Guy Fawkes in : how the seventeenth century English insurgent became an international political symbol Pratibha Rai Published: 2/2/2020

Keywords: resistance ; Hong Kong ; insurgency ; symbolism

1. Introduction

In a sea of umbrellas in Hong Kong, yellow vests in Paris, and black hoods in , one face sinisterly smiles up at the government; the of from the graphic novel, . This face depicts an historical person, Guy Fawkes, who was in charge of explosives during the of 1605, the famous failure of which the U.K celebrates every November. In the 1980s, Fawkes entered the global zeitgeist in the comic series V for Vendetta, where he features as the antihero in a dystopian, fascist England. Through the torque of legend, the mask of Guy Fawkes or ‘V’ is now an international symbol of political destabilisation for protestors. This article aims to disentangle the utterly fascinating and interdisciplinary web of how a seventeenth-century English insurgent became a resistance symbol, which recently prompted the anti-mask law in Hong Kong on 4 October 2019. The Guy Fawkes mask embodies the prismatic role of anonymity and disguise in empowering political resistance.

Broad Street Humanities Review, [Issue] www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 2 of 9

2. Discussion

Born to a Protestant family from York, Fawkes converted to Catholicism during his teenage years. As a Catholic, Fawkes was discontent with the persecution of his religious group who, in England, were barred from voting, owning land, and holding public office. This intolerance was not unique to his epoch but was perilously building through religious upheavals half a century before. The Reformation had unleashed religious and political instability throughout Europe, pitting Catholics against Protestants. A year after her accession Queen Elizabeth I and her advisers formulated a religious “settlement,” which envisaged a national Protestant church. In this period, it was an accepted and expected rule that all subjects within a state must adhere to the country’s official form of Christianity. In order to obtain this uniformity, the Elizabethan regime made being a practicing Catholic punishable by law and the act of importing or printing Catholic literature high treason. English Catholics hoped that Elizabeth’s successor, James I, whose mother was a Catholic, would bring a reign of peace. However, James continued to adhere to the 1559 settlement, thereby perpetuating its intolerant public policies. Furthermore, he ordered Catholic priests to leave the country and introduced legislation which denied Catholics the right to make wills. In this context of increased oppression and ingrained divisions, Guy Fawkes left England for the Netherlands and served in the army of Catholic-ruled Spain. As a talented soldier, he ascended the ranks and became notorious for his skills in handling explosives – a skill that caught the attention of another English Catholic named . It was Catesby who was the mastermind behind the Gunpowder Plot with its principal aim being to bomb the Houses of Parliament on the day of its ceremonial State Opening. The group of conspirators hoped that this explosion would be sufficient enough to assassinate the Protestant ruling elite and plant a new Catholic monarch on the throne. The Plot, as history informs us, was a disastrous failure. Fawkes was responsible for protecting the barrels of explosives, which were discreetly hidden in the ’ cellar. However, the plot was discovered before the explosives were detonated. Fawkes was then incarcerated in the Tower of London and after undergoing torture to force him to disclose the names of his fellow co-conspirators, he was found guilty for high treason and executed in due manner. The anniversary of the Plot was made an official holiday in Britain in which bonfires are lit and effigies of Fawkes are set alight.i The event planted itself so firmly in the British psyche that since 1928, the Houses of Parliament are still searched every November by the Yeomen of the Guard.

Though the Guy Fawkes mask is popularly associated with the graphic novel series V for Vendetta, the tradition of wearing of Fawkes had much earlier ancestors. From the eighteenth century, disguising oneself as Guy Fawkes became a cunning pretext for disorder and unpoliced revelry. In 1790, The Times documented instances where children were, “begging for money for Guy

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 3 of 9

Faux”.1 A report on 4 November 1802 described a similar event where, “a set of idle fellows…with some horrid figure dressed up as a Guy Faux" were begging and receiving money, consequently being sentenced to prison as, “idle and disorderly persons”.2 In the Victorian era, it became customary for people to dress as Fawkes, wearing a stylized mask with features similar to the mask we now associate with V for Vendetta: a thin goatee, an upturned moustache and arched eyebrows.3 Throughout the centuries, Guy Fawkes’ image morphed from religious extremist, pretext for idle crime to a populist underdog; a metamorphosis largely catalysed by the serialisation of his life in the 80s’ graphic novel V for Vendetta. The Fawkes character, simply known as ‘V’, lives in a futuristic dystopian Britain governed by a fascist government. Similar to his historical counterpart, he plans to bomb the Houses of Parliament but whereas Fawkes fails, V succeeds. V’s crusade is successful in large part due to his ability to hack the state’s gargantuan computer network. The reinvention of Fawkes through V, whose plan ultimately prevails, gives the mask an ominous portent: that this time, their ploy may lead to victory. The book and the accompanying movie released in 2005 foisted a new image of Guy Fawkes within the socio-political zeitgeist, just at the time when a new generation of movements were gaining momentum.

1 David Cressy, "The Fifth of November Remembered", in Myths of the English, ed. By Roy Porter (Polity Press, 1992), pp. 79–80

2 "The great annoyance occasioned to the public by a set of idle fellows", The Times (hosted at infotrac.galegroup.com), 4 November 1802.

3 Sara Barrett, ‘Opinion in “” <‘https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/opinion/guy-fawkes-day-v-for-vendetta.html> [accessed 6 January 2020]

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 4 of 9

Figure 1. A masked Guy Fawkes being paraded on , Public Domain, 1868.

The mask’s polemical energy gathered pace after appearing in various Web forums as it was adopted as a symbol for anti-establishment groups such , , the , and Anonymous for the Voiceless. The mask provided Anonymous with just that: anonymity. The mask’s affiliations with anti-government or anti-establishment movements enabled it to become an international symbol of resistance. In an event heavily allusive to the Gunpowder Plot, protestors in May 2009 began wearing the Guy Fawkes mask as they rallied over the controversy of British MPs’ expenses by detonating a fake barrel of gunpowder around Parliament. In subsequent years, the Occupy movement explicitly identified themselves with the mask. On Guy Fawkes Day of 2011, a Facebook invitation called for, “all OCCUPY protesters of the world to come together on 5 November to rally again for our efforts to end corruption and social injustice.” Similar to the 2009 , not only the mask but also its historical reputation provided the fulcrum for dissent. The mask’s re-appearance in the protests served to solidify the Guy Fawkes mask as a symbol of public rebellion. In recent times, V’s grinning visage has infiltrated the streets of Hong Kong during protests that began in June 2019, where resistance continues to be inflamed currently in 2020.

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 5 of 9

Figure 2. Anonymous supporters wearing Guy Fawkes masks, Los Angeles, Author: Vincent Diamante, Creative Commons

Why did Guy Fawkes’s mask in particular become such a symbolic confederate for millions of protestors around the world in the twenty-first century? Is it not ironic, even comically ignorant of protestors, to brandish a failed insurgent as the face of their efforts? The power of the Guy Fawkes’ mask may reside not in the teleological unfolding of the Gunpowder Plot but rather the dissent it represents and the lasting power the event had on public memory. While Guy Fawkes’ presence in twenty-first century protests might seem anachronistic, there is an historical continuity to Guy Fawkes’ face in our epoch; a face which symbolises dissatisfaction with the ruling elite; for Fawkes and his men, it was with a King who was not alleviating the oppression of his country’s Catholics, in Hong Kong, at plans to give extradition rights to mainland China. Furthermore, in 2011, Anonymous delivered a manifesto during OpTunisia, which unambiguously referenced the historical Guy Fawkes. On Guy Fawkes Night, it is customary to recite the rhyme:

Remember, remember, the fifth of November, The Gunpowder Treason and plot. I know of no reason why Gunpowder Treason, Should ever be forgot.

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 6 of 9

In an open letter to the government of Tunisia, Anonymous alluded to this whimsical rhyme by stating: “the tighter you squeeze, the more your citizens shall rebel against your rule. We will use this brief span of attention we’ve captured to deliver a clear and present message which we hope shall never be forgot.”4 Thus, Anonymous transformed the Gunpowder Plot from a failure to a promise of justice, from transience (‘brief span of attention’) to a traumatic message that outlasts time. It is not the failure of the Gunpowder Plot that protestors find alluring about Guy Fawkes but rather the fact that the Plot left a permanent impression on historical memory. The mask thereby exhumes the rebellious spirit of the Gunpowder Plot and evokes, as it did then, the sound of marching, agitation, battle cries, and turmoil bubbling under the surface of a seemingly ordered society.

Though the mask is saturated in ideology, it is worthwhile to pose a purely logistical question: what is the cost of ideology? What is the cost of resistance? The statistics are, similar to the history of the mask itself, illuminating and ironic. Rubie’s Costume Company based in New York licenses the right to sell the V mask from the copyright owner, WarnerMedia. According to a report from Bloomberg in 2016, the costume company had substantial contracts with factories in China, which accounted for 70% of its production. The New York Times also calculated that from 2011, it was the company’s best-selling mask, with more than 100,000 sold each year, compared to only five thousand or so other masks. Furthermore, it is also listed as the best selling mask on the websites: .co.uk, Amazon.com, and Amazon.de. It is ironic that the mask, worn by anti-establishment protestors suspicious of corporations, is in fact a lucrative commodity that feeds a major corporation: WarnerMedia. The masks have appeared in protests in every continent around the world; such as the protests in Lebanon against inequality and government corruption, which led to the resignation of the Prime Minister Saad Hariri. Near Martyr’s Square, the centre of Beirut’s protests, Quartz found a vendor who was selling fifty-sixty plastic varieties of the Guy Fawkes mask each day since the protests began. This vendor told them, “This mask comes from Yiwu [in Zhejiang]. We import them, and they go to a number of countries, not just Lebanon”. From these statistics, it is notable how countries where protests are rife operate the supply and demand chain for the V mask.

The accessibility of the mask to all rungs of society caused alarm when the Bahraini government was faced with the Fawkes mask during the Bahraini uprising. In February 2013, Hassan Fakhro, the Commerce Minister, ordered a ban on the import of the Guy Fawkes masks. In the opinion of the Industry and Commerce Ministry, the ban of the so-called “revolution mask,” was implemented due to concerns over “public safety”.5 Any individual caught wearing

4 Anonymous, ‘AN OPEN LETTER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF TUNISIA’ [accessed 6 January 2020]

5 Sorcha Pollak, Bahrain bans Guy Fawkes mask’, Al Akhbar (Lebanon), February 2013.

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 7 of 9 the mask faces arrest. Bahrain installed the mask ban a few months following a similar decision made by another country, the . Soon after, in May 2013, the Saudi Arabian government also banned the import of the masks as well as banning the selling of the mask, stipulating that they would confiscate any mask found on sale. The Saudi Ministry of Interior claimed that the mask, “instils a culture of violence and extremism.” Several days later, the measure was extended to the destruction of all Guy Fawkes masks in Saudi stores. Thus, in the strange time-warp of history, Guy Fawkes’ act of rebellion in 1605 England has since become so incendiary that several Middle Eastern countries perceive even wearing his mask as a form of criminal activity. Recently, Hong Kong followed suit with a complete mask ban. For months, pro-democracy protesters took to the streets behind Guy Fawkes masks to conceal their identities from police, parents and employers, but also to protect them from the tear gas fired amidst the demonstrating crowds. The violent clashes became so intolerable that at midnight on 4 October 2019, the Chinese territory's government decided to enact a ban on all masks. However, the ban only escalated rage as legal challenges were launched and thousands of angry protestors took to the streets, ripping down a banner commemorating seventy years of communist rule and setting it alight before a cheering crowd. Why did a mask ban elicit such a provocative reaction? What is it about our right to anonymity that makes it so offensive when it is taken away?

An important part of the answer may lie in an anthropological study of the significance of masks in human cultures throughout time. A common form of mask in African and Oceanian cultures for example is the admonitory mask, which usually cover the entire features of the wearer and is seen as a vehicle for discipline. In many cultures around the world, the mask is associated with a judge who wore a mask in order to protect them from future recriminations. In these cultures, the mask represents a sanctioned spirit from the past, which assumes responsibility for the decision levied on the culprit.6 Tibetan masks similarly represent supernatural beings and spirits who enable the decision-making process and deliver warnings.7 The role of masks in international protests could also be seen within this power structure; the dominant power being the mask-wearer in the guise of the arbiter, incriminating an unjust government and dispensing the relevant punishment. Another power-play is added by wearing a mask from popular culture such as the V for Vendetta mask, which makes protest appear as a form of entertainment or theatre. The mask is thus frightening as well as comical. This ultimately subverts power structures as the public creates a story in which they are the protagonist – they have full agency over a ‘game’ that the authorities have no power over because they do not know its rules. Ironically however, the masked protestors

6 Paul S. Wingert, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc, https://www.britannica.com/art/mask-face-covering/The-functions-and-forms-of-masks

7 James H. Birx, Encyclopedia of Anthropology, volume 1 (Thousand Oaks, Ca.; London : SAGE, 2006), p. 1548

Pratibha Rai

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 8 of 9 are not only creators but also the creation. That is to say, their anti-government sentiments have been born out of the inequalities that the authorities have created. This is not dissimilar from Frankenstein’s monster hunting down his creator, Victor Frankenstein, to interrogate him on why he created such a monster. In the movie Joker, Arthur Fleck, (the Joker) is told by his social worker and counsellor that he can no longer receive the counselling he needs because the government has decided to defund the mental health service. The subsequent fatal consequences of his actions, his self-destructiveness and mockery of society can be thus seen as a result of him not receiving the support that should be available in an equitable society. In this perspective, the rage of the Hong Kong protestors in response to the mask ban can be understood; you have created this mess and now, this is your punishment for ignoring a problem you are responsible for creating. Thus, the mask is at once judgement, solidarity, omen, creator, and creation.

We have traversed over four hundred years to analyse the evolution of the Guy Fawkes mask in the eye of the most rebellious storms. While the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot and the execution of the perpetrators might have given relief to the English ruling elite in 1605, the mask of Guy Fawkes or V instils panic to governments around the world today. As a mascot and ‘Vox Populi’ for anti-government causes, his mask ferments public dissent and radical rage. The grafting of the Gunpowder Plot in popular culture and legend evidences that the underdog can never be silenced even by death and a perceived failure is merely passing on the torch to the next generation who are dissatisfied by a complacent system. While the contemporary image of Guy Fawkes is loosely related to his original context, as long as there are individuals who refuse to accept government inaction and corruption, his image shall continue to ‘never be forgot’.

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 9 of 9

Bibliography

1. The Gunpowder Plot, House of Commons Information Office, Revised January 2004.

2. David Cressy, "The Fifth of November Remembered", in Myths of the English, ed. By Roy Porter (Polity Press, 1992), pp. 79–80

3. "The great annoyance occasioned to the public by a set of idle fellows", The Times (hosted at infotrac.galegroup.com), 4 November 1802.

4. Sara Barrett, ‘Opinion in “The New York Times” <‘https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/opinion/guy-fawkes-day-v-for-vendetta.html> [accessed 6 January 2020]

5. Anonymous, ‘AN OPEN LETTER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF TUNISIA’ [accessed 6 January 2020]

6. Sorcha Pollak, Bahrain bans Guy Fawkes mask’, Al Akhbar (Lebanon), February 2013.

7. Paul S. Wingert, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc, https://www.britannica.com/art/mask-face-covering/The-functions-and-forms-of-masks

8. James H. Birx, Encyclopedia of Anthropology, volume 1 (Thousand Oaks, Ca.; London : SAGE, 2006), p. 1548

© 2020 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Broad Street Humanities Review, 1 www.broadstreethumanitiesreview.com