Monday, February 20, 2006

What's So Difficult about Peace, Love & Understanding?

7 Comments:

Blogger Omaniblog said...

Paige,
What a lovely image! How do you do it.

I know of your love for the President. But I've not yet tuned into you affection for the Reverend.
My mother spent several years living in Belfast. She went there from Limerick and lived in a mixed faith house (they were christians of different denominations, with perhaps one jew).
My mum told me that the Reverend had a reputation for representing both 'protestants' and roman catholics as a constituency MP and doing it without favoritism. That made me think of the public man and the private person. (I know that doesn't quite fit, but I think you'll know what I mean.)
It would be wrong of me to stand up for the Reverend. If I were to say that I feel he has a remarkable sense of humour, I'd expect to be misunderstood.
If I were to blog on about the development of two competing national traditions in Ireland, I might be rightly accused of using your blog as a political platform.
But I hope others have their say on your splendid image.

8:11 p.m., February 20, 2006  
Blogger KnackeredKaz said...

Er, I don't get it?! Am I missing something?

On second thoughts, don't even answer that, I'm so dim!

11:27 p.m., February 20, 2006  
Blogger Fence said...

The problem is that love, peace and understanding make you look like a "wee softie" when you need to be hard and tough to impress your politician-friends (hmmm, that may be an oxymoron)

8:48 a.m., February 21, 2006  
Blogger Paige A Harrison said...

Paul,
I've heard sufficient testimony about the Rev's bipartisan representation to believe it. What I can't understand is, if the man is such a decent skin, how he can so comfortably play the role of an ignorant bigotted dinosaur when (as Fence quite rightly observes) he has to play to his particular gallery of supporters.

I'd say it is fair to say that this rabble rouser has been responsible for as many deaths as Messrs Adams & McGuiness

9:38 a.m., February 21, 2006  
Blogger Curly K said...

I think we've all heard lots of positive testimony as to the Reverend's representing all his constituents equally.

I have to agree with Paul, in that, whilst I don't agree with his opinions, I do think the Reverend has a remarkable sense of humour. He also has an extremely adroit command of language which has been exhibited in the war of words we have witnessed throughout the Troubles.

5:50 p.m., February 21, 2006  
Blogger Omaniblog said...

Even though I was away in England during much of the war, I kept a bit of an eye on the Reverend. But I think it is too early to elaborate my impressions and reflections. It's fairly easy to be misunderstood.
Maybe I can say this: if the Reverend didn't give expression to that point of view, what form of expression would there have been? Would it have been more benign, more friendly, more charitable? Or would it have been more vicious? If there was no hope among people who thought like that particular branch of unionism, that their viewpoint would be expressed for them by a prominant politician, what would have happened?
Hypothetical questions, I know. But if I blurt out that if the Reverend didn't exist, he would have had to be invented, where would that get me?
Someone is out there thinking that even the fascist leaders were kind to their aunties.
The Reverend has said many times that the pope is an "anti-Christ". I don't know what that means because I don't belong to that particular religious persuasion. I hear the words but I can't translate them into an equivalent which I could understand. To me, it simply means: I don't like the pope.
We are all born in the state of "original sin": I've heard that said. It tells me that I was born in a state of something bad. It tells me that I was not an innocent smiling babe but was, for a time, a nasty piece of work. The words I interpret with a broad swathe of insight. They leave me amused nowadays. Once upon a time they terrified me.
I am trying to say that I was a frightened child brought up in a zeitgeist that revelled in imagery of suffering and blood sacrafice.

I am straying much too close to the mentality of some of the 1916 leaders, and also the mentality of those who urged the young to walk out of the trenches of Verdun into the hail of bullets.

The Reverend isn't the only one who dwells within a mental framework inhabited by martyrs, stained souls, purgatory, limbo, hell and the Divine Comedy.

I'm a long way from being able to say what's inside me.

Thank you for your thought-provoking words and propositions.

Curly K : I really didn't think I'd find anyone else who can see the Reverend as a stand-up. You're a gem.

10:55 p.m., February 21, 2006  
Blogger Paige A Harrison said...

Paul + Curly K,
Thanks for the brilliant contributions - excellent as ever. There is always other ways of looking at the same situation. Yes, if he didn't articulate those views doesn't mean that others wouldn't still hold those beliefs. I just abhor (beginnig th sound like Mary) the politics of destruction. Dr Paisley's sharp intellect would be much better spent tackling Adams et al rather than attacking the only politician from the Republic to begin to understand Unionists and to treat them as equals.

Maybe that's the message. Mary's treatment of Unionists and Protestants as friends has done more to unnerve the DUP that 25 years of bombs and violence.

12:05 a.m., February 22, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home