Aloha,
>On 1/5/2006 at 11:06 AM jason winslade wrote:
>Wow, that's a pretty stark and inaccurate generalization of neo-paganism.
In my earlier post, I was doing my best to describe some attributes of
popular
culture as a whole, not attributes limited to Neo-Paganism. But on
re-reading
my email, I see that I wasn't that clear. apologies for my ambiguities.
I do think that part of what bothers some of us, at least, about *poppy
wicca*
comes from a once-small movement or enthusiasm being more and more infused
with the sorts of popular culture attributes that I mentioned.
At the same time, it seems pretty clear to me that the post-WWII Neo-Pagan
revival linked itself to popular (or mass popular) culture from the get go.
>On the other hand, I also question the biases of those
>who differentiate between pop culture magick and 'real' magick, as if
>so-called 'highbrow' and 'lowbrow' distinctions actually mean anything.
>Those terms are inherently flawed and culturally biased and I question
>their scholarly use in this day and age.
Well, even if terms like *highbrow* and *lowbrow* might stir up controversy
in more or less strict academic discourse, they do serve in more informal
arenas
like email lists. They do seem to tease out something of
value/content/competence
divergence that holds that *pop wicca* is both different from and less
fulfilling
than the other sort of wicca.
Musing Scratching My Head Over *High* Culture Neo-Paganism! Rose,
Pitch
<<You mean to say that while I was talking theology he was talking
physics?>>
--a character in Alexei Panshin's SF novel *StarWell* about his
conversations
with Torve the Trog
|