The Journal of Music in Ireland, 2003, Volume 4, Number 1, pages 18-21

Ireland, Modernity and the Question of Definition Eugene.OBrien@mic.ul.ie Eugene.OBrien@ul.ie

Reading the current edition of The Journal of Music in Ireland , I find a discussion, entitled !Reactionar" #rogressi$es%,

as interested to

hich touched on t o areas

hich are of particular interest to me & namel" the issue of modernit" as it related to Irish societ" and culture, and also to the recent boo' Engaging Modernity, published b" Veritas and edited b" (ichael )*ss and +amon (aher, -et me immediatel" declare an interest here as mine is the final chapter in that boo', dealing articulation of the ith an

ritings of .eats and /eane" and those of 0ac1ues 2errida as

e3pressi$e of a specificall" Irish notion of modernit", /uman nature being hat it is, I as interested to see ho 0ohn 4aters reacted to this boo', and as mo$ed b" that

reaction to pen this repl", I ill respond to the article in three sections, 5irstl", I ill conte3tualise the

debate as I see it, secondl" I ill e3amine the issues raised b" 0ohn 4aters in terms of the relationship bet een modernit" and tradition6 and finall", I ill offer some

obser$ations on the role that the or' of 0ohn (c7ahern pla"s in this debate,

Engaging with the cultural context -et me begin b" stating the $alue of such a discussion in the conte3t of the contemporar" social milieu, 8hat Ireland is no in something of a $alue-deficit is all

too ob$ious, 8he aftermath of the $arious scandals, tribunals and in1uiries has left the paladins of church and state $er" much on the sidelines in terms of the arbitration of cultural and ethical $alues, 8he net result has been a fall in respect for the institutions of church and state, and a conse1uent desire among thin'ing people to be participati$e in the shaping of the $alues that ill define the Ireland of the 8 ent" 5irst centur", In this conte3t, a debate such as this one, in$ol$ing 0ohn 4aters, 2esmond 5ennell and +amon (aher can onl" be a good thing, If a traditional hierarchical $alue s"stem is to be replaced b" a more emancipator" and democratised one, the creation of such a sensus communis is dependent on such interchange, 4aters ma'es the point himself, stressing the $alue of debate, and lamenting ho ell

such debate can be

attenuated b" !moral censure, personal attac' or a combination of both%, 9f course, I agree ith and applaud such a perspecti$e, If e are e$er to ha$e a serious intellectual forum for the e3ploration and honing of ideas, then the differentiation bet een personalit" and ideas must be clearl" demarcated, Regrettabl", at times in his article, 4aters seems blind to this distinction, and he ma'es comments hich I feel personalise the issues to an unacceptable degree, 8here is a defensi$e posture ta'en up unnecessar", hich, again, to m" mind, is both unhelpful and

5or e3ample, 4aters spea's of remar's made about him in the

introduction to Engaging Modernity as labelling him as a traditionalist, and further adding that the tenor of these remar's is to suggest that !tradition is, ipso facto, demonstrabl" dubious, and its adherents intellectuall" if not morall" 1uestionable,%

Reading the introduction to this boo', I ha$e failed to find an" real sense that tradition is !demonstrabl" dubious%6 indeed, (aher and )*ss both stress the necessit" for a nuanced reading of the interaction of modernit" and tradition, and the" also stress that theirs is not, in an" sense, a final definition, a point st"listicall" e$inced b" their title, !+ngaging% modernit" is an acti$e, dialectical process hich see's to

define modernit" in a performati$e manner: this is $er" far from 4aters%s notions of the boo' as in some a" binarising a benign modernit" ith a malign tradition, ;s a self- ritten tribute to hid o n intellectual openness, 4aters appro$ingl" cites his o n collocation of <ean 2ohert" and =2 as e3amples of the breadth of his o n riting, 4ith this I holeheartedl" agree: academic dons, in their i$or" to ers,

riting of nothing but the great or's of a canonical tradition ha$e little to contribute to contemporar" cultural debate, 8he" ould do ell to remember that an i$or"

to er necessitates an a ful lot of dead elephants, /o e$er, in Engaging Modernity, this is precisel" the t"pe of openness that is to be found, 8he canonical figures of .eats, 0o"ce and )ec'ett mi3 easil" ith discussions of church, state and

contemporar" culture, )" posing 1uestions as to the status of the modernit" that is the Irish e3perience, this boo' sets out some tentati$e ans ers, but ans ers based on hat (aher and )*ss term !interesting dialogues across the disciplines of the humanities and social sciences,% It is to these dialogues that e no turn,

Asking questions and questioning answers 8he points at issue in the article are an attempt to defend the opinion of 2esmond 5ennell from the !sound thrashing% that (aher is supposed to ha$e doled out >though one imagines that a riter as prolific as 5ennell is 1uite capable of 3

defending himself?@, an e3ploration of the notion of modernit", and its relationship ith tradition, and an attac' on the si3ties generation ho clearl" are the root of all

e$il in the 4aters Lebenswelt, 8he arguments, as the" are structured, are interesting in that, hen one loo's for e$identiar" reinforcement or clearl" constructed points,

one loo's in $ain, 4e hear, for e3ample, four times in the article, that the ideolog" of the si3ties is a #eter #an ideolog", 8his is an interesting metaphor and I read on, aiting to see its rele$ance to the discussion6 I the rele$ance of the metaphor as, alas, left aiting in ne$erland, as

as ne$er e3plained, 8his is almost a modus operandi

of the article as s eeping statements appear, are repeated, and then assume the status of hol" rit in the later stages of the piece, 5or e3ample, 4aters sees the liberal, modernist, post si3ties generation as !a generation hich has not gro n up%, and his e$identiar" arrant for this assertion

seems to be a reading of )ob 2"lan%s song !8he 8imes the" are a-changing%, 4aters e3presses seeming surprise that the !meaning% of this song has changed o$er time, Aontemporar" literar" and cultural theor", the discipline that is much in e$idence in Engaging Modernity >that is if one is to read be"ond the introduction and an occasional footnote@ ould argue that all te3ts are pol"semic & that the notion of a

single meaning has long been deconstructed and that the pluralit" of meaning is one of the 'e" signifiers of the condition of modernit", or post-modernit", /e also posits the notion that for the !si3ties generation% the ord !modern% is

!no longer merel" an adBecti$e denoting some aesthetic or technocratic recenc": it is clearl" a moral description%, and he goes on to tal' about this generation as seeing its o n progress as !the 9ne 8rue 0ourne"% >capitals original@, #erhaps I%m missing something here but the clarit" of hich 4aters spea's is lost on me, and m" one true ith e$identiar" arrant or e3amples hich

Bourne" in search of it is unencumbered

could point me in the right direction, 4aters ob$iousl" ta'es his sense that the si3ties generation are fi3ated as a gi$en of his argument, and not in an" need of e3ample or illustration, Ironicall", this is precisel" hat the thrust of Engaging Modernity as

calling into 1uestion, (an" of the essa"s in this collection too' as an o$erarching perspecti$e the need to call into 1uestion the !gi$ens% of traditional Irish societ" and culture6 the essa"s and anal"ses contained therein as'ed as man" 1uestions of their o n assumptions as the" did of those of others, 4aters goes on to describe this generation as en$isioning itself as a !marginalised bunch of ageing radicals, left-leaning and liberal% o$erthro ho are see'ing to

the establishment, and ma'es the assertion that this is an eas" tas' as there

are hardl" an" !Aatholics, nationalists, traditionalists, conser$ati$es or patriarchs left%, ;gain, one is left to onder at this? Aatholic influence on education at all le$els in hich ha$e at the $er" least

this countr" is still ongoing, despite the man" incidents

cast doubt on the Roman Aatholic hierarchies bona fides in terms of the care and education of the "oung, 8he recent resignation of 0ustice -efo", the mounting

resistance to a full tribunal of en1uir" and the strong resistance b" legal teams on behalf of religious orders, is "et more e$idence that, to paraphrase the ords of 7err" ;dams: !8he" ha$en%t gone a a", "ou 'no %, In terms of gender e1uit", there is still a long a" to go, the patriarchs are still in e$idence, if in a more co$ert a", and

recidi$ist nationalism is still capable of 'illing in the name of its ideolog", 8he core argument is the notion that the use of the term modern or modernisation is someho specious, and 5ennell%s point, asserting that the Irish ha$e on a

al a"s ta'en to modern methods is cited, 4aters seems to feel that he has 'noc' do n argument

hen he hoists (aher on the petard of the modernCtraditional

binar", noting that (aher seems to see tradition and modernit" as both in opposition

and as part of the same continuum6 as each being neither !all good% nor !all bad%, 4ell, this, of course, is e3actl" the point: tradition, if it is not to become h"postasised or reified must be teased out of itself b" modern impulses, Bust as modernisation, if it is not to s eep out the bab" ith the bath ater, must be tempered, to some degree, b" the habits of tradition, +=7+N+, I<N%8 8/I< 4/;8 4;8+R< <;I2 ;8 8/+ +N2 95 /I< ;R8IA-+E ). R+#+;8IN7 8/+ <+N8I(+N8 4+ ;R+ I(#-.IN7 8/;8 I8 4;<N%8 <;I2 .es, but it is also the point raised b" (aher and )*ss in their introduction & I%m not sure aters has actuall" read it be"ond the mention of his o n name??, (aher, in ma'ing these points, is positing, both in his Irish Times piece and in Engaging Modernity, a nuanced, deconstructi$e >in the strictl" 2erridian sense herein the paradigm of choice is bothCand as opposed to eitherCor@ and conte3tsensiti$e sense of modernit", 8his, I ould further argue, is precisel" (aher%s reason for introducing the or' of 0ohn (c7ahern in support of his thesis,

McGahern, Modernity and Misappropriation 8he obBecti$e of (aher%s article, in this reader%s $ie , as ne$er to gi$e 2esmond

5ennell !a sound thrashing for his blin'ered $ie s%, but rather to repl" to 5ennell%s pre$ious article that ga$e a rather simplistic and limited interpretation of hat

Engaging Modernity see's to achie$e: namel" a nuanced and non-dogmatic !engagement% ith the thorn" and highl" comple3 issue that is modernit", 8he or' of 0ohn (c7ahern, and particularl" to his latest no$el, That

references to the

They May Face the Rising Sun, sought to bring out the fact that tradition and modernit" can co-e3ist side-b"-side, that the" must in fact so do because one cannot sur$i$e ithout the other, F

(aher is sa"ing that (c7ahern%s latest no$el has a traditional rural setting that adds to its impact and charm, 8he Ireland that is e$o'ed ith such po er b"

(c7ahern is on the $erge of disappearing & this is not a cause for lament but for celebration, celebration of a rich culture and tradition that are about to go under, 8he celebration is all the more palpable because of the sorro associated ith its passing,

If 4aters had gone to the bother of reading (aher%s e3cellent article de$oted to (c7ahern in Engaging Modernity, he ould ha$e seen these ideas de$eloped more

full", 8he unfa$ourable comparison bet een (c7ahern%s rural id"ll and the current e3cesses of the 8emple )ar as Bustified and clearl" stated the $ie that tradition in

this instance is preferable to modernit", Indeed, this contrast is an e3emplum of the nuanced $ie of modernit" that is $er" much at the core of Engaging Modernity,

herein the comple3 and dialectical relationships bet een modernit" and tradition6 Irishness and +uropeanness6 and literature and culture are teased out, 4aters gi$es the distinct impression that (aher is not entitled to sa" an"thing positi$e about tradition, gi$en that he is the co-author of Engaging Modernity, a tome that is as unappetising to him as the Satanic Verses are to the (uslim orld, ;ll

(aher is sa"ing is that there aren%t an" absolutes in this debate, (c7ahern is a onderful riter, not because he stic's to traditional settings and st"le, but because he manages to remain obBecti$e in his depiction of a societ" that caused him much undeser$ed pain & the banning of his second no$el, The ar!, in 1GFD, led to his

dismissal from his teaching post in Alontarf and made him feel !ashamed% that something as unfair as this could ha$e ta'en place in the Ireland of postIndependence, <o hen (c7ahern e3presses the $ie that the Aeltic 8iger is a great from our shores

thing, he is referring to the almost total absence of emigration no

and the fact that people are b" and large better off, /e ma" also be of the $ie that e

ha$e e$ol$ed as a societ" and that people are no ouldn%t ha$e been tolerated a fe

allo ed to do and sa" things that

decades ago, 8his Bust ser$es to strengthen the

position upheld throughout (aher%s article that tradition and modernit" ha$e more in common than ma" appear at first sight, and certainl" decries an" sense that (aher is being o$er simplistic in his readings of modernit", 4aters 1uestions (aher%s obser$ations in relation to the abuse of alcohol, the high incidence of male suicide and $iolence and sa"s that these are issues that he has dealt ith on a regular basis in his Irish Times column, 2oes this mean that no one

else, especiall" someone as ill-informed and blin'ered as (aher, can reflect on them as being indicati$e of the negati$e side of our modernit"E +=7+N+, I<N%8 4;8+R< (;IIN7 8/+ #9IN8, R;8/+R, 8/;8 89 (+N8I9N 8/;8 I<<=+< N++2 5=R8/+R <8=2. ;N2 .+8 N98 (+N8I9N 8/+ 49RI 8/;8 ; 2I<<I2+N8 >4;8+R<@ /;< 29N+ IN 8/I< ;R+; I< 9N+ 95 8/+ A/;R;A8+RI<8<IA< 95 IRI</ #=)-IA 2+);8+ & 8/+ V+R. 8/IN7 8/;8 4;8+R< I< ARI8IAI<IN7, <9, A;N I8 R+;--. )+ R+2=A+2 89 )+IN7 ;)9=8 !<8+;-IN7 8/=N2+R%E I thin' the problem is that 4aters is guilt" of precisel" the same fault in his point & he is un illing to allo for (aher%s opinion in the same a" as he accuses (aher as being un illing to reference his o n, 0ust because 0ohn 4aters rites about them doesn%t mean that the" are not burning issues for others as

ell, Indeed, in a manner that is almost a locus classicus of 2erridian deconstruction, 4aters is accusing (aher of stealing his thunder6 it is as if the 4aters road is the !one true Bourne"% and no-one else, especiall" not the !incoherent and completel" unremar'able% (aher, is entitled to space on the road? If there as e$er a case of a tu "uo"ue argument, this must be it? (aher asn%t one of those ho !dismissed or tried to silence% 4aters on his $ie s, ;nd hat about this for a s eeping statement that

asserts

ithout an" 1ualification or e$idence

hatsoe$er: !I >4aters@ thin' one of the

reasons people cannot e3tend me an" credit for such things > riting about male suicide and alcohol dependence@ is that the" are imprisoned boundaries of traditionCmodernit" ithin the $er"

hich the" claim to be deconstructing,% 8his is the

person ho a fe lines later on ill spea' so positi$el" of the openness "oung people displa" to ards the things he thin's and sa"s, I ould sa" that the" either don%t read

him too often or that hat the" do read is not the emoti$e language and self-absorbed rhetoric that are the hallmar's of the JMI article, <cholars li'e +amon (aher are not the ones tr"ing to !destro" this openness%: rather, the" are encouraging students to thin' criticall" and obBecti$el", to !engage% not to see e$er"thing in personal terms, Indeed, one must seriousl" 1uestion ith hat depth 4aters has read ith problems in a rational manner and

+ngaging modernit", or e$en the introduction, 9n page t ent" four, there is a 1uote from the ;merican sociologist 2a$id 7ross, hich foregrounds the attitudes of (aher and )*ss to the modernit"Ctradition dialectic, and hich completel" refutes the 4aters reading of their position, 7ross is tal'ing about embracing modernit", but suggests that e do so !criticall"% b" !returning to tradition%, /e goes on to e3plain that b" this he means: !to bring tradition for ard in such a manner as to disturb, not affirm, the clichJs and commonplaces of the present,% If this is not a uKnuanced modernit", I don%t 'no hat is, ho espouse the $er" notions of an ith

(aher and )*ss are the people engagement

ith modernit" that ill ma'e Ireland a better place, 8he $er" title, ith modernit", is important to

its d"namic suggestion of an engagement

hat is

being discussed: far from being a programmatic, simplified cult of !the one true Bourne"%, the pol"semic connotations of !engaging% suggest an interchange, an

in$ol$ement, an ongoing dialogue, an argument, a teasing out & all of completel" at odds ith 4aters%s o$er simplistic sense of

hich are

hat is being broached

here, If I ma" conclude this discussion of pla"ing the man, the ball and the game, b" pla"ing a little on m" o n trumpet and 1uoting m"self: the $ersion of modernit" that is enunciated in Engaging Modernity in$ol$es !the 1uestioning of the gi$ens of the past in order to car$e out a space that is both a are of that past but at the same time focused on the modern and be"ond%,

2r +ugene 9%)rien is /ead of +nglish in (ar" Immaculate Aollege, =ni$ersit" 9f -imeric', and ;ssistant 2ean Research in the Aollege of /umanities, =ni$ersit" of -imeric', /e is the author of fi$e boo's: The #uestion of Irish Identity in the $ritings of $illiam %utler &eats and James Joyce 6 E'amining Irish (ationalism in the )onte't of Literature* )ulture and Religion+ , Study of the Epistemological Structure of (ationalism6 Seamus -eaney . )reating Irelands of the Mind6 Seamus -eaney and the /lace of $riting and Seamus -eaney Searches for ,nswers,

10