|
|
|
I love learning. I love good sources of information, and I consider academic work to be invaluable. I just wanted to say that at the start, so as to leave no doubt. If only it were that simple, though.
As Pagans, many of us are trying to recreate, revive or reconstruct elements of ancient practices or ideas. We take an interest in history, mythology, folklore, archaeology and anthropology in ways the general public rarely does. These things inform and inspire each one of us a little differently, and I believe that's as it should be. I want my fellow Pagans to have access to the best quality information about whatever they need to know. I like to share things that will help them get there, including directing them toward the things that helped me.
So why do I think there is trouble? Perhaps a list is the easiest way to cover this.
The trouble with terrible information: There is no doubt that many Pagan and "esoteric" books have been published which are full of bad information. This also goes for blogs, documentaries, and things being taught in workshops. To call the bad stuff scholarship, though, is probably stretching a point, and there are also great documentaries, blogs and workshops. Bad information is nothing new. The Greeks, Romans and medieval Europeans have plenty of BS to offer us. Old isn't always better. Well informed Pagans see the bad stuff for what it is, and like to warn newcomers, which is fine, but it often leads to ...
The trouble with posturing: This is popular on the internet. People with a little knowledge like to lord it over people with a little less, and people with even more knowledge sometimes behave very badly, indeed. A lot of name-calling ensues, but even when it doesn't come to that, we find people speaking in absolute terms about things which any true academic would agree have not been proven. A little knowledge probably isn't that dangerous, but an overabundance can sometimes be the worst weapon, as in...
| The trouble with snowballing: This is when someone asks an innocent question and gets a nine paragraph answer. Another form is the Big Bibliography. "Come back after you've read these seventeen books. Then we'll talk." Now there are times when I have gratefully received such answers, but most of the time a question doesn't warrant it. You might know a lot of stuff, but you don't have to share it all at once! |  |
However, removing the bad manners and bad information only fixes part of the problem ...
The trouble with academia, itself: Academic jobs that provide a decent living are getting harder and harder to come by, especially in the US. This can make career academics wary of questioning the established consensus, or pursuing novel lines of research. It's safer to gently push the edges of whatever is currently accepted, or just keep digging in the middle. This means that little progress gets made in some of the most interesting areas.
There are also issues with "tainted" areas of inquiry. Some of the most brilliant theories and discoveries are made by individuals whose work is patchy. Innovators and lateral thinkers often go down a few wrong roads before they find their answers. They may get overenthusiastic and publish their findings before they have checked all their conclusions, or simply carry their theories too far. They may even fudge things a little, because they are so sure of something that they might as well create an extra margin of proof so people will listen.
There are also issues with "tainted" areas of inquiry. Some of the most brilliant theories and discoveries are made by individuals whose work is patchy. Innovators and lateral thinkers often go down a few wrong roads before they find their answers. They may get overenthusiastic and publish their findings before they have checked all their conclusions, or simply carry their theories too far. They may even fudge things a little, because they are so sure of something that they might as well create an extra margin of proof so people will listen.
 | With the academic climate being what it is, there are plenty of people waiting to savage good work because they found a loophole. Not only is this a shame for someone's career, it is often a complete dead-end for whatever they were working on. They may have been right, or getting very close to being right, but once a theory or line of research has had a good, public de-bunking, no one but the most secure, or ready-to-retire will dare to touch it. |
Sadly, the posturers of this world rarely consider this. They may have an impressive level of amateur scholarship, but because they love to position themselves as having superior knowledge, they are easily drawn into discrediting things that are academically unfashionable. Granted, there are plenty of dodgy ideas around, and if someone tells me "Oh, nobody listens to her theories, anymore" or "Current research suggests that never happened" I try to follow that up with a bit of research. For example, are various people all quoting one writer's attack on something? Does that attack seem warranted?
One final problem is fame. Academics who get contracts to make documentaries, or who write popular books that actually sell, sometimes come in for a special kind of backstabbing. It's occasionally deserved, and there's no doubt that personal image is as strong a selling point as brains, especially for television, but sometimes, people are just jealous.
One final problem is fame. Academics who get contracts to make documentaries, or who write popular books that actually sell, sometimes come in for a special kind of backstabbing. It's occasionally deserved, and there's no doubt that personal image is as strong a selling point as brains, especially for television, but sometimes, people are just jealous.
The trouble with over-emphasis: Neo-Paganism is a set of spiritual or religious ideas. We may seek the best information about the past as a way of finding our way forward, but it can only take us so far. We all have different ideas about the woo-woo part. "Whatever I feel like" works for some, while others will insist on shared or "verified" gnosis. It's a personal choice. There is an awful lot about deity and spirituality that we can never be sure about, and everyone has a right to choose their own level of filtration. Ultimately, keeping religion/spirituality on a purely academic level cuts its heart out, especially when it comes to ...
The trouble with proof: This one is especially problematic in Celtic studies, because the Celts didn't write about their own culture until comparatively recently. There is a well-known maxim: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In other words, if you can't prove that something happened, then maybe it didn't, but without evidence, you also can't be sure that it didn't happen. We have to accept that we can't look into the distant past with accuracy. As much as we'd like to know all about our ancestors' beliefs and customs, we never will. So sometimes we have to trust our hearts, or go with our best guess, or try to channel it, because the only alternative is ...
The trouble with overthinking: I consider myself to be intuitive. Plenty of people are. Most definitions of intuition focus on the ability to reach conclusions without consciously thinking about the knowledge you are drawing on. That's not the same thing as clairvoyance or seeing a holy vision or any of the woo-woo stuff. It's just the mind's ability to connect up ideas without us telling it how. I don't believe that intuition should always be trusted, but I do know that it is only as good as what you feed it. I've never studied calculus, so I'm unlikely to ever have an intuitive breakthrough there. I'm going to have my best intuitive thoughts where my knowledge already runs deepest, and if that knowledge is faulty, my intuition might be, too. That's why I like my little scholarly pursuits, because they feed me. They feed me best if choose my intake wisely, and consume in moderation.
Lugh Lleu
A collection of prose and poetry about two intertwined gods. This is a literary approach based on scholarship, so I have included bibliographical notes for those who want them.
8.5" x 5.5"
28 pages
$
8.00
RSS Feed
