As for Irish films that portray working class people not defined purely by social problems, the adaptations of Roddy Doyle’s comedy books spring to mind. A film like Studs, though I haven’t seen it, appears to be set among ordinary working class people, and a film like Man About Dog, no matter how execrable its execution, seems to fit the bill.

It’s no coincidence that these are all comedies, or attempts at it. We don’t have a strong tradition of comedy film making here and consequently a lot of films come across as morose and aiming for depth. Anything that isn’t tackling some important issue seems to be whimsical or trivial to the top brass at RTE and the Irish Film Board. I think this focus on seriousness is a sign of cultural insecurity, not the outlook solely of some unwitting class prejudice.

Niall, with regard to tourists having a clearer view of the country, I’ll keep that in mind next group of Manchester hens I see crawling back to the Ardmore Hotel on the Finglas Road at 11 in the morning. Or when I’m stuck for a bit of clarity on Irish history I’ll reach for the nearest Lonely Planet guide to sort me out. And with regard to filmmakers chasing the interesting - you’ve missed what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that when they DO go for their interesting working class characters they draw off a set of aesthetics that have become the standard for such dramas - the worst example being the aforementioned “Prosperity”. The reason being is that they do not come from a working class background and have absolutely no idea what the culture is really like. Not to worry, ‘cos those reviewing it in newspapers, or on television programmes - are in the same boat. What they do have, however, is exposure to similar drama - enough to let them know what “looks” authentic, and what doesn’t. And the aesthetics are the extremes. I mean, take someone like Shane Meadows, who deals with some very dark working class characters. Take a look at the aesthetics in his movies, in A room for Romeo brass, for example. Check out the furniture, the wallpaper, the banter between families - these little details don’t show up in Irish drama ‘cos the people making them are usually too busy dealing with “issues” in an aesthetic that is just wrong. They just don’t know how to get the setting right, but they’ve watched enough movies to know who to make it look “authentic.”

Let me make it clear as well. None of this, I believe, is done completely consciously. Influences don’t always work at a conscious level. However, they can be analysed, and highlighted, and alluded to, and that’s what I’m doing here. I’m not saying that those making these types of dramas are fully aware of what they are drawing upon, but I know it ‘aint Irish working class life, ‘cos it’s the last thing these guys know anything about.

On another point, is it not interesting that when it comes to middle class dramas, we have the people involved dealing with relationship problems, but when they turn their skills towards working class based dramas, all we get are needles, doleys and drunks? Again, the precedents, the aesthetics, the cultural production itself.

I mean, as far as contemporary working class representations within Irish culture that are NOT based on the margins… where are they?

Can people point me to them please? All I can think of is Intermission.

Sean, with regard to whether working class portrayal is Abrahamson’s main concern or not. Whether it’s his main concern or not, what is certain is that he uses particular socio-economic groups in Irish society to try to tell us something about Irish society - and when he ventures into these portrayals of particular socio-economic groups in Ireland (as he does with Adam and Paul and his four-part TV series, Prosperity) he does so with a heavy reliance on cultural works of a similar nature that have gone before (both Irish and British), rather than on any particular insight into the actual cultural, economic, and social reality. Also, I’m giving a materialist analysis, which is going to place issues of class portrayal and cultural production to the fore. when Abrahamson’s work is placed within the wider context of the portrayal of particular socio-economic groups in Irish cultural production - (as opposed to the portrayal of relationships in Irish cultural production) these specific patterns emerge, patterns of aesthetics, editing, even story-telling, and it is these patterns that I want to highlight - in particular, the fact that in present-day Ireland, “middle class” practically means anybody with a job, and “working class” means the above. Again, click on “The View” link above and its discussion of “the pride of Parnell st” to watch this type of underclass as working class idea play out. and it’s only one example.

Not necessarily authentic or representative of a wider class, just different. Adam and Paul don’t represent the Dublin working class but an extreme of society. They are extreme not just to middle class people but to working class people. To assume their portrayal casts the Dublin working class in a poor light makes an assumption of commonality and overlap most Dublin working class people probably wouldn’t make themselves.

“If the film-makers perceive their subjects as ‘on the extremes’, as you say, then their own starting point must be not from the extremes, but from the ‘centre’, which is, wait for it, where the middle class thinks it is.”

Films that involve middle class protagonists deal in extreme characters also. Its called entertainment.