PLEASE REMEMBER I HAVE A FAQ POST NOW AND THANK YOU FOR LEAVING A COMMENT IF YOU'RE READING! LOVE AND THANKS TO ALL MY READERS!
The all new 50 Books Challenge!
Title: Consorting with Spirits: Your Guide to Working with Invisible Allies by Jason Miller
Details: Copyright 2022, Weiser Books
Synopsis (By Way of Back Cover): ""This is a book I wish I had fifteen years ago when I began working closely with spirits."
-- Mat Auryn, author of Psychic Witch
"Jason Miller masterfully guides you through many worlds of spirit, based on his own deep experiences and balanced with an understanding of multiple traditions and paradigms. With his guidance, you can learn to consort with the spirits, too, and find your own place in this time-honored tradition of communing with the unseen."
-- Christopher Penczak, author of The Inner Temple of Witchcraft and The Mighty Dead
"Miller has written the definitive next-level book on working with spirits." -- Jacki Smith, author of Coventry Magic with Candles, Oils, and Herbs and The Big Book of Candle Magic, and founder of Coventry Creations
Throughout history, humans have sought power and knowledge from spirits. Learning how to conjure, communicate, and negotiate with these unseen powers is one of the keys to success in magic.
Consorting with Spirits presents a detailed explanation of what spirits are, their different classifications, and how they exist in relation to the world we normally perceive. The reader will then learn a system of practices that will cultivate three main skills: The capacity to perceive spirits clearly, the ability to interact with them effectively, and the tools to deepen your relationships. It is this focus on deepening relationships and increasing clarity in communications that has been missing from much of the material about spirits.
This book will teach you different ways of interacting with spirits, from offerings and invitations to forceful conjurations. With these tools in hand, you can work with your spirit allies to achieve any goal, from protection, to wealth, to vast knowledge. "
Why I Wanted to Read It: The past few years have been big for books about Witches (of all kinds) and the occult. The matron secular saint of this blog (I guess you could say she's one of its guiding "spirits"), Claudine, surprised me with this book as a present, which I've wanted to read but my library did not have.
How I Liked It: Let me tell you something you probably already know. At least, if you've been here awhile. I've had this current book project going for nearly three and half years now. And I've learned a lot of lessons about books, stories, authors, and reading in that time. One of those lessons, particularly since I've read more Witch and occult books in the past two years than I have in a decade, has been evolving as I read more Witch and occult books. And that lesson seems to have never related harder than this particular book: Just how much can you disagree with an author, yet still find usable (and not in a cautionary-example way) material in their book? Let's find out!
To start! The author has a foreword from occult author Mat Auryn (uh oh...) praising this book's necessity. In the introduction, the author mentions that even owning this book would be illegal centuries ago and goes on about what to expect from this book including the fact this should not be your first book on magic (this is part of a theme, and we'll get to that).
He starts out with what spirits are and from there details about working with them, including dangers and general suggestions, and a whole question and answer chapter in the back. Throughout, he gives histories of magic and personal stories of his own experiences with spirits (and more than a sprinkle of pop culture references).
Before I get into what I thought, I should say this is not my first book on magic, as you, the reader, well know. This is not even my first book on contacting various spirits (quick note: if you're unfamiliar, spirits to this particular author can be anything from ghosts, Deities, angels, demons, fae, and even more). I'm not just familiar with what this book is about, I'm pretty experienced with it personally. I bring this up to note from where I come as a reader about this: I'm not a beginner. However, I haven't read any of the author's other books (we'll get to that).
As I said, the author opens the book by saying how this shouldn't be your first book on magic. That's not necessarily a problem (although it might've been clearer on the outside cover and promotional text that this is for people looking to expand their existing knowledge and/or practice, lest a beginner take it home), as there are plenty of beginner books on the market for nearly all angles of occult practice, but finding intermediate to advanced books can be more difficult. No, where there starts to be a problem is the fact that at least occasionally, the author isn't putting a lot of faith in this book (or books as a whole) to be able to teach this sort of thing, which is-- somewhat strange for an instructional book about it? Also, I understand authors can't cover everything in depth and if they've written a book already covering the subject, they both don't need to cover it again in this book to that level of detail, and should also reference their previous book for more information. But a "I discuss this subject at length in my book _________" and offering a short summary of whatever the topic is is quite different than not providing information at all and telling people you already wrote about this in another book (as the social media maxims go, tone is difficult to discern from text, but one does tend to get a defensive vibe).
Some of you reading this far into the book are probably pulling your hair out over the fact that I have not talked about protecting yourself against spirits yet. I already have you doing exercises to open you up to the spirits, making offerings to attract spirits into your life, and traipsing around graveyards and forests looking for spirit allies. Isn't this dangerous?
Sure. A little.
So you might wonder why this book is so light on shielding and amulets and banishings. Why is this chapter called "Fear and Danger" rather than "Protection Magic"? There are three reasons.
First: I already wrote a book called Protection and Reversal Magick, and as I said in the introduction, I am not writing this book with the intention that it be your first foray into magic. If every book has to contain every possible preliminary and protection, then there will never be room for the substance of the book itself. Still, I look forward to the Amazon reviews complaining that I did not properly instruct people on how to protect themselves.
[...]
Having confidence that you can respond when shit goes sideways is better than any protective shield or circle. As mentioned, I have already written that book so I don't want to do it again. (pgs 107 and 108)
This comes into play when the author talks somewhat troublingly about meditation.
One last thing: while you can't be bad at meditation, meditation practices can be bad for some people. It doesn't happen a lot, maybe half one percent, but it is still worth talking about. There are some people who, when the pitter-patter of their usual thoughts slow down, experience traumatic memories or even get freaked out by a loss of Self. In some meditators, blood flows away from the parietal lobe that controls boundaries and toward the frontal lobe that controls analysis. You become hyper-aware of a loss of boundary. This is good for those looking to lessen the grasp of their ego, or for those looking to communicate with unseen intelligences, but it can be disruptive and traumatic for some. If something like this happens, consult relevant medical help. This is only a book, after all. (pg 45)
While he's an advocate for meditation, even understands that most people eschew meditation for one reason or another, and yet gives ammunition to a very scant possibility (incidentally, a great way to avoid any of that I would think would be using a guided meditation app. There are free ones on YouTube and you can download the Calm App, which has both free and pay options).
Meditation has immensely helped my own practice aside from my health and I run into the same stumbling blocks whenever I've suggested it to people. So why try to dissuade people further? It seems like something like that would also be fed by the power of suggestion.
Incidentally about meditation...
When someone is experiencing an active psychic or magical attack, I of course have them banish every day. I have them shield and wear amulets. I have them disengage from most magical practices, even meditation, so that they can protect, heal, and fight back if necessary. (pg 109)
Meditation practices can vary, and meditation is a great healing tool.
But back to the subject of books!
Sometimes it can also be amazing to ask a spirit during a spell to do something and show you how they do it. You can learn so much that really cannot be explained easily in books this way. Half the magic I do comes from this type of exploration and only maybe 30 percent of that comes from books and courses. (pg 206)
He also can have an inconsistent approach to protection, both decrying "too much" protection and armor, and then turning around and throwing out:
As a Witch, Magician, or Sorcerer who is trafficking with unseen entities, you should learn to protect yourself. You should have a baseline of protection that covers you in everyday life. You should have operational security that is active during specific workings. You should have response plans in place that are employed only when facing real difficulty and danger. (pgs 109 and 110)
Other downsides, and a big one for me, he has the disdain trendy in occult books for Paganism, particularly Wicca. As a pocket refresher for any newbies, the term "Witch" has many meanings, including referring to a religious/spiritual practice (thus why I give it the capital W). As I broke down Wicca before in the latter review linked:
So there's a bit of a split, sometimes. You should never call someone who calls themselves a Witch a Wiccan, but you should also never call someone who calls themselves a Wiccan a Witch, either. (It's honestly not that hard.)
I prefer the term Witch for a number of reasons. Number one, it's the term Doreen Valiente used. Number two I've noticed a watering-down, kind of "Christianization" of Wicca that's just harder to do when you call it Witchcraft. For one, to this way of thinking, the Wiccan Rede (also known as the Witch's Creed) about "Do what ye will but harm ye none" isn't seen as a moral guideline, but becomes a "golden rule" and even a "law" which it is not. Really, it's intended to be a suggestion, and frankly, it's a bit purposely ambiguous. Sometimes you have to hurt someone to help them or for the greater good. For example, there are rumors of British Witches hexing Hitler to prevent his gaining greater power in England. But calling it a "law" seems more acceptable to a majority Christian country. Trying to force the Rede into a law and otherwise taking a very Abrahamic, particularly Christian world view (Deity is your parent in the sky, angels are God's messengers, and there are very cut and dry rules about morality, et cetera) is unfortunately far more likely to happen with people calling themselves Wiccans-NOT-Witches.
Okay, got all that? The skyrocketing popularity of Wicca in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s led to an influx of books on the market and numerous unfortunate "Wiccan stages" (QUICK NOTE! Always be respectful if you're looking to learn more about a spiritual/religious practice, especially if you realize it's not for you; if I tell you I'm a Witch and have been for more than half of my life practicing, don't tell me about how you were "really into" Wicca as a teen for awhile; I'm sure you wouldn't do that to a Christian?).
People that travel in occult circles hear a lot about Wicca specifically and while it's nearly as nebulous a term as "Witch" (I have absolutely known self-described Wiccans who hexed and even cursed), among certain (tiresome) occult people there's a certain cache in trashing/mocking it.
I'm not saying there aren't criticisms to be made of how certain mindsets/schools of thought or certain authors do things, I'm saying that you living in a majority Christian country and culture and claiming "Wiccan/Pagan bubbles" (as though Pagans don't have our own issues with "Christianized" influence as I mentioned) is unbelievably short-sighted.
Thankfully as we all settled into a new millennium, Magicians, Witches, and other magical folk began to see through this complicated and convoluted quantum entanglement of occult theories. If there was a trend that marked the magic of the new millennium, it was a return to tradition. The last twenty years have seen dozens of English translations of old grimoires and magical workbooks. Classics like the sixth and seventh books of Moses and The Book of the Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage got re-issued with new scholarship, correcting many errors and misunderstandings. Witches began to investigate traditional craft outside of the Wiccan/Neo-Pagan bubble. (pgs 12 and 13)
In my experience, I've found far, far more people living in an Abrahamic religious bubble (largely Christian) than could ever exist in a "Wiccan/"Neo-Pagan" bubble.
I have met a family in which a familiar spirit has been acknowledged through at least four generations. Now you might get excited at this, thinking that these examples must be the real old-school Pagan Witchcraft people have dreamt of, but in truth every member of that family is Greek Orthodox by religion. A point often overlooked is that a lot of the world's Witchcraft is far more tied up with Christian rather than Pagan survivals. I am not saying that's good or bad, it just is. (pg 178)
Here's the thing: "real old-school Pagan Witchcraft" doesn't have to be "dreamt" of; examples do exist, this just isn't a particular case of that. Also, while I'm referring to the historic, I'm assuming the author means "Pagan Witchcraft still existing through antiquity" which is part of the "how much was created/how much was preserved" conundrum I mentioned before. I don't think endless debates on this subject are productive use of time. If you don't know how old something is, be honest and say that. What works works. No religion or spiritual practice exists unchanged and it doesn't matter if something is millennia old or you just wrote it this morning if it means something to you.
Also, the author's glib "A point often overlooked is that a lot of the world's Witchcraft is far more tied up with Christian rather than Pagan survivals." in itself overlooks a lot of factors: people adapt their practices and Christianity, in most corners, had an extremely aggressive marketing campaign. Again, if you're not aware of the fact you live in a majority Christian country and culture and what was wiped out due to forced conversion and assimilation, genocide, colonialism, and other, let's say, hard-sell tactics, you're the one living in a bubble and you need to keep some perspective.
This talk of Abrahamic religions brings me to something else, a bit more of a matter of personal taste. I am a Witch. I am not interested at all in the devil or any other Abrahamic religious concepts, thank you. The image and concept of the devil was frequently stolen and perverted from Pagan Gods for propaganda reasons and I personally find those Gods much more interesting. If for whatever reason, you are interested in working with the Devil for some sort of reclaiming purposes, fine. But I'd be just as happy, particularly given the Satanic Panic if people kept Paganism and Witchcraft out of it ("magic" and "sorcery" work just as well if you're using witch to mean "a general magic-maker"). And this author is interested in working with Lucificerian magic (in addition to Christian and Pagan magics... we'll get to that) so there's quite a bit of material on that.
I should say that the author both does and doesn't use Witchcraft and Wicca interchangeably, and adding to the confusion, randomly capitalizes words without explanation, as you may have noticed. Maybe this is explained in his other books.
Satan or Lucifer may mean something entirely evil to a devout Christian, but represent freedom and liberation to people who have been marginalized or victimized by the Church. Is he a fallen Angel? A dark Lord of Witchcraft? A serpent who delivers knowledge? My answer is yes, all of the above. (pgs 20 and 21)
Just going to say from the Witch angle, if you want to worship/work with the Gods that at various times Abrahamic religion has used to create their image of the Devil... why not work with Them? I'm guessing that they just don't have the same shock value as the Devil. Again, to each their own (within reason), but I try to purge Abrahamic influences from my own practice.
The last few years have seen an embrace of Luciferian and Satanic points of view in a way that has never been open. The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina has depicted Satanic Witches in a positive light. In another show, the Devil solves crimes with the LAPD. Scholarly work is being down on Satanism and Black Masses in fin de siècle France. In the United States, there are Satanists going to court to fight for civil rights as well as doing important charitable work. Entire branches of Witchcraft are openly dedicated to Lucifer, Cain, and Lilith. The Devil is surely having his day.
As someone who started practicing Magic in the middle of the Satanic Panic in the late '80s, I am amazed and overjoyed. I am not a Satanist or a Luciferian, but because I'm a Sorcerer operating in the West, he is definitely part of my Witchcraft and my world. (pg 80)
A couple things to unpack here. I was not aware (or maybe I was and I purposely forgot) that the Riverdaleification of Sabrina the Teenage Witch depicted Satanic witches, and... I haven't seen the show just watched and read reviews but that's pretty disappointing in this day and age, but also not surprising given the fact the show is a Riverdale in terms of not-that-shocking shock value of a pre-existing kid-friendly franchise.
Also, note the author using "witchcraft" to mean multiple, quite varied things, but not explaining that that's what he's doing (or differentiating between meanings). I realize this isn't a book for beginners, but I'm hardly a beginner and it was sometimes tough to follow, especially with the random capitalization. He's referring to "witchcraft" to mean "magic making" here, I assume.
Quick side note about those capitalizations:
Whenever I move somewhere new, I like to research local legends of Witches, Ghosts, Monsters, and assorted occult shenanigans related to where I live. The Pine Barrens of New Jersey are most famous for the Jersey Devil, but there are other spirits who wander the sandy tracks and orange streams that weave between pines. (pg 87)
He both capitalizes spirits in some places and not in others.
Confused? Throw Witchcraft and witchcraft and Wicca into the mix, along with statements about what (w)itches (WHICH witches?!) do and are:
Several years back I interviewed Jason Miller about his works and courses. I asked him why he embraced the word "Sorcerer" for himself over some of the more popular terms. He explained to me that for him, the term "Sorcerer" felt like a middle ground between the words "magician" and "witch." I would say Jason definitely stands where those two paths meet, potently working form the nexus of what appears to be often contradictory paths of magic of spiritism. (From the Forward by Matt Auryn, pg xiii and xiv)
Again, "witch" as "general magic-maker".
When you do get a true appearance [by a spirit], or at least an appearance chosen without the input of the human, it is usually initiated by the spirit rather than a Magician, or it is the result of mystical practice. For our purposes here the main differentiator between mysticism and magic lies in the role of effort versus effortlessness. The Magician or Witch makes an effort with a ritual or conjuration and often repeats it many times, whereas a mystic opens themselves up to a presence and lets go more and more. (pg 34)
Ehhhh, I don't know if I agree with this. I've met many Witches that take the "mystic" route here.
I saw myself as more a Witch who worked ceremonial magic than a classic Ceremonial Magician. In my mind, Witches got on with Demons more than bossed them around. (pg 57)
I'm a Witch and I tend to classify demons (both capital or lowercase) as Abrahamic religious figures and therefore not my interest/belief.
Modern Pagans adopt God forms in a similar way: they see themselves as the Deity, they invoke the Deity, and in some small way they become the Deity (at least long enough to work some magic). (pg 62)
Again, not so, at least not always. By the way, quick note about the word "Pagan"? I capitalize it to refer to the spiritual/religious practice (same as Witch). Pagan religions refer to the pre-Abrahamic religions that were usually nature-centered, polytheistic, and animistic to varying levels. Modern Paganism has (as I said) both elements of the old and elements of the new, like any spiritual/religious practice. That said, I don't feel the need for the term "Neo-Pagan" which people (including occasionally this author) use to mean modern Pagans. The term pagan itself originated as a word for kind of rural people who held on to the old religions. So it's weird to see it capitalized in a modern way:
This 4th century hieromartyr was the most learned and famous Sorcerer of his time, having trained in magic and Necromancy all over the Mediterranean world. The story is that he set his eyes on a beautiful maiden named Justina, and used his magic to try to win her love. Much to her Pagan parents' chagrin, Justina was a devout Christian, and when she felt the onslaught of Cyprian's Demons, she dispelled them with a sign of the cross. (pg 77)
Again, this is one of those stories that if you evaluate the fact history is often written by the winners, Christianity "overcoming" paganism is certainly how conquering Christians would write it. But more importantly to my initial point, what a weirdly modern way of putting a 4th century story.
The author offers a Luciferican "spin" on a Buddhist prayer. I'm not Buddhist, so my lane I'll stay, but this sounds more than a bit offensive. Why not just write an original prayer?
The Devil's Refuge
This is a spin on a Buddhist refuge and Bodhicitta prayers.
I take refuge in the devil, fallen for freedom's sake
I take refuge in the witchcraft, the path of wisdom made power
I take refuge in the damned, cast out, fallen, and forsaken
May all beings have freedom and the causes of freedom
May all beings be free from slavery and the causes of suffering
May all beings enjoy the freedom that knows no slavery
May all beings live deliciously, free from ignorance and oppression (pg 114)
While "magic" or "sorcery" could've filled in fine for "witchcraft", I suppose this is as good as any as to understanding why people might want to revere Satan as a revolutionary figure.
The first time I saw a better way of conjuring was when I read Mastering Witchcraft by Paul Huson, my first really good book on Witchcraft. In the book, Paul presents an unusual conjuration of the Demon Vassago. (pg 116)
Again, changeable use of the term witchcraft, particularly since the author left out the full title of the 1970 book which is Mastering Witchcraft: A Practical Guide for Witches, Warlocks and Covens. Witch, incidentally, is a term for people of all genders. "Warlock" is not. Also, if you are leery of using a term so historically associated with women and you are a man, maybe sit and think on that and why that bothers you.
This also sounds like witchcraft as "general magic-maker".
If you are conjuring in the name of YHVH, your Wiccan Athame is not a good choice. If you are conjuring in the name of your Witch Gods, then it is probably a great choice. (pg 127)
"Witch Gods"? Thus, Witch-as-spiritual/religious-practice, not Witch-as-general-magic-maker.
Saint Cyprian is my intermediary spirit of choice for most things. As I am sure you can tell by now, I operate freely in Christian, Luciferian, and Pagan worlds without bias or exclusivity. As a figure that stands between the Christian and Pagan worlds, as surely as he does between heaven and hell, Cyprian is my guy. (pg 176)
Something that fascinates me about people who have no problem integrating Christianity (particularly an Abrahamic outlook, as this author) with other traditions is the fact the religion literally has a Commandment against doing this. It's not one of those shakier interpretations in Christianity, it's one of the Ten Commandments. I get it's that same "borrowing what works" but it's literally outlawed by the religion to do exactly that. Just a musing/wondering as a Pagan.
Some Witches claim that their familiars are ghosts of the dead, nature spirits, Fairies assigned by the Queen of Fairy, or Demons assigned to the Witch by the devil or his emissaries. (pg 178)
Witches and the Devil again. Sigh.
Okay! So we've covered the not-so-greats. What's good about this book?
Well, I wouldn't quite call it a draw with the downsides of the book, but the author makes a number of excellent points about occult practices and the occult community as a whole.
He tackles cultural misappropriation in a way that makes it clear you CAN practice things from outside of your culture/heritage, so long as you do it in a respectful way (I'll add here that there are some practices which are closed, meaning that the only respectful way to practice them is not at all).
I am not one for wild eclecticism. I see a lot of misappropriation, strange connections, and cultural disrespect out there. If you are trying to call upon Jesus using the Phurba of Odin, you have strayed too far from any reasonable expression of truth or respect for the path. On the other hand, there are people who want to divide the world into neat boxes that never overlap or inform one another-- keeping all things separate. The world is not neat and tidy and never has been. (pg 4)
I would argue that the author has some pretty wild eclecticism of his own as I mentioned, but this is the right attitude.
What are some common misconceptions about spirits?
Oh, so many.
[...]
· That you must never ever contact spirits outside your culture.
· That you can just contact anything from any tradition in any way you want. (pgs 209 and 210)
In addition, some great all around points.
I mentioned that energy and mind both play a huge role in Asian magical systems, but so do spirits. There is no need for a model that reduces magic to one function. Arguing about whether magic works exclusively through the intercession of spirits versus mind or energy is like debating whether your car works exclusively via gasoline versus electricity or oil. The car requires all these elements as facets of its operation. So, too is it with magic. The view needs to be mega, not meta. We need a large view where spirits are real and active, but the role of mind and energy is also important. These are important, not only because it explains how magic works, but also because you are a spirit too.... (pg 13)
Regardless of what distant land of place of pilgrimage you might hold dear, ultimately you need to recognize the place where you live as a place of magic. If you live in a place famously steeped in occult lore like New Orleans, Glastonbury, or Kathmandu, you have an enormous, if perhaps touristy, body of local material to link your Sorcery to. Truthfully, though, the whole world is alive with spirit. Even if you live in the dreariest suburb, surrounded by box stores and blight, you can still investigate the land and integrate it into your practice. (pg 90)
If I was the type to write in books, even books I own, I would circle this paragraph a few times, and even highlight it. YES.
Every place I have ever lived, I have made a map that details the important locations I might need for magic. Once you have this map, mental or on paper, you can begin to establish a relationship with the land and its spirits. It will serve you in ways that you would never expect as long as you serve it faithfully as well. (pg 91)
An interesting idea and a way to make even a grim apartment complex feel magical.
Did you hear about the girl who became possessed by the Babylonian Wind Demon Pazuzu after using a Ouija board? Or about the family who had a pact with King Paimon and all wound up dead? How about the Witch who would make love potions to attract men only to be driven to insanity and death? These kinds of things happen all the time-- in movies. Specifically, the Exorcist (1973), Hereditary (2018), and The Love Witch (2016).
Stories of people making deals with spirits that lead to their ultimate demise are timeless. They are to magic what Reefer Madness was to marijuana: over the top and unrealistic portrayals of what will happen if you break society's taboo. Like marijuana, the dangers of magic are often overstated by people who know nothing about it other than they are told it's bad. Unfortunately, misinformation can come from the other side as well, and safety can be overstated. I have seen people push a line of "Nothing bad can happen," or "The spirits love you," which is also not true at all.
Most of us think absolutely nothing about getting behind the wheel of a car and driving to the grocery store even though roughly 38,000 people a year die in accidents on US roadways and an additional 4.4 million are seriously injured. We do it because the rewards of driving, or getting into a public vehicle, outweigh the risk. We also take precautions when we do it, such as wearing a seatbelt and driving cars with airbags and safety features. If we decided that we wanted to do something particularly dangerous in a care, like race in a derby, we know that our risk increases so we take more precautions as well: a five-point harness, a helmet, a roll cage, and so on. (pgs 105 and 106)
Excellent, because too many of these horror movie cliches still abound from so-called serious people.
I am going to repeat something here, but it is something that bears repeating: there is no such thing as pure unadulterated perception. It's true for interactions with people and is even truer for interactions with beings that are by definition more subtle.
When you practice something that your experience tells you is real, but which the world says is fake, it can be tempting to rebel by trashing skepticism altogether. This is a mistake. I have met some magic-using folks who seem to believe things simply on the basis that the mainstream says they are not true. This is how so many people in the New Age and magical communities wind up believing in conspiracy theories. Embrace a healthy skepticism, even of your own experiences.
Better yet, suspend the rush to believe or disbelieve entirely. After you finish with a spiritual experience, tell yourself, "This is what I just experienced." Instead of asking yourself if it's true or not, ask yourself if it's actionable or not. Ask if there is anything new here that you didn't already know, and if there is a way to verify it.
If you conjure Baal and he says you descended from a 16th-century Witch named Mabel, what do you do with this? Some people I know would instantly adjust their family tree to reflect Mabel and tell their kids and anyone who will listen that they descended from a Witch. Others would junk this idea entirely and assume that they fantasized the whole conversation and forget all about it. What I would do is start researching family history for any sign, and maybe even try to contact Mabel with magic. I might engage with Mabel's spirit if it turned out to be useful, but I would need hard non-magical evidence before I added her to the family tree. (pgs 186 and 187)
Again, excellent, particularly to see conspiracy theory BS called out.
Does the past life model and reincarnation concept conflict with the ancestor model? Can someone be reincarnated and also function as an ancestor at the same time?
We are more than just one thing. The idea that we are just a body and a spirit is fairly new. Most religions break down the Self into various parts. I don't want to get into all the specifics, but we can say that part of us reincarnates, part can become an ancestor, part can be a ghost that stays behind, and part is beyond all this. (pg 204)
I really appreciated this as someone who has a, diverse, shall we say, outlook on the afterlife. We are more than one thing.
So we have a hugely mixed bag. From some of my caveats and criticisms, you'd think this book was a total wash. But it obviously was not. In addition to the sections I quoted, the author puts forth a respect for spirits (or Spirits) as a whole that's inspiring and engaging and will no doubt affect the relationship of many with the spirits with which they interact. While I have a lot of criticisms, I learned from the book as well, and I think he covers important points that are too frequently passed over.
How much can you disagree with someone and still find their work usable? Well, it's like this. In these types of practices, there's a saying about "Use what you like/what works for you and leave the rest." It means make the practice your own by adapting it. While there are of course considerations with this (proper accreditation and cultural misappropriation, and yes, you can use this model and still use it ethically), it's a pretty great system. And this book makes an excellent argument for it. Read the book, debate with it, disagree with it-- and learn and grow from it.
Notable:
Have you ever noticed that a great stand-up comedian can deliver jokes on stage that would ordinarily be offensive, yet have that audience laughing and not taking the slightest offense at otherwise racy material? This is because they have spent years learning to deliver jokes to an audience in person. Everyone leaves the club happy. The same routine as a Netflix special may still work, but without the social proof that comes from being in front of a crowd, it may not. When that jokes gets written down without the benefit of the comedian's skills or facial expressions, that same material will be offensive because what people see are just words on a page.
What does this have to do with spirits? Simple: Every interaction you have with another person is colored by who you are, who they are, and the medium through which you are communicating. If communication can be this subtle for people, how much more so is it for subtle beings like spirits? This is why it's not enough to know what a spirit is We need to also know the ways in which they manifest. (pg 23)
Perhaps it's because Netflix has a terrible reputation for platforming particularly bigoted stand-ups lately who are generally at a low point in their career and the culture wars are as good a way of staying relevant as any, but this rubbed me the wrong way for a lot of reasons.
For one, it's an imperfect analogy. There are plenty of examples (some infamous) of people not enjoying stand-up in person because of the comedian. There's also the fact that even pre-COVID considerations (you want to risk your life and/or quality of life for some live entertainment?), if you paid money for a show, you want to enjoy it, even if maybe it's not really landing with you.
"When that jokes gets written down without the benefit of the comedian's skills or facial expressions, that same material will be offensive because what people see are just words on a page."
In some cases, sure. In plenty of others, though, we have the benefit of seeing for ourselves the full context including facial expressions, set-up, and tone. It's not a matter of the "magic" being lost, it's a matter of the comedian punching down.
________________________________________
There's some troubling sentiments about police and authority that appear in the book:
Forceful authority is also used to get a spirit to appear in the specific mode of manifestation you want. A spirit who might be comfortable supplying loose inspirations or hazy manifestations of resonance when asked might only be motivated to appear visibly and speak plainly when compelled to controlled appearance. Some people are like this too, only giving straight answers when under a penalty of violence or imprisonment. (pg 58)
Hey, have you heard about "false confessions under duress"? You'll get a confession or information with certain tactics, but it certainly won't be the truth.
Graveyards are the Sorcerer's friend, or at least the home of a few of the Sorcerer's friends. Shades of the dead can be useful in all types of magic. Spirits of murderers and thieves are obviously good for cursing and jinxing. Spirits of soldiers and policemen are likewise good for justice work and also for protection and binding. (pg 94)
"Spirits of policemen are likewise good for justice work and protection" is certainly an interesting choice to write in 2021.
________________________________________
Months later, one of these spirits appeared to me in my house to warn me of impending danger from an unstable person I had recently befriended. As it turns out, this warning came in handy and I distanced myself from him before he started lashing out and causing trouble. (pg 94)
Keeping in mind the critical thinking that the author himself strongly supports in other parts of the book, I have questions about this.
Okay... if you knew he was unstable, did you need a spirit warning? If you unfriended him before anything actually happened, how do you know it was going to, other than common sense?
I could believe that a spirit warned you about a business deal that was bad but looks perfect and you later find the company tanked, or someone who seemed like a perfect friend but you got a spirit warning and unfriended them and later found out how they'd tried to, say, betray your friendship in some way (that didn't work because you distanced them) but this is a bit of a reach to share as example. I'm not saying the spirit warning wasn't legit and this person wasn't trouble, only questioning the use of this particular story.
________________________________________
In the case of a possessed spirit or haunting, it's easy to see why an exorcist would be handy to kick out an entity that is already there, but why on earth would anyone want to deliberately and aggressively seek out Demons and then bind them into service? If we can ask spirits for their aid, or make mutually beneficial pacts with them, why would we want to start off like Karen demanding to see the manager? Why would we be bossy? (pg 146)
Okay. I really need white men to put down the "Karen" meme and for everyone not to use it unless they know what it actually means.
"Karen" refers to a specific kind of white privilege, specifically white women employing the perception of white female frailty (that needs protecting "harm" from white male authority) from dangerous people of color, usually Black people of color. This can be calling the police on a Black birdwatcher who was asking them to leash their dog (a park requirement), to a spurious accusation of sexual harassment by a Black child, to harassing Black barbecue attendants, to basically ANYTHING where they can lean on their racism (and the racism of the police) to get their way.
Too many people use it to mean "an angry woman" or "a bitchy woman" and give their misogyny a veneer of social consciousness (and in some cases, distract from their own racism) when it actually has a very specific usage.
Incidentally, I'm not accusing this particular author of anything other than misusing an already overused meme at the risk of losing its meaning.
________________________________________
As more people in the general occult community also become initiated into African Traditional Religions, there can be a pressure to relate strongly with the ancestors because that is the bedrock of most of those traditions. I think that's a good thing in general, but not for everyone and not the universal way to do magic. Some people have a very hard time dealing with the sins of their ancestors. Other people might hold trauma from the religions of their birth, which eventually let them to seek magic or Witchcraft in the first place. No one is understanding orders to get right with their ancestors or spirits of a religion that they are traumatized by. It can be a rewarding thing to undertake, but there are plenty of other rewarding things to do in life, and you can't do them all. (pg 203)
While I think we need to have discussions about how to work with the ancestors, a couple points. Working with ancestors is not only found in African Traditional Religions, it's pretty widespread. Also, the concept of a spiritual ancestor (Are you a writer? Dorothy Parker! A Queer activist? Sylvia Rae Rivera! A musician? Jimmy Hendrix! And so on) is becoming increasingly widespread and it should. Our ancestry is not just our biology.
________________________________________
He has belonged to a few groups, traveled to a few magical places, and been initiated into this and that, none of which are very important. What is important is that he can do magic that actually works and is told he can teach other people how to do that magic in plain language. He hates writing about himself in the third person. (from the About the Author)
Forming a self in the author's bio section is tantamount to memoir voice and remember there are people (like me) who always read this section. If you don't like filling them out, have a friend do it for you. Also, where is it written that it has to be in the third person?
Final Grade: B-
No comments:
Post a Comment