Shared Identity in Long Kesh/Maze…by South Belfast.

I have been fortunate as to not have spent any time incarcerated in either of the prison camps in Northern Ireland. However, many of my friends have had the experiences. I was reading an article “The Negotiation of Identity at Shared Sites: Long Kesh/Maze Prison Site, Northern Ireland

 by  Laura McAtackney  2005”. The article was very interesting but leaned a little towards Republicans. I would be keen to hear from those ex prisoners as to whether or not this article highlights the Loyalist identity with Long Kesh/Maze Prisons.  Its very important that Loyalists replace negative propaganda with a more positive approach to our culture and identity in particular with the system that held many of our volunteers.  I am attaching 2 parts of the article which focus on the Loyalist relationship/identity. The full article can be read using the title and author in an internet search.

3.2 Loyalist Experiences

Loyalists had a much more complex relationship with the authorities. In contrast to Republican prisoners, Loyalists did not question the right of the State to dispense justice or imprison. They saw themselves as fighting on the same side, and even fighting alongside, the soldier, policemen and civil authorities against Republicanism. As one Protestant clergyman stated with regard to the security forces in Northern Ireland, and in reference to the contentious local policing force the ‘B’ Specials in particular: ‘The “B” Specials were a Protestant force to maintain a Protestant state’.(Galliher & DeGregory, 1985, p.96) As they did not question the status quo of the state, Loyalist prisoners found themselves with a more ambiguous level of support from their local communities. If a Loyalist wished to combat this perceived Republican threat then they had many possible, legitimate routes that they could follow without turning to paramilitarism: namely joining the police or the army. Furthermore, as very few internees were from Loyalist/Unionist communities there were no initial perceptions of state persecution, only fear of Republican attack. The Loyalist experience inside the prison was not one where they wished to educate themselves about the right of their cause: for they fought on the side of the State! Loyalist paramilitaries believed that they existed as a reaction to Republican paramilitaries and did not need to justify their existence. Therefore, the Loyalist prisoners who partook in educational programmes did so as individuals, not as a group endeavour. The emphasis on organised debates or discussions on politics or history that helped to generate intellectual stimulation and comradeship amongst the Republicans was not to be found to the same extent amongst Loyalist prisoners. It could be suggested that their experiences of prison was more akin to that of the ‘ordinary decent criminal’, in the less communal nature of their experiences, than their Republican counterparts. The relationship of Loyalist prisoners with the authorities was therefore very different from Republican prisoners. These differences, and their impact on group identification and morale, lie at the root of why Republicans were able to self-consciously use this site as a symbol of injustice, torture, tyranny and all that was wrong with British rule in Ireland and Loyalists were slow to publicly articulate any connection with the site. However, this does not mean that both sets of prisoners did not identify, to different degrees, with the site.

 5. The Role of Long Kesh/Maze Prison in Loyalist Identity

Although Long Kesh/Maze prison is more closely associated with Republican prisoner it would be wrong to assume that Loyalist prisoners have not constructed their own identity through their negotiation with this prison site. Due to the ambiguous relationship between Loyalist prisoners and those who imprison them, the prison has not played such a high profile role in Loyalist identity. However, it should be remembered that the demands for the return of Special Category status by Republican prisoners, which culminated in the 1980/1981 Hunger Strikes, were not ultimately successful. Segregation and movement towards de facto return of Special Category status was in fact a direct result of pressure by Loyalist prisoner in 1982. As even veteran Republican Martin Meehan tentatively admitted:

And then there were still Loyalists on the wing and then eventually the force of  numbers, we were outnumbering Loyalist four to one in numbers, and eventually the situation became untenable for the Loyalists so they went and said our lives are under threat so they moved them. (Meehan, Interview, 11.01.06)That this is not widely known indicates the extent to which Loyalists did not wish to utilise the Long Kesh/Maze prison in the same way as Republican prisoners: as a key propaganda tool. However, the prison did have a significant impact on Loyalist identity. Artefacts made within the prison were used within that context and for dispersal amongst Loyalist communities: including banners depicting Loyalist prisoners on site [see Figure 2] and Loyalist artefacts, such as Orange Order regalia with particular reference to marching. The numbers of these items that were confiscated and are still held by the Northern Ireland Prison Service, including flags, banners, orange sashes, decorative weaponry, perhaps says something about the need for communal display and marks attempts to preserve a distinctly Loyalist/Unionist identity whilst inside prison. Indeed, many of these prisoners would not have been members of the supposedly respectable, middleclass Orange Order on the outside. These artefacts, although not in the quantities of their Republican counterparts, obviously indicate a relationship with the prison that was singular to them and consciously unconnected with Republican identification. It is through examination of Loyalist wall murals outside Long Kesh/Maze Prison tha tthis view can best be substantiated. There have been a significant number of murals that depict prison exteriors located in Loyalist areas and connect to Loyalist paramilitary groupings, although they often do not specifically mention LongKesh/Maze prison in their representations. What is most interesting about these murals is the similarity in depiction. The vast majority of these images show the prison from an eye-level view facing an exterior wall covered with barbed wire and with a watchtower in the background. It is surely not a coincidence that Loyalist mural painters have decided to depict the prison using a perspective in opposition to the birds-eye view of the H Blocks that dominates so many Republican representations of Long Kesh/Maze prison. Instead the prison is depicted from a very specific view that does not highlight its most publicly prominent representation and in fact represents it as a generic prison. It is equally significant that, in stark contrast to Republican murals, any depictions of the Long Kesh/Maze prison are not accompanied by representations of specific events or individuals connected to the site instead they tend to act as a backdrop to images of contemporary paramilitary figures. Therefore, Long Kesh/Maze prison plays a role in the construction of identity for Loyalist prisoners and the Loyalist community. However, through the ambiguous relationship with the State, and a desire not to emulate the identity that Republican prisoners associate with Long Kesh/Maze prison, their connection with the prison and  adoption into Loyalist iconography is more low-key. However, as the Long Kesh/Maze prison appears on Loyalist banners and in murals to some degree indicates that the image of the prison has not totally been surrendered to Republican prisoners despite its representation being undeniably affected by what Republican prisoners have done before them.