Indo-European Studies Book Review--Comparative Mythology by Jaan Puhvel
Comparative Mythology, I will say, is not a book to be jumped into for light reading. While well read and versed with the mythos and comparisons between cultures throughout the ages, the extreme scholarly vocabulary, euphemisms and page to chapter jumping for definition and re-explanation could and did get terribly confusing. For example: page 228, Traditions-Baltic and Slavic Myth "It affords a crucial third dimension to the myths of the Divine Twins, otherwise attested mainly in Vedic India and ancient Greece (cf. chaps 4 and 8).; *names, page 174, Traditions-Celtic Myth "Mercurius", "Nantosuelta", "Rigantona", "Dea Arduinna", Boduognatus". Flipping back and forth in this book for "reminders" and trying to pronounce the names of the past in myth, does not bring one forward and truly wanting to continue into reading onward.
However, this book is dead on explaining how amazing the mythology is so associative between culture, after culture, after culture. It is quite an eye opener. From the very distant ancients all the way to the modern people/societies still sharing these myths.
Over all, once you begin to learn Jaan Puhvel's pattern of writing, you do come to enjoy this book and what you are being told. He is teaching you to listen and learn mythical comparisons.
The content as a whole is very enlightening. To know and understand [aside from Puhvel's own interruptions], who throughout our cultural history has had the same beginnings, middle and ends to their myths. I truly never realized the generations nor miles in mythology that actually had everyone so drawn together, until modern day barriers divided and separated all societies.
Would I recommend this book? Could I recommend this book? To other Dedicants? While yes, it IS a great resource to ADF, students and intellects alike, I feel that this piece of literature gets lost in itself, ie, too many academic explanations and revisits of who, what and where. So, no, I would truly have a difficult time recommending this particular book to any student of the Dedicant Path. (344)
Hearth Culture Book Review--A Brief History of the Druids by Peter Berresford Ellis
The Druids is a bit confusing, as it seems Ellis is arguing with himself at times. He rambles on and on, incessantly about who wrote what and what their "versions" or "explanations" meant to that individual person. There is such a small segment on actual Druidry, that I wasn't sure why the book had "Druids" in the title at all. I wasn't worried about the manner of anyone's hair. Whose Roman mother was named "Driadia"...a name meaning Druid, mentioned to prove what? That the Roman's had not truly forgotten the Druids? It is believed there was a "Druid in the outhouse?"
In each chapter, Druids are in the title. I see more history on what went on with what Strabo had to say, who were the Brahmins, Pythagoreans, Hyperboreans, and so forth. Page 144, Rudyard Kippling had a statement to say about man's first words being lies? I truly was very lost in this book. A *brief* history of the Druids is in fact all you will find in this book. The rest is a listing and telling of historical, archaeological and scholarly resulted quotes from famous research and peoples. The true search for a brief history of the Druids gets lost in Ellis' torture of wanting to display where he has found all of the evidence he put together for this book.
I can't say I was overly impressed with this one. I REALLY had to force myself to finish this one. It took me over 6 months to read it. Ellis may be a brilliant man, but perhaps a better suited "history" would have been for him to write. I find more history on the Druids, floating around the internet, than I found in this book.
I realize this is part of the required Dedicant Reading, but no, as far as being able to gain any real knowledge, other than being scholarly confused...I truly do not recommend this book to any Dedicants. (340)
The Druids is a bit confusing, as it seems Ellis is arguing with himself at times. He rambles on and on, incessantly about who wrote what and what their "versions" or "explanations" meant to that individual person. There is such a small segment on actual Druidry, that I wasn't sure why the book had "Druids" in the title at all. I wasn't worried about the manner of anyone's hair. Whose Roman mother was named "Driadia"...a name meaning Druid, mentioned to prove what? That the Roman's had not truly forgotten the Druids? It is believed there was a "Druid in the outhouse?"
In each chapter, Druids are in the title. I see more history on what went on with what Strabo had to say, who were the Brahmins, Pythagoreans, Hyperboreans, and so forth. Page 144, Rudyard Kippling had a statement to say about man's first words being lies? I truly was very lost in this book. A *brief* history of the Druids is in fact all you will find in this book. The rest is a listing and telling of historical, archaeological and scholarly resulted quotes from famous research and peoples. The true search for a brief history of the Druids gets lost in Ellis' torture of wanting to display where he has found all of the evidence he put together for this book.
I can't say I was overly impressed with this one. I REALLY had to force myself to finish this one. It took me over 6 months to read it. Ellis may be a brilliant man, but perhaps a better suited "history" would have been for him to write. I find more history on the Druids, floating around the internet, than I found in this book.
I realize this is part of the required Dedicant Reading, but no, as far as being able to gain any real knowledge, other than being scholarly confused...I truly do not recommend this book to any Dedicants. (340)
Modern Paganism Book Review--Drawing Down the Moon; Witches, Druids, Goddess Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America Today by Margot Adler
Drawing Down the Moon, written by Margot Alder, whom I understand is not only an author but a wonderful journalist.
I will say that I feel she well represented numerous views of many Pagans, which is very refreshing. I liked Chapter 9 about re-constructionist religions. So many I had never heard of.
From my view point I don't understand asking anyone "How did you come to be a Pagan and a Witch?" (pg. 136) That would be like asking, "How did you come to like sushi?" So, you tried it and you liked it? One merely doesn't just 'become' anything, in my experience.
I also don't understand what I would call a "witch gene". Is there such a thing? To be a "hereditary witch"? (pg. 136) I have ancestral blood that was a Druid. That does not make me a "hereditary Druid". I also got confused when referring to the "Craft" in Wicca and Witchcraft. (pg.s 10, 11, 19-10, 137, etc.) MANY Witches are 'of the Craft', yet I'm understand that is who 'Wiccan' are also?
NeoPagan "religions". Isn't this a huge blanket statement? Many will and do take offense and strongly disagree referring to themselves or being referred to as being of the religious. I, personally, refer to myself as Spiritual and I know many that do. (ex. Ch. 9)
I do, whole heartedly, agree with her quoting Isaac Bonewits (pg. 153), "as intellectuals, we have been raised to have a knee jerk reaction to such terms as 'magic', 'the occult', 'ritualism', 'the supernatural', etc., so that can only think about these subjects in the ways we are supposed to."
Chapter 14, 'Living on the Earth', is one I was completely engrossed in again; the views and view points made. Spirituality/religions do become a way of life for many, yet we are still biased, critical, vocal, overly expressing humans, dwelling upon this earth in city and country side.
Overall, this was a long, if not well written book, that I did find hard to put down at times. I have few criticisms for work, and do say that I am please to have had this as required reading and highly recommend this to all Dedicants. (389)
Drawing Down the Moon, written by Margot Alder, whom I understand is not only an author but a wonderful journalist.
I will say that I feel she well represented numerous views of many Pagans, which is very refreshing. I liked Chapter 9 about re-constructionist religions. So many I had never heard of.
From my view point I don't understand asking anyone "How did you come to be a Pagan and a Witch?" (pg. 136) That would be like asking, "How did you come to like sushi?" So, you tried it and you liked it? One merely doesn't just 'become' anything, in my experience.
I also don't understand what I would call a "witch gene". Is there such a thing? To be a "hereditary witch"? (pg. 136) I have ancestral blood that was a Druid. That does not make me a "hereditary Druid". I also got confused when referring to the "Craft" in Wicca and Witchcraft. (pg.s 10, 11, 19-10, 137, etc.) MANY Witches are 'of the Craft', yet I'm understand that is who 'Wiccan' are also?
NeoPagan "religions". Isn't this a huge blanket statement? Many will and do take offense and strongly disagree referring to themselves or being referred to as being of the religious. I, personally, refer to myself as Spiritual and I know many that do. (ex. Ch. 9)
I do, whole heartedly, agree with her quoting Isaac Bonewits (pg. 153), "as intellectuals, we have been raised to have a knee jerk reaction to such terms as 'magic', 'the occult', 'ritualism', 'the supernatural', etc., so that can only think about these subjects in the ways we are supposed to."
Chapter 14, 'Living on the Earth', is one I was completely engrossed in again; the views and view points made. Spirituality/religions do become a way of life for many, yet we are still biased, critical, vocal, overly expressing humans, dwelling upon this earth in city and country side.
Overall, this was a long, if not well written book, that I did find hard to put down at times. I have few criticisms for work, and do say that I am please to have had this as required reading and highly recommend this to all Dedicants. (389)
No comments:
Post a Comment