Booming economic base, booming cultural superstructure? Someone (actually, a critic; actually, me) put the case a few years ago that Irish criticism is a kind of business specialising in the production of coherent images of national history. This suggestion has at least two interesting implications. The first is that it challenges the prevailing climate in which criticism functions as a mere adjunct to those supposedly "primary" phenomena it has traditionally been considered to serve: art and history. In fact, criticism is far better understood as a highly creative and at the same time persistently interventionist social practice. To extend the metaphor, criticism is a production industry rather than a service industry, dedicated to making things - specifically, the terms within which art and history may be apprehended - rather than attending to the whims of the self-sufficient literary/historical text.
If contemporary Irish criticism is a kind of business, and this is the second point, then I suppose its internal personnel structure should function along the lines of any other concern looking to exploit the tigerish economy: aloof directors and upper management focused on long-term strategy; stressed-out middle management obsessed with medium-term growth and shop-floor harmony; skilled producers of the core product simultaneously sceptical of company policy and nervous of the ambitious young guns pushing from below. In the limited institutional sphere that is contemporary Irish Studies, it pays to know who and where you are.
But what of those young guns? P.J. Mathews has edited a book of essays by a number of twenty-somethings who, as Professor Declan Kiberd writes in the preface, have been finding it increasingly difficult of late to get their ideas regarding Irish cultural history published, never mind accepted as valid critical engagements. The concept of a forum for "new voices" emerged initially from a seminar series convened by Kiberd as part of UCD's MA in Anglo-Irish literature in the spring of 1998. A New Voices conference was held at the Irish Film Centre in Temple Bar early the following year to consolidate the initiative, and there is hope that similar events and publications might become a regular feature on the Irish Studies calendar.
New Voices in Irish Criticism reflects what Mathews calls the "interdisciplinary and intercollegiate nature" of the original project. The volume, stylishly produced by Four Courts Press, offers a snapshot of the wider field rather than a collection focused upon a particular theme, issue or author. There are 32 pieces by pre-doctoral scholars from 16 Irish, American and British institutions.
As with any large collection the quality of the research on view is uneven, although as you might expect from such bright minds working in such privileged institutional contexts, some of the material sparkles. High points include a much-needed essay on popular women's fiction by Kathy Cremin, and two pieces (by Frank Shovlin and Robert B. Tobin) which should contribute to the growing acknowledgement of the 1950s as a seminal period of modern Irish history.
Even these stronger contributions reflect their genesis as conference papers, however, in so far as they are for the most part generally shorter than essays found in academic journals or edited collections. Their status as theses extracts is further reflected in the provisional and allusive nature of many of the contributions, although it is fair to say that most stand as discrete and coherent scholarly exercises.
BUT what, to reprise the question, should be the attitude of these "apprentice scholars" towards the business in which they are attempting to establish themselves? Should the young guns fall into line with the established order, accepting the validity of the issues identified by previous generations as "issues", and spending their valuable research time elaborating minute modifications of certain core theses? Or should they be looking to revolutionise the field, to diversify (or even discontinue) the core product so that it reflects the changing requirements of the wider society ostensibly served by the business? The metaphor may be getting out of hand, but this doesn't change the fact that careers are made or broken on such choices, something which younger critics are obviously only too aware of in an increasingly "publish-or-be-damned" academic climate.
The essays are organised into a number of sections covering topics such as "Politics and Revival", "Theorising the Novel", "Women and Fiction", "Imagining Northern Ireland" and "Poetry/Nation/Language". Not much new there, then. The title of Section Six, "Literary Journalism/Children's Literature", bespeaks its own tendentiousness, although to be fair this is less a reflection on the editorial process (which must have been difficult enough, given the range of material) than the difficulty young scholars face in either locating institutional contexts or imagining intellectual debates which challenge the dominant regime. The two sections which seem to promise alternative takes - "New Directions in Irish Studies" and "Challenging Irish Studies" - cover areas that have already been broached as part of the "Mergers and Acquisitions" wing of mainstream Irish-related scholarship.
It could be argued that all this is beside the point, as what counts is the existence of the volume rather than the archival content or methodological assumptions of its constitutive elements. But wherein lies the challenge of a forum for "new voices" if those voices continue to speak the old language? It would be churlish to deny that this collection augurs well for the future of Irish cultural criticism. But whether that in itself is a good thing rather depends on whether you consider "Irish cultural criticism" to be the practice of a community or the product of a corporation.
Gerry Smyth is the author of Decolonisation and Criticism: The Construction of Irish Literature, published by Pluto Press in 1998. He lectures in Cultural History at Liverpool John Moores University.