Shaw's Pearse is the real one

I think that we three are on the same wave-length; we beleive that Ruth
> pulled her punches regarding Pearse. I've been re-reading ''Triumph of
> Failure,' after nearly twenty years. She undermined Father Francis Shaw's
> credibility regarding a corrosive article on Pearse he had published in
> 1972, by insisting that Shaw made the same mistake as Pearse's
> propagandist's, and lost sight of Pearse as a human being.Only Ruth had
> discovered the ''real'' Pearse. I beg to differ; I think Shaw found the
> real Pearse that mattered regarding posterity, in all his Mitchelite/Hyde
> like reality.
>
> Ruth's accomplishment was very important; she removed Pearse from his
> iconic plane, and revealed indeed the human being: the real Pearse.
> However the real: Pearse was not only the gentle, cultural educational
> nationalist, but also the hate-filled, Mitchilite, who in fact went even
> further than Mitchel regarding his hatred of England, and Ireland's duty
> to punish her.Ruth also covers for Pearse in another respect. She gives
> Pearse the benefit of the doubt concerning Mitchel's pro-slavery rhetoric,
> and racism.She had no right to do this. At the very least she should have
> wrote, that on balance it is difficulty to accept that Pearse didn't know
> about Mitchel's notorious pro-slavery polemic, nor the death's of his two
> son's in the Confederate cause.The article will now of necessity, involve
> a degree of criticism of Ruth. She won't like it, but so be it.
>
> Pierce

Absorbing matter of Irish culture

The response from Tomai O Conghaile (Write Back, June 22) to my earlier letter about a proposed Celtic Cup was very disappointing. Having acknowledged the accuracy of my analysis, he then reverted to an old-fashioned Irish nationalist position and spoke of "our country's native culture".

According to his view, there is only one "native culture" in Ireland and he is not going to let the facts get in the way of prejudice.

Such a narrow mono-cultural perspective was the hallmark of late 19th century Irish cultural nationalism. Its leaders sought to create an exclusively Gaelic Ireland, which could only accommodate other cultures by absorbing them. That nationalist vision was reflected in the statement, 'The Gael must be the element that absorbs'.

With four centuries of history and heritage, the Ulster-Scots culture is as much a "native culture" as Irish culture and, if we are to build A Shared Future in Northern Ireland, it is imperative that we challenge Gaelic cultural imperialism.

Perhaps, when he is reflecting on this, Tomai O Conghaile might also reflect on the research, published in The American Journal of Human Genetics in 2004, which showed that the 'genetic legacy' of people in Ireland, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, is actually pre-Celtic, rather than Celtic.

I have been accused of 'pedantic paranoia' and so, in case the writer thinks that this research was the product of such paranoia, I would point out that the project was funded by the Dublin Government under the Genetic History of Ireland programme.

Nelson McCausland, MLA Belfast