>From: Caelum Rainieri <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Society for The Academic Study of Magic
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Pop-Wicca
>Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:26:48 -0800
>
>Thanks for re-posting your reply, Sabina. I like your re-classification of
>the three levels, although I don't believe that it touches on many people's
>primary objection to "Pop Wicca", which is content - particularly the
>do-it-yourself or spell-based variety. As far as I know, none of the
>academic presses have published a "book of spells" or a "How to" book for
>practitioners (thank the gods).
>
> Caelum Rainieri
>
Have they not? Surely they have - it's just that the spells are hallowed by
time? What else are the magical papyri, but what you describe?
I'm not (well, not merely) being pedantic here... this is something I think
relates to other discussions on this list, that it's considered acceptable
to study the ancient texts, but somehow... less acceptable (to put a polite
face on it) to be involved in current practice?
Diotima
|