Witches At Harvard

From The Harvard Gazette, May 10, 2007

Colloquium attracts scholars, witches

Students and practitioners of witchcraft mix it up at folklore and paganism conference

Harvard News Office

What does the word “witchcraft” mean to you?

If it’s Elizabeth Montgomery’s twitching nose or something some hapless woman in Colonial Salem was put to death for, you’ve got some catching up to do.

Witchcraft is very much of the present, a 21st century religion or philosophy or practice (exactly how to define it is a bit tricky) with plenty of passionate adherents as well as cadres of academics ardently scrutinizing its history, its sociological significance, and its beliefs.

The vitality of witchcraft (or Wicca, as many within the movement prefer to call it) was on display May 3-4 at a colloquium titled “Forging Folklore: Witches, Pagans, and Neo-Tribal Cultures,” sponsored by the Committee on Degrees in Folklore and Mythology.

According to Stephen Mitchell, professor of Scandinavian and folklore and chair of Folklore and Mythology, one of the reasons witchcraft, magic, and paganism fascinate scholars is that their study brings together so many different disciplines.

“Part of what makes the topic so intriguing,” Mitchell said, “is that its proper study is inherently interdisciplinary and calls on a highly discursive skill set. And it is an excellent example of how adjacent disciplines can learn from each other.”

At the Harvard colloquium, academics weren’t the only ones doing the learning, or teaching. Practitioners as well as scholars (and those who combined the two roles) were present in goodly numbers. Although there seemed to be some tensions between the two viewpoints, Mitchell sees the heterogeneity of the group as an advantage.

“What perhaps made this conference a little different was the fact that so many pagans and pagan academics attended, but that may be understood in part as a reflection that these [pagan] groups are among the fastest-growing religions in America today. After all, what would a conference on, say, Buddhism or Islam be that didn’t include people who could provide an ‘emic’ view of things?” (“Emic” is a description of behavior in terms meaningful to the actor as opposed to the observer.)

What was most striking about the colloquium was the variety of forms that witchcraft and paganism have taken and the variety of perspectives from which they have been observed.

On the more traditional side of the spectrum, for example, Matthieu Boyd, a Ph.D. candidate in Harvard’s Department of Celtic Languages and Literatures, discussed the survival of pagan themes and images in Breton folklore. In a very different vein, independent scholar Leslie Roth spoke about “Technopagans, Chaos Magicians, and Postmodern Narratives of the Occult,” while Lindsay Coleman of the University of Melbourne, Australia, discussed “The Faun as Father Surrogate in Guillermo del Toro’s ‘Pan’s Labyrinth.’”

Randy Conner of the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco gave an impassioned defense of “Aradia, or the Gospel of the Witches,” an 1899 book by the American Charles Godfrey Leland, which claims to reflect an ancient witchcraft tradition practiced secretly in Tuscany, and which has become a fundamental text of modern Wicca. Conner accused those scholars who have tried to discredit the authenticity of “Aradia” of anti-pagan prejudice.

“If it’s not a medieval work, then it is a living vision of an alternative religion. Why are people so hell-bent to dismantle counter-hegemonic histories of paganism?”

Ronald Hutton of Bristol University in the United Kingdom delivered the keynote address, “Modern Pagan Festivals,” in which he traced the origins of the eight festivals that comprise the wheel of the modern pagan year. Hutton, who has written books on 16th and 17th century British history as well as on witchcraft, magic, and shamanism, argued that these festivals are not of ancient origin, as many of their celebrants claim, but can be traced back to relatively recent sources.

Interest in the pre-Christian religions of the British Isles began, Hutton said, in the mid-18th century when scholars began to study and to speculate about the ancient druids, then mistakenly believed to be the builders of Stonehenge and other megalithic monuments.

One of the most influential authorities was Edward Williams, a Welsh stonemason and antiquarian who called himself by the Welsh name Iolo Morganwg. Williams published large quantities of what he claimed were lost poems written by ancient Welsh bards but which have turned out to be forgeries.

According to Williams, the druids considered the four “quarter days” (corresponding to the solstices and the equinoxes) to be sacred and held religious festivals at these times.

Margaret Murray, a British Egyptologist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries who also wrote popular books on witchcraft, added the other four festivals, to which she gave the names Imbolc, Beltane, Lughnasadh, and Samhain. According to Hutton, Murray’s insistence that British witches held festivals on these dates is based on the slimmest of evidence.

The person who did the most to popularize the pagan Wheel of the Year as the centerpiece of modern Wicca, along with the notion that Wicca’s beliefs and rituals had survived in an unbroken line from ancient times, is Gerald Gardner. According to Hutton, however, many of the songs and liturgies Gardner introduced as ancient were actually taken from published sources while others were written by his associate Doreen Valiente.

Since Gardner’s death in 1964, other writers, including Aidan Kelly, Starhawk, and Vivianne and Christopher Crowley, have added to the accumulation of lore and belief that comprises modern Wicca.

According to Hutton, the most striking difference between ancient and modern paganism is the absence among moderns of the idea of sacrifice, of a lesser being trying to propitiate a more powerful one. Instead, modern pagans seek to cultivate a closer bond with the natural world and to cultivate hidden powers in themselves. In this sense, Hutton finds Wicca to be distinctly modern, despite its claims to antiquity.

“It lacks just those aspects of religion which modern critics of religion have found most unpalatable — namely, human weakness and helplessness.”

ken_gewertz@harvard.edu

To Neff and Zsen…and to old friends…

Some people you meet and you just know…

There will never be another friend, like this friend.

No one else can make you as angry or as happy.  No one else “gets” you.  No one else can get away with saying the kinds of things you’d let this person say. 

Certain people become a part of your insides.  And when they exit before you do, it’s hard not to spend the rest of your life wondering, “what would he/she have thought about this, done with this, said about this…”

You make your peace with things the older and wiser you get.  Memory becomes a blessing and a curse.

And life’s just life.  It’s exactly what you make of it.  And of old friends…

(The silliest people on earth, after midnight, Fairfax Village – Neff T’s last visit to LA, to shop with ZZZsssen!)

You are GOD

Love is the law.

The Crowley quotes that revolutionized occult thinking for Jimmy Page and countless other seekers of truth:

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”

“Love is the law.  Love under will.” 

“Every man and every woman is a star.”

Love is patient…

The thirteen lines below are the only lines from the Christian bible that I have any use for.  It’s always amusing (and frightening) that most of the Christians I have met don’t seem to know it or heed it.  Funny. 

Ah well, it’s just poetry…


The Excellence of Love

If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant

Love does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered

Love does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;

Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.

For we know in part and we prophesy in part;

But when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.


New American Standard Bible Copyright © 

For Nev in October, Full Moon Tomorrow…

I was thinking about Nev Tillak today, as I do every day.  Nev passed away October 31st, 2002.  Six years later, I all of a sudden need to write about it because Nev would have LOVED being blogged about. 

A friend wrote this one month ago.  Today, with the Full Moon coming, it seemed safe to re-read.

“I still think about that summer we all spent together. Do you remember when we all sat in Nev’s room and watched the film he made of all of us at the pool?  I remember he projected it on the wall next to his bed and played “Every Day is Like Sunday,” by Morrissey. I remember someone said, “it’s like we’re all dead…” Ironically, Nev was the only one not in the film. I love that song but still have a hard time listening to it. God, I am sooo melancholy today…full moon is coming… Be well my friend”

Here is what I wrote back:

“Nev used to come to LA for certain pop-culture must-sees like Coachella and The Smiths Convention.  And I always felt like his “beard” at these things because once he got there he would ditch me to go buy cool merchandise!!! Can you picture that??? 

SMITHS Convention in Pasadena. Nev gets ready ALL MORNING and is SO MAD that I am not ready yet. He said, “Jen’s cats are just like mama…stay up all night and sleep all day…”

We finally get there and it is PACKED!!! We wait in line and once inside the Pasadena Convention Center EVERYONE makes a mad rush for the middle where all the booths are. I begin to speak to Nev so we can PLAN our stroll around and he is GONE like a gunshot! I can see him disappearing like Buddha amongst the goth kids!!!!!!

Needless to say he turned up a few hours later, completely satisfied with his tshirt, magazine and vinyl purchases and ready to go!! With me driving of course :)   Later, I drive him all over the valley in search of Morrissey’s home. We also see Morrissey at the first Coachella. At night’s end, in the parking lot we begin arguing. I can’t remember the argument, just the resolution which sounded like this:
JH: “Nev, this is not even an issue anymore.”
NT: “Yes, Jenn, this is a non-issue!! A total NON-ISSUE!”
JH: “This was never an issue in the first place”
NT: “Right, Jen, this is a total fucking non-issue!”
This carries on until 2am as we drive back to LA and of course Nev HAS TO stop for fast food. “I’ll treat” he says.

To this day I have dreams that Nev and I have been talking and I wake up and it’s 5 AM and I realize that I have been crying in my sleep. Those are the times that I get that he is really gone and not just living in SF where I can’t see him this year but will see him next time. The no next time is the hardest part.”

Those whom we have loved and lost never really leave us.  They are in our hearts and minds forever.  Especially during the Full Moon and Autumn and on days that feel like Sundays…

Why I Don’t Blog About Sarah Palin

So the obvious question is, “If this is a Witch/Revolutionary site, then why aren’t you blogging about Sarah Palin”? 

My obvious answer to that is “Do I need to?  Isn’t she doing a wonderful job of scaring the hell out of us entirely as is?” 

What nuance of right wing stupidity could I illuminate that Sarah Palin doesn’t already convey every time she speaks publicly?  Dissecting Sarah Palin has become the national pasttime of all the Democrats anyway.  Fun times.  They love that shit.  And of course their camp doesn’t thrill me any more than Sarah Palin’s scares me. The Democrats and the Republicans have long been the same old boring party to me anyway.  Blah, blah, blah.  There is nothing fresh or innovative coming out of either parties mouths.  Again, we are stuck with the same boring “bail out the middle class” last minute patriotism that have made both parties seem completely penny wise and pound foolish to me. 

Besides, Witches deal with Sarah Palins on a daily basis!!  Always have and probably always will (at least in the US)!!!  We didn’t just wake up to this new American horror, we live with ignorance and prejudice and intolerance on a daily basis.  We don’t slumber on the cultural watch the way those lazy liberals seem to. 

For those of us who are inclined to believe that God and Goddess can be found in yourself, or perhaps does not exist at all, this is how the United States has always looked:

Homogenized.  Self-righteous.  Delusionally religious.  Hypocritical.  Dangerously conservative.  Completely void of innovative and progressive thought. Patriarchal women passing for feminists.  Scary.  24/7 Scary.

Come to think of it, that’s how I usually feel about the Democrats too!  Funny!

Long ago, those of us who were lucky enough to hear what Ralph Nader was proposing and who campaigned fervently for him and who endured the stupidities of those who were angered by Nader’s “spoiler” votes (please deliver me from the hubris and assumptions of the narcissistic Dems) shook our heads when we realized he wouldn’t get the debating time or attention that he deserved. 

I don’t need to say anything about Sarah Palin.  As stated earlier, she speaks for herself.  And for all those like-minded.  To those who woke up recently, to an ugly America in danger of fascism, I say “Where have you fucking been?  We could have used you in the Nader camp years ago…”

For those of us already mourning the loss of our sacred and cherished hope of giving Ralph Nader one more well deserved chance to intelligently CHALLENGE this corporate hegemony of bullshit that passes for a free nation’s government….well, all I can say is “FUCK IT!”  I now have to give my vote to the shitty middle class Dems who appear to be a lesser evil than the ruling class bible thumping Repubs.

To all the earnest Sarah Palin haters, who get off on daily dissections of her, I flap my paws for you.  This election has made me feel about as stimulated as a drunken seal, sluggishly congratulating the already self-congratulatory Dems for their wit: you guys are SOO MUCH SHARPER than those boring old Republican farts.

I hope that when Obama wins, people will blog about the great BAIT AND SWITCH or  ”what happened when Obama got elected and nothing improved”?????

We Witches are looking forward to seeing all the optimistic American children winning their great big Obama prize.  For many of us (we can already feel it on the winds), the next four years (of no lasting change) will be the last stop before flying out of this nest altogether and seeking higher ground, higher thinking in other, less narcissistic lands.

Renaissance Tarot: The Empress Card

Renaissance Tarot
The Empress

“The Empress holds a fan of worldly pleasure and the orb of sovereignty. Hera (Juno) and the peacock accompany her. The queen of the pagan gods gave the hundred eyes of the vanquished Argus to the foul to adorn its tail, and adopted the bird as her attribute. Later, Mary the Christian queen of heaven inherited the symbol of the peacock and its “eyes” became the all seeing eyes of providence.”

“The Renaissance Tarot is a modern deck, with symbolism drawn from the heroic age and rendered in renaissance style. This deck is an excellent choice for exploring questions of passion, mastery, and the inner workings of human reason”

What this card means in a reading: Feminine fertility and power. Civilization. Domestic tradition. Family and childrearing. The active, fecund aspect of the anima. The mother and the queen, on earth and in heaven.

Undoubtedly one of the more inspirational archetypes…

bell hooks on patriarchy, sexism and feminism

bell hooks!  bell hooks!  bell hooks!

Video credit: I WANT DEMOCRACY NOW

Oops I missed Mabon!

Oops, I missed Mabon!  One of the greatest harvest holidays of the year.  That’ll happen from time to time.  But it’s never too late to celebrate.  It’s better to wait til you feel it than to give thanks halfheartedly.

I’m only four days late!  And happy to report that the gratitude is genuine. 

In Praise of Rapturous Truth: Roger Ebert’s letter to Werner Herzog

Last night I finally got to meet longtime hero Werner Herzog when he kindly stopped by the New Beverly Cinema for a showing of 2007’s Encounters At The End Of The World.  WH spoke before the film and then graciously treated everyone to an unhurried Q&A session which I will elaborate on in a future posting. 

Just for today, since I am still giddy over finally meeting the man, I thought I would post Roger Ebert’s letter to Werner Herzog, originally posted on WH’s website: www.wernerherzog.com, in November 2007. 

WH dedicated Encounters At The End Of The World to his dear friend Roger and this letter succinctly captures so much of what I (and assumedly other fans) appreciate about Werner Herzog and his lifelong dedication to miraculous storytelling on film.  I hope I am not in violation of copyright by promoting this letter and passing it on.  It is a letter I wish that all Hollywood directors would read.

A letter to Werner Herzog:
In praise of rapturous truth

November 17, 2007

Dear Werner,

You have done me the astonishing honor of dedicating your new film, “Encounters at the End of the World,” to me. Since I have admired your work beyond measure for the almost 40 years since we first met, I do not need to explain how much this kindness means to me. When I saw the film at the Toronto Film Festival and wrote to thank you, I said I wondered if it would be a conflict of interest for me to review the film, even though of course you have made a film I could not possibly dislike. I said I thought perhaps the solution was to simply write you a letter.

But I will review the film, my friend, when it arrives in theaters on its way to airing on the Discovery Channel. I will review it, and I will challenge anyone to describe my praise as inaccurate.

I will review it because I love great films and must share my enthusiasm.

This is not that review. It is the letter. It is a letter to a man whose life and career have embodied a vision of the cinema that challenges moviegoers to ask themselves questions not only about films but about lives. About their lives, and the lives of the people in your films, and your own life.

Without ever making a movie for solely commercial reasons, without ever having a dependable source of financing, without the attention of the studios and the oligarchies that decide what may be filmed and shown, you have directed at least 55 films or television productions, and we will not count the operas. You have worked all the time, because you have depended on your imagination instead of budgets, stars or publicity campaigns. You have had the visions and made the films and trusted people to find them, and they have. It is safe to say you are as admired and venerated as any filmmaker alive—among those who have heard of you, of course. Those who do not know your work, and the work of your comrades in the independent film world, are missing experiences that might shake and inspire them.

I have not seen all your films, and do not have a perfect memory, but I believe you have never made a film depending on sex, violence or chase scenes. Oh, there is violence in “Lessons of Darkness,” about the Kuwait oil fields aflame, or “Grizzly Man,” or “Rescue Dawn.” But not “entertaining violence.” There is sort of a chase scene in “Even Dwarfs Started Small.” But there aren’t any romances.

You have avoided this content, I suspect, because it lends itself so seductively to formulas, and you want every film to be absolutely original.

You have also avoided all “obligatory scenes,” including artificial happy endings. And special effects (everyone knows about the real boat in “Fitzcarraldo,” but even the swarms of rats in “Nosferatu” are real rats, and your strong man in “Invincible” actually lifted the weights). And you don’t use musical scores that tell us how to feel about the content. Instead, you prefer free-standing music that evokes a mood: You use classical music, opera, oratorios, requiems, aboriginal music, the sounds of the sea, bird cries, and of course Popol Vuh.

All of these decisions proceed from your belief that the audience must be able to believe what it sees. Not its “truth,” but its actuality, its ecstatic truth.

You often say this modern world is starving for images. That the media pound the same paltry ideas into our heads time and again, and that we need to see around the edges or over the top. When you open “Encounters at the End of the World” by following a marine biologist under the ice floes of the South Pole, and listening to the alien sounds of the creatures who thrive there, you show me a place on my planet I did not know about, and I am richer. You are the most curious of men. You are like the storytellers of old, returning from far lands with spellbinding tales.

I remember at the Telluride Film Festival, ten or 12 years ago, when you told me you had a video of your latest documentary. We found a TV set in a hotel room and I saw “Bells from the Deep,” a film in which you wandered through Russia observing strange beliefs.

There were the people who lived near a deep lake, and believed that on its bottom there was a city populated by angels. To see it, they had to wait until winter when the water was crystal clear, and then creep spread-eagled onto the ice. If the ice was too thick, they could not see well enough. Too thin, and they might drown. We heard the ice creaking beneath them as they peered for their vision.

Then we met a monk who looked like Rasputin. You found that there were hundreds of “Rasputins,” some claiming to be Jesus Christ, walking through Russia with their prophecies and warnings. These people, and their intense focus, and the music evoking another world (as your sound tracks always do) held me in their spell, and we talked for some time about the film, and then you said, “But you know, Roger, it is all made up.” I did not understand. “It is not real. I invented it.”

I didn’t know whether to believe you about your own film. But I know you speak of “ecstatic truth,” of a truth beyond the merely factual, a truth that records not the real world but the world as we dream it.

Your documentary “Little Dieter Needs to Fly” begins with a real man, Dieter Dengler, who really was a prisoner of the Viet Cong, and who really did escape through the jungle and was the only American who freed himself from a Viet Cong prison camp. As the film opens, we see him entering his house, and compulsively opening and closing windows and doors, to be sure he is not locked in. “That was my idea,” you told me. “Dieter does not really do that. But it is how he feels.”

The line between truth and fiction is a mirage in your work.

Some of the documentaries contain fiction, and some of the fiction films contain fact. Yes, you really did haul a boat up a mountainside in “Fitzcarraldo,” even though any other director would have used a model, or special effects. You organized the ropes and pulleys and workers in the middle of the Amazonian rain forest, and hauled the boat up into the jungle. And later, when the boat seemed to be caught in a rapids that threatened its destruction, it really was. This in a fiction film. The audience will know if the shots are real, you said, and that will affect how they see the film.

I understand this. What must be true, must be true. What must not be true, can be made more true by invention. Your films, frame by frame, contain a kind of rapturous truth that transcends the factually mundane. And yet when you find something real, you show it.

You based “Grizzly Man” on the videos that Timothy Treadwell took in Alaska during his summers with wild bears. In Antarctica, in “Encounters at the End of the World,” you talk with real people who have chosen to make their lives there in a research station. Some are “linguists on a continent with no language,” you note, others are “PhDs working as cooks.” When a marine biologist cuts a hole in the ice and dives beneath it, he does not use a rope to find his way back to the small escape circle in the limitless shelf above him, because it would restrict his research. When he comes up, he simply hopes he can find the hole. This is all true, but it is also ecstatic truth.

In the process of compiling your life’s work, you have never lost your sense of humor. Your narrations are central to the appeal of your documentaries, and your wonder at human nature is central to your fiction. In one scene you can foresee the end of life on earth, and in another show us country musicians picking their guitars and banjos on the roof of a hut at the South Pole. You did not go to Antarctica, you assure us at the outset, to film cute penguins. But you did film one cute penguin, a penguin that was disoriented, and was steadfastly walking in precisely the wrong direction—into an ice vastness the size of Texas. “And if you turn him around in the right direction,” you say, “he will turn himself around, and keep going in the wrong direction, until he starves and dies.” The sight of that penguin waddling optimistically toward his doom would be heartbreaking, except that he is so sure he is correct.

But I have started to wander off like the penguin, my friend.

I have started out to praise your work, and have ended by describing it. Maybe it is the same thing. You and your work are unique and invaluable, and you ennoble the cinema when so many debase it. You have the audacity to believe that if you make a film about anything that interests you, it will interest us as well. And you have proven it.

With admiration,
Roger

 
   

Mondo Marilyn: Again!

Mighty Aphrodite! 

MM: still a cover girl, Vanity Fair, October 2008. 

Friendly Full Moon Reminder

Full moon tonight.  Season’s changing.  Autumn on the way.  Best time to start saying this year’s goodbyes.

Still I Rise.

This is required reading for all eighth grade girls in the United States, isn’t it???

You may write me down in history

With your bitter, twisted lies

You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I’ll rise.

Read the rest of this entry »

Two new moons in one month…

Sometimes it takes two new moons in one month to get it right…

Visualize.  Work for perfection.  Enjoy.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »