Paganistan: Notes from the Secret Commonwealth
In Which One Midwest Man-in-Black Confers, Converses & Otherwise Hob-Nobs with his Fellow Hob-Men (& -Women) Concerning the Sundry Ways of the Famed but Ill-Starred Tribe of Witches.
Two Priestesses
It seems that N's high priestess was at a festival, going to the evening ritual in a simple white robe.
En route, she runs into—I'm quoting my friend here—a “Laurie Cabot clone,” hair done to the max, made-up to the nines, gown by Elvira, clanking with the weight of all her occult silver. Clearly this woman has worked for hours to make herself look like this.
“Oh honey,” she says to my friend's high priestess, “Aren't you going down to the big ritual tonight?”
“Sure, I'm going there now.”
Not-Laurie looks at her, dismayed. “Oh honey,” she says, “Dressed like that? Don't you want to make yourself beautiful for the Goddess?”
I could tell that my friend was bragging on his high priestess, and that I was supposed to be impressed by the purity and austerity of her approach. I don't think he sensed my disloyalty.
But lean and less-is-more, compared to someone for whom a ritual is a personal encounter with her Goddess, and the offering that she brings to the one that she loves is the confidence, dignity and pleasure of making herself look good?
Sorry N.
I know whose coven I'd rather join.
Comments
-
Tuesday, 03 March 2015
I have to say that if someone were making what comes across as a judgement on my (inoffensive) clothing choice for a spiritual experience? I'd be irked by it. Simple or intricate, whatever you feel comfortable with is fine, but making a comment like that seems set to make the simply-dressed priestess feel bad about what should be a wonderful experience.
-
Wednesday, 04 March 2015
At this remove it's impossible to say what degree (if any) of meanness there was to the initial exchange. N's priestess was either miffed or amused enough by it to report it to someone else.
I'd be a fool to draw any conclusion at all about anyone on the basis of a few lines of reported conversation. My own major response here was to my friend's implication (which maybe didn't come through in the piece) that the second priestess was a shallow lightweight. Maybe so, but I admire the degree of personal engagement with the tradition that her comment evinces.
They say that if you have to explain what you were trying to say, you haven't said it effectively. I think that may well be the case in this piece. Ah, well; back to the keyboard. -
Wednesday, 04 March 2015
I can understand appreciating the second priestess' approach and disapproving of any mean implications from 'N'. However, it also feels like you're implying that the first priestess didn't have an equal degree of personal engagement just because she didn't dress up. She may well have put the same amount of thought and good intentions into her attire.
I'm sure you didn't mean anything bad by it, but it's worth noting that the approach you took in this piece imitates N's attitude in a way I don't think you intended. -
Please login first in order for you to submit comments
I've always felt what's on the inside of a person counts for a lot more than the packaging.