|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:30 pm
Sanguina Cruenta Hmm. Just out of interest, to those who have read this chapter already, does she actually discuss magical symbols in this chapter or is it entirely about unrelated stuff? It's pretty much about spellwork as opposed to symbols. I agree that the spells are good examples, but you are right, six pages is a bit over the top. As for the saffron issue I guess you could always use imitation saffron - it's much cheaper. I can't believe I forgot to write this when I wrote about her table of correspondances - yet again she mention Robin Hood as a god! scream She.Is.Insane.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:38 pm
Yeah, I'm just really annoyed with the whole book right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:44 pm
iKillCaustic--uKillMe I can't believe I forgot to write this when I wrote about her table of correspondances - yet again she mention Robin Hood as a god! scream She.Is.Insane. I think this comes from her using the poor scholarship of Margaret Murray as she puts a footnote on page 133 for Chapter 6 saying: "A more complete explanation of the identification of Robin Hood with the Horned God of the Witches is given by Margaret Murray in The God of the Witches (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 41-42."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:02 pm
lifeaura iKillCaustic--uKillMe I can't believe I forgot to write this when I wrote about her table of correspondances - yet again she mention Robin Hood as a god! scream She.Is.Insane. I think this comes from her using the poor scholarship of Margaret Murray as she puts a footnote on page 133 for Chapter 6 saying: "A more complete explanation of the identification of Robin Hood with the Horned God of the Witches is given by Margaret Murray in The God of the Witches (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 41-42." Ah, right. Not too surprising I suppose. Murray would also be where she got the whole "Joan of Arc - not a Catholic but seekritly a witch!" thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:40 pm
I think Starhawk got a lot of stuff from Murray. I also don't think that she's stopped using her as a source. She never once mentions anything of the sort in her notes and Murray has been debunked for decades.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:09 am
As a first year university student Starhawk has taught me one thing - how NOT to use and cite sources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:10 pm
I've been very bad about this lately. Not only have I not bean reading it, I'm out of town for the week and I left the book at home (kind of on purpose).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:13 pm
I've been pretty bad too. I have the book beside me now, I just have to bring myself to open it. stressed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 5:12 am
Alright next chapter. Energy, the cone of power.
Ugh, the first two paragraphs make me want to vomit. "Magic is LOVE!"
I don't understand the "more tangible than emotion" part. Is this the sort of thing where emotion is less tangible for some people than others, or something? Am I thinking about these things in the wrong sort of way?
I feel like much of page 155-6 should have gone before the previous chapter (if not most of the previous chapters). I can't actually understand why her editor didn't re-arrange them... why would you put a chapter explaining what magic is after a chapter in which you explain spellwork? Admittedly much of it is repetition from elsewhere in the book and pointless waffle.
Haha, stupid woman. DNA isn't a spiral! It's a helix. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.
..no, seriously, you can't tell me you've written 8 chapters on a book and you don't know simple mathematical shapes like what a spiral is.
I strongly question her claim that all energy flows in spirals (for which she has provided no evidence).
Oh, and we're back to her using her book for her political platform again. Beautiful. And now she's tearing pornography. Way to abuse the freedoms of other women, Starhawk. Way to enforce your own gender stereotypes. This entire ritual reeks of hypocrisy; first they tear up pornography, then they tell themselves not to be ashamed of their sexuality. So what was the porno tearing in aid of? Don't be ashamed of your own, but shame that of others? Shame women who choose to pose without their clothes on - why? Shame men for liking to look at nekkid ladies?
I can see no reason for her including that ritual, particularly in the place she did. I'm beginning to think this entire book exists solely as a platform for her sexism and hypocritical feminism.
A little disconcerting to read her 10 year notes on the cone of power. Apparently she actually changed the text for this one because no one in her coven had ever managed to get it right the way she had originally described it. I'm glad she changed it, I just wish she'd done a proper overhaul of the text and changed the whole damn thing.
Oh, hey, men! Apparently you have a "womb centre"! Also, ideas? Not born in the mind, as you may have thought. In fact they come from the inner womb, apparently located within the belly. Why does she keep using the word "womb", anyway? It makes me feel rather ill. It's called a UTERUS, Starhawk. Can you say that word? UTERUS. Next lesson we'll work on saying "p***s" without implying everyone who owns one is a rapist.
So, this "raith" word, did she make that up or did it come from somewhere else?
I'm fairly sure she doesn't know what a familiar is. I'm also a little disturbed that she thinks witches keep pets to syphon off their energy.
She's going over the "Self" stuff that I found boring the first time she said it back in chapter 2 or whatever. Why is she stating it again? Is it because she secretly wants to fill the rest of the book with exercises but needs waffle to break them up? I think it must me. I am failing to see what pendulum exercises and "sensing auras" has to do with the cone of power, by the way. But that's probably symptomatic of titling a chapter "cone of power" when much of your cone of power-esque discussion took place in the previous chapter.
I want to spit in this woman's face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:04 am
Sanguina Cruenta I feel like much of page 155-6 should have gone before the previous chapter (if not most of the previous chapters). I can't actually understand why her editor didn't re-arrange them... why would you put a chapter explaining what magic is after a chapter in which you explain spellwork? Admittedly much of it is repetition from elsewhere in the book and pointless waffle. I noticed that too...after I had read both of them I went back and read them in reverse order and it made slightly more sense. Sanguina Cruenta Haha, stupid woman. DNA isn't a spiral! It's a helix. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE. ..no, seriously, you can't tell me you've written 8 chapters on a book and you don't know simple mathematical shapes like what a spiral is. There's a part in the book where she tries to get all technical about genetics as well...it sounds like she opened a biology textbook and wrote down some fancy-sounding words to make herself appear smarter. Sanguina Cruenta I'm glad she changed it, I just wish she'd done a proper overhaul of the text and changed the whole damn thing. You're not alone in that thought. Sanguina Cruenta Oh, hey, men! Apparently you have a "womb centre"! ... It's called a UTERUS, Starhawk. Can you say that word? UTERUS. Next lesson we'll work on saying "p***s" without implying everyone who owns one is a rapist. Tell me about it. stare Sanguina Cruenta So, this "raith" word, did she make that up or did it come from somewhere else? Who knows? Quite frankly it just confuses me. Sanguina Cruenta I want to spit in this woman's face. So do many others... xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:05 am
It wouldn't bother me if she did make it up, I'd just like to know where it came from. (I also keep thinking "wraith".)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:24 pm
Alright I want to get this over and done with. Chapter Nine.
Back in chapter two, the italics bit at the beginning of the chapter pleased me and reminded me of "Essential Asatru". Now it just seems put on, forced and fake.
I'm on the second page and she's still talking about trances! It's some sort of miracle: a chapter actually about what it says it is about.
Oh my gooood it is so nice to read a chapter where she apparently knows what she's talking about! It's so clear that she has actual knowledge about this subject and only really underlines her total lack of knowledge regarding everything else, because she manages to stay on topic for nearly the whole chapter! And she hasn't said anything too stupid yet!
I don't like that, at the top of page 171, she says people can't be exploited via suggestion during hypnosis because we won't do anything against our moral beliefs. That doesn't mean at all that people can't be exploited. Memories of sexual abuse have been created from whole cloth during "memory retrieval" hypnosis, and this has ruined not only the lives of the people now suffering from a fake history but the lives of those people arrested and convicted of child molestation. I'm sure that this is the sort of thing people didn't know in the 1970s but it's incredibly important to acknowledge and I would have thought it would have been added in, as people were aware of it in the late 90s.
I'm concerned too that she doesn't address the dangers of leaving one's body and going Elsewhere, of meeting gods and entities that aren't a part of one's subconscious but are separate.
"No fear is stronger than our fear of our own shadow" - has this woman not experienced much fear in life? Personally, I'm far more terrified of being buried alive than I am of myself.
Victor Andersen's interaction with "evil entities" at the bottom of page 172 is both hilarious and a little sad. I wonder what interesting things he would have learned had he followed the guides that appeared to him, rather than dismissing them as "evil" out of hand because they told him something he didn't want to hear or gave him a choice he wanted no part of. I tend to think that some things cost regardless of how natural or beautiful they are.
The comments on drug use are typically naive and culturally imperialistic. She tries to undo the cultural imperialism but lady, it's already been said. Change the statement and stop trying to say "oh but they are traditional shamans and it's okay for them". I'm glad she recognised her hypocrisies and so forth in her 20 year notes but I'm sad it took her 20 years to do it.
I'm unsure whether her trance examples are meant to be journeys or visualisations/guided meditations. They're quite distinct for me and involve different preparations and methods and she hasn't made it clear which she means. I assume they are guided meditations but one can never be sure.
The "feasting" and "farewell" and "opening circle" are sooo out of place in this chapter. I also feel like she's being very patronising about people with addictions... changing "cakes and wine" to "feasting"? Really? Are people going to get offended by reading the word "wine"? Are they going to go out and get s**t-faced because you mentioned an alcoholic beverage? Really?
Overall a way better chapter than the others, it's so refreshing that she kept on-topic for most of it and actually seemed to know what she was talking about. Still some concerns, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:45 am
Sanguina Cruenta I'm on the second page and she's still talking about trances! It's some sort of miracle: a chapter actually about what it says it is about. Sanguina Cruenta Oh my gooood it is so nice to read a chapter where she apparently knows what she's talking about! It's so clear that she has actual knowledge about this subject and only really underlines her total lack of knowledge regarding everything else, because she manages to stay on topic for nearly the whole chapter! And she hasn't said anything too stupid yet! Yeah this chapter was quite good to read. Sanguina Cruenta I'm concerned too that she doesn't address the dangers of leaving one's body and going Elsewhere, of meeting gods and entities that aren't a part of one's subconscious but are separate. I've never tried to do anything like that because I lack the guidance and sourses to guide me through this. Surely there's more to trancing and leaving one's body than what she describes? Sanguina Cruenta I also feel like she's being very patronising about people with addictions... changing "cakes and wine" to "feasting"? Really? Are people going to get offended by reading the word "wine"? Are they going to go out and get s**t-faced because you mentioned an alcoholic beverage? Really?I know! The have problems with alcohol when they consume it, not when they read about it. Unless they have somehow figured out to drink a beer with their eyeballs...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:01 am
iKillCaustic--uKillMe I've never tried to do anything like that because I lack the guidance and sourses to guide me through this. Surely there's more to trancing and leaving one's body than what she describes? To be honest I was doing it before I really knew what it was, so I have difficulty pinning down the possibilities of learning it from books, and what is necessary to describe in writing and what is superfluous and what is impossible and so on. I mean as an introduction it's not bad - though she could have spent more time on the actual subject and less on the aura stuff. But I have to admit that reading it I did not get the feeling like i had the sort of information i'd need to feel like it was something I could attempt just based on what she had given us. I think she assumed we'd have someone to guide us, which is a bit of a ridiculous assumption given that the book is aimed more or less at people looking to start their own groups or practise alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:17 am
Sanguina Cruenta To be honest I was doing it before I really knew what it was, so I have difficulty pinning down the possibilities of learning it from books, and what is necessary to describe in writing and what is superfluous and what is impossible and so on. I mean as an introduction it's not bad - though she could have spent more time on the actual subject and less on the aura stuff. But I have to admit that reading it I did not get the feeling like i had the sort of information i'd need to feel like it was something I could attempt just based on what she had given us. I think she assumed we'd have someone to guide us, which is a bit of a ridiculous assumption given that the book is aimed more or less at people looking to start their own groups or practise alone. I guess I just need to find someone with experience to tell me what should and should not be done and maybe direct me to a few sources before I give it a go. Then again...I might want to try to work on my concentration span first...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
