Guy Fawkes Fallout

and the next question--
if its the case, did it extend to the ira, will it extend to muslims ?

the how can you there is genuine cuirosity, for history and context--and not accustory at all.

and this might be too close, and we can delete it, if it would make people feel comfortable.

but their seems to be an underground (30 in the top 100 britions poll by the bbc is a pretty big underground), in addition to moore, in addition to some other folk cultures, in opposition to the standard folk readings.

i am curious about how they are intergrated, and how they will be intergrated.

like martin says, they are v. different situations: fawkes was not trying to kill innocent (of course, these terrorists don't consider any of their victims innocent) people but the powered and oppressive

there is v. little connection, save explosives and fawkes' didn't even get to use his

crossposts

lets answer this question first.
is that true.
if it isnt, delete this thread.

if it is, then how does that oppositonal claiming work in context of the last 30 years.

and also, does the "victim" change, does the anti papist subtext in the case of fawkes get imprinted on other terrorists.

and what about the folk saying "he was the only man to go to Parliament with honourable intentions"

er, i don't think they're being entirely serious, dude. i think it's, y'know, a bit of a joke. "ho ho, blowing up politicians. ho ho ho."

or morrissey talking about him as a genius

it's morrissey, FFS. anything to get a rise out of people. he's a knob and he talks shit.

or voting him one of britians greatest folks.

i have a feeling the first answer comes into play here.

Well yes, of course there has been, but I'm not aware of Guy Fawkes Night itself being used to celebrate him. I'm not sure how it's commemorated - probably not at all.

and i dont think yo uget to 30 with it all being a joke, and i think jokes sometimes say something larger. (and this is where blount comes and calls me humourless.)

and we havent really talked about moore.

or if there was any discussion of what it meant, or if it was recontextualised in the ira cases, when there was a real threat about blowing up the parliment buildings.

if this is too close, then i can back off, im not englisih, and im just wondering

teh hobb is right: nobody really thinks about it at all. it's just an excuse for a big fucking bonfire, innit? people have very, very short memories.

does anyone sing the november song

Nobody remembers more than the first two lines.

it's just an excuse for a big fucking bonfire, innit?

OTM. This even applies in Lewes, where until a few years ago they burned The Pope instead of Guy Fawkes.

(a few years ago someone pointed out that it was a bit silly burning the pope still; so now they make an effigy of whatever demon the tabloids most hate at the moment)

or if there was any discussion of what it meant, or if it was recontextualised in the ira cases, when there was a real threat about blowing up the parliment buildings.

The sort of things you talk about are only going to be discussed by a handful of leftwing sociologists and literary theorists. Nobody else gives a toss.

(why is it that literary and social theorists like to adopt the word "theory" to refer to only their own discipline, as if it is somehow the primary form of human thought? Or do they? I'm assuming that they do from the titles of the books they write; or at least the titles of the books that were on the library shelves five or ten years ago)

But this year they get a BRAND NEW POPE to burn! Surely that's got to be better than doing Blair or Bush or Saddam for the umpteenth time. Unless the nation has become so disengaged with politics that they'll be burning a giant Makosi or something.