Of the smaller Pagan presses Immanion/Megalithica have really stood out as a place that isn’t afraid to tackle  difficult and unusual topics or thorny issues. From serious-minded explorations of Otherkin, to in-depth meditations on Ogam, to updated reissues of out-of-print classics, the company has carved out a unique identity rather than trying to clone the industry leader. Their latest offering, “Talking About the Elephant: An Anthology of Neopagan Perspectives on Cultural Approporation”, is no exception. Edited by Lupa (“DIY Totemism”, “Fang and Fur, Blood and Bone”) , the book shines light on an often-contentious issue within the larger Pagan community.

“Talking About the Elephant is an attempt to shatter that stillness and to promote constructive communication about the issues surrounding cultural appropriation in neopaganism. The nineteen essays approach such practices and faiths as Celtic reconstructionism, neoshamanism, and ritual magic; and explore and critique topics ranging from academic appropriation of pagan and occult practices, to intra-community intimidation, and potential solutions to the problem of appropriation. The controversy surrounding cultural appropriation in neopaganism is nothing new; however, it’s time to stop pretending the elephant isn’t staring at us as we stand in silence. This powerful, diverse set of voices is poised to break open a new dialogue, one that must occur if our spiritual communities are to balance individual needs with concerned criticisms.”

It is safe to say that the issue of cultural appropriation is one that often generates more heat than light when brought up in  various forums. From Goddess worshippers trying to negotiate a manner in which to properly honor indigenous voices, to polytheistic reconstructionists balancing hisotrical and cultural fidelity with “UPG” (unverified personal gnosis) and syncretic urges, many of these discussions can end up as bitter flame-wars with both sides hurling brickbats at the other. “Talking About the Elephant” bravely steps into the midst of these simmering debates and attempts to both discuss the various forms of appropriation existing within modern Paganism (everything from Vedic Druids to Christo-Pagans), whether appropriations can or cannot be done respectfully, and the somewhat murky issue of authenticity. While there are a variety of perspectives on display in the collection, there is an overwhelming message here that modern Pagans do need to be more careful in spiritual seeking and how they present themselves. A message summed up rather well by Elizabeth Barrette in her essay “Braiding Pagans”.

“The responsible spiritual tourist, or pilgrim in search of a new religion, takes care to harm no one along the way. In order to survive and thrive in this increasingly multicultural world, we must learn to live together in harmony and respect each other’s traditions. That means sharing or trading our practices, not simply absconding with what we want and giving nothing in return. It means asking before taking, and sometimes, it means taking “no” for an answer.”

As for the contributors, the book features a veritable who’s who of rising stars in modern Paganism, including Erynn Rowan Laurie, Dr. Phillip Bernhardt-House, Lupa, and Kenaz Filan (among others). This is an excellent starting point in addressing this ongoing issue within our communities, and it would make and ideal centerpiece for a book discussion group. While I doubt we’ll ever completely settle the issues raised within this tome, I do hope that quality books like this will start to let more light in, and produce the constructive dialogue needed to move us collectively forward. The Wild Hunt recommended!

A kind soul has brought to my attention a download of a 1964 Life Magazine article about modern Witches and Pagans. Providing most of the text for the piece is Eleanor Ray Bone, “Matriarch of British Witchcraft”,  and one of Gerald Gardner’s High Priestesses. This being Life Magazine, it also has several nice pictures (though sadly they aren’t in the newly digitized collection).

Besides being a nice snapshot of Wicca in England circa the early 1960s, it also shows how little journalism conerning modern Witchcraft has changed in the course of over 40 years. We’re still debunking myths and talking about how normal and nice we are, while the press continues to look somewhat askance at the “witch-cult”.

We 20th Century witches are happy in our knowledge; we are simple people with simple beliefs. We know that come what may, “another sun will rise tomorrow.” – Ray Bone, Life Magazine, 1964

While Witches and Pagans certainly get a lot of press today, I can’t imagine a major mainstream magazine allowing one of us to write our own profile. I suppose we aren’t “exotic” enough at this point to allow such luxuries.

I don’t know if you’ve heard, but there’s this gigantic blockbuster film featuring dystopian super-heroes coming out later this week called “Watchmen”. Perhaps you’ve seen an ad or two. The film is an adaptation of one of the most critically lauded comics of all time. It, and several other works from writer/creator Alan Moore, have been turned into would-be blockbusters against his wishes. This reluctance to play the Hollywood game, and his outward eccentricities, guarantee a run of profiles by journalists often amazed that he doesn’t want to cash in.

At 55, the Northampton hermit will take no more credit for the film than he did for From Hell, the screen adaptation of his Jack the Ripper comic book, which starred Johnny Depp, or for the anodyne film version of his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Moore’s name will not appear on the credits of Watchmen and his share of the cash goes to his illustrator on the series, Dave Gibbons.

So what? Aren’t “Hollywood botches the book” or “Hollywood cashes in against the wishes of the writer” stories a dime a dozen? What’s different is that Moore is, for all intents and purposes, “one of us”. By that I mean he’s an occultist/magician who possibly worships the “sock-puppet god” Glycon, and is currently hard at work writing a “a clear and practical grimoire of the occult sciences”. In addition, he also wrote an outstanding 32-issue comic series that doubled as primer in magic entitled “Promethea”. Yet, despite all that, Moore isn’t really a figure of much discussion outside the small subsection of comic-book collecting Pagans and occultists. Neil Gaiman in contrast, who has a comparable track-record of critical and mainstream successes, has a huge Pagan following. Perhaps it’s that Gaiman is far more outgoing, Internet-savvy, and willing to work with Hollywood? Whatever the reason, you’re far more likely to hear a Pagan talk about “Coraline” (which was great) than the fact that Moore’s upcoming “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” comic sequel (due out in April) will prominently feature fictional/literary versions of Aleister Crowley.

“…an apocalyptic plot masterminded by obscure W. Somerset Maugham villain Oliver Haddo, a parody of Aleister Crowley; it almost goes without saying that Moore seizes the moment to populate Haddo’s entourage with fictional creations of the actual, prolific Crowley, while steeping the diabolist’s scheme in arcana from Crowley’s 1917 novel Moonchild.”

So when you head off to the theatre to see “Watchmen”, keep in mind that what you see on the screen is merely an echo, a fannish recreation (warning: spoilers at that link) of a work specifically created for the comics medium. A work not intended to be adapted to big-screen action. Or better yet, why not spend the weekend (and the money you might have spent on admission, a large popcorn, and soda) getting to know one of most brilliant writers of his generation. A writer who happens to share with us an interest in the practice of magic. I think that in retrospect, historians of our wider religious and philisophical movement will pay far more attention to the influence of people like Moore than the dozens of “Wicca 101″ niche writers we currently argue and debate over. Perhaps it’s time more of us got a jump on those historians.