I’m going to make a suggestion this morning that I suspect most of you who post responses will recoil from. My suggestion is that you ask yourself a question. I know that self-questioning is a difficult and upsetting thing, sometimes, but I genuinely believe this one is worth asking. The question to direct at yourself: “Why am I wearing a mask?”
To answer “It’s what nearly everybody does” is to bleat like a sheep, and clearly unworthy of a rational human being. To say “But if people knew I said that, they’d get really angry/attack me/ despise me” – if that’s your response to yourself, you might want to look again at what you’re saying. Is it stupid? Abusive? Nasty? Or just a truth that you believe is important – but you’re not prepared to let others know you’ve said it.
You don’t have to wear a mask. The three guest bloggers that I’ve just put up this morning – Joe McVeigh, Donal Kennedy and John Patton – don’t wear masks, and they’ve gone into more detail of their thinking than most comments. Joe and John are occasional bloggers here, Donal is a very regular contributor. What is it these people have that you haven’t?
I’m saying this because a number of people have accused me of allowing defamatory comments on various blogs, and they may possibly be right. So this Monday morning, ask yourself: does my mask allow me to say stuff that I’d be afraid/ashamed to say if I took it off? And let’s have a sensible debate on it.
Ok Jude I get what your saying, perhaps not using alias will heighten the tone and stop some of the more vile talk.
I’m willing to play along and I’m quite happy to use my full name from now on and stand by what I say.
I suspect many won’t however and it may cause some contributors to stop posting. It would be a great shame to lose anyone’s voice here as differing opinions are informative and interesting.
Very good Jude and worth saying. As you know my ego and alter -ego are as one in my writing and commentary.Those with eyes to see and ears to hear already know that…. and my personality is always in full view. That old cartoon dog “paddykool” speaks the very same language as his master “Harry”. the only real difference is that “Harry” has been personally invited by your own good self to stand atop the dungheap of life and crow whenever he feels like it or is pressed by rage, humour, wit or ego, to scribble something very quickly…That’s the real deal.”paddykool” on the other hand usually only gets to respond and argue. It’s not such a bad deal really…the idea that you can literally sometimes “fight with your own toe-nails” is sometimes very interesting.
Some obviously have reservations exposing their white underbellies to the light of public display, of course ,and simply want to rave and rant undercover.You might even call it cowardly behaviour. I have already suggested that some of our more prolific and vociferous “secret identities”, with strong points of view ,should be allowed to write considered pieces in their own names. Then …you’ll have to ask the question …are they up for it? Or is their ego big enough to stand up and be counted?
paddy
Have you never felt like cutting loose and telling us what you really think about that Harry bucko and his silly bees?
Come on man,he’s not the boss of you!
I feel another story welling up gio……
The operative phrase in the above being, “considered pieces”.
Usually when I am writing a piece for inclusion with my name attached , I actually attempt to posit it without too much ambiguity, so that the reader knows exactly what i am saying .That takes some specific effort and time and it can be downright dismissive to have a single line “cut and pasted ” from the context of a lengthy piece or story by some careless browser and simply answered with an ambiguous one-line comment that quite possibly makes little or no sense in its starkness.
That’s bloody bad manners , really.That’s only marginally better than no comments at all, which happens too….all of that and only a nickname to attach to it.what kind of mad kick could someone get out of that and how would it make their life richer?
I suppose it’s a bit like busking on the streets. To be ignored or spat at by passer-bys …or sometimes tossed the odd bone.The commentator usually hides his lazy snidery behind that mask ,whereas if he put his full name to the comment he may well think a little harder before that committment . Even when I am responding as my alter ego , I will still try to do so in a reasoned, thoughtful way which might add something to the conversation .That’s not what we see a lot of ,so it leaves me wondering why anyone would bother to read this blog at at all sometimes …or rather , comment on an item if they were not prepared to fully engage in a worthwhile conversation . Sure there can be a little banter and we can surely all leave the bile outside the door …but are the masks used for a little harmless fun and wordplay, or because many contributors actually live in a permanent state of fear, here?Now …if that is the case that is really a very sad state of affairs.
Might it be possible for contributors such as all of us here to have access to the true identities of our fellow scribblers …by the very fact of having contributed ourselves…bearing in mind that Jude has a ready list of our e-mails and identities already. Surely anyone “in the club” could leave their fear in the cloakroom and be made aware of the true identities, because, I suppose any one of us is easily traceable by a creative hacker anyway… and if we were to say something truly liable Jude would pull the plug.
In 1949, when the New Statesman held a contest for parodies of Graham Greene’s writing style, Greene submitted an entry under the name “N. Wilkinson” and won second prize. Greene, who once worked for MI6, also wrote an introduction to Kim Philby’s 1968 memoir, ‘My Silent War.’
The majority of contributors to this blog submit interesting and some unusual perspectives on a wide range of current affairs. Many submissions are laced with humour.
I have no issue with any individual who may choose to use a pseudonym. For those with a malicious disposition, Graham Greene once said that hatred is a reflection of a lack of imagination. I have no issue with any individual who may choose to use a pseudonym. Those well paid individuals who remain engaged in silent wars tend not to use names or pseudonyms and their silence is not always golden.
does my mask allow me to say stuff that ide be afraid/ashamed to say if i took it off…
hardly when the pc brigade are watching every move.all these new nonsense laws you cant write what you want anyway.
And just think how much wed miss all the sunshine and joy you bring into our lives billy. 🙂
i think you need to get out in the sunshine more,instead of waiting in on something thats not going to happen for at least 50yrs dont you.
At least you’re now accepting it is going to happen.
That’s progress.
it wont be happening in my lifetime anyway,or anybody over 40yr old imo.so i dont really worry to much about it,lifes good enough for me the way it is now if this rain would stop till i get a spot of fishing done.
See now billy .You’ve done it again ….You write….
“hardly when the pc brigade are watching every move.all these new nonsense laws you cant write what you want anyway.”…….
….and left us all hanging in the air . We don’t actually know what that sentence means . What “nonsense laws “are these you are describing ? When did they come into being and what are they exactly …and why are they nonsensical?
Nobody knows what you mean when you say something like that because you never explain what you are talking about.That’s what we want to know …and who is this “pc brigade” that is watching your every move? Do they drive about in unmarked cars with tinted windows spying on on you? You need to paint a clearer picture so that we can answer you properly. We can’t see inside your head . Is it that you don’t want any laws …just a free-for -all? …Or at which point of the process do you want a cut-off point.? 1896…or maybe 1952?
well if you say something in a pub,work,in the street wherever,and somebody said thats racist,sectarian,you would just say so fxxk.you cant do that on line,well you can but you can be done if they start touting because its on line forever as evidence.so its nonsense you can be done online and cant be done off line gettit,pc,political correct brigade you know the ones werent you writing the other day about them i think yer wee man advertising robinsons jam got the sack over them,you know the type.
I see what you mean now, billy.I always had a fondness for that wee golly on the jar.i saw him as nothing but benign and I think Robinson’s saw it as a sign of inherent goodness within their peerless preserves….not so those who saw racism under every rock. Now racism …that’s another thing entirely.That’s something i don’t enjoy in any sense…no matter the source it comes from. In that respect i think we are all made of equal stuff. Now if you were talking about aspects of a fellow’s personality rather than where he came from or the colour of his skin , that might not annoy me at all. A bollix is stil la bollix , no matter his origin story.
I have to admit being the owner of a framed picture of said gollywog from the jam jars.
I also remember them before they were considered un pc. I also never linked them to black people, more of a doll with features exaggerated. I say it in a shop window somewhere, I think it was in Dublin but not certain and bought it out of some sort of affection for past memories when things were not so complicated.
I actually have one of the little enamel brooches from the 1960’s..(vintage, eh?)…of a little guitar player, which I had pinned to my lapel on one of my trips to Liverpool to see my daughter and family. She advised her foolish father to remove it before some fellow accused me of racism and gave me a verbal or physical kicking. Explaining that it was my homage to the great blues guitarist Skip James cut no ice at all…..
We have covered this before I believe. But no anything I have said I stand over alter ego or none. However we live in the real world where a point of view could result in you not getting a job,promotion etc. It could also bring unwanted attention from the gestapo. The gestapo can make life difficult for you and your children. If you never had the misfortune of encountering the gestapo and its ways then you’ll never understand. However I can’t understand why the gestapo supporters on here need alter egos.
A simple answer, Jude, might be this. If I post an opinion under an alias, it may get a favourable reception. If I post under under my regular name – the same opinion – it inclines people who know me to weigh up that opinion in the light of what they know about me. I see sensible opinions and arguments on all aspects of politics and life on this blog and if I knew that, for example, they emanated from, say, Colum Eastwood, I would view them in a totally different light. I actually would prefer not to know who wrote them. And people might say about me: Has that waster nothing better to do than rant and rave on poor Mr Collins’ blog?
Back in the Fabulous Fifties, Esteeemed Blogmeister, the wireless made music fit for angels in the Isle of Inisfree.
Specifically, for one listener at least, in the signature tunes of two Radio Eireann programmes: the first was ‘Haydn’s Serenade’ and the second was the fifth movement of Beethoven’s Sixth Symphony (the Pastoral).
It was one’s first introduction to the majesty of classical music and while one is not naturally inclined to look back The Perkin has made up for that visual lack by listening back, and back to both Haydn and Beethoven. Not to mention, listening back to the different variations of the Clan Bach.
One mentions this, EB, because in both cases neither tune was actually what it said of the tin. ‘Haydn’s Serenade’ was not composed by the fabulous Franz Josef but rather in tribute to him by a gifted contemporary fan : the still almost unknown,Roman Hofstetter, a Benedictine monk.
No matter: it remains a sublime piece of stringed magic and a hint that the hubris of the human race might be just that. Or at least that uber-certain cohort which claims to be atheistic and which seems to be in the ascendancy at this moment in three four time, going forward. Hoffstetter’s Serenade could be the clincher that there they may well be such a thing as celestial inspiration, after all.
In the second instance, the doubt arises in the case of the disc jockey rather than in the composer. Fred Desmond it was who used the Beethoven piece of aural abracadabra as a sig. tune for a progamme called ‘Down the Country’.
FD was in fact, Desmond Frederick Fricker. It is not certain whether he shortened and inverted his name because of his surname or because he was a civil servant by day. His daughter, Brenda became an actress and won an Oscar.
One mentions these instances , EB, as early examples of pseudonyms / masked identities etc to which one was exposed from an early age, acquiring, perhaps, even a tolerance for same. While it is a Warbeckian thing of course not to adopt an alter ego for obvious reasons, we were not totally dependent in Warbeck Towers upon the wireless to acquaint ourselves with aliases.or indeed, AKAs for that matter.
Indeed, the reason we learned to live with the phenomenon of the nom de plume with aplomb is more down to one particular ancestor, on the distaff side. That was LaToya Warbeck, a non-Oscar winning actress and contemporary of The Immortal Bard. It is alleged she went to her grave with her greatest secret still intact. To wit, the real identity of the author of the Collected Words of Shakespeare.
Which allegation is only that, as we Warbecks well know. In fact, her last words, even as she lay on her second best death bed, forms part of the verbal heirlooms of the family:
-It was not William Shakespeare who wrote the Collected Works but, forsooth, an author of the same name.
To conclude: and continuing with the idea of identity.
On first glimpsing the enchanted portrait which illustrates today’s blog, EB, one at first thought it was a rather flattering photo of Sir/ St. B. Geldof. On mature reflection, however, one realized one’s mistake.
What one was actually reminded of was a malodorous remark once barked to all who would hark by the Boom-town Rodent:
-During my schooldays I was once presented with a copy of The Man in the Iron Mask……..(pause for dramatic effect)…….translated into the……Gaelic !
Cue for collapse of raconteur/ Royal pet corgi into a fit of d.i.y., thigh-slapping hysterics.
The real funny element here, ar ndoigh, is that the original of the novel was in French:
-L’homme au Masque de Fer.
The Man in an Irony Mask, anyone ?
Exactly right! I’ve often wondered who Jessica, the self anointed Queen of Sheba, was. Or was she just another Mrs Irish Voorhees?
Surely you must know that Jessica regularly contributes under her full moniker ,KC?It’s there at the top of her pages.There ‘s no fear there.Jessica simply speaks her mind and to hell with the world.We don’t have to agree with everything she says but if she makes the honest effort…and it’s usually very honest…. to spend a little time writing down her thoughts and if you, for example waste your own precious time bothering to search out Jude’s blog in an internet stuffed with other things to do…and read her thougths, rather than some latin text or the latest James Bond, surely you should give a more freasoned and thoughtful response.?
I wouldn’t say to hell with the world harry, I actually find rejection from our people in the south very traumatic. I can take it from unionists or the British all day but when I hear it from my own people it sends my emotions all over the place
There is nothing new about masks; from the highly decorated of the Viennese Masked Ball, to Zorro, the Lone Ranger and the more terrifying balaclava of the gunman, masks have served a variety of purposes in all ages.
Those of us, like me, who wear the mask of a pseudonym also do so for a variety of reasons. The first, and the reason I do so, is that the Internet is not always a safe place. Even those who publish their names are not known to us, making these digital communities very unlike our ordinary communities in which we can ask the question, “And who’s yer man”; in a country as small as ours someone will nearly always know.
The occasional and regular bloggers here have, I imagine, the security of knowing and being known by one another, or at least Jude; if not, they are braver than I am.
I suspect then, that safety is a prime reason for the digital mask.
Those, however, who wish to use their mask for a more sinister purpose should always remember that they are not completely anonymous. My email address for example, is known to Jude; this means I am fully traceable – that alone should be enough to keep us all in check.
But if not, we can do as Jude suggests, and look into our own hearts.
Well you have Jude.
I was called a racist over and over again not so long ago for a business decision I made not to employ people from certain EU countries nay more, basically because I had given them a chance and had it thrown back in my face which almost cost us contracts and hence could have lost jobs.
Basically I am now afraid to take the risk and whether it makes me racist or not it is not a decision I would change.
Personally I don’t think there is any point posting here if we aren’t going to be honest and open, but I will not be called a racist by any upstart which can make for boring reading if it is allowed over and over again.
In terms of identity.
How do we know you are the real Jude Collins?
Who is Slugger OToole?
I take it there is some economic value to you for the time and effort you put into monitoring our discussions, at least I hope so.
Slugger isn’t really interested in his identity being known as his site is monetised and he gets paid whether users know his identity or not.
Out of curiosity, what were the remarks which you considered to be defamatory?
Another interesting point, some of your comments I recognise as the real Jude Collins having been a reader for while now, but some of your one liners could just be a Judebot for all we know.
I wonder does that make short one line responses botisms?
Or people who regularly use short one word or one sentence answers such as MT a bot head?
My mask is for my protection, due solely to protect me from those who would target a nationalist for speaking his mind. The question I would also like pondered is why do nationalist feel that they cannot speak their mind? Is it due to some acceptance amongst nationalism that the unionist position is the default position and any break from it is somehow lesser?
Jude,
Trolling, abusive, defamatory remarks are all a result of the an anonymity which is available through blog sites. I think people certainly are prepared to say things they wouldn’t normally say if they were identifiable and it might be argued that it could possibly lead to more interesting conversations but I don’t believe abuse or personally hurtful statements are acceptable. I hope I have not been personally offensive to anyone and apologise if I have.
I would not object to using my own name in future if that is the consensus of opinion.
I think we spoke about this topic a few months ago. I don’t think I’m wearing a Mask, the stuff I type on this blog I would say to people face to face. I certainly don’t think I’m saying anything defamatory or illegal, if so any sort of “Mask” would be useless since the police could easily track me down and arrest me. That also goes for everyone else who comments on this blog but I have never seen anyone type anything so serious that it would warrant legal attention.
As I said I don’t think I’m wearing a Mask nor do I have the desire to, what I type on this blog I would say to people publically and have done on many occasions. I have debated Unionists, Socialists, etc face to face. Of course it was informal, it wasn’t as if I was sitting in front of an audience but still I expressed my opinion in public in exactly the same way I do on this blog. There was only one time when I have upset someone with my views and that was during a Class debate at College. A Feminist didn’t like me saying that the traditional family unit is the bedrock of a stable society. She got even more upset when most of the class, male and female, agreed with me. But that’s democracy, everyone has an opinion whether you like that opinion or not.
Do some people wear Masks? Of course, just one look at the comments on Unionist facebook pages prove that. Of course I’m not saying just Unionists make up fake accounts and type sectarian statements, Republicans do it too but its a good example of people wearing a Mask. But as I mentioned previously, a Mask wont hide you from the Law if you break it. That’s why scores of Unionists were arrested and lost their jobs since the 2012 flag protests because they hid behind a facebook account whilst typing sectarian statements. Facebook was their Mask.
I believe everyone’s opinion should be listened to and considered, though not necessarily agreed with obviously, whether they wear a Mask or not.
Ryan
We have indeed been here before and I think it is a particular bugbear of Jude’s.
People have all sorts of reasons for wanting to be anonymous,some good some bad.
My suggestion,which will be ignored I know,is that Jude has a couple of options.
1) He can simply stop allowing anonymous contributions. He will lose a number of commenters (including me but I doubt that would bother him) but maybe the quality of debate would improve.
2) He could bring in a more robust policy on commenting, something he has talked about in the past, but seems reluctant to implement.
I don’t think I am abusive or indulge in name-calling but if I did I would have no complaint if I was barred for a while or even permanently if he chooses, provided he is consistent and fair.
Some of the more obvious personal abuse here is actually often coming from named commenters, including a couple of regular bloggers (“no balls” springs to mind),so I am not sure that anonymity is really the problem.
i am assuming the accompanying picture is the anonymous Perkin.
Gio,
I really don’t mind people being anonymous, but what constitutes “anonymous”? My real name for example is Ryan but I don’t want to give my full name because I value my privacy. Does that mean I’m “anonymous” now? I should’ve asked that question in my original comment. I don’t display a photo of any kind nor even an emblem, does that mean I’m “anonymous”? The reason why I don’t display one is because I really haven’t thought to put a photo/emblem up…..plus my da told me when I got my first PC (in the year 2002) never to put up a photo or give my address to anyone or meet anyone from online, so that kind of stuck with me.
I don’t think Jude wants to stop you from commenting Gio, anonymous or not, or anyone else for that matter. In fact, I’m sure Jude wants the opposite, he wants more people regularly reading his blog and commenting, I know that’s what I would want if I had a blog. I always found Jude to be fair to everyone, he has told me off once or twice for light insults towards our MT and rightly so but that’s what debating is all about, people get heated at what is being said, whether its fact or not. It’s healthy.
There would be no debate at all Gio if there was no Unionists commenting. It would simply be Nationalists talking about things they already mostly agree with, it would just be a waste of time. I always found your comments worth reading despite the obvious ideological clash but that’s politics.
Debating and reading other peoples opinions is all part of learning and expanding your knowledge. Whether a person does that anonymously really is irrelevant. I don’t think that warrants anyone being banned from commenting.
Close, but no cigar, alas, girdanobruno, a chara.
Some of one’s closest muckers in the Drones Club in Damascus emailed one to enquire if that fetching photo of the jihadist in the mask was actually Al-Perkin on a ‘bad hair day’.
Happily, no. Though the similarity is striking, one freely admits, from 4,000 feet high.
It was Abou Ben Ahmed (may his tribe increase !) in fact among one’s chums who set the other mistaken members of the Damascus Branch of the Drones Club straight on this matter. This was unsurprising as the same AB-A is particularly sensitive to this matter of mistaken identity.
Ever since his distinguished poetic ancestor who wrote under the ‘pseudonym’ Leigh Hunt was in turn blaggarded in print by one Charles Dickens as ‘Harold Skimpole’, the amateur artist and musician who was forever sponging on his friends in the novel ‘Bleak House’.
One thing which is positively indubitable is that the direct and no messing descendant of the close friend of Charles Dickens , one Wilkie Collins (author of the first detective novel, ‘The Moonstone’) runs the polar opposite to a ‘Bleak House’. Here be silky prose and no powdered milk of human unkindness or anything of that deplorable ilk.
Indeed if it is Sneak House one wants on Liffeyside , one need not be either a sleuth or a Shamus itself to turn to the unspeakable Independent House or a Geek House to the equally unspeakable Tara House where The Unionist Times has tentatively pitched its tent in the shape of a Big Top.
Here be housed some of the biggest Billy Smart-arses ever to disgrace the hideous history of Hiberno hackery. For them their editor is forever bestowed with the affectionate moniker of ‘King Billy’. This is the barker who traces his roots back to 1690, such is his prodigious memory and inclination to sit on the white high horse of moral superciliousness.
No wonder the logo of this communications circus has always been the trademark herd of pink elephants. Thankfully, the human animals rights animals are on their case.
Charles Dickens it was who first smelt a Boom Town Rodent when someone called ‘George Eliot’ first penned ‘Scenes of Clerical Life’ (and later, the middleclass, middlebrow but by no means middling novel ‘Middlemarch’).
-If these scenes originated with no woman, I believe that no man ever before had the art of making himself, mentally, so like a woman, since the woman began.
And thus was outed the authoress, Mary Ann Evans.
To conclude, with a ‘George’ of a different tint. That was another novelist who was gifted with an unique talent for ‘looking into the seeds of time to see which grain would grow and which would not’, that sort of thingy, e.g., ‘1984’ (published in 1949).
Otherwise , Erica, oops, Eric Blair’s surname would have gone into the language, not as Orwellian but as (gulp) Blairite. Wise man.
Arrividerci.
What would Pagliacci have been without his mask?
But sometimes the mask is not to protect the face behind it, but a relative who may mistakenly be associated to your words!
“But sometimes the mask is not to protect the face behind it, but a relative who may mistakenly be associated to your words!”
Good point Sherdy. One click on a persons facebook page can open up the names, addresses and job locations of their family members…..not to mention photos, hobbies, likes or dislikes, etc…..
I have read all of the responses; in the main they have been remarkably positive – perhaps we should all be encouraged.
From Scott’s willingness to change his approach to posting comments; the understandable concerns about internet safety; some suggestions and a number of apologies – not at all bad – and a fair attempt at the request for self-reflection.
I wonder, then, and following the the replies given, if it would be reasonable to ask Jude for his thoughts?
Well, Jude, an bhfuil freagra agat?
Piosa beag, fiosrach,piosa beag…
Jude, my belief is that many chose to use a pseudonym due to where they are at in life, for example if they are in employment. I use my own name because I have reached an age where I am less inhibited by this kind of consideration. Yes, if I were still in my career I possibly would be more circumspect in what I post.
That’s a good point Bridget. We actually lose many fears when we have the freedom that age brings.That’s why i find it interesting to try and understand the ages of the contributors at times . It’s not always apparent other than at times when someone writes anecdotally about their own experiences and what they grew through.It gives some idea as to whether or not what they might be writing about might be real memories of events(Sometimes very fightening or horrific events) or simply something they’ve come across second -hand in a book or documentary and through someone else’s eyes.Age also brings a certain acceptance of who exactly we have become after a lifetime’s experiences if not necessarily any great wisdom or new insights.