IF YOU DON'T like this column then you might like to arrange a boycott of future editions. You know how such things work. You and your friends get up at six in the morning, fashion signs from cornflake boxes and stand outside The Irish Timesoffice yelling at anybody who dares to cross your circle of righteousness.
Oh, hang on. That’s not right. These days, you just write the word “boycott” beneath the relevant comment board and refrain from clicking the online edition.
Is there anything so pathetic as the contemporary movie boycott? A classic example is currently brewing on the outer moons of Tatooine. It seems that George Lucas has elected to make a few more digital alterations to the Star Wars saga before releasing it on Blu Ray. Appalled at the fact that (I’m honestly not making this up) the Ewoks now blink, large numbers of purists are angrily brandishing the b-word.
This is just the latest in a line of supposedly courageous boycotts of mainstream Hollywood product. Nearly a decade ago, some maniacs threatened to shun Sam Raimi's Spider-Manbecause the director had dared to replace Spidey's mechanical web-shooters with a queasy organic version. It became one of the biggest films of all time. After making pathetic denials that they were exhibiting racism, certain comic fans boycotted Thor because the makers had dared to cast a black actor as a Norse God. That film also did well at the box office.
Even more hopeless are the isolated protestations from individual punters. After news leaks that four lines of dialogue are to be cut from the latest Harry Potterfilm, the angry fan will rush to the IMDb page – or access so-called "Twitter" – and declare that he or she is to "boycott" the film.
Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! You are not, in any meaningful sense, boycotting the picture. You are choosing not to attend. By these standards, Screenwriter has, over the past few decades, "boycotted" Hollyoaks, Hetty Wainthropp Investigates,the novels of Dan Brown, two annual dental appointments, the RDS horse show and a Roy "Chubby" Brown gig.
As all domestic readers will be aware, the notion of the boycott emerged in late 19th century as part of the Irish Land League’s campaign. In more recent decades, commuters in Alabama, former consumers of Cape oranges and the United Farm Workers have used the technique to effect desirable change.
By way of contrast, the supposed movie boycotts organised by nuts on the internet are simply a way of making the participants feel good about themselves. They are of no more worth that pointless online petitions demanding the abolishment of this or the retention of that.
Unless you are actually inconveniencing yourself – and fighting for a worthwhile cause – you are not allowed to call your lack of participation in anything as “a boycott”.
I have spoken. If you don’t like it, then find another unreasonable column to line the budgie’s cage.
