William L Rukeyser is an American reporter who was actually able to capture Bloody Sunday on camera. I plan to use his photographs as my visuals in my paper. One such photograph, One of the Dead 
portrays the seriousness of the event. This Irish protester, identity suspected to be Barney McGuigan, was covered with a blanket. He was an unarmed civilian, as many who were at the event attested to (Melaugh). According to Melaugh, McGuigan and the other protesters were only throwing stones at the British officers. While I'm sure there is more to be gleaned from this photographs and the others Rukeyser took, I feel that just having pictures makes Bloody Sunday seem more real and adds to the gravity of the situation.
portrays the seriousness of the event. This Irish protester, identity suspected to be Barney McGuigan, was covered with a blanket. He was an unarmed civilian, as many who were at the event attested to (Melaugh). According to Melaugh, McGuigan and the other protesters were only throwing stones at the British officers. While I'm sure there is more to be gleaned from this photographs and the others Rukeyser took, I feel that just having pictures makes Bloody Sunday seem more real and adds to the gravity of the situation.
In addition to photographs, Rukeyser also obtained audio recorded statements about Bloody Sunday. I'm not sure how or if I even can use these in my paper, but I'm happy to find that they exist. Currently, I am relying heavily on the CAIN website for my primary sources, but I am still searching for memoirs and autobiographies that pertain to The Troubles. Court documents from Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Great Britain, I have found are also available online. While I appreciate the objectivity of court documents, the statements from the civilians are truly invaluable to me. They provide the emotional aspect that is required to reveal the severity of this modern conflict. A quote that I found quite moving from Coroner Major Hubert O'Neill stated: "This Sunday became known as Bloody Sunday and bloody it was. It was quite unnecessary. It strikes me that the Army ran amok that day and shot without thinking what they were doing. They were shooting innocent people.These people may have been taking part in a march that was banned but that does not justify the troops coming in and firing live rounds indiscriminately. I would say without hesitation that it was sheer, unadulterated murder. It was murder" (Melaugh). Statements like this and pictures such as One of the Dead, I believe are going to really help develop my paper.
Chicago citation for the CAIN website:
Melaugh, Martin. "Bloody Sunday, 30 January 1972- Summary of Main Events." CAIN. June 17, 2010. http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/bsunday/sum.htm.
Woah, talk about a depressing topic. I think you and I are in the same boat with that one, so to speak! I agree about your comment that the civilians' statements add a bit more than court documents; official documents are always so lifeless. It's important, however, to remember that eyewitness statements are likely more biased, especially if they were taken immediately after the event. I'm glad to hear that you've narrowed your topic down, and I think that this line of research will definitely provide some thought-provoking details!
ReplyDeleteYes, eyewitness statements are definitely going to be biased. But I hope to get accounts from both sides- both loyalist and nationalist supporters. And I'm not throwing out court documents all together! Actually, even they can carry some biases. Anyway, thank you for the comment.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete