Author: mgabouer

Northern Ireland today is a solemn place. There is a sense of a gaping wound only just barely healing day after day as you walk down the streets of Derry/Londonderry or stroll through the neighborhoods of Belfast. The pain that is felt by the residents is tangible, hanging in the air like a thick fog. If you engage someone on the street in the conversation and mention it, they’ll tell you that the tension is thick, and that they are not at peace internally. This overcast tone permeates the American culture today, yes, but the true feelings seem to be those of the fiery nature. Hearts and minds seem to be ablaze and searching for an unbelievable amount of change.

It can be argued that most Americans are searching for peace, maybe. However, the energy surrounding the current climate in the United States seems to be anything but healing from a wound. After completing this course, I have realized that the same sentiments existed in the 60s and 70s. The conflicts in Northern Ireland had an air of grief and reluctance and recognition of unifying qualities, as we saw in The Informer and Pentecost. In the United States, however, the fiery Trial of the Chicago 8 and the burning desire for change inspired by Huey Newton were fueled by anger and a “shot” at the system that is supposed to provide justice. I’m not sure why this contrast is so apparent in my mind, however I believe that the 68ers in America were fighting against each other and against a tangible government that is right in front of them, while those in The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland were battling with a government hundreds of miles away and with people who believed in peace. These are such different types of battles, and the contrast glares out amongst all of the similarities.

At a time in society where media platforms (and our choice of settings) have the ability to censor and filter the information that individuals receive, I felt myself growing curious as to what the media would have been like in the late 60s and early 70s. Watching the video clip of Huey Newton in class, I noticed that, although he said otherwise, he was an entertainer. And, I assume, in those days you had to be entertaining in order to fit the TV culture at the time, and to get people’s attention. Today, with platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, an individual with a voice can record himself or herself proclaiming his or her message about anything — freedoms, politics, religions, or ideologies. That is both the beauty and the downfall of technological innovations: how can we digest all of this material and decide if we agree with, disagree with, resonate with, or abhor any and every sentence?

Would people have resonated with Huey Newton as a leader of a movement today? Would his messages be censored by Facebook or Twitter? I would argue that Huey Newton and his method of speech — the fast-talking, repetitive, sarcastic and ironic speech calling out the leaders of today and the issues that are prevalent in the country would get people to watch, listen, and try to understand. If that truly is the case, would the media publish the ten-point program and showcase Huey as a hero of 2020?

We are influenced by the actions of our parents, our friends, our peers, and our teachers. We look to those around us to fill the gaps in our knowledge, and to steady our wavering hands. As children, this need is exacerbated; the exploration of life and love and truth is innate and is fueled by our surroundings. Mojo Mickybo illustrates the depth of this need for others while adding in the role of imagination and the ideologies of temporal society.

The imaginations of Mojo and Mickybo are fascinating. It is even more interesting, however, that the extent to which they align is ten-fold. The question becomes, then, is this alignment innate? Or was it formed out of a need for companionship? For Mojo, it is no secret that his family is in a different situation than that of Mickybo. Even so, he continues to go to Mickybo’s home, speak to his parents, and join forces with him against the bigger, meaner kids in town. If Mojo were presented with the choice to divorce the comfort that his family has to salvage his friendship with Mickybo, I believe that he would. This belief stems from the importance of imagination, and of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid within the play.

Cowboys aren’t really portrayed as having families and religions. In a sense, they’re bachelors living on the land and on the adrenaline of appearing as a “hero”. But since Mojo and Mickybo are still dependent on their parents and are being taught by their actions, the parents are intertwined in their thoughts and imaginations. This is seen when they discuss going to Australia with each of their sets of parents. They would prefer to go as a group. However, when the going gets tough, they go to “Bolivia” alone, truly living out their fantasies of being Butch and Sundance.

I would argue that the need for companionship, and the friendship between Mojo and Mickybo, is stronger than the ideologies of their families because of the extent to which their imaginations run wild. This is further shown when Mickybo describes Mojo as childish when he wants to roll down the hills at the park. Mickybo has “grown up” and his sense of imagination has faltered due to the death of his father; he then becomes committed to the ideology and religion of his family, because those ideas are the connection to the love of his father. Imagination was the link between Mojo and Mickybo.

Having read several of Liam O’Flaherty’s short stories, I was struck by the power of his novel, The Informer, and its ability to place a reader back in this time of great shadow and darkness. I noticed, throughout the book, that setting is a huge part of the writing and influences the mental journeys of each character, especially Gypo. The darkness enveloping Gypo in several scenes throughout the novel was comforting to him in his rage or his mental confusion. The influence of setting in O’Flaherty’s writing lead me to think about the influence of our surroundings on our lives and our mentalities and ideologies today. Across the world, different cultures are affected by uprisings, riots, war, peace, or political changes. Each country, and each neighborhood, even, is subject to major differences. What people in rural France felt about Charles de Gaulle and the revolutionary movements would have been vastly different from those living in Paris, just as the ideologies of farmers in America differ greatly from individuals living in cities such as Chicago or New York.

With the different settings influencing our everyday thoughts and mentalities, what are we called to do as unique individuals? Are we meant to place ourselves outside of our comfort zone and learn about other places, or are we called to be people of our homes and our surroundings? Are the homes and places we grew up in supposed to influence our ideologies, and how do we change these ideologies if they do?

As humans, we don’t enjoy being boxed in, whether it’s into a category, a state of mind, or even a physical space. When thinking about 1968, I have tried to fit it into a compartment in my brain that can be analyzed and pored over, but every aspect of the year has been amorphous. I think it is fitting that this year is so multi-faceted; none of the groups involved in conflict at that time wished to be physically barricaded or compartmentalized. The posters that we saw in class today called for barricades to be taken down. Civil rights protests called for the ending of separation, the ending of a compartmentalized mindset in the United States. The French yearned to be free in their universities and in their work. Putting up walls and barricades only brought violence, fear, and greater radicalism.

Seeing photos of walls, barricades, posters, and murals is one way to heed the messages and imagine the tension of the Long ’68, but reaching out to touch the Peace Wall in Belfast or walking along the stone walls in Derry makes one feel that tension. Last year, I had the privilege to travel to Northern Ireland and learn about the Troubles from various perspectives. The upheaval and unrest that came in 1968 and beyond has left behind remnants that cannot be erased; there are still extremists and paramilitary groups ready and willing to incite violence at any moment, there is a sadness that hangs over each city in the rain-clouds. The walls, barriers, and gates were meant to protect each community from violence, but they kept the tension, the despair, and the grief inside of them. I hope that in moving forward through this class, I can come to think of 1968 and its conflicts as something that cannot be compartmentalized; it is a symphony of fears and categories and states of mind that mingle in raucous bursts of sound.