Madam, - As a poet and writer who regularly visits schools under the Poetry Ireland Writers-In-Schools scheme, and as someone who is employed as a mentor under that same scheme, I wish to voice a few concerns over the recent debate on Fairytale of Kathmanduand its subject, Cathal Ó Searcaigh.
In recent weeks we've heard calls both for the banning of the documentary and also the repressing of Cathal Ó Searcaigh's poetry. There have also been calls, both public and private, to expel him from Aosdána and also from the Writers-in-Schools list.
The central issue is clear. Mr Ó Searcaigh, by his own admission, had sexual relations with Nepalese youths as young as 16 while engaged in voluntary aid and teaching-work in Nepal. As he is an Irish poet of international standing it is fair to say that he was also playing an ambassadorial role.
There are two fundamental problems here. Firstly, Cathal Ó Searcaigh has gone to the limit of the age of consent, and to me that demonstrates a lack of responsibility at the very least. Secondly, and more crucially, the age of consent for males here in Ireland is 17; to go to another jurisdiction where the age of consent is lower and then to go right to the limit of it can only be seen as sexual tourism. There is no other way of looking at it. Cathal Ó Searcaigh had a duty of responsibility and professionalism towards these young men that he failed to honour. He is an intellectual, a complex thinker, so this should have been obvious to him. It should also be obvious to all the complex thinkers in Aosdána and elsewhere who have run to support him on this matter. This is not an issue of sexual orientation, but a matter of inappropriate transgenerational sexual activity.
There is no appropriate context for behaviour of this nature, and all arguments to the contrary are unconvincing. The Irish literary and artistic community must move forwards with courage. And so must Cathal Ó Searcaigh.
No human being can be denied the chance of redemption, and writers and artists in particular are adept at pulling themselves above even the darkest moments. But first Cathal Ó Searcaigh needs to come forward and account for himself immediately. Statements issued from a distance or read out on the Late Late Showare not enough to address the damage that has been done.
Finally, may I touch on the subject of censorship? Personally and philosophically, no writer would wish to see any other writer removed from Aosdána or the Writers-in-Schools list. Neither would they wish to see his poetry banned or proscribed. Generally, nothing should be done to interfere with an artist's art or an individual's right to earn a living in their chosen profession. But having said that, one must also recognise that art must convince its public and workers must convince their individual employers. The Writers-in-Schools programme functions as an employer of writers and therefore has an added level of responsibility.
Further, if an individual teacher feels morally unable to teach the poetry, or a parent feels his or her child should not be taught it, or if a person does not want to buy or read the poetry, then that is the prerogative of the individual. With freedom comes the responsibility of choice. We have fought long for that and we should keep it. That choice should not be left just to governing bodies. It should be our own individual burden as well.
It may be as unwise to try to censor the poetry as it was morally wrong of certain senators and members of Aosdána to try to censor the documentary. Judgment, one way or the other, rests with all of us; but it cannot be made for us. As individuals we make up the consensus of society and so we must all speak up.
However, nothing ever exists in isolation, including the governing bodies. Although Poetry Ireland or Aosdána might not expel him, they must very clearly and very publicly state a position. Poetry Ireland administers the Writers-in-Schools scheme on behalf of the Arts Council and has signed up to the child protection guidelines, so this issue is very pertinent to it and it cannot remain silent. No one can sit on the fence.
The main onus, however, is with Cathal Ó Searcaigh. He must come forward and offer an account of himself, which is the honourable thing to do and is what he should have done weeks ago, instead of leaving us all here debating his issue and carrying his burden and tearing shreds off each other on his behalf. If he cannot convince us, then no one should have to expel him from Aosdána or any other body, for he should be honourable enough to resign. Only with honour can come the chance for healing. - Yours, etc,
JOHN W. SEXTON,
Poet and Children's Author,
Kenmare,
Co Kerry.
****
Madam, - In the plethora of comment and indignation about Cathal Ó Searcaigh in Nepal, important questions have yet to be answered.
How much money did he raise for his "charity"? How was this money spent - apart from those amounts which the poet told us he prefers to give directly to the boys? - Yours, etc,
AIDAN HARMAN,
Brian Dillon Park,
Cork.