Misleading RTE documentary on 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley'

cork | history and heritage | other press

Friday June 23, 2006 02:25

by Ellen Wilkinson - An Phoblacht 15 June 2006

Revisionist historian allowed to go unchallenged

TV review: Documentariy on the making of The Wind that Shakes the Barley

Good in parts

'Rebel County' Hidden History. RTE 1 Tuesday, 13 June. Pat Collins, Producer/Director, Harvest Films

This documentary on the War of Independence in Cork, using Ken Loach's prize winning The Wind that Shakes the Barely as a backdrop was, like the curate's egg, good in parts. Interviews with Ken Loach, Scriptwriter Paul Laverty, academic historians and relatives of those who fought, illustrated the fight against the RIC, Tans, Auxiliaries and regular British forces.

The story of the "ordinary people" who in Ken Loach's words "were able to shake the might of the Empire" was well expressed. So too was the effect on the community of the torture and executions of IRA prisoners. Post-torture photographs of Tom Hales and Pat Harte, hit with hammers and their fingernails pulled out, and with Harte forced to hold up a Union Jack, was reminiscent of more recent US torture in Abu Ghraib,

An Phoblacht criticises RTE documentary

Attacks on the community by British forces who burned down the family homes of republicans and sympathisers was outlined and the burning of Cork was dealt with. A clear picture emerged of forces whose "reprisals" against the community were at first tolerated by the British and then "sanctioned", when it became clear they could no longer be hidden from public view. But there were indications that the full story was missing, and in some ways misrepresented.

Revisionists

We were told that Sinn Féin won 73 seats in the 1918 election with "48% of the vote". This is an old British propaganda line and effectively a lie when promoted as a measure of Sinn Féin support. Sinn Féin won 25 uncontested seats where the party had overwhelming support. No votes were cast there and the support was not officially measured. This was a very serious weakness and factual misrepresentation as was the comment by Stirling historian, Michael Hopkinson, that the vote was not pro-Sinn Féin, just anti Irish Parliamentary Party.

The other attempt to sell a line was in the attempt to suggest that the IRA targeted Protestants. Discredited revisionist historian Peter Hart was wheeled out. Hart, who reported interviewing an anonymous veteran of the Kilmichael ambush six days after the last veteran died, spoke about his "study". Hart sold a line about innocent Protestants "who had no information" being targeted.

New research- John Borgonovo's on IRA Head of Intelligence in Cork, Flor O'Donoghue, demonstrates the accuracy of IRA intelligence and informer targeting. As Road to Crossbarry author, Duirmuid Begly was allowed to put it briefly: the IRA was indifferent to the religion of the informers who were responsible for the torture and execution of republicans. Historian Brian Murphy, not consulted here, has shown that Hart misrepresented evidence. As with his 'research' on Kilmichael, Hart's attempt to construct a sectarian basis for IRA actions is discredited. While some local loyalists tried to create a sectarian mini-Belfast in Cork, the IRA found them out. British intelligence admitted this - the evidence that Peter Hart misrepresented. In fact many Protestants were sympathetic to the struggle and some, like Dunmanway's Sam Maguire, were in the IRA. Unlike unionists and the British, republicans prevented and suppressed sectarianism.

Anti-sectarian

If I dwell on this point in the review it is because it is going to become a refrain of revisionist historians and their hangers on in weeks to come, as they attempt to pick holes in the Ken Loach film. However, there is ample evidence for the truth, which is that even in the midst of the war, Protestant spokespersons ridiculed the notion that southern unionists, never mind Protestants, were in danger from republicans. This anti-sectarian truth will out.

Unfortunately, this documentary has offered an opening to sectarian misrepresentation that others will attempt to walk through. Whether this misrepresentation was witting or unwitting is a matter for speculation.

save preference

Comments (8 of 8)

what about the black prisons Tom??

by fred

Fri Aug 23, 2013 23:43

The US had many black prisons.
The real nasty stuff they couldn't possibly do in their media show prisons (guantanamo / abu ghraib), they did regularly in these black prisons.

Often the victims didn't live to tell the tale. It is thought many inmates were "disappeared" when these black prisons were publicised

The US really aren't the "nice guys" shills like yourself would have us believe.

Comparison wrong

by Tom

Fri Aug 23, 2013 05:46

Comparing the Brits torture of the Irish to Abu Gharib is just factually wrong. The U.S. didn't pull fingernails or use hammers. Now, if you want to talk about what the Iraqis did to each other during Saddam's reign, that is another story.

Just a Movie.

by Pete.

Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:32

ALL Hollywood style entertainment films are just that.....works of entertainment.
Not accurate scholarly historical works.

I remember the Irish national anthem being sung in The Wind That Shakes The Barley.
It was Amhán Na bhFiann (a Soldier's Song.)

Trouble is that song only became the National Anthem in 1926.
Peader Kearney only wrote it around 1907 or thereabouts.

The de-facto Irish National Anthem during the Black-n-Tan War was "God Save Ireland".
(A much nicer song in my humble opinion.)

"Saving Private Ryan" never pretended to be a scholarly work of history either.
Like a host of other "War Films".

They are just movies.

Thomas Hales

by Sean O'Cathasaigh

Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:51

georgemoreland at gmx dot co dot uk

07895808297

Is this Thomas Hales in the photo the same Tom Hales who ''boasted of organising the killing of Michael Collins'' at Beal na Blath? and is therefore the brother of Sean Hales who was assassinated as a pro treatyite in Dublin in 1923?

Hart as Historian

by comic book store guy

Sun Jun 25, 2006 18:59

I agree. Hart is a unique historian. Not only does he write about the dead, he's able to interview them as well. So when you're trying to fit a complex issue into 45 minutes of television, it's best to ignore the other experts in the field and go for the man with the ouija board. Below is a link to oral history interview techniques. In fairness to Peter Hart, nowhere does it explicitly say that the interviewee has to be alive when the interviewer asks the questions.

Waxy

by pat c

Sat Jun 24, 2006 20:03

I agree, people reading about that period in Cotk should examine all sources. But they should be careful when dealing with secondary sources such as Harts 3 (dont forget his Collins bio) Cork books. His statistics on RIC/Tan/Auxie casualties can only have been picked from thin air. In particular his figures for British casualties at Crossbarry are laughable. If the British only lost 3 men at Crossbarry then why did over 1,000 RIC/Tan/Auxie & soldiers retreat in disorder?

We still have to find out whether Hart used an Ouija Board or a Seance to make contact with the Kilmichael Volunteers and scouts he interviewed.

When Hart was writing his Collins Bio he failed to consult the Collins / Kiernan correspondence which is held in Cork Public Museum.

I could go on but I hope that I have made my point.

Disgraceful....

by Waxy Gordan

Sat Jun 24, 2006 17:22

Yes, it was indeed disgraceful the RTE allowed a documentary that interviewd peter Hart. What a shocker! He has only written a book on Cork and another on the IRA 1916-23! Is the review saying that he should have been ignored? The number of anti-Hart views seemed to be in the majority in my view and fair enough. But to complain just because he is there at all seems to want to have your cake and eat it. The torture inflicted on Hales and his comrades was detailed graphically in Hart's first book and the above photograph is the cover of his second book. meda Ryan and Brian Murphy should have been interviewed by all means but so should Hart. Anyone who seriously wants to know what happened in ireland in the 1916-23 period should read ALL the work published on it.

Discussion opens up on issues in Ken Loach Film

by James Reilly

Fri Jun 23, 2006 11:25

In addition to the above, see Luke Gibbons' intro to the recently published script of the film, partly published on:

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/76800

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Lockdown Skeptics

Voltaire Network

Misleading RTE documentary on 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley'

Comments (8 of 8)