LONDON â€" A decision by authorities in Bahrain to outlaw Guy Fawkes masks looks like a pretty desperate and ineffective way of crushing dissent.
Officials at borders and ports were ordered this week to be on the lookout for anyone trying to import the masks, which have been adopted by pro-democracy demonstrators in the small Arab kingdom.
The ban is unlikely to deter the hardy Bahraini protestors.
It will certainly do nothing to dent the popularity of the masks as symbols of international anti-establishment dissent from Wall Street to Tahrir Square. If anything, it will enhance it.
But how did a reactionary 17th century English sectarian end up as the symbolic hero of a global movement that espouses freedom, fairness and justice
The real Fawkes was among a group of would-be bombers who, had their Gunpowder Plot succeeded, might now be remembered as having heralded an era of absolutist rule. (Fawkes had previously fought in the service of autocratic Spain against the freedom-loving Dutch Republic.)
As it turned out, the failed plot to blow up Parliament and the protestant king, James, set back the emancipation of the conspirators’ fellow Catholics by 200 years.
Although the November 5 anniversary of the plot long since lost its anti-Catholic overtones, Fawkes remained the seductive villain of the celebrations.
His masked effigies, put together by schoolchildren in Britain out of old clothes stuffed with newspaper, were annually put to the torch in backyards across the country to the accompaniment of fireworks â€" at least until health and safety concerns took the fun out of Bonfire Night.
In recent years, Fawkes has become the chosen avatar of anti-authoritarian movements that oppose the unaccountable power of governments, corporations and religious sects.
The credit, o! r the blame, goes to the makers of “V for Vendettaâ€, a 2005 movie based on a graphic novel set in a futuristic and dystopian Britain, ruled by a brutal dictator. The dissident hero of the film hides his identity behind the now familiar Guy Fawkes mask.
The plastic mask has since emerged, via the brand-promoting influence of an Internet meme, as the must-have accessory at every street protest.
Supporters of Anonymous, the hacker movement, adopted it to disguise their identities and to promote their cause in demonstrations against the Church of Scientology and other targets.
“It’s a symbol of what Anonymous stands for, of fighting evil governments,†one mask-wearer told my colleague Nick Bilton at a San Francisco demonstration in 2011.
The Guy Fawkes craze provided an unintended boost to the bottom line of TimeWarner, which owns rights to the image and is paid a licensing fee for the sale of each mask.
Anonymous now offers online guidance on where to find alternatives that avoid the trademark fee.
All efforts to argue against the Guy Fawkes phenomenon, widely adopted by the worldwide Occupy movement, are probably doomed to failure, despite efforts to explain the history.
It has sparked some lively online debates, with even protest activists arguing Fawkes is an odd choice as a hero. Apologists argue that at least Fawkes died for his cause, even if it was not one they would support.
Perhaps it’s time to look for a more appropriate symbol for a worldwide protest movement that has been boosted by public outrage at government failures and market excess. What about Robin Hood, who stole from t! he rich t! o give to the poor
Does the ubiquitous Guy Fawkes make you squirm And who would you pick as a more appropriate symbol of people power Let us know your thoughts.
