11 replies to this topic

[David]

Seems like another old traditional that is dying out. Its a shame, really- building a guy was something creative that children enjoyed doing- so much better than television. It annoys me when miseries say it is "Just begging." NO! Its not begging. Begging is asking for money and offering nothing at all in return. Penny for the Guy is asking to reward a creation with a bit of change.

Edited by David, 31 October 2007 - 07:21 PM.

[Asteroid]

I am doing a display with the scouts and have been asked to not even create a guy because of some peoples religious beliefs!

[dr thrust]

two words " nanny state"

[pyrotrev]

I will add another 4 words - stupid politically correct b*****s. When was Guy Fawkes ever a symbol for anyone's religion? - as far as I'm concerned he was probably the only person to ever enter the Houses of Parliament with honourable intentions. PS we have a guy competition at the village fireworks - no fund raising involved, but there are some amusing entries some years

Edited by pyrotrev, 01 November 2007 - 07:10 PM.

[Asteroid]

He was fighting a religious fight I believe. But i totally agree. Absolutely ridiculous

[David]

Probably the best way to support the tradition of Guy Fawkes is to argue that he is a symbol of the victory of lawful government over ter or wrist activity. The only drawback to this argument is that it is total bollocks.

Guy Fawkes, himself, was a professional soldier -a mercenary. He was hired by, and sympathised with, a group who plotted against the king and government and attempted to kill them. As such he could certainly be described as a Ter or wrist, or an assassin. The group he represented were not simply opposed to (as they saw it) unfair treatment of Catholics, they were also trying to further their own political agenda.

Ok, so far, so good- bad Guy Fawkes, good king and parliament...

Well, no. The governement was not, as we would see it, democratic. The King himself was very much disliked- a Scotsman (in an era when Scotland was an independent nation). The king and parliament were by no means allies- it would be like a modern day terrier a wrist targeting a both Busgh and Iran's president at the same time.

From the perspective of the English people, they stood to gain (or lose) little by these events. But a cause for celebration is a cause for celebration- and why not?

Edited by David, 01 November 2007 - 11:33 PM.

[icarus]

the one thing i find offensive is political correctness it should be ignored at all times !!!!

[Andrew]

some peoples religious beliefs!

What on earth has religion got to do with it these days??????

It also just happens that you are allowed to engage in religious ridicule, it's not against the law and so their beliefs are not really an issue, bloody catholics! Last year they tried to get halloween banned, cited it as devil worship!! WTF!

We still sing A penny loaf to feed the pope on the 5th.

[Andrew]

wrist activity

lol

Seriously though, no one should forget the events and the history. No one should belittle Fawkes as a terrorist/traitor. The motives of the plot were well founded by years of relentless persecution, something that is not tollorated today. Most do not know what serious persecution is like, it drives people to grave acts, for the time from our perspective the plot was justified. One positive outcome could be debated that outright Cathoilic rule did not insue. If this did happen the England as we know it today would simply not exist. What happend was a sucession of religious favour from one side to the other post 1605. Gradually over time these oscillations conveged with society as a whole becoming more tollorant. This is argued as a critical turning point in the history of England; as the alternative would be an England with a similar political and religious standing as Spain. The historically recent civil war in Spain was massively fueled by the catholic church. Spain suffered decades of a fascist dictatorship, which was accepted by and in part controlled by teh RC church. No doubt we would have suffered a similar 400 years as Spain. In England church control and extreamists faded faster and theses were replaced by a faster developing democratic and tollorant state. It took it's time but it certianly made it there a lot faster than Spain, even though RC backed Spainish and other hostilities were waged against England to regain control.

We have a lot to thank the prevention of the plot for, but it is also important to not forget the level of persecution that is required to enact such a plot. The people involved were not terrorists, they were freedom fighters aiming for the top and a military coup crossed with revolution.

[David]

What happend was a sucession of religious favour from one side to the other post 1605.

Actually after the plot, England was only ever ruled by a Catholic for three years, James II between 1685-1688. He was forced to abdicate by the military invasion of William of Orange (his protestant nephew/son in law).

Also the idea that the plotters were subject to persecution is very debatable. James I was certainly a very tolerant king on religious issues by the standards of the time.


The problem of viewing Guy Fawkes is we tend to think in modern terms- in 1605 Religion was very much a political issue, essentially a power struggle between rival groups. Personal faith had little or nothing to do with it.

Edited by David, 02 November 2007 - 02:39 PM.

[5thElement]

I seen a few kids in blackpool last weekend with guys, and i seen one somewhere else aswell, forgot where, so the tradition isnt dead, but it's pretty rare to see it these days!

[Stew]

Still happens in Lewes, Sussex. Bonfire will always be a tradition here!