Gendered Spaces in Contemporary Irish Poetry

intervention so that they are denied firm ground of their own from
which to make a footing, stake their claim or identify themselves. This
comment alludes to clear divisions between ëIrishí and non-ëIrishí,
and between colonizers and colonized. This has the effect of
excluding those, whose ëconsciousnessí does not agree with Corkeryís
sense of the ënationalí and it excludes those who do not share a
nationalist ëmentalityí.
Corkery imagines a sense of community between ëIrish peopleí
while at the same time describing their lack of a firm basis from which
to communicate with themselves, one another and the rest of the
world. His comments are symptomatic of the history of colonial
imposition in Ireland, yet Corkery overlooks the complexities of
writing for ëthe Irish peopleí in a sectarian political context where
Irish, Anglo-Irish, Ulster Scots and British identities inhabit the ëIrishí
landscape. Unionists may view the Partition as dividing ëusí from
ëthemí, whereas nationalists may view it as dividing ëusí from
ëourselves.í Regarding the sectarian context of the North, the Irish
landscape and political geography can be assessed in differing ways.
Paying attention to the contested terrain of the North of Ireland, it is
essential to ask how, in view of the divisions between ëIrish peopleí in
the North of Ireland, Heaneyís early poetry engages with the
problematic of self-consciously forging a ëpost-colonialí-
consciousness in the face of Corkeryís ëquaking sodí. For Corkery, the
notion of ëthe Irish consciousnessí was bound up with the Irish
language and metaphor. It is the metaphorical reimagining of Irish
identity as articulated in the poetry that is of a prime concern here.
The ëEnglishí imagined the ëIrishí as belonging to the bog, so to
compare ëIrishí consciousness with a ëquaking sodí is to mimic the
colonial stereotype and to locate ëthe Irishí in ëIrishí ground.
However, Heaneyís bog poems insist less on attending to the ëIrishí
landscape as a source for ëIrishí identity than Lloyd suggests. Rather,
they move away from preoccupations with the land, rejecting
traditional ënationalistí endeavours to provide ëthe peopleí with a
straightforward politics of repossession. It is therefore necessary to
acknowledge the differences between ënationalistí and ëpost-colonialí
positions, and to ask how far does Heaneyís poetry illustrate these
differences?