イングランドでは有名な祭りであるガイフォークス(Guy Fawkes)の夜は、イングランドからすれば犯罪者のガイフォークスを引きずりまわして火をつけ、花火をあげるお祭りだ*1。
この有名な祭りが安全上の問題から、下火にせざるをえないとIHTで報じていた。
この記事によれば、花火はお金がかかるという経済上の理由もあるようだが、健康・安全に関する法律がやかましくなり、伝統的な行事も下火にならざるをえないという事情があるようだ。
イングランドのヨーク(York)という町は、アメリカ合州国のNew YorkのYorkである。オランダ統治時代はニューアムステルダムという名前だったニューヨークは、イギリス統治になって、New Yorkと改名した。その本家本元が、イングランドのヨークに他ならない。「ニューヨークのヨークという町は、そもそもはイングランドにあり、イングランドの地図をよーく見ると…」と、下らない冗談を言いながら、高校生に地名のもつ歴史の重要性に気づいてほしいと教えてきた。こうした地名の歴史には、植民地的な支配・被支配の関係が透けて見えるからだ。
それで、このヨークこそがガイフォークスゆかりの地だから、ガイフォークスの夜が下火になれば、観光の目玉であるガイフォークスを売り出せないということになって観光上マイナスであるとIHTで報じていた。
ローマカトリックと袂を別ち、ローマカトリックを弾圧し始めたイギリス国教会派のジェームズ1世の時代、熱心なローマカトリックのメンバーだったガイフォークスは、1605年11月5日に、ジェームズ1世殺害を企て、議会爆破の計画を立案に加わった。ガイフォークスは、いわば実行部隊で、宮殿地下にもぐり、火薬の点火の任にあたっていたが、事前に発覚し、ガイフォークスは逮捕されてしまった。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes
今日ではイギリス人でもこうした時代背景に疎いようだが、こうした歴史的事件をもとに、11月5日にはガイフォークスの人形がひきずりまわされて燃やされたり、花火をおこなう風習があるのである。
さてイギリスといっても、イングランド、ウェールズ、スコットランド、北アイルランドの連合体だ。United Kingdom(UK)、つまりイギリス連合王国といわれるゆえんである。政治的には、イングランドの歴史的な支配と優位性、またカトリック教徒が多いアイルランドとの宗教的対立があるから、きっとガイフォークスの評価も分かれるに違いない。北アイルランドでは、ガイフォークの夜は、当然といえば当然だが、北アイルランドではやらないようだし、スコットランドでは、自由を求めて戦った英雄という評価がガイフォークスに与えられているようだ*2。これは、イングランド憎しのスコットランドらしい。
英語教師をやってきた私は、アメリカ合州国、アオテアロア・ニュージーランド、オーストラリア、ハワイ、そしてアイルランドと、いわゆる英語圏をまわってきたが、近場のアイルランドまで行きながら*3、イングランドは避けてきた。私には、ある種のルサンチマン、あれやこれやと格闘させられてきたイングランド語の発祥の地であるイングランドは、最後に取っておこうという気持ちがあるのである。
「奴」を意味する英語のguyは、ガイフォークスが語源だと言われている。
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/04/europe/journal.php
A U.K. Bonfire Night gets doused
By Sarah Lyall
Published: November 4, 2007
YORK, England: Say York, and Britons might think of its glorious cathedral or its rich Roman history. And they would surely think of Guy Fawkes, the city's most famous deceased resident.
His failure to blow up Parliament in 1605 - and subsequent torture and grisly death - are enthusiastically celebrated with fireworks, bonfires and the burning of Fawkes effigies across Britain every Nov. 5.
York, along with many other British municipalities, has often been the scene of blowout celebrations to commemorate Bonfire Night, as it is called. But the city is not having one this year. No one wanted to spend the money to "address the health and safety measures of having large numbers of people in close proximity to the fireworks," a spokeswoman for the City of York Council said.
The news has raised some criticism in York, where many residents think it is perverse not to have a Guy Fawkes celebration in his hometown. But Steve Galloway, who leads the City Council, said in an interview that a fireworks display would be prohibitively expensive, perhaps at least £100,000, or $200,000, because of such things as crowd control, temporary lighting and crash barriers, not including the fireworks themselves. An accumulation of regulations also made it seem too difficult this year.
Not everyone takes the tradition in the proper spirit, either, Galloway said. "There are those who feel that Guy Fawkes and his attempt to blow up a democratic institution is not something you want to celebrate," he said.
The cancellation has put the city's tourism bureau in a difficult position.
"We get hundreds of calls from people saying, 'We want to celebrate Bonfire Night in the home of Guy Fawkes, and what are you doing?" said Gillian Cruddas, chief executive of the York Tourism Bureau. "We have to say, 'Actually, nothing.' It's quite embarrassing, really."
Beyond that, York's fireworks-free day has provoked a degree of soul-searching in Britain, which loves its traditions and is ever alert to new examples of how safety regulations are thwarting people's efforts to enjoy them.
"You name it and somebody, somewhere behind a desk, will quickly find a regulation that bans it," Michael Nicholson, a television correspondent, wrote in The Daily Mail in an opinion article. He gave other examples, like banning of an annual pantomime show in Kent after the local vicar was told that he was required to pay about £700 to "weight test" an iron beam carrying a light bulb and the organizers were told that they were not allowed to store costumes and scenery behind or under the stage.
Christmas lights displays in towns, as much a feature of the traditional Christmas season here as eating plum pudding, are another problem. Stephen Alambritis, spokesman for the Federation of Small Businesses, said many municipalities and businesses were unwilling to spend the money to comply with safety rules governing their installation.
Only registered electricians can put up the lights, and they are required to use cherry-pickers, not ladders, Alambritis said in an interview. Every light bulb has to be tested every year to ensure that it is electrically safe and that it will not "flash in someone's eyes." He said he had heard of one municipality that leaves its Christmas lights up all year around rather than pay the $100,000 or so required to put them up and take them down every year.
"It's a sad state of affairs," Alambritis said. "Each year, it becomes more difficult as local authorities become more risk-averse."
But this time of year, when the air is thick with smoke from bonfires and heavy with the sound of fireworks, people are most upset about what they see as the dwindling of one of their favorite old customs. Last year, rather than trying to meet the safety requirements for building an actual bonfire, a rugby club in Devon showed 1,400 spectators a short movie of a previously filmed bonfire.
"It's just ridiculous," said Rob Anderson, the leader of the Labour opposition in the Slough Borough Council, which decided not to have a bonfire this year. It will have fireworks, though, along with an Asian Elvis impersonator.
"On Bonfire Night, you have a bonfire," Anderson said. "Unfortunately, the people running the council seem to have other ideas, but they don't seem too clear about the reason why not."
Among other things, the Slough authorities have argued that having a bonfire would violate environmental laws, upset residents from foreign countries with no tradition of Guy Fawkes day, and kill animals who settle into the wood before it is set alight and are unable to escape in time.
"In past years I have gone and looked at the embers of Slough's bonfire, and you could see hundreds of animal bones," Richard Stokes, the council leader, told The Slough Observer.
Supporters of the tradition point out that in the absence of organized fireworks and bonfires displays, people are likely to build unsafe bonfires in their backyards or set off their own fireworks in a reckless manner. But tough new fireworks regulations have made it harder to obtain the really dangerous ones that used to blow people's fingers off.
Even so, in York, the city government is convinced that it has done the right thing.
"If you were someone who had been hit by a firework, particularly one of the more powerful ones," said Galloway, the City Council leader, "you'd take the view that your health and safety are more important than making a few fairly cheap points about bureaucracy."
