Guido Fawkes Day (a very long essay for a weblog, I got carried away a bit. No literature was used in the argument, so most of it is speculation, but -I hope- learned speculation. Just ignore this if you are actually interested in my life)
At the fifth of November people in England set fire to bonfires and sometimes burn effigies of someone called 'Guy Fawkes' and they set of fireworks. Apparently the English still celebrate the fact that exactly 400 years ago (1605) some disgruntled Catholics tried to blow up parliament. But this explanation cannot really be the full truth, i.m.h.o. There must be more to it. In anthropo-speak, I think there are two narratives* at play here. Narratives is a term used for 'stories' people tell to explain why they do what they do, but anthropologists never completely trust what the natives tell them ;-)
One of these narratives is an official, 'state'-narrative. And I think it may be reminiscent of what was intended by the dictators in George Orwell's 1984 by the "Two Minutes / Week of Hate": to ritually focus the angry feelings of the masses at an enemy to create a feeling of national unity and to strengthen orthodox belief in the system of the ruling class (be they 'Party'-members or Parliamentarian Democrats). In 1984 people scream at a picture, at Guy Fawkes Day people burn traditionally burn an effigy of state-enemy Guy Fawkes. These enemies, by the way, are both mysterious conspirators and most importantly: outsiders. The one is a Catholic (Guy Fawkes) and the other a Jew (Emmanuel Goldstein in 1984). As Anna showed in her blog (here), Catholics were targeted in Exeter during Guy Fawkes day in the 19th Century and the Church of England openly participated. I am guessing here, but I believe that 'the state' (who's that then? Shut up.) at that moment in time particularly needed such a rallying point as the nation was very much divided. Marx called it class struggle and believed that the inevitable revolution of communism would start in the UK.
But also: this is a State-occassion at which the ruling system is affirmed in its rule. By setting of the fireworks people 'celebrate' (that is why we usually set of fireworks, isn't it?) the fact that Parliamentary Democracy survived and continues to thrive. May be we can see it as a sort of acclamation, a form of election by voice.
But this alone can, again i.m.h.o., not explain why people still celebrate Guy Fawkes Day. There must be another 'narrative', one that is more hidden and not really pronounced. What I am going to say here is, by the way inspired by an explanation for Guy Fawkes Day that I found in an tiny article in last Saturday's 'Guardian'. In this explanation 'Guy Fawkes Day' is a more 'primitive' (mind you, not necessarily pre-Christian pagan) ritual transition between Autumn and Winter. Primitive in the sense that "transitions and borders (wherever and in whatever shape they may appear) always invite ritual" is almost an Anthropological law - although of course invitations are not always accepted - and because we are dealing here with an event that was very close to home for people living with nature in a way city dwellers don't. That means the other 99.99999999% of humanity that ever populated this earth of which you are not a member.
At the bonfire people burn 'life' (plants & a human figure), just like winter kills 'life' in autumn. And from the ashes new life emerges in spring. On another level you can explain the burning of the evil spirit of Guy Fawkes as a ritual moral cleansing. Fire = 'cleansing', and 'destruction', a necessary pre-condition for regeneration. Another aspect of the burning of the puppet at the stake ties in with the 'state' narrative, but 'elevates' the meaning of Guy Fawkes to the level of 'Evil Spirit'. Warding off of evil spirits is an important thing to do when winter approaches! And this way we find another explanation for the fireworks, because they are often associated with the expelling of evil spirits as well. This is certainly true of the Chinese context, and I believe also of the Western context. See for instance how often the Chinese explanation is repeated in our parts of the world; plus this explanation fits in nicely with the picture I am trying to make here, so again shut up, you imaginary critic ;-) But to give you another reason: note, for example, how fireworks are associated with the 'moral purity' of individuals that set them off: we want only trustworthy people to be allowed to handle the potentially dangerous materials.
But that is again state narrative, we have all seen the kids roaming the streets with fireworks and every year people get injured by experimenting with fireworks, as this risky behaviour does not fit in with the state narrative it is repressed, at least where the central state is strong. Because another interpretation of Guy Fawkes Day is also possible: as a carnival (inversion of roles) and a ritual challenge to authority. This is demonstrated in places like Ottery St Mary (where Anna went) and Lewes. In the first village people run around with burning barrels of tar and in the second there is general mayhem of a similar manner combined with a, erm, more contemporary interpretation of Guy Fawkes: here puppets made after dis-liked local and world figures are ritually burned at the stake (including people like the mayor, certain police officers, Tony Blair and George Bush). If I had more energy left I would try and find out why people in Ottery St Mary carry burning barrels around, but I've got more to do, although this essay is already quite long now...
But indeed, as Anna already rightly noted, traditions are constantly under negotiation; they need to maintain a meaning for the participants. May be that explains why there was no bonfire on Black Heath Park, where I went last saturday. For the city dweller the whole 'regeneration of the earth' business is of no importance (a simple"but the bonfire is so nice for the kids!" won't do, unless a new meaning is constructed), as the shift of the seasons will not affect his live apart from the clothes he wears. That might explain why there was no bonfire at Balck Heath Park, as it was too much associated with regeneration and cycles of seasons and hence unimportant in the city. Of course you could say that there were practical reasons why there was no bonfire, but if the bonfire would have been important enough in the heads of the organisers there would have been a bonfire, believe me. For this reason I think that for the city dweller what I called the 'state'-narrative is the more important one, so they celebrate 'Parliamentary Democracy' and drive away the 'Evil Spirits' of its enemies, all by setting off fireworks, while the shift of the seasons argument might be more important in the countryside (Ottery St Mary). Lewes is, I believe, somewhere in-between countryside and sub-urb for London, and apparently the authority / carnival question is more important there. But I don't really know the contexts of these two places so I can't really say anything about them.
But, to conclude: I think the tradition of Guy Fawkes Day is not going to dissappear anytime soon. There are many reasons to celebrate that all fit under the big mask of Guy Fawkes Day; reasons that can give the day a meaning in many different places, from agricultural communities to big cities.
OK, now I have ruined another evening that I could have better spent writing an essay that is actually due friday, but I guess I am half-excused as I praticed my Anthropological analysis skills. Please, any feedback is very welcome, just write me an e-mail or leave a comment by clicking on the comment button below.
At the fifth of November people in England set fire to bonfires and sometimes burn effigies of someone called 'Guy Fawkes' and they set of fireworks. Apparently the English still celebrate the fact that exactly 400 years ago (1605) some disgruntled Catholics tried to blow up parliament. But this explanation cannot really be the full truth, i.m.h.o. There must be more to it. In anthropo-speak, I think there are two narratives* at play here. Narratives is a term used for 'stories' people tell to explain why they do what they do, but anthropologists never completely trust what the natives tell them ;-)
One of these narratives is an official, 'state'-narrative. And I think it may be reminiscent of what was intended by the dictators in George Orwell's 1984 by the "Two Minutes / Week of Hate": to ritually focus the angry feelings of the masses at an enemy to create a feeling of national unity and to strengthen orthodox belief in the system of the ruling class (be they 'Party'-members or Parliamentarian Democrats). In 1984 people scream at a picture, at Guy Fawkes Day people burn traditionally burn an effigy of state-enemy Guy Fawkes. These enemies, by the way, are both mysterious conspirators and most importantly: outsiders. The one is a Catholic (Guy Fawkes) and the other a Jew (Emmanuel Goldstein in 1984). As Anna showed in her blog (here), Catholics were targeted in Exeter during Guy Fawkes day in the 19th Century and the Church of England openly participated. I am guessing here, but I believe that 'the state' (who's that then? Shut up.) at that moment in time particularly needed such a rallying point as the nation was very much divided. Marx called it class struggle and believed that the inevitable revolution of communism would start in the UK.
But also: this is a State-occassion at which the ruling system is affirmed in its rule. By setting of the fireworks people 'celebrate' (that is why we usually set of fireworks, isn't it?) the fact that Parliamentary Democracy survived and continues to thrive. May be we can see it as a sort of acclamation, a form of election by voice.
But this alone can, again i.m.h.o., not explain why people still celebrate Guy Fawkes Day. There must be another 'narrative', one that is more hidden and not really pronounced. What I am going to say here is, by the way inspired by an explanation for Guy Fawkes Day that I found in an tiny article in last Saturday's 'Guardian'. In this explanation 'Guy Fawkes Day' is a more 'primitive' (mind you, not necessarily pre-Christian pagan) ritual transition between Autumn and Winter. Primitive in the sense that "transitions and borders (wherever and in whatever shape they may appear) always invite ritual" is almost an Anthropological law - although of course invitations are not always accepted - and because we are dealing here with an event that was very close to home for people living with nature in a way city dwellers don't. That means the other 99.99999999% of humanity that ever populated this earth of which you are not a member.
At the bonfire people burn 'life' (plants & a human figure), just like winter kills 'life' in autumn. And from the ashes new life emerges in spring. On another level you can explain the burning of the evil spirit of Guy Fawkes as a ritual moral cleansing. Fire = 'cleansing', and 'destruction', a necessary pre-condition for regeneration. Another aspect of the burning of the puppet at the stake ties in with the 'state' narrative, but 'elevates' the meaning of Guy Fawkes to the level of 'Evil Spirit'. Warding off of evil spirits is an important thing to do when winter approaches! And this way we find another explanation for the fireworks, because they are often associated with the expelling of evil spirits as well. This is certainly true of the Chinese context, and I believe also of the Western context. See for instance how often the Chinese explanation is repeated in our parts of the world; plus this explanation fits in nicely with the picture I am trying to make here, so again shut up, you imaginary critic ;-) But to give you another reason: note, for example, how fireworks are associated with the 'moral purity' of individuals that set them off: we want only trustworthy people to be allowed to handle the potentially dangerous materials.
But that is again state narrative, we have all seen the kids roaming the streets with fireworks and every year people get injured by experimenting with fireworks, as this risky behaviour does not fit in with the state narrative it is repressed, at least where the central state is strong. Because another interpretation of Guy Fawkes Day is also possible: as a carnival (inversion of roles) and a ritual challenge to authority. This is demonstrated in places like Ottery St Mary (where Anna went) and Lewes. In the first village people run around with burning barrels of tar and in the second there is general mayhem of a similar manner combined with a, erm, more contemporary interpretation of Guy Fawkes: here puppets made after dis-liked local and world figures are ritually burned at the stake (including people like the mayor, certain police officers, Tony Blair and George Bush). If I had more energy left I would try and find out why people in Ottery St Mary carry burning barrels around, but I've got more to do, although this essay is already quite long now...
But indeed, as Anna already rightly noted, traditions are constantly under negotiation; they need to maintain a meaning for the participants. May be that explains why there was no bonfire on Black Heath Park, where I went last saturday. For the city dweller the whole 'regeneration of the earth' business is of no importance (a simple"but the bonfire is so nice for the kids!" won't do, unless a new meaning is constructed), as the shift of the seasons will not affect his live apart from the clothes he wears. That might explain why there was no bonfire at Balck Heath Park, as it was too much associated with regeneration and cycles of seasons and hence unimportant in the city. Of course you could say that there were practical reasons why there was no bonfire, but if the bonfire would have been important enough in the heads of the organisers there would have been a bonfire, believe me. For this reason I think that for the city dweller what I called the 'state'-narrative is the more important one, so they celebrate 'Parliamentary Democracy' and drive away the 'Evil Spirits' of its enemies, all by setting off fireworks, while the shift of the seasons argument might be more important in the countryside (Ottery St Mary). Lewes is, I believe, somewhere in-between countryside and sub-urb for London, and apparently the authority / carnival question is more important there. But I don't really know the contexts of these two places so I can't really say anything about them.
But, to conclude: I think the tradition of Guy Fawkes Day is not going to dissappear anytime soon. There are many reasons to celebrate that all fit under the big mask of Guy Fawkes Day; reasons that can give the day a meaning in many different places, from agricultural communities to big cities.
OK, now I have ruined another evening that I could have better spent writing an essay that is actually due friday, but I guess I am half-excused as I praticed my Anthropological analysis skills. Please, any feedback is very welcome, just write me an e-mail or leave a comment by clicking on the comment button below.
posted by Isalicus at 20:21
2 Comments:
Excellent job!
I thought it was very interesting, especially your comparison of Guy Fawkes day and the official narrative to 1984 :-) You should consider writing anthropology textbooks, at least you would keep us awake and not only that, but amused as well ;-)
Post a Comment
<< Home