The Musings of a Confused Man

I finished "reading" (even after a year, it still seems strange to call it "reading" when I'm actually listening to the book on audio) Terry Pratchett's The Wee Free Men for the second time. I really wish that Harper Audio would get around and put more of Pratchett's books on audio. The man's writing is absolutely incredible.

Personally, what amazes me about this book is the almost fairy tale "tone" to it. I don't remember quite the same tone in Small Gods (which I read the "old fashioned way") or Monstrous Regiment. Indeed, it makes me wonder if the man has a wide range of writing styles and "tones" at his disposal. Considering the number of books that he's written, I can't say as that would surprise me.

It's easy to get lost in this particular book, in my opinion. The Pictsies and young Tiffany are such great characters. They grow on you, and in a good way. And the interraction between them is absolutely incredible. When you look at the way that the Pictsies appraoch which suggests that a good head butt to be a proper and effective resolution to any problem to Tiffany's incredible tendency to over-intellectualize and analyze every little detail -- especially for a nine year old girl -- you end up with a curious interplay between them. It makes for a humorous part of the story.

And just for fun, Pratchett seems to like to throw in some legitimate spirituality. I find myself almost wondering if he does it just to see if anyone notices. For example, when Tiffany and the Queen have their final confrontation, Tiffany "wakes up." Pratchett describes the effects of this awakening as being a sort of hyper-awareness. Every scent, every sound, every pattern becomes blindingly clear to to Tiffany. And in this sense of awareness, Tiffany is able to both defeat the Queen and realize that she has to "go back to sleep." During this time, she acknowledges that no one could maintain this state of hyper-awareness indefinitely. She comments to herself that it would prevent them from getting anything done. To paraphrase her, "you could spend all day studying a rose, but the cheese would go unmade."

It seems to me that there is a real truth that applies to witchcraft in this. Witches seek a sort of heightened awareness, themselves. In her book, Witchcraft: Theory and Practice, De Angeles suggests an exercise that requires one to go about their routine for an hour each day taking note of as many details around them as they can, to become "fully aware" of everything. As part of this excercise, she also recommends sitting down sometime after the hour and writing down everything your mind recorded during the exercise. The idea behind doing this for a number of days is that it will stretch your awareness, enabling you to note more and more details.

But, as Tiffany says, this has to serve more purpose than creating a situation in which "we spend all day studying a rose and allow the cheese to go unmade." After all, witches are (in theory, at least) a practical bunch. So what is the purpose of such an exercise?

It seems to me that the point of becoming "more aware" is so that we can better control what it is we're aware of in the first place. By "waking up" -- to use Pratchett's term -- we give ourselves a chance to "go back to sleep," but to control how we "sleep." We have a greater control of what we're aware of. We're more able to filter out those details that are unimportant while not missing the ones that are -- even if they are rather subtle.

And perhaps the other part of this exercise is just to make sure we do realize we're "asleep." Perhaps a large part of this exercise is to bring us to the point that we understand that no matter how "aware" we think we are, there are still those little details, those subtle nuances, that slip past us without notice. Perhaps this is to help keep us humble and to remind us to question our "facts" on a situation from time to time.

Today, I ran to Waldenbook's to pick up my order. I got a copy of both Witchcraft Today and The Meaning of Witchcraft by Gerald Gardner. After being told that they weren't available in the U.S. six to nine months ago, I was finally able to order a copy of them. Of course, I have used copies of both, but I was glad to get brand new copies. Especially since my used copy of Witchcraft Today is so old the pages are just about falling out and my copy of The Meaning of Witchcraft has a blank (misprinting) page in it. That was annoying when I found it. So I'm glad to have new, in print copies.

Personally, I'm ecstatic that Gardner's books are back in print. I loved reading them, and I think that they are very telling. I look at some of the things that Gardner makes so abundantly clear (such as the Goddess and God being "the little gods" rather than an Infinite Creator) that most people today never even stop to consider. There's just so much in his books that most Pagans don't even seem to know about these days.

Unfortunately, I don't expect that they'll sell many copies. It seems to me that the current consumer tendency towards "how to" books will keep Gardner's books to a rather small readership. Because after all, he doesn't give careful instructions on how to do any spells or rituals. In fact, he doesn't give any such details at all. Sure, he describes a couple things, but not in enough detail to do them effectively. His books are informative and descriptive rather than instructive. And because of that, most people will likely toss it aside. Heck, I doubt they'll even make it to the shelves on most bookstores. To be honest, I even told Jeanine an Waldenbooks not to bother stocking them, despite the fact that they're excellent books.

Of course, the "anniversary edition" of Witchcraft Today irks me in its own right. They've made it an "expanded edition" by adding extra essays from "big names" in Paganism. These "big names" include Judy Harrow, the founder of the Protean tradition; Ronald Hutton, of Triumph of the Moon fame; and Wren Walker, co-founder of The Witch's Voice. Now, let me say right up front that I have no problems with any of these individuals. They are all respectable individuals that have made good contributions to Paganism in general. And even their essays in this book aren't bad in their own right. My only annoyance with it all is that my first skim of this "added material" is primarily there to make the book appealing to the "Wicca is what you want to make it" crowd by stroking their egos. It's all about how Gardner was an "innovator" in his own days or how "Wicca" has changed since his day. I'm sorry, but I just find that sad. Why not let the man's book stand on its own right? Why not embrace the fact that the man was a Traditionalist and wrote from a Traditionalist standpoint. Why must everything be made to cater to the "eclectic" community.

Oh wait, that's where the money is, right? *sigh* Somedays, I hate that the publishing industry is a business.

I got to cassette 14 of "Wicked" only to find out that it had a manufacturing flaw (the tape was twisted during asembly). Nothing like getting to the last "chapter" of a book, only to find the "pages ripped out"!

I actually sat down and went through the entire tape from end to end, just to make sure that it wasn't something that could be fixed by hand. It's not. Either the tape needs to be cut and re-spliced, or the whole assembly needs to be taken apart and one of the spindles switched around.

So naturally, I went out to the publisher's (Recorded Books, LLC) website, found a support number, and called, asking for a replacement. And was promptly told they couldn't help me because I didn't buy the stupid thing direct. No, I bought it at Barnes and Noble. So now, I have to run to Barnes and Noble (an hour away, no less), take the entire box back, and deal with them to try to get a full replacement. And of course, do you think I have the receipt? Of course not! I had no intention of returning it! It would've been so much easier if Recorded Books would've been so kind as to take care of the mess for me. But no, that would've been too accomodating of them. Thanks a lot! (Don't be surprised if I start writing "Return to Sender" on the catalogs you mail me every month out of spite.)

Hopefully Barnes and Noble will exchange it for me without too much trouble.....*sigh*

Oh, and let me just say that the ribbons in cassettes are terribly staticy! The darn thing clung to everything while I was unwinding and rewinding it. You'd think that a piece of plastic covered in rust wouldn't attract so much static.....

It's a bit crazy here tonight. The kids are really carrying on. Their mother is currently working on rounding them up and sending them to bed. As I sit here listening to their insanity, I find myself wondering how long it's going to take them to calm down and actually fall asleep. I half suspect that we're going to end up wishing that we had some tranquilizers or something. Ah well, hopefully I'll get a few quiet hours before I head for bed. Besides, I got plenty of quiet time earlier today. So I can't complain.

When my sister was getting ready to go to her in-laws, I decided to take a quick nap. I figured that I needed it after staying up until after 1am. I was planning a nice short nap, but I ended up dozing for a full two hours. Oops! But I think I needed it, so it was all good.

Once I got done napping, I decided to read Witchcraft Today. I had three chapters left to read and I decided to finish it tonight. That way, it's all fresh for the book discussion. I do need to reread chapter two though. I plan on rereading each chapter as we start to discuss it, and Brian just called for the start of the chapter two discussion.

I've enjoyed reading the book this time around. Last time I read it (I think that was back in this past winter), I didn't get as much out of it. I guess I'm just in a better mental space to be able to appreciate what I'm reading this time. (I remember reading many of the quotes from the "What Gardner Said" site I love and being surprised at what I didn't remember, so I was glad to reread it anyway.) One of the things that I'm really noticing this time around is the number of times he repeats certain things. He tells about certain beliefs or about certain practices multiple times. In fact, there were a few times that I had to make sure I didn't accidentally "jump back" in the book because it sounded so familiar. Though each time he repeated something, I usually noticed he phrased it a bit differently or seemed to almost look at "another angle." (Not exactly, but I don't know how to express it better.) I'm thinking that these repetitions and the subtle differences in the presentation might be good to look into. I'm thinking at some point, I might reread with an eye to writing down the repeated material, copying what is said each time to look at it all side by side at some point. I'm not sure if it'll prove worthwhile, but I think there's only one way to find out.

I went for my walk this evening. I didn't get out of bed or get laundry started early enough to commence my walk in the afternoon as has become my custom. And without clean laundry, my only other option was to walk in the nude. The chances of that happen are one in a google. Maybe even one in a google plex. Besides, considering the temperature out right now, that's jut not an option.

Overall, I give my exercise effort a B this week. I'm half tempted to go with a B-, but I think that's being too hard on myself. I actually managed to walk four days this past week. It's only one less than the five that I'm aiming for. I missed yesterday's walk because, quite frankly, I wasn't feeling well enough to go for a walk. I wasn't sure that I wouldn't get half way through it and suddenly find myself in dire need of a bathroom -- which would be nowhere to be found.

After my walk tonight, I went out and bought some music. I bought a sampler of trance music. I'm checking it out now. It's actually pretty good. I'd love to get more. Now I just have to find out who I might like. That's always the fun part. I know absolutely nothing about music. And to be honest, I don't have a huge desire to learn. I'm very superficial about my music. All I want to know is "this song sounds nice."

I also ran to Friendly's for supper. I had a lovely bacon cheeseburger. One of my favorite things. I was in a mood for some good beef. I probably had way too much, but it was worth it.

While there, I also read some. Friendly's is my favorite reading spot, after all. Much less distractions than at home. I continued on in my reading of Huson's book, "Mastering Witchcraft." I'm still having mixed feelings about it. I still think the guy's being more than a little pretentious. What gets me is that he always adds "of art" to the end of most things he's talking about. "Using your brush of art, write these runes on it with your paint of art." It just strikes me as being ridiculously wordy. I just have trouble imagining any of the witches I know and respect -- all who seem to be rather down to earth and plain spoken -- using such phrases.

Of course, the underlying reason for using such phrases also leaves me wondering. He's one of these people who seem to think that every little thing that you use in magic should only be used in magic. It should never be used for anything else. Now, in many cases, I agree with him. I think that the major altar tools -- such as the knife, the cup, and the censer -- should usually only be used for those purposes for which they were consecrated. There are good and sound reasons for this. But I'm not sure that really applies to such things as paint and other supplies. These are not the "great tools." These are "things a witch finds useful." And it seems that the no-nonsense style of witch magic would call for just pulling whatever was needed from an already existing of "mundane items." You need a piece of red thread? You go to your sewing kit, get the spool of red yarn that you bought to repair that dress, and you cut off what you need for your magic. You need to paint symbols on a tool or talisman? You grab the paint cans from when you painted the bedroom and you use a small quantity of it. Now sure, maybe the paint should be consecrated. So you pour out the small amount you will use into a smaller container and you consecrate it. You don't consecrate the entire bucket, thereby risking wasting it if you don't use it before it dries up. And I see no need to go buy something special for magic when you have a perfectly usable quantity of the same thing already.

I don't know, I just see the idea of keeping two separate sets of supplies for "mundane" and "magical" uses as entirely impractical. And that goes against the nature of witchcraft, in my opinion.

This morning, I decided to watch Disney's animated rendition of "Snow White" while I ate breakfast. It's your typical sweet and sappy Disney movie. We all know the pattern of these tales fairly well. The heroine starts out in rags, finds herself in a position of threat, hides away, makes some friends, is discovered by her nemesis, is "destroyed," is avenged, and is then revived by true love.

As I sat watching it, I had an idea. "Hey, let's read the original version out of our copy of Grimm's Fairy Tales." So after the movie was over, I rand upstairs, located my cherished book, and began to read it.

Man, I always knew Disney liked to change things, but I didn't realize how much they changed things until this reading. I had usually assumed they tended to just make things less gory (or to be faux witty about it, remove the most grim parts of Grimm). But man, they even changed the natuere of the seven dwarfs. In the original tale as told (or recorded, as is more accurate) by Jacob ad Wilhelm, the dwars were actually quite meticulous in their own housekeeping. In their written tale, Snow White (who it might also be noted was originally called Little Snow White, as she was only nine) found a spotless house in excellent order. Yes, the dwarfs do tell her that she has to cook and clean if she stays, but in the tale, it's apparently not because they need her services. Knowing that dwarfs in Teutonic mythology and lore are generally seen as the embodiment of industriousness, it seems to me that the original interpretation of the seven dwarfs' conditions to Snow White have more to do with the idea that one must make oneself productive in some way in order to stay in the realm of the dwarfs.

The other thing that stuck out to me is that in the written tale, it's not the Prince's kiss that awakens Snow White from her slumber. In fact, the Prince doesn't kiss her at all. Instead, when he comes to stay with the seven dwarfs and sees the beautiful maiden asleep in her coffin, he begs the dwarfs to allow him to take her back to his castle as "his most treasured possession." (We'll try to keep the inner feminist from barking too loudly about that poor choice of words on the tale-spinners' part.) While he is transferring Snow White and her coffin to his castle, the wagon hits a bump which dislodges the bit of poisoned apple from her throat. That is what revives her, not love's first kiss. Quite a difference, eh?

Now, I don't mean to bash Disney for these changes. Disney's animated movie is a work of beauty in its own right, and I'll hopefully enjoy it many more time times in my life. But that doesn't change the fact that it's very different from the tale as written down by the Brothers Grimm, and I'm glad I read their version as well. It just seems to be packed with so many details. In fact, I hope to explore why the story-tellers of old (those who actually recounted these tales to the Brothers) would have mentioned them. After all, these are folk tales, (and folk tales that come from the same cultural groups that developed the myths of my gods no less, so they're likely of value to me)and that means that they likely have much symbolism that would've been understood and seen as important. So some of the little details I hope to look into and find possible signficicance include:

1. The repitition of "splitting things" over the seven dwarfs (such as when Snow White eats a little from each of the seven plates she finds upon entering the house "so as to not clear any one plate" or when the seventh dwarf who gave up his bed to Snow White sleeps one hour with each of his six brothers in their own bed).

2. The three methods that the Queen uses to try and kill Snow White.

3. The fact that the Queen asks the huntsman to bring back Snow White's lung and liver so she can eat them.

4. The seven hills our mountains past which the seven dwarfs live.

I also find the introductory paragraph to the tale interesting. In this paragraph, the story-teller introduces us to the first Queen, Snow White's mother. This paragraph tells of the snowy morning where she pricked her finger so three drops of blood fell. It is upon looking at these red drops of blood, the white snow, and the black ebony of the window frame that the Queen suddenly wishes for a chile "white as snow, red as blood, and as black as the wood of the window-frame." It leaves me wondering if this is merely to describe the eventual beauty of Snow White, or if there's some deeper signficicance to these events and their resulting wish.

So now, I need to find a good commentary on this tale as well as the rest of those recorded by the Brothers Grimm.

During this past Halloween season, I ran across an article by a woman named Catherine Edwards Sanders. In this article, she wrote a few comments on the growing interest in "Wicca" (she uses the term in a broader context than I do) and Paganism, as well as explaining how this growing interest represents a failure on the part of "the Church" as a whole. As part of her by-line on the article, she mentions that she also wrote a book on the same subject, whose title is Wicca's Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunger Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality. Being the curious sort, I decided to order a copy. It came today, and so far I have torn through the preface and first chapter.

So far, I think the book deserves a fair amount of praise. This is not to say that I agree with everything the author says, mind you. Indeed, I think there are some points that need to be criticized. But so far, I think that the woman deserves a great deal of credit for setting her personal and religious views aside as much as possible and trying to understand the practices of those she observed and interviewed. As such, I feel it only appropriate to take a close look at her book and investigate both those areas where she made some excellent observations and those areas where her information, presentation of that information, or both are weak or faulty. It is my intention to do this in this blog -- both this entry an future ones -- as I read through the book.

The first thing I notice in chapter one is that it seems to me that the majority of her "sources" are from the "eclectic Wiccan" camp. (Even the one interviewee in this chapter that identifies as having become a Gardnerian says some thign I'd consider uncharcteristic of most Garderians, and I've met more than a few) I'm not sure if this is just the nature of this chapter -- after all, it focuses mostly on her encounter with and investigation of the "Pagan" side of Salem around Halloween -- or will continue through the book, but it does raise a bit of concern to me. After all, it raises a strong risk of painting all Pagans with the same broad brush. And even among the "Wiccans," the image she's portraying will not remain accurate for long.

Sanders actually opens chapter one by describing a "spell performed for spectators" that she witnessed. I must say that I admire Sanders for her even tone in the description of this rite. She neither tries to make it sound more sensationalistic than it is nor tries to deride it as a bunch of "nonsense." Instead, she gives a matter-of-fact, clearly descriptive account. This account immediately demonstrates her sincerity in wanting to represent the subject of her books fairly and kindly. Truth be told, I felt she gave a much kinder description of the rite than i would have been inclined to offer, myself. After all, I'm inclined to call into question the very idea of doing a spell "so that spectators can watch" (and charging them for the privelege, no less!), whereas Sanders is willing to let such a dubious activity pass without challenge.

She then gives a brief "history" of Wicca, repeating the commonly held -- if not entirely accurate in my opinion -- view that Gardner and his colleagues cobbled the religion out of a number of sources. While she doesn't come right out and say that she disbelieves the stories of Gardner's involvement with New Forest Coven (or NFC's very existence), she does seem to hint that she's of that mindset. Of course, given her sources, that's mostly understandable.

Sanders then offers four basic points that she considers to be common threads in the various practices of "Wicca." I think that these four points deserve special consideration and examination, as they again demonstrate the kinds of "Wiccans" she was observing and interviewing. As such I shall take each point as she writes them. The first point, she summarizes as follows:

All is one -- Wiccans hold the monistic and pantheistic beliefs that all living things are of equal value. Humans have no special place, nor are they made in God's image. They have, for example, the same value as flowers, trees, or grass. The cosmos is undifferentiated universal engergy, and everything is one vast, interconnected process.

Based on the Wicca I know, I find it difficult to comment on how accurately it reflects their practice. It is neither entirely accurate, nor entirely inaccurate. Furthermore, it is rather difficult to point out to specific points within this statement and say "this is true, but that isn't." While it is true that the Wicca tend to believe that many people in our society tend to over-emphasize the value of human beings in comparison to the value of non-human life (or even those things that we don't generally view as alive), I would not say go so far as to say that they see everything as being "the same" or "undifferentiated." In fact, I'd argue that it's quite the opposite. They see the individual and unique beauty of both humans and all other parts of the world around us, and they appreciate each one for its own greatness. In this sense, there is this idea of thigns being "valued differently," which must be honored in it's own right. Contrast this with the idea of being "less valued" or "more valued," and you get a more clear idea.

Point two reads as follows:

You are divine -- Wiccans believe they possess divine power within themselves and that they are gods or goddesses.

To be honest, I wonder how much of this point comes from Sanders' communications with "public witches" like Laurie Cabot and those who follow them. Most of the Wicca I know -- as well as most other witches and Pagans -- hold no such belief. While it is true that the Wicca believe that each individual is a reflection and representative of the gods and that the gods can be seen within each individual, this is a far cry from actually believing one is a fully fledged god. It seems to me that Sanders has either met some rather unusual witches in her studies or she is misunderstanding what is actually believed by most.

The third point is as follows:

Personal power is unlimited -- Wiccans believe that their power is not limited by a deity, as in Christianity.

This is the first point I think the Wicca I know might actually agree with her on. But to be honest, I'm surprised most of the "Wiccans" she spoke with also believe this. In my experience many people still have this idea that magic is still "asking" or "getting" the gods to do something for them, much as Christians see prayers of petition.

The fourth and final point reads as follows:

Consciousness can and should be altered through the pracice of rite and ritual -- Wiccans believe in the supernatural realm and the practice of altered consciousness through rite, ritual, and spell-casting in which they tap into the power and energy of the unseens spirit world.

This is fairly accurate, though I might personally eschew the use of the word "supernatural." Personally, I'm inclined to view the "spirit world" as natural as the "physical world," just of a nature we can't quite understand in the same way at this time. Indeed, I think that this constant tendency to separate the "physical" and "spiritual" or "supernatural" into two neat packages that have nothing to do with one another to be an area of concern. And unfortunately, it's a tendency found in various forms of both Christianity and Paganism.

I think that Sanders next hits upon a goldmine, but then glosses over it too quickly. She mentions that "Wicca" seems to delight in having no orthodoxy (quoting what is probably one of the few actually useful things Aidan Kelly has ever said on the topic of Wicca in his entire life). She points out that rather than focusing on doctrine, direct experience seems to be important. This is something I personally do not believe that can be emphasized enough, as the proper performance of certain rites and the internalization of the resulting experiences is the heart and soul of Wicca. Unfortunately, this heart and soul is too often lacking in eclectic circles. In her own way, Sanders points this out as she goes on to say that "Wicca" is instead defined "in opposition to issues such as environmental degradation, the perceived patriarchy within Christianity, or monotheism in general." If this is truly how the "Wiccans" Sanders interviewed see Wicca, then I am inclined to suggest that they "missed the boat" in that regards. Unfortunately, Sanders seems to be equally unaware of that state of affairs.

Sanders next tackles the question of Satan. In this area, Sanders deserves more praise. She again states clearly and almost emphatically that "Wiccans" do not believe they worship Satan. Moreover, she presses the issue by stating that she considers it inappropriate for Christians to accuse them of being Satan worshippers. In this, she does draw the fine line that there is a difference between believing that Pagans are "unwittingly" worshipping Satan in disguise (a position she implies that she holds herself) and believing they knowingly and explicitly worship him. It is the latter she is decrying in this part, and she makes a strong case for her views.

One thing that I do note about this part of her discussion is that she brings up that "Wiccans" don't believe in Satan and the fact that they don't believe in "absolute evil" in the same paragraph, suggesting the two are somehow linked. I find this curious, as it again suggests a belief on her part that Satan is the absolute source of evil (for more thoughts on this topic, I refer the curious reader back to an earlier entry I posted that touched on that line of thinking.

This chapter review has grown long. I think I will leave my remaining thoughts for another entry on another day. In the meantime, I hope my readers will find this review informative.

In a previous post, I began reviewing chapter one of Catherine Sanders's book, Wicca's Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunge Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality. In this entry, I hope to complete this review.

After discussing "Wiccans'" disbelief in Satan and the fact that they are not horrible devil worshippers, Sanders turns her attention to trying to explain the belief in magic and spellwork. This is no easy task for most Pagans and witches, let alone a Christian journalist, and I admire Sanders's care and effort in writing about this topic. She begins this discussion by offering Starhawk's definition of magic (personally, I prefer Crowley's definition), as well as an example Starhawk has used to clarify and further explain her definition and how magic works.

One of the things that disappoints me is that Sanders does not discuss any Pagan beliefs concerning the source or nature of that power (hopefully, she will cover it in a later chapter). I believe this to be a fairly serious oversight, as I believe that the understanding of the source of the witch's power -- that the witch generates that power with her own body -- is an essential key to grasping many profound truths within the Craft. Of course, not all Pagans and "Wiccans" agree with me on the importance of this understanding, and this may explain Sanders's ommission of that particular point.

Sanders then goes into some of the common themse that most "Wiccans" will agree on, such as the perception of the Goddess as the Mother Goddess and the God as her Horned Consort. I do get the impression that her sources all tend to believe that "all gods are one and all goddesses are one," and this shines through in her descriptions of the God and Goddess. She also mentions the eight Sabbats and thirteen esbats.

She also mentions the commonly accepted symbol of the pentagram. Unfortunately, she does propagate an incorrect belief that runs rampant in the Pagan community -- another sure sign that all of her sources come from a closely related subgroup of the greater Pagan community. This is the belief that "Wiccans" and Pagans eschew the inverted ("one point down") pentagram, indicating that it is a symbol of Satanists. While it is true that Satanists have often made use of the inverted pentagram, they do not have a monopoly on that form of the symbol. There are indeed magical and religious traditions outside of Satanism that make use of the inverted Paganism. Unfortunately, by propagating this particular falsehood, Sanders is unintentionally encouraging her Christian readers to jump to incorrect conclusions if they happen to run across a practitioner of one of those traditions who do make use of an inverted pentagram.

Sanders then goes into a discussion about the Wiccan Rede and the Threefold Law. This is of particular concern to me. Unfortunately, far too many people in the Pagan community think that these two items make up the sum total of Pagan ethics. This is completely untrue, as some Pagan groups don't subscribe to either the Rede or the Threefold Law. Even among those who do subscribe to them, the way they are interpreted can vary greatly and widely. And many groups have further gudelines and factors to consider in their ethics. (Personally, I've always felt that the line in the Charge of the Goddess that calls for reverence, humility, compassion, and similar values was far more helpful in making ethical decisions than either the Rede or the Law of Returns.)

As an aside, Sanders paraphrases the thoughts of a Salem witch named Marisa concerning Osama bin Laden during this discussion of ethics. I found Marisa's views on that particular topic dubious at best, and it concerns me that these views were presented as universal to all "Wiccans" -- or even Pagans in general. While I may disagree with how our government officials are currently handling the "war on terror" to some degree, I do not endorse a course of action of "sending the terrorist positive energy and letting them be eventually punished by the Threefold Law." I find such a suggestion downright preposterous, and I doubt I'm the only witch who does!

Sanders then describes some time she spent observing and talking with Laurie Cabot. I will not spend any time coveing that, but will merely point out that I'm not sure what Ms. Cabot practices, but it seems to bear little resemblance to the forms of witchcraft I or those I have come to know and personally respect happen to practice. And while I respect Ms. Cabot's right to practice as she wishes, I wish she didn't make such an effort in presuming to "represent" all of us.

Sanders closes the chapter with a brief description of a Samhain ritual on she observed on "Gallows Hill." This ritual seems like the standard "open rite" performed for a general public: A bit showy, but very little depth. However, it's vibrant colors and themes does provide a pleasant closing to Sanders's first chapter.

One thing I will note on this chapter is that Sanders refers to "Gallows Hill" as the place where the witches of the Salem witch trials were hanged. I realize that she is merely repeating what tourists are told every year. However, I do find the fact that she didn't look into the truth of this matter as a journalist a bit disappointing. Truth be told, there are no records that indicate where the historical Gallows Hill was. Danvers's (formerly known as Salem Village -- where the trials actually took place) best efforts to uncover this information has still born no fruit.

It's been a while since I started my book book review of Wicca's Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunger Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality by Catherine Edwards Sanders. As such, I decided to take the time to read through and review chapter two of the book, which the author gave the title, "Tired of Sitting in Pews." In this chapter, Sanders attempts to look at the reasons that so many people are looking to find spirituality in Paganism rather than seeking it through Christianity. The four reasons that she compiles are as follows:

1. Concern for the earth
2. Empowerment for women
3. Frustration with consumer culture
4. The draw of the supernatural

What interests me here is that Sanders does not try to dismiss these reasons. In fact, she shows a certain amount of sensitivity towards these sentiments. She even goes so far as to admit that many Christians and churches do seem to ignore these matters, and can even be antagonistic towards them.

Once acknowledging these differences, she speaks of the complaint of hypocricy within "the Church" that many Pagans complain about. Again, she does not shy away from this and does not deny that these things happen. However, she does rightfully point out that not all Christians play the part of the hypocrite. She also rightfully points out that there are some less-than-perfect people within Paganism.

As she discusses the tensions between Christians and Pagans alike, as well as the preconceived notions each side has about the other, Sanders makes what is both one of the simplest and one of the most important observations about the whole affair:

Sadly, many Christians don't take the time to get to know people like Ginny [one of the witches the author interviewed for this chapter]; instead, they judge her from afar. And, like Ginny, many Pagans judge Christians from afar. This only alienates neo-Pagans from Christians. It would be better if Christians defied the stereotypes by getting to know neo-Pagans, as the apostle Paul did.

I would add to Sanders's thoughts that it would also be helpful if more Pagans took the time to temporarily "forget" the stereotypes when meeting a Christian for the first time and got to know that individual as a real person. Until we're willing to stop filtering every experience through the stereotypes and our past experiences, no sincere attempt by Christians to get to know us better is likely to be all that successful.

One of the specific incidents that Sanders mentions where Christians have generated some "bad blood" involves an incident that happened three and a half years ago. (Incidentally, this is another area where Sanders demonstrates a need to be a bit more exacting in her research. The incident that she is describing did not occur at Midsummer, but during a ritual honoring the Spring equinox.) A small group of overly-zealous Christians attempted to interrupt a rite being performed outside a Craft store in Lancaster California and generally harassed those in attendance. This is one of those cases where Sanders certainly shows her willingness to look critically at some of the things adherents of her own faith have done.

Overall, I felt this chapter was a bit short and more than a little superficial. The author certainy did not cover the widh and breadth of reasons why people might leave Christianity, or what theological issues individual Pagans might have with Christianity. For example, she did not consider the fact that many Pagans question the need for "salvation," or the fact that many find Christianity's all too common focus on the afterlife to be rather life-negating in nature. It's not clear to me whether Sanders just picked the "top four" reasons she ran across and chose to focus on them, or whether she really believes those four reasons actually "cover all the bases."

I suppose as the month of January is almost half over, it would prudent of me to post a first blog entry for January 2006. I know it's been over a month since I posted anything, for which I apologize. December was a difficult month for me on a personal level. Part of that was due to craziness at work. Another part was due to the fact that it was my first Christmas alone after ending a long term relationship with a man I truly loved.

Another part was that my main focus in the past few entries, a series of entries reviewing Catherine Sanders' book titled Wicca's Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunger Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality, has hit a bit of a roadblock. I won't get into too many details at this point, as I would rather cover them in future entries in that series (assuming I ever "pick up the trail" again). However, suffice it to say that I'm struggling with Sanders's incomplete research and tendency to focus almost entirely on the most superficial aspects of the Pagan movement. (Also, her chapter covering the "history of Wicca" is full of the same misconceptions, straw men, and other flaws as most treatments of the subject, and that's something I'm getting tired of even trying to address.) So I've decided to put that process on hold.

However, I recently obtained another book which I'd like to cover in my blog. This one is by Robin Wood, a artist that is fairly well known in the Sci-Fi communities and probably most famous in the Pagan and Occult community for her tarot deck. (It's certainly one of my favorite decks.) However, the book I've just finished reading is her less known introduction to "Wiccan" ethics, When, Why ... If. It's a relatively small book, being about 175 pages long without the appendix, glossary, and recommended reading list, so it makes a relatively quick read. Of course, you could spend a good bit of time thinking about what she has written, and Ms. Wood includes a number of "exercises" at the end of each chapter to encourage exactly that.

I will start out to say that this is by no means an exhaustive and complete discussion of ethics, Wiccan or otherwise. But then, that's not what the author set out to do. She makes it quite clear in the introduction that her intent was to write a book to start the Seeker out on thinking about what it means to live an ethical life, and I think she more or less achieves that goal. I particularly like the fact that the first topic she covers in the book is the topic of honesty. Ms. Wood posits that it's only when we learn to be honest with ourselves that we can truly begin to live ethically. If we continue to make excuses for our behavior, rationalize a poor decision, or even beat ourselves up for a poor decision rather than doing what we can to rectify things and learn from our mistakes, then we will continue to be lost.

The rest of the chapters cover such topics as love, helping others, harming others (or more accurately, avoiding harming others), sex, and the difference between wanting and willing. Each of these topics are covered quite well (though I still get the impression that like many "eclectic Wiccans," Ms. Wood falls prey to forgetting that the Wiccan Rede has six other words besides "harm none" and that those words and their arrangement bear consideration). There was very little I could disagree with.

My issue with the book falls more to the fact of what was missing. Personally, I think that any book on Wiccan ethics should include solid discussion on beauty, strength, power, compassion, honor, humility, mirth, and reverance. After all, these are the very values that the Goddess of Wicca herself calls for after telling her adherents that all acts of love and pleasure are her rituals. The author covers a good number of these virtues implicitly in her book, but it seems to me that a more explicit and substantial exploration would be in order. One can only hope that Ms. Wood or another author will consider doing so in a follow-up book.

This weekend, I ran to Blockbuster and rented a copy of "The Visitation," a movie that is "loosely based" on the novel by the same title, written by Frank Peretti.; I originally started reading Peretti's novels when I was in high school. A good adult friend from my little hometown church recommended them to me, and I was hooked. Even now that I don't agree with the author's theology, I can still enjoy many of his works.

Unfortunately, I was dismayed by the changes made when transforming this book into a movie. This was particularly dismaying as Peretti was listed as one of the producers, suggesting that he had (though limited I'm sure) some say in these changes. Primarily, a number of characters were changed, merged, or just plain deleted. A prime example of this was the circumstances surrounding the death Travis Jordan's wife. This had the effect of transforming Jordan from a man mourning the loss caused by a disease he and his church couldn't "pray away" into a man who was bitter do to an unsolved murder.

Normally, I can be fairly understanding when things are changed in order to make a book-based movie "work." Books and movies are completely different media, and what works in one doesn't always work in the other. But the changes to the characters and plot-lines in this case represent a change to the entire theme of the original book.

"The Visitation" was a rather unique book amongst Peretti's writing experiences. It was different in that it was about something Peretti doesn't often write about. Unlike books where he's focused on the spiritual or supernatural -- like "This Present Darkness" -- or some particular issue of religio-political significance -- like "Prophet" -- this book focuses on people, as well as people's experiences with "church stuff." The supernatural "miracles" of the man who would be the new Jesus take a secondary role to the people who are reacting to him, or to Travis's painful memories of his memories -- both pleasant and unpleasant -- of life in the church. It is these things that made me appreciate this book most out of all of his other novels. And I was saddened to see all of this missing from the movie.

The movie itself was pretty good for a movie. But I think that everyone did both the movie and an excellent novel a great disservice by associating it -- even "loosely" -- with Peretti's awesome book. And I'm disappointed that Peretti would not only allow it to happen, but appears to have been at least partly involved in such a travesty.

The other day, I picked up a rather interesting book at Borders. The book is Among the Bears and is written by Benjamin Kilham and Ed Gray -- though I get the impression that Gray's contribution was more editorial while the bulk of the content is Kilham's. It's a fascinating story about Kilham's experiences rehabilitating wildlife cubs near his New Hampshire home.

The book starts with the story of LG and LB (short for "Little Girl" and "Little Boy" respectively), two cubs whose mother abandoned them before they even left the natal den. LG and LB were the first bear cubs that Kilham is asked to care for. Kilham relates his experiences how he worked through the process with very little information to go on -- and the looming knowledge that no one had yet managed to rehabilitate black bear cubs to the point of being able to successfully returning them to the wild. In the process, he makes some fascinating discoveries about black bear behavior and the development of cubs.

Currently, I'm only on chapter 5 and into Kilham's first summer with LG and LB. So in the great scheme of things, I haven't read but a small part of the story. I still have the rest of his experiences with LG and LB as well as the subsequent cubs he's raised to read about. But if the rest of the book is like the chapters I've read so far -- and I suspect there may be even bigger discoveries ahead -- it will be a most interesting book.

As an aside, I'd like to point out the idiot who gave this book a bad review on Amazon. This is clearly a case of someone brainlessly adopting a cause without understanding the issues. Which is a shame, because it's quite clear that they were so focused on their anti-hunting rhetoric that they missed an excellent opportunity to learn about the animals they claim to love.

Over this past weekend, I decided to buy and read a copy of The Saga of the Volsungs. It was a relatively easy read, at only about 109 pages (with 20 of those pages being part of the translator's introduction). I got through it in a couple of days -- and it only took me that long because I was taking my time and taking breaks in between reading.

One of the first things that struck me is just how many themes it has in common with Tolkein's books. The most notable one was the "broken sword reforged" motiff. In the saga, Sigmund's sword (gifted to him by none other than Odin) is broken during the battle in which he falls. The fragments of the sword are then rescued from the battlefield by his wife, who later gives them to their son, Sigurd, so that he can have a new sword forged from them. This new sword is even stronger, and eventually enables Sigurd to kill the dragon, Fafnir. As I read the story, I couldn't help but think of Aragorn's sword the entire time. Of course, Tolkein's tale lacks the whole part of the story where Regin tries unsuccessfully to forge Sigurd a satisfactory blade before the hero asks his mother for the fragments of his father's sword.

The other thing I noted was how the gods and feats of magic were flawlessly weaved into the first half of the saga. Odin makes several appearances, both helping various heros and bringing about the doom of one (Sigmund). sadly, the fact that this saga is about warriors pretty much guarantees a strong presence of Odin rather than appearances of Vanic deities, but enough of my biases. I can at least take comfort in the fact that the mention of the she-wolf who kills Sigmund's brothers being a shape-shifted witch probably shows some Vanic influences in the tale, even if poorly aspected. It made for a rather interesting read.

Reading the saga also reaffirmed just how family-oriented ancient Scandinavian society really was. Seeing how each family was left to seek justice -- or more accurately, vengeance -- for the wrongs done against their kin demonstrated the lack of central authority that historical commentaries can only describe in bland words. Of course, it also demonstrates just how treacherous individuals living in such a society truly can be.

The other thing I noted is that the ancient saga writers were not exactly verbose or descriptive in their tales. Actions are described matter-of-factly, and little attention is given to scenic details, if any attention is given at all. As such, the reading tends to be on the bland side, and doesn't spark the imagination as much as one might hope. But it was well worth reading, for cultural/religious reasons.

According to one Amazon reviewer, another translator has published a copy of this saga with the Icelandic and their translation side-by-side. I may have to see if I can find a copy. It didn't come up on Amazon, unfortunately.

While surfing the web tonight, I came across a book I'd never heard of before. The title is From Boys to Men: Gay Men Write About Growing Up. I find myself wondering how closely any of the stories contained in the book resemble the experiences I'm working on writing about. One of the reason I started writing about my own sexual self-discovery is because I feel like the topic is not well covered. So it would be interested to see if this book is a sign that there's more out there than I realize. It would be a pleasant discovery if that is the case.

I've added the book to my wish list. I'd buy it outright, but I think I spent enough money today. I got a laptop in the price range I expected. But by the time I added all of the extras I decided to get with it (including a new wireless router for the house), the bill was a bit...shocking.

I just got done watching Eragon on DVD. Overall, it was an excellent movie with a pretty good, if predictable plot. The development of that plot and the characters themselves were pretty good for the 100 minutes or so that everyone had to work with.

I should admit right up front that a few of the issues I had with this movie are the result of a misconception I had going into it. When I saw previews for this movie, I heard the word "dragonrider" and immediately thought of Anne McCaffrey and her series of books about Pern and its dragonriders. Because of this, I noticed some glaring discrepancies, that made me wonder how closely the movie followed the books. However, a bit more research on my part revealed that this movie was not based upon McCaffrey's works, but on the first book in Christopher Paolini's Inheritance Trilogy. Apparently, Paolini's writing was heavily influenced by Ms. McCaffrey's books. However, this certainly explains some of the discrepancies, such as the fact that the dragons in Paolini's world actually choose their riders before they hatch. (Come to think of it, that's a nice touch.)

I think that my favorite part of the movie was the oft repeated phrase, "one part brave, three parts fool." It seems to sum up the nature of many heroes, both in this story and in general. I also like the addition of the fact that Brom (played by the venerable Jeremy Irons, no less) reveals that his quest for vengeance results in the death of the last dragon, save for the evil Galbatorix's own dragon.

The one part I will note as being underdeveloped was the part of the other boy (his name escaped my notice) whose father turned out to be a dragonrider who joined forces with Galbatorix. They ntroduced this information and the boy's desire to follow a better path than his father did rather late in the plot. As such, it seemed underdeveloped to the point of being extraneous.

One thing I particularly liked, however, was the fact that they didn't play heavily on the romantic aspects of the movie. Certainly, they hinted at some underlying romantic tensions between Eragon and Arya, especially at the end. However, most Hollywood movies would have brought that far more to the forefront, even turning it into a major plot element. Those in charge of this movie made a different choice, and I think it was to the benefit of the movie's overall integrity.

On a loose tangent, when looking for Anne McCaffrey's website to link to it, I discovered that she actually has posted guidelines for fan fiction and fan art based on her works. I find it a rather interesting approach to the topic, and I wonder if many other authors have done similar things. Of course, I also wonder if the fan fiction authors and fan art creators actually bother following them. But it's nice to see an author trying to find a peaceful compromise with those who would emulate her.

Yesterday evening was rather pleasant. After getting out of work, I ended up running over to Psychic's Thyme. Michele was on duty and I had hoped to spend a bit of time chatting with her. Unfortunately, that didn't work out, as she was busy actually doing readings. We were both disappointed, but glad she was getting the work, as it meant a little extra money for her.

Because both she and Lisa were pretty busy with readings, I ended up minding the store with George. This was good, as George actually had to leave at about twenty minutes before closing due to another commitment. So I spent my time keeping an eye on things and even spent a bit of time talking to one of the of the customers who was interested in getting a reading. I answered her questions about what readers worked the next few days and what services each one offered. She seemed like a pretty nice girl, and I get the impression she'll be in on Saturday.

Michele had something of a family situation brewing, so she had to leave a few minutes early. So I stuck around a bit extra and helped make sure Lisa was okay before taking off myself. Once out of there, I decided to run to Applebee's for dinner. While there, I read several pages in Witch in the Bedroom, a book I picked up about a month ago. So far, I've really enjoyed it. I plan on doing one of the exercises out of it this weekend. It's the exercise about writing a vision letter, and I have all kinds of ideas for one running through my head. It should be an interesting experience, I think.

After I got done with dinner and reading, I decided to run to the mall for a short walk. I had originally planned on going back to Genesee Valley Park for a walk, but the threat of rain intimidated me. So I spent about a half hour wandering the halls and through various stores. It was enjoyable, and I even got treated to some pretty good eye candy. It wasn't quite as pleasant as being out along the canal or watching shirtless college students playing softball, but I enjoyed myself well enough.

Tonight or tomorrow morning, I'm headed back to my parents' house for the Thanksgiving holiday. Saturday, my father and I will drive down to York to have dinner with much of the extended family. It's a four hour or so drive, so I hope to do some reading on the trip. Of course, I suspect other members of the extended family will be joining us, so I need to be judicious in my selection of reading material.

For those who may not know, I am the religious oddity in my family. While I am a practicing witch, just about everyone else (at least on my father's side of the family) is a conservative, evangelical, and even fundamentalist Christian. This means that sitting with them while reading such selections as Witch in the Bedroom or Anything But Straight would probably lead to all sorts of unpleasantness. And while part of me feels like I'm reaching a point where I need to assert myself around my family regardless of how they may react, the holiday season just doesn't seem like a good time to do so. (Too bad it's about the only time I seem to see most of them.) So I've started thinking through some choices that may be safe.

The first obvious choice is my new copy of Beowulf. (Special thanks to Pisco for bringing this particular translation to my attention.) I figure that no one can complain about me reading classic literature. And hey, they don't need to know that I'm reading it for spiritual reasons in addition to literary ones.

As another option (because I always have to have multiple books available to read) is American Gods. Because even if it's fiction that my family may not care for, fiction is still a relatively safe choice. As long as it's not erotic fiction, of course.

In many ways I'm looking forward to the trip, too. Melissa's wedding reminded me that I don't spend nearly enough time with my extended family, and I need to change that to some extent. Of course, that means putting aside some of my own biases, as I've unfortunately come to expect time with my family to be unpleasant. (In reality, the unpleasantness only comes from one or two people, who often aren't even there.) But in the end, I'm hoping it'll be worth it.

In the meantime, I'll be looking over my shelves for a third and possibly fourth choice in "safe" reading material.

The picture in my post is of my parents' kitten, Kisa, and one of the "outdoor cats" that often come indoors to visit her, Gray. I figured I'd spice up this entry with a picture that my father took of them playing together last week. After all, it's catblogging day, right?

As I write this, I'm sitting at my parents' home, relaxing. I drove down here yesterday morning after getting up, finishing packing, showering, and dressing. We had the traditional turkey dinner with all the extras at three in the afternoon. Then Mom took a nap, as she had to work third shift last night. When she got back up, we all sat down and watched Sky High. My parents had never seen it before and loved it.

Today, I got up, showered, and ran to town so that I could pick up a copy of Divine Nobodies. (Special thanks to Erin for recommending it.) I decided to start it this afternoon rather than waiting until the car trip tomorrow. So far, I've enjoyed it overall and hope to write about it after I've finished it and processed through all my thoughts.

Speaking of tomorrow's trip, I was pleased to discover that only my aunt and uncle, Janet and Tom, will be riding down with Dad and I. Of all my relatives, they're some of my favorites. It also means that conversations during the trip should remain relatively casual and "safe." So that's quite a relief. My cousin, Melissa, will also be coming from Philadelphia, which means I'll get to see her a second time in the same three month period. Considering we went two years without seeing each other prior to her wedding, this is pretty significant.

I have to admit that I do miss some of my friends right now. I love my family, and I'm constantly feeling more comfortable around them (I even managed to mention a couple of gay friends in the context of relationship while talking with my mother yesterday). But at the same time, I miss spending time with those I've built mutually beneficial relationships with over the past couple years. In fact, I think I'll call Michele here in a bit.

I'm going to skip the common practice of listing the things I'm thankful for. Instead, I'm merely going to say that I'm thankful for my life in general and the countless blessings -- both large and small -- that have come to fill it.

The second picture is one I just took of Precious curled up on her grandpa's lap.

As I mentioned in my last entry, I picked up a copy of Jim Palmer's Divine Nobodies and began reading it this weekend. I finished the book yesterday while at my aunt's home for the extended family Thanksgiving. Let me just say right up front that it is a great book, and I highly recommend it.

The title of the book is the perfect label for the series of chapters about "ordinary" people that Jim has met throughout his life and learned important lessons from in regards to his faith. Indeed, he relays each of these experiences to underscore his own growing belief that God most often brings spiritual growth and understanding not through "big name preachers" (or even preachers at all), but average Joes that we meet all through our lives. In effect, these people -- often seen as "nobodies" in the greater religious movements of Christendom -- truly offer a direct experience of and encounter with the Divine.

What I personally find interesting in addition to the individual stories (which are all touching and moving), there seems to be a handful of underlying themes that run through many of the chapters. One such example is the fact that Jim constantly finds his tendency to try and "do enough" and "be good enough" to justify his existence and God's love for him challenged. (This is a theme I can particularly identify with, as that's a tendency I've also struggled with at times.) Many of his experiences he describes offers another chance to revisit this particular struggle in his life and experience further healing from it.

Another common theme in many of the chapters is Jim faced with his own prejudiced opinions about others and the problems they cause. Whether it's his opinions of Catholicism and closely related denominations being challenged by Father Jeff, his opinions of liberals being blown apart while he peruses the bookshelves at the home of his daughter's swim instructor, or his understanding of hip hop being shattered by Doug, the author finds himself having to rethink his hard-line assumptions when faced with real people who should fit those stereotypes, but don't. Indeed, these many experiences strongly show Jim's own discovery of a more relational approach to faith and those around him.

In many ways, I saw much of my own perspective in Jim's outlook on life and the world in general, and even found much theological common ground in the rare instances where he delved (however lightly) into theology. Of course, reading his thoughts gives me a few suspicions about the kind of reception his ideas might find in the greater Christian (particularly evangelical and fundamentalist) community. Indeed, I find myself wondering if a witch writing a glowing review of his book might merely give his biggest critics more "ammo." But I'm hoping Jim would appreciate my words anyway.

Overall, Divine Nobodies was well worth my time. In fact, I hope to follow up by obtaining and reading a copy of Wide Open Spaces in the near future.