Here is the film about Irish republicanism that won Ken Loach the Palme d'Or at this year's Cannes film festival, and the peahen shriek in the press could not have been louder if the European commission had succeeded in making Tony Benn lord president of the UK, with powers to raise income tax at the rate of 95 percent on all newspaper columnists.
Sadly, pressure of deadlines evidently meant the pundits involved were not able to see the film before letting rip, and the really strange thing is that if they had, they might have seen a different film than the one they were expecting. It is a period drama about the IRA's guerrilla war against the British in the early 1920s, and the civil war that followed the establishment of the Free State in 1922. It is not simply a denunciation of British beastliness, but an evocation of the futility and fratricidal despair Ireland encountered and somehow even embraced on attaining self-government — a predisposition encoded into the Free State's DNA at birth at least partly by the IRA's ruthless readiness to execute informers.
It is not Loach's best film, but it is a fine and powerful drama, with relevant things to say about what happens when an occupying force withdraws. It is a film about anger and bitterness, but there are, as it happens, characteristic moments of gentle, unworldly Loachian humor, as when a boy on a bicycle brings news of the British ceasefire to the Republicans and loses the bit of paper with the vital facts. Its insights into current politics are oblique and indirect, however, and the whole movie does look sealed and varnished into its historical time, compared with, say, Loach's 1990 film Hidden Agenda, which was so explosively contemporary. The Wind That Shakes the Barley looks light years away from contemporary Ireland, a prosperous EU country that has renounced its claim to the north, and whose government, like Britain's, enthusiastically supported the Iraq war. So why make this film now? Is it simply a case of reviving something that Conor Cruise O'Brien acidly called a neurotic tradition: The Opening of the Wounds?
PHOTO COURTESY OF SWALLOW WINGS
The story told by Loach and his screenwriter Paul Laverty is a simple one. Cillian Murphy and Padraic Delaney play Damian and Teddy, two brothers in rural Ireland in 1920. Damian intends to leave Ireland to take up his medical studies in London. Teddy is a committed member of an IRA unit that has been exploiting its superior knowledge of the terrain to harry British troops in a guerrilla war. But Damian abandons his plans when he witnesses the swaggering violence of some Black and Tan troops in his village, and joins the war of independence. He is euphoric when the IRA's campaign brings Winston Churchill to the negotiating table with Michael Collins, but enraged by what he sees as the resulting sell-out. When the Free State comes into being, Damian sees it as necessary to continue the struggle against his own comrades.
So The Wind That Shakes the Barley is not just about how the British behaved, but about how the Irish behaved — and how they learned their behavior in government both from their former imperial masters and from their masters' enemies. It is fatuous and tiresome to wonder if Loach and Laverty should have been less severe in their portrayal of the Black and Tans, in the interests of broadsheetbrow "balance" — as if it would be acceptable to present the broad facts of how the Black and Tans treated Irish villagers, so long as one soldier is shown suppressing a tear, or maybe sadly ruffling some peasant boy's mop of hair, or perhaps, as in David Lean's Ryan's Daughter, having a doomed affair with a local woman. Loach is not interested in splitting the difference between historical realities and lenient liberal scruple. In any case, the point of the film lies elsewhere, in the agony of what happened after 1922.
The Irish state emerges from this film as a collaborationist entity, which imbibed its habits of governing from its former rulers, who were able to sub-contract the prerogative of cruelty to a deeply uncertain new dispensation.
The film's final cadences are ones of misery and bitterness and rage. But it is a finely made, finely acted piece of work. For this, and for his remarkable and uncompromising career, Loach deserves his golden palm.
June 2 to June 8 Taiwan’s woodcutters believe that if they see even one speck of red in their cooked rice, no matter how small, an accident is going to happen. Peng Chin-tian (彭錦田) swears that this has proven to be true at every stop during his decades-long career in the logging industry. Along with mining, timber harvesting was once considered the most dangerous profession in Taiwan. Not only were mishaps common during all stages of processing, it was difficult to transport the injured to get medical treatment. Many died during the arduous journey. Peng recounts some of his accidents in
“Why does Taiwan identity decline?”a group of researchers lead by University of Nevada political scientist Austin Wang (王宏恩) asked in a recent paper. After all, it is not difficult to explain the rise in Taiwanese identity after the early 1990s. But no model predicted its decline during the 2016-2018 period, they say. After testing various alternative explanations, Wang et al argue that the fall-off in Taiwanese identity during that period is related to voter hedging based on the performance of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Since the DPP is perceived as the guardian of Taiwan identity, when it performs well,
A short walk beneath the dense Amazon canopy, the forest abruptly opens up. Fallen logs are rotting, the trees grow sparser and the temperature rises in places sunlight hits the ground. This is what 24 years of severe drought looks like in the world’s largest rainforest. But this patch of degraded forest, about the size of a soccer field, is a scientific experiment. Launched in 2000 by Brazilian and British scientists, Esecaflor — short for “Forest Drought Study Project” in Portuguese — set out to simulate a future in which the changing climate could deplete the Amazon of rainfall. It is
What does the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) in the Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) era stand for? What sets it apart from their allies, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? With some shifts in tone and emphasis, the KMT’s stances have not changed significantly since the late 2000s and the era of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) current platform formed in the mid-2010s under the guidance of Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), and current President William Lai (賴清德) campaigned on continuity. Though their ideological stances may be a bit stale, they have the advantage of being broadly understood by the voters.
RSS