Past or Place? Exploring the relationship between violence and commemoration in the 'new' Northern Ireland

2012年6月27日，北爱尔兰副首席部长、前爱尔兰共和军指挥官马丁·麦吉尼斯在希尔斯伯勒的一次活动中首次与女王伊丽莎白二世握手。对许多人来说，这一姿态象征着北爱尔兰向和平过渡的巩固，文化和传统的汇聚，以及对未来的希望。然而，仅仅几周后，在一系列纪念游行之后，暴力事件蔓延到贝尔法斯特北部和西部的街头，标志着敌对行动的夏天。从表面上看，这些例子呈现了两幅截然不同的“新”北爱尔兰图景：前者是一个社会向前发展，将过去抛诸脑后；后者显然是分裂并执着于过去。此外，他们还揭示了两个非常不同的地方，在公共空间的竞技场上公开握手；骚乱和打斗发生在远离公共领域的空间。但为什么会有这种并列关系呢？这一探索性建议的主要目的是考虑零星和精心策划的暴力事件之间的复杂关系，这些暴力事件有时会伴随着特定地理区域的纪念活动。报告从多学科的角度探讨了“地方”的含义，调查了为什么在经历了近15年的缔造和平和政府主导的一系列旨在解决记忆、身份和受害者问题的倡议之后，过去会在北爱尔兰的一些地区演变为暴力。该项目的重点是“在哪里”、“为什么”和“谁”等相互关联的问题。在绘制14年(1998-2012年)这一暴力事件的空间地图时，我们的目标是开启一场关于暴力发生的空间的性质的讨论。然后我们可以开始解开地方的特征，解开它的许多层次，探索它与过去的联系。由于北爱尔兰地区的重要性和划分差异的象征意义，我们想知道，纪念和记忆只是将人们聚集在一起的工具，这一论点是否有任何杠杆作用？是地理而不是被唤起的记忆是暴力的根本原因吗？在质疑为什么会发生暴力以及谁参与了暴力的产生时，我们希望探索地点、议程和动机之间的关系。是否有一种对过去或地方的监护感；是否有代际动力来保护和保持对过去的记忆，或者过去对新一代人来说相对不重要，并为围绕这个地方的更深层次的问题提供了烟幕？或者，暴乱和暴力是通过对被唤起的事件的记忆而合法化的？北爱尔兰将于2021年迎来百年诞辰，这一跨机构和多学科的提议恰逢其时，因为北爱尔兰即将迎来关键的、可能造成分裂的十周年纪念。仅2012年一年，与纪念活动有关的暴力事件估计就花费了740万GB，4月至9月期间，在治安和安全方面花费了约610万GB。这一数字不包括旅游损失和外来投资造成的宏观经济成本。当然，这不仅仅是经济问题。全年的骚乱造成数十人受伤、财产损失，并对社区的心理健康产生了负面影响。这也是对未来的挑战。在探索暴力、记忆和地点之间非常复杂的关系时，这项研究试图确定如何支持公共机构，特别是教育机构、社区和志愿组织在未来十年和以后管理纪念庆祝活动。

On June 27th 2012, the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland and former IRA commander, Martin McGuinness shook hands with Queen Elizabeth II for the first time at an event in Hillsborough. For many the gesture symbolised the consolidation of Northern Ireland's transition to peace, the meeting of cultures and traditions, and hope for the future. Only a few weeks later however violence spilled onto the streets of north and west Belfast following a series of commemorative parades, marking a summer of hostilities. Outwardly these examples present two very different pictures of the 'new' Northern Ireland; the former of a society moving forward and putting the past behind it and the latter apparently divided over and wedded to the past. Furthermore they revealed two very different 'places', the public handshake in the arena of public space; the rioting and fighting occurring in spaces distanced from the public sphere. But why does this juxtaposition exist?The overarching aim of this exploratory proposal is to consider the complex relationship between the sporadic and choreographed outbreaks of violence that can sometimes accompany commemorative practices within specific geographies. Incorporating multidisciplinary perspectives on the meaning of 'place' it investigates why, after almost fifteen years of peacemaking and the introduction of a range of government-led initiatives that have sought to address issues of memory, identity and victimhood, the past can evolve into violence in some parts of Northern Ireland. The project focuses on the interconnected questions of 'where', 'why' and 'who'. In mapping this violence spatially over a fourteen year period (1998-2012), we aim to open up a discussion about the nature of those spaces in which it occurs. We can then begin to unpack the characteristics of place, unravelling its many layers and exploring its connections to the past. Because of the importance of place in Northern Ireland and the symbolism attached to demarcating difference, we ask if there is any leverage in the argument that commemoration and memory is simply a tool to bring people together in 'vulnerable' spaces? Is it the geography and not the memory being evoked that is fundamental to the violence? In questioning why violence occurs and who is involved in its production, we hope to explore the relationship between place, agenda and motivations. Is there a sense of custodianship over either the past or the place; is there an intergenerational impetus to protect and maintain the memory of the past or is the past relatively unimportant for a new generation and a smokescreen for deeper issues surrounding the place? Or is rioting and violence legitimated through the memory of the event being evoked? As Northern Ireland embarks upon a decade of pivotal and potentially divisive anniversaries leading up to the centenary of its birth in 2021, this cross-institutional and multidisciplinary proposal is timely. Commemorative-related violence cost an estimated £7.4 million in 2012 alone, with some £6.1 million spent on policing and security between April and September. This figure does not include the macroeconomic costs of lost tourism and inward investment. It is of course not just about economics. Rioting throughout the year resulted in scores of injuries, damage to property and impacted negatively on the psychological well-being of communities. It also presents a challenge for the future. In exploring the very complex relationship between violence, memory and place, the research seeks to identify ways in which it can support public bodies especially educational institutions and community and voluntary organisations in managing commemorative celebrations during the next decade and beyond.