Hi David,

Surely including ‘some respected academic sources’ is what you should do anyway, in the interests of scholarship, not covering your back. Also, how do you know that ESSWE is regarded with suspicion by a large number of scholars? I haven’t heard this.

By the way, at the University of Lampeter we engage with magic, pagan beliefs and esoteric ideas with no problem.

Nick Campion

Sophia Centre, University of Wales, Lampeter.

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:36 AM, David Robertson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Thanks again, everyone, this has moved from a piece I thought I migh struggle with, to something I'm actively looking forward to.

"Academic"/"scholarly" is a concern. I'm working under the auspices of the Divinity department of the Edinburgh University, which has a very good Religious Studies department, but it's origins lie with the Church of Scotland, and we're outnumbered 5 to 1 by Theologians and trainee Ministers. My research has ruffled a few feathers already, so when I get into areas like this involving Crowley (gasp!), sex (blush) and magic (shudder), I have to make sure I include some respected academic sources to cover my back. In the Religious Studies field in the UK, theologians study Christianity, Religious Studies people study other religions, and religion as a broader phenomenon is studied by sociologists. Things like the ESSWE are still regarded with suspicion by a large number of scholars, something which is slowly changing but needs to change faster. I would like to think that this is an example of scholars of magic and scholars of religion being able to cooperate, and produce work that informs both disciplines.

David


--