I am primarily interested in the assumption that ‘Irish people are alcoholics’ and want to interrogate the origins of this statement.

This project will display the trajectory of this stereotype (the drunken irishman) in chronological order, highlighting first person experiences both from those inside the culture and outside. This collection of stories will help outsiders to understand the behaviors of the Irish and the unfair reaction to them. I am using primarily historical sources that give detail on the past experiences of Irish people through time, to understand the history of the “drunk Irishman”, and one a final source that takes place in the present, to show the future projection of this stereotype and how it is currently received by the Irish race and its descendants. 

By looking at how this information originated and spread, and its validity today, i want to pull the hood shroud off of this stereotype, and help to understand that alcohol is not the fate of the doomed Irish, that there is so much proof of progression and hard work and resilience hiding underneath this derogatory assumption. There is much more to the Irish man or woman than relation to ‘the drink’.

Growing up very independent, when I was 18 and fresh out of highschool I solo traveled internationally for 8 months. I was in countries where it was legal for me to drink, and unattached to authority. This was the first time I had been so untethered from control, and I took full advantage of my newfound freedom. I was so young, and still figuring out how to navigate social settings, extra pressure added by the foreign dissonance I was experiencing. I began drinking regularly as a method of fitting in, and quickly became reliant on it in unfamiliar crowds. This pattern of use spiraled into many unsafe and regrettable decisions, situations that were damaging and scarring, that have had a lasting impact on the way I experience the world to this day. This constant usage ended with a majorly traumatic event that required me to seriously evaluate the way I had been treating myself and the people around me, and I stopped drinking for a while to find a better headspace to cope. In the aftermath of that event I remember feeling significantly less than I was before, not as responsive or witty, not as aware. I have found a balance with time, and now have a relatively healthy relationship with alcohol, mostly kept in check by my fear of falling into that dark place again.

Basic overview of indigenous research methodology

relationality

https://academic.oup.com/alcalc/article-abstract/30/4/407/178385?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Addresses historical origins of the claim that irish are prone to alcohol use

https://alcoholireland.ie/our-work/campaigns/silent-voices/

Brief article describing origins of st patricks day

https://www.drinkaware.ie/research/alcohol-consumption-in-ireland/?a=adult-per-capita-alcohol-consumption-in-ireland

Data displaying percentage use of alcohol for those ages 15 and above, and in comparison to other countries.

Tuck and Ree: Glossary of Haunting

Concepts of settler colonialism (talking about how many wars lost by Ireland, they were treated so poorly. The effect of this on cultural moral.)

Mutual implication (the if/then implication of Irish heritage and alcoholism)

https://www.tcd.ie/news_events/articles/2023/how-ireland-served-as-a-laboratory-for-the-british-empire/

Trinity College Dublin source

https://drive.google.com/file/d/195FnwU8RvSg1AgARzFwPiFC9B7E-UOZq/view?usp=sharing

Bell hooks 'Representing whiteness in the black imagination' essay

The reception of the Irish by the recently established Americans was poor, to say the least. The Yankees were not ‘ready to go that far’ in accepting newcomers to their (already stolen and contested) land, they did not want to admit the Irish were there to stay. Defining them as ‘papists to the core’ in a slang description of their religion, the Irish emigrants were viewed as a threat to the ‘pursuit of liberty’ and the protestant approach that was most commonly held in the new world. The religious differences between catholic and protestant had been long fought over and debated, boiling down to a difference between salvation through faith alone (protestant) or salvation through a combination of faith and good deed (catholic). This battle was already being waged between the Irish and the English, and transferred hands to continue on through the Irish and the Yankees. Those who had already established themselves on American soil wanted to ‘keep them in their place’, keep the new Irish in a precarious and dangerous position, living in the ‘ghettos’ and fighting for their survival. This was effective, yet the Irish did not concede with grace– they held their grudge close to their hearts and quietly alive, allowing it to continue to ‘smolder’ with small passion. They may have put their heads down, but they did not break.

This introduction of what a stage irishman is, gives us an idea of the public’s conception of a true irishman, and how that idea spawned. By referring to the ‘stage’, Hillard shows us that we are receiving information derived from entertainment performances, Highlighting the unreality of the portrayal. We are being broadcasted and “edified” an untrue ideology with the intention of bashing the Irish and thereby lowering the public standard of them as people. The phrase ‘brogue’ is interesting here, as it holds multiple meanings; here referring to the way that an irish accent sounds, it is also defined as a traditional leather shoe worn often by irish farmers. This slang adaptation supposedly stemmed from the English describing the Irish accent as a “shoe in the mouth’. Following this word, which already displays negative connotation in origin, are the terms ‘vulgar’ and ‘ignorant’ which sharply reiterate the already hateful slander. All of these terms are then encompassed by the word ‘typical’, displaying how deeply permeated the idea of an uncouth Irish is. This statement displays the severity of the consistent anti-irish agenda, and reminds the reader how ridiculously unfair and unbacked the generalizations were.

This second level of character portrayal of the Irish as drunken individuals is the notion that has stuck around most solidly for the century following this publication, and Hillard is as baffled by its origin as anyone. The unbacked ‘degradation’ of drunkenness already carries with it the picture of an unkempt and reckless fool. Hillard questions why the Irish are so targeted, when they are ‘more temperate’ than the English or Scottish who produced the plays to begin with, though this statement is not backed by any fact. He follows with the claim that Ireland has ‘furnished more temperate apostles’-- a phrase which essentially indicates that the Irish have had a footing in spreading gospel or goodness at levels higher than their invading neighbors. It is interesting that Hillard speaks with such strict surety here, acting as an almost satire of the stereotype of the Irish. His response to their claims made against the Irish is just as extreme, yet starkly in their favor, comparing them to ‘any other nation’. In conclusion to his boldness, the question of trustworthiness is again raised, asking: ‘is it fair to typify?’ This begs something larger, while holding rhetorical power in following such typifying statements. If the reader has questioned the validity of earlier statements, should they question the validity of the beliefs they hold? All cultures have people who exemplify the good and the bad and the Irish are no different, but we cannot judge all for one.

The thesis of the article lies in this sentence, and boils down to the fact that these productions are harmful toward the Irish people. They are ‘doing the work’ of propagating hatred and discrimination against the Irish, and are therefore the ‘deadliest enemy’. The outreach of this theater is wide, stretching past ‘home and abroad’ and ensuring that false ideas not only permeate outside culture but also trickle into the minds of the Irish themselves. The term ‘manhood’ here serves as a descriptor for ‘soul’ or ‘purpose’ (Hillarrd later expresses his admiration for Irish women, describing them as ‘possessed of gentleness and grace’). This soul and autonomy highlighted in ‘intelligence’ are being jeopardized with tactical intention. This is the core of the issue, and those who know true Irish pride and nationalism would be best served to prove the stereotype wrong. The statement read as a battle cry of sorts, standing in recognition of the psychological warfare enacted.

This passage gives us a background of how the Irish were viewed by the English even before they ventured to America, proving that the fight against hate-speech toward Irish goes further back than many think. The migration of the Irish was ‘more than welcomed’ by the English in the United Kingdom and those colonizers already living in the isles who were glad to gain even more ownership. There had been a struggle over property since the initial English invasion in 1169; the English considered Ireland a colony, and the Irish fought to protect their native rights (Trinity college Dublin). The term ‘irish problem’ determines that the irish people are a general nuisance, yet gives no parameters to this so called ‘problem’, assuming the general public already agrees with and understands the English sentiment. Following with ‘good riddance’ displays how eager the English were to get rid of the irish pest, and the following lines use verbal attacks to hone in on their iea of the irish people. Describing them as ‘marauders’ who would ‘shoot’ depicts them as violent, desperate, and uncaring. The list at the end is full of viciously descriptive sharp-consonanted words that further highlight the agenda the English is spewing about Irish nature. We learn here of the extreme ideas of irish deviance that were held by the English, ideas that came through in their literature and entertainment, and subsequently invaded the global zeitgeist. 

We learn here of the specific working conditions of the Irish, and about the almost forceful introduction of alcohol into the lives of those men working on developing the Erie Canal. Conditions were incredibly rough and harsh, workers spent ‘12 hours on the job per day’ earning very little for their efforts. They were provided food and board, but this illusion of generosity was just that– an illusion– and the ‘fuel’ provided was of little sustenance, mostly stale carbs and ‘maggoty’ meat. It was clearly not enough to provide adequate energy for the men working their bodies to the bone to make enough measly coin to survive on, and there was a tendency towards illness as a result. There is provision of a ‘good jigger of whiskey’ though, alcohol provided in exchange for labor, given by an outside source who was likely acting on the assumption that an Irishman could not survive without it. And this alcohol was temporary relief for those brutal working conditions, it is also important to note that this was an outside force perpetuating consumption, and that same outside force later denoted the consumption as a problem so large and uncontrollable as to demand a mass generalization of the ‘drunken irishman’. The inclusion of drink in the promise of food and board treats alcohol as a necessary ingredient for living, the words ‘of course’ point us to think that there was no possibility of survival without it. We need to remember the time period when hearing this– people drank more frequently as a means of coping. Alcohol was a medication for the physical pain of hard labor, the harsh weather conditions on the east coast, and the general cloud of depression that hovered over daily life. The roots of the stereotype lie here, in the forced reshaping of the Irish patterns, and then the perpetuation of that fictional ideology. 

• “Why stereotype Irish people as being raging drunks?”

These two statements come from a woman named Christina, who was the original caller and instigator of this conversation. She is frustrated over a department store’s casual sale of St. Patrick's Day themed t-shirts with phrases that depict Irish people as drunks. Christina realizes that these do not have evidence backing them, and is confused as to why they are sold in the first place. Stores that stock merchandise with the ‘implication’ of Irish people as being ‘under the influence’ are doing so to capitalize on the holiday of St Patrick Day, and even though it is not a direct attack on Irish people, it contributes to an unfair portrayal of the Irish individual overall. St. Patricks Day is one of the few times where there is a heightened awareness of Irish culture, and making the ‘basis and construction’ of that holiday alcohol draws a straight parallel to that behavior being common for irish people. It is not a picture of casual drinking either, but that of a ‘raging drunk’, someone who is completely out of control. This is an image that is truthfully perpetuated not by the Irish themselves, but by the adoption of other countries of the celebration of the holiday, and their ready acceptance of an opportunity to freely lose control of themselves through alcohol in a public setting. Her question is a rhetorical one, and her complaints are valid– Chrisitna does not want to be grouped in with this stereotype. 

The first quote is from the interviewer, the responding statement is from the second caller, a man named Tommy, responding to the frustration that Christina originally detailed. For context, Tommy had just explained his ownership of a shirt that states Gallway Drinking Team Lifelong Member in jest of Irish alcohol consumption. The interviewer responded to this image by essentially posing the question, ‘are you okay with wearing the reputation of a drunk?’ The word ‘proud’ is important here, rather than ‘comfortable’ or ‘accepting’ or something softer, the interviewer is asking if Tommy would want to willingly broadcast drunkenness. The response given is interesting, he refers to ‘the image’ and proves awareness that this is an idea, not reality. He tells us that all people ‘Ireland and abroad, going back generations’ (so similar to the line from the first story about ‘home and abroad’ in reference to theater) have become so convinced of this false-truth, and have ‘had to live’ with it for so long that, in his opinion, it has become a moot point. His final statement about the problem originating with someone taking up the issue, displays that he does not want to be seen as different. This insistence that it is ‘just a bit of fun’ is reminiscent of the writer bell hook’s theory of emotional investment in the myth of ‘sameness’ – a belief that is often adopted by those who do not want to face their differences and risk being seen as the Other. The argument presented by Tommy is important in representing the inadvertent indoctrination of these harmful and demeaning ideas, even within Ireland itself.

• “People that are not from our country feel that an intricate part of our heritage and our society is inextricably linked with alcohol.”

• “It is deep rooted in our whole society that we think this is acceptable– it's not.”

This is the final response to the previous two callers, and ends the section of the show that I am focusing on. This last statement comes from a man named Micheal, who agrees with Christina on the unfair attitudes towards the Irish. He recognizes clearly the way Ireland is viewed from the outside, and adamantly stands against it. Using descriptors such as ‘intricate part’ and ‘inextricably linked’, he underlines the realization that this idea of dependence on alcohol is embedded within Irish culture. The words do not sound hopeful, they make us believe that it is near impossible to shift the well established narrative. ‘Deep rooted’ echoes this sentiment, Micheal knows how far back the prejudice goes even within his own culture. He asks for a stand regardless of the knowledge that little will change, begging the listeners to recognize that it is not acceptable to bend to the assumptions made by others, it is not acceptable to go along with the false narrative. You may be ignorant or you may be pretending not to see, but the truth is there, and that is that the stereotype is alive and well and incredibly damaging. 

Regardless of the claims made against them, the Irish refused to be broken, and to this day live with a cultural pride and surety that is as strong now as it was when they were an isolated island. Each of these stories have strong roots in dominant cultures fearful of a possible threat, and the categorization of the Irish as alcoholics, as uncouth, was a tactic established to lessen their perceived intimidation. While the idea of the ‘drunken paddy’ put a sour taste in the mouth of Ireland, it also acted as a label that could be rebelled against, and the Irish have proven themselves a sso much more than people with a propensity towards alcohol. The Irish are aware of the way they are perceived, and they meet this perception with humor and general acceptance, understanding that perception is not equivalent to reality. They may play into the ideas that have become so synonymous with their existence as a form of jest, but they are not prone to alcoholism any more than another culture may be, and they do not have a genetic predisposition towards addiction. They allow their actions to speak louder than assumptions, and the lack of resistance shows a form of humility: the Irish man or woman knows who they are, they do not need to prove anything. While the stereotype continues– bars opening early on St Patrick's day across the world, tourists flocking the Guiness brewery in Dublin on a ‘cultural’ tour– the Irish themselves live untethered to the notion that they are ill-fated towards addiction. They recognize their worth, and live alongside the hackneyed haunting that follows them. The ‘drunken paddy’ remains in his place of origin– he is a myth.