Allan Metcalf

This delightfully short book tells two interrelated stories. The first is the life of Guy Fawkes, his role in the Gunpowder Plot and his identification with the annual bonfire remembrances of the Plot. The second is how the first name of a great villain somehow became the origin of the increasingly common second person plural pronoun, you guys.

The 1605 plot to blow up King and Parliament at Westminster was initiated and led by a group of Catholic aristocrats. Guy Fawkes was the experienced soldier from Continental wars who had the technical knowledge to place and ignite the explosives. One of the main reasons why his name has become associated with the Gunpowder Plot is that he was arrested on site when the authorities stopped the plot shortly before Fawkes was to set off the explosion. By contrast, the man who initiated and led the conspiracy, Robert Catesby, was killed in seeking to escape capture. In the bonfire remembrances that occurred annually on November 5th, the effigy of Guy Fawkes was the symbol for the plot.

To provide context, the author starts with the English Reformation which had the ultimate effect of transforming England from a Catholic to a Protestant nation and recites the struggles between Catholics and Protestants during the 16th century, including prior Catholic conspiracies. He also talks about how the bonfire celebration was adopted and evolved in the American colonies, taking on more of an anti-papal tone because Guy Fawkes was relatively unknown. The American Revolution's opposition to King and Parliament created sympathy for the Gunpowder Plot, while George Washington sought to limit the celebrations in order to avoid anti-Catholic fervor when broad unity against the British was necessary. Also the bonfire celebration lost traction to the emerging Fourth of July holiday as well as Halloween. To the extent the name of Guy Fawkes was remembered, it lost some of its villainous overtones.

While the author may hope that the story of Guy Fawkes will attract readers, the main purpose of the book is to understand why and how his name became a pronoun in modern English. The author tells the story of second person pronouns in English and contrasts them with Continental languages, including French. What happened over time was that the second person singular pronoun (thou, thee, thine) went out of use. These pronouns were used by a person in the English hierarchy when speaking to a lower ranking person. They were not used in reverse; rather, "you" was used when addressing one's betters. In the 18th century, with the growth of egalitarianism, and with individuals taking umbrage if they were addressed "thou" by those who were confused about their social ranking, there was a reaction against the use of a second person pronoun based on one’s societal ranking. The Quakers demanded that all persons, whatever their rank, be addressed with "thou." What happened in fact was that thou began to disappear and the second person plural pronoun (you, yours) began to be used in place of thou and thee as the single second person pronoun in all situations, not just when speaking to one's betters. That created confusion in distinguishing between the single and plural “you” and thus opened up the need/desire for a new plural pronoun.

Exactly how Guy Fawkes was converted in everyday speech to become “you guys” is not clear. The author notes that in America, which also celebrated the annual remembrance, the connection with the historical facts was more tenuous and Guy Fawkes was also less known. Somehow the references to guy in these celebrations turned into “you guys” which then progressed into the general language, including English spoken outside the United States.

The author uses a broad range of sources in telling his stories, not just historical research, but also the use of language in English literature and, in the more recent period, statistics. He also contrasts you guys with the other main candidate in American English, you all, which has been largely confined to the South and seems to be in retreat. He also addresses the interesting development that the term “you guys” covers both men and women.

The author writes in a playful but often repetitive way seeking to create a sense of suspense that is difficult to maintain considering the principal subject matter, the evolution of language. He also seems to leave no stone unturned, especially in quoting relevant passages from literature. One of his objectives may have been to lengthen an already short book which probably could have been half the length it is. While this style can be mildly annoying, it does contribute a bit to the absurd atmosphere of a story of why and how the name of an English Catholic conspirator intending to blow up Westminster could become a benign pronoun.

Whatever one thinks about the style of the book, the author’s conclusions on the acceptance of you guys seems incontrovertible. Indeed, on the day I finished this book, I watched a segment of the PBS News Hour in which Amna Nawaz moderated a discussion among Amy Walter and Tamara Keith on Politics Monday, at the end of which Amna thanked “you guys” for their participation.… (plus d'informations)