Baltimore: Heiress, Rebel, Revolution
Directed it’s JoLawlor and Christine Molloy, 2023
Readers of IR with an interest in political conflict will welcome this film about one of Ireland’s most remarkable and enigmatic figures. Starring Imogen Poots in the lead role, In Baltimore is the life story of the late Rose Dugdale, a British heiress turned IRA member. Two screenwriters, Joe Lawlor and Christine Molloy eschew the conventions of a biopic, to explore another contradiction of an English millionaire who abandons her privileged life to join the IRA and play a key role in one of the biggest conspiracies in history. Thankfully, the film seems to be true to the events so we are treated to some historical accounts of the financial affairs running the IRA in the 1970s, and the theft, among other great works of art, of the famous Vermeer.
The film’s successful launch, and Rose’s recent death in Dublin at the age of 82, prompts reflection on a life lived in excess. This new film promises to be of interest to all those involved in international relations, as few people may be in recent decades of the incomprehensible but at the heart of the conflict. Dugdale was instrumental in many multi-million dollar IRA robberies, as well as numerous bombings.
There is already drama in these crucial years. In fact, Future Tense (2022) Lawlor and Molloy’s previous film, was an ‘unmade biopic’ about Dugdale. So cinematographically, those who have seen the previous movie, can see In Baltimore as a ‘constructed’ version of the 2022 film. In places there is a detailed description of events, which does In Baltimorefor this viewer, a simple experience for those who may not be as familiar with the complexities of the Irish conflict.
In the film’s words, Baltimore is more of a ‘character-driven heist film’, a moody triptych that jumps freely between timelines. We see Dugdale studying at Oxford, then becoming an artist at Russborough House in Co. Wicklow and his IRA comrades. The artwork will serve as a ransom for the return of imprisoned IRA members Dolours and Marian Price. The third part of the triptych depicts their paranoia-spiked hideout in a Cork cottage, rescuing a priceless art collection by Goya, Vermeer, Rubens, and others. These events all seem larger than life, but we are brought down to earth by current media images.
Considering Dugdale’s recent death, and the film’s depiction of an extraordinary life, one naturally wonders why this English patrician nobleman joined the cause of the Irish republic? What is the ongoing story of this movie? Despite a good amount of previous work in cinema, I mean In Baltimore it doesn’t get us that far in understanding the roots of Rose’s radicalization. This observer would suggest that he was the kind of eccentric “one off” who formed the volunteer roots of the IRA. Rather than worrying about himself or his family, he had a hidden hatred for them. His discomfort with his social class is undoubtedly full of disgust. In Baltimore suggests that the news of Bloody Sunday – the day in 1972 when 13 Derry residents were killed by British paratroopers – was a dramatic moment for Dugdale, perhaps the point at which righteous indignation turned into militant action.
By the early 1970s, Dugdale had been politically radicalized by the student protests of 1968, and had been inspired after a visit to Cuba. By 1972, she had dedicated herself to helping the poor, after quitting her job as a civil service economist, selling her house in Chelsea, and moving into a flat in Tottenham with her lover, Walter Heaton, who described himself as a “revolutionary. socialist”. Heaton was a former court-martialed security guard. Dugdale and Heaton had involved in the human rights movement, and together they ran the Tottenham Claimants Union. They were interested in the human rights movement in Northern Ireland, and traveled there regularly to participate in protests. The film touches on all these events.
It also portrays Dugdale as a sort of “class hero”. He was accused of burglarizing his own home to fund the IRA. Before he was found guilty, he spoke to the judge saying “By finding me guilty, you have made me a freedom fighter. There is no better title I know”. Heaton was jailed for six years, while Dugdale received a two-year suspended sentence as the judge deemed the risk of him committing further crimes “extremely remote”. He was soon proven wrong. In the months following the trial, Dugdale traveled to Ireland and joined an active service unit of the IRA working along the border.
The film depicts his role in an IRA art heist, as on 4 May 1974 Garda raided the house Dugdale rented in Glandore, County Cork. Dugdale was arrested under Section 30 of the Criminal Code, and the next day he was charged in connection with the helicopter attack and art theft. As at his previous trial in 1973, Dugdale used the platform as a political platform, shouting “The British have an army busy in a small part of Ireland—but not for long!”. In Dugdale’s court appearance he denounced Britain as a “dirty enemy” and said the Dublin government was guilty of “insidious dealings” with England. On 25 June 1974, he was sentenced to nine years in prison after pleading “proud and incorruptible”, and gave a firm fist salute to fans in the public gallery.
The film then examines his release from prison, Dugdale was active in the Irish republican prisoners’ campaign during the Irish hunger strike of 1981. He worked as a bomb-making specialist for the IRA. From the mid-1980s to the early 2000s, he and Jim Monaghan built homemade bombs and weapons. They developed a new explosive which was successfully used to attack the British Army’s Glenanne fortress in May 1991, and the Baltic Exchange in the City of London in 1992. In 2007, he spoke in support of the Shell to Sea campaign against the proposed construction of a high-pressure green gas pipeline through Rossport by Shell.
Towards the end of the film, we see that in 2011, he was honored at the annual Dublin Volunteers event for Irish republicanism. In an interview with the republic newspaper An Phoblacht before the event, Dugdale said he believed that “the rebel movement that was the IRA had achieved its main goal, which was to get your enemy to negotiate with you.” They did this with amazing ability and skill, and I can’t help but respect what was done according to the Good Friday Agreement.” Of his involvement in the IRA, he added: “I did what I wanted to do. I am proud to be a part of the Republican Movement, and I hope to have played my very small part in the success of the armed struggle.” Until her death, Dugdale lived in a care home for children in Dublin run by the Poor Servants of the Mother of God, most of whose residents are retired nuns. The film gives a glimpse of this retirement.
The most relevant of IR is perhaps the link between political violence and personality traits among participants. Thus we see the conflict through a wide-angle lens that becomes “up front and personal”. a lot of In Baltimore it concerns the events following a robbery in a small house in West Cork where they plan and consider moving to a safe house in the nearby town of Baltimore – which gives the film its title. This false sanctuary explodes, and the arrest ends the film. For all those interested in political conflict this film provides an interesting mix of personal and larger stories about the Irish conflict.
Rose Dugdale died on 18 March 2024, the week of Baltimore’s official release, and the facts of his mysterious life – and the cinema – as a non-biopic by Lawlor and Molloy. As a result, we see a strange contradiction in life. It is unlikely that anyone will know the full story as he has been keeping a close eye on events. He declines slowly in public life, safe in the knowledge that growth allows a certain degree of historical latitude. Imogen Poots perfectly portrays a complicated life. There is much here to interest IR readers.
Further Studies in E-International Relations
Source link
