MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4396802551 · doi:10.1353/nhr.2023.a926405

Learning Behind Bars: How IRA Prisoners Shaped the Peace Process in Northern Ireland by Dieter Reinisch (review)

2023· article· en· W4396802551 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aidan Beatty

Notice bibliographique

RevueNew hibernia review · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCambodian History and Society
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNorthern irelandProcess (computing)ArchaeologyPsychologyPolitical scienceEthnologyHistoryComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Learning Behind Bars: How IRA Prisoners Shaped the Peace Process in Northern Ireland by Dieter Reinisch Aidan Beatty Learning Behind Bars: How IRA Prisoners Shaped the Peace Process in Northern Ireland, by Dieter Reinisch (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2022, 240 p., hardcover, $70) Historians of the Troubles have not always fared well with oral history writing. The infamous missteps of the Boston College oral history project are, of course, a well-known example. And yet oral history remains an obviously rich source for this field; there is a general (if not total) willingness to speak, and, most practically, many of those who lived through the period from 1969 to 1998 are still alive and available to talk. Dieter Reinisch's Learning Behind Bars is a strong example of what oral histories can do for Northern Irish history. As Reinisch discusses at the outset, his own positionality—Austrian, and so a suitably neutral outsider; sympathetic to republicanism, but not uncritically so; relatively young—clearly played a role in his ability to secure interlocutors. The chapters are organized chronologically, geographically, and thematically, moving from prisoner protests and Sinn Féin's presence in Portlaoise Prison in the early- and mid-1970s to Marxism in the H-Blocks across the 1980s. An outlying chapter in the middle focuses on internment, oscillating between chronicling the history of assaults on internees and recording how they attempted to offset their miseries by using the time to read Paulo Freire, Frantz Fanon, or various canonical republican texts. The book's central concern is how jail time functioned as a forum for prisoners' own personal and political education. As Reinisch shows, Irish Republican Army prisoners engaged in conscious projects of self-development through self-education, but always in a system not controlled by the prisoners themselves. There were obviously fascinating incongruities here. In a sense, what Reinisch is studying, with Michel Foucault probably lurking in the background, is how IRA prisoners' subjectivity was being created by the prison itself, rather than just being self-created within the prison. Of interest beyond Irish Studies, the book contributes to reorienting our focus on subjectivity within carceral institutions. Learning [End Page 141] Behind Bars is essentially an investigation of subjectivity within top-down institutions that are themselves seeking to remake the prisoners' subjectivity. In a final chapter, Reinisch discusses how an increasingly educated cohort of prisoners in the early 1990s understood both the collapse of Soviet Communism (an uneasy development for those who had embraced Marxism in prison) and the emergence of the ultimately successful peace process. In the book's recounting, these were not discrete events but part of the same transnational process of political change. Thus the book closes with a welcome global perspective. That prisoners played a massive role in the development of Irish republicanism since 1969 is well known, and Reinisch certainly succeeds in his stated goal of using oral history interviews to give a sense of what daily life was like for them. In doing so, he moves into new territory compared to high political histories of Sinn Féin and the IRA. Moreover, as Reinisch himself notes, post-conflict oral histories create an archive where none existed, since illegal groups tend not to produce large tranches of self-documentation. And where an empirical archival historian might wrongly assume the printed facts do not lie, Reinisch cautiously notes that his book does not provide an objectively true accounting of republicanism. Rather, a work based on oral histories provides insight into subjective attitudes and identities. Nonetheless, hanging in the background is the problem of whether, and to what degree, we can actually trust IRA prisoners' oral accounts and memories. By definition, Reinisch's list of interviewees skews male—Irish and Northern Irish prisons being gender-segregated spaces—but the rhetoric used, such as claims that they were not "broken" by prison conditions or that these were "the best years of their lives," seems to be something of a slightly different order. Within this male-heavy interviewee cohort emerges a masculinist recalling of their own histories: that they were strong men who could not be broken by the British state. Of the forty-one interviewees...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,110
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,756

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,310
Écart entre enseignants0,285 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNew hibernia reviewMême sujetCambodian History and SocietyTravaux en français237 207