Longing for Animism: Intimacy With Landscapes And Other Dreck

[tagonist]

I've suddenly started working seven days a week, which has cut into my thinking time somewhat, and I've been absent from this blog now for longer than I care to think about. I'm also frustrated by an as-yet-unfinished post on Oomoto and the concept of "mazeways"- the techniques people use to accomplish their goals which, while delineated by culture

Comments

[lorihollet]

You hardly write like an idiot.

I appreciate the way your writing starts at such an a specific entry point, but ends up addressing many related issues/topics.

This topic in particular--the value of ritual/religion with regard to the natural world or humanity or other targets of "respect"--is something I've been thinking about, that certainly appreciate your perspective on.

[chipmunk_planet]

I really like this. Thank you.

[anonymous]

Hi Ann

[tagonist]

Hm. I agree most people (statistically) live in cities, and that this means some distance from agriculture, but I'm not sure its entirely possible to say what is and is not "truly important." There is a social landscape everywhere, with its own markers and locations, and its definitely productive to talk about rituals in those contexts as well. I'm thinking of, say, in the eighties, going out to Rocky Horror every Saturday and from there to someone's basement for a party. There's an inherently portable theme to this (Rocky Horror was screened every Saturday all over the country for several years) but at the same time, for the teens involved, it was all about our specific theater, Jake's basement, and the recurring people and relationships that were always there. Extended over a lifetime, or a few generations, you have something that approximates a ritual cultural practice, with all the metaphysical comfort that comes along with it.

A

[anonymous]

Yes, I agree, and I think your example is a good one. I realized later that my use of 'important' could cause some misunderstanding. What I meant to express is what you have doubtless seen among your Rocky Horror friends; the group has probably dwindled, and most likely the group of friends who remain involved in some shared ritual have found some other practice besides Rocky Horror. This is supposition on my part, obviously, but I've seen similar groups as they move along

[tagonist]

I feel this is well-worn turf, and the footprints ahead of us are not those in which we should be placing our feet (metaphor deathmatch!) Its hard to talk about this without (mis)using psychological tropes like individualism and learned helplessness, but ultimately, I think, the question comes down to how indispensable people are to each other. Rituals and the social stability that come from them are developed over generations, few social landscapes seem to last anywhere near that long. For instance, long after I gave up Rocky Horror as a pass-time, other kids in their teens were still going regularly- it was a semi-permanent ritual even though it wasn't a permanent part of my life. What ended it, in my opinion, was the decision to release the VHS in the US

++

[amnesiadust]

Let me freeload awhile on the admiration train: While I usually like your posts, I agree with the others that this one is unusually thought-provoking. I've always been interested in deconstructing religious thought, less to be free of it than to try and discover what really is fundamental about it.

Thanks also for the link to American Gods. I like what I've read of Neil Gaiman's work, but in these days of infinite reading material it helps to have some directions pointed, and that one looks unusually good, at least from the blurb

Re: ++

[tagonist]

Two quibbly points worth noting- First, if you asked Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, and Carl Sagan what their religions were, all three would say "Jewish." Judaism is a non-proselytizing world religion, that has survived in the absence of charismatic personalities, an organized body, or anything remotely approaching pomp. There is an anecdote in Kamenetz' The Jew In The Lotus in which the Dalai Lama, concerned about the seeming permanence of his exile from Tibet, asks a council of Rabbis how the Jews have survived intact for so long without losing their identity. Their answer: the Seder, the collective meal in which the story of how the Jews escaped from slavery, is taught to children over and over again every year. I don't think science (or, Science) has anything on that kind of ritual continuity, nor is there any conflict between the two

Re: ++

[amnesiadust]

Yeah... Perhaps it's worthwhile following up on "Science" a bit more from a sociological perspective, if someone else hasn't done it already. While science with a small 's' doesn't really belong in this debate, capitalized Science is another beast. I tired long ago of the "Science vs. [Mostly Christianity]" thing, but I'm curious now about where the narratives on either side of the dichotomy came from and what stories people are acting on but not telling themselves. I don't know how to make more sense than that without further thought (and sleep), but perhaps it will come to me on a long walk on a beach in Queensland and then I'll write those thoughts up

Re: ++

[tagonist]

As I understand it (Peter Matthiesen's The Snow Leopard is pretty much my only source here) what we think of as Tibetan Buddhism is a syncretic collision between Mahayana (which allows great souls to return from an enlightened state as Boddhisattvas, and hence is great at post-facto incorporating heroes and spirits from other traditions, a la Catholic sainthood) and a central-Asian animist religion called Bön, which Buddhists moving in from Nepal attempted to completely wipe out. Its somebody else's question whether this constituted a genocide, but according to Matthiesen, nearly the entire Bön priest caste was killed