106
PARTISAN REVIEW
place, but still it is a place. And the prized material, written for no prac–
tical purpose, has most often probably not been preserved at all, and,
when preserved, often has little or no bearing on major historical events.
Then there is the case of material composed for the attainment of
practical objectives in the here and now, and without concern for place
in history. Speeches and articles by practical politicians fall into this cat–
egory. These statements are certainly by no means as reliable as the
material written for no practical purpose. But they are much more copi–
ous, and as they are also varied, and often written with conflicting
objectives in mind, the sensitive and judicious historian can often piece
together from the conflicting evidence a fairly convincing account of the
nature and purposes of the dispute.
And the memoir material, at another and lower level, can also com–
plement the speeches and articles. The speeches and articles show how
the contenders sought
to
portray events during the period when they
were happening. The memoirs-when available-show how the same
contenders sought to portray the same events in
retrospect.
Compar–
isons of the two sets of statements can be quite instructive, though sel–
dom edifying. So the place of memoirs in historiography though a lowly
one is real, and an indispensable part of the limited though varied body
of relevant historical material.
I should now like to offer a case-history-my own-first as an active
participant in politics, and then as the author of a memoir.
Trained as I had been by Moody, I was used to setting a high value
on truth. But when I was involved in active politics I found myself con–
strained to set limits to the expression of truth so that I might-in
Edmund Burke's elegant phrase-"Iive to tell it the longer."
That in itself was a bit disconcerting. But what was much more dis–
concerting was when I found myself constrained to say things which I
did not believe at all, in order that I might retain the capacity to main–
tain a cause in which I did passionately believe.
The cause in which I believed was that Irish Nationalists should desist
from insisting that the Unionists of Northern Ireland should move in a
direction in which they are altogether unwilling
to
move: that of a
united Ireland. I thought then, as I still think now, that this insistence is
at the root of the violence that continues in Northern Ireland (despite
the prevailing misleading announcements that the violence has stopped).
But my position on the North was strongly controversial within the
Irish Labour Party,
to
which [ belonged and which I represented in par–
liament. A strong section of the party, especially in Dublin, insisted that
I should come to heel and oppose partition, or be removed from the
