Talk:Mastering Witchcraft/Archive 1

Archive 1

references not fully supporting claim

This reference:

Luhrmann, T.M. Persuasions of the Witch's Craft, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989, p.261 "Appendix: Core Texts in Magical Practice. Any list would be incomplete but certain books are central...for non-feminist witchcraft Doreen Valiente Witchcraft for Tomorrow (1978) and Paul Huson Mastering Witchcraft (1970)

while it supports that Luhrman thinks "it certainly became one of the chief sources of information and ritual", ascribes to multiple people ("for novice practitioners") the opinion of one author, and surely, in the quoted text, says nothing about the claim "did not particularly care for or identify with the agenda currently being propounded by the Wiccan covens then extant in the United States". It's a nice source, and all, but, seeing as how we have repeatedly been harped on about ascribing opinions where there may be no basis, this source does the same thing, and fails to adequately support the claim.--Vidkun 14:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with you here. Luhrmann, as an anthropologist and research fellow at Cambridge University, devoted a year of fieldwork in the UK during the 1980s, taking initiation into a variety of Wicca and non-Wicca covens and indeed becoming a Wiccan in order to write the book. The book, published by Harvard University Press, was a result of her extensive research, which unlike Hutton's, involved actually gaining the confidence and entering into the mindset of the Wiccans from whom she gathered her information. I frankly don't know how, other than from a book like this, you could get more objective documentation of Wiccan beliefs and practices during the 1980s. It remains a highly respected source work. If you read the book, you will see that so scrupulous is Luhrmann's work, there is simply no basis to claim that "opinions are being ascribed where there may be no basis." To quote one of the reviews of the book: "By working close to home, Ms. Luhrmann is able to overcome the huge problem of translation and of commensurability between anthropologist and 'native' and yet produce arguments and conclusions which speak directly to the magic and ritual of more exotic societies and which also undermine some of the stereotypical assumptions about the nature of the Western rationality which are pitted against them." - Stephen Hugh-Jones, University of Cambridge. Her "core texts" were those actually used by the covens she belonged to. And she correctly labeled "Mastering Witchcraft" as "non-feminist".

As for the line "the agenda currently being propounded by the Wiccan covens in the United States", this simply refers to the issue that is brought up in "Mastering Witchcraft" itself, namely that not all witches ascribe to the edicts of the feminist Gardner covens where the High Priestess rules supreme, where ritual flagellation is practiced, and where all working is done in the nude.

Does this address your concern? Maybe you can suggest alternative wording that avoids the pitfall you see. KitMarlowe2 01:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

From reading Vidkun's comment above, he is not criticising Luhrmann's knowledge or competence to make such a judgement; he's observing that in the given quote Luhrmann doesn't make any such judgement. Perhaps we could try to read certain judgements into Luhrmann's choice of books to promote, or her experiences and choice of paths, but that's beyond our remit, and we run the grave risk of putting our own words in her mouth. Better to present what she actually said, rather than try to extrapolate. If you can find some other quotes from her that say these things a bit more clearly, then add them in by all means.

As for the actual wording: the term "agenda" is a loaded term; also to suggest that "wiccan covens" in the US have a single agenda misrepresents the level of organisation between what are in fact autonomous and only very loosely connected groups, and starts to sound a little like some of the more bizarre Christian conspiracy theories... The phrase "did not particularly care for or identify with" is chatty and emotive, and particularly in context with the loaded phrases that followed, sounded particularly biased and anti-Wiccan. Fuzzypeg☻ 00:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and if you want to add some info regarding Huson's opinions regarding Wicca, as presented in Mastering Witchcraft, that would be great. I seem to recall he was mildly critical of it. I don't recall him terming it "feminist witchcraft", but I could be wrong... that term would require some explanation, since it is generally taken to mean Dianic Witchcraft, not Wicca. Fuzzypeg☻ 00:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)