Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Claiming My Name

Two years ago today, I met Jeff Lilly in person for the first time, after having known him as an "online friend" for several years.

I wish I could say birds sang, sparks flew and cosmic spheres clicked into perfect harmony. What actually happened was that we were both so nervous and shy, it took several hours of awkward glances and chatting on the futon before we could look each other in the eye without blushing furiously. Still, two years later and we're madly, amazingly, blessedly in love. And six months from today, we'll officially be newly weds. Rock!

Which means... my name is changing. I'd assumed for a long time that if I ever did get married, I'd be keeping my own name. I adore my name, especially my first and middle — Alison Leigh — and as a feminist, the idea of taking my partner's name seemed a bit antiquated, and too much of a hassle.

But Jeff's name is so simple, and sweet, like him, and I find myself honored and excited to be taking it. Family names, like families, come with lots of baggage and ambivalence and history. Jeff's name comes with four step-kids, for a start. It also comes with a whole complicated history and heritage that, stepping into his life as a partner and best friend, I'll now be a part of, too.

But I didn't much like the idea of becoming "Alison Shaffer Lilly." Just didn't jive. And like I said, I love my middle name — after a period of intensely disliking it when I was little, I eventually made peace with its odd spelling and lilting brevity. I learned later on that it was my father who chose that name for me, Leigh, the Gaelic spelling, meaning according to some "meadow or clearing" and according to others "courageous one." Keeping my middle name seemed an appropriate way to honor my father's family and our Irish ancestry, as well as the rolling farmlands and fields of my childhood home in Lancaster County.

So "Alison Leigh Lilly" is who I'll be. In six months, legally.

But I'm impatient. And, let's face it, a bit of a teacher's pet perfectionist. I like reading the books before I take the class, and getting ahead of the ball before it starts rolling. So I've decided, in the spirit of my anniversary with my beloved today, and in honor of my Irish family roots — I'm making the change now.

Yup, starting today I've decided to be "Alison Leigh Lilly." It'll give me some time to practice my signature. I can try on my new name like the pair of shoes you get for your wedding, the ones you're supposed to wear to your dance classes so that come the Big Day they'll be all broken in and you can dance like a demon all night long without getting blisters — except, of course, that we're not taking dance lessons. And I won't be wearing shoes at my wedding.

It's also a practical career matter, and I am if anything a practical career woman. (She said seriously. No, seriously, you guys! Why are you laughing?) Though I've put this blog on semi-hiatus for the past several months, the career opportunities keep rolling my way, and really, I'm sick of worrying about having to send out notices and new bios six months from now when we finally get around to getting hitched. A stitch in time saves nine, they say. So from now on, my "professional" name is transitioning from "Alison Shaffer" to "Alison Leigh Lilly (née Shaffer)" so that, six months from now, I can drop the "née" and get on with my day.

I am totes serious, you guys. So serious that I've made a Facebook page. Yeah. That serious. You should check it out.

In fact, you should hop on over and tell me your stories about how you "claimed your name." And maybe share some advice about how long I can expect the slip-ups and stumblings to last. Because I gotta say, breaking a twenty-seven year old habit may not be easy. I'm going to need all the help I can get. So next time you see me, lend me a hand with a friendly wave and a "Why hello, Alison Leigh Lilly! Lovely day!"

Together, we'll get there.

Friday, March 4, 2011

Calling Writers for Nature & Environmentalism Blog

The PNC is recruiting writers for a new group blog project exploring Pagan and nature-centered spiritualities and their relationship to environmentalism, conservation and science.

This blog will cover a variety of topics, including: environmental news and on-going conservation efforts across the nation and throughout the world; the evolving relationship between religion and science in modern culture; explorations of environmental ethics and philosophy; personal reflections on a spiritual life rooted in earth and environmental awareness, and anecdotes and advice about "living green" day-to-day.

Anyone interested in joining this exciting project, and who can commit to blogging about nature-related topics from a Pagan perspective on a regular (ideally, weekly) basis, please email the PNC at: projects [at] pagannewswirecollective.com

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

How Many Druids Does It Take to Screw in a Lightbulb?

Well, I was so busy doing my best to write up an unbiased report on the recent news coming out of the UK about The Druid Network being granted religious charitable status by the Charity Commission — and interviewing lots of folks (including some who are kind of like famous people now, you know, if you're a Druid) about their own thoughts and opinions on the news — and then collecting and organizing all the information I could about US and UK nonprofit law to write up an article on the process of seeking status as a church or religious organization for minority faiths — that I never did get around to writing about what I thought of the whole thing. And now it seems I may have missed the boat, or the wave, or the tide, or whatever water-related metaphor you want to use [insert plug for Blog Action Day 2010 on 15 October here]. But — to twist a trope that's also been making its way around the Pagan blogosphere — I'm a Druid, and I have opinions about stuff.

Of course, I'll be honest, most of those opinions are about other people's opinions. The run-down of my own initial reaction to the news, which I read about first on The Pagan and The Pen goes something like: Hey! That's fantastic! Good for them! Even though I'm not a member of TDN because (a) I don't agree completely with the definition of deity that Emma Restall Orr outlines in her book Living Druidry, and (b) it seems like the Network is mostly focused on the UK more than the US — I still very much respect the organization's leadership and the projects they promote. Plus, their anti-hierarchical anarchic tendencies are pretty cool, and Jeff and I really enjoyed doing the freely-available-on-their-website Perennial Course in Living Druidry over this past year. Maybe this news will help them grow and inspire more people to take a serious look at Druidry and what it can offer as a modern spiritual tradition. Whereupon I forwarded the news and link on to Jason at The Wild Hunt to perhaps be included in the regular "Pagan Community Notes" feature... because at that point, it was of note to our community, but not actual news.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Blog Action Day 2010: Water

Folks who might be a bit out-of-the-loop (such as yours truly) but still eager to hop on board the Opinions About Social Change Express as it makes its way around the blogosphere next week might want to think about participating in the annual Blog Action Day on Friday, 15 October, when thousands of bloggers will join an international discussion about water.

Yes, that's right: water. From the Blog Action Day website:

Right now, almost a billion people on the planet don’t have access to clean, safe drinking water. That’s one in eight of us who are subject to preventable disease and even death because of something that many of us take for granted.

Access to clean water is not just a human rights issue. It’s an environmental issue. An animal welfare issue. A sustainability issue. Water is a global issue, and it affects all of us.

In previous years, Blog Action Day has focused on issues like climate change, poverty and environmental awareness. I'll be participating once again this year with reflections on water and its role as both element and realm in Druidic spirituality, and how our spiritual relationship with water connects us to the larger questions of social justice and environmental activism.

I encourage others out there in the Pagan blogosphere to join in the conversation a week from today and share their insights, too! Just visit the Blog Action Day 2010 website for more information and to register your blog.

You can also snag this year's Blog Action Day badge, though not as snazzy as last year's it's infinitely more practical and proactive:


Change.org|Start Petition

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Interview with Phil Ryder about The Druid Network's Charity Status

The following is an interview with Phil Ryder, Chair of Trustees for The Druid Network and one of the members most deeply involved in the four-year-long process of applying for religious charity status with the Charity Commission of England and Wales. I want to express again just how grateful I am to Phil for taking the time to answer my questions and give me, and all you readers, a little more insight into the long and difficult journey that TDN has made over the past several years. Congratulations once again to him and all the members of TDN on their success!

For my full coverage of this story, please hop on over to The Wild Hunt and stay tuned for my guest post tomorrow! To read the full text of the Charity Commission decision document, you can download the .pdf or visit The Druid Network's website.


Ali: Thanks so much for taking the time to do this interview, Phil! I know you and everyone at TDN must be very busy these days.

Phil: As you can imagine, I've been flat out trying to deal with the media folk — and on the whole it has been positive, within their limited ability to understand just what we are about. But I think it's important for everyone to understand just what this acceptance means and why TDN did it. I'm not sure we can cover everything in such a limited time — the amount of material we've sent to the CC would fill a very large book and covers everything from the anarchic setup of TDN through to explaining not only Druidry but all nature-based spiritualities and how they are religions. I know many shy away from that term — and I'm not keen either on the terms 'pagan', 'religion' and to some extent 'druid' — but 'religion' simply means to bind one to the sacred, and religions are defined by their identifiable method of doing that....

Oooops — there I go, going off on one! So, yes, fire away and I'll see what I can do to help.

Ali: All right, here we go!

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Bonus Post: Gettin' Hitched!

This is just a brief post to announce some very exciting news! For those not yet aware, at the beginning of August my partner, Jeff, proposed! (No, this is not an April Fool's joke!) Looks like Ali's gettin' hitched...

And being that we are both huge nerds (read: bloggers), naturally we figured our first order of business should be to launch a co-hosted wedding blog and website. So without further ado, introducing:

Wedding on the Edge

We're not exactly your typical mainstream bride and groom. We are pacifists, feminists and environmentalists. We are Pagans. And we are, as they say kindly, "creative types." We're a couple of weirdos, and we know it. And while this makes us practically perfect for each other — and quite cute as a couple, I like to think — we also know that we have family members and friends out there wondering, "What exactly is a pacifist, feminist, eco-friendly Pagan wedding going to look like, anyway? I'm not going to have to dance naked around a bonfire under a full moon chanting prayers to Gaia, am I?"

Wedding on the Edge is our answer to those uncertainties. (The short answer is, only if you want to!) We hope it will be a way of reassuring our loved ones, and inviting them into these wilder places on the edges of the normal. Let us begin with a picnic basket and a friendly wave. And who knows, maybe it'll provide a bit of inspiration for other couples out there, too, who want to know how they can plan a low-budget, eco-friendly, fringe-faith love-fest of their own.

This blog will mostly be a place for friends and family members to come for tidbits and insights over the course of the year leading up to the wedding. But it is our hope that other readers might also enjoy following along with our goofy struggles and mushy love stories, as we stumble towards a low-budget, eco-friendly, fringe-faith love-fest celebration. Maybe you're thinking about tying the knot yourself? Maybe you crave craft and party-planning suggestions that embrace alternative lifestyles? Maybe you just want to indulge your voyeuristic urge to learn about the intimate secrets of that intrepid author and blogger, yours truly. Whatever your reason, stop on by! (And if you like what you see, grab a badge and spread the word!)

We know we're not the only Pagans out there getting hitched (or handfasted, or whatever)! We'd love to hear from you!

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Ali's Summer Vacation: Announcements, Guest Bloggers, New Features, O My!

Hello, all of you lovely and beautiful readers out there! I hope your summers have been full of smooth sunlight, cool waters and copious green. I know mine sure has! And there's more to come, as I pack up and ready myself for a month-long hiatus from the blogosphere.

During the sweltering dog-days of August, I'll be traveling north to the rocky shoreline cliffs and wooded mountainsides of Acadia National Park in Maine, where I'll spend a week with my family and my partner Jeff, hiking, biking, swimming, reading, wining and dining. Soon after my return, I'll be off again, jet-setter that I am, on my first ever trip abroad to the emerald and mist-strewn coast of Northern Ireland, to attend a week-long retreat on Celtic Spirituality and Radical Activism, led by Gareth Higgins and Carl McColman.

But never fear! Though I'm taking the month of August off to do some sun-soaking and soul-searching, I've been working hard in the meantime to make sure readers here at Meadowsweet & Myrrh have plenty to keep them engaged and entertained.

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Pacifism comes to Pagan+Politics

I am pleased, proud and (incredibly) nervous to announce that I have been invited to join the ranks of politically-savvy bloggers over at the Pagan Newswire Collective's Pagan+Politics group blog. Many thanks to Jason for his invitation and his vote of confidence — I hope to rise to the challenge of writing weekly about pacifistic- and anarchistic-related news, without too many days ending in tears and wails of "why doesn't anybody understand me?!"

My introductory post is already up, but in case you need some enticement, here's an excerpt:

I have been writing publicly about pacifism for several years now, and it still remains a challenge to face down my own anxieties about misinterpretation, hypocrisy, judgement and impotence. It is not always fun to write about ideals and ethical principles that can make not only my readers but even myself feel uncomfortable, uncertain, inadequate, angry or sorrowful.

So why do it? Because I honestly believe that, despite our discomfort and uncertainty, despite our habitual resistance to the idea, the truth is that peace is easy and freedom is innate. Though we are surrounded today with myriad examples of violence, war, hatred and rage, though we have complicated systems of government control looming over us at every step — ordinary, everyday life for most of us is still characterized by spontaneous, consensual cooperation and moments full of the profound simplicity of peaceful relationship. Outside my window and here in this room, the world revels in this sunny spring afternoon, a spring that came without coercion or malice, that arose delicately and swiftly out of the interplay of countless creatures and forces, gods and forms, all organizing themselves through their striving and reaching and vying and dancing, rooted in the necessary rot of autumn, preserved through the inevitable cold of winter, and deeply engaged in the ceaseless process of becoming something beautiful.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

The April Fool

courtesy of nataliej, via flickrI was waiting for the right time to share this, but today is such an amazingly beautiful day — warm and sunny here outside Phipps Conservatory, with the miniature daffodils in bloom and a single red tulip already spilling open among the green beds, and inside the agave plant in the cactus room (Jeff's favorite room in the Conservatory) is in bloom for the first and only time its whole life, sending up a flower-topped stalk forty feet into the air, so high they've had to remove a pane of glass from the greenhouse ceiling... aw, hell, I decided, I'll just blurt it out! Jeff and I are getting married!

In fact, we're getting married next month! I know, I know, you Pagans out there might point out that traditionally Beltane (or May Day) was considered a day of ill-omen on which to be married, associated as it is with rather more ephemeral and (gasp!) even illicit love affairs and heady-passionate tumbles in the dewy grasses. But you know... we're tired of waiting! For the past week, Jeff's youngest daughter, age five, talked about little more than her mother's up-coming June wedding to her next husband, and how pretty and expensive the dresses would be, and dropping incredibly casual hints to us, such as, "When are you and Daddy going to get married? You love each other enough, don't you?"


I guess Jeff took his daughter's hints to heart, because this morning I rolled groggily out of bed to find him already downstairs, preparing a luscious raw vegan breakfast (complete with a few lit tealights blessed by my Kildare-flame candle and a few twigs of blooming, bright yellow forsythia from the backyard in an adorably tiny glass vase on the table) and, before I was even fully awake, he was down on one knee. To be fair, he's spent a lot of time on his knees lately, having broken his foot about a month ago and finding crawling around the house easier than using the too-short crutches to hobble around on (he's gotten to know the cat better this way, too)... but this time it was, you know, the big Down On One Knee, the real deal. Apparently, he'd been saving up for a ring for the past month or so, but he's always been terrible at keeping secrets and, anyway, neither of us knew my ring size. So as of this morning, I wear proudly on my finger the white, ratcheted band of one of those plastic ring sizers they send you free in the mail.

And after enjoying a delicious berry breakfast, we got to talking about what comes next, and well, we started to wonder... why wait? We can hop down to the County Register or whoever and get a marriage license and, after a quick informal ceremony, be done with the whole thing. None of this big white dress and half a dozen bridesmaids and $500 wedding cake nonsense. Anyway, we're Pagans, which means we can chuck half the wedding traditions right out the window to begin with as being stuck in an anti-feminist and archaic form of purity-obsessed Christianity.

Can we plan a wedding in a month? Who knows! But one thing we can be sure of is that come Beltane, we'll be on our way to husband-and-wife-hood regardless of whether the florist can scrounge up enough calla lilies or the photographer knows how to highlight our new matching hubby-and-wifey tattoos (I'm thinking a single tiger lily in a heart with each other's names emblazoned across, maybe on the bicep, or the forearm?).

And the best part is, for only $15,000 or so venue fee, we can hold the ceremony in Phipps Conservatory itself, among the blossoms and foliage we have come to love so well! It's a dream come true! But one thing's for sure: April is bound to be a crazy month for two fools in love!

Friday, December 18, 2009

Musings on News(ings): Nature's Salvation

Note the clever ambiguity of the title to this blog post, my second in half-cocked summarizing and semi-ranting about major topics in the blogosphere of late. What's she going on about this time? you may ask, not at all impressed. Well... The two big, glaring, angrily-harumphing topics circling the same central issue of global warming and the nonsense going on at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, of course! The role of skepticism and the trustworthiness of the scientific community; and the extent to which environmentalism is "religious" and/or dangerously "pagan."

Where to begin? Surfing from link to link this morning over four-cheese soufflé and a hot chocolate, I came across this article by Jonathan Abrams about his conversion from AGW-denier to true believer, and how this was not a scientific or even a rational conversion, but really a change of heart. It seems that among the scientific rationalists and new atheists, especially those of libertarian and right-wing persuasion, there is some dissension in the ranks about exactly what role skepticism should play, and just how far we should push such skepticism when it risks undermining common sense and the consensus of the intellectual (read: scientific) community.

My impression, from reading only a few select blogs mind you, is that the question of skepticism is one that hits very near the heart of New Atheist belief. They debate its relative merits and applications with a seriousness and intensity that rivals religious debates over scriptural literalism and transubstantiation, with global warming (and the embarrassment of "Climategate") sparking new fervor as scientists are revealed to be human and the world to be, well, complicated. If I didn't know better, I might think I was reading in these "skeptical of skepticism" debates the panicked musings of folks undergoing a spiritual Dark Night of the Soul. But that can't be the case; these are atheists after all, and everyone knows atheists are purely rational beings completely without any need for a "soul"! (Of course, not everyone debating global warming is an atheist; but I've noticed a heightened sense of vulnerability from these folks in particular, and my heart goes out to them.)

In the end, I am of the firm but probably unpopular opinion that all this controversy over the facts of global warming is misdirected energy. We have scientists working around the clock and around the world to compile complicated graphs and statistical models, some of which may very well be botched or inaccurate, all to convince us of a single basic and obvious truth: don't shit in the bed. Whether or not the planet is actually, literally burning up under our destructive stupidity is really beside the point. What is painfully obvious is that we have complicated systems of waste disposal removal redistribution to obscure the consequences of our consumer-driven plastic-packaged lifestyles. Even if the planet can survive our belligerence and abuse, I for one don't want to live in a world where a continent of trash swirls in the Pacific and people "would rather drive fancy cars than breathe clean air or look at the stars," even if that world isn't a single centigrade warmer.

Which is why I laugh with a kind of horror when the Pope objects to "'absolutizing nature' or considering it more important than the human person," because it may end up "abolishing the distinctiveness and superior role of human beings." I have some news for the Pope (as if any good Catholic didn't already know this): human beings are small, selfish, stupid creatures capable of great ugliness. Anyone who thinks that people are the best and most superior thing about this world just hasn't been paying attention. And I say this as a lover of humanity, really; this is one of those "I can call my dog ugly, but if you call my dog ugly we're going to have a problem" scenarios. I have said many times in this blog that I do believe in and celebrate humanity's uniqueness as a species, though I could not conscientiously describe that uniqueness as "superior," let alone the most important (surely the role played by cyanobacteria in creating an oxidizing rather than reducing atmosphere billions of years ago was fundamentally vital to absolutely all forms of life on this planet, for instance). It is true that, in order to learn how to be good human beings, it is not always wise to emulate the wolf or the spider or the sunflower or the kangaroo rat, but that is not the same thing as saying we are separate from Nature-capital-N and have nothing to learn. I think sometimes we make pretty crappy human beings.

I'm getting bogged down in my own messy rhetoric. My point, to put it simply, is that it does not serve us to set up a false dichotomy between humanity and nature (or, what we really mean to say, the rest of nature). We are a part of nature, and while we may be unique within it, it would be as much a mistake to imagine ourselves exempt from its laws and limitations as it is to idealize a less rational, more "animal-mind" way of living. We cannot forfeit our humanity, and any environmentalism that would ask us to reject our uniqueness would be as misguided as one that demanded trees stop behaving like trees, and lions lay down with lambs. But neither can we afford to fall into self-worship and imagine ourselves separate and above the natural world, who is our mother and sustainer (and seems to have no qualms pulling out the big guns of consequence and causality when we step over the line).

Does this constitute a religion or religious belief? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: yes. It is, anyway, fundamental to my religion. I can see that now especially when I contrast it to the Pope's stated views, which seem utterly ridiculous and even a bit unhealthy (and which, it is important to remember, do not represent the extremist/fundamentalist worldview, but express a general belief held by or at least expected of the world's one billion Catholics, among others). Believe me, I was a bit surprised myself. I certainly don't remember thinking, during my Catholic childhood, that man was essentially and existentially superior to nature. Yet back then, the Pope's assertion wouldn't have phased me or seemed so completely wrong-headed, yet now I'm taken aback at how obtuse the position sounds. Perhaps this is the kind of belief so embedded in our culture that we simply can't acknowledge it or look it squarely in the eye and demand that it account for itself, not until we have shifted to a new worldview that places the earth at the heart of our being.

After all, in some ways the debate about what to do about global warming still takes humanity's superiority and exceptionality as its central tenant. We made this problem, and by God, only we have the power and knowledge to fix it! But it seems to me that the very first thing we have to do, regardless of everything else, is stop doing harm. Plans to cover the oceans with cooling hurricane-thwarting devices or taking other drastic and short-sighted measures to wrench temperatures back in the "right" direction are doomed to well-meaning but uninformed failure. In any case, a world economy based on our presupposed right to consume without limit could never support such action (unless the World Saving Technology could be properly patented and would make a lot of important people rich) — which is why the Climate Conference in Copenhagen amounts to only so much waffling and mutual fear-mongering.

Because if it's fair to characterize environmentalism as a kind of spiritual commitment (one might even use the word "faith"), then we must also remember the long-unspoken religion of consumer capitalism against which it struggles. In the face of our own arrogance, I can't hold out much hope that we will somehow be the saviors of the world. Instead, all I can do is seek humility, and do every single little thing I can to step out of the cycle of harm and abuse and ignorance and greed that spins and spins off in every direction. As for the rest, I can only sigh deeply in my grief and say to myself, Let go, and let Gaia. If humanity's salvation as a species doesn't lie in the hands of our Mother, then at least I can go out singing and dancing and making love in the grass under her arched blue skies.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Musings on News(ings): Quacks Like a Pagan

The holiday season is busy busy busy, in the Mr. Krebbs kind of way. (Ten points to whoever can name that reference.) And so, I find myself with lots to say about certain bits of news and kerfuffles in the blogosphere, and no time in which to say hardly anything, between the decorating and the shopping and the handicraft-making and the gift-wrapping and the seeking-for-sanity that happens all down in the dark inbetween bits. In past years this has been my winding-down time, when I sit back and note the utter soul-shunting solitude in which I usually dwell, while others are running around pleasing and appeasing family and friends with offerings to the shopping mall gods, all to escape the lengthening night. This year, I have kids in my life, and what for lack of a better word might be called "in-laws." And a tireless kitten who likes to stalk my hair while I'm trying to sleep. So the following two posts are brief summaries of my thoughts on two major issues being tossed around the interwebs at the moment, fashionably sleep-deprived and cursory as they are.

Quacks Like a Pagan: Self-Definition & Community Identity in Modern Paganism

First is the debate raging in the Pagan blogosphere right now about Corban-Arthen's "(re)definition of Paganism" at the recent Parliament of World Religions in Melbourne, Australia. I know that careful thinking and discussion about topics of self- and community-identity are not only vital for the on-going, thriving evolution of any religious movement or community, but also one of the main reasons why Paganism in particular appealed to me so greatly from the very beginning. I also know that if it looks like a duck, and smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and when it quacks it says, "I'm a duck!" — well, it's probably a duck. Or an insecure, feather-bedecked, shaman-esque white suburban teen trying her best to reconstruct the ancient initiatory mysteries of Duckery in her parents' basement from poorly-translated, forgery-riddled manuscripts (with diagrams!).

courtesy of spratmackrel via flickr.comWhen it comes to definitions for words like "Pagan," "Druid," and even "Christian," (or "atheist" or "anarchist" or "spirituality" for that matter) I've grown increasingly laissez-faire in my approach. Not because I think these terms are meaningless or unimportant, but because it seems to me that the conversations and deep self-reflection that such ambiguities provoke are far more important (and more interesting) than reaching some definitive conclusion. But what I think we lose sight of in these debates, too often, are the reasons we as human beings choose labels or names for ourselves, why we identify ourselves to begin with as belonging to this or that community, this or that tradition or culture.

Here we have a religious community that is willing to acknowledge that perhaps there is no single, universal, omnipresent God acceptable and believable to all people, and yet continually struggles to define its own name in terms that will be universally acceptable and applicable to such vast diversity. A community that celebrates the gods and goddesses of many traditions as existing in the startling, powerful, liminal realm between psychological archetype and spiritual reality, and yet shies away from embracing the same ambiguity and complexity for the names we choose for ourselves. In a way, it's almost endearing. We overlook the essential fact — so apparent in our theology, what little we have of it — that when we choose names for ourselves and our communities, we are primarily identifying with and investing in archetypes.

Of course, I can only really speak for myself. But looking back at my own struggle to find a name for my spirituality, it seems clear that it is the archetype that made the difference. I identify with the archetype of "Druid" the way I never could with that of "Witch", which never fit quite right, despite there being so many similarities in practice and belief between the two. And once the archetype had its hooks in me, it became a guiding influence on the direction my spiritual life took, what particular aspects of ritual, philosophy, poetry and praise stood out as important and worthy of study and emulation. But archetypes are ideals, not exhaustive definitions, and they provide a guiding influence, not a set of restrictions. Beyond my ever-deepening roots in Druidry, for instance, Buddhist philosophy continues to fascinate me; yet I admit that my personal experience of this Eastern religious tradition is almost entirely Western in flavor and focus, and what aspects I might adopt into my personal spiritual practice will remain "American Druidic" in the same way that we can identify the unique intricacy of Celtic knotwork despite its heavy African and Indian influences, or the classic clean lines and simplicity of a bodhisattva statue as Buddhist despite the influence that Greek sculpture had on its development.

So is it right, or accurate, to say that Paganism is "pre-Christian European"? I think it is. While Eastern and African influences have played their parts, the core of the modern Pagan archetype has its roots in ancient Europe, and many of its practitioners today are firmly Western both in lifestyle and cultural heritage. Remove what other influences you like, but take away this foundation and what you get isn't really "Pagan" anymore in any readily recognizable way. Which is not to say there aren't exceptions; only that as an archetype, as a name to which people feel drawn, the earth-centered spiritual culture of pre-Christian Europe remains the underlying concept. Then of course there is the word "indigenous," which for plants and non-human animals has the pleasant meaning of being rooted in the local landscape and native to the area's unique ecosystem. And if this were all it meant, I would say that yes, Paganism is and should be indigenous, should be earth-centered and deeply connected to the land. But, for we human animals, the word "indigenous" has become super-saturated with political and cultural implications that need to be handled very carefully and respectfully, lest we callously overwrite the history of suffering and struggle that non-Christian non-white non-Europeans have undergone. Still, one day I hope that we can all aspire to be indigenous, without identifying that word with marginalization, and without that aspiration implying a kind of selfish cultural misappropriation.

In conclusion: time for lunch.

Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/30591976@N05/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

Friday, September 25, 2009

Archetypes in Market Mythology & The Role of Protest

This is a continuation of my previous post, inspired by the G20 Summit in my city this week, and a post on A Heathen's Day about the role of mythology in society...

Heroes of Market Mythology: The Humble Worker & The Fire Thief

The mythology of the Market, like any thriving mythological worldview, has its heroes who exemplify the ideal relationship that man can hold in relation to his gods. The myth of the Self-Made Man is the best example of such a hero in modern Market mythology, and it is familiar to almost anyone who aspires to succeed in the world of the Market today.

The story of the Self-Made Man is summed up simply in the epithet "from rags to riches," but there are in fact two versions of this mythic figure. In one, the Self-Made Man is a simple, humble, hard-working guy who has always believed himself to possess a special gift, talent, skill or idea that he wants to share with the world. Often, this person must struggle against obscurity, inherited poverty and other kinds of set-backs and stumbling blocks before his gift is revealed to the world and he is justly rewarded with wild financial success. This Humble Worker version of the hero rarely has aspirations to wealth, but is more often portrayed as uniquely devoted to the qualitative contribution he can make to his community. He is akin to the hero of ancient myths (such as Perseus or Cu Chulainn) who, though born of the gods and privileged with unique gifts and abilities, does not spend much of his time concerning himself with the gods directly but goes off to make his own way in the world. The archetypal model of this version of the Self-Made Man reflects the common belief that "if you just work hard enough, eventually you'll get your lucky break."

The other version of the Self-Made Man begins much the same way — with someone of humble, lower class origins — but it differs in the story it tells of success. While the Humble Worker plugs away, earning his success on the Market's own terms, the Fire Thief defies the standard rituals and precepts of his gods and goes directly after the power and privileges that they possess, intent on bringing them back to his community or keeping them for his own personal glory. This is the entrepreneur who risks everything on an uncertain business venture and, against all expectation, succeeds; or the musician who quits his day-job to play guitar and ends up with several platinum records and a fanclub of millions. The Fire Thief rejects the standard security of the 9-to-5 job and the corporate ladder, and either earns respect or steals success from the Market through his cunning and bravado. Yet it is understood that most who attempt such rashness fail miserably and suffer the consequences of their disobedience.

These archetypes of the Self-Made Man (and the male emphasis is intentional, for even women are expected to conform to the masculine elements of the mythology in order to succeed) are found pervasive throughout modern society. J.K. Rowling exemplifies the first, the Humble Worker, who might have continued to struggle with depression and poverty had not the Market smiled upon her and brought her work to light. Bill Gates can be cited as an example of the Fire Thief, the unlikely nerd working out of his garage and suddenly rising to obscene wealth and a global monopoly, so powerful and yet so benevolent now that he gives millions of dollars to aid the less fortunate and even has designs on controlling the weather. No one single living person might perfectly embody the Hero in all his aspects, but there are enough familiar, living examples of "rags to riches" stories that, together, they seem to offer convincing evidence that this myth is not just a metaphor, but a reality that can be enacted.

Prophets, Priests and Politicians

In any mythology, eventually the gods — in their power and ineffability — may need to enlist the help of prophets and priests to communicate their esoteric demands to the common-folk, the laity. Priests organize and lead the ritual acts of the community, while prophets come to the forefront as society begins to lose faith in the efficacy or benevolence of its gods as a result of social turmoil, upheaval or rapid change. Traditionally, political leaders ask for the blessings and heed the advice of priests and prophets alike, though at times prophets who offer unpopular or inconvenient ideas may be ostracized or condemned for a time, before eventually being vindicated.

In the mythology of the Market, economists, intellectual pundits and CEOs most often play the role of the priest, acting as an intermediary between the Market and the community, interpreting the god's needs and moods, recommending which ritual acts — tax cuts, bail-outs, consumer spending, etc. — will appease it, which will avert disasters and which will cause them. For a time, a Market-priest may grow to such prominence that his pronouncements are taken as practically infallible; such was the role that Alan Greenspan played for the past two decades as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, his blessings sought by each new president during this time as kings used to seek blessings for their legitimacy from the Pope.

In times when the priests of the Market fail to accurately predict its demands and reactions, faith in its benevolence (though not in its existence) may begin to waver. Up step the prophets, then, with their unique insight into the workings of the mythologies, and sometimes with warnings of doom for those who lose their way. The social stirrings caused by colonialism and the scientific revolution that laid the foundation for the industrial revolution in later centuries also set the stage for political philosophers like John Locke, Adam Smith and Thomas Hobbes, some of the most influential prophets of the Market mythology. These philosophers first articulated versions of the Creation Myth of modern capitalism, as well as laying out a theology of practice still referenced today. The industrial revolution itself led to great social upheavals and sometimes great suffering, making the prophesying of Karl Marx and the advent of communism almost inevitable.

Even Marx, however, does not challenge the existence of the Market, and in fact founds his entire philosophy on the supreme importance of economics. The difference is, in his interpretation, the capitalist Market ceases to be a god worthy of worship and becomes instead a dragon which the downtrodden workers have had to appease with virgin sacrifices for far too long. The hero of Marxist communism is neither the Humble Worker nor the Fire Thief, but the Dragon Slayer. This hero arrives suddenly, and bravely comes to the aid of the harassed village, intent on killing the monstrous beast and freeing the villagers from their burden. From within our modern mythological worldview, the collapse of the Soviet Union eventually proved Marx and his followers as false prophets who failed to understand the true nature of the Market and led many believers and especially political leaders astray. The end of the Cold War is now commonly attributed not primarily to Western military might, but to its commitment to capitalism and freedom (as defined largely in terms of consumerism and the free market).

Heresy & Iconoclasm

In some respects, heresy cannot exist until there are priests and prophets within a mythological tradition outlining and codifying some kind of agreed-upon canon. Pre-Christian pagan traditions in Britain, for instance, were not considered heretical by the Church; but the various early gnostic sects were, as were reemergent pagan aspects within the Church once Christianity had moved in and established its hold. When it comes to the Mythology of the Market, Marx is an excellent example of a heretic according to the dominant capitalist worldview, for he disputes some fundamental assumptions about the purpose and proper relationship of individuals to the Market, but he does not reject the most basic premise of the mythos: that the Market is the primary and essential way in which we should understand human social relationship (and possibly the meaning of human life in general).

We are ourselves currently so entrenched in the modern Market mythos, however, that it is incredibly difficult, perhaps even impossible, to disagree with the established canon without becoming merely heretical. When we disagree with certain consequences or implications of the mythology of the Market, our usual response is to begin tweaking. We work backwards from obvious flaws and failures until we find ways of changing some minor aspect of our mythology without challenging its fundamental premises about the world and how it works. Even when we ascribe to some other supposed mythos about these fundamental premises, we often find that we live our lives according to the mythology of the Market and make room for these other worldviews only as far as they do not conflict.

This seemed to be the case with many Catholics I knew growing up, who attended church on Sundays and thought it all very well and good to speak of charity and the Law of Love during Mass, but who would never have dreamed of taking seriously Jesus' and the early Christians' injunctions against wealth and private possessions in favor of simple communal living. Jesus' own advice to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" has been giving Catholics a pass on fully integrating their spiritual and political lives for centuries, so it's not fair to blame modern culture alone for this attitude. More uniquely modern, however, is the development of the Prosperity Gospel, preached especially among televangelists, which seeks to wed Christianity explicitly with the Market mythology in order to ease tensions between the two. In either case, it's difficult to find someone who has accepted and taken seriously the worldview of Christianity in a complete and consistent way, who has not also come into a fundamental conflict with the prevailing myth of the Market.

I believe that this is true of any alternative mythological worldview, including that potentially offered by Paganism. When it comes to the Market, most Pagans are at best merely heretics, struggling valiantly to revise their understanding of consumer capitalism to make it compatible with or at least not painfully contradictory to their concerns for the environment and their appreciation of ancient myths from a pre-Market time. Shopping at eco-friendly stores and utilizing the propagandists of the advertising industry in order to promote "green" living and earth-centered fashion trends are only two examples of this uneasy relationship. The truth is that a consumer-based culture will never fully embrace, support or promote a message of drastically reduced consumption; it will at best find ways to make consumption more efficient so that it can continue to put off any negative ramifications. This is in no way meant to suggest Pagans are any more culpable for the many contradictions of modern Market-embedded environmentalism as anyone else, of course.

Which brings me back, in a round about way, to the G20 and its protests. I suspect that the reason locals are so antagonistic towards and dismissive of protesters is that in most respects they view them merely as heretics, trouble-makers who have no fully integrated, coherent worldview of their own to offer but merely a jumbled collection of complaints and objections about how "life isn't perfect" (to which the humble, hard-working Ordinary Guy replies, "no shit, get over it"). In some instances, this may be an inaccurate and unfair view of the protesters, but it's not unexpected. When we are deeply involved in living out or enacting the story told by the predominant mythology of our culture, it is practically inconceivable that others might completely reject or denounce this worldview. This is precisely because we do not see it as a mythos or worldview at all, but as reality. We are likely to consider those who reject our mythology as quite literally denying or rejecting reality itself; that is, we're likely to view them as insane, and thus unpredictable and potentially even dangerous. Hence all the hype and security measures to protect the city from the influx of unpredictable and unreasonable protesters, "anarchists and other self-described 'anti-authoritarians,'" as one newspaper article puts it.

On the other hand, it is likely that most of these protesters are themselves still enacting, in one way or another, the mythology of the Market as they've known it and lived it all their lives. Their chosen public actions, such as boycotting various businesses and disrupting ordinary consumer activities, belies a continuing emphasis on the Market as the primary definition of socio-cultural relationship and power. In this sense, the protesters are participating in acts of iconoclasm, in which members from within a given culture destroy that culture's religious symbols and images for the purposes of making a religious or political statement.


I do not want to go so far as to suggest that the protests of the G20 are utterly useless, though I expect that in most ways they will remain essentially an ineffective spectacle serving mostly as media fodder. There was a time when, despite the apparent futility and self-contradictions, I would still have been out there myself marching and hoisting signs above my head — not because these acts are themselves revolutionary, but because they are symbols of solidarity and hope, a demonstration that, yes, I too recognize that there is something out of balance and unjust in the way we are living and this needs to change. These demonstrations are important and they serve a purpose. But so too do the quiet poets and dreamers and lovers who are wandering in the deep and intimate work of creating an alternative mythology, who are listening intently to the natural world and its mysteries, and discovering new stories to enact. This work too is absolutely vital if we are to overcome the domineering Mythology of the Market. And I know my strengths and my passions well enough to know that my place is here, watching the setting moon and searching for words in the silence, and not out on the streets amidst the noise of protestation.

At least, for now...


Image attribution:

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The Group of 20 and the Mythology of the Market

A Modern Creation Myth

In the beginning, there was chaos and darkness and scarcity, and this disorder was called the State of Nature. And man lived in the State of Nature as a savage beast, constantly fearing for his life lest another come along and kill him for his possessions, for man had no way to relate to and communicate with his fellows. But such chaos was unbearable, and so eventually the State of Nature gave birth to Social Contracts, and these children of Nature grew strong and powerful enough to rein in the chaos and destruction of their mother. And the most powerful of these Contracts was the Market, and he was their ruler and king.

Now, the Market brought gifts to struggling, destitute man: the gift of order and security, the gift of relationship to his fellows through the exchange of goods and services. Man no longer needed to fear his neighbor's killing blow, for instead each could barter and bargain for what he needed in sacred rituals the Market had designed. In return, man offered the Market nonperishable votives, and these became relics preserved and hoarded through time, beautiful though useless objects like shells, gold and printed paper. And the Market imbued these with value and meaning, so that they too could be traded in exchange for goods and services, or could be saved up against times of scarcity and hunger.

And this is the story of the beginning of man's worship of the Market, king of the Social Contracts, children of the State of Nature, who subdued and brought order to the world.

Last year around this time, you may remember, we were undergoing some pretty startling economic ups and downs (mostly downs). This year, the Group of 20 comes to the city of Pittsburgh to discuss the current economic crisis that, although slowly stabilizing in the U.S. and other rich countries, continues to plague poverty-stricken nations the world over, making it likely that by 2010 there will be 89 million more people living in extreme poverty. The World Bank has prepared a paper on this data to present to the G20 this week, urging the political leaders of the wealthiest nations to consider taking further stimulus measures to prevent the worst of this forecasted slip into desperation, starvation and poverty for a large chunk of the global population.

"Outside my city is bracing for the next killing thing..." That line from an Ani DiFranco song plays over and over in my mind as I watch the cops patrolling the streets on intimidating, revved-up motorcycles, and the locals grumbling about protesters camping in public parks and blocking up roads. Rumor has it downtown is almost completely boarded up for fear of the disruption angry mobs might cause, and they'll be closing the bridges on Thursday. In a city whose very heart lies at the point where three rivers meet, the idea that we might not be able to cross the water feels like the severing of a limb, slashing the city into pieces. Amongst all this hype and inconvenience is the pride and gratitude Pittsburghers are told and expected to feel at their city having been chosen; millions of dollars have already been spent not only on increased security measures, but on city beautification projects, patching up roads and planting more trees where tourists and visitors might see them. The front page of the local paper features some story about the coming G20 Summit almost every day of the week. Last week was an article noting almost casually an incident during the G20 Summit in London, in which the police beat a man to death during a protest rally.

And yet, to hear the casual conversation of ordinary people around here, you would think there were no larger implications of the "Group of 20" meeting in our city than inconvenient business closings and dangerous "anti-authoritarians" (alternately read: teenagers freed early after a half-day of school) roaming the streets making trouble. If a respected science-fiction author were to write a dystopian novel about a future in which an elite group of select men in power converged on a city to revel in its local color while debating the fate of the impoverished and disenfranchised of the world, readers would shake their heads wisely and think how lucky they were not to live in such a society. Yet today, in my city, the very notion that there is something odd or unjust about the existence of the G20 — their presumption to the kind of power they take for granted let alone the exercise of that power for the benefit of the "little people" — doesn't even come up. All the righteous anger and talk of justice is reserved for the out-of-town protesters clogging up the works, preventing good honest folk from getting to their jobs and earning a living.

Perhaps it is merely coincidence, or perhaps a more vital synchronicity, that just as these concerns are overtaking my city and churning in my own mind (right around a holy festival of harvest and balance, as well as the soon-prevailing dark), Hrafnkell Haraldsson, over at A Heathen's Day, writes on the importance of mythology. Yet while Hrafnkell suggests that one problem with modern society is that we lack a coherent mythology of our own and have grown dismissive of and deaf to the value of the old myths, I do not believe that this precisely true. In fact, I would argue that we moderns have not lost myth at all, but are so deeply entrenched in our own that we do not recognize it as such. Although the mythology of our times incorporates and synthesizes almost every major aspect of individual and social life — as all healthy, relevant living mythologies do — its prevailing theme can be described as the Mythology of the Market.

This mythology is so pervasive, we take it to be a fundamental truth. It is a coherent story about who we are, how we fit together (that is, how we "sustain collective unity") and how we should live. Even during times of economic crisis, for instance, the myth of the Market is not questioned but only reinforced: we're urged to more faithful trust in the Market, which will restore prosperity if the appropriate ritual acts are observed (including believing the economy will stabilize, the necessity of consumer confidence). This mythology has its own rituals (working that nine-to-five job as a necessity for security as well as meaningful self-identity and respected social standing) and institutions (the Stock Exchange and the financial sector as a whole) and holy days (Black Friday and the entirety of the Christmas shopping season, President's Day sales, Back-to-School sales, etc.). This mythology is so ubiquitous that even socio-cultural events that have nothing to do with economics are viewed primarily in those terms. In response to 9/11 we were told by political and cultural leaders that the most important thing we could do as a community was not pray, or grieve, or make art — but shop. The debate over universal health care centers on the effect it will have on the Market and whether or not the Market will support it, and not the common sense concern for the health and well-being of citizens. My mother, an intelligent woman by any standard, once told me that the "best way to stay healthy is to have health insurance" — as though paying someone else money was far more effective than, say, good hygiene, a healthy diet, regular exercise and proper rest.

And yet, if you ask most people today, they could not identify this as a mythological worldview even after prompting. They do not see the Market and all its rituals merely as a useful allegory for guiding behavior and shaping relationships — they believe it is real, with a solidity that rivals and sometimes even surpasses the monotheistic God of the Judeo-Christian mainstream. In a way, they're not wrong: the Market is real, insofar as it has measurable effects on society as an agreed-upon social construct. How people view and interact with the Market through rituals of employment, investment and consumerism quite often shapes their individual lives in obvious ways, and these effects are taken as confirmation of the Market's reality and meaningfulness. Even the economists and political pundits who speak about the Market in abstracted metaphorical terms and treat it primarily as an allegorical device still live as though these metaphors were literally true, investing a vital importance in how we think about and relate to the economy as a real thing, perhaps the realest thing in our shared social existence.

This in part explains why the people in my city do not even question the existence of a "Group of 20" or its role in shaping and responding to a global economic market. If the Market takes on the role of deity within our modern mythological framework (hardly avoidable, with its thriving stock of golden bull idols and votive offerings inscribed with devotions like "In God We Trust"), then the necessity of prophets, priests, heros and heretics is no more jarring or unexpected than it would be in any other mythology. Amusingly, the nature of our modern worldview as a mythology is best brought into stark relief when it is directly compared with already widely-acknowledged mythologies like those of the ancient Greeks or Celts (though there is no need to prove, for instance, that the Celtic myths are indeed myths because they match up with Greek ones, we do not have such a clear perspective of our own).

(In my next post I'll explore some of the archetypes of Market Mythology and how these relate back to the inefficacy of protesters at the G20. I would include it here, but this post has already started to reach an unreasonable length!)