If you wrote this book...

[TatteredAngel]

I was hoping I could get you all to indulge me in a little bit of creative brainstorming. Many books on modern magic-related religions are either focusing on a specific path or trying to mash everything into one superpagan mush (frequently while interchanging Wicca and witchcraft, joys).

I always like to think about what books I might write someday in my copious free time, ha ha ha, and I'd like to play with the idea of writing a book on the modern pagan "scene" and the popular elements like Ravenfluff and the ever-so-abused term Wiccan in regards to the less-popular but better researched paths.

I know it's a broad topic, but I'm not thinking of writing the book for people who are hoping for sort of an encyclopedia of paths. I'm thinking of this in terms of those who aren't looking to follow one of these paths but still want to know more about the modern pagan world. Sort of a source book to point to when someone, say, listens to the local news and hears that your state is just a super-great place for Wiccans and that it's a growing religion in the area.

So, for fun, here's the questions-- pretend we're all gonna write this book:

Which paths would you try to represent? Just how inclusive would you try to be? Would you include paths that use magic but do not consider themselves pagan in nature?

How would you represent the scene as such? How would you reconcile the popular (and what the media has helped to promote as reality) with the well-researched?

Would you conduct interviews with both fluff types and non-fluff types?

((And as a bonus research note, where could one hope to get numbers and statistics from when within the pagan scene there's such a horrible muddling of bad research and misunderstood terms?))  

[TeaDidikai]

Which paths? The problem is that these kinds of books become sound byte theology that is just as flawed in it's application as anything else out there.

Unless we went into it from an anthropological angle, I'm not sure anything even the most well researched of us could put together that wouldn't have the same flaws as what is already on the market.  

[Ethermus Prime]

I'd do my book like Ouspensky's, except less verbose. A Series of Lectures directly related to meat and potatoes of the subject. Knowledge of the possible paths is useless, unless you have the wisdom to see the paths with out aid.

I would not associate myself with any one group, nor would I disassociated myself with any one group.

There would be three subjects:

Balance
How to attain it [Balance]
How to apply it [Balance]  

[TeaDidikai]

May I request a fourth chapter?

How to define it?  

[Ethermus Prime]

TeaDidikai

May I request a fourth chapter?

How to define it?

Would I need that, when that encompasses the first chapter.  

[Astrox]

I feel like a number of New Age and Pagan authors borrow many ideas from other authors, which is fine, but sometimes I want to read about a concept that I haven't previously read about.

If I were writing a New Age or Eclectic Pagan book, I would like to make a comparison with contemporary theory, feminism in particular, because I think there are lots of interesting ideas that come out of Feminism that conflict with Pagan beliefs. I don't think many authors have gone past fluffy feminism and equally fluffy Pagan beliefs. Starhawk...

A few Ex-Christian-Now-Pagan ladies I met recently told me they became Pagan particularly because they did not want to be a part of a belief system that, as one of them stated "puts men on a pedestal over women." Which seems kinda silly because in a lot of mythology men are portrayed as superior, the strong willed woman is depicted as the villain unless she is submissive to men, then she is praised...

I don't know... This is something that my girlfriend and I have been feeling quite conflicted by lately, and I'd like to see authors provide a critical analysis of the relationship between Feminism and Pagan beliefs.

Woo...

Yeah...

I got kinda off topic there...

My apologies.  

[TatteredAngel]

TeaDidikai

Which paths? The problem is that these kinds of books become sound byte theology that is just as flawed in it's application as anything else out there.

Unless we went into it from an anthropological angle, I'm not sure anything even the most well researched of us could put together that wouldn't have the same flaws as what is already on the market.

The anthropological angle might actually be the best bet. It'd be a really bad idea to fall into the trap of just sort of saying "oh, here's a neopagan encyclopedia," and the point of writing it wouldn't be to inform people of the details of different modern pagan paths, but more to inform that there are these different paths.

The biggest hurdle for me would be to write something that is accessible without being flufftastic tripey rubbish. There's sort of a sweet spot for good books that are well-researched that an average Joe still might still pick up. That's what I'd want to aim for.

Atrox: Sounds like a great Women's Studies thesis. I can't hold my own with modern theory in terms of feminism, but I'd love to see someone at least do a paper on that. I think it would be interesting to trace how all this modern and sometimes pulpy Goddess-centric stuff really came to be, and where it stands in terms of New Age versus Recon, etc.  

[godhi]

If I were to write a book about Paganism, it would be how to avoid becoming a 'fluff bunny' and become a serious student of witchcraft and the occult.  

[TeaDidikai]

godhi

If I were to write a book about Paganism, it would be how to avoid becoming a 'fluff bunny'

We have that much. See. wink  

[Deoridhe]

I tend to only try to be inclusive in the fictional world I've created.

In this world, I don't have the luxury of being the creatrix and having the ability to see and shape from the outside. Al I have are my flawed experiences and the stories I hear from others.

I think narrowly focusing a book, perhaps focusing on types of world manipulation that are symbolically based or types of world manipulation that use energy images, might be an interesting cross section - but it's not like taking the cross section of a tree, where it can tell you anything much about the other bits; it's more like taking the cross section of a Rembrandt and finding out that the only thing you can be sure of is that the middle is still liquid.