The Beam in Irish Naitonalists' Eyes: Joyce's and Friel's Critical Examination of Irish Naitonalism

• Main Authors: Liu Hong-ling, 劉虹伶
• Other Authors: Chuang Kun-liang
• Format: Others
• Language: en_US
• Published: 2001
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/31553213887418536084

碩士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 英語研究所 === 89 === Abstract My intention of studying Joyce’s and Friel’s literary works is to see how the two writers interrogate Irish nationalism in a critical manner. Joyce’s “Cyclops” (the twelfth chapter of Ulysses) and Friel’s plays─The Freedom of the City, Making History, and Translations─is scrutinized in terms of Irish nationalism: what kind of strategies the nationalists adopt to defy the British Empire, and how the authors criticize their strategies and find problems in them. In “Cyclops,” Joyce applies parodies to expose various ridiculous words and deeds of the radical nationalists in Barney Kiernan’s: in order to wipe away the humiliation of being feminized by the English colonizer, the Citizen and the other barflies desperately construct their masculine images by invoking physical and sexual violence; in order to keep Ireland as racially pure as possible, they assume intolerant and xenophobic attitudes toward the English and minor immigrants; and in order to emphasize the peculiarity and superiority of Irish culture, they conceive a nostalgic project of reviving the ancient Gaelic language, heroic legends, and Arcadian myths. Friel also takes a critical stance when examining Irish nationalism. In The Freedom of the City and Making History, dangers are revealed when the nationalist balladeer and historian contort the reality and depersonalize their protagonists in order to turn them into national heroes who can arouse Irish people’s patriotism; in Translations, problems are uncovered when the nationalist villagers counter the invasion of British cultural imperialism with the essentialist claim of a pure language and a golden past. Comparing the two writers’ examination of Irish nationalism, we find that they share many similar opinions on the issues of national heroes, language, ancient folklore, and national identity: both of them accuse Irish nationalists of propagating blood sacrifice by martyrizing those who die willingly or unwillingly for their country; both of them consider the revival of the Gaelic language unpractical and thus adopt a new linguistic strategy─appropriation─to challenge the supremacy of English; both of them criticize the nationalist way of constructing an ancient, pastoral arcadia with the help of Irish folklore; and both of them object that Ireland should be fixed to a static identity but would rather it become an open space in which divergent elements can equally display their uniqueness and interact with each other. Unlike Irish nationalists who employ a limited, nativist manner to defy the political and cultural invasion of the British Empire, both Joyce and Friel try hard to provide the Irish with a more open-minded, international way of thinking to confront Ireland’s various colonial problems. And unlike Irish nationalists who display their patriotism toward Ireland by embalming the nation in a beautiful, glorious image, both writers show their love and expectation to their motherland by exposing its defective side, hoping that through self-examination, Ireland and its people can make progress and become better in the future.