I must confess to finding myself confused and perturbed by the contradictory messages and standards of acceptability that are generated by these kinds of identity politics:

 

Texts exclusively focused on culture group A are Good but Texts exclusively focused on culture group B are Bad

 

Castigating an entire group of people linked by either cultural heritage/ DNA haplo-group/ linguistics/ Some other selected point of connection is either (Insert Group label)-Phobic/ Bigoted  or contrary-wise entirely acceptable.

 

One could make a whole list of such contradictory positions

 

In the absence of any semblance of logic or reason to such argumentation would it not be better and frankly far more relevant to the purposes of this list to simply ask the question – ‘Is this text interesting/ useful/ stimulating in so far as it discusses the theory and practice of magic?’

 

Bw

Jon

 

 

Jon Sharp, Acting Director of Learning and Teaching Services

University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ

Office: Room 0.27, The Registry      Email: [log in to unmask]

Tel: 01603 597374, or contact Liz Monahan: [log in to unmask] on (59) 3563

Mobile: 07795666465

 

This email is confidential and may be privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient please accept my apologies; please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this email or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  Please inform me that this message has gone astray before deleting it.  Thank you for your co-operation.

 

From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Green
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Defining magic

 

OK, let's just avert yet another flame war here and take a breather ... The anthology looks superb and I have ordered it. The point - though I think that it could have been expressed with a little more tact - made by N.W. is important. These are definitions which are seen to exclude non-Western magics. Western scholars have to be more alert to this, and need to flag this exclusive nature or be accused of orientialism ... Without anger or ire - or I will delete people - I think it would be useful if N.W. could respond to Robert's question - though this is not about gumption - what should have been included to make the collection inclusive to the non-Western world?

 

Dave

  

Dr Dave Green

 

Senior Lecturer in Sociology, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

 

Society for the Academic Study of Magic (SASM): https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC

 

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=653230719

 

From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of N.W. Azal [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 16 January 2013 13:47
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Defining magic

The Western academic knowledge industries engage in skimming over the knowledge production of entire civilizations, literally making them into none persons, wherein the validity of knowledge only produced by white Europeans is held to be real knowledge (everything else mere curiosities), and I am the one denigrating? Perhaps such denigration is warranted in order to allow for some real introspection by those same Western scholars who in their representation of human knowledge productions still act and behave as if  Europe and Europe alone is the axis mundi. Doing favors or not, such is the truth of the matter. Sorry if us perceived non-European subjects protest over the voices of our perceived European imperial masters for not including us in the human knowledge enterprise!

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Nicholas Campion <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi

 

N.W.Azal, while you do your case no favours in indulging in abuse of western scholars – it is not Otto and Stausberg’s fault that they operate in a particular lineage - I thank you for posting this link. As a child of western scholarship myself, I despair at the parochialism which afflicts much – bit not all – of it.  Personally I will look forward to reading Otto and Stausberg’s contribution.

 

Your link would have spoken volumes, posted by itself, without the need to denigrate others.

 

I have, by the way, forwarded it to my students at the University of Wales and my Facebook page.

 

Nick

 

From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of N.W. Azal


Sent: 16 January 2013 12:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Defining magic

 

Yet another Anglo-European academic text perpetuating an exclusively hegemonic Eurocentric narrative about magic. The colonialist is alive and well in the knowledge industries of the Western Ivory Tower.

 

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM, David Green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Bernd,

This looks great. Thanks for posting.

Dave

Dr Dave Green

Senior Lecturer in Sociology, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

Society for the Academic Study of Magic (SASM): https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=653230719
________________________________________
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernd-Christian Otto [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15 January 2013 12:56
To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Defining magic

Hello everyone!

I would like to announce the publication of a volume which might be of interest to some readers of this list, namely Michael Stausberg’s and my Defining Magic: A Reader. It was just recently published in the series "Critical Categories in the Study of Religion" at Equinox Publishing/Acumen. Those of you who teach courses on magic might find the genre of a reader particularly useful as it includes a range of important definitions and theories all in one place. Apart from the usual suspects, i.e. excerpts of classical authors (Tylor, Frazer, Mauss/Hubert, Durkheim, van der Leeuw, Malinowski, Evans-Pritchard, Horton, Tambiah, Leach), we also included a section covering pre-academic sources (from Plato to Blavatsky) and a section with original texts by five contemporary authors (Greenwood, Lehrich, Sørensen, Stratton, Styers). Have a look at the TOC: http://www.acumenpublishing.co.uk/display.asp?K=e2012121911335322&sf1=subj_code&st1=RS&sort=sort_date/d&ds=Reference&m=18&dc=50.

All texts are seperately introduced for student readers. There is also an introduction devoted to sorting out the definition riddle, and sectional introductions which aim at embedding the selected sources in the wider discourse of the respective time.

But now enough of advertising! Best wishes from
Bernd-Christian Otto & Michael Stausberg