Category Archives: Paganism

He’s back in print!

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.

China Goddesses?

The other night, a friend was showing me various “Goddess pictures” he’s collected over the last few years. As I was sitting there, looking at them, I began to notice a pattern in all of them. All of the pictures, while drawn with exquisite talent and an eye for detail, seemed unreal to me. They all had this almost ephemeral look to them.

I began to notice that every picture of every goddess seemed to picture a slim, almost ghostly woman in a flowing gown of some short. And in each picture, it gave the deity pictured an appearance that was so idealized and stylized that she didn’t seem…well, human. And not in a good way.

It seems to me that I’ve found this characteristic in a lot of “Goddess” artwork in the last five years. It’s as if many artist try to create a lofty picture, but in effect creates a picture of an unreal, untouchable being. (Indeed, they almost look as if they’d be sullied or even broken if we touched them, much like a china doll.) Where is the artwork of real goddesses? Where are the pictures of Artemis walking through the forest in huntress clothes? Where are the pictures of Aphrodite, exuding enough sex appeal to make your average male pop a boner just looking at her? Where’s the picture of the Mother Goddesses who actually look like they’ve held a child and had said child spit up on her?

We Pagans talk about how our gods are close to us. We talk about how they are readily available and even imminent. And yet, then we turn around and create artwork which almost seems to contradict this. I find myself wondering how much we believe our own words.

Not that I’m guiltless of this. I’ve had my times where I’ve pictured my own “china doll Goddess,” too. I’ve pictured the gods as untouchable and unrealistically idealized. But I’ve also come to find more “realistic” images. I try to picture Freyja in a down-to-earth outfit that both exudes sex appeal and strength. I’ve tried to see her in the kind of garb as worn by the spakona. I’ve tried to see her as more real.

Inform, Don’t Insult

On a message board, I watched someone come in and complain about the poor treatment she had gotten on another message board for a post she left. She went on about how someone accused her of being insulting and got a bit rude with her. After all, she was just trying to be helpful.

Now, I’m about to say something that would probably get me called a cynic. But if there’s one thing that life has taught me, it’s that people can be downright unkind and disrespectful when they’re “trying to be helpful.” “Helpful people” — especially the ones that offer unsolicited help, tend to have an ego thing going, themselves. At least that’s been my experience.

So a couple of us asked for further details before we told this would-be good samaritan how terrible her experience was. So she gave us a link to the conversation under discussion. Well, it didn’t take long for some of us to find why the poor guy was offended. One simply had to read the paragraph he quoted during his protest.

The board this woman posted to was a discussion forum for a law enforcement resource and networking site, as near as I can tell. And she was posting information about “Wicca” (I will have to explain why I put that in quotes someday, I think) and Paganism. Basically, she wanted to inform the police officers there so that they would be better able to handle situations involving Pagans or crimes that looked ritualistic. A noble gesture, indeed. But there are just a couple of things that I would’ve avoided personally. Let me point out the first one by quoting a statement from her post:

You will also become better by not jumping to conclusions when you are at a crime scene or an alleged crime scene with evidence of “ritualistic crime.”

Now, it seems to me that the underlying assumption our “educator” is making here is that these police officers currently jump to conclusions. Now, call me crazy, but I’m sure that these nice officers have gone through rigorous training on how to properly investigate a crime. And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that one of the first lessons of investigating a crime — whether there are ritualistic elements or not — is probably don’t jump to conclusions. So I can understand someone getting a wee bit bent out of shape when a perfect stranger suggests they’d do such a stupid thing. Whatever happened to giving people credit.

The second statement is of a similar nature. Allow me to quote it:

And, PLEASE, above all – if you have a question just ask a member of the pagan community or do some research for yourself.

Once again, our “educator” jumps to a rather insulting conclusion. I’m sure that police who investigate crimes are well aware of the value of research. In fact, I’m sure that they spend a good portion of their time both researching and consulting with experts in whatever subject becomes central to their investigation. To imply otherwise — as this “educator” has done — is to basically call these police stupid.

I’m sorry, but whatever happened to assuming that people were intelligent? Whatever happened to the bit of common sense that said that treating someone as if they were a fool is a good way to get off on a bad foot? Whatever happened to actually showing the people you’re trying to “inform” a bit of dignity and respect!

Sure, I’m sure there are some bad cops out there. I’m sure that if one looks hard enough, you can find someone who does jump to conclusion. I’m sure you can find one who does skimp on the research. But to actually face a group of officers and assume that the ones you are addressing would do any such thing is a good way to show what an ass you are, in my opinion. And quite frankly, I think you should expect to be treated like an ass.

Honestly, if this is the kind of person that’s handling “Pagan relations” with our valuable “boys in blue,” I think we’d be better off not being represented at all.

Awareness

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.