Sir, - It is difficult to criticise a national icon without condemnation from those who hold it in the highest esteem. Any alternative view, such as that voiced by Kevin Myers (An Irishman's Diary, July 22nd) is dismissed as unpatriotic, unjust and downright irrational. If the debate which Mr Myers has inspired, however, proves anything, it is that Pearse, like the Bible or the Good Friday Agreement, can be quoted by everyone to suit their viewpoint.
Mr Myers contends that Pearse supported violence as a solution to Ireland's problems and rejected those who favoured peace. His opponents seem to think this is a kind of insult and argue that he was indeed a man of peace and an enthusiastic democrat as well. Even modern republicans, who always claim that their right to use violence was endorsed by Pearse and the other 1916 leaders and all who came after them, are wrong, if we are to accept the evidence of Brian Murphy and Dr Martin Mansergh.
Indeed, if the latter two contributors are right, then republicans in particular have been wrong about Pearse for generations. I'm inclined to agree with Kevin Myers, however, especially when I reflect on the conclusion of Pearse's oration at the grave of O'Donovan Rossa in 1913: "The Fools, the Fools, the Fools, they have left us our Fenian dead; and while Ireland holds these graves, Ireland unfree shall never be at peace." Every republican knows these lines, and regards them as an endorsement of violence.
One could quote Pearse extensively to prove his addiction to violence and the idea of blood sacrifice as a legitimate weapon by revolutionaries, but I offer just one example from The Coming Revolution, 1913: "We may make mistakes in the beginning and shoot the wrong people; but bloodshed is a cleansing and sanctifying thing, and the nation which regards it as the final horror has lost its manhood. There are many things more horrible than bloodshed; and slavery is one of them."
The violence of the past 30 years is justified in the minds of many young men by these words of Pearse, and that is his terrible legacy. It may be, as Brian Murphy argues (Opinion, August 2nd) that he was caring, socially aware and concerned about education; but so were many other violent oppressors and war-mongers throughout the history of mankind. Paying lip-service to high ideals and at the same time creating the conditions that lead to mayhem and slaughter is a contradiction, and it leads some people to believe that the former is impossible without the latter. - Yours, etc.,
Sean Kearney, Glantane Drive, Belfast.