Gentle Readers, I've been remiss. Hope you will forgive the wee hiatus.
The Great Apes Book Group continues to read, meet, drink, eat, cuss, discuss, and revel in each other's company. July featured a double-header. Earlier this month a few of us met at The Forge to knock-about
The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Robert Louis Stevenson's examination of descent to madness. Stevenson's 1886 short novel falling between between Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818) and Bram Stocker's Dracula (1897) takes place in an era in a fog shrouded London that we have become all too familiar with.
Let's consider this era with repressive Victorian mores, the developing compounding-pharmaceutical industry, general medical advances, emerging psychology as a (pseudo?) behavioral science, British mediums conducting seances to communicate with the dead, Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, Jack the Ripper, conflicts in Africa, Afghanistan, Asia, industrial expansion-what we might call steampunk today. How did these experiences frame Stevenson's work?
Maybe these references speak to transformative/transactional periods. Man's search for meaning and understanding is perpetual. Man's articulation of relative satisfaction/dissatisfaction with self is a bit more elusive. The American Founding Fathers must have felt that "Happiness" and it's pursuit was important. It's enumerated in our Declaration, probably thanks to Thomas Jefferson. Is Stevenson questioning what a person is willing to do to achieve happiness? Is Hyde's evil the opposite of happiness? Jekyll must be incomplete, dissatisfied with who he is. He "creates" Hyde to complete (?) him? He searches for happiness and learns all to quickly that his alternate self, rather than leading to satisfaction, possesses a darkness. Jekyll invited Hyde in. Jekyll lacked what Hyde had.
For our second offering in July the Apes met at Doc's for a bit of a meal share and drinks on the patio to discuss
Say Nothing, A True story of Murder and Memory in Northern Ireland, Patrick Radden Keefe.
Such and interesting read. This writer picked Say Nothing. Some time ago I heard a brief mention of The Belfast Project at Boston College. It intrigued me then and I promptly forgot about it. Say Nothing is mentioned on literary lists. The Troubles have interested me. I've been to Northern Ireland. Lots of boxes were checked for me with Say Nothing.
The title, Say Nothing, refers to the vow of silence/denial members of the Irish Republican Army swore to obey. The Belfast Project was a secret cache of recorded interviews housed in a library archive at Boston College. IRA members spoke believing their words would no be published until after the death(s) of (all?) of the participants. Their words were used in the hunt for perceived criminal violations. The police authority in NI were successful in subpoena-ing at least some of the transcripts/recordings in 2011 and arrested Sinn Fein's Adams in 2013 on suspicion of murder in the disappearance of Jean McConville, a young widow and mother of 10 children in 1972. She was suspected of giving aid and comfort to the British during an uptick in violence in Belfast.
It seems Keefe rang the bell of McConville's murder/execution again and again. Whether she was an innocent or collaborator will never be clear. Fewer than 20 individuals were "disappeared" by suspected IRA actions. When the Peace Agreement was signed in the late 1990's, the process reconciliation was not satisfactorily addressed.
This book's importance cannot be diminished. There are some faults here. I'm less than satisfied with Keefe's lack of balance. He smugly mentions in the last few pages that a reader can look for Loyalist atrocities elsewhere. I feel manipulated. The more I read Say Nothing, the angrier I got. Angry at the IRA and Gerry Adams, but then I expanded my Venn diagrams and the cognitive dissonance of the missing Unionist actions took hold. "Wait a minute.", I thought.
In 2019 and beyond, what players in The Troubles be held accountable? How will that happen? Will memories from 50 years ago be the primary source of testimony? Will hearsay evidence from the Boston College tapes be admissible?
Some Apes, this writer chief among them, is troubled by an inability to determine who "the bad guys" are. What constitutes war? Must war be reserved strictly for "The State" to declare? Is the individual ever justified in acting against oppression?
War is not healthy for children and other living things.