12.20.07
Posted in Sunday Times Columns at 8:28 pm by Sarah
(a quick clean-up-an old post that had disappeared – Betty was looking for it)
Sheep have a reputation for stupidity that is well deserved. The black sheep in the family flock had twins this week and in the several acres of perfect pastureland available to her, she perched them on top of a steep bank. Inevitably, one slipped down towards the river necessitating a heroic rescue by your columnist. I proudly reported this minor drama to my uncle, ovine midwife and general livestock expert. He predicted that this particular lamb was clearly both frail and foolish and would find another way to kill itself before the night was out.
Over dinner, my city-bred husband expressed concern for its survival. Thus prompted, I regaled him with glowing childhood recollections of the lambs we were charged with rearing as pets each Spring. We always gave them Imperial names like Romulus & Remus or Caesar and Cleopatra. We fed them from old wine bottles and rubber teats and we thought we were great.
Inspired by the fables, and spurred on by a surprisingly good Australian Chardonnay, we resolved to check on the endangered lamb and stumbled off towards the field in great cheer. Of course, despite the dark and the mild intoxication it took the briefest inspection to see that my uncle’s prognosis was correct and the lamb was dead. I was philosophical enough at this development but he took the bereavement poorly and shared his dejection with my sister.
She admonished him severely for his sentimentality. Lambs would break your heart. Even if you rescue them and keep them as pets they die anyway. Some of our pets got terrible mouth sores and were hungry but couldn’t feed with the pain. Most of them died. If they did live, they were sent out to the field after a while and then you’d have to round them up to send them for slaughter. They’d recognise you and run over, looking to be saved. And you’d have to send them on their way regardless. We were only children and we’d cry. I’d cried the most, she claimed. The moral of her story: don’t get attached to lambs.
We were equally appalled at this litany of misery. He never knew; but I had completely forgotten. I had firmly maintained a romantic cheerful version of the pet lamb saga in my head and wiped out the subsequent miseries, which for my sister were the predominant factor in the tale.
I had been in a deep state of denial and thanks to the prevalence of the therapy culture in which we exist I knew this was a very bad thing. The purpose of denial is to minimize anxiety. It would appear I had managed to eliminate anxiety entirely by simply replacing a miserable memory with a happy one. Having successfully buried the tragedy of the dead lambs, who knew what other disasters lay hidden in my psyche? If Freud was right, through a course of expensive and no doubt traumatic analysis, I could create a link between defects in my personality and these distressing early experiences. Were I to indulge in such a process, who knows what narrative I could create to justify any negative behavioural patterns in my life. Armed with a dodgy diagnosis such as general anxiety disorder (being worried about stuff), I could revert from being a mature and reasonably well-adjusted adult into a victim in a state of recovery. Mining my brain for upsetting childhood events, is it a coincidence that therapist alternatively reads as ‘the rapist’?
But if the exposure of my false memory syndrome proved anything, it was the futility of discussing childhood experiences with someone who wasn’t there. An entire diagnosis and treatment could be based on a series of incidences that never happened whilst omitting crucial events that did. If the purpose of therapy is to force us to acknowledge the truth, then surely its principle flaw is the subjectivity of these truths. The psychoanalyst will claim that it matters not whether one’s grievances are based in fact, but frankly, I disagree. In the absence of any real pathological illness, does a reasonably well functioning adult have much to gain by seeking out childhood upsets in order to justify poor behaviour?
Of course, that justification is in itself the gain and is at the source of my resentment of the culture of victimhood cultivated in today’s society. The ex-slave Epictetus said “Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them” or in modern parlance, “It’s not what happens to you that counts, but how you deal with it’.
When bad things happened our parents like the Second World War, TB and poverty, they developed characteristics such as forbearance in adversity and fortitude in times of distress in order to survive. Sadly this stiff upper lip approach to life is seriously out of fashion. The transcendence of every day problems is now seen as a retrograde step on our evolutionary path. The Stoic has been pushed aside in favour of the Hysteric and simply coping as a life strategy has been crushed in the stampede to the therapist’s couch. Hysterics get to excuse their bad behaviour because someone was mean to them when they were 6.
This therapeutic perspective places us as casualties of life rather than survivors and creates an environment where pulling yourself together is seen as being somewhat Neanderthal. This wouldn’t be so bad if it didn’t mean that the unfortunates around the alleged victim didn’t have to pick up the pieces left behind. Work has to be done, children have to reared and perhaps sometimes one is better off getting on with the mundane tasks of life rather than pointlessly nursing grievances.
I suppose I could decide to nurture resentment against my parents for cruelly exposing me to the emotional risk of rearing cute but doomed animals. I could accuse, they could defend and the only achievement would be that a drama had been created in which I was a central character. Everyone else would be upset, but my ego would have been gratified. Looking out the kitchen window at the frolicking lambs in the spring sunshine, I decided there were two options available to me. I could embark on an investigation to discover what other tragic episodes of my youth existed in my unconscious. On the other hand I could embrace my ignorance and respect my mind for so wisely concealing these miseries. In a culture of acknowledgment, I decided to acknowledge that my denial was the only therapy I needed.
Permalink
12.19.07
Posted in Feminism at 10:12 am by Sarah
Sunday’s column – posted a little late due to onset of vomiting bug..uuuugh. Anyways, I am taking a little blog break and going to go cold turkey by getting a trusted friend to change the password so I can’t get into it! This addict needs a week or two of cold turkey! Happy Christmas all and hopefully the new year will find ye a little less antagonistic! xxx
THE sister rang last week wondering how to deal with complaints she’d received about the magnificent crib the staff had constructed in their office. I got all excited. It sounded like the secularist conspiracy to rid Christmas of cribs had reached our quiet midlands village.
Not quite. The cribbing about the crib in my sister’s office related to the premature arrival of baby Jesus in the manger (he’s not supposed to turn up until December 25), and the heresy of placing a Wise Man in adoration when he and his perceptive pals are not due until January 6.
The complainers are like most people in Ireland; when religion is done, they want it done right. I advised my sister to hand around some application forms for the Association of Pedants. Afterwards I wondered why, when cribs are so popular in Ireland, did Veritas roll over so easily?
The revelation that an ad for cribs placed by Veritas, suppliers of Catholic books and artefacts, had been banned from RTE Radio stirred up a good bout of moral outrage. An Irish Christmas without cribs is clearly a ludicrous exercise. I’m all for them myself, and in my wide and varied circle of acquaintances I can’t track down anyone against them. So I would have expected Catholic bishops to fight such ridiculous censorship by petty bureaucrats all the way to the Supreme Court.
The problem is that the “crib” ad wasn’t banned at all. Veritas submitted a script to RTE which included a list of items available for sale at its shop in Abbey Street. Someone fretted that the inclusion of “cribs” might be a problem and suggested that Veritas seek clearance or a “determination” from the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI), which regulates ads.
The BCI duly received a phone call from Veritas during which there was a general chat about the intention behind the Broadcasting Act. It’s possible that the Veritas people read between the lines or interpreted the conversation to mean that “crib” might be a problem. The BCI is adamant that it was never asked for a determination and never expressed an opinion on the inclusion of the word “crib” in the list.
For whatever reason, Veritas chose not to seek a formal decision from the BCI and ran the ad without mentioning “crib”. Then Catholic bishops issued a statement claiming they were “concerned and disappointed” that the word “had to be omitted from the script of the advertisement before the station would broadcast it”. But it was only omitted because an informal and very general telephone conversation with a BCI official put them off. The Penal Laws would have finished off Catholicism if the hierarchy had been this lily-livered in the 19th century.
Veritas could easily have stood its ground and argued the toss – because it has an excellent case. Instead someone decided to cry “censorship” and must have known the outrage that would ensue. There’d be loads of free publicity and a debate heavily weighted against the secularist cabal at the BCI. Sure enough, the rest of us spent the next 24 hours aghast that such outrageously anti-religious elements exist within the establishment. In an overwhelming Christian society, how could anyone object to references at the heart of the Christmas story? Throw in rumours of a crèche cancelling a nativity play and before long we’re on the alert for anyone wishing us a Happy Holiday or a Merry Winterval.
It looks like an unnecessarily sneaky way to make a point. A similar outbreak of moral outrage happens in America every year when right-wing broadcasters such as Bill O’Reilly on Fox News hype up claims of cancelled nativity plays and other evidence of a war on Christmas. Some time in January it’s quietly discovered that the stories are either completely wrong or wildly exaggerated. By that stage it’s too late and Christian people have been radicalised over a slight which never existed.
The pity is this: there is a cabal at the BCI who have completely lost the run of themselves and should be taken in hand. Their decisions on religious and political advertising are consistently over the top and take no account of the spirit of the original legislation. We actually do need someone to challenge their strict interpretations in court, rather than settle for some cheap-shot publicity. A ban on religious advertising was included in the 1960 Broadcasting Act, and a look back at the parliamentary debate which led up to this is instructive. Legislators feared that evangelical Christian churches, or cults such as Scientology, would spend millions in Ireland on recruiting souls and would then relieve Irish people of their savings and force them all to live in compounds.
Michael Hilliard, the then minister for Post and Telegraphs, said he favoured banning religious advertising since otherwise RTE “would have to accept advertisements from any religious group, including advertisements which the majority of viewers might consider very objectionable and offensive”. By religious group he obviously didn’t mean the Catholic Church or the Church of Ireland, and by “offensive” he most certainly did not mean a mention of a crib. (Although keep in mind that not one Irish person has ever said that the term “crib” is offensive to them.) Hilliard also made clear that the ban on political advertising strictly related to political parties, because he didn’t want to place new parties or those with lesser means at a disadvantage.
For some years, the BCI and some elements in RTE have deliberately thwarted this clear and reasonable intention of the legislators by enforcing a blanket ban. The Irish Cancer Society was even prevented from urging the government to organise a free, nationwide cervical-screening service – that was too “political”.
The Dail has attempted to restrict this tendency by making clear that the religious ban refers only to proselytising and not benign announcements. A 2001 amendment stated that advertisements for religious events or publications are allowed provided they “do not address the issue of the merits or otherwise of adhering to any religious faith or belief or of becoming a member of any religion or religious organisation”.
Regardless of how fundamentalist the BCI has been, it is inconceivable that even it could argue successfully that an ad for cribs could be construed as conferring merit on religious faith. The bishops must have taken the same view and decided it would be safer not to ask the question at all. After all if the BCI had approved the ad they’d have lost the opportunity for some cheap publicity.
Some day, someone should challenge the BCI, but we can only condemn a stupid decision when it’s actually made.
Permalink
12.14.07
Posted in Sunday Times Columns at 9:47 am by Sarah
I woke up at 4am in a sweat (related to back pain – a temporary affliction) and remembered that someone wanted to know where the reindeer are.
The female deer, sans antlers, are always west of the papal cross – down at the Farmleigh end. The males, ie the guys you want 
are always east of the papal cross – usually near the football grounds.
The lads only cross the road to visit the females in October for mating. Hang around for 3 weeks and then regroup.
We all agreed this was an eminently sensible way of ordering the world
Permalink
12.13.07
Posted in Domestic/Relationships, Feminism at 2:24 pm by Sarah
Because there are loads of things I should be doing but am not, I ended up reading the Seanad debates on the 1960 Broadcasting Act. This argument by Professor Patrick Quinlan, NUI Senator, for the control of advertising on RTE is hilarious:
“Let me take as an example Aer Lingus advertising. It is a body which has to pay its way. It advertises wonderful holidays abroad and, as it were, tries to attract us all to take our holidays in foregin parts. Of course, if too many followed that advice it would be very detrimental to the country’s economy. In the same way, but on a much graver scale, we can relate this to the question of agricultural advertising. It is well known that our farmers are impressionable in the matter of advertising and demonstration. One needs only to go to the Spring Show and walk around the machinery exhibits to see young farmers looking at all the wonderful gadgets, like young boys in a toyshop, and if they had sufficient money or credit, they would have all those wonderful gadgets home with them.
That is a very real problem. It is so real that the first committee set up by the Agricultural Institute was a committee for the evaluation of machinery, so as to be able to advise the farming community what machinery was suited to our conditions and to mark them preferentially, because machines which work well elsewhere under far different conditions are not always suited to conditions here.
463
I feel then that if we take that paragraph alone, there should be some type of a veto on the machinery that is advertised. For instance, it could carry the stamp of approval of the machinery evaluation section of the Agricultural Institute which would mean that what is advertised is a genuine product. How can we achieve that? Certainly we do not want to foist on our farming community £1,000,000, or maybe £2,000,000 worth of machinery that is not suited to our purposes, merely for the sake of getting [463] in another £20,000 or £30,000 worth of advertising. In this matter, we must look at our economy as a whole.
The other feature is that of consumer advertising. I expect one could include in that kitchen equipment, and one can visualise the impact on the Irish housewife of wonderful gadgets being advertised in her own home, especially when she is told that no self-respecting housewife would be without these aids and that all she has to do is put down half-a-crown and get them on the “never-never” system. Therefore, the impact of these two things, together with the all too free availability of hire purchase, presents a very grave national threat.”
My emphasis. Wonderful, isn’t it?
Permalink
12.11.07
Posted in Sunday Times Columns at 3:43 pm by Sarah
I was on Q&A last night. Not totally satisfied with performance. But Michael Martin grew on me. I hinted in the show that he could end up with a promotion. Wouldn’t surprise me at all. I think forces are rising against the heir apparent.
In these cranky high anxiety pre-christmas weeks, let me recommend to anyone in the greater Dublin area a wonderful event. In the midst of opposition I mustered up the energy to load everyone into the car with cold sausages and mince pies and headed for the Phoenix Park to observe the “reindeer” – the male fallow deer who with their antlers are convincing Santa’s reindeer having a pre-Christmas rest. By sheer coincidence, as we were leaving a park ranger stopped us and advised us to hang around. Then he gave a little talk to the two dozen hangers on – parents and small children – on the deer and the lo and behold, Santa arrived out of the trees to check up on the deer. Said hello to all the children and we were given popcorn and little oak trees to plant. All free, and great crack and enthusiasm from the rangers.
Special special thanks to the OPW for doing this. Apparently they do it every Sat and Sun in December and it was around 12.30. Worth checking out and not a shop in site.
Our other aim is to go to Donadea Forest Park in Kildare. They do it up with great lights and there’s a Santa and you can get your Christmas Tree. Again, a non-shop Santa…
Permalink
12.06.07
Posted in Feminism at 10:31 pm by Sarah
I’m not sure what to do or say about this. The news was sad. She seemed like a nice girl, but she made mistakes and has paid, and her family has paid, an enormous price for them. Let’s not be too hard.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized at 12:01 pm by Sarah
I’m a Pullman fan and hope to catch the movie. But this article in the Irish Times left me bewildered. Maybe I’m thick but what does this mean?
“Though robust believers should still enjoy the film, few will mistake the Magisterium – an authoritarian, quasi-religious force that stifles debate and promotes belief in a class of original sin – as an allegorical model of the Campaign for Real Ale. The books’ implied criticism of organised religion remains very much in evidence.”
I am not familiar with this Real Ale campaign. Enlightenment please?
Oh and the budget seemed alright.
Permalink
12.04.07
Posted in Feminism at 9:51 pm by Sarah
I’ve criticised families before when the dead sons are coyly described as being “the life and soul of the party” and no reference made to the circumstances of the death.
So I have to commend Doyle’s family for issuing a truly brave and honest statement tonight. These are good people. We need more like them.
“The family of Mr Doyle said they were devastated by the death and urged people not to take potentially deadly substances.
“Kevin will always have a special place in our hearts, our thoughts and our prayers – not only because of his untimely death but also because of the heroic manner in which he overcame life-threatening cancer,” they said in a statement.
“He was a dearly loved son, brother and grandson and he will be sorely missed.”
The family said Mr Doyle had a wonderful life ahead of him which he had only just had the opportunity to pursue after his brave battle with cancer.
“We sincerely hope that no family has to suffer the pain and anguish that we are going through,” they said.
“We would earnestly ask all those – both young and old – who may be tempted to dabble in potentially lethal substances to simply say no. No amount of so-called fun is worth the loss of life that so often befalls young people in Ireland today.”
Permalink
Posted in Irish Politics at 9:34 pm by Sarah
Ah, so Bush says today that all Iran needs is KNOWLEDGE and they are a danger to the world. How will he know that the Iranians know? Set a test?
Worth reading the Q&A and the bluster for headshaking disbelief…
Permalink
12.03.07
Posted in Irish Politics at 9:14 pm by Sarah
Those Yanks. What idiots. The wonderful PO’Neill calls them to account as always.
Permalink
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »