David said...
>>I personally think too that the experience of having one's belief and 
>>culture held up to scrutiny is an alienating experience for people.<<

Sabina said...
>>Yes, this is exactly right on.  Lots of ethnographers/ anthropologists/ 
>>folklorists experience outrage from members of the communities they study; 
>>I first experienced it in my Sardinian field research in the 80s. 
>>Foucault would say being subjected to the ethnographic gaze is inherently 
>>disempowering; I think this is what fuels a lot of the negative Pagan 
>>reactions to what academics write about them.<<

As a Pagan Witch I was initially *disoriented* by some of what, for example, 
an academic such as Ronad Hutton in 'Triumph of the Moon', had to say about 
the history, or lack thereof, and the fantasy of modern Witchcraft's idea of 
its own history. His book came out just at the time I was simultanelosly 
getting interested in Pagan Reconstructionism (in 2000) and realising that 
ancient paganism(s) look very different to what is purported to be 
'Paganism' today. However, far from wanting to attack Hutton, or the authors 
of books on ancient religions because they didn't back up what I had been 
*told* was "our Pagan and/or Witchcraft history" by other Pagan 
practitioners, I became fervently interested in investigating Euopean 
Witchcraft/WitchTrials and ancient Pagan religions (in my case mostly around 
the Mediterranean) through academic sources. So interested and despetate for 
good information was I that I enrolled at university as a mature-age 
student, where I still am - and am absolutely loving it. I find it really 
baffling that people (Pagans are the ones I am most familar with) have such 
a problem with academic histories or other types of academic investigations 
into their 'religions'. Aren't they interested to find out whether something 
is true or untrue, (no not in the realm of religious experience, but of 
historical facts) like for example, the frequently bandied-about idea that 
the worshipping of goddesses by ancient cultures *definately meant* that 
women automatically had high status? Which is not actually true, although 
Goddess Movement participants believe it is. Or the way that modern Wiccan 
Witchcraft is compiled from many disparate sources, some of which are quite 
recent, rather than it being an intact package, transmitted secretly through 
time, which we have received today direct from the Paeleolithic era? Or that 
ancient pagan religious weren't really all that interested in "being one 
with the earth and loving everyone in a bliss of cosmic harmony"... or that 
animal sacrifice was the distinguishing feature of Mediterrnaean religions, 
or that priesthood wasn't a "spiritual calling", or that religion wasn't 
necessarily particularly concerned with "belief" but with practice... Aren't 
they interested in that?

>>What strategies can we use to work and write against this dynamic?  How 
>>can we better incorporate the members of the communities we study and 
>>belong to in our research?  What are our responsibilities, if any, to the 
>>communities we study?<<

Not being an anthropologist, I'm actually really glad I don't have to worry 
about this. I'm not formally studying "live" Pagans. I'm not inclined to be 
all charitable about people yelling about how they don't like academics 
studying them. I mean who is "them" anyway? I am "them" as well, because I 
come from a Pagan background *to* academia. I'm trying to understand more 
about my 'religious' culture that I've been involved in for over 20 years. 
Trying to sort out what is correct about what I've been taught by 
practitoners, and what is completely wrong.

Initially I thought I might concentrate more in my academic ventures on the 
interaction between archaeological material and modern Pagans, but I've been 
moving further and further away from wanting to involve modern Paganism in 
my work. Now I think I'll stick to the archaeology of the ancient world 
only, and any comments about how Pagan use or interpret archaeology will 
just be side articles, perhaps. Although I am still very interested in say, 
the uses of Minoan archaeological material by the Goddess Movement, of 
Ancient Near Eastern Material by Goddess Judaism, the ancient themes in 
Wicca such as the Descent of the Goddess (Descent of Inanna), the uses of 
ancient Egyptian deities in Hermeticism (my 4th year thesis topic). I do 
find certain appropriations of archaeology frustrating, like the opposition 
to the academic interpretation of the site of Catalhoyuk by Goddess Movement 
participants - yes, I know Ian Hodder's post-processual approach to that 
site allows for multivocality in interpretation.... But Goddess Movement 
participants wilfully stick to the older interpretation of the cultic nature 
of that site by James Mellaart because *they like it*, it *suits their 
beliefs about The Goddess*, rather than being open to more recent 
interpretations which they feel are simply ignorant of Mellaart's "truthful 
vision" (that Catalhoyuk was a Goddess-centric, woman-centric Eden), but 
which are jsut as interesting, if not more interesting than Mellaart!!!!

>>I'm currently involved in a project of this type with one of the most 
>>notorious creators of modern Italian Pagan traditions, and it's a 
>>challenge for me in a lot of ways.  It really forces me out of my comfort 
>>zone at times, and does the same for him, I daresay.<<

And I know exactly who you mean and I can't wait to read about it.

~Caroline Tully.

http://necropolisnow.blogspot.com/