The Works of Picasso-s-vthe greatest living artist of our time"-are on display in Trinity College.

Miss Ann Crookshank contributes an essay on the man and his work and comments on the artist's works we publish in full colour and black and white.

Fianna Fail returns with a fresh, clear electoral mandate to continue in Government. Immediately some urgent problems confront the new cabinet. We discuss these and how they might be dealt with.

The author of the "Just Society" and on his own the only alternative to Fianna Fail-discusses Irish political development over the next few years and the imperatives of co-operation between Fine Gael and Labour.

Angela MacNamara, the well-known columnist on personal problems, reviews "Marriage Irish Style" by Dorine Rohan.

Picasso Exhibits in Trinity College

A unique exhibition of several of Picasso's works is currently being held in the New Library of Trinity College until August 31st. There are special admission rates for children, students and groups. "Nusight" acknowledges the assistance given to it by the organizers of the exhibition and, in particular, Professor Dawson, in allowing our photographer, Walter Pfeiffer, to photograph some of the exhibits which we reproduce. Cover photograph by Walter Newman.

AN ALlERNA liVE?
The General Election results have been a disappointment in their emphatic re-affirmation of the status quo. Fianna Fail has won a dubious vote of confidence as the government party and Fine Gael has won an unequivocal vote of confidence as the major opposition. The only indication of change is in the Labour Party results where the diehards element suffered a severe defeat in rural Ireland and the new radical wing achieved notable success in Dublin. There is widespread belief that the country wanted a change from Fianna Fail which had been 12 years in office and had grown tired and desultory. Many in the Fianna Fail party sensed this desire and the party tacitly admitted it in their advertisement which read "Keep the Change". However this desire-such as it was-was frustrated by the absence of a real alternative to the existing government. Neither Fine Gael nor Labour on its own could pose with any credibility as a potential government party-and they refused to co-operate in a joint assault on Fianna Fail. It is very probable that in 4 years time the government will be even tireder and more desultory than it is now and that the desire for change will be correspondingly greater. However, it seems equally certain that neither Fine Gael nor Labour will on their own offer a creditable alternative. So that, unless their attitude changes it will be

Fianna Fail again in 1973, irrespective of the electorates wishes. Politicians have an obligation to represent the feelings of the peopletherefore when a popular demand is evident for a change of government the politicians are obliged to meet that demand realistically. Whatever validity the arguments in favour of both Fine Gael and Labour going it alone in 1969-the electorate's recent decision has robbed those arguments of any validity for 1973. All this would still be valid even if Fine Gael and Labour were politically incompatible. But when a large area of compatability is discovered between the two parties the argument is conclusive. In both parties' published policy statements there was little substantive difference. Both favoured a radical re-distribution of the country's wealth in favour of the deprived and both sought to democratise Irish society by decentralising governmental and industrial power. While it is true that in Fine Gael there was frequent retraction from the demanding commitment of "The Just Society" and in Labour there was left-wing pressure for the nationalisation of all industries and the adoption of other traditional ultrasocialist policies-both parties probably now recognise that diversions from official policies were electorally damaging. The opposition parties have four years now in which to reconcile their outstanding differences and propound

joint policies for radical, social and economic reform based on the principles of real democracy and social justice. They could broaden their base to advantage by involving in their deliberations the radical elements in the Trade Unions, the Universities and especially rural Ireland. By doing so they would be establishing the basis for a truly national progressive movement which would bring the concepts of participation, democracy and justice not just to the corridors of power but to the shanties of the weak. It would be well to remember that contrary to current legend coalition governments are not inherently unworkable or disastrous. The State's coalition Government from 1948-51 was, as John O'Donovan says in an interview with him in this issue of 'NUSIGHT' "the best government the country ever had," In any event a preplanned broadly based alliance between Fine Gael and Labour would be quite a different prospect to the hastily assembled governments of 1948 and 1954. A bye-election is pending in Dublin South West following the deeply regretted death of Sean Dunne. One man who clearly exemplifies the idea of democratic socialism and who is acceptable to both Fine Gael and Labour is Declan Costello If chosen as a joint-Labour-Fine Gael candidate for this bye-election Costello could begin the movement towards a socially just democratic Ireland.

VINCENT BROWNE who has been recently appointed Editor of "NUSIGHT" is aged 25 and comes from Broadford, Co. Limerick. He was educated at the local national school, Ring College, Waterford, St. Mary's Secondary School, Drumcollogher, Castleknock College and U.CD., where he graduated in 1966 with an Honours B.A. in economics and politics. For the past two years he has been with R.T.E. and was the only Irish journalist in Czechoslovakia during the Soviet invasion last August (which he reported for "The Irish Times").

JACK DOWLlNG---'the former R.T.E. producer has joined "NUSIGHT" as Associate Editor. Born in Dublin and educated in Trim and Sydney, Australia-Jack spent 15 years in the Irish Army. On leaving he joined a data processing company in London specialising in publishing schemes. When he returned to Ireland he became Editor of Shell Publications and did secretarial work for Gills. His involvement with R.T.E. began five years ago when he was a participant on the religious proramme "Horizon" which he later chaired. He became a producer in 1966 and was responsible for "Horizon", "Insight" (an arts programme), "Home Truths" (which he left following "undue exercise of advertising pressure"), a programme on the Rose exhibition and many others. While with R.T.E. Jack acquired a unique reputation for creativity and competence. He resigned from R.T.E. in April last following the refusal of the authorities to acknowledge the charges of the station's cultural degeneracy, made by Bob Quinn, another producer who had also resigned. At present Jack is engaged in writing a book on culture and authority with special reference to R.T.E. in conjunction with another colleague who also resigned, Lelia Doolan. The book entitled "Sit down and be Counted" will be published in the Autumn. Over the next number of months "NUSIGHT" will be expanding its staff and range of contributors. We will be announcing further developments in our next issue.

A MANDATE
FOR WHAT?
About the only constructive innovation among Mr. Lynch's Cabinet changes was the promise to create a new department for Housing and Physical Development with Mr. Blaney to be in charge. This presumably will mean a higher priority for one of the nation's most pressing social needs as well as greater prominence for a neglected aspect of Irish economic affairs. Apart from that, the numerous promotions, demotions and "transmotions" effected by Mr. Lynch seem only to be aimed at concealing the absence of substantative change by making a multiplicity of minor alterations. The departures and arrivals from the Cabinet were perfectly predictable and politically innocuous. Mr. Lenihan's movement to Transport and Power was undoubtedly a demotion, but whether for him or the Department of Education is not clear. Dr. Hillery's movement to External Affairs makes sense in the light of EEC developments but none at all when one considers the problems remaining in the Department of Labour. And so on. In fact the most significant feature emerging from the changes in the Cabinet is that it confirms Mr. Haughey in his strategic position as Minister for Finance. From there he can continue to exercise his enormous, and generally conservative, influence over the direction of government policy. He is also, needless to say, in a strong position to move into Mr. Lynch's place should the latter decide to move on to higher things in 1973. For this prosaic state of affairs there are probably two important reasons. The first is the simple fact that the Fianna Fail party is chronically short of talent. The second reason why Mr. Lynch's "new" Cabinet has an aura of familiarity about it arises from Fianna Fail's interpretation of the general election result as a mandate for continuity rather than change. For although the party's percentage of the total poll did slip a couple of points its vote remained constant absolutely and the party captured enough seats to avoid having to be unduly worried by elections in unfavourable constituencies. And all of this was accomplished, the Government can claim, while holding with rare consistency to the past policies when the two opposition parties bombarded the electorate with a wide variety of proposals of varying degrees of radicalism. But although continuity rather than change is what last month's result suggests the people probably want, it does seem unlikely that Mr. Lynch's new Cabinet will, in fact, be able to avoid a fairly considerable amount of re-organisation of the nation's social, economic and political institutions. If a pragmatic conservatism under Mr. Lynch's genial leadership is what the people were promised last month, and what Fianna Fail probably thinks they approved, then this at least, is one election promise, which the Government is unlikely to be able to deliver. For one thing, there is the sudden re-emergence, after six years in a state of suspended animation, of the possi-

JACK LYNCH
"A promise of genial leadership"

bility of Irish entry into the European Economic Community. This should prompt a wide-ranging re-appraisal of how much preparation still remains to be carried through within the next few years. Although a fair amount of work was begun eight to nine years ago when the first hint of free trade sent Government and industry into convulsions of activity, there still remains a vast number of Irish firms not only incapable of meeting foreign competition but many who are quite possibly lacking the human and material resources to accomplish the necessary adaptations. To push on with what remains to be done, Mr. Colley may find himself impelled, in due course, to depart from the "free enterprise" philosophy of his party and to intervene a little more directly in the affairs of private industry. More radical still, however, are the measures, needed of Mr. Gibbons when he moves to Agriculture, to deal with the economy's most intractable problem -the persistent failure of agricultural net output to show any consistent expansion. In the EEC context agricultural markets will, of course, provide better opportunities than those currently available to Irish farmers. But if

these markets are to be exploited then substantial improvements in the quality and volume of agricultural output will be required, necessitating in turn, significant alterations in the structure of Irish farming and traditional techniques. Only substantial changes in the present armoury of Government subsidies and price supports will secure this. But these are far from the only set of radical changes in policy which the Government, however complacently it may view the election result, seems unlikely to have forced on it. A much more immediate, and certainly more delicate problem than preparing for the EEC is caused by the pressure of rapidly rising incomes on the economy's not-so-rapidly-rising productive incomes policy. For one thing, the economy is now operating close to capacity and even the relatively bullish prognostications of the Economic and Social Research Institute quarterly survey expect prices to rise 6.5% this year and the deficit on the balance of payments to widen to 57 million. Secondly, and obviously closely connected with the first, the results of last February's strikes may eventually unleash a chain reaction of comparable demands among the members of other unions. Precisely, because the horrors of a free for all scramble for wage increases are fairly evenly distributed between both sides of industry, the Government, and Mr. Haughey in particular, have an opportunity to intervene in a manner which could produce some order among forthcoming wage claims - presumably by getting an agreement on a basic percentage increase for all industries. But such action is essentially a matter of preventing a bad situation from getting worse. What is also required is some institutional arrangement which will render less likely repetitions of the Maintenance strike. To that end something on the lines of the British Prices and Incomes Board may be needed, although here it might be questioned whether Mr. Brennan, in Labour, is quite the man for the exceptionally difficult task of setting up such an agency. But, of course, these areas, sensitive though they may be, are far from comprising the complete list of fundamentally necessary reforms. Perhaps the most significant of all those not yet mentioned arise from the Buchanan Report on physical planning. Followed a few days later by the announcement of a General Election, the Buchanan Report barely entered the public con. sciousness. Yet dealing as it does with the deployment of industry and urban development throughout the country, and calling for commitment of almost 2l billion over the next twenty years, the report could hardly be more significant for the social and economic future of the country. Unfortunately it is the lot of all plans
3

for regional development that fewer areas are favoured than are excluded. In the statement which is issued with the report's publication, the Government betrayed its fear that the Buchanan Report would lose it more votes in the rest of the country than it would gain in Cork or Limerick. Moreover, the future appointment of Mr. Blaney, who hails from an area deliberately neglected by Buchanan, suggests that the Government is unlikely to follow all of its recommendations. How-

ever, any policy is better than none, and the creation of a special Department suggests that an active programme for urban development will now be promoted by the Government. On the other hand the acquisition of the Department for Social Welfare by Mr. Boland presumably means a lower priority for that section of our social services. Certainly, no one would consider Mr. Boland one of our more thoughtful and inventive Ministers. He is, however, capable of carrying on traditional Fianna Fail policies which in Social Welfare have consisted in minor adjustments to existing benefits as and when a fairly parsimonious estimate of the health of the exchequer permits. The trouble is that raising the level of Social Welfare benefits is likely to meet increasing difficulties for so long as Mr. Boland adheres to flat-rate insurance contributions from employers and employees. Only a shift to the more equitable system of graduated contributions will allow the degree of buoyancy required to finance a modern system of Social Welfare benefits. In the health services, where the somewhat more enterprising Mr. Childers now holds sway, the collision between the cost of improved services and the inadequacy
4

of a narrow and regressive revenue base, has already occurred. There the rising burden of health charges on the rates has provoked Dublin City Council into refusing to strike an adequate rate. While part of the resentment against rates stems from the speed with which they have risen, much is derived from the knowledge that the rateable valuations constitute an extremely archaic tax-base with numerous anomalies and injustices. Unfortunately, the solution to this problem also lies in Mr. Boland's territory where he continues to control the Department of Local Government. Moreover, an Interdepartmental Committee on local finance recently argued against any change in the use of rates as a main source of local authority funds. And this despite the fact that several different types of tax, entertainment taxes, turnover taxes, etc., have been in use in other countries. Nevertheless, in respect of both Health and Social Welfare, unless the Government succeeds in breaking away from systems of taxation laid out in the 19th century further development of the services will meet increasing popular opposition. Developing new sources of finance for the social services is one of the more urgent necessities facing the country and one of the Government's most difficult political problems. Very different are the difficulties facing the Government in its educational policy. Here the disaffected are not the public at large, which probably has greater approval of Government policy in education than Government policy on any other department, but rather the teachers and, less noisily but no less determinedly, the staffs of the two universities. The dispute with the teachers is as much a consequence of internal rivalries in the profession as it is of ministerial hamhandedness - though of that there has been a fair amount. So, although Mr. Faulkner's tact, impartiality and ability to secure the confidence of all those involved with education, can help to secure agreement on salaries among the teachers, the ultimate solution lies in the distant future. For it will only be when the training, social backgrounds, and promotional opportunities are the same among the three branches of the teachers, that rivalry between them will cease. The other acute problem awaiting the Government's attention in the educational field also arises out of disagreements between members of the educational profession-if one can so describe all those who teach in primary, secondary and higher education. In this case the disagreement lies in the failure of the two universities in Dublin to find some means of following through the

proposal of Mr. O'Malley that they should merge. Unless the Council on Higher Education can perform some very remarkable feats of diplomacy the Minister for Education will be faced with the unpleasant choice of riding roughshod over the inclinations of all the staffs concerned or retreating from the Government's stated objective behind a smoke screen of "co-operation," "joint operation," and the like. In short, Mr. Lynch and his party went into the General Election of 1969

prormsmg the public no more and no less than a continuation of the policies which they had followed since Mr. Lemass's accession to power. They were returned with a handsome margin of superiority and Mr. Lynch constructed a Cabinet, which, despite numerous superficial changes, accurately reflects the character of the party's electoral victory. But whatever the people thought when they voted Fianna Fail back into office, the reality of the situation is that there is an urgent need for a wide range of reforms. Some of it, such as the need for an incomes policy, is obvious to the public. Other needs, such as that for a new source of finance for social services, is not so obvious. But taken altogether there is an overwhelming case, so far as the good of the country is concerned, for turning aside from the implications of the General Election and launching into a period of reform. Should Fianna Fail do just that, then the 19th Dail will see some of the most fundamental legislation since the founding of the state. But should the Government party follow the quiescent policies implied by the shape of the new Cabinet then the next five years should see Fianna Fail continually surprised by events, and increasingly certain of being out of office in the 20th Dail.

SPEAKING IN THE DAIL on the approval of members of the Government, Ritchie Ryan said that those Ministers who are able are not honest and those who are honest are not able. If the Taoiseach chooses when he is re-shuffling the cabinet or appointing the Parliamentary Secretaries, he can have a man who is palpably both able and honestMichael O'Kennedy, the new Fianna Fail T.D. for North Tipperary. O'Kennedy, a good-looking blond six-footer, was born 33 years ago in Nenagh, Co. Tipperary. He attended the local National School, the Christian Brothers and later St. Flannan's, Ennis. When O'Kennedy was 15 his father-who was a shopkeeper-died, leaving six children of whom Michael was the eldest boy. The subsequent years were ones of some hardship for the O'Kennedy family but ones which the new deputy remembers with pride. At 17 years of age O'Kennedy went to Maynooth to "give the priesthood a try." He tried it for H years, found it didn't suit him and left. While there he made friends with another fellow-student now also politically prominent, John Hume, Stormont M.P. for Foyle. On leaving Maynooth O'Kennedy went to D.C.D., where he resumed his studies of classics. He had won first place in the County Council scholarship. exam but had to supplement the 90 plus fees allowance accruing to him from that, by parttime teaching and grinding. He got 1st class honours in his B.A. and again honours in his M.A. (also in classics). While his devotion to classics was and remains profound - he felt the inkling to enter public life ever since he left Maynooth and with this in view he commenced legal studies in the King's Inns. One year later, however, feeling the itch to travel he went to Switzerland for a year, where he taught in an international school. On his return he resumed his legal studies while living off income derived from teaching in Ringsend Technical School. He was called to the Bar in 1963 and began the hard grind on the Tipperary circuithowever, though lacking any legal contacts initially - his likeability soon won him goodwill among solicitors. In 1963 O'Kennedy formally joined Fianna Fail-having been an active supporter of the party since his infancy. His father had been a founder member of the party but he had left it in 1947 to become Director of Elections for Clann na Poblachta in the Tipperary by-election of

that year. The senior O'Kennedy never re-joined Fianna Fail though he left the Clann on the day after the first Coalition Government was formed. Fianna Fail traditionally had two seats in North Tipperary. However, they lost one to Fine Gael in 1961. (Fine Gael had been represented in the constituency by Dan Morrissey, former Minister for Industry and Commerce, until 1957-it then lost its seat to Labour-so that really it was Labour which "held" the second Fianna Fail seat.) The Fianna Fail bosses recognised that they needed an attractive candidate to recapture the seat and they turned to Michael O'Kennedy-the dashing young barrister in the area (who had just married a very presentable young Athlone girl). O'Kennedy put up a magnificent show but just failed to win the seat. In the midst of his disappointment it was suggested to him that he try for the Senate and he jumped at the prospect. O'Malley, Lenihan and Haughey pushed his nomination through the party for the Educational and Cultural Panel and he was comfortably elected along with Liam o Buachalla and J. Nash on the same panel. Immediately O'Kennedy was appointed on the Senate front bench of his party and made a consistently favourable impact on all members. Garrett Fitzgerald's admiration for his qualities is very high "but I don't know what on earth he is doing in Fianna Fail!" On several occasions O'Kennedy lead mini-party revolutions in the Senate-notably on the Succession Bill-where his legal expertise stood to him well. It was on this occasion

that Brian Lenihan, then Minister for [ustice, was heard to remark to his civil servant who was insistent on not giving in "but what can I do with our front bench in revolt?" At the end of the Committee stage on that Bill Garrett Fitzgerald remarked on how constructive and effective opposition could be in the Senate (it had forced through amendments which had been rejected in the Dail), O'Kennedy irately shot to his feet to claim that the opposition had come from his side of the house! O'Kennedy enjoyed his four years in the Senate where he was very popular. He became a good friend of the late Ben O'Quigley, the former leader of Fine Gael in the Senate. He marvelled at his dedication on the donkey work in Committee. From his experience, O'Kennedy rejects the idea of a purely vocational Senate which, in his view, would be too sectarian and divisive. He prefers the present system, i.e., mix of vocationalism and party politics, "what's wrong with party politics?" While in the Senate O'Kennedy astutely "nursed" North Tipperary in careful preparation for the next election. He held weekly "confessions" and took up residence again in Nenagh. When the sitting Fianna Fail T.D. John Fanning announced his decision to retire O'Kennedy was the obvious heir apparent, and in the recent elections he topped the poll, winning on his own, 30% of the first preference votes, bringing in with him one of his running mates, Michael Smith of Roscrea, thereby depriving Labour of its seat which was held by Sean Tierney who had also retired. O'Kennedy's political outlook would seem to reflect in an unusually sophisticated manner the current attitudes of Fianna Fail, i.e., slightly right of centre. He defends the Criminal Justice Bill on the ground's that no rights are absolute and must be subjected, as in the constitution to law and order. "Those who are the most vociferous opponents of the Bill become its most vociferous supporters-having been caught for two hours in a traffic jam because of some demonstration." He favours the merger on the O'Malley grounds that Dublin cannot afford two second rate universities. In general he supports the economic growth phil osophy-"for without more wealth we cannot relieve the hardship of the underprivileged." His classical background has given a dimension to his thought unusual in a politician. We will be hearing much more of Michael O'Kennedy in the next four years.

THE CONVENT

CRUSADE
IT WAS certainly Jack Lynch's campaign. By car, aeroplane and helicopter he crisscrossed the convents of the country in one of the greatest crusades since the holy wars of the Chief. But as always nowadays it was Charlie Haughey's idea. Six months ago Haughey made up his mind when the Taoiseach should call an election. He had felt the revival of the party's morale from the doldrums of the referendum defeat. Despite the instant economic crisis of March he appreciated that the country's mood was buoyant and optimistic-but, most of all, he saw the opposition parties make a mess of it. Haughey-who still thinks that he would make a better Taoiseach than anybody else-realised that the best thing Fianna Fail had going for them was Jack Lynch-therefore the strategy was to expose Jack as much as possible and he got his Tacateer friends Des McGreevey and Eoin Kenny to plan Jack's job of journeywork. When the budget began to shape up well the final decision was made to go to the country in mid-June. Neil Blaney was the most outspoken opponent of a June election-wanting to postpone it until the autumn-but Charlie had made up his mind. So when the budget, the Electorate Amendment Bill and the Fine Gael Ard Fheis were out of the way--off they went. Charlie with Desmond O'Kennedy wrote and designed all the advertisements-wrote the T.V. scripts for all Fianna Fail speeches and quite a few other speeches for the Taoiseach as well. And all this was while he frequently was doubled in pain with a stone in his kidney. While Haughey proved himself as a first rate backroom boy-Jack was proving himself as an excellent front man. Despite an inauspicions start to his tour in Kilkenny, and minor incidents in the Gaeltacht and Dundalk -his country-wide. parade was a magnificent success. Charges of arrogance, corruption and dishonesty just don't stick to Lynch-the affable sportsman. He could talk knowledgably about hurling and football to the old stalwarts and young aspirants at every crossroads-and his ever-sure belt of the sliothar didn't do any harm either. Jack's tour was not one of a compelling, exciting leader of the Kennedy mould or of the awe-inspiring mystique of the de Valera-de Gaulle ilk, but rather of the hurling hero who exemplified those qualities most beloved in rural Irelandtrue sportsmanship, skill and quiet determination. The times when only he could clear the raging crowds from Thurles and Killarney pitches by a few quiet words, "Come on now lads-get off the field." And of the countless
6

hurling feats he accomplished without ever deliberately fouling-were recalled again and again even in the land of the old foe-Tipperary. They seemed much more important than the third programme or the Buchanan report and maybe rightly so. Looking back now some Fianna Fail people said that the convents were overworked-but Jack's rendering of "The Bould Thady Quill" to the nuns and two-stepping with the sistersproved the goodness that was in him and "sure anyone that would be going again him must be a communist," and the word went out the children were father of the men. "Let's back Jack" was the campaign's best slogan-for it got the message through and the issue was very clearly "do we want to risk these commies or these Fine Gael "do dahs" or both together, when we can have honest dependable Jack-one of our own. Had Charlie left the back room more often the result might have been differentbut he knew better. Blaney stayed up in Donegal-he knew better too-and wouldn't even come down to do the T.V. broadcast. Paddy Hillery filled in and Blaney didn't give a tupenny curse. Colley tried to angle in on the act by announcing a new dollop of factories. Charlie was furious and so was Jack and that was the end of the factories. The "Fine Gael Will Win" banner was a sick joke from the outset and was rivalled by the "Fine Gael are Ready to Govern" with the pinchy photograph of a moth-eaten Cosgrave underneath. 'Leave Liam Alone" might have been more apt-except for the fact that nobody needed to be told. Poor Liam wasn't up to the crusading lark and there were few nights he didn't sleep in his own little bed at home-and few mornings that saw him out before halften. But then Liam's idea of a full-time politician's week is 6 hours for three days, 2 on one other day and the telephone off the hook after 7,00 p.m. every evening. Liam didn't read too bad in the papers when Michael Sweetman could take time out from his own campaign in Dublin North West-but on his own we had the "reports coming in from the country indicating a massive swing to Fine Gael" and the like. But Liam wasn't entirely to blame. Tom O'Higgins didn't move far beyond South County Dublin-and him the Presidential candidate and a great reputation all over. Gerry Sweetman-apart from being eaten up by Haughey on T.V. laid low and the party's whiz-kid Garret Fitzgerald huffed in South East over the treatment meted out to Maurice "The Liberator" O'Connell. Declan Costello

went off to sulk in Spain leaving his Just Society to rot on the lips of the Ritchie Ryans and the Paddy Donegans. Apart from Jack himself-"Brending" Corish made the best effort. He did his stint in the country and if he left the New Republic in Earlsfort Terrace after him-what matter. Brendan Halligan "the cleric in mufti" worked hard that his chausables and sou tans are all hanging off him. And litttle help he got from the new recruits. Thornley beamed from behind his battered nose at the housewives of Glasnevin and Ballymun and who cares about socialism when you've got sex appeal? The Cruiser was the stickiest of them all-he went after the biggest fish in the pool and stayed there nibbling at him and sure enough he got into the Dail clinging on to Haughey's throat. It was such a pity about all those smears really-wasn't it? It's such a shame that in this day and age people should be called "communists" and "queers". Anyway-'twas quite an interesting campaign in the good old style (and none of your Marshall McLuwan T.V. guff). 'Twill be better next time around when Jack is in the Park and Charlie, Conor and Garret will be doing the rounds.

By GARRETT

FITZGERALD

A STRIKING FEATURE of the 1969 General Election campaign was the evidence of a marked swing against the Government in the Dublin area. Yet although when the votes were counted this swing was as evident as during the campaign itself - the Government party's share of the Dublin vote was reduced by no less than 18% - Fianna Fail nevertheless returned with an increased majority, securing 75 seats as against the- 72 they won in the 1965 General Election. How did this happen? There are two main reasons for this out-turn. One is the fact that on this occasion, uncharacteristically, the country did not follow Dublin at all; indeed outside Dublin Fianna Fail's share of the poll was fraction tally higher than in 1965-47.65% as against 47.5%. The other reason was that Fianna Fail's votes yielded a higher return in seats this time, partly, but not solely, because of the way in which the constituency revision was carried out by the Government. The Differential Swing While there is a clear contrast between the drop in Fianna Fail's share of the poll in Dublin, (from 48.2% to 39.5%, a fall of almost one-fifth), and the stability of its vote in the rest of the country taken as a whole, there are marked regional differences in the voting pattern. Comparisons with the 1965 General Election are of course rendered difficult by the extensive changes in constituency boundaries, but it is possible by grouping certain constituencies together - e.g. those of North Leinster together with Monaghan and Cavan; or Donegal together with much of Connaught and Clare-to make valid comparisons between the results of the two elections. The country may be divided into five well-defined geographical regions for the purpose of this analysis. First of all in the cities of Dublin and Limerick, (but not Cork), there was a very large swing to Labour, principally at the expense of Fianna Fail but also, to a small degree, at the expense of Fine Gael. In the east and south-east outside Dublin there was a clear-cut and almost universal swing from Fianna Fail to Fine Gael. Of the areas in this region in respect of which valid comparisons can be made, only Louth failed to show this pattern. There the three parties' shares of the vote were almost completely static. It is possible that Fine Gael's failure to achieve gains at the expense of Fianna Fail in Louth may have had something to do with disagreements within the Fine Gael organisation over the question of a candidate from Dundalk. Labour's position within this eastern and south-eastern area varied somewhat from place to place; it held its own in Wicklow and in Louth, and lost very little ground in the rest of the

"Overall majority a result of gerrymandering"

northern part of this area, but it suffered set-backs in Carlow-Kilkenny, in Waterford, and, to a lesser degree, in Wexford, Brendan Corish's own constitunecy. There the situation was complicated by the presence this time of two Independent candidates but if their votes are allocated to the parties which benefited from their elimination, emerges that Labour's share of the party vote fell slightly from 321,% in 1965 to 31 % this time. The third area to be considered is Cork and Kerry. There the two main parties both gained votes at the expense

of Labour and Independents-Fine Gael gaining a little more than Fianna Fail. In the middle of the country, in the counties of Laois, Offaly and Tipperary, Fianna Fail gained from both Labour and Fine Gael- principally from the former party. And finally in the West of Ireland, from Clare to Donegal, Fianna Fail gained ground slightly at the expense of Fine Gael almost everywhere, increasing its share of the poll on average by about 3% or 4%. As Labour also secured more votes than previously, partly as a result of putting up candidates where none had stood for Labour in 1965, Fine Gael's share of the vote was cut by about 7t% on average in this region. Thus Fine Gael gained ground in the east and south, and lost some support in Dublin and Limerick, and in the midlands and west. Fianna Fail lost heavily in the cities of Dublin and Limerick and also lost support throughout the east and south-east, but gained some ground everywhere else. And Labour gained ground in Dublin and Limerick, held its own in parts of Leinster, and gained a little support in the west, although this was somewhat illusory in character, reflecting rather the presence for the first time of Labour candidates in some areas than a swing in votes. In the midlands, south-east and south, Labour lost a lot of ground -and a number of seats. One result of this very mixed geographical voting system is that the regional disparities in the voting strengths of the two principal parties have been greatly reduced. In 1965 Fine Gael polled 35% less votes than Fianna Fail in the east and south of the country; this time its vote was only 25% lower than that of Fianna Fail in this area. By contrast in the rest of Ireland, where in 1965 Fine Gael's vote was only 18% below that of Fianna Fail,

it is now running about 26% below Fianna Fail's. Thus the two principal parties are now similarly matched throughout the country as a whole. Labour, by contrast, which previously had at least one-fifth of the votes throughout the south-east and south, including Tipperary, now finds itself with this proportion of the vote only in Dublin, Wicklow, Wexford and Waterford. It is now much more of a regional party than previously. The Seat/Vote Ratio So much for the way the votes went. What about the seats? Everyone knows that in this election Fianna Fail's votes yielded them more seats than previously. Although the Government party's share of the total vote was reduced by over 4%, its share of seats in the Dail was increased by 4%. Only once before in its history has Fianna Fail secured such a large bonus of seats, beyond the proportion to which its share of the votes entitled it. In the exceptional circumstances of 1943, when almost one-fifth of the electorate voted for candidates other than those nominated by the three main

parties, Fianna Fail's share of the seats was almost 16% greater than its share of the votes. On no other occasion has there been a disproportion as great as on this occasion; Fianna Fail's share of the seats is now 14% greater than its share of the votes. Of course the largest party always secures some 'bonus' of this kind. Thus in 1965 Fianna Fail's share of seats was just under 5% greater than its share of votes, and in the five elections between 1951 and 1965 the 'bonus' averaged about 6%. If in this election Fianna Fail's bonus had been of average size, its reduced share of the vote would have given it 70/69 seats. If its 'bonus' had been the same as in 1965 it would have had 69 seats. Instead it has 75. Why? To answer this question satisfactorily it is necessary to look at the regional results in some detail. In this election Fianna Fail secured 39t% of the Dublin vote, but secured 17 out of 38

Dublin seats - 45% of the seats, or 2 more than its share. This reflects the result of the revision of constituency boundaries in Dublin, and the introduction of 4-seat constituencies in as many cases as possible, which certainly ensured a bonus of 2 seats. It should be said that this bonus already existed in the last Dail when the 1961 distribution yielded 1 or 2 more seats than Fianna Fail's share of the vote entitled it to. In other words the 4-seat device in Dublin merely preserved a bonus which Fianna Fail already had, and did not contribute to the increased bonus it secured this time At the same time the Dublin redistribution was extremely ingenious, and in conjunction with the fact that Fianna Fail's share of the vote fell below 37t% -the critical figure to secure 2 out of 4 seats-in only two of ten constituencies, it enabled Fianna Fail to hold an advantage that might otherwise have been lost. The areas where Fianna Fail secured extra seats as a result of its additional 'bonus' were Cork, Waterford, LaoisOffaly, and the west, where it secured two extra seats. It is arguable also that

NOTE: The areas dealt with above are those in respect of which reasonably valid comparisons are possible between the 1965 and 1969 General Elections. There are minor differences in boundaries between three groups of areas, viz. between N. Leinster/Cavan/Monaghan and the area described as the Rest of the West; between Cork and Kerry; and between West Galway and the area described as the Rest of the West; but these differences are too small to have any significant effect upon the figures.

its retention of 4 seats in Co. Limerick, despite a drop in its share of the vote from 54% to 45 % also represents an extra 'bonus', but as half its drop in votes in Limerick was due to the intervention of Mrs. Hilda O'Malley, it is arguable whether a fairer distribution of seats within Limerick would in fact have led to the loss of a Fianna Fail seat. If one examines the five constituencies mentioned above, one finds that in two cases the Fianna Fail gains were largely fortuitous viz. in Laois-Offaly and in Waterford. In both cases the constituency boundaries remained unchanged, and Fianna Fail gained seats from Labour because the Labour share of the poll dropped. In the other three cases however, it is fair to credit the constituency redistribution with the gains secured by Fianna Fail. Of course in Cork the drop in the Labour poll would in the normal way have led to the loss of one seat by Labour, which would have gone to Fine Gael. But owing to the redistribution of the Cork constituencies Labour lost not one seat but three-and Fianna Fail and Fine Gael each gained one more seat than their shares of the poll entitled them to. But the main gain from the constituency redistribution was obtained in the west, with its solid mass of 3-seat constituencies. In the last Dail Fianna Fail, with 50i% of the votes in this area, secured 54!% of the seats-18 out of 33. This was one more than its share; with this proportion of the vote it should have had 17 seats. To sum up then-Fianna Fail's share of the vote entitled it to 66 seats in this Dail. The normal 'bonus' secured by the largest party under PR, with constituencies ranging from three to five seats, would have raised this to 69 or 70, and it is possible that because of special circumstances in this election-the decline in Labour support in certain rural areas where they had only a tenuous hold on certain marginal seats - this figure might have been raised to 71 or 72. But the fact that the Government has an overall majority of 75 seats is the direct result of the gerrymandering of Cork and of the west, and the way in which the 4-seat constituencies in the Dublin area preserved an abnormally large 'bonus' secured, perhaps fortuitously, by Fianna Fail in the 1965 election. At the same time the gerrymander would not have given Fianna Fail an overall majority had it not been for that party's success in improving its poll in the west and south, and part of the midlands, which went a long way towards offsetting its loss of votes to Labour in Limerick and Dublin and to Fine Gael in the rest of the east and south-east.

Sl AGNAliON RENEWAL

OR
conservatives in blaming Labour for not co-operating when they themselves opposed any form of co-operation whatsoever. Fine Gael is still essentially the same. One thing that seems reasonably certain is that Liam Cosgrave will not lead the party into another General Election. However, his departure will probably be somewhat more dignified than Dillon's following the 1965 General Election. One cannot point to any substantial source of support for Cosgrave within the party. He has long been discredited in the eyes of the leftwingers and his reputation among the other party members has consistently sagged since the referendum. Even his major prop, Gerard Sweetman, cannot now be relied upon, for Sweetman undoubtedly sees the writing on the wall, and will now be concerned not so much to protect Cosgrave as to ensure that an "undesirable" will not succeed. Surprisingly, there is no shortage of candidates for the leadership. Paddy Donegan has nursed secret ambitions for over a year now and a few months ago held a top-secret meeting in Athlone to boost his candidature. Donegan was elected Vice-Chairman of the party by a large vote at the recent Ard Fheis but in view of the blatant fiddling of the ballot this result is not of itself significant. If Donegan were to make it , which is unlikely, Fine Gael would become a rural based taca-party, even more conservative than the Fianna Fail urban based one, and, needless to say the left-wingers would depart en bloc. Donegan would be a likely candidate with Sweetman's support and

FINE GAEL has greeted the election results with predictably diverse reactions. On the one hand the conservative wing gloat at the repudiation of

in the absence of another right-of-centre candidate he could muster a few votes from the diminishing number of T.D's who consider that Fine Gael has strayed too far from its traditional business man and professional base. Another contender would likely be Tom Fitzpatrick, T.D. for Cavan, who would probably run as a middle-of-the road man but with a little more dynamism than Cosgrave. At the moment his campaign has just begun and one cannot really determine the strength of his possible support. However, his election would be also anathema to the left and he would be unlikely to contain the ambitions of the other aspirants. With Fitzpatrick as Leader, Fine Gael would change hardly at all and would drift with the prevailing political tide. Of course, the obvious successor to

LIAM COSGRAVE "May not lead the Party into another General Election." Labour and its own re-establishment "as the only alternative to Fianna Fail," while at the same time blaming Labour for handing the election to the government by refusing to co-operate. On the other hand, the younger and more radical elements view the results as a defeat of old fashioned Fine Gaelism as exemplified by Gerard Sweetman, and point to the hypocrisy of the

Cosgrave is Tom O'Higgins, the former Presidential candidate and currently the party's spokesman on Finance. O'Higgins, though stodgy, is considerably less so than either Donegan or Fitzpatrick, and he is, perhaps, the only one of the three, that could now keep the party together. Whereas, under O'Higgins there would be few dramatic changes, nevertheless, the influence of progressives, such as Garret Fitzgerald, would be more keenly felt than now, and the possibility of co-operation with Labour would be enhanced. A long-term possibility is Garret Fitzgerald. Currently, his popularity in the party is at a rather low ebb, for he has, apparently, been seen to breach party discipline which, of course, is the mortal sin in the Fine Gael book. To many of the backbenchers Fitzgerald is a little too clever and, of course, to the Sweetman mob he is a dangerous leftie. However, Garret's prestige in the party

The outcome of the Senate election will have a significant bearing on the emerging leadership contest. If people like Alexis Fitzgerald and Michael Sweetman get elected, then Tom O'Higgins would seem to be assured of the leadership if he wanted it, which is, of course, a moot point. Otherwise, Garret Fitzgerald's chances would be enormously enhanced. One significant factor in the Fine Gael equation now is the absence of James Dillon. Dillon, through his prestige and powers of persuasion, was a huge conservatising influence within the party, and one who always successfully squashed any leadership crisis by his rhetorical pleas for party unity against
1

the common enemy. His absence now means that one of the great unifying bonds of the party is no more and the conservative heavy weight has got off the scales. In a sense the country's entire political development over the next number of years is dependent on the outcome of the Fine Gael leadership contest. If either Donegan or Fitzpatrick win or, by some fluke, Cosgrave remains, then we can expect stagnation and continued political apathy. However, if either O'Higgins or Fitzgerald make it, and particularly the latter, then we would seem to be assured of a radical alliance between Fine Gael and Labour, and in the next election a real alternative to Fianna Fail. Really, the choice is between stagnation or renewal.

MICHAEL SWEETMAN Tried hard in Dublin North-West is likely to improve with his Dail performances. For the party will see him, for the first time, using considerable powers of intellect and personality in the daily battle with Fianna Fail, rather than in the party rooms against the Fine Gael establishment. All politicians admire winners and Garret is likely to be a winner-at least in the Dail. Of course, with Fitzgerald as Leader of Fine Gael the party would be entirely transformed and the overall political stagnation arrested. For Fitzgerald would move Fine Gael significantly leftwards towards the Labour Party and a coalition between the two with Fitzgerald as Taoiseach would be an inevitability. The chances of Fitzgerald becoming leader' would appear to be decidedly remote at this stage, for the opposition he would encounter from the Sweetman/ Donegan and possibly Fitzpatrick nexus would be formidable. In any event, there are genuine misgivings, even among Garret's most ardent admirers about his leadership qualities. Indeed, those very human qualities of unusual tolerance and fair-mindedness, which Fitzgerald possesses in abundance, could well be his greatest defects as leader. In the hearts of a few remaining starry-eyed optimists in the party there still lingers hope that Declan Costello will come back and lead Fine Gael out of limbo. Costello, of course, had he remained in politics, would have been the obvious successor to Cosgrave. However, his refusal to stand in this election, whatever his disillusionment with Fine Gael as it was, is regarded as an act close to betrayal and many of his former friends won't quickly forget it. However, stranger things have been known to happen in politics and the Costellos have always been a law unto themselves.

Declan Costello, age 42, married, with 5 children-son of former Taoiseach John Costello, educated at Xavier's College, Donnybrook, U.CD. (B.A. 1st Class Honours Economics) and the King's Inns. Called to the Bar in 1948 and to the Inner Bar in 1965 where he is now one of the country's leading senior counsels. He was first elected to the Dail in 1951 as Fine Gael TD. for Dublin North West. It is widely believed that he was omitted from the Cabinet of the second Inter-Party Government (195457) because his father was Taoiseach. Nevertheless, he remained very active during that period as an ardent advocate of progressive social and economic policies. Following numerous unsuccessful attempts from 1957-1964 to persuade Fine Gael to move lejtuiards he finally succeeded in 1964, with the aid of a Fianna Fail inspired press leak, to have the draft of a new policy programme adopted by the party. Then singlehanded he pushed through the policy "Towards a Just Society"-encountering intransigent opposition from the entrenched conservative core-Dillon, Sweetman, O'Higgins (Michael)-suspicious apathy from the majority of the remainder and some support from his father, Paddy McGilligan, Pat Harte and Denis Farrelly. Immediately following the 1965 . General Election James Dillon resigned as leader of Fine Gael and Cosgrave was manoeuvred into the leadership by

an inner cabal consisting of Dillon, Sweetman and himself. Their main purpose was to "block" Costello who during the Just Society "debates" had shown an alarming amount of ambition. In 1966 Costello announced his decision to retire from politics for health reasons-he had been physically and mentally exhausted by the endless

and often frustrating committee work on the Just Society policy. In November 1968 following appeals mainly from Garret Fitzgerald and the Young Tiger element in Fine Gael-he offered to re-consider his decision to retire. But the party hierarchy showed little inclination to have him back and even less inclination to share his ideals -so he stayed out. Brendan Corish and Brendan Halligan of the Labour Party made incessant efforts at this stage to persuade him to join their party or to form a new party (the Social Democratic) or even to remain in Fine Gael. Costello, though sympathetic to Labour policies believed that it was futile to operate from such a meagre base as the Labour Partyimpractical to form a new party and pointless remaining on in Fine Gael when Labour refused to join a coalition. Both Corish and Halligan, while reaffirming their determination to stay out of a coalition after the 1969 election-nevertheless argued that their decision was valid only for the immediate future and was open to reconsideration thereafter. Costello was unimpressed. With the return of Fianna Fail to power-new political re-alignments will have to be considered. Declan Costello though not a member of the 19th Dail will inevitably be a focal point of any negotiations or talks on this question. His contribution below begins a debate which is likely to dominate political discussion in the next few years.

FINE GAEL AND LABOUR NOW

By DECLAN COSTELLO
THE RIGHT back-lash is now to be anticipated in Irish politics - not, perhaps, demonstrating the startling characteristics which are to be observed in other countries, but nonetheless affecting powerfully the future of Irish political development. It is likely to influence each of the political parties, but in different ways and in varying degrees. In the case of Fianna Fail it would be a mistake to talk in terms of a possible victory of the Right over the Left. Like many conservative parties, Fianna Fail is divided into factions, not wings. Those who wistfully desire a polarisation of Irish politics and talk of the Left of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael joining Labour usually have some difficulty in naming names when they are asked to particularise-particularly when examining Fianna Fail. Indeed it is almost an impossible task, for its factions may start stirring again. But
12

there will be no doctrinal disputes, with one wing triumphing over another. In relation to Fianna Fail, therefore, the Right back-lash will not influence the balance of power within the Party, but it will certainly influence the policies which the Party will follow in government. Fianna Fail has always been a party which carefully gauges the public mood. Indeed this is one of its greatest weaknesses, for in spite of the great power which it has enjoyed over the years it has frequently failed to exercise it, because of its interpretation of what is politically wise. Fianna Fail will have taken careful political soundings in recent weeks. To its ears these will almost certainly have contained a simple message. Anything smacking of Left-wing policies should be out. To play safe is to be safe. Eschew adventure, in economics, politics, social welfare-at home as well as abroad. And so the progress and direction of the government will remain the same as it has been for years past. No dramatic changes in legislation are to be expected; modest minor improvements here and there from time to time is all that will be thought necessary. The rule of cautious unimaginative uninspiring expediency will continue.

It is on the two opposition parties that the Right back lash is most likely to be more directly felt. At first sight it might appear that the Labour party might suffer the most. After all, it is now a widely held view that the Labour policy documents adopted by the 1969 Convention were responsible for Labour's defeat, and it is argued that the opponents of the Party's new socialist image will seek their revenge. But such an argument is a gross oversimplification of a complicated situation. The concept of the Labour Party, divided between the decent clothcapped conservative trade-unionists on the one-hand, and long-haired intellectuals on the other was a caricature (but one which, incidentally Fianna Fail successfully paraded in speech and canvass). Even, however, if it is true that the conservative element in the Party comprised in the main the members of the Oireachtas Party elected from outside Dublin (and even to that generality there would have to be reservations), a simple counting of heads will show that there are not so many of them around now. Obviously Labour is going to have to do a great deal of re-thinking, but amongst the deputies in the Labour party who will

do the most of H there is a good majority of those who supported the New Republic. It seems highly probable that the party must run into serious controversy within its ranks, but it is equalIy improbable that decisions wUI be made which do not have the backing of the majority of the Oireachtas Party. If controversy erupts into disputes, it is difficult to see victory going to those who are identified with the Right of the party. A further factor has also to be considered. It is a notorious fact that minority parties in opposition, unburdened by prospect of immediate governmental responsibility, are likely to be more extreme in their statements and criticisms than those who believe themselves close to achieving power. This natural tendency is, in the case of the Labour Party, likely to be accentuated by the frustrations and annoyances which the Fianna Fail government will certainly engender in the months and years ahead. It would be very surprising if the Labour voice in the Dail was in any way a muffled one, or if the Labour stance is altered to any significant extent. Fine Gael finds itself once again in its, by now, accustomed place on the Opposition benches. There is a considerable danger that instead of examining itself for possible shortcomings it may use Labour as a convenient scapegoat. The theory goes this way. Labour strategy in the election (by refusing coalition or even support) and/or Labour policies ("cuban," "foreign" or "maoist" socialism) are responsible for the fact that Fine Gael is not in power, because the people were given no alternative to Fianna Fail and/or because they were frightened into voting for Fianna Fail. Before examining the effects of this theory, a few comments on it should be made A strong case can be made that the results of this election might have been very different if there had been a pre-election programme agreed between Labour and Fine Gael and a firm alternative to Fianna Fail offered to the electorate. The causes of the failure to achieve such a development go back many years, and to put alI the blame on Mr. Corish is again a gross over-simplification. But many of those who now blame Labour's strategy were in the past most strongly opposed to any rapprochement with Labour, which opposition in turn had its reactions on Labour thinking. The suggestion that Fine Gael's failures are to be blamed on Labour's policies (as distinct from its strategy) also requires some analysis. Labour, it is said, went too far; faced with the prospect of a doctrinaire socialism the electorate was stampeded into voting back Fianna Fail into power. But this is not what happened in Dublin City

(where Labour gained seats) and Labour party policies are obviously not an adequate excuse for Fine Gael's unsatisfactory result in the capital. Nor does it explain Fine Gael's failure to pick up more seats outside Dublin. The theory breaks down before the results in East Mayo, Cavan and Monaghan. Why did these constituencies give Fine Gael two seats out of three? Was the electorate in these areas immune to threats of cuban socialism whilst people elsewhere were not? And surely, if Labour's policies alienated one of the Opposition parties would it not be reasonable to expect that this would have been to the benefit of the other. True or false, the Labour scape-goat theory may gain strength and could have serious consequences. Most obviously, it would deflect attention from an examination of Fine Gael's role in Irish politics and possible explanations for its failure seriously to challenge Fianna Fail to-date. But furthermore the adherents of the policy could use it to stultify the efforts of those in the party who might seek some sort of understanding with Labour in the future. Again, now that the challenge has been warded off, the old beguiling idea that Fine Gael alone could beat Fianna Fail could gain new recruits Policy-making could also be discouraged. There are always those in every political party who are opposed to working out policies on the ground that they only divide the party, antagonise support, and give weapons to the opposition. And those who oppose policy - making because they usualIy find the results unpalatable will point to any streak of pink that may appear in any Fine Gael statement or speech and warn of the electoral' dangers of such a line. Fine Gael's move to the Left might not only grind to a halt-it could also be discreetly reversed. These developments could materially effect Fine Gael's relations with the Labour Party. They could also significantly affect the long-term prospects of the Party itself. It is welI known that within the ranks of Fine Gael there are a number of excelIent young intelligent people who without hesitation would calI themselves socialists. Their continued presence in the Party is far from guaranteed, nor is there any firm prospect that there will continue to be an influx of new people with progressive sympathies. Labour supporters find it hard to understand how people with progressive views either join or stay in the Fine Gael party. The explanation is not hard to find. Their initial memo bership may have been the result of heredity, or friendships or even chance.

But their continued membership depends on a conscious exercise of judgment. Power is what politics is about. To achieve power to realise certain aims and ideals is what politicians should work for. Fine Gael with 50 seats is obviously much closer to power than Labour is. As long, therefore, as there is a reasonable prospect that Fine Gael in power would implement the ideas which the progressives hold then the attractions of membership of Fine Gael are clear. There is, of course, no immediate prospect that the status quo ante belIum will be altered. Decisions taken in the next few months, however, could have important long-term effects. There are those in both Fine Gael and Labour who see how disastrous it would be if the 1973 election was fought on the same terms as the elections of 1969 and 1965-disastrous not merely in terms of electoral support but for the political and economic development of the country. To gain support for their point of view is not simply a question of prevailing over the extreme wings of the two parties. The powerful force of party loyalties will be encountered. It is hard for those outside active politics to appreciate what this means. The outside cynic does not realise that the great majority of party supporters give their time and energy out of genuine idealism, from no selfish motive, and with an enthusiasm that can sometimes border on fanatacism. Without this dedicated loyalty democratic politics as we know them would not work. If, however, the ultimate loyalty is to the organisation which is to implement the ideas, and not to the ideas themselves (as can frequently be the case) the common good can suffer. Co-operation between parties merely for the sake of power and to share out the jobs would be a form of treason. But to refuse co-operation which could result in a government genuinely committed to a programme of social reform could also be treasonable The best is the enemy of the good. Both Fine Gael and Labour could welI believe that a government of their own party would be the best for the country. But circumstances might not permit this. Human nature being what it is, a refusal to compromise may in certain conditions stem from intelIectual arrogance, or unwillingness to accept responsibility, as welI as from principle. It is easy enough to sketch a course of action. It is more difficult to get it accepted as desirable. It is more difficult still to ascertain the circumstances in which it should be folIowed. In present circumstances, however, it seems to at least one observer of Irish politics that the problems facing the opposition parties can only be resolved, and the reforms required in Irish society assured, by folIowing the way here indicated.

IT HAS BEEN a disappointing, embittering, but also an enriching and maturing election for the Labour Party. Disappointing because of its loss of four seats; embittering because of the campaign of smear and vilification; enriching because of the influx of new "quality" deputies; and maturing for its new socialist policies have been electorally seasoned. Of course the Labour Party had been foolish to expect to win up to 30 seats in the election, for while it could reasonably expect to gain four or five seats in Dublin, it should have foreseen that these gains would be offset, at least somewhat, by losses in the country, notably Laois/Offaly, Clare and Kildare. Furthermore, it should have been recognised that as the party's new policies were so explicitly urban orientated this would necessarily occasion a backlash in the country which could have lost a few seats. Had these rational predictions been made (though it is easy to say so now with hindsight) by the Labour Party prior to the election, then the euphoria which had so enveloped the party would not have been replaced by such deep depression among the rank and file now. The election has instilled a roaring rancour in the Labour soul which has unfortunately sometimes exhibited itself as petty pique. However, the anger is understandable when one remembers the charges of communism, Trinity queers, etc., and more particularly the covert rumours. But politics is largely a matter of communication and in failing to dispel the communist and other charges the Labour men failed as politicians. But the significant outcome of the election for Labour is, of course, the radical transformation in the character of its Dail representatives. During the period of the last DaH, the Labour Party contingent was demonstrably unrepresentative of the new thinking within the Party as exemplified in successive conferences. The only deputies who gave any expression to the New Republic ideas were Michael O'Leary and, to a lesser extent, Brendan Corish, Frank Cluskey and, perhaps, Eileen Desmond. The vast majority of their colleagues were, at best, unsympathetic to the new trend. Thus, the Labour movement was, to a large extent, incohesive and divided. The replacement of the hard core of die-hards (within Labour terms) including Tom Kyne, Henry Byrne and Pat McAuliffe, though excluding Mrs. Desmond, by such articulate spokesmen of the new policies as Conor Cruise O'Brien, David Thornley, Justin Keating and Noel Browne, necessarily re-establishes a unity and cohesion to the Party, 14

and, most significantly, gives its thoughtful policies the mouth-pieces they demand. On the question of Labour and rural Ireland it was disastrous of Brendan Corish to suggest that the country people were not sufficiently sophisticated to understand Labour policies. For, apart from the implied insult involved, it missed the point. The Labour

CONOR CRUISE O'BRIEN "An obvious choice as leader ... but not yet." Party's failure in rural Ireland is attributable to two factors: the first is that there was never much hard core Labour support in rural areas anyway, and where Labour held seats it was attributable to the personality of the candidates more than a solid Labour vote. Therefore, as happened in four of the constituencies where Labour lost a seat, where the "personality" was not standing again-it was discovered that there was simply no substantial Labour vote in these constituencies where they lost out. In one case (Waterfordwhere Kyne would have got in had he stood on his own) the loss was due to bad tactics, and in the other two, MidCork and North East Cork, the rearrangement of constituency boundaries was an important factor. The second point is that the new Labour policies were never clearly explained in a rural or agricultural context. Socialism has traditionally been an urban phenomenon and has rarely been adapted to rural conditions. It is easy to identify the Labour Party with the urban worker - a good deal less easy with the rural worker and small farmer. Rural Ireland is beset with discontent and despair due to the decay of society there. This is fundamentally a social concern and the Labour Party must now analyse the rural problem and

offer remedies consistent with its wider aims. The influx of the new radicals into the Party and Dail group paradoxically will make the Party less radical and image-wise, more responsible. The power within the Party will now transfer to the Dail from the conferencefor while the conference will theoretically and perhaps in fact remain the centre of decision-making it will now be led by the Dail members whose experience of the daily political battle will mature their judgment and refine their general political approach. This does not mean that the new policies will be abandoned or diluted but rather presented in a more practical, less extravagant manner. The Party cannot for long postpone the leadership question. While Brendan Corish was ideally suited to hold the Party together during its regenerationit is now clear that the new Labour Party demands a new figurehead and chief spokesman. Fortunately Corish is neither vain nor ungenerous and probably is fully aware of the need for change himself. Conor Cruise O'Brien is of such remarkably outstanding qualities that he is an obvious choice-but not yet. His own image as a politician must mature and he must prove his durability and dedication. There will be demanding tests on one of such diverse competences and of impatient energies. He must also, of course, prove his ability to get on with lesser mortals. In two years' time if O'Brien can discipline himself to the drudgery of the Dail and avoid Cubanesque blunders-then the Labour Party could be offering the country the leader of the century. And finally to Coalition. Already it is obvious that the Party's attitude is changed somewhat. The chief proponent of the no coalition idea-Michael O'Leary-speaking in the Dail on the first day of its assembly said that Labour would not join with any party which did not sincerely share its beliefs. Gone was the "no coalition under any circumstances" attitude. This change of mentality is somewhat augmented by the new deep hatred Labour now share with Fine Gael of Fianna Fail. Whereas this is an inauspicious incentive to come together-it could act as a valuable catalyst. Furthermore, O'Brien, Thornley and Keating cannot be expected to consign themseves to the opposition benches indefinitely. Then, of course, there is Noel Browne who has always been sympathetic to the coalition idea. Despite this obvious thaw in Labour's attitude to coalition-if Fine Gael remains or becomes more conservativethen Labour cannot but refuse an alliance and then presumably it is Fianna Fail yet again. So it's up to Fine Gael.

DR. JOHN
IT IS A SODRCE of some amuse. ment to many of Dr. O'Donovan's former students of Economics at U.CD. that "[ohnno" has ended up on the Labour benches of the Dail besides such unlikely comrades as Dr. Noel Browne and Dr. Conor Cruise O'Brien. Dr. O'Donovan has revealed himself in his well-attended classes as an economist of strikingly orthodox views and, potentially, at least, a politician of decidedly conservative tendencies. Will the professor who ambled so aimably through D.C.D.'s academic cloisters now prowl the corridors of power brandishing the thoughts of Chairman Mao? In short, has the genial don become "J ohnno the Red?" Alas, no ... Dr. O'Donovan is not a political transvestite; no incredible change has taken place beneath the benign exterior and the impish grin; "Iohnno's" allegiance may have changed, but his convictions have not. His past is chequered, but his record is consistent. Educated at C.D.S., D.CD., Oxford and a number of American universities (which include Harvard and the University of Chicago), he holds a Doctorate in Economic Science from N.D.I., and a B.Litt. from Oxford. He was a Principal Officer in the Department of Finance from 1943 until he joined the staff of D.C.D. as Lecturer in Economic Theory in 1951. O'Donovan's entry into politics happened in an intriguing manner. Paddy Lynch, now Chairman of Aer Lingus and a colleague of Dr. O'Donovan's in the D.C.D. Department of Economics was during the first Coalition Government private secretary to John A. Costello, the Taoiseach. Mr. Costello and his sonin-law Alexis Fitzgerald, (who with Lynch was the power behind the throne) endeavoured to persuade Paddy Lynch to quit the Civil Service and stand with Mr. Costello as Fine Gael candidate for Dublin South East in the 1954 election. Professor Lynch, having considered the offer at some length decided against but recommended a colleague and friend of his at the time, John O'Donovan. Dr. O'Donovan was approached and accepted because he felt that "the McEntee budget of 1st April, 1952 represented a deplorable approach to the finances of the country which was directly intended to prove that McGilligan's system of finance was not genuine." He said that with the abolition of food subsidies wages rose and the effects of this were not really felt for some time. This created difficulties for the second Inter-party Government. O'Donovan stood with Costello in Dublin South East in 1954, stating

O'DONOVAN

RETURNS TO

POLITICS

explicitly at the time that his object was to "drive Dr. Noel Browne (who was standing in that constituency with McEntee as a Fianna Fail candidate) out of public life for ever." He achieved his objective, at least temporarily by defeating Browne by 100 votes and joining Costello and McEntee in the Dail. Costello appointed him Parliamentary Secretary to the Government. The appointment proved unfortunate for O'Donovan and the Minister for Finance, Mr. Sweetman, never got on. The former's undoubted talents were, to a large extent, frustrated. Dr. O'Donovan commenting on the second Coalition Government "were it not for the influence of Dillon and Sweetman there would have been no difficulties. Dillon wouldn't give away money to the farmers to compensate for the decrease in cattle prices. The difficulty with Sweetman was that one couldn't really object to his first lot of import levies but he insisted on a second lot in July 1956 and in conjunction with the commercial banks he engineered a credit squeeze behind the government's back. Then in autumn in 1956 he insisted on a 6 million cut in the government capital programme. He lost 6 million in current revenuean amount exactly coinciding with the cut in capital expenditure. In the 1957 election (following the break-up of the second Coalition Government) Browne, who now stood as an Independent had his revenge by defeating Dr. O'Donovan and putting him out of the Dail. Dr. O'Donovan then ran for and got elected to the Senate where he was Leas Cathaoirleach, 1959-1961. In 1960, on his own, he challenged the constitutionality of the Electoral Act of 1959 and was successful. In the 1961 election he again ran for the Dail for Fine Gael in Dublin South East but was again defeated. For a few years Dr. O'Donovan

laid politically low except of course, for his early morning economics classes in D.CD. where the stories of the first and second Coalition Governments and Sweetman's diabolisms were told and retold. "What brought me back was when I saw the very strong movement towards American type capitalism here in the 60's. I felt a junction of forces had been made in Dublin: the two big parties, the directors of the commercial banks, higher civil servants, a few innocent bishops and industrialists. This was why I joined the Labour Party." His joining Labour was precipitated by attacks on decisions of the E.S.B., Manual Workers Tribunal of which he was chairman, by Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. He never actually resigned from Fine Gael. He quietly withdrew. "Actually, I should have left the party the day James Dillon was made Leader, but I didn't like to make things awkward for a new leader about whose election there were grave doubts in the Party." How does he feel about current Labour policies? "The great success of the original state enterprises (E.S.B. and the Irish Sugar Company) and more recent enterprises such as Nitrigin Eireann Teo., proves conclusively the case for further development of carefully chosen state enterprises. I believe that an industrial group merits nationalisation because of its extremely bad behaviour over a number of yearsthe flour millers. Otherwise I wouldn't dream of nationalising a firm like Guinness or Jacobs. I disagree completely with anyone who would want to do so." "Industrial democracy is giving workers a say in the conduct of the businesses on which their livelihood depends. It's all nonsense to talk of industrial democracy as an objectively alien idea. In fact it has been found to work for many years in both France and Germany." He stood as a Labour candidate in Dublin South West in the 1965 General Election with Dr. John O'Connell, but lost his deposit. Many of his friends tried to persuade him not to go forward this time, but he was adamant and, much to everyone's surprise, including his own, he won the seat which was expected to go to his running-mate, the youthful Vice-Chairman of the Labour Party, Dermot O'Rourke. "I was accepted completely by Labour branches this time, unlike the last, when I was fresh from Fine Gael." At 61, "Iohnno" begins his second political life. To many it seems incongruous that he should begin again at all, but with Labourimpossible.

The life and toork of Picasso

PABLO PICASSO was born in Malaga in 1881. He came of an ancient family and his immediate relatives were priests, doctors, or were employed in business. His father was the only artistic member of the family; he was an artist who taught in the local art school and ran the local museum. Later in Picasso's childhood they spent four years in Corunna and finally settled in Barcelona when he was fourteen. His father was of course his first master and apparently he was a very precocious child, who took no interest in his school work at all and only thought about drawing. He asserts that he learnt absolutely nothing at school though this is clearly something of an exaggeration as he can certainly read and write. He was a Picasso visited Paris for the first time in 1900 and finally he settled there in 1904. He has lived in France ever since though latterly not in Paris but in the Mediterranean area near Cannes. In his first years in Paris he was extremely poor but survived through the kindness of a few far sighted patrons and friends. He became a leading figure in avant garde circles, both literary and artistic, and was a friend among others of Max Jacob, Gertrude Stein, Guillaume Apollinare, and of course of Matisse, Braque, Derain and the Douanier Rousseau. Picasso said that when he first settled in Paris he was more influenced by Van Gogh than anyone else but like all great artists he has drawn his inspiration his career "Les Desmoiselles d'Avignon", This large picture is often claimed as the first cubist work of art though it predates this style by some two years. When it was first seen it caused great disgust and distress even among his most devoted admirers though within months it was influential in creating an entirely new trend in art and indeed heralds the break through of twentieth century painting. It shows five nude women against a blue curtain with a still life of fruit in the foreground. The three figures on the left follow directly on from his earlier work showing his interest in the simple planes of early Iberian sculpture such as had been recently discovered in North Spain and exhibited in The Louvre. But the heads

The MIN 0 TAU ROM A CHI A is Picasso's most famous etching. It dates from 1935 and is an outstanding example of the numerous drawings, engravings and pictures in which he uses the symbolism of the ancient myth of the Minotaur, half-bull, halj-man with figures taken from bull-fighting. In this strange subject the Minotaur, a figure of colossal power and menace advances with a drawn sword over a group of a disembowelled horse and a dead female matador. This evil figure is stopped by the simplicity of a little girl holding a light who is protecting the man fleeing up a ladder. Two women, again symbols of peace, are leaning out of a window with two doves on a ledge. The close connections of this print with GUERNICA and its implications for the politics of its time need no elaboration. It is a tremendously impressive design with a superbly balanced use of lights and darks.

student first in the School of Art in Barcelona and later in Madrid. But he seems to have learnt more from looking at pictures and reproductions, and from his father and friends than from the rather dry tuition at the Schools of Art. He was a fantastically accomplished draughtsman from his teens and his academic prowess was considerable. He won many prizes. His stay in Madrid when he was for the first time isolated from his family, brought him into contact with poverty and his acute sympathy for the outcasts of society which becomes the theme of so much of his painting must have been aroused then. He returned to Barcelona after eighteen months in Madrid and established himself among the most radical artists there.

from very widely varying sources which he has later transformed into his own personal statements. Roughly speaking his pictures about 1900 are akin to Toulouse Lautrec, Bonnard, Munch and Van Gogh and develop soon into what is now known as his Blue Period, a time when his subject matter was taken from circus life and from the poor, the depressed, the desperate and the lonely. Frequently his subjects have a strong social flavour, as in his Absinthe Drinkers, but always they are hauntingly sad. A rather more cheerful period follows on about 1905 with a markedly classical feeling in his figures. This is known as his Pink or Rose Period. By 1907 his style was simplifying markedly and in that year he painted one of the vitally important pictures of

of the two figures on the right have a savage vigour which horrified everyone. Picasso had (rather later than many of his friends) discovered the negro mark and been overwhelmed by the magnificence and directness of this art form. For the first time in "Les Desmoiselles" we find Picasso building his picture into a solid faceted plane with the background invading the foreground, a feature of his later Cubist work. The next two years are usually described as the "Negro period" but this is rather misleading as the influence of both Iberian sculpture and Cezanne are also very prominent and all is leading up to the Cubist works of 1909. In fact it was a landscape by Braque which was first called Cubist and Matisse Wh0 noticed that it was com-

posed of 'little Cubes'. In the years from 1909 to 1914 which are the great years of Cubism, Picasso and Braque worked side by side. It would be . impossible to say who introduced any particular motif or technique into their paintings, and frequently it is even more difficult to tell their work apart, for they were so deeply involved in this new style that they really did create it together. It was immediately enormously influential and was taken up by Italian, Russian and English painters usually with a flourish of manifestos

He has always remained a figurative painter. One of the strange facts about Picasso's cubism is its elegance. He was so absorbed with his interest in form that the colours of his pictures at this time are monochrome. This adds a curious sophistication to these magnificent, still canvasses. His portraits which remain identifiable and his figures have an intensity which arises from their simplicity. By 1914 these cubist pictures had become much more complex frequently incorporating actual

include the Three Musicians (Museum of Modern Art, New York) and the Three Dancers (the Tate Gallery). Here movement is all important in creating the atmosphere of gaiety and life. The Surrealist movement was perhaps the most important artistic event of the twenties and though Picasso can never be regarded as a surrealist painter in the full sense of the word, he was associated with it and his liberation of the artist from academic trammels was of course vital for surrealism as for all other artistic movements till the mid-

THE WEEPING WOMAN etching and aquatint of 1937 is one of the many versions of this theme which include an oil painting. All of these are ultimately derived from the female figures in the great mural GUERNICA. In this epic work Picasso conveys the stark tragedy of the women by the convulsive movement of their heads which fall backward but here the emotion is to some extent controlled to suit the size of the work. The extreme distortion of the eyes and nose is coupled with the almost domestic touch of the handkerchief so that the WEEPING WOMAN is changed from the archetype of despair in Guernica to something which may in fact move us more through its relation to everyday reality. We can relate the picture to an actual sorrow that we have all experienced.

and great references to modern environment, industry etc. But with Picasso and Braque iti was a new discovery which grew naturally out of their earlier work and was not a manifestation of any particular point of view. In their Cubist pictures one sees all the facets of an object simultaneously. For instance in a still life one sees the bottom of the bottle as well as the label and the whole at the top and all are welded together in series of simple shapes which are intensely satisfying. The artist was no longer copying nature but creating an object with its own life through this new vision where ordinary things are a starting point and not an end. Naturally this led many to abstraction but not Picasso whose interest in humanity is so deeply seated.
18

materials like newspaper or wallpaper, and colour and movement were returning. During the 1914/18 war his friends were all dispersed. Throughout the war his work remained cubist but colour was once again important and circus subject matter returned. He made a number of incisive line drawings of his friends, including Stravinsky, and it was at this time he made designs for ballets produced by Diaghilev including Parade and The Three Cornered Hat. The twenties found him working in two quite separate styles, one very influenced by Greek Art shows a return to realism with a series of monumental studies of women, great statuesque creations. This largeness of form overflowed into his Cubist works which

century. In the late twenties ambiguity becomes a keynote in his picturesit is difficult sometimes to decide if a figure is human or insect, whether it be alive or a statue, and a sense of growing horror does pervade much of his work. Sometimes the ambiguity is created by his use of mythology-the minotaur, half bull, half man is introduced into many themes now and is frequently associated with symbols culled from bull fighting; the disembowelled horse and the matador. But it is impossible to say sometimes whether it is a form of evil with its power and its cruelty or a hero figure. Sometimes it is shown blind led by a young girl. It would seem that the artist was groping for some means of conveying the great truths of existence

to our age by disguising them by symbols from Ancient Greece. But though a vein of tragedy runs through much of his work in the early thirties, In his prints, his drawings and his paintings where one finds the most ferocious distortions, there are also glowingly happy pictures nearly always of women. The years 1933-1935 were ones of personal difficulty and few paintings date from them, but he made innumerable prints and drawings in which the

paint a series of horrifying images varying from the poignancy of his Weeping Woman to the sinister cruelty of his Cat and Bird and Girl with a Cock. And indeed throughout the war years which he spent in Paris his work frequently shows his feelings for contemporary events in just this way. Peace brought a transformation. Suddenly the subject matter ceases to be sinister and we are transported to a pastoral world of dancing fauns and Arcadian symbols. His new family

for form, should work in three dimensions and as the Trinity Exhibition shows very clearly his developing styles are reflected in his work in sculpture as in painting. It is incredible that a man in seventies and eighties should create such a joyous art-full of colour and childish simplicity-pictures which delight the eye with that perfection of line and form which he alone can achieve by a few apparently hasty strokes on the canvas.

THE FRUGAL MEAL, an etching of 1904 is an excellent example of Picasso's Blue Period. it shows his deep sympathy for the poor and his concern for the outcasts of society. It was at this time that he painted so many pictures of circus people. His social conscience was markedly ahead of his time for he treats his subjects quite simply as individuals who feel deeply the degrading circumstances of their lives and does not morali'se about them. In this etching he creates a fascinating pattern through the elongated hands and the right-angled bends of the couple's arms. it is a jagged, staccato line which accentuates the thinness of their bodies. The folds in the tablecloth create another pattern which seems to foreshadow the facets of his later cubism. One realises that from his earliest works Picasso simplifies in order to emphasise vital features, here the despair of the two figures.

minotaur theme was worked on reaching its climax on the great etching of 1935 - Minotauromachia. In this work lie the seeds and the personnel of his mural, 'Guernica' of 1937. This great work commissioned by the Spanish Government in exile for the Paris Fair is Picasso's great statement of the horror and misery of war occasioned by the bombing of the Basque city of Guernica in broad daylight by Fascist forces. It is not tied down by any direct references to anyone event; it is a statement for all time of the futility of war and its agony, the dead child and the weeping mother, the dying horse, and the pleading woman. In this work the bull one feels, is ultimately in its strength and stability, a symbol of hope. In the next few years Picasso was to

appears in many of these pictures and his love of children is brought into our consciousness with the playfulness and charm of most of the post war paintings and drawings. In 1947 he went to live . near Vallauris, the centre of a long established pottery in the South of France and he started to make and paint vases, plates and ornamental objects which sustain the sunniness of his new style. This venture into three dimensional work was not new. Few of us realised until recently that Picasso was as great a sculptor as a painter, but in fact throughout his life he has worked in a very great variety of media. It is natural that an artist who has inherited the strong feeling of all Mediterranean art

His new work may not show any great developments; it is indeed a synthesis of his earlier discoveries, but in its mood of hopefulness it adds another dimension to the work of an artist who has given the twentieth century some of its greatest tragic masterpieces. Anthony Blunt and Phoebe Pool sum up Picasso's career with great insight when they say "It is true that much of his art aims at expressing something beyond the appearance of the visible world, and at conveying ideas which have to do with an ultimate truth, whether these ideas be concerned with the sadness and misery of human beings as in the early years, with the tragedy of war as in 'Guernica' ... or with the blessings of peace, as in the paintings of the Antibes period".

(Top left) This portrait of DORA MAAR of 1941 is one of those almost completely realistic pictures with iohicn Picasso punctuates his work and which can be so disconcerting in their clarity. The convention of one eye being more closed than the other is very old in portraiture and is used to give a living, moving quality to the face. Dora Maar's portrait is both simple and grand.

(Top right) CHiLD IN A CHAiR painted in 1939. This work is calm in comparison with the portrait of 1937 even though a feeling of menace is conveyed through the grey, swollen face. The body is cut up into facets like a cubist picture but the parts are all in a realistic order.

(Right) PORTRAIT OF A WOMAN. This portrait was painted in 1937 and is a superb example of Picasso's use of colour and distortion for emotional effect. It dates from the same year as GUERNICA and the WEEPiNG WOMAN and conveys the extreme effect of horror and misery suffered by the artist during the years of the Spanish Civil war.

(Page 17) NUDE WOMAN WITH A TURBAN is one of Picasso's post war paintings and dates from 1955. At this time a decorative element appears in his work and a love of the exotic. all of which help to build up the gaiety of his late paintings. His brushwork in contrast to his simple subject matter and colour is almost violent in its freedom and is much more exciting than at any other period.

ELECTION DIARY
By

J.

T. KELLY

PAT LINDSAY, poor man, is demented. Having failed to get re-elected to the Dail he can't quite make up his mind whether to go for the Senate or not. Within one single day recently he dispatched a letter to Victor Carton asking him for support to win a nomination on the Labour panel, not realising that Victor Carton himself was again going forward for re-election to that panel. In the afternoon he had his name put forward for- a Senate nomination by the Bar Council but unfortunately he was defeated by 11 votes to 3. Then that night he announced at a Fine Gael meeting in Dublin North Central that he had never intended standing for the Senate and would under no circumstances contemplate it. It would be tantamount to writing his political epitaph he said. However, two days later he virtually wrote his epitaph for himself by an outstandingly idiotic performance on 'The Late Late Show.'

they come very close to the bone. My dad made Brendan Behan look like a tame mouse-he could dine with the heads of state and curse with the drunks of Limerick." But what really got them was the bit "Fianna Fail never wanted my dad-over ten years ago

But now it seems all that is changed and there was never any question of "backing." However, some of his Tacateer friends on Howth Hill are under quite a different impression-and they ought to know. By the way, Matt will not be standing as an Independent again-next time it will be for a party! DAVID THORNLEY has been busily making a fool of himself since he announced his intention to enter politics -and in the process-rapidly diminishing the considerable source of goodwill and respect he rightfully enjoyed. We were bleeding with sympathy for him to realise that instead of an 6,000 annual income he will now earn a mere 3,500 or so (2,500 Dail salary and a further 1,000 for lecturing and parttime journalism). Any socially aware socialist must know that it is absolutely impossible for an academic socialite to live on such a meagre allowance even allowing for the tax-free concessions. By the way what's this the old age pensioners get? David was very perturbed by the smear campaign especially as every

de Valera came down here to Limerick to interview my dad for the job of Parliamentary Secretary and said to him "I don't like the things I'm hearing about you" and my dad said to him "I don't like the things I'm hearing about you either-but I don't believe them." Already Fianna Fail have their eyes on young Dara and will ensure that the O'Malleys won't stray too far from the fold. Hilda would get favourable consideration for a Senate nomination if she asked for it. "But of course she wouldn't ask" I hear you say. Would you believe two days after the election? MATT FINNEGAN, the Independent candidate for Dublin N.E. was kicked out of Fine Gael by Paddy Belton after the local elections in 1967. Since then he has drifted almost unconsciously towards Fianna Fail. As a business man (a butcher) his admiration for Charles Haughey is boundless-"a man who makes so much money must be good." (The question is-at what?). As an Alderman on the now defunct Dublin Corporation Matt seemed to see the Fianna Fail point of view clearer than any other and he was among those who voted recently to increase the rates. Matt's election campaign was extravagant if nothing else - he was the first politician in Ireland to use luminous posters - which bore the legend "In again Finnegan." It was rather a pity his idea of a smoke-writing aeroplane didn't come off on election-day. During the campaign he made no secret of the strong backing he was receiving from "certain quarters."

Actually he's no loss - he did no work for his Mayo constituents over the last four years and was worse than useless on the Fine Gael front bench as spokesman on education-a topic on which he had no knowledge and less interest. HILDA O'MALLEY put up quite a good show in East Limerick. The O'Malley name has a Kennedyesque magic in Limerick - but not even the 'Jackie' of the clan could do it against the Fianna Fail machine. One O'Malley who could have done it, however, was Dara-Donogh's and Hilda's only sonthe only thing wrong was-he is only 15. At church gate meetings during the campaign and at the final rally on the eve of the election-Dara out-hammed Donogh by a mile. The punters [ust loved - "they are saying a lot of hard things about my dad these times and

Sunday in Westland Row Church he sings aloud the praises of Brendansorry! I mean the Lord. No communist he as he proved by exposing his scapular at his inaugural press conference. By the way, isn't it fortunate that our particular religious customs demand of us such unembarrassing exposures of our orthodoxies? Incidentally, one would think from the tone and fervour of some of David's recent pronouncements that he has been a convinced labourite from way back. Actually he was on the point of joining Fine Gael some months ago and were it not for bungling on Gerry Sweetman's part he would now be Fine Gael T.D. for Dublin North-Westswearing never-ending allegiance to the everlasting leadership of Liam Cosgrave and abiding faith in the non-existent principles of the Just Society.

A LOT TO

BE LEARNED
By CIARAN McKEOWN President USI, Independent Candidate in Dublin South-West in recent election THE CONSOLING THING about coming bottom of the poll is that you can say what you feel, and even your opponents will listen, if only out of pity. Indeed, there is as much pity after the election as there is filth before it. The filth is cleaner. Mind you, there would be something radically wrong with democracy if a bearded student haranguing the citizenry for all of two weeks could do any better than I actually did. So given that democracy was exercised within its present limits, I'll not worry about my own expensive experience, and talk more about the election proper-about the real candidates, I mean, the ones who got the votes. "God Bless you, Missus, I hope you'll do your best for me." This inspiring line sums up the high calibre of political discussion which decided the issue in Dublin South-West, and elsewhere, from what I gather. And sure enough, though the voter despised the politician as much as the politician despised the voter, she did her best for him, and he shook her hand. The mutual deception was over for another five years; master and serf had swapped roles for five minutes. All the abuse and empty promises of three weeks are driven into obscurity by the crippling realisation that the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know. Especially with all the strange things that are going on, with strikes and drugs and economies and like mysteries. And after all, didn't they manage to put a few bob on this and a few bob on that. For all the talk, things must be all right when they can get that amount for land. Still, I'll throw out a preference or two in the direction of Labour, just to let them know we're watching them. Let them know who's the master.

"But Mister, this is a huge lie. There's only about 4% get those grants. You're only a promising young person if you get four honours. And the majority of kids that could get into higher education don't get four honours. All the promise they have is a boat ticket." "Ah well, I don't know. I think things are going along well! Too well. Sure look at them students. Drugs and Communists and Beards-no offence, your beard is neat enough-but some of them! My God, and this is supposed to be a Catholic country." You resist the temptation to teIl them that Christ had a beard, so had St. Patrick and St. Francis, and Parnell and Casement and a dozen others-he'll think it was blasphemy. You go on down next door, and listen for twenty minutes to the widow with the pension problem, and then she promises you fifth preference after she's voted the Labour ticket. You wonder at your folly. The professionals have warned you-"not more than two minutes at any door-it only confuses them, and you'll never get round them at all." But you haven't the gaIl to treat them with such derision, so you get lots of sympathy, and a few votes.

word filters back, "That's an honest feIlah-he'Il make them work for their money. That's what we need in this country." Every tit-bit of praise and support is regarded as the tip of the ice-berg, the posters go up quicker, the canvass moves faster, the speech gets more eloquent. Then you hear it. You don't believe it at first-so you ask around. Horror slowly sets in. It's like being told you've two months to live. "He's an out-and-out Communist." "Voting for McKeown? Sure he's against the Irish language."

Nothing you can do. Ignore it. Work twice as hard. But all the time you know it-it'll take years of ground work to kiII it. You have a fair idea who's doing it; part of you rages, part of you forgives, part of you almost respects.

"Free education? What are you talking about son? Sure there is free education. My eldest lad is up in the Tech. And wasn't it in the paper, did you not see that ad for Fianna Fail? University grants for all promising young people that need them. Isn't that free education?
22

Still, the lads are putting up the posters with great enthusiasm and the leaflets are nearly ready for the post, and youthful optimism abounds. We're going to win, we're going to give the machines the shock of their lives: have you heard one yet that is for Fianna Fail? It's all Labour, Labour. That suits us. Keep it up, we're getting among the votes. And so it seems. The

Suddenly it's all over and the result is exactly as you forecast. One F.F. on top, two Labour in the middle, one F.F. creeping in fourth. There's an impressive reality about it after all the dreams. You fall to reflection, to analysis, to the recall of details. The F.F. machine working relentlessly underground, just a few miserable pictures of Jack on the posts so as not to offend anybody, a few strategic boards on houses to impress the punters, while the lads get round and nobble the voters. And then there's the imaginary meeting where speeches are made by the script factory: very impressive that-especially when you remember the real speeches you made

yourself, 150 of them and you get a total of about twenty column inches. You've only yourself to blame: the outgoing deputy has summed it up: "Speeches don't go anymore, they don't get results!" But you can't rid yourself of the conviction that a deputy should prove he can stand up and speak out, so you go on wasting your sweetness ... Mind you, when it comes to knifing their party colleagues F.F. have the finesse. The Labour men are crude about it. "That so-and-so bastard ... he's looking after himself." And they were all looking after themselves but F.F. did the best job of concealing it. Would you believe this conversation between myself and one F.F. candidate? F.F. "How're you doing?" Me "Ah, better than I should be on paper." F.F. "Good for you. I really hope you do well. You're getting our fourths." (Smiles benignly). "Tell me, how do you think we're doing?" Me "Well, on paper," say I, "It should be two F.F. two Labour: but I think the second F.F. man will be struggling for it." F.F. "Ah well, maybe you're right. But Labour's not as strong as they're trying to make out. We're very encouraged by the canvass. But, tell me, do you think X will suffer by the redrawing of the constituency? After all, it was over in A that he has his strength." Me "Well he has the name, of course, but I think he'll be struggling. He'll probably just make it. Unless" say I with a laugh, "Unless I just beat him to it." We all laugh. F.F. "Well, how do you think the other lad is doing. He's well known round here of course." Me "Aye he is. But I'd be surprised if he did well. A bit too middleaged to bring in the young vote."

Controlled grins all round. Restrained satisfaction. Information complete. End of friendly chat. F.F. 'Well I hope you'll do well. Sincerely." Me "Me too. I think you'll be safe enough yourself." Ireland has such golden opportunities. Look at Dublin South West: how many of its 40,000 kids will get a chance of a life commensurate with their ability and national resources. Look at the facilities for recreation for both children and adults: forcing children onto the streets, and into petty crime; and adults into pubs, and psychiatric clinics, and mute acceptance of their situation. Look at the humiliating health service. Look at the disastrous planning. Look at the growing problem of alienation. Look at the uncertainty of young people about their values. If you have eyes to see, you'll agree that we are coming into the most challenging period in Irish history, all the more challenging because the dilemmas come very much from within, and not so much from outside interference. The human race is approaching total self-awareness as a result of modern communications: we have ultimate weapons of destruction, ultimate means of survival. Yet the world faces dramatic conflicts of justice, conflicts of value systems. Little Ireland, with her present resources, her surviving faith, her history free of colonial guilt, can give a unique example to the world by fulfilling the simple promise of the Proclamation to cherish all the children of the nation equally. Will the 19th Dail face this challenge? Or will Ireland be blighted by a violent conflict between one generation, complacent in its rectitude, and another, no more virtuous, but arrogantly determined to establish its vision of peace, justice and creativity?

The Fine Gael support was very civilized and didn't get many votes.

But it's a vain politician who doesn't learn a lot from every election. And I think I learned a wee bit myself. That slowness to ask a friend for help, the lack of ruthlessness, that tendency to actually enjoy a conversation with a voter, all these faults and more-they must go. More truthfully, the inability to keep to a strict timetable, the tendency to stop for that unnecessary cup of tea, or for an uninterrupted pipeful-these are luxuries that the dedicated campaigner should not allow himself. Perhaps. But the prime objective is to be the devil they know.

It would be nice if politics were like sport One could say "Thanks for the game" and mean it. But magnanimity has no rights over honesty and I am not happy over the results of this election, nor over the way in which it was conducted. It was dirty and meanminded and marked by a singular lack of concern, not only for the truth, but for the plight of the children of the nation. If there is bitterness and anger in this article, believe me, it is not because I was hammered: a heavy defeat was predictable and acceptable, and I am a comfortable happy young man with both prospects and interests. What galls me is the complacency and the gutlessness that prevails at a time when

IRELAND FOR A HOLIDAY

THE "NUSIGHT" TEAM REPORTS "THERE WAS NO TOAST - just the egg and bacon; and it were a bit soggy -so we didn't stay more than the one night there." Mr. Robertson, an insurance agent from Yorkshire was talking about the one unfortunate experience which he and his wife had had during their "all in all" wonderful fortnight in Ireland. Mrs. Robertson: "We have met some who have been very disappointed, who have just walked in and walked straight out again. I did read that brochure of that woman we met, dear, who were staying in the ... down Wexford way, you know, and the brochure, oh it just sounded like Buckingham Palace - it did really-it had everything. And she said 'we just walked in and had a look and we just walked out - we couldn't possibly stay there', she said Yes there are a few who have been dissatisfied." "Nusight" was spending an afternoon sticking a tape recorder microphone through the windows of queuing cars waiting their turn to move onto the new car ferry at Dun Laoghaire, to learn a few things about how some fairly typical tourists found Ireland for a holiday or just how they found Ireland. "If you want my comment on the Irish hotels-the good ones, they cater too much for the casual trade. Like a place we stayed at last night - it had dances, functions, and this and that. Do you want names?" A comfortable looking, moustachioed Londoner reached his hand under the dash of his well cared for Humber, and produced the previous night's bill from a south Dublin county hotel. "You come in and you can't find a porter and you can't find your key at night. 'They're all so busy making money on the side shows that the people paying the money for the rooms don't get the attention. Ordered tea for this morning-girl was so busy at the desk -she took it to the wrong room-had to phone up twice--she couldn't think how we hadn't got it. She was very apologetic and it was fine when it did arrive. "They're expensive-you see, as I said to the wife, you don't mind paying if you do get the service with it, but there is a lot to be desired in places like that. "The trouble with all these receipts, dockets, and carbons is that they seem to manage to put 12 % on every item. Well that's all right if you've got the service. "The night before-just before we came to the hotel at which we were going to stay four coach loads of American tourists turned up and of course the place was in tumult. "The place we stayed at most of the

time, Castle Ross at Killarney, was a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y perfect. Most perfect place we've ever been to in our lives." A business man from Manchester and his wife had had "12 very pleasant days of business and pleasure," apart from being disturbed at twenty to three in the morning on the Saturday night by political activists in Killarney burning election posters "all in good fun." They did have a spot of trouble in Glengariff with a hotel "which was classec' as a 'B' and didn't come up to expectation." "We arrived there at lunch-time and were served with fried plaice and baked beans (which doesn't go down too well)," "It was a set meal - so we thought we couldn't spend six days there - so we went to the Tourist Bureau in Bantry just to check how we were fixed legally, you see. The Irish Tourist Board - you can't speak too highly of the work they do. They were exceptionally helpful. The girl rang her head office and offered to book us a hotel in Killarney when we said we were going there. "The hotel that she booked us in Killarney, the Arbutus, was very good indeed-the service, and everything about it was excellent." A well heeled young couple in a red E-type were less happy about the variety and availability of hotels in the high season. "We came in June," they said, "because we had heard that all hotels are full all the time during July and August particularly. "Now it's obvious that tourism is a basic source of income for you-so we would have thought you could perhaps have done a bit more." So there. "The only complaint I've got is that there are not enough toilets at the semilarge towns, I find. I had to go into a private house this morning-the woman was very charming-I asked her where there was one and she said oh there's nothing here. I felt a bit funny but she was so nice about it it just didn't matter." This was Mrs. Benly from Chester who apart from that had nothing but good to say about her time here. Not so Mr. Jackson from Suffolk, who thought, from what he had seen of "the slovenly attitude to agriculture, tourism, and modern methods in general, that we didn't stand a snowball's in hell" of making our way in the E.E.C. "Mind you I don't think Britain has a great deal to offer," he allowed after a few probing questions on international comparisons. An amateur fisherman from Keating, Yorkshire, had averted his four children's eyes from the sight of two nuns bathing on a Wexford strand, which more than made up for their not catching a glimpse of that other Irish export legend-the little people. "What we've been more surprised

with than anything is the cost of living. We don't see how a bloke earning 12 a week can afford to keep body and soul together. "We looked in the newspapers at houses for sale but none of them seem to have the prices in but the rateable valuation is very low-are they very cheap? Is that why?" A short explanation from "Nusight" ensued which drew the question: "Well how on earth do the people live? "When I came over about ten years ago it was relatively cheap living, but the only things cheaper now seem to be milk and cream. We are not grumbling mind-just surprised. You are in a position we were in ten, twelve, years ago. I gather from the newspapers that you are cutting out a lot of subsidies which don't really matter and concentrating on the things that really matter -or which will matter in ten or fifteen years. Education, for instance, is being put on a proper footing-at least I gather that-I could be wrong." They were delighted by the attitude of a woman in a cottage by the road in Waterford, whom they had tentatively approached about the blockage which an unattended herd of cattle had been causing in the road. "We were all worried about it but she just said" and he did a tolerable imitation of a sleepy, soft country voice, " , oh, I'll go and get your man'. That sort of thing MAKES a holiday," A camping couple from North London who had spent most of their time in the west and north-west were very cheerful considering they had had their exhaust pipe pulverised by the undulating roads of Donegal and Mayo, and refreshed by the ease with which they were allowed to pitch the tent where they liked. Much of the holiday had obviously been spent in making sociologial observations. Much of their conversation was anyway. "You get the impression that there's no money here and that people are living on what we call the dole, inasmuch as the pubs, in the west at any rate, are empty all week, and then on Friday, Saturday and to a certain extent on Sundays they appear, but they're all on half-pints, we noticed. "And when we came over here to the east all the people were drinking pints in smart lounges which said something -to me it did anyway. You get the impression the money's all down this side of the coast; and all the little crofts and hovels we've seen people living in-we can't believe they are still inhabited really, but they are. Really shocking I think it is. "Another thing we noticed was you don't see any housing estates whatsoever until you get to near Dublin. "The most amazing thing is-they don't complain, not at all, do they? The only complaints we heard were about the price of drink and cigarettes and

things like that going up but otherwise no grumbles at all. "It seems an awful pity to see places like Achill-communities breaking up and that. It's a way of life, to my way of thinking, that you'll never regain once it's gone and you see it just slipping through your fingers. "It's a tragic shame really. "People in England sigh for the good old days when there wasn't all this television and jukeboxes which we've got in every blasted pub you go into, and one-arm bandits. But that's what I think will happen in Ireland eventually -you will have a great vast area of nothing in the west and people concen trated in the east and the south-east." It was hardly necessary for them to point out that they "don't just like whizzing through a town in a car without noticing what there is to be seen." They like to stop and "have a good jaw with the people," (or perhaps it was
jar).

way. I don't think I'd come to Ireland again. I'm not very keen on the Irish." (E-type couple.) "They are very short, aren't they, dear?" "I think as a country there are an awful lot of prospects here that the Irish don't make the best of." "We're not keen on your weather." "Where are all the little peoplewe've been looking for them?"

the money for drinks and things like that. Several times they just forgot about it until we reminded them. "There's a right load of churches, aren't there?" "Didn't like the amount of-I don't know if you call them tinkers, or diddycoys, or what, who come thrusting their hands in front of you. That's mostly in towns like Galway, we found." "We crossed over the border near

"That's why we don't like to go to places like Killarney where it's all singing lounges and all Americans and English people. It's all laid on for those people and you can't get to the true Irish people. "We had what we call a real authentic evening at Ennis-just outside of the town-at Tullow-you know, where the ceili band comes from. It was just a bit of music taking place in this little tiny bar and everybody tapdancing round the floor." The start of a great adventure? Random Impressions of the Irish "Well they're casual-and dangerous on the road. (I shall be thankful to get my car back in one piece.)" "More commercialised than they were before the war, but nothing is too much trouble for them, and I like that. (The wife went into a hotel this morning-she likes a certain sherry-a medium dry-well now, they hadn't got the particular one but they couldn't trouble enough to find her another. The barman produced one and said 'well try this-drink a drop' he says. Well now, you would never get that in England, you like it or lump it.)" "Killarney caters too much for the Americans and its just a bit much anyway. We looked for some Waterford glass, couldn't find any-well of course they had $100 for our 10. Some of the Irish naturally prefer that." "In terms of poverty Ireland seems more like a Mediterranean country than a typical western European country." "Really most helpful." "A sort of a slaphappy country if you know what I mean." "Your cost of living's too 'igh." "I think I trust them." "They don't like the English, and they try to make it pretty obvious, especially in the Midlands. All they're interested in, with the charm, is our money-there is a good bit of that anyway but of course they don't overplay it. I suppose they are quite clever in a "Very nationalistic-it's sad really~\ They don't like to change when they are away from home." "I haven't been able to distinguish between your Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Labour. I met a publican in Tramore and he reckoned that Labour was much more communistic than it is in England. "Fianna Fail, from what I can gather (and I could be wrong in this) is really the nearest thing to the I.R.A. you've got. You've got the head of that as, what you call him, your old President, he was in Fianna Fail." "Well to me the country seems very well run and everything so as regards politics I imagine things will just go on the same. Most people we met seemed to think that anyway." "The service in the shops is not as good in shops as it is in England, at least in the towns." "I will say one thing about your traffic lights-how you don't have more accidents I just don't know. There's no amber for one thing when you are starting, and there's just people coming from all sides. They seem to like it that way over here." "The only Irishman I met before I came over here was drunk but I haven't seen many of that sort in Ireland." "I don't get the impression that the Irish hate the English." "I don't like the gimmicky Irish." "They are not too keen on asking for Lifford (is it?) and we thought we were in England for a few minutes, road signs, and telegraph poles and all that were different to here. It was a bit too English really to me-too damned tidy." "Everyone has been ever so friendly though 'aven't they, John." "Yea, mostly they have." "There are a few hotels that want bucking up." "I came across one fellow who was rambling on about 1916 as if it was my fault, the black and tans and-oh God, and what good blokes Pearse and Connolly were." "They are much more patriotic over here than what they are in England. The amount of times I've seen 'Remember 1916', 'Join the I.R.A. now' and Sinn Fein and things like that-in fact I've even taken transparencies of them in the past. "Of course we haven't had a civil war in our country since 1690 or something -11ever mind 1916." "We were a bit disappointed we didn't meet General de Gaulle. We had a drink in his local, though." There were many more and they were all glowing with hyperbolic praise and from the effects of the freak heat which had a few of them rightly fooled. The efficiency of the car ferry marshalling area made more than one feel as if "this slaphappy little country" was already folding into fond memories, and that they were on home territory.

REV. WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN (44) is Chaplain to Yale University in New Haven. But he is more than that-at least to many thousands of young Americans. To them, particularly to the young men plagued by their country's involvement in Vietnam, Sloane Coffin and others have been a source of inspiration and a refuge from despair. On May 31st, 1968, Coffin, along with Dr. Benjamin Spack: and three others, was charged with "conspiring to unlawfully, knowingly and wilfully counsel, aid and abet" young Americans in evading the draft. On June 21st, they were found guilty of the charge. They now await the outcome of appeal against a temporarily suspended sentence of 4 years imprisonment. In the third report from his recent trip to the United States, Henry Kelly speaks here to the Reverend Coffin. The Yale chaplain-s-t'i] anyone thinks I'm controversial it shows how much they know about controversy"-talks about what he did, why and the possible consequences. He also speaks of his hopes, but more importantly and at greater length, of his fears for his country in the years immediately ahead. NUSIGHT: Sloane Coffin, why advise young Americans to burn their draft cards? COFFIN: That is not exactly right. I didn't advise anyone to burn a draft card-which seems to me an unnecessarily hostile act. If you want to do something with the flag, don't burn it, wash it. And if you want to do something with a draft card it seemed the best thing was to turn it in. That's a better symbol. Actually as a pastor I didn't feel that I could advise anyone to take a decision which is such an eminently personal one but I certainly tried to stand by those who did decide to turn their draft cards in and we've been indicted for conspiring to aid and abet them. NUSIGHT: While you haven't directly counselled people to break the law then, the administration considers you a danger under present circumstances? COFFIN: That's one of the bad things about this war-e-if anyone thinks I'm controversial it shows how much they know about controversy. NUSIGHT: While you are against this war, are you a pacifist? COFFIN: Well, I take a plebiscite with myself every morning and come out 51 % to 49% a non-pacifist. I am not in fact a pacifist. For instance the Middle-East-if I were an Israeli at this moment I'd have a hard time being a pacifist. The same would apply if I were a Vietnamese. This war I consider particularly unjust from our point of view, from an American's point of view because I think it represents 26

essentially a unilateral and a massive intervention in the civil affairs of another country. NUSIGHT: How damaging do you think this war is to the United States? COFFIN: Well, I'm more worried about how damaging this is to Vietnam. It is very damaging to the social and moral fabric of this country. This country is being torn apart by this war. The priorities that are represented by

DR. BENJAMIN SPOCK A prominent campaigner against the Vietnam war, his arrest for taking part in anti-war demonstrations, in 1968, led to widespread controversy. the war are distorted so that we are not dealing with the poverty problem and the problem of urban blight. The longer the war continues the greater will be the damage at home as well as the perfectly horrible damage that we are obviously committing in Vietnam. NUSIGHT: The war has, however, brought together for the first time many of the left-wing influences in the United States. It was suggested recently by Martin Dubberman in the New York Times that a phenomenon of the left was that according as its numbers grew its strength ebbed. What do you think of that? COFFIN : Well we haven't found a leverage of power that's for certain. A protest movement is very much like throwing a baseball into a fifty pound pillow-it's very hard to get a reaction. We haven't found the means of turning the Government around but my hope is that more and more people towards the centre are going to be disaffected, more and more business men are going to find their business hurt. Then the pressure from the centre will probably be far more effective in altering Government direction than the pressure from the far left.

NUSIGHT: The left hasn't really been successful up to now. Do you think they can come together to form a coherent opposition? COFFIN: I'm not sure that we can be too discouraged. After all Johnson was thrown out. You may say it's not much of an improvement to get rid of Johnson and MacNamara only to get Nixon and Laird. On the other hand the fact that Nixon is in trouble over this issue is some progress. I really don't think that politically he can go on with this war. NUSIGHT: Are you saying there is a better chance of ending the war under a more right wing administration? COFFIN: Yes, because this administration has no personal investment in this war. It doesn't have to save its pride-s-it's not its war. And also because it's going to become more and more obvious, if it's not so already that we are going to have more riots in the cities, more campus outbursts simply as an expression of frustration. NUSIGHT: What are the prospects for constitutional change? COFFIN: I'm afraid it's true that the American Congress is nothing if not representative. What we have before us is a massive educational task. It involves telling Americans that communism for example is not a monolithic, messianic block. Then we'll need to explain why former colonised peoples who may be turning communistic are essentially interested in being artisans of their own destiny. An finally, we'll have to stop trying to exert too much power abroad and begin to straighten things out at home. The trouble is that the average American voter is still with Nixon. For example, when you speak of constitutional change, I never expected Gene McCarthy would get elected. I thought he was an excellent man to overthrow a government but I didn't think he was a very good man to form a new one. My hopes were that Bobby Kennedy would get elected and his assassination will probably prove a good deal more tragic than it even appeared at the time. NUSIGHT: What about the longterm prospects of Ted Kennedy? COFFIN: 1972 is a long way off and a lot of things can happen if we don't change the priorities in this country. There are going to be riots in the cities. We haven't begun to deal with the problem of mental genocide in our schools, our whole educational programme is way behind the times, we don't build low-income housing, we don't provide jobs for the unemployed and programmes for the unemployable. If we don't deal with these now they'll fester and they'll erupt. There nas been some progress but it must accelerate. Otherwise the peaceful revolution of rising expections turns into the violent revolution of dis-

appointed hopes. We're right at the point now where that can happen unless there is some real progress on the domestic front. NUSIGHT: Surely one area at least where this has happened is with the black man and the white man. How do you see the position of this confrontation now? COFFIN: Unless some real changes are made the black community will unravel and involve itself in the politics of desperation. Even deliberate violence and terror. Then if there is too much violence in the country the repressive apparatus which is always available to

right wing. We have enormous responsibility to our own people and to humanity to see that the American right wing does not take over in this country. NUSIGHT: Do you think socialism is the answer to the problems? COFFIN: Well it's ironic in the United States-we have socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor. Those who are poor go to the poor schools, they are not provided with basic facilities of housing and employment nor is their chance of being provided with jobs as good as that of the rich. There is not the same type of oppor-

courage to tell him-"Look isn't the American Dream wrong?" So he turns to look for scapegoats and blames the Vietcong, the U.N., the French or liberal professors or way-out blacks or the S.D.S. Our job is to convince him that the glories of life do not consist in stultifying T.V. sets or mortgaged houses One of the things we might tell the American people is that if you win a rat race you're still a rat. NUSIGHT: Are you pessimistic about the immediate years ahead? COFFIN: Yes. The frustrating fight is against bureaucracy. That is what identifies students in the West who are in protest and have free speech with students in communist countries who don't have free speech. They feel they cannot bring about change whether they have free speech or whether they don't have free speech. We have no other choice now except to change this country outright for our own sake and for the sake of the world. Wasn't John Gardner right when he said life presents us with a serious of brilliant opportunities brilliantly disguised as insuperable obstacles. NUSIGHT: A final word? COFFIN: How can we say this country is free when so many people feel so helpless-you cannot feel free and helpless at one time. Maybe this is the deep spiritual problem behind so much of the feeling of despair and insecurity among our people.

Washington

police removing anti-war demonstrators from the Pennsylvania inaugural parade route of President Nixon.

avenue

any Government will be called into action and one can foresee concentration camps around the corner for blacks. That's why it's so crucial to deal with the problems at home. NUSIGHT: How important do you think world support for your cause is? . COFFIN: I'~ afraid large and powerful countnes can ~fford to .be provincial. Or so th~y think. Foreign opinion IS not a very .Important levera~e of power in the United States at this moment. NUSIGHT: What sort of a United States do you see in the future? COFFIN: We already have the resources-technical, intellectual and material to bring about a high level of justice in the States and even a certain real quality of life. On the other hand I can see the country being increasingly tom apart and becoming a repressive state. This is where the left have real problems. Some of them think "we can do anything and the people in the squishy middle will see that the right wing never takes over". But I'm afraid that the people in the middle-good liberals--ean fold and then the right wing can take over. And I can think of no worse fate than to put the whole world at the mercy of the American

tunity offered to those on the lowerincome scale. NUSIGHT: To return to protest for a moment, do you see any division between say, intellectual and circumstantial protest? COFFIN: There will always be that charge of course, but the problem is getting the organisation to mount the right kind of political pressure. Who can organise such movements, who can control them and unite them? It's ironic that the people like myself we are talking about should have baby doctors and chaplains among them. NUSIGHT: How will you unite the splinters who are basically protesting against the American Way of Life? COFFIN: It's going to take quite a while. When you have an affluent majority there is always the danger that the affluence will be gained at the expense of the entrapment and poverty of the minority. Then you have people who are just beginning to make it, they have taken a slice of the American pie but they don't realise that it's the American Dream that's wrong. An American comes home now to his mortgaged house, in the car with payments due, to his D in English carsmashing son and his over-heated teenage daughter and no-one has the

BRAZIL: CRUCIBLE OF CHANGE

By JOHN HORGAN BRAZIL TODAY IS, by virtually common consent, the country most likely after Cuba to erupt in some kind of a revolution. It is large and heavily populated, with some 90 million inhabitants-even though there are huge areas where human beings are relatively few and far between. This fact in itself is an indication of the road that Brazilian development is taking-a road which leads the Indians of the countryside inevitably to seek the supposed delights of the cities. The truth is less attractive. If anything, the Indians and half-breeds who come to the cities get poorer: their cousins and brothers whom they have left behind certainly do not get any richer. And the gap between people like these and the affluent groups in Sao Paulo and the other big cities is increasing steadily. This is, even as it stands, quite an explosive mixture: to it can be added the fact that the Brazilian population as a whole is probably the most politicalised in Latin America. This is a result of many different things, and even though at first sight it is difficult to see why Brazil should be ahead of any other Latin American country in the sphere, the fact remains that it is so. The present CrISIS(a strange enough word to use for a situation which is in a sense endemic) dates back effectively to 1964, when elements in the Brazilian armed forces ousted the left-wing Government of Goulart. This was a fantastic shock to the entire spectrum of the Brazilian left, most of whom had been looking forward with something like optimism to the advance of socialist ideas in their country, and who had -to their cost - ignored the potential threat to this movement from the essentially middle-class army structure. The immediate reaction to the 1964 coup was one almost of paralysis: it was not until 1965 that the necessary process of evaluation and tactical planning began again within the various organisations opposed to the military government. This process of reflection took at least two years, and its first and most obvious result was when the Brazilian Communist Party split in 1967. The split was between two almost completely irreconcilable groups: the first, more traditional group still insists that the only way for the left to regain power is by constitutional means, including the eventual formation of a Popular Frant government in which they would have a large interest. The second group, on the other hand, argues that the situation is so intractable that nothing short of revolution can cure it.

Since 1967 almost every radical political organisation in Brazil- and quite a few liberal ones as well-have suffered the same trauma. Not even the Catholic Action movement has escaped the tension and it, too, has recently split along the same lines as the Communist Party. What is interesting is that although the constitutionalist fragments of each of these movements have remained relatively powerless and still divided from each other, the separatist groups are finding increasingly common ground under the Brazilian Communist who led the split in his own party-Carlos Marighella. Earlier this year Marighella wrote a " Message to Brazilians" from "somewhere in Brazil" which has not yet received the publicity it deserves. This is largely because of the attitude of the regime not only towards the national newspapers in Brazil, but towards foreign correspondents. The only really searching articles on the current situation there that have appeared in any foreign newspaper appeared not long ago in Le Monde, To avoid cable censorship, the paper's Latin American correspondent there had sent them out by post. Immediately after they appeared, he was expelled by the regime. Marighella, who is at present on the run-quite literally-has produced a document which, it is fair to say, marks a significant step forward in the development of revolutionary thinking on the mainland of Latin America. It is not, perhaps, as historic in its content or in its implications as Castro's famous speech at his trial in Santiago, "History Will Absolve Me," but it does mark some important new departures. The first part of this document is devoted to examining the injustices under which Brazilians suffer-or which their government plans to inflict on them. One of the most far-reaching of these is the government's decision, in consultation with USAID, the United States agency, to change the status of the 50 per cent of Brazil's universities that are at present owned - and paid for-by the state. Under the new scheme they will become private, feepaying universities like the others - a move of bewildering and frightening implications. Among the other abuses attacked are the illegal occupation of common lands and the grinding system of credit on the large plantations which has the effect of tying the peasant irrevocably to the "company store." The three most important paragraphs, however, are the following, which give Marighella's message the tone of a genuine manifesto. "We do not believe in a conformist and submissive parliament, allowed to exist at the whim of the dictatorship and prepared to yield whenever neces-

sary, while its deputies and senators survive on their subsidies. "We do not believe in a peaceful solution, "There is nothing artificial about the conditions for violence: they have existed in Brazil since the dictatorship impised itself by force. "Violence generates violence, and the only solution is to do what we are actually doing: to use violence against those who first opted for it to prejudice the interests of the country and the masses of the people. "The violence which we proclaim, defend and organise is that of the people's armed struggle - guerilla warfare." Later on, Marighella sketches out a very rough programme for change. After the victory of the revolution, he says, they will abolish censorship, establish religious liberty, release the political prisoners, close down the secret police, expel North American agents and confiscate North American property, as well as the property of collaborationist Brazilians, and confiscate the vast estates which amount to a virtual monopoly of the best agricultural land. An obvious programme, people might say-and to some extent an unrealisable one. Revolutions are never ushered in with sweetness and light: there are many paragraphs of "History Will Absolve Me" which remain only as ideals in a Cuba which is in a state of siege, and there is no guarantee that a revolutionary Brazil would be any better equipped to provide all the liberties people are used to at the same time as organising a complete reversal of the country's internal and external trading system. It is interesting, incidentally, that this programme does not include the nationalisation of all Brazilian private enterprises-only of those which have collaborated with North American economic interests. Here, quite clearly, is an attempt to broaden the base of the revolutionary movement to include those members of the Brazilian middle classes who are vaguely anti-American and nationalist in sentiment but who have never articulated this feeling in political terms. How much chance is there that such an audacious programme would win support? All the evidence at the moment suggests that the rebels have a long and bitter struggle ahead of them -some of them, I am told, expect that they will have to wait for almost twenty years, and are doing so with a patience unusual in revolutionaries. At the moment, the government has all the trump cards especially a highly trained and mobile army, which can isolate pockets of guerillas with bewildering rapidity. There is a certain

cleverness about the government's approach to the guerillas, as well: if they capture any, they do not shoot them: that would be to make martyrs of them. They just lock them up and laugh at them which, from a popular point of view, is far more effective as propaganda. Not everything, however, is going their way. Of late, for instance, the guerillas have become better trained and more daring. They have adopted a "Robin Hood" style, whether they are robbing banks for funds or armouries for weapons, which effectively deflates the government's attempts to rally popular feeling against them. On one occasion, one of the regime's generals went on television to charge the guerillas with cowardice: they had never, he said, attempted to violate the sanctity of his barracks . . . Less than twenty-four hours later a small van loaded with high explosives went up right under his window. The discontent is also seeping through the Church, in which the diminutive but pugnacious figure of Archbishop Helder Camara of Recife, in the country's troubled north-eastern corner, acts like a beacon to Brazilian Christians who believe that their Christianity does not commit them to the status quo. The bishop proclaims a kind of evangelical non-violence which is far from the passive, milk-and-water thing that non-violence can sometimes be in the minds of people who have not really come to terms with the political situation. In a sense, even, he does not disapprove of violence in blanket terms -but he sees the duty of a Christian bishop as one which leads him to abstain from actual violence, while being prepared to understand the need for others to use it. At one level this sounds like a commitment that is less than total, but in another there is a very positive side to it: all revolutions need their critics, if they are to become genuinely human revolutions, and not merely the exchanging of one system of domination for another. It is here that the witness of the Christian bishop or priest from just outside the actual revolution-however many of his flock may be inside it-can be of enormous value. The difference is not one of commitment: it is a difference of role. The reaction to all this, of course, has been brutal in the extreme. The shooting-up of Helder Camara's house, the hanging of one of his most active priests, and all sorts of other actions, testify to the fact that the armed right wing is not going to give up power without a struggle. And yet an enthusiastic businessman could take an American journalist (whom I met on the plane from Havana to Mexico City) to the window of his palatial office, point to the teeming street below them, and ask: "There-do you see any repression?"

ONE OF THE most unusual meetings in the recent General Election Campaign took place in the Grosvenor Hotel in Dublin. About 60 artists held a political meeting under the chairmanship of Godfrey Quigley in order to "bring the arts into politics". Two politicians attended, Mr. Michael Donnelly of the Fianna Fail Party and Dr. Noel Browne of Labour. The discussion took an unexpected turn, at least it seemed unexpected to the politicians. Painters, poets, actors, sculptors and writers seemed to think that the revitalising of the Arts in Ireland was a matter of primary concern to Local Government and of only secondary importance to Central Government. To at least a considerable section of the artists present, it was evident that the virtually total centralisation of artistic activity in and about Dublin was deplorable and not at all inevitable. Its concentration into the hands of smaller and smaller elite-groups within the capital city (the Arts Council, the Dublin Theatre Festival, the Commercial Galleries) is an unhappy state of affairs. It is natural and possibly inevitable that a great part of the artistic life of a nation in terms of "high culture" will take place in its capital. But what is needed most, for the health of the whole people, as for the health of the arts, is the widest and deepest level of participation in the making of works of art. This, of course, will mean a great deal of bad or mediocre art. This has always been the case; most art at times is bad or mediocre, if one considers art not as an activity of a people but as the accomplishment of its geniuses. The logic of this would seem to be that if participation in the arts is to be wide-spread then responsibility for the arts must be equally widely based. While it was recognised that the main practical problem was to provide money, it would not follow, as politicians would tend to assume, that the money must necessarily come from central funds or be controlled by Dublin administrators. The suggestion was canvassed and sympathetically received that a levy of l d. in the pound on all rates would give the County Council and Municipal Authorities funds under their control for the promotion of the arts. This, with a legal obligation to allot 1 % of the value of any public building to the visual arts for ornamentation and decoration, would help to decentralise! artistic activity and provide a fair poof of funds. The meeting considered the desirability of treating culture and leisure as a complex of rounded activities affecting the whole nation, and every individual. Culture was not merely 'high culture' but included physical culture and every activity of leisure. It seemed reasonable therefore that a tax on all entertainments and sports

should be devoted to the development of all the arts of the mind and body, from Painting to Physical Training. Many felt that this would never be done with the systematic dedication that the task required, unless a Ministry of Culture and Leisure was set up which would allow the Municipalities and County Councils to develop their local responsibilities and provide them with the necessary funds and guidance. It would also provide for scholarships, adequate art training, services supplementary to the present school curricula and a regionalisation of the work of the Arts Council. Mr. Donnelly raised the question of the need of the administrator of public monies to have some objective criterion by which to judge the artistic integrity and seriousness of intention on the nart of those who claim the support of public funds. He made it clear that he was not arguing for a supervision of the Artists' creativity but rather for some means of excluding the frivolous or the insincere. There seemed to be unanimous agreement with Michael Kane's insistence that only the judgment of the artist was of any use in determining the cultural value of a work of art. Any imaginative scheme for the promotion of the arts was going to involve risk. The real cost of a high and wide-level of participation in intellectual or physical culture was not to be measured by the amount of it that would be fit for inclusion in a museum a 100 years hence. It was to be measured by the total level of artistic activity and interest that could be stimulated throughout the country. Dr. Noel Browne welcomed the intrusion of artists into politics in any party or in any effective sense. 15 years ago he had been invited to open an exhibition of painting in Dublin but felt that since the artists of Ireland at that time seemed indifferent to the social life of their people, they were being understandably ignored by the people. This was no longer the case. Artists were now aware of their work. He welcomed this but conceded the difficulties. Irish society was philistine. It was brutally indifferent to the values which the artist brought to the common life. In his view the whole function and purpose of civil society was to nourish and protect the insights and the wisdom which the artist had to offer. "This is not a party issue", said Browne "and ought never be one. But it is a political matter. I welcome Mr. Haughey's gesture to the Arts and would do everything to encourage it. The artist must become involved in politics in order to see that the state and the municipalities do their work in this important, vital area". This strange piece of political campaigning may have no immediate effect but if it is a symptom of some real movement in the body politic, its importance is incalculable. JACK DOWLING.

is studying for her Teaching Certificate. She also had a picture in the RH.A. two years ago, when she was only twenty. She has been chosen by the Franco / Irish Commission for a scholarship to study art in Paris, and is now hopefully waiting for confirmation from France.

MALACHY SHERLOCK, a Derry man, and General Manager of the newly issued Golden Pages Classified Telephone Directory is extremely pleased with its success so far. Jack McGouran, P.R.O. for the Company tells of a window cleaner who has been inundated with calls since his name appeared in the directory. An insurance man reported that he had fourteen calls in six days Admitting that even computers make mistakes Jack ruefully mentions the man they entered under the wrong heading-Addressing Machines instead of Adhesives. Berenice Cleeve (22) elder daughter of T.V. man Brian Cleeve has been highly praised for her painting of Maire Comerford exhibited at the R.H.A. Berenice entered the College of Art when she was seventeen. She has already got her Painting Diploma and

There was little style or elegance at the Irish Sweeps Derby at the Curragh on Saturday, 28th June-that is barring the horses. To compensate we had a fair share of celebrities - Susannah York, Peter O'Toole and Clement Freud: "You know the thing that amazes me? The way you all stay in your own enclosures. They'd have to have forty or fifty men guarding the entrances in England. Quite amazing. But I love Irish racing." And then there was Mr. Robert Morley, complete with panama: "Just over for the racing, my dear. Going back straight away. I'm making a film, you know, about Cromwell, with your Richard Harris-he's from Wicklow or Wexford, isn't he? And I've been doing some riding myself. But the horse sank into the mud in Spain. I really don't know why. I'm only 19 stone. No, no, it's quite true, I promise you, my darling. It's these Spanish horses. No stamina, you know."

In her best inimitable Dublin accent Maureen comments: "They say this to you when actually you're up there, you're up there, worried to death, your knees are knocking, you've a pain in your stomach and you wonder will you even be able to walk on!" This year, for the first time since 1888 the Annual Summer Meeting of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers was held in Dublin. Over three hundred delegates travelled here from abroad to attend. They were welcomed by Dr. J. D. Barry, M.Sc., B.E., C.Eng., Deputy Principal, College of Technology, Bolton Street, Dublin. Dr. Barry is also a member of the Board of the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards. He is a graduate of both University College, Cork and University College, Dublin and did research at M.LT. Cambridge,.Massachussetts, U.S.A. He has represented Ireland at many International Conferences.

Sir Robert A. Mclean, Chairman Navan Carpets Limited, said at the presentation of design awards and scholarships by Navan Carpets that for the first time in the four years they had been presenting awards the Scholarship was going to a student outside the College of Art. This was a deliberate move on the Company's part to alter the rules in such a way as to introduce to the world of art a student who would otherwise have been lost to another vocation. He continued' "Desmond Hogan, this year's scholarship winner, is such a student. I doubt if he himself fully appreciated the extent of the talent which the adjudicators could see in his entry. Now, as a result of the Navan scholarship he is setting out on a four year course in Art. We shall watch his progress with exceptional interest." Desmond Hogan is an 18 year old leaving certificate student of St. Joseph's College, Ballinasloe.

For the fifth year in succession Maureen Potter stars in Gaels of Laughter, Just opened at the Gaiety Theatre, Dublin Chatting over a drink with John Molloy (who wrote some of the scripts for the show) Maureen talked of the people who come up to her and say "Of course it's easy for you. Anyone can see you're enjoying yourself. It's not really work as far as you're concerned, it is?"

religion
SOCIETY OF ST. VINCENT DE PAUL
NOT MANY PEOPLE in Ireland today realise that the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is 136 years old. It was founded in May 1833 by a group of 6 students in Paris. After its first year in existence it had grown in size to nearly 100 members. Frederick Ozanam, one of the 6 founder members had felt dissatisfied with the Catholic Church's lack of social involvement and resolved to remedy the situation. The aim of the society was not, as was suggested to them, to teach catechism to the poor, but to help needy families with material assistance. To date the society has grown to such an extent that it has spread round the world and has 500,000 members. Here in Ireland there are now approximately 13,000 men and women in the organisation They visit the poor and the sick, help to run hostels for Conference in 1940 and began visiting poor families in Bride Street and Francis Street. He also helped to run a Boys' Club and thus became very much involved in youth work. In 1953, together with other members of various conferences, he was asked to work in the suburb of Ballyfermot as there was no conference there at that time. Again he went visiting and started a youth club there. In 1954 Mr. Cashman was asked to take charge of St. Vincent de Paul Youth Clubs in the archdiocese of Dublin and continued with this work until 1960, when he was appointed a member of the National Council of Ireland. He was given the job of implementing the society's overseas effort, which was designed to make some contribution to the needy in other parts of the world. Ireland, because of the many missionaries there, was given the responsibility for former British territory in Africa. The society is now extremely involved in such things as the Kilkenny Social Centre and also those being planned In Limerick and Waterford, and even in quite small places they are co-ordinating with other organisations working in the same field. One of the best things that the society has done in recent years is to establish a number of contacts with other Churches, particularly the Presbyterians and the Quakers. For instance, in Dublin the Presbyterian Youth Movement have come to several of the society's meetings and the Vincent de Paul Society have gone to theirs. As far as social work is concerned generally, Mr. Cashman said that the activity is not moving as fast as some people would like. But the great thing is that people of different beliefs are now beginning to come together to work for their less fortunate fellow men and women. This, he feels, is something to be proud of, particularly in such a conservative country as Ireland. has since merged with a larger group of companies. Mr. Cummins said he could not name the company as it is one of the rules of The Legion that the organisation should not be used to advance the material interests of its members. He joined The Legion of Mary in 1932 just after the Eucharistic Congress and since then he has had several periods of office in the Concilium, as VicePresident, Secretary, Assistant Secretary and Treasurer. He is immediately recognisable as a gentle, sincere man, who says simply "All my life I have had a sincere devotion to Our Lady, and if I feel any honour attached to what has happened it will lie in my endeavour to improve and perfect this as much as possible for the glory of God and in the service of his Church." However, he emphasises that he is only one of many who have given dedicated service to The Legion. The Legion itself is almost 48 years old. The first step towards its foundation took place at a monthly meeting of

" ... wanted

to help people off as himself"

not as well

"Aim

JAMES CUMMINS is personal development

sanctification of members"

and

homeless men, take children to the seaside for holidays, run youth clubs, work for itinerants, orphans and handicapped children. They help emigrants, run legal secretariats, salvage bureaux' and for some time past they have been involved in overseas aid to needy countries. Mr. Robert Cashman, married, with two children, is the newly elected President of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in Ireland. Mr. Cashman, who is 48, was born in Fermoy, Co. Cork, but now works in the Civil Service in Dublin. He says he first becameInterested in social work through his brother and fellow workers who were members of the society. He joined simply because he wanted to help people who were not as well off as himself. Mr. Cashman joined the Myra House

THE LEGION OF MARY

JAMES PATRICK CUMMINS (63), married, no children, ("If I had had children I wouldn't have been able to devote so much time to the Legion") was recently elected President of the Concilium of The Legion of Mary. This is the General Council of the Legion and its function is to govern the Legion all over the world. Mr. Cummins was born in Liverpool, of Irish parents. He was educated there and came only once to Ireland during his boyhood. The fact that he eventually settled down here was purely accidental. He says, "Things were pretty bad in England in 1927 when I was offered a job in Ireland. My father urged me to accept it and I did." He is now a company secretary and in 1946 was a co-founder of a wholesale food and importing business which

the Society of St. Vincent de Paul when men and women met at Myra House, Dublin, in September 1921. Mr. Matt Murray had been describing his visit to patients in the South Dublin Union (now St. Kevin's Hospital). After listening to him two young women spoke up, saying, "Could we not have a society for visiting the women in the South Dublin Union?" They got their wish and the first step was taken which was to carry the name and activity of The Legion of Mary from Myra House to the farthest corner of the earth. Mr. Cummins, speaking of the organisation stresses that firstly its aim is the personal development and sanctification of the members by prayer and active co-operation in the work of the Church. He quotes the Vatican Council which emphasised that every Christian should be active in the service to others.

REJECTED BY THE "ABBEY"?

BRIAN FRIEL'S STORY of the Abbey Theatre's rejection of his hilarious political satire 'The Mundy Scheme' recently presented at the Olympia is both interesting and revealing. He says: "I went to Phil O'Kelly and said: "I've written a new play. Are you interested?" "He said 'Yes'." "I said 'There are two or three tags to the script: Firstly I want Donal Donnelly to direct. Secondly, I want Godfrey Quigley to play the lead. And thirdly, because Donal is going away to Russia to make a movie, we would need to have it on before the end of July." "Phil was very gracious, and so was Alan Simpson, the Artistic Director.

"In actual fact I was never notified officially that my play was rejected. I got the script back with a little slip attached saying 'With the compliments of the Abbey' or something like that. And that's all. 'Anyway, to cut a long story short, I discussed the matter with Donal Donnelly and we decided to offer the play to Brendan Smith. In a matter of hours he had agreed to everything." Brian Friel (40) married, with four daughters, has no theatrical background. But he did get two lucky breaks. In the early sixties Tyrone Guthrie, who was building a theatre in Minneapolis suggested to him that he should come over there for six months and watch a producer and actors at work. "It was a great experience," says Brian, "watching Guthrie directing Hamlet, Chekhov, Moliere. I was really exposed to professionalism." His second bit of good luck occurred on his way home to Ireland, when he learned that he had been awarded the MacAuley Fellowship--a grant of one thousand pounds. This allowed him to devote himself, without worry, for six months, to writing 'Philadelphia Here I Come' which was an instant success. This was the first of his four plays with a love/ hate human relationship theme. When he had seen them produced he thought he would write a political satire. "That was why I offered it to the Abbey. I felt the theme was the kind of thing a National Theatre should present. I was very bitter over its rejection at first. But I've got over it now." It would be interesting to hear the Abbey Directors' comments on the play now. Presuming, of course, they have taken the trouble to see it at the Olympia.

Ray McAnnally is married to Ronnie Masterson. They have four children, two boys and two girls. He was born in Buncrana, Co. Donegal (the trace of the accent is still there) but very soon afterwards the family moved to Moville, where he was brought up. It was always his ambition to act. He did all the usual school plays, and also toured with a fit-up company during the holidays. As a good throwaway line he mentions casually the fact that when he was sixteen he was offered a contract with Middlesborough football team as goalkeeper. In 1947 he made his way to Dublin, marched into the Abbey and asked for an audition. He got it and was straight away offered a job. He stayed there until 1962 when he decided to go free lance. Since then he has worked in films, theatre, television and radio. His greatest success to date must surely be the thirteen months' run of

BRIAN FRIEL "I was never notified officially play was rejected."

THREE DIFFERENT ROLES

that my PLAYING THE LEAD in three plays, one immediately after the other, in the same theatre must be some sort of a record. Yet this is exactly what Ray McAnnally has been doing in Eamonn Andrews' Gaiety Theatre. The original idea came from Fred O'Donovan, Managing Director of Andrews Studios. He put it to Ray and they decided to try it as an experiment. The first thing Fred O'Donovan and Ray had to decide was what plays they would present. The decision was to do 'Who's Afraidf of Virginia Woolf?'-a strong, meaty American drama, 'Relatively Speaking'-a West End comedy, and 'Alfie'-a realist comedy of modern London life A nice balance, and one which gave Ray, a master in the art of make-up, a chance to play three utterly different roles. 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?' in London's West End, where he starred opposite Constance Commings and got rave notices from the critics. Last year he played the lead in an English television series called 'Spindoe', When asked if he thought it would be shown on Telefis Eireann, and if so would he make a lot of money out of it, he replied: 'I don't know if it will come over here, but if it does I won't be making money. In Ireland you only get a t of 1 % for a repeat. In England it would be 100 'V, at peak viewing time, or 50% outside that time. In other words, in Ireland you get five shillings for every hundred pounds of your fee." (Dear Mr. Hardiman-are you that poor or just plain mean?)

They read the script and were very enthusiastic. A week passed. The Abbey Board sat the following Wednesday. Then Alan Simpson, who was in Limerick, rang Donal Donnelly in London and told him the directors had turned down the play. "Donal rang me. I rang Phil. Phil said, yes, it was true. He was sorry, but there was a majority decision of three to one against producing it. (As a matter of fact there are five directors, but one was not available to read the script). ' "The comments of the directors later were at odds. One said they rejected it. Another said I withdrew it. Yet another said they didn't reject it, but had I left it with them they probably would have.
32

IN NEED OF A SUBSIDY
THEATREGOERS old enough to Look Back in Anger to the closing down of the brilliant little Gobe Theatre in Dunlaoghaire must have rejoiced to see Godfrey Quigley back with all his old powerful style of acting in 'The Mundy Scheme' at the Olympia last month. Way back in the early fifties the Globe was the 'In' place-where people flocked from all parts of the city to watch a group of dedicated young actors, Jack McGowran (famous now for his interpretations of Beckett), Donal Donnelly, Dennis Brennan, Michael O'Herlihy (now in Hollywood), Milo O'Shea (apparently lost to films), Norman Redway, Anna Managhan, Pauline Delaney and Genevieve Lyons, perform all working under the direction of a brilliant, but as yet almost unknown young producer, Jim Fitzgerald. They all worked, as they will tell you, for buttons, but with any sort of a

"Why doesn't it include actors, designers and directors? My God, it's almost criminal to sayan actor is not a creative artist!" "And take this play, 'The Mundy Scheme. Is there any reason, legal or otherwise, why it shouldn't be subsidised? When I think what the Abbey gets!" "And then there was that time when Mr. Haughey was considering subsidising the theatre He asked people to come and see him. .Well, I went along. I had a conversation with him, which didn't fill me with hope, but I gave him a three year plan I'd worked out for the theatre. Other members of the profession-management, and Equity also put forward plans. And Mr. Haughey's complaint was that none of us could see eye to eye. Maybe we didn't. But nevertheless, he hasn't come up with any active policy himself. We can only hope that the new Minister will present us with a working policy based on our suggestions." Let us hope, with Godfrey Quigley, that someone is going to do something about theatre in Ireland-and soon.

TRACTS FOR THE TIMES

NO ONE who was at the Olympia on election eve could have failed to savour the extra piquancy provided by the piquancy provided by the happy collision of life and art. Nearly every one of Mr. Friel's jokes came across the footlights trailing what looked like a wicked double-meaning, and the audience were not slow to applaud the shots which seemed to land fair and square on such clearly marked targets as Mr. Haughey's house. The Mundy Scheme is an unsubtle play based on a very one-sided view of Irish politics. It is certainly funny, and, in Donal Donnelly's production, very slick and fast-moving, but for all its easy laughs and easier targets it leaves an unpleasant taste in the mouth-and not quite, I think, the taste the author intended. The prologue and epilogue, though perfunctory, suggest that Mr. Friel intends us to take his sour view of the political world seriously, but if that is so he should not have gone quite so far into savage caricature. His Taoiseach and cabinet ministers are all so pitifully incompetent and illiterate that it is impossible to consider them other than as figures of farce unless one admits that Mr. Friel is committing one of the seven creative sins by being beastly to his characters for reasons that have nothing to do with the work in hand. This play is like a late-night pub sermon on The State of the Country-you agree at the time with every word that is said, but in the morning you are happier to forget about the whole thing. I don't think it does the author's high reputation a tap of good

GODFREY QUIGLEY "Criminal to sayan actor is not a creative artist" reasonable subsidy they would not have had to disband and most of them emigrate. Godfrey Quigley, their leader, nowadays spends his time crossing backwards and forwards between Ireland and Britain although Dublin still remains his base. Televiewers will have seen him recently in that controversial crime serial 'Hog' as well as another muchargued-about religious play 'Son of Man'. He laughs: "I always seem to be getting myself into controversial plays these days," he says. , Unlike most actors, he is not very interested in talking about himself. He is, however, to launch forth at length and with emotion about theatre in Ireland to day." And about the new tax free scheme for painters, writers and musicians.

Neveretheless this was a fluent, highly-finished production which made the most of the material. It was good to see Godfrey Quigley back again in a part-that of the Taoiseach, F. X. Burke-which suited him down to the ground. Patrick Laffan, as his P.S., and Cecil Barror, Barry Keegan and Martin Dempsey as his ministers lent strong support, and Alpho O'Reilly's set was rich in exactly the right kind of decorative chiche, But I can't see anyone outside the country--or outside the present time-regarding The Mundy Scheme as anything other than a rather noisy and vicious private joke. It lacks the perspective of good satire and seems untouched by Mr. Friel's normally exacting artistic discipline. "As an O'Neill you could rule Ulsterand to hell with the English!" Thomas Kilroy's play, The O'Neill at the Peacock on the life of the great Hugh also picks up one or two stray emotive overtones bounced back from the current scene, but by and large it owes nothing to topical intrusions. This is a very exciting piece of work, with considerable depths of characterisation and a real feeling for language, and it was admirably directed by Vincent Dowling to clever and economical sets by John Ryan. The substance of the play is made to hinge cleverly in time on the Battle of the Yellow Ford-the victory of Kinsale-and Kilroy paints O'Neill as a man fatally torn between two worlds and two heritages-the old tight Gaelic tradition and the English manners and world-view that he learnt at the court of Elizabeth. The choice of Joseph O'Connor for the part of this self-divided West Briton was a good piece of casting, his English acting style contrasting pointedly with the native Abbey manner, displaying in the strength of his foreign-bred convictions the very weaknesses that his fellow Ulstermen were only to ready to pounce upon. It was good too, to see Aiden Grennell again in a beautifully cold, steely interpretation of Lord Deputy Mountjoy, well supported by Patrick Duggan's Robert Cecil. The writing in the scenes, between these two, cleverly recapitulated to offer us a constant yet slightly shifting viewpoint, has a tight-packed economy which is almost Shakespearean. The play is made, however, by the author's brilliant conception of the three spies, brooding like tatty vultures at the end of the action, changing sides at the drop of a banner, new proof of the [ohnsonian indictment that partiotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. These three chancers were beautifully handled by Dermot Kelly, Edward Byrne and Tom McGreevy, and offered as poignant a commentary as you could wish for on the well known fact that we are and always have been our own worst enemies. This excellent play deserves a production 'upstairs' and a permanent place in the Abbey repertoire.

A MATTER OF REGRET
THE DOWLING CONSORT is one of finest groups to appear in the country. For the last eleven years they have performed the music of the 16th and 17th centuries with an elegance and attention to detail which is often lacking in musical interpretations by other musical organisations in this country. It is deeply regretted, therefore that Dr. Boydell, the Consort's leader, has decided to close shop. This was announced at the concert sponsored by the Italian Institute in the National Gallery at the end of May. There is a lunch-time recital this month and then a final concert probably in November. Dr. Boydell paid tribute to the Italian Institute and the B.B.C. for making it possible to continue in recent years. It is a sad reflection, however, on the programme planners of R.T.E. who, despite paying lip service to the encouragement of Irish artists, turn a blind eye to the one music group in this country whose standard could well be described as truly international and whose expertise has already been recognised by the B.B.C. Third Programme. Surely acceptance in the far more competitive London scene should prove to R.T.E. the value of this group. Indeed if the station had any initiative it could undertake a series of Dowland recitals and sell them abroad. If the B.B.C. is interested, other stations should be prepared to buy as well. As regards the concert in the National Gallery, the Consort showed itself in splendid form. Their programme ranged across the great madrigal writers of the Italian High Renaissance and finished with a group of songs by John Willbye, the great Elizabethan stylist. This music pre-dates the era of the "well tempered" keyboard as the harmonic inventions are much freer than in Bach and the classical 18th century period. Indeed at times the madrigals of Marenzio and Gesualdo can sound like luscious 12-tone pieces written by Webern in one of his happier moments. Real bargains New bargain labels are always welcome and the "Debut" series for Deutsche Grammophon is a particularly valuable addition to the range. The Company's very noble idea is to present a series of discs recorded by young, up-and-coming artists and to retail them at an extremely competitive price, about 14/6d. in fact. ' This gives new performers an opportunity to reach a wide audience while presenting the record 'collectors with some real bargains. The recordings are produced to the usual high standards and nothing has been spared to make this a most useful set of records.

The first four discs cover two pianists (Dino Ciani and Roberto Szidon), a tenor (Horst R. Laubenthal) and a violinist (Andre Rohn), Ciani is a twenty-eight year old from Fiume, formerly an Italian town now in Yugoslavia, and he plays the rarely heard Schumann "Novelettes" Opus 21. His performance is extremely convincing and it is a real bargain to have this fine interpretation at such a low price. Szidon is the same age as Ciani and comes from Brazil. Having attracted attention as a child prodigy by playing Chopin at the age of five, he avoided the pitfalls of too early a musical career and went on to study medicine. Last Autumn he came to Germany and made these recordings, before being heard in a concert at all. This year his concerts will bring him to Spain, Portugal, Spoleto, Brazil and Hanover. He has chosen a Russian programme of Rachmaninoff and Scriabin together with a brilliant performance of Prokofiev's Sonata No.6. Laubenthal shows all signs of filling the gap caused by the awful death of Fritz Wunderlich. Making his debut at Wiirtzburg in "Don Giovanni" he sang at Salzburg last year in "Zaide" a lesser-known Mozart opera. The present disc is devoted to German lieder from Beethoven to Wolf and he shows himself a consummate artist with a light but splendidly controlled voice equally capable of handling the passionate phrases of Brahms and the delicate nuances of Wolf. The final disc by Hamburg-born violinist Rohn is my favourite. He has a flawless technique and a rich, exciting tone which makes his playing of the Brahm's 1st Violin Sonata particularly breathtaking. His performance of sonatas by Handel and Debussy which complete the disc give ample evidence of the wide range of his abilities. At twenty-four he is the youngest of the quartet and despite his great devotion to his art, admits he would prefer to live in "swinging London". In all, this is a most exciting issue and we must loudly applaud DGG for undertaking the series and for giving us such splendid performances and recordings at really bargain prices.

owner, it also is the source of millions. of pounds to the Government in taxes. The ownership of cars can be split into sections: (1) the private owners and (2) the company car driver. The former buys, maintains and runs his car at his own expense, the other just drives a car and charges everything to the company. The time has come for the private owner to rebel against the taxes and petty regulations designed to make a criminal out of him if he stops on a city street to get an evening paper. It doesn't matter to the "company car" man whether an extra 5 % is added to the wholesale tax or not. He will get his new car every year, or two, at the most. The cost of road tax, or petrol means nothing to him. His greatest inconvenience will be having to wait at a garage while the car is being washed. But he'll make up for that by adding a little to the price. For him motoring is great, he can make a few pounds (sterling!) on it. Now let us see how their less fortunate brethren fare out. With the savage increase in wholesale taxes to over 15 % very few cars will be privately owned. More likely a grand tour of garages looking for "the" bargain. The actual road worthiness of the machine doesn't matter so long as the engine goes and the body condition is reasonable. Second job to pay the instalments The only requirements now are a hire purchase agreement (tax and insurance included, if required) and a second job to pay the instalments. Road tax is a sore point. Some millions of pounds are extracted annually to improve roads. Only a small portion is actually used. The balance goes to the Exchequer for balancing the budget. The Government differentiates between private and commercial vehicles for road taxe purposes but it does not differentiate between a car used for business or commercial purposes and one used solely for pleasure. Now, surely, a company car being used by a representative on company business should be bracketed in the commercial category and liable to a higher rate of tax than the one used by an individual for pleasure only. Here is one way of equating costs. Adding twopence, or three, appears to be normal procedure at Budget time. When it is realised that nearly 70% of the price you pay for every gallon of petrol goes to the Government we wonder if the Minister of Finance ever heard of tyres, batteries or accessories. Or even why not impose a tax on fuel and gas oil in industry and domestic heating. Surely there are many other sources of revenue other than petrol? The new Government will have to take a long look at the motor industry. They never stop adding to the taxes and duties on cars and equipment on one hand while on the other they are trying to protect the personnel in the industry. It seems all very strange to me. ANDREW MURPHY.

PITY THE PRIVATE OWNER

THIS IS the era of the motor-car. It is no longer a luxury for the rich; with a ratio of one car to eleven people here the point is proved. All sorts of gimmicks are used to sell one to anybody over driving licence age. Labourer, typist, director or celebrity, there is a car to suit everyone's pocket; there is also hire purchase (or personal loan in its new guise) to get it. The motor car opens up a whole new social life for its

MARRIAGE-IRISH STYLE by Dorine Rohan; Mercier Press; 7s.6d. Reviewed by ANGELA MacNAMARA MISS ROHAN is a journalist whose work is compelling because she herself is honestly concerned about her subject. Her's is a book which will bring to light for many, some attitudes towards marriage which cannot be perpetuated. I cannot agree with John B. Keane who states in the foreword that the book does what it sets out to do "to analyse ruthlessly every and any aspect of marriage in Ireland." Miss Rohan could hardly be expected to do so in one hundred and twelve pages. We, therefore, must accept the fact that the many ordinary, happy marriages were left out. Likewise it is well to remember that what constitutes a reasonably happy marriage in one environment, may be pitied by those whose way of life is totally different. There is a certain danger in the rich man saying to the labourer "Poor you." Discontent is often started by misplaced sympathy. Miss Rohan illustrates very clearly the world-wide lack of person-to-person communication. She quotes someone who said "Television is a modern device which when broken down stimulates conversation." Certainly an ugly portent this. Need for "a compulsory course in human relationships" Miss Rohan indicates that divorce might solve many a problem. I have noticed a growing number of problems created by divorce in other countries. I should imagine that the legalization of divorce in this country at present would be chaotic. Miss Rohan herself has pointed out the tremendous need for "a compulsory course in Human Relationships, to be part of the school curriculum," That, plus her advocating of more and better pre-marriage courses, indicates that what we need is not the easy way out of marriage; but a more mature and responsible attitude towards the Sacrament of Matrimony. Our young people need to have a mature concept of married love if their relationship is to be capable of developing. Many of the broken or unhappy marriages Miss Rohan describes clearly originated from a young person's desire for affection and deliverance from apparently insurmountable difficulties at home. As Dr. Dominion states in his book 'Marital Breakdown': "Unfortunately, the very circumstances that prompt such urgent action (marriage) are exactly those which have least prepared the participants to overcome the difficulties which they have to face when the initial burst of enthusiasm wanes."

We are back again to the fact that many of the situations outlined truly and sensationally by Miss Rohan can be cured only by giving children, from birth, a living example of love, which will gradually include (at school and at home) the various aspects of love, spiritual, social, psychological and sexual. It can be said of marriage partnership as well as of child/parent relationship, that those who are praised, loved and rewarded for behaviour, want to repeat that behaviour, and repetition is likely to become habit. Unstable marriages reflect too often homes where security, praise and love were missing. "Promiscuity and permissiveness have increased" Miss Rohan indicates rightly that "promiscuity and permissiveness have increased." She describes well the situations that arise as a result of this increase. But I wished again and again while reading this most readable book, that she had asked repeatedly "What is being done about it?" and "What should be done" to jog the reader into a realization that these situations are the responsibility of each one of us. She does state that "One can only hope that a more progressive education on sexual matters will see an end to this social problem (the unmarried mother) in the near future." I hope likewise that the problem will become less acute But "progressive education on sexual matters" is not alone the answer. As one unmarried mother said to me, "I knew the lot about all the sex end of it, but I didn't ever see or hear what love was." Since God is Love in human life, we can clearly see the need for relevant and meaningful Christian formation at home and school. Christians are supposed to be identifiable by "the way they love one another." The author's description of the coarse approach to marital relations of premarital sex is no exaggeration. Help from Advisory Councils In the chapter "Sex in Irish Marriage" she portrays exactly the cases wellknown to the social worker. But again here (p. 72) there is a note of pessimism. I would like to have seen an account of the great work being done in this country to try and update old ingrained attitudes towards love, sex and marriage. Miss Rohan writes, "It is one thing for the Church to acknowledge the necessity for a more enlightened attitude ... but it is another matter to try to undo the harm that has obviously been done by less enlightened generations ... " Miss Rohan does not here acknowledge the efforts that are being made by both Catholic and Protestant Advisory Councils, both to help those whose marriage have become difficult or intolerable due to repressions and inhibitions; and also to introduce specially planned approaches to help

school children, engaged couples and parents. The prevalent ignorance Miss Rohan portrays so clearly is being tackled. Surprisingly few offer voluntary help, yet many are garrulous about what "the powers that be" have not done! I think we all need to be educated to recognise how ignorant we have been in the past! Miss Rohan's book will certainly portray aspects of marriage which you had never really thought about, and some of her revelations may, to an uncomfortable extent, hit home. Read it and see! Pre-marriage courses to learn how

Miss Rohan describes (p. 110) the young wives who, after "the romantic wedding and honeymoon, suddenly find the whole business of running a home is beyond them." This is very true, but pre-marriage courses will soon be available all over the country to help engaged couples to cope with every aspect of married life. In a short time there should be less of the type of comment overheard some years ago when Mag and Tom, who had been courting for ten years had got around to planning the Big Day. Says Mag to Tom "and will we be having sexual relations too, Tom?" "Aye, indeed we will, girl," he replied. To which Mag replied with a further question-" Will they visit us often, Tom?" His reply is not recorded. Miss Rohan quotes (p, 37) one priest as saying "I doubt if religion really registers an awful lot in the average marriage ... " I doubt if it really registers in the average person. Religious education in the past has not been made sufficiently relevant to life, and many of our people have been left spiritually in "foreverness of infancy" as Rosemary Haughton puts it. But that, too, is being rapidly improved. Post-marriage courses will include talks and discussion on "Religion in the Home" as well as many other matters of vital importance to the married people. Each partner equal and indispensable Bishop Fulton Sheen writes: "Marriage is a triune partnership between husband, wife and God." Each partner is equal and indispensable in the planthe lover, the beloved and the mutual unifying love of God. I thought it a pity not to underline the training in self-sacrifice and charity which link the child with God in Love, and subsequently the marriage partners in this triune partnership. Perhaps Miss Rohan will give us the pleasure of a second book giving the answers to the cases so vividly and truthfully described in "Marriage Irish Style." I hope that many who read this outspoken book will be prompted to contribute what they can towards the re-building of the Christian concept of Love.