keefe-Vigneron (Eds.) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement: Building a Shared Future from a Troubled Past? Oxford: Peter Lang, 95–114. McAuley, J. W. (2022) ‘Changing Cultures and Identity? Politics in Post-brexit Northern Ireland’. In P. Carmichael and G. Holfer (Eds.) Unions, Break-Ups and Special Relationships. Postfach: WVY, 175–188. McAuley J. W. and McCormack, P. J. (1990) ‘The Protestant Working Class and the State Since 1930’. In S. Hutton and P. Stewart (Eds.) Ireland’s Histories. London: Routledge, 114–128. McAuley, J. W. and C. McGlynn (2011) ‘“Auxiliaries in the Cause”? Loyalist Women in Conflict and Post-conflict’. In J. W. McAuley and G. Spencer (Eds.) Ulster Loyalism after the Good Friday Agreement: Politics, Processes and Futures. London: Palgrave, 132–146. McAuley, J. W., Tonge J. and Mycock, A. (2011) Loyal to the Core? Orangeism and Britishness in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. McAuley, J. W. and Nesbitt-Larking, P. (2017) Contemporary Orangeism in Canada: Identity, Nationalism and Religion. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. McBride, I. (2017) ‘The Truth about the Troubles’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 9–43. McCann, E. (1993) War and an Irish Town—New Edition. London: Pluto Press. McCleery, M. J. (2015) Operation Demetrius and its Aftermath: A New History of the Use of Internment without Trial in Northern Ireland 1971–1975. Manchester: Manchester University Press. McCully, A. (2011) ‘The Contribution of History Teaching to Peace Building’. In G. Salomon and E. Cairns (Eds.) Handbook on Peace Education. London: Taylor and Francis, 213–223. McCully, A. (2012) ‘History Teaching, Conflict and the Legacy of the Past’. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 7(2): 145–159. McDonald, H. (2004) ‘Remember the Horrors’. The Guardian, 22 August. McDowell, S. (2007) ‘Armalite, the Ballot Box and Memorialization: Sinn Féin and the State in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. The Round Table, 96 (393): 725–738. McDowell, S. (2008) ‘Commemorating Dead “Men”: Gendering the Past and Present in Post-conflict Northern Ireland’. Gender, Place and Culture, 15 (4): 335–354. McEvoy, S. (2009) ‘Loyalist Women Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland: Beginning a Feminist Conversation about Conflict Resolution’. Security Studies 18 (2): 262–286.

254

BIBLIOGRAPHY

McGarry, F. (2011) Rebels. Voices from the Easter Rising. Dublin: Penguin Ireland. McGarry, F. (2016) The Rising: Ireland: Easter 1916. Oxford University Press. McGlinchey, M. (2016) Unfinished Business. The Politics of ‘Dissident’ Irish Republicanism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. McGlinchey, M. (2019) Unfinished Business: The Politics of ‘Dissident’ Irish Republicanism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. McGovern, M. (2019) Counterinsurgency and Collusion in Northern Ireland. London: Pluto. McGrattan, C. (2013) Memory, Politics and Identity: Haunted by History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. McGrattan, C. and Hopkins, S. (2017) ‘Memory in Post-conflict Societies: From Contention to Integration?’. Ethnopolitics, 16 (5): 488–499. McKay, D. (1990) Flight from Famine: The Coming of the Irish to Canada. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. McKearney, T. (2011) The Provisional IRA. From Insurrection to Parliament. London: Pluto. McKittrick, D., Kelters, S. Feeney, B. Thornton, C. and McVea, D. (2007) Lost Lives. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing. McKnight, Martina, and Dirk Schubotz. (2017) ‘Shared Future—Shared Values? Taking Stock of the Peace Process in Northern Ireland: Teenagers’ Perspectives’. Cultural Trends 26 (3): 216–232. McLaughlin, D. (2021) ‘Four Green Fields’. In P. McVeigh (Ed.) The 32. An Anthology of Irish Working-Class Voices. London: Unbound. McLaughlin, J. (2003) One Green Hill. Journeys through Irish Songs. Belfast: Beyond the Pale. McNicholl, K., Stevenson, C. and Garry, J. (2019) ‘How the “Northern Irish” National Identity is Understood and Used by Young People and Politicians’. Political Psychology, 40 (3): 487–505. McQuaid, S. D. (2017) ‘Parading Memory and Remembering Conflict: Collective Memory in Transition to Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 30: 23–41. Mead, G. H. (1956) On Social Psychology. Selected Papers. Edited and with Introduction by Anselm Strauss. Chicago: Phoenix Books. Mees, L. (2019) The Basque Contention: Ethnicity, Politics, Violence. London: Routledge. Melucci, A. (1995) ‘The Process of Collective Identity’. In H. Johnston and B. Klandermans (Eds.) Social Movements and Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 41–63. Meyer M. K. (2000) ‘Ulster’s Red Hand: Gender, Identity and Sectarian Conflict in Northern Ireland’. In S. Ranchard-Nilsson and M. A. Tétreault (Eds.) Women at Home in the Nation? London: Routledge, 119–142.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

255

Michaelian, K. (2016) Mental Time Travel: Episodic Memory and Our Knowledge of the Personal Past. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Middlebrook, M. (2006) The First Day on the Somme. London: Pen and Sword. Middleton, D. and Edwards, D. (1998) (Eds.) Collective Remembering. London: Sage. Middleton, D. and Brown, S. D. (2005) The Social Psychology of Experience: Studies in Remembering and Forgetting. London: Sage. Millar, S. R. (2017) Irish Republican Music and (Post) colonial Schizophrenia. Popular Music and society, 40 (1): 75–88. Millar, S. R. (2022) ‘Let Us Entertain You: Paramilitary Songs and the Politics of Loyalist Cultural Production in Northern Ireland’. Race and Class, 63 (4): 9–34. Mistzal, B. A. (2003) Theories of Social Remembering. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Misztal, B. (2010a) ‘Collective Memory in a Global Age: Learning How and What to Remember’. Current Sociology, 58 (1): 24–44. Misztal, B. (2010b) ‘Narrative’s Reliance on Memory: The Case for and Interdisciplinary Exchange between Memory and Narrative Studies’. Life Writings, 7 (1): 83–97. Mitchell, D. (1982) The Spanish Civil War. London: Granada. Mitchell, S. (2017) Struggle or Starve. Working Class Unity in Belfast’s 1932 Outdoor Relief Riots. Chicago: Haymarket Books. Moloney, E. (2002) A Secret History of the IRA. London: Penguin. Moloney, E. (2010) Voices from the Grave: Two Men’s War in Ireland. London: Faber. Monaghan, J. (2016) ‘Belfast Scheme Offers £25,000 in Grants to Replace Paramilitary Murals’. Belfast Telegraph, 25 August. Mooney, G. and Neal, S. (2009) ‘Community: Themes and Debates’. In G. Mooney and S. Neal (Eds.) Community: Welfare, Crime and Society. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Morrison, J. F. and Gill, P. (2017) ‘Introduction: 100 Years of Irish Republican Violence’. In J. F. Morrison and P. Gill (Eds.) 100 Years of Irish Republican Violence. Abington: Routledge, 1–8. Morrissey, M. and Smyth, M. (2002) Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement. Victims, Grievance and Blame. London: Pluto Press. Morrow, D. (2019) Sectarianism in Northern Ireland: A Review. Sir George Quigley Foundation. Belfast: Ulster University. Moscovici, S. (1981) ‘On Social Representations’. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.) Social Cognition: Perspectives on Everyday Knowledge. London: Academic Press. Moscovici, S. (1984) ‘The Phenomenon of Social Representations’. In R. M. Farr and S. Moscovici (Eds.) Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–69.

256

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Moscovici, S. (2001) ‘Why a Theory of Social Representations?’. In K. Deaux and G. Philogéne (Eds.) Representations of the Social. Oxford: Blackwell, 8–36. Mosse, G. (1990) Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mulholland, M. (2007) ‘Irish Republican Politics and Violence before the Peace Process, 1968–1994’. European Review of History—Revue Européenne d’Histoire, 14 (3): 397–421. Müller, J-W. (2002) ‘Introduction: The Power of Memory, the Memory of Power and the Power over Memory’. In Jan-Werner Müller (Ed.) Memory and Power in Post-war Europe: Studies in the Presence of the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–35. Muldoon, O. T. (2004) ‘Children of the Troubles: The impact of Political Violence in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Social Issues, 60 (3): 453–468. Mulqueen, J. (2017) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: The Official Republican Movement, 1970–1982’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 142–164. Munck, R. and Rolston, B. (1987) Belfast in the Thirties. An Oral History. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Murphy, W. A. W. (2010) ‘Touring the Troubles in West Belfast: Building Peace or Reproducing Conflict?’. Peace and Change, 35 (4): 537–560. Murphy, Y. et al. (2001) (Eds.) Troubled Images: Posters and Images of the Northern Ireland Conflict from the Linen Hall Library Belfast. Belfast: Linen Hall Library. Museum of Free Derry. (2023) ‘Welcome to the Museum of Free Derry’. Available at: https://museumoffreederry.org; downloaded 9 February. Museum of the Troubles and Peace. (no date) Museum Foundation. The Troubles and Peace. Belfast: MoTaP. Museums Association. (no date) Museums Change Lives. Northern Ireland. London: Museums Association. Nagle, J. (2017) ‘One Community, Many Faces’ Non-sectarian Social Movements and Peace-Building in Northern Ireland and Lebanon’. In L. Bosi and G. De Fazio (Eds.) The Troubles in Northern Ireland and Theories of Social Movements. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 185–201. Natzmer, C. (2002) ‘Remembering and Forgetting: Creative Expression and Reconciliation in Post-pinochet Chile’. In J. J. Climo and M. G. Cattell (Eds.) Social Memory and History. Anthropological Perspectives, 161–179. Neiger, M. (2020) ‘Theorizing Media Memory: Six Elements Defining the Role of the Media in Shaping Collective Memory in the Digital Age’. Sociology Compass, 14 (5), e12782. Neiger, M., Meyers, O. and Zandberg, E. (2011) (Eds.) On Media Memory: Collective Memory in a New Media Age. Springer.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

257

Nelson, K. and Fivush, R. (2004) The Emergence of Autobiographical Memory: A Social Cultural Developmental Theory. Psychological Review, 111 (2): 486. Nerone, J. (1989) ‘Professional History and Social History’. Communication, 11 (2): 89–104. Nerone, J. and Wartella, E. (1989) ‘Studying Social Memory’. Communication, 11: 85–88. Nets-Zehngut, R. (2013) ‘Major Events and the Collective Memory of Conflicts’. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24 (3): 209–230. Nets-Zehngut, R. and Bar-Tal, D. (2014) ‘Transformation of the Official Memory of Conflict: A Tentative Model and the Israeli Memory of the 1948 Palestinian Exodus’. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, (27): 67–91. Newby, L. (2021) ‘Troubled. Generations? (De)Constructing Narratives of Youth Experience in the Northern Ireland Conflict’. Journal of War and Culture Studies, 14 (1): 6–24. Nicholson, C. (2017) ‘The Role of Collective Memory in Protracted Conflict’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 217–233. Nienass, B. and Poole, R. (2011) ‘The Limits to Memory’. International Social Science Journal, 62: 203–204. Nisbett, M. and Rapson, J. (2020) The Role of Ex-paramilitaries and Former Prisoners in Political Tourism. Political geography, 80, 102185. Nora, P. (1989) ‘Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Memoire’. Representations, 26: 7–25. Novick, P. (1999) The Holocaust in American Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Nugin, R. (2010) ‘Social Time as the Basis of Generational Consciousness’. Trames, 14 (4): 342–366. Ó Coinn, S. (2007) The Rising of The Phoenix. Belfast: Shanway Press. Ó Dochartaigh, N. (2009) ‘Reframing Online: Ulster Loyalists Imagine an American Audience’. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 16 (1): 102–127. O’Brien, B. (1999) The Long War. The IRA and Sinn Féin. New York: Syracuse University Press. O’Brien, P. (2017) Havoc: The Auxiliaries in Ireland’s War of Independence. London: Collins Press. O’Callaghan, M. (2016) ‘1916: Attitudes to Commemoration have Reflected the Politics of the Time’. Irish News, 20 March. O’Callaghan, M. (2017) ‘The Past Never Stands Still: Commemoration the East Rising in 1966 and 1976’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 115–141. O’Doherty, M. (2020) Fifty Years On: The Troubles and the Struggle for Change in Northern Ireland. London: Atlantic Books.

258

BIBLIOGRAPHY

O’Doherty, S. (1993) The Volunteer: A Former IRA Man’s True Story. London: Harper Collins. O’Donnell, R. (2017) ‘The Provisional IRA: History, Politics and Remembrance’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 44–76. O’Malley, P. (1983) The Uncivil Wars: Ireland Today. Boston: Beacon Press. O’Malley, P. (1990) Biting at the Grave: The Irish Hunger Strikes and the Politics of Despair. Boston: Beacon Press. O’Sullivan, P. (1992) The Irish World Wide: History, Heritage, Identity, 6 Volumes. Leicester: Leicester University Press. O’Sullivan, P. (1996) (Ed.) The Irish Worldwide, 6 Volumes. Leicester: Leicester University Press. O’Rawe, R. (2005) Blanketmen: An Untold Story of the H-Block Hunger Strike. Virago Press. O’Toole, F. (1997) The Lie of the Land: Irish Identities. London: Verso. O’Toole, F. (2010), Enough is Enough. London: Faber and Faber. Obradovi´c, S. (2017) ‘Whose Memory and Why?: A Commentary on Power and the Construction of Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 23 (2): 208–216. Ochs, E. and Capps, L. (1996) ‘Narrating the Self’. Annual review of Anthropology, 25 (1): 19–43. Ochs, E. and Capps, L. (2009) Living Narrative: Creating Lives in Everyday Storytelling. Harvard University Press. Office of the First and Deputy First Minister. (2002) Victims Unit, Progress Report, 1 April 2002 to 31 March—Reshape, Rebuild, Achieve. Belfast: OFDFM. Officer, D. (2001) ‘“For God and For Ulster”: The Ulsterman on the Somme’. In I. McBride (Ed.) History and Memory in Modern Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 160–183. Officer, D. and Walker, G. (2003) ‘Protestant Ulster: Ethno-History, Memory and Contemporary Prospects’. National Identities, 2 (3): 293–307. Olick, J. K. (1999) ‘Collective Memory: The Two Cultures’. Sociological Theory, 17: 333–348. Olick, J. K. (2007) The Politics of Regret: On Collective Memory and Historical Responsibility. London: Routledge. Olick, J. K. (2008) ‘“Collective Memory”: A Memoir and Prospect’. Memory Studies, 1 (1): 23–9. Olick, J. K. and Robbins, J. (1998) ‘Social Memory Studies: From Collective Memory to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices’. Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 105–140. Olick, J. K., Vinitzky-Seroussi, V. and Levy, D. (2011) The Collective Memory Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

259

Oren, N. and Bar-Tal, D. (2007) ‘The Detrimental Dynamics of Delegitimization in Intractable Conflicts: The Israeli–Palestinian Case’. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31 (1): 111–126. Páez, D., Bobowik, M., De Guissmé, L., Liu, J. H., Licata, L. (2016) ‘Collective Memory and Social Representations of History’. In G. Lo Monaco, S. Delouvée and P. Rateu (Eds.) Social Representations: Theories, Methods and Applications. Brussels, Belgium: De Boeck, 539–552. Paez, D. R. and Liu, J. H. (2011) ‘Collective Memory of Conflicts’. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.) Frontiers of Social Psychology. Intergroup Conflicts and their Resolution: A Social Psychological Perspective. Hove: Psychology Press, 105–124. Paez, D., Pennebaker, J. W. and Rim, B. (1997) Collective Memory of Political Events. New York: Psychology Press. Pakenham, T. (1969) The Year of Liberty: The Great Irish Rebellion of 1798. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Palmberger, M. (2016) How Generations Remember: Conflicting Histories and Shared. Memories in Post-war Bosnia and Herzegovnia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Papadakis, Y. (1998) ‘Greek Cypriot Narratives of History and Collective Identity: Nationalism as a Contested Process’. American Ethnologist, 25 (2): 149–165. Park, H. Y. (2011) ‘Shared National Memory as Intangible Heritage: Reimagining Two Koreas as One Nation’. Annals of Tourism Research, 38 (2): 520–539. Park, J. (1998) Living with the Trauma of the Troubles. Belfast: Social Services Inspectorate. Park, R. E. and Burgess, E. W. (1967) The City. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Passini, S. (2011) ‘Individual Responsibilities and Moral Inclusion in an Age of Rights’. Culture and Psychology, 17(3): 281–296. Patterson, H. (2008) ‘The Republican Movement and the Legacy of the Troubles’. In I. Honohan (Ed.) Republicanism in Ireland: Confronting Theories and Traditions. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 147–163. Pennebaker, J. W. and Banasik, B. L. (1997) ‘On the Creation and Maintenance of Collective Memories: History as Social Psychology’. In J. W. Pennebaker, D. Paez and B. Rimel (Eds.) Collective Memory of Political Events: Social Psychological Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3–19. Petersen, R. D. (2002) Understanding Ethnic Violence: Fear, Hatred and Resentment in Twentieth-Century Eastern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pickering, M. (2001) Stereotyping: The Politics of Representation. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

260

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pickering, M. and Keightley. (2013) ‘Communities of Memory and the Problem of Transmission’. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (1): 115–131. Pinkerton, P. (2012) ‘Resisting Memory: The Politics of Memorialisation in Postconflict Northern Ireland’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 14 (1): 131–152. Pipes, R. (2003) Communism: A History of the Intellectual and Political Movement. London: Phoenix Press. Plokhy, S. (2014) The Last Empire: The Final Days of the Soviet Union. London: Oneworld Publications. Polletta, F. (1998) ‘Contending Stories: Narrative in Social Movements’. Qualitative Sociology, 21 (4): 419–444. Ponton, G. (1994) The Soviet Era. Soviet Politics from Lenin to Yeltsin. Oxford: Blackwell. Porter, N. (1998) (Ed.) The Republican Ideal: Current Perspectives. Belfast: Blackstaff Press. Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage. Prager, J. (2000) Presenting the Past: Sociology and the Psychoanalysis of Misremembering. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Prince, S. (2011) ‘Narrative and the Start of the Northern Irish Troubles: Ireland Revolutionary Tradition in Comparative Perspective’. Journal of British Studies, 50 (4): 941–964. Prince, S. and Warner, G. (2019) Belfast and Derry in Revolt. A New History of the Start of the Troubles. Kildare: Irish Academic Press. Prior, R. and Wilson, T. (2016) The Somme. Haven, CT: Yale University Press. ˇ Psaltis, C., Carretero, M. and Cehaji´ c-Clancy, S. (2020) (Eds.) History Education and Conflict Transformation. Social Psychological Theories, History Teaching and Reconciliation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Purdue, O. (2021) ‘Troubling Pasts: Teaching Public History in Northern Ireland’. International Public History, 4 (1): 67–75. Putnam, R. (2001) ‘Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences’. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2: 41–51. Radford, K. (2004) ‘Red, White, Blue and Orange: An Exploration of Historically Bound Allegiances through Loyalist Song’. The World of Music, 46 (1): 71–89. Radstone, S. (2008) ‘Memory Studies: For and against’. Memory Studies 1 (1): 31–39. Rainey, M. (2022a) ‘Widespread Support for Dame Arlene Foster after “Up the Ra” Selfie Incident’. Belfast News Letter, 21 November. Rainey, M. (2022b) ‘“Up the Ra” Video Woman Called on to Apologise and Engage with IRA Victims’. Belfast News Letter, 25 November.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

261

Rasmussen, S. (2002) ‘The Uses of Memory’. Culture and Psychology, 8 (1): 113–129. Redawek, K. (2011) Irish Republican Terrorism and Politics: A Comparative Study of the Official and the Provisional IRA. London: Routledge. Reicher, S. and Hopkins, N. (2001) Self and Nation. London: Sage. Reid, A. (2012) Leningrad: Tragedy of a City Under Siege, 1941–1944. London: Bloomsbury. Relatives forJustice. (no date) ‘Ballymurphy Internment Massacre’. Pamphlet. Available at: http://relativesforjustice.com/index.php; accessed 16 June 2022. Renan, E. (1990 [1882]) ‘What is a Nation?’. In H. K. Bhabha (Ed.) Nation and Narration. London: Routledge. Reynolds, C. (2015) Sous les pavés ... The Troubles: Northern Ireland, France and the European Collective Memory of 1968. Bern: Peter Lang. Ricoeur, P. (1984) Time and Narrative, Volume 1 (translated by K. Mclaughlin and Pellauer). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur, P. (1991) From Text to Action: Essays in Hermeneutics II (translated by Blamey, K. and Thompson. J. B.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Ricoeur, P. (2004) Memory, History, Forgetting (translated by K. Blamey and D. Pellauer). Chicago: Chicago University Press. Rieff, D. (2016a) In Praise of Forgetting: Historical Memory and its Ironies. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. Rieff, D. (2016b) ‘The Cult of Memory: When History Does More Harm than Good’. The Guardian, 2 March. Riessman, C. K. (1993) Narrative Analysis. London: Sage. Riessman, C. K. (2008) Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. London: Sage. Rigney, A. (2018) ‘Remembrance as Remaking: Memories of the Nation Revisited’. Nations and Nationalism, 24 (2): 240–257. Rittersporn, G. (1991) Stalinist Simplifications and Soviet Complications. London: Harwood Academic. Robb, J. (1992) ‘A Divided. Community: The Effect of Cultural Divisions’. In J. Lundy and A. Mac Póilin (Eds.) Styles of Belonging: The Cultural Identities of Ulster. Belfast: Lagan Press, 63–77. Roberts, B. (2006) Micro Social Theory. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Robinson, J. S. and McClelland, A. G. (2020) ‘Troubling Places: Walking the “Troubling Remnants” of Post-conflict Space’. Area, 52: 654–662. Robinson, P. (2002) ‘Victims: The Story of Unionists “Living” at the Interface with Republican Short Strand’. DUP Insight, November. Rodriguez, J. and Fortier, T. (2007) Cultural Memory: Resistance, Faith and Identity. Austin: University of Texas Press.

262

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Roe, M. D. (2002) ‘Contemporary Catholic and Protestant Irish America: Social Identities, Forgiveness, and Attitudes toward the Troubles’. Eire-Ireland, 37 (1): 153–174. Roe, M. D. and Cairns, E. (2003) ‘Memories in Conflict: Review and a Look to the Future’. In E. Cairns and M. D. Roe, (Eds.) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 171–180. Roe, M. D. and Dunlap, S. (2002) ‘Contemporary Scotch-Irish Social Identities and Attitudes toward the Troubles in Northern Ireland’. Journal of ScotchIrish Studies, 1(3): 12–36. Roe, M. D., Lenius, J. and Bennett, J. C. (2002) ‘Irish Diaspora in America: Attitudes toward Political and Social Solutions to the Conflict in Northern Ireland’. Irish Journal of Psychology, 23 (3/4): 234–258. Roediger, H. L. and Wertsch, J. V. (2008) ‘Creating a New Discipline of Memory Studies’. Memory Studies, 1 (1): 9–22. Rolston, B. (1991) Politics and Painting: Murals and Conflict in Northern Ireland. London: Associated University Presses. Rolston, B. (1992) Drawing Support: Murals in the Northern of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Publications. Rolston, B. (1995) Drawing Support 2: Murals of War and Peace. Belfast: Beyond the Pale Publications. Rolston, B. (1998) ‘From King Billy to Cú Chulainn: Loyalist and Republican Murals, Past, Present and Future’. Eire-Ireland, 33 (1–2): 6–28. Rolston, B. (1999) ‘Music and Politics in Ireland. The Case of Loyalism’. In J. P. Harrington and E. J. Mitchell (Eds.) Politics and Performance in Contemporary Northern Ireland. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 29–56. Rolston, B. (2003) Drawing Support 3: Murals and Transition in the North of Ireland. Belfast: Beyond the Pale publications. Rolston, B. (2004) ‘The War of the Walls: Political Murals in Northern Ireland’. Museum International, 56 (3): 38–45. Rolston, B. (2006) ‘Dealing with the Past: Pro-State Paramilitaries, Truth and Transition in Northern Ireland’. Human Rights Quarterly, 28 (3): 652–675. Rolston, B. (2010) ‘“Trying to Reach the Future through the Past”: Murals and Memory in Northern Ireland’. Crime and Culture, 6 (3): 285–307. Rolston, B. (2011) Children of the Revolution. The Lives of Sons and Daughters of Activists in Northern Ireland. Derry: Guildhall Press. Rolston, B. (2012) ‘Re-imaging: Mural Painting and the State in Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 15 (5): 447–466. Rolston, B. (2018) ‘Women on the Walls: Representations of Women in Political Murals in Northern Ireland’. Crime Media Culture, 14 (3): 365–389.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

263

Rolston, B. (2020) ‘Ambushed by Memory: Post-conflict Popular Memorialisation in Northern Ireland’. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 14: 320–339. Rolston, B. (2022) Drawing Support 5: Murals, Memory and Identity in the North of Ireland. Belfast: BTP Books. Rooney, E. (2008) ‘Critical Reflections: Documenting Gender and Memory’. Women’s Studies International Forum, 31 (6): 457–463. Rose, D. V. (2014) Reconstructing Spain: Cultural Heritage and Memory after Civil War. London: Sussex Academic Press. Rosenthal, G. (2006) ‘The Narrated. Life Story: On the Interrelation between Experience, Memory and Narration’. In Narrative, Memory and Knowledge: Representations, Aesthetics, Contexts. Huddersfield: University of Huddersfield Press, 1–16. Roudometof, V. (2002) Collective Memory, National Identity and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria and the Macedonian Question. Westport, CT: Praeger. Roudometof, V. (2003) ‘Beyond Commemoration: The Politics of Collective Memory’. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 31 (2): 161–169. Rowan, B. (2022) Living with Ghosts: The Inside Story From a ‘Troubles’ Mind. Newbridge: Merrion Press. Rowlands, M. (1993) ‘The Role of Memory in the Transmission of Culture’. World Archaeology, 25 (2): 141–151. Rozhdestvenskaya, E., Semenova, V., Tartakovskaya, I. and Kosela, K. (2016) (Eds.) Collective Memories in War. London: Routledge. Russell, N. (2006) ‘Collective Memory before and after Halbwachs’. The French Review, 79 (4): 792–804. Ryan, L. (2010) ‘Memory, Power and Resistance: The Anatomy of a Tripartite Relationship’. Memory Studies, 4: 154 Ryder, S. (1999) ‘Speaking of ‘98: Young Ireland and Republican Memory’. Éire—Ireland, 34 (2): 51–69. Sahdra, B. and Ross, M. (2007) ‘Group Identification and Historical Memory’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33 (3): 384–395. Saito, H. (2010) ‘From Collective Memory to Commemoration’. In Handbook of Cultural Sociology. London: Routledge, 629–638. Sakwa, R. (2019) ‘Politics in Russia’. In R. Sakwa, E. Henry Hale and S. White (Eds.) Developments in Russian Politics. London: Red Globe Press. Sammut, G., Andreouli, E., Gaskell, G. and Valsiner, J. (2015) (Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Samuel, R. (1994) Theatres of Memory Past and Present in Contemporary Culture. London: Verso.

264

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Samuel, R. (2012) Theatres of Memory: Past and Present in Contemporary Culture. London: Verso. Savage, C. (2023) ‘Families of Troubles Victims Continue Protest against Legacy Bill’. The Irish News, 23 April. Schacter, D. L. and Welker, M. (2016) ‘Memory and Connection: Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future in Individuals, Groups and Cultures’. Memory Studies, 9 (3), 241–244. Scheff, T. (1994) ‘Emotions and Identity: A Theory of Ethnic Nationalism’. In C. Cailoun (Ed.) Social Theory and the Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Schopflin, G. (1993) Politics in Eastern Europe. Oxford: Blackwell. Schudson, M. (1989) ‘The Present in the Past versus the Past in the Present’. Communication, 11: 105–113. Schudson, M. (1992) Watergate in American Memory: How we Remember, Forget and Construct the Past. New York: Harper Collins. Schudson, M. (1995) ‘Dynamics of Distortion in Collective Memory’. In D. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion: How Minds, Brains and Societies Reconstruct the Past. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 346–364. Schuman, H. and Corning, A. D. (2012) ‘Generational Memory and the Critical Period: Evidence for National and World Events’. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76 (1): 1–31. Schumann, H. and Scott, J. (1989) ‘Generations and Collective Memories’. American Sociological Review, 54: 359–381. Schuman, H. and Corning, A. (2014) ‘Collective Memory and Autobiographical Memory: Similar But Not the Same’. Memory Studies, 7 (2): 146–160. Schütz, A. (1964) Studies in Social Theory: Collected Papers II . The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Schwartz, B. (1982) ‘The Social Context of Commemoration: A Study in Collective Memory’. Social Forces, 61: 375–402. Schwartz, B. (2001) ‘Commemorative Objects’. In N. Smelser and P. B. Baltes (Eds.) Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2267–2272. Schwartz, B. (2007) ‘Collective Memory’. In G. Ritzer (Ed.) Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Sociology. Oxford: Blackwell, 588–590. Schwartz, B. and Schuman, H. (2005) ‘History, Commemoration and Belief: Abraham Lincoln in American Memory, 1945–2001’. American Sociological Review, 70: 183–203. Schwartz, B., Fukuoka, K. and Takita-Ishi, S. (2005) ‘Collective Memory: Why Culture Matters’. In M. D. Jacobs and N. W. Hanrahan (Ed.) The Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Culture. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 253–271. Scullion, H. (2022) ‘Our Young are Being Fed Diet of “Greenwash” about the IRA’s True Actions during the Troubles’. News Letter, 8 August.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

265

Sherman, D. J. (1994) Art, Commerce, and the Production of Memory in France after World War I. In J. Gillis (Ed.) Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 186–214. Shearman, P. (2015) Rethinking Soviet Communism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Shnabel, N., Noor, M. Halabi S. and Nadler, A. (2012) ‘When Suffering Begets Suffering: The Psychology of Competitive Victimhood between Adversarial Groups in Violent Conflicts’. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16: 351–374. Shirlow, P., Tonge, J., McAuley, J. W., McGlynn, C. (2012) Abandoning Historical Conflict? Former Political Prisoners and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Siegel. (2006) Criminology. Massachusetts: Thomson: Wadsworth. Siegel, D. A. (2009) ‘Social Networks and Collective Action’. American Journal of Political Science, 53 (1): 122–138. Sinnerton, H. (2002) David Ervine. Uncharted Waters. Dingle: Brandon. Simine, S. A. (2013) ‘Memory Boom, Memory Wars and Memory Crises’. In Mediating Memory in the Museum: Trauma, Empathy, Nostalgia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Simpson, K. (2009a) Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland: Critically Interpreting the Past. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Simpson, K. (2009b) Unionist Voices and the Politics of Remembering the Past in Northern Ireland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Skey, M. and Antonsich, M. (2017) (Eds.) Everyday Nationhood: Theorising Culture, Identity and Belonging after Banal Nationalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Skinner, J. (2016) ‘Walking the Falls: Dark Tourism and the Significance of Movement on the Political Tour of West Belfast’. Tourism Studies, 16 (1): 23–39. Sluka, J. (1996) Hearts and Minds. Water and Fish. London: JaI Press. Smith, A. D. (1995) Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press. Smith, A. D. (1999) Myths and Memories of the Nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Smith, W. (2014) Inside Man. Loyalists of Long Kesh–The Untold Story. Newtownards: Colourpoint. Smith A. and Robinson A. (1996) Education for Mutual Understanding: The Initial Statutory Years. Coleraine: University of Ulster. Smith A. and Vaux T. (2003) Education, Conflict and International Development. London: Department of International Development.

266

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Smith, E. R. and Mackie, D. M. (2015) ‘Dynamics of Group-Based Emotions: Insights from Intergroup Emotions Theory’. Emotion Review, 7 (4): 349– 354. Smithey, L. A. (2009) ‘Conflict Transformation, Cultural Innovation and Loyalist Identity in Northern Ireland’. In M. H. Ross (Ed.) Culture and Belonging in Divided Societies: Contestation and symbolic Landscapes. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia. Smithey, L. A. (2011) ‘Mitigating Murals and Loyalist Cultural Innovation’. In L. A. Smithey, Unionists, Loyalists and Conflict Transformation in Northern Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 78–115. Smyth, J. (2017a) ‘Introduction: From Popular Mythology to History and Memory’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1–8. Smyth, J. (2017b) ‘Milltown Cemetery and the Politics of Remembrance’. In J. Smyth (Ed.) Remembering the Troubles: Contesting the Recent Past in Northern Ireland. Notre Dame Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 165–178. Smyth, M. (2000) ‘The Human Consequences of Armed Conflict: Constructing “victimhood” in the Context of Northern Ireland’s Troubles’. In M. Cox, A. Guelke and F. Stephen (Eds.) A Farewell to Arms? From ‘Long War’ to Long Peace in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 118–135. Smyth, W. (2015) Toronto, the Belfast of Canada: The Orange Order and the Shaping of Municipal Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Somers, M. R. (1992) ‘Narrativity, Narrative Identity and Social Action: Rethinking English Working-Class Formation’. Social Science History, 16 (4): 591–630. Somers, M. and Gibson, G. (1994) ‘Reclaiming the Epistemological “Other”: Narrative and the Social Construction of Identity’. In C. Calhoun (Ed.) Social Theory: The Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell, 705–709. Spangler, M. (2009) ‘Performing “the Troubles”: Murals and the Spectacle of Commemoration at Free Derry Corner’. In S. Brady and F. Walsh (Eds.) Crossroads: Performance Studies and Irish Culture. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 100–113. Spiegel, G. M. (2002) ‘Memory and History: Liturgical Time and Historical Time’. History and Theory, 41 (2): 149–162. Spillman, L. (1997) Nation and Commemoration: Creating National Identities in the United States and Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Squire, S., Davis, M., Esin, C. Andrews, M., Harrison, B., Christie, L. and Hyden, L-C. (2015) What is Narrative Research? London: Bloomsbury.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

267

Steiner, L. and Zelizer, B. (1995) ‘Competing Memories: Reading the Past against the Grain: The Shape of Memory Studies’. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12 (2): 214–239. Stevenson, G. (2004) ‘The Politics of Remembrance in Irish and Quebec Nationalism’. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de science politique, 37 (4): 903–925. Stone, M. (2003) None Shall Divide Us. Newport: John Blake. Stone, C. B. and Hirst, W. (2014) ‘Induced Forgetting to Form a Collective Memory’. Memory, 7 (3): 286–296. Strömbom, L. (2013) Israeli Identity, Thick Recognition and Conflict Transformation. Palgrave Macmillan. Strömbom, L. (2014) ‘Thick Recognition: Advancing Theory on Identity Change in Intractable Conflicts’. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 20 (1): 168–191. Studdert, D. and Walkerdine, V. (2016) ‘Being in Community: Re-Visioning Sociology’. Sociological Review, 64 (4): 613–621. Sturken, M. (1997) Tangled Memories: The Vietnam War, the Aids Epidemic and the Politics of Remembering. Berkeley: University of California Press. Sullivan, D., Landau, M. J., Branscombe, N. R. and Rothschild, Z. K. (2012) ‘Competitive Victimhood as a Response to Accusations of Ingroup Harm Doing’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102 (4): 778–795. Sumartojo, S. and Wellings, B. (2014) (Eds.) Nation, Memory and Great War Commemoration: Mobilizing the Past in Europe, Australia and New Zealand. Bern: Peter Lang. Switzer, C. (2007) Unionists and Great War Commemoration in the North of Ireland, 1914–1939. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Switzer, C. (2013) Ulster, Ireland and the Somme: War Memorials and Battlefield Pilgrimages. Dublin: The History Press Ireland. Thompson, M. (1992) A Paper House: The Ending of Yugoslavia. London: Vintage. Thompson, P. (1988) The Voices of the Past: Oral History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Thomson, A. (2013) Anzac Memories: Living with the Legend. Clayton: Monash University Press. Thorne, A. and McLean, K. C. (2003) ‘Telling Traumatic Events in Adolescence: A Study of Master Narrative Positioning’. In R. Fivush and C. A. Haden (Eds.). Connecting Culture and Memory: The Development of an Autobiographical Self . New York: Psychology Press, 169–185. Tileag˘a, C. (2018) Representing Communism after the Fall. Discourse Memory and Historical Redress. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmilllan. Tint, B. (2010a) ‘History, Memory and Intractable Conflict’. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27 (3): 239–254.

268

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Tint, B. (2010b) ‘History, Memory and Conflict Resolution: Research and Application’. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27 (4): 369–399. Tonge, J. and Gomez R. (2015) ‘Shared Identity and the End of Conflict? How Far has a Common Sense of “Northern Irishness” Replaced British or Irish Allegiances Since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement?’. Irish Political Studies, 30 (2): 276–298. Tönnies, F. (1957) Community and Society (Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft). Michigan: Michigan State University Press. Toši´c, J. and Palmberger, M. (2016) ‘Introduction’. In M. Palmberger and J. Toši´c, (Eds.) Memories on the Move: Experiencing Mobility, Rethinking the Past. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–16. Townshend, C. (2015) Easter 1916: The Irish Rebellion. London: Penguin. Trademark (2011) Community Identities and a Shared Future for N. Ireland? Identity Exploration, Final Report, 31 March. Traynor, K. (2008a) Loyalist Murals of Northern Ireland. Belfast: Ashling Photography. Traynor, K. (2008b) Nationalist Murals of Northern Ireland. Belfast: Ashling Photography. Tremlett, G. (2021) The International Brigades. Fascism, Freedom and the Spanish Civil War. London: Bloomsbury. Trew, J. D. (2007) ‘Negotiating Identity and Belonging: Migration Narratives of Protestants from Northern Ireland’. Immigrants and Minorities, 25 (1): 22–48. Trew, J. D. (2013) Leaving the North. Migration and Memory, Northern Ireland 1921–2011. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Trew, K., Muldoon, O., McKeown G. and McLaughlin, K. (2009) ‘The Media and Memories of Conflict in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Children and Media, 3 (2): 185–203. Trouillot, M. R. (1995) Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Boston: Beacon Press. Tulving, E. (1972) ‘Episodic and Semantic Memory’. In E. Tulving and W. Donaldson (Eds.) Organisation of Memory. New York: Academic Press. Tulving, E. and Craik, F. I. M. (2000) (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Turner, B. S. (2006) Vulnerability and Human Rights. Pennsylvania: Penn State University. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D. and Wetherell, M. S. (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-categorization Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Uhl, H. (2013) ‘On the Culture of Memory. Why do Societies Remember?’ Cultural History, Supplement, 4: 3–13.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

269

Ulster Museum. (2023) ‘Discover Together’. Available: https://www.ulstermus eum.org; downloaded 12 January. Urry, J. (1995) ‘How Societies Remember the Past’. The Sociological Review, 43 (1): 45–65. Van Dyke, R. and Alcock, S. (2003) ‘Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction’. In R. Van Dyke and S. Alcock (Eds.) Archaeologies of Memory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1–14. Vann Woodward, C. (1987) ‘Review of David Lowenthal (1985) The Past is a Foreign Country’. History and Theory, 26 (3): 346. Verovšek. (2016) ‘Collective Memory, Politics and the Influence of the Past: The Politics of Memory as a Research Paradigm’. Politics, Groups and Identities, 7 (3): 529–543. Viejo-Rose, D. (2011) Reconstructing Spain: Cultural Heritage and Memory after Civil War. Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press. Viggiani, E. (2014) Talking Stones: The Politics of Memorialisation in Post-conflict Northern Ireland. Oxford: Berghahn Books. Vinitzky-Seroussi, V. (2002) ‘Commemorating a Difficult Past: Yitzhak Rabin’s Memorials’. American Sociological Review, 67 (1): 30–51. Vinitzky-Seroussi, V. and Teeger, C. (2010) ‘Unpacking the Unspoken: Silence in Collective Memory and Forgetting’. Social Forces, 88 (3): 1103–1122. Vollhardt, J. R. (2012) ‘Interpreting Rights and Duties after Mass Violence’. Culture and Psychology, 18 (1): 133–145. Wagner-Pacifici, R. and Schwartz, B. (1991) ‘The Vietnam Veteran’s Memory: Commemorating a Difficult Past’. The American Journal of Sociology, 97: 376–420. Wagoner, B. (2014) ‘A Sociocultural Approach to Peace and Conflict’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 20: 187–190. Wagoner, B. and Brescó, I. (2016) ‘Conflict and Memory: The Past in the Present’. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22 (1): 3–4. Walker, B. (1996) Dancing to History’s Tune. History, Myth and Politics in Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Walker, B. (2000) Past and Present. History, Identity and Politics in Ireland. Queen’s University Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies. Weaver, D. (2007) ‘Thought on Agenda Setting, Framing and Priming’. Journal of Communication, 57 (1): 142–147. Weingarten, K. (2004) Witnessing the Effects of Political Violence in Families: Mechanisms of Intergenerational Transmission and Clinical Interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 30 (1), 45–59. Welzer, H. (2010) ‘Re-narrations: How Pasts Change in Conversational Remembering’. Memory Studies, (3): 5–17. Wertsch, J. (1997) ‘Narrative Tools of History and Identity’. Culture and Psychology, 3: 5–20.

270

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Wertsch, J. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wertsch, J. (2007) ‘Collective Memory’. In J. Valsiner and A. Rosa (Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 645–660. Wertsch, J. (2008) ‘Collective Memory and Narrative Templates’. Social Research, 75 (1): 133–156. Wertsch, J. (2009) ‘Collective Memory’. In P. Boyer and J. V. Wertsch (Eds.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 117– 137. Wertsch, J. V. and Roediger, H. L. (2008) ‘Collective Memory: Conceptual Foundations and Theoretical Approaches’. Memory, 16 (3): 328–326. White, R. W. (1993) Provisional Irish Republicans: An Oral and Interpretive History. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. White, T. (2013) ‘Generational Change and Redefining Identities: Post-conflict Peacebuilding in Northern Ireland’. Peace Research, 45 (2): 95–117. Whitehead, A. (2009) Memory. Abington: Routledge. Whiting, S. A. (2015) Spoiling the Peace?: The Threat of Dissident Republicans to Peace in Northern Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Wilson, R. A. (2011) Writing History in International Criminal Trials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wing, L. (2010) ‘Dealing with the Past: Shared and Contested Narratives in “Post-conflict” Northern Ireland’. Museum International, 62 (1–2): 31–36. Winter, J. (1995) Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, J. (2001) ‘The Generation of Memory: Reflections on the “Memory Boom” in Contemporary Historical Studies’. Canadian Military History, 10 (3): 57–66. Winter J. (2006) ‘Notes on the Memory Boom’. In D. Bell (Ed.) Memory, Trauma and World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Winter, J. (2009) ‘Historians and Sites of Memory’. In P. Boyer and J. V. Wertsch (Ed.) Memory in Mind and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 252–268. Winter, J. ([1995] 2014) Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, J. and Emmanuel S. (1999) (Ed.) War and Remembrance in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winter, J. and Sivan, E. (1999) ‘Setting the Framework’. In War and Remembrance in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 6–40. Woodward, C. V. (1987) ‘The Past is a Foreign Country by David Lowenthal— Review’. History and Theory, 26 (3): 346–352.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

271

Wright, R. (1992) Home and Away. Toronto: Knopf. Yuval-Davis, N. (2004) ‘Borders, Boundaries and the Politics of Belonging’. In S. May, T. Modood and J. Squire (Eds.) Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 214–230. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006a) ‘Belonging and the Politics of Belonging’. Patterns of Prejudice, 40 (3): 197–214. Zamponi, S. (1998) ‘Of Storytellers and Master Narratives: Modernity, Memory and History in Fascist Italy’. Social Science History, 22 (4): 415–444. Zelizer, B. (1995) ‘Reading the Past against the Grain: The Shape of Memory Studies’. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12: 214–240. Zerubavel, E. (1997) ‘Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past’. Qualitative Sociology, 19 (3): 283–314. Zerubavel, E. (2003) Time Maps: Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zerubavel, Y. (1994) ‘The Death of Memory and the Memory of Death: Masada and the Holocaust as Historical Metaphors’. Representations, 26: 72–100. Zerubavel, Y. (1995) Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zimmermann G. D. (2002 [1966]) Songs of Irish Rebellion. Dublin: Four Courts Press.

Index

A An Phoblacht/Republican News , 136, 139, 144 (Auto)biography, 78–82, 84, 89, 94, 115, 221

Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, 33, 43 Brexit/post-Brexit/Northern Ireland Protocol, 51, 202

B Ballymurphy ‘massacre’, 66, 160 Battle of the Somme, 7, 14, 146 Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement (GFA), 34, 81, 143, 160, 194, 198 Belonging, 3–5, 7, 9, 10, 18, 35, 37–39, 51, 53–57, 59, 62, 63, 68, 69, 79, 85, 88, 89, 93–97, 99, 100, 102, 103, 112–115, 118, 121, 123, 127, 128, 131, 146–148, 155, 158, 160, 161, 163, 165, 172, 173, 187, 197, 217–219, 226 Black and Tans (Auxiliary Division of the Royal Irish Constabulary), 15, 142, 181

C Claudy bombing, 223 Collective memory framing, 7, 98, 100, 103, 146 interpretations, 7, 8, 10, 42, 89, 90, 113, 144, 172, 222 public arena, 67 representation, 18, 116, 117, 122, 157, 184, 186, 218, 221 and social identity, 4, 49, 58, 62, 94, 218 theoretical approaches, 5 transmission, 67 Commemoration active commemoration, 93–95 acts of commemoration, 58, 158, 207

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 J. W. McAuley, Collective Memory and Political Identity in Northern Ireland, Memory Politics and Transitional Justice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47675-4

273

274

INDEX

discourses and narratives, 31, 95 everyday, 31 narratives, 5, 36, 58, 63, 92–95, 131, 165, 187, 223 Communism, 27–29, 31 Community boundaries, 56, 112, 130, 173, 177 collective identities, 10, 200 collective past, 113, 119 conflict, 115, 120, 207 constructing community, 89, 127 everyday use of term, 112 and memory, 113, 115, 116, 118 myths, 89, 96, 102, 115 narratives, 118, 140, 184, 207 post-conflict memories, 207 psychological constructs, 112 social boundaries, 112 territorial definitions, 112 Consultative Group on the Past in Northern (CGP), 196 Cultural and memory ‘wars’, 200, 222 Cú Cú Chulainn, 131–134 loyalist narratives, 128, 133 republican narratives, 128, 132

D Decade of commemorations, 40 Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), 137, 202 Demonstrations and street performances, 84 Discourse, 2, 10, 28, 34, 55, 57, 62, 65, 67, 69, 88, 90, 95, 96, 101, 122, 142, 145, 146, 156, 157, 163, 177, 185, 186, 198, 201, 202, 210, 220, 224 Discursive strategies, 54 Displays banners, 12, 147 performance, 3

street theatre, 60

E Easter Rising, 7, 8, 40, 132, 158, 224 Emigration and memory beyond Ireland Australia, 175 Canada, 175 United States of America (USA), 175

F Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition’ (FICT) report, 39, 221, 222 Forgetting, memory gaps and constructed amnesia, 64 Formal and informal education, 32, 34, 67, 163–165, 174 Framing collectives, 56, 57, 89 group history, 5 senses of being, 54 senses of belonging, 3, 8, 11, 34, 39, 41, 42, 54–57, 62 understandings of the past, 5, 10, 11, 41

G Generations change, 113, 114, 172, 210, 224 cohorts, 6, 8, 87, 91, 224 future, 92, 194, 203, 225 identity, 206, 225 inter-generational relationships, 220 memory, 63, 87, 99, 205 remembering, 34, 36, 87, 113, 205, 206, 220, 225

INDEX

H H-Block hunger strikes, 58, 94, 140, 158 Healing Through Remembering report (HTR), 195 Heritage and the past, 177 I Identity class, 10, 27, 63, 80 collective, 10, 36, 38, 49, 53, 58, 61, 62, 84, 95, 97, 118, 119, 123, 176, 198, 221 collective memory, 4, 7–9, 36, 49, 58, 62, 77, 89, 94, 98, 122, 127, 155, 160, 172, 178, 206, 209, 221, 223 community, 7, 18, 35, 36, 43, 49, 57, 59, 69, 79, 89, 93, 102, 111, 112, 114, 118, 120, 127, 165, 180 ethno-political, 61, 179, 208–210 gender, 10, 62, 63, 80, 208 narratives, 3, 4, 7, 8, 18, 37, 38, 40, 41, 49, 50, 54, 58, 59, 61, 62, 69, 88, 89, 102, 112, 115, 117, 118, 121, 128, 146, 160, 161, 175, 208, 210, 218 religious, 63 social, 4, 7, 9, 27, 37, 49, 54, 57, 58, 62, 69, 85, 89, 90, 97, 102, 103, 161, 187, 208, 217, 218, 225 transnational, 172, 173 Imagined community, 88, 122, 123, 184 Irish Republican Army (IRA), 15, 80, 81, 129, 135, 137, 180, 202, 204 official republicanism, 145 Provisionals/Provisional movement, 141, 143, 145

275

Irish Times , 200, 202

L Labour movement, 4 Legacy, 32, 35, 102, 144, 175, 196, 197, 199, 203, 204, 210, 220, 221 conflict memory, 199 the past, 35, 197, 199, 204, 220, 221 LGBTQ+ community, 4 Loyalism loyalist community, 4, 14, 60, 82, 83, 89, 120, 134 loyalist history, 129 loyalists, 4, 6, 9, 14, 36, 50, 51, 54, 62, 63, 68, 69, 82, 87, 89, 90, 97–102, 112, 113, 120–122, 128, 130–140, 142, 146, 147, 155–164, 176, 182–184, 200, 203, 204, 207, 208, 221–223 loyalist understandings of the past, 50, 54, 61, 101, 121

M Memorialisation/memorials, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 28, 29, 31–33, 36, 39, 41, 52, 57, 58, 60, 66, 68, 87–89, 92, 94–98, 113, 120, 122, 130, 131, 137, 140, 143, 147, 148, 156–158, 175, 179, 184–187, 194, 195, 210, 217, 218, 220, 223–225 official, 131, 186 unofficial, 131 Memory agents, 7, 37, 50, 92, 146, 147, 158, 160–162, 165, 225 aspirational, 130 beyond Ireland, 26, 175, 178

276

INDEX

and community conflict, 18, 42, 55, 63, 89, 103, 113, 116, 118, 225 constructed amnesia, 64 contested, 51, 146, 178 cultural, 39, 55, 67, 81, 83, 89, 101, 113, 114, 156, 201, 202, 218, 221, 225 dominance, 99 entrepreneurs, 25, 36, 60, 65, 133, 141, 224 episodic, 78, 79 everyday, 2, 7, 42, 58, 61, 77, 146, 186, 225 gaps, 2, 64, 115 globalisation, 173 harnessing, 30 and history, 52 individual, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 26, 36, 38, 42, 52, 57, 64, 65, 77–79, 84–86, 90, 91, 210 inscribed, 157, 160 legacy, 32, 176, 199, 210, 221, 222 living and lived memory, 96, 97 meaning, 51, 60, 86, 88–91, 119, 186, 187, 196, 206, 210, 224 official, 66, 89, 181, 187 ownership, 41, 66, 141, 143–145, 156, 175, 178, 200 popular, 15, 69, 89, 155, 156, 159, 160, 163, 175 production, 58, 156, 179, 185 public involvement, 158 semantic, 78 social construction of, 103 stereotyping, 56 and symbolic community, 116 use, 25, 33, 77, 88, 117, 131, 140, 142, 172, 218, 224, 225 Murals loyalist, 159

representing the past, 159 republican, 132, 159 Museums committed, 181–183 living, 182, 184 official, neutral or agnostic, 181 Myths competing, 114, 133 construction, 36 everyday popular culture, 179 foundation, 15, 90, 101, 139, 142 N Narrative belonging, 3, 4, 51, 53, 90, 96, 118 and collective memory, 7, 32, 36, 77, 96, 138, 146, 160, 220 community, 38, 42, 63, 69, 86, 95, 96, 103, 118, 121, 139, 140, 147, 171, 184, 207 macro and micro, 58, 93, 138 sectarian, 3, 51, 210, 225 shared identity, 93 social and political influence, 53 social construction of, 34 New Decade New Approach (NDNA), 39 News Letter, 40, 202, 203 Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill 2022, 204 Northern Irish identity/Northern Irishness, 208 O Orange Order (Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland) commemorations, 8, 12, 60, 129, 136, 147, 158, 177 memorialisation, 129, 147

INDEX

narratives, 8, 86, 134–137, 146, 147, 177 Other/Otherness, 13, 38, 51, 55–57, 82, 97, 99, 102, 114, 117, 122, 123, 134, 138, 148, 199, 200, 219, 224 P Paramilitaries funerals, 157 loyalist, 15, 185, 199, 204 murals, 221 republican, 157, 160, 163, 184, 185, 199, 200, 204 (The) Past common past (belief in), 38, 112 constructed, 33, 35, 39, 58, 80, 162 ‘ghosts’ of the past, 87 imagined, 101, 179, 219 Popular cultures, 37, 58, 67, 69, 89, 122, 155–157, 161, 162, 164, 224 R Recollection, 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 35, 36, 40, 41, 52, 55, 59, 64, 78, 79, 114, 127, 161, 205, 207, 222 Remembering and recall active, 3, 86, 119, 148 forgetting, 29, 50, 85, 86, 90, 130, 146, 186, 217, 220, 224, 226 pliable nature, 29 social aspects, 87, 88 social context, 85 Representations of the past, 10, 17, 89, 98, 157, 160, 218, 226 Republicanism (Irish) dissident, 144 republican community, 60, 81, 83, 97, 129, 140, 163

277

republican history, 81, 142 republican movement, 80, 81, 141, 143–145, 182, 200, 201 republicans, 4, 6, 9, 13, 16, 36, 38, 50, 54, 58, 62, 63, 66, 68, 69, 80–83, 87, 89, 90, 94, 97, 101, 133, 136, 139, 143–145, 158, 163, 181, 200, 201, 203 republican understandings of the past, 101 Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC), 15, 180, 181 Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), 136, 200 S Sectarianism/sectarian politics, 3, 59, 195, 209 Self (construction of), 18, 54, 57 Short Strand/inner east Belfast, 134, 136, 137, 139 Sinn Féin, 15, 16, 80, 100, 140–145, 181, 200–202 Socialisation, 26, 81, 82, 95, 128, 129, 205, 209 attitudes, 3, 6, 53, 63, 97, 123 beliefs, 53, 123 Social movements, 4, 10, 11, 33, 100, 160, 209 Spain, 32, 33, 43 collective memories, 43 Franco era, 32 Stereotyping, 57 St. Matthew’s Church, 135 battle of, 138 massacre, 137, 138 Stormont House Agreement (SHA), 197 Storytelling, 49, 60, 87, 96, 179, 195, 197, 205 Symbolism collective identity, 123

278

INDEX

collective memory, 7, 29, 52, 90, 94, 116, 121, 139, 143, 179, 221, 222 commemoration, 37, 43, 88, 91–94, 113, 143, 157, 179, 180, 185, 187, 225 murals, 164 representations, 6, 37, 116, 117 T Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV), 202 Troubles (The), 7, 8, 41, 50, 56, 57, 82, 97, 102, 117–120, 123, 132, 141, 145–147, 157, 158, 164, 172, 182, 184, 185, 194, 195, 197, 198, 203, 204, 206–208, 224, 225 U Ulster Covenant, 40, 130, 161, 203 Ulster Defence Association (UDA), 133, 183

Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), 14, 40, 93, 128, 138, 161, 182, 203, 224 Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), 26–28, 30 reconstruction of history, 15 Stalin years, 32

V Victimhood defining victims, 57, 200 narratives of victimhood, 198 populist representations, 199 victimhood and entitlement, 198

W Women commemoration, 41, 185 marginalisation, 165 memory, 64, 99, 185 women’s movement, 4