CHILL's Bonfire Party
On November 5th was bonfire night. We hosted our local youth group's Bonfire Party, with Guy and slightly dangerous fireworks, however no one was hurt, Thankfully.
Above should be a link to a slide presentation of what happened that day.
Notice the guy's head is a globe, perhaps, a reference to the continuing threat of global terrorism facing Britian, or just that we didn't want to burn a football.
It crossed my mind that the differing fashions of a guy each year made the event of setting fire to him more relevent. I did not feel a patriotic urge, as one does when England or Team GB do well. instead it was more a relief, a sense of defiance. That someone 400 years ago was thwarted from destoying a peaceful institution, based on collaboration, honour and, yes ok, social unbalance, gross unfairness and religious persecution, but that it was done with a goal of life and civility, with an aim of order and allowing debate to flourish. As many journalists are pointing out again that the situation has not changed. Terrorist doctrine allows no compromise or discussion, but simply aims to destroy opposition, simply a position which is untenable to justify, tarring innocents with the same brush as the percieved villains.
Another strange notion I came across this Bonfire Night, was the percieved un-Christianness of burning a guy, in some way that it was blasphemous. This view may be based on mixing the so called pagan ritual of the burning man with the celebration of freedom. Burning a guy is not a religious statement, it is a political statement, celebrating the beginning of parliamentary debate, religious freedom and the ending of autocracy. It is no coincidence that the people meeting in that hall, were the people who seperated church and state, the Bishop Bancroft, who would hold the committees that would write the King James Bible, allowing England to be mostly free of religious persecution. Obviously belief is not entirely just political or just religious, but the political aspects of it, I don't think can be confused with an anti religious message.
posted by Ropertron @ 12:17 am
2 comments
2 Comments:
Jon
Very interesting bud.
I agree that bonfire night can't be viewed as an anti-relig thing. However, it is very much an anti-catholic thing. The whole story surrounding Guy Fawkes is one of Catholic v CofE hatred. Fawkes' attempt to blow up parliament was as much about terms of faith as it was terms of politics. his fate was also a reflection of this. This is a fact that time has consigned to the history books and removed from public consciousness - which I think, personally, is a good thing.
History lesson over. ( I foolishly took A-levels in Medieval Hist, Ancient Hist and Roman Politics - so I'm a walking cemetery...)
Cool blog.
Laters....
I do agree entirely with the anomymous comment. That it used to be an anti catholic celebration. This was because catholicism used to be the major threat to the realm, to an extent that we cannot realise today. (A modern equivilant would be similar to a tiny Christian East Timor's relationship with a vast Indeonesia bearing down upon it.) Therefore guy Fawkes night WAS an anti catholic thing but is not longer today, as you rightly point out, but more a festival of pro independence for the nation, harder to define, except in its definition about what it is opposing.
Post a Comment
<< Home