Just a short one today, as I’ve got WAY too much to do, and not enough time to do it…
Below is a video of my old friend and colleague Jenny Butler, who was working on her Ph.D. in the Folklore & Ethnology department at my university in Ireland (University College Cork) when I was there–this video is from last year, but I’m not sure if she’s finished her Ph.D. yet or not. In any case, her dissertation is on Irish witchcraft and paganism in the modern period. This is a short summary of what she’s been doing, for an audience that doesn’t know much about the subject (or about folklore and ethnology).
Something that is to be commented on in this, and which I have often been at pains to communicate to people in the U.S.: there are a number of pagans of various types in Ireland, and though some identify as Druids and practitioners of Druidry, almost none of them are what could be classified as “Celtic Reconstructionists.” Sure, they use some sites that are definitely Celtic in origin (e.g. Tara), as well as ones that are pre-Celtic (e.g. Newgrange), and they themselves are Irish and have a lot invested in various aspects of the Irish folk tradition–but, their celebration of the Irish Quarter Days is along the lines of Wiccan celebrations of such, not anything demonstrably derived from direct Irish sources.
So, it’s a very interesting matter to think about further in considering how the diasporic nature of CR in the U.S. can be somewhat unique in comparison to how paganism is done in Ireland (and other countries, for that matter).
I’ve long noted that areas at the fringes of the Indo-European world tend to be more conserving of archaic practices and beliefs than the more central areas. While “conserving” may not be precisely true of modern polytheism, nonetheless the core areas may be similarly more comfortable with introducing or incorporating innovative material than those in the diaspora.
By: Faoladh on August 6, 2012
at 10:39 pm
Yes–that also seems to be somewhat the case with the Thracian group I noted on here a while back. While they’re much closer to the source, and no doubt incorporate a great deal of the living folklore and such into their practice, their overall theology is pretty much Wiccan duotheism.
I wonder if this speaks to something that many recons in diasporic areas aren’t entirely comfortable with: that there is a feeling of underlying “identity” in those traditional places (that are literally indigenous in their practice) that is not that bothered with form, structure, and theological framework because they’re secure in their identity as Irish, Bulgarian/Thracian, etc., whereas Americans (and Australians and Canadians, e.g.) aren’t so much, and thus must work harder to recover what’s “original” and “native” and so forth, and there’s far more politics around it, etc.
(This gets into a whole other debate on the “indigenous” nature of some pagan religions, and the–in my view–erroneous notion that some people and groups claim in that respect. One can’t practice an indigenous religion unless it’s a religion that is indigenous to the geographic area one is in; and for the U.S. and all of us born here, that would have to be Native American practices appropriate to whichever area we live in–and since most of us aren’t Native American, we can’t do that and won’t do that and get very touchy about it, etc. We’re definitely diasporic in our approaches, though, because that is the nature of it and the nature of us–none of us are “from here” in an extremely deep way; but, if our religion did grow up in this American culture and environment, as many forms of paganism have, then they might even have greater claim to indigeny than some of the ones who are crowing about it the loudest at present. Hmm!)
By: aediculaantinoi on August 6, 2012
at 10:57 pm
Oh, boy, is that a big kettle of worms! I mean, we do eventually have to confront it, but there are a lot of us who simply don’t feel qualified to speak to those issues definitively.
Matters of identity, originalism, and so on are important ones. They are central to issues of paganism and the differences between existing religious structures and the ones we’d like to see in place. For instance, if Wiccan duotheism, why not Christian monotheism (which has the added advantage in every European context of having been integrated over a period of centuries)? That is, why a Wiccan structure instead of a Christian one? Why a Christian one instead of an Indo-European polytheist one? Why a Wiccan one instead of an Indo-European polytheist one? Or vice versa in each case?
I don’t know, perhaps I am not expressing myself well here. I need to think about this a lot more (and I’ve been thinking about it for years now!) I do have some tentative conclusions, but I need to talk them over with people before presenting them publicly. Sadly, it’s very difficult to have that conversation because of the matter I brought up at the beginning: many of us do not feel qualified to speak to these issues, and they are difficult issues to think about (for reasons both emotional and intellectual).
By: Faoladh on August 6, 2012
at 11:19 pm
You don’t need to speak to them definitively, though–very few people can speak on anything definitively, to be honest (including myself on subjects I’ve done my Ph.D. on!), and since you are an informed and thoughtful person, any discussion of this issue on your part would be useful, in my opinion.
And, considering that some of the people who are presuming to speak on these issues in a manner that they consider definitive, and they’re doing so publicly and getting a lot of pagan media attention (even internationally) for doing so are poorly informed and ill-thought-out in their process, and you’re definitely not either, would make it all the more important to inject a useful and insightful voice on the matter when and where possible, I’d have thought!
By: aediculaantinoi on August 7, 2012
at 10:23 am
Really interesting points you bring up, and definitely things I’ve been thinking about. Not about Wiccan practices in Ireland – I didn’t realize that. Mostly I’ve been thinking about myself as a recon-oriented Druid living in America and what that means for myself and my spirituality.
By: greycatsidhe on August 7, 2012
at 8:36 am
Yes–and I’m glad those are useful things to think about, because one should think about them! Even if it doesn’t change one’s own practices, if it at least gives you an idea of why you prefer to do what you’re doing and that it means something for you to do them that way rather than another, that’s a very useful personal insight, I think.
By: aediculaantinoi on August 7, 2012
at 10:18 am
I agree. Thanks for your thoughts!
By: greycatsidhe on August 7, 2012
at 11:47 am
I am not sure why it matters? Honestly. Almost none of the people practicing a Pagan religion here in the U.S. could be classified as Celtic Reconstructionists either. I wouldn’t doubt that the percentage per-capita, is about the same in both countries (a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction). I’ve seen this argument used as an attempt to invalidate CR before. It’s nothing new and nothing that we (at least every CR I’ve ever spoken with on the subject) are unaware of.
The vast majority of Irish are perfectly happy speaking English and many whom I’ve met resent the fact that they were forced to learn any Irish in school. A small fraction (in both countries) think preservation of the language is important and work to do so. Same difference.
By: stoneofdestiny on August 7, 2012
at 8:36 am
It does matter, because some CRs that I’ve met in the U.S., who consider themselves “authorities” on the movement, have said quite the opposite about people in Ireland without knowing Irish people first-hand or having lived there, etc. When I pointed out to them that there are a lot more Wiccan-esque Irish pagans than CR-style ones, they made some disparaging comments about the people I associated with in Ireland, rather than taking this information seriously. And Jenny’s work on this matter really demonstrates that’s the case.
It’s not an attempt to invalidate CR, lest I also invalidate a large portion of my own practice and experience within modern polytheism; it’s simply a corrective to those who have attempted to try and argue otherwise without any proof. And, it’s also a good set of things to think about, and to consider in terms of what it means for us as diasporic practitioners–particularly when some (U.S.) CRs start to get ideas that the way they do things is the only “right” way, and is what the Irish themselves would prefer if given the chance, etc.
By: aediculaantinoi on August 7, 2012
at 10:17 am
I didn’t mean to imply the you were trying to invalidate CR, only the the same “that not what the Irish are doing” argument has been used on me in the past as an attempt to do so. If I made my decisions based on what the majority of Irish were doing I suppose I’d be Catholic (heh).
I obviously cannot speak to the opinions of those you’ve interacted with in the CR community, except to say that your experience has not been my own. Perhaps the folks you talked to are only in contact with CR elements in Ireland (no surprise there, as it’s no secret that there is often friction between the two camps). I’m not making excuses for people I don’t know. As I said, those I’ve talked to tend to be fairly involved and informed with what’s going on across the pond. Frankly, I do wish that more Irish would look to their own cultural history rather than outside influences, but that’s a much bigger topic than just pagan spirituality (western monoculture strikes again).
By: stoneofdestiny on August 8, 2012
at 6:46 am
This is a really interesting question for me.
Does the insecurity of Americans in their own cultural identity inspire them to seek an identity elsewhere? I’d wager that this is the case and is what inspires so many Americans to identify with their ethnic and/or cultural heritage more so than any particular resonance with Americana. Especially out West. And yet because we live in a nation-state some take their American identity from patriotism.
I think both of these trends are inspiring Pagan approaches to what it means to be an American or whether that identity should be abandoned in pursuit of “seeking one’s roots” in their ethnic/cultural heritage. Thus much of the self-consciously “American” Paganism we see is rooted in reverence of the Founding Fathers and seeking out uniquely American gods. The proliferation of people seeking to weave the ceremonial deism of the U.S. government into a coherent Pagan religion speaks to this, I think.
The rubber band on the other claw being the hard core, hard polytheist groups that adhere to strict methodological reconstructionism even to the point of making the mistake of strict mono-culturalism. After all how can you have a solid Greek Pagan identity without throwing out all those Egyptian influences? And that’s the rub. In some reconstructionists eyes they’re not really trying to seek out their ancestral heritage on its own terms, they’re desperately trying to establish their own sense of religious, and more broadly, cultural identity.
One wonders if this is why Pagans actually living in and native to the “target” countries often aren’t concerned about establishing a uniquely and exclusively “target” identity. Or if they are it often manifests as a reaction to foreign influences they perceive to be threats to their national identity. A good example of this being the political paganism of many former-Soviet countries who were almost always more interested in reasserting their national identity than in reviving their ancestors actual religions.
For me personally I think a uniquely and explicitly American Paganism can come from a strong understanding of American identity based on shared cultural values common to Americans. I think that the counter-culture heritage of much of modern Paganism is indicative of this having already happened and being an example of where we can go from there.
Great discussion!
Dave
By: Dave the Human on August 7, 2012
at 2:46 pm
Totally agree with everything you said!
The anti-syncretism of so many recon groups is truly astonishing and ridiculous, since you can’t rule out Near Eastern and Egyptian elements in Greek religion, elements from all over in Rome, Roman elements in Gaulish, Christian elements in Irish and Welsh, Scythian elements in Thracian, Christian and Roman and some Gaulish and even Irish elements in many Germanic cultures, and so on and so forth…And yet, there are people who think these cultures are individually-wrapped and sealed packages that are “pure” and don’t have external influences, etc. The people who claim to know the most about these cultures, and who crow the loudest about how “pure” they are in their pursuit of them, turn out to be the least well-informed on what these cultures actually are and did and were interested in, then. (We talk a bit about this in my Reconstructionism as Methodology course–these type of recons don’t fare very well opinion-wise in the materials of that course…!)
By: aediculaantinoi on August 7, 2012
at 5:53 pm
What it comes down to for me is I can’t be a reconstructionist as it is popularly meant in the Pagan and polytheistic communities. The way it is so commonly described it sounds like a renovation project, if I may make that metaphor.
Except this renovation is described as attempting to find the house your grandparents’ grandparents’ grew up in and trying to rebuild it exactly as it was without any additional construction materials or accurate blueprints (or even idea of layout depending on your grandparents). Also instead of hiring an architect and construction team you’re doing it all yourself with no training (or if you’re lucky a construction background of some kind).
Additionally, you must live exactly like they did in the house otherwise you’re just “playing house” and you must ignore the fact that they had neighbors over that you’ve either conveniently forgotten about or never knew about for whatever reason. Your success in this renovation is measured by how well your house is an exact replica of theirs and how perfectly you mimic their lives.
Except because of all the time that has passed, the condition of the materials, and the inability to utilize new building techniques or modern materials you’re living in a rotten, falling down pile of crap of a “house”. It may not stand up, it may not have a floor, or a roof, or running water. But you found their tattered drapes and moth eaten clothes and you just feel so connected to them. And there are people who want to raise kids in that house. Yuck!
Now if you talked to your grandparents, visited the site, and built a house modeled on the one your ancestors lived in using modern techniques, new construction materials, and a professional design/building team that’s one thing. And if you took inspiration from the example they set in how they lived their lives and strove to uphold those moral ideals that’s awesome. I could see living that life in that house. I could see kids growing up there. And if you built it yourself? Even more impressive.
Unfortunately, too many poly-recons seem dead set on the first house. And that’s not a place I could ever see myself living. Not the least of which is because the most important part of living in the first house is to sit around arguing about who’s doing it right and who’s doing it wrong and never really getting any actual work done on the project itself. But that’s alright. The first house is never in any real danger of being completed. Ever.
By: Dave the Human on August 9, 2012
at 12:37 am
The only quibble I have with your characterization here is the whole bit about tattered drapes and such: most of those type of folks don’t want drapes of any kind, they want wattle-and-daub huts with walls that are made of woven reeds with mud between them.
In the Reconstructionism as Methodology course, we talk about different types of recons, and the ones you’re describing are what I’d call passive, often secondary (though occasionally primary), and appeal-based: “passive” because however good their work at restoring what amounts to a ruin is, they’re not making it habitable or usable, nor are they using their own creativity or the input of the gods here-and-now to do so; “secondary” because many of the folks crowing the loudest for what you’re describing haven’t actually read the original sources or done in-depth study of them in a direct manner (if they had, they’d be “primary” instead); and “appeal-based” because, for whatever reason, this sort of thing and that way of approaching it feeds a need that they have. It’s not necessarily “wrong” to be that way; it’s just not the only way, which is unfortunate, because it’s those type of recons that take all the ownership of the “recon” term, identify most closely and most loudly with it, and who other polytheists think of when they hear “recon.”
By: aediculaantinoi on August 9, 2012
at 1:10 am
Incidentally, it needs to be pointed out that there are polytheistic reconstructionist individuals and groups who are living morally excellent lives in beautiful religious homes. They just care more for home renovation and are more family oriented than I.
Personally I know my ancestors too well to take my moral cue from them and I’ve always been more of an apartment guy than a wannabe homeowner. Perhaps my religious minimalism is a symptom of being largely “unchurched” or of a generation prone to “I’ll have spirituality, hold the religiosity” as I like to put it.
At any rate, if I thought poly-recon was a lost cause I wouldn’t be following this blog!
By: Dave the Human on August 9, 2012
at 12:54 am
Thank you! I appreciate the vote of confidence!
By: aediculaantinoi on August 9, 2012
at 1:11 am
[...] This post from August, particularly the last paragraph, had me thinking about it once more. Are we, the descendants of Celtic and English diaspora, trying to overcompensate in the form of Celtic Reconstructionism and its methodology? The seed of ADF was planted in America. Although it is an international Druidic organization, the girth of its membership continues to be in America. Compare ADF to OBOD, as John Michael Greer did and you’ll notice some interesting differences. Having been a member of OBOD for a few months* I came to the conclusion that its rituals were more similar to Wicca, although still very beautiful! So what does it mean when the biggest Druidic tradition in the UK feels more like Wicca compared to the American-born ADF with it’s reconstructionist methods? As Greer notes, neither tradition is “real Druidism” as in historically handed down from the ancients. Similarly, both address different needs and can be combined. Indeed, some folks on the ADF e-lists were just discussing how they’ve successfully combined ADF and OBOD in their personal lives. [...]
By: Living Druidism as an American « The Ditzy Druid on October 11, 2012
at 4:19 pm