Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by gann3b
Say Nothing: A True Story of Murder and Memory in Northern Ireland by Patrick Radden Keefe
5.0
I understand why the author used the story of Jean McConville's murder as the narrative arc, but the best storytelling doesn't really have anything to do with the murder. The Price sisters, Gerry Adams, and Brendan Hughes are the leading characters here. Gerry Adams is perfectly portrayed as the little bitch he is.
Despite Jean McConville being "a perfect victim," the reaction to her murder depended, and still depends, on what side of The Troubles one sat. This made me think of the murder of George Floyd. Typically, only one side has demonstrated outrage over police brutality and killings of Black people. But both sides seemed to agree that George Floyd's murder was too brutal, too unnecessary, too atrocious. Does that represent some sort of shift in the tribalism that defines American and global politics? If so, it probably won't stick, but under peak tribalism, as demonstrated by Jean McConville's murder, it is hard to imagine Republicans and other right-leaning people from showing any sympathy for the murder of a Black man by the police.
When police and prosecutors pursued cases against former British solders, they were accused of a "witch hunt" against young men who were just trying to do their jobs in a difficult environment. To such charges of bias, the top prosecutor, Barra McGrory, responded that there had been no "imbalance of approach" and that investigations of terrorist atrocities far outnumbered cases against the state. But was that not itself a kind of bias? Was it possible to appropriately calibrate the number of investigations of republican murders with those of loyalist murders? Would anything but a perfect one-to-one ratio suffice? People in Northern Ireland talked about the danger of a "hierarchy of victims." Outrage is conditioned not by the nature of the atrocity but by the affiliation of the victim and the perpetrator. Should the state be accorded more leniency because, legally speaking, it has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force? Or, conversely, should we hold soldiers and cops to a higher standard than paramilitaries?
Despite Jean McConville being "a perfect victim," the reaction to her murder depended, and still depends, on what side of The Troubles one sat. This made me think of the murder of George Floyd. Typically, only one side has demonstrated outrage over police brutality and killings of Black people. But both sides seemed to agree that George Floyd's murder was too brutal, too unnecessary, too atrocious. Does that represent some sort of shift in the tribalism that defines American and global politics? If so, it probably won't stick, but under peak tribalism, as demonstrated by Jean McConville's murder, it is hard to imagine Republicans and other right-leaning people from showing any sympathy for the murder of a Black man by the police.
When police and prosecutors pursued cases against former British solders, they were accused of a "witch hunt" against young men who were just trying to do their jobs in a difficult environment. To such charges of bias, the top prosecutor, Barra McGrory, responded that there had been no "imbalance of approach" and that investigations of terrorist atrocities far outnumbered cases against the state. But was that not itself a kind of bias? Was it possible to appropriately calibrate the number of investigations of republican murders with those of loyalist murders? Would anything but a perfect one-to-one ratio suffice? People in Northern Ireland talked about the danger of a "hierarchy of victims." Outrage is conditioned not by the nature of the atrocity but by the affiliation of the victim and the perpetrator. Should the state be accorded more leniency because, legally speaking, it has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force? Or, conversely, should we hold soldiers and cops to a higher standard than paramilitaries?