Brea -- I loved Mists of Avalon, then read her book on Cassandra, which is in my field (Classical Studies) and was offended not only by the inaccuracy but the sheer lack of any kind of sensitivity to the culture. Inaccuracy I can deal with, in fiction at least, but insensitivity narks me. Then it occurred to me that Celtic historians might feel the same way about Mists of Avalon. (On the other hand, I loved the Darkover books when I read them in my late teens/early 20's.)
My feeling about deity is that it forms itself according to the needs of the culture (like archetype) -- the fact that there was not any monolithic Great Goddess in the past doesn't mean that a Great Goddess is an invalid focus of spiritual energies in the present day. The fact that Wicca has a strong 19th century component doesn't mean it's not a valid form of polytheistic religion now.
It would be nice if people took what they do and believe sufficiently seriously not to need to project it into the past. As I intimated earlier, the reason some dancers/New Age types are so adamant about a Great Goddess in the past is that they don't believe in her power in the present day. If they're going to keep the Mother Goddess warm fuzzies alive, they have to project her into the past.
I also get peeved at times because people assume that you're a supporter of patriarchy if you don't believe in the Gimbutas-style matriarchy that's so prominent in belly dance pseudo-history. The reason I don't believe in it is that I'm a feminist to the core, and believing in a fictitious 19th century-style New Age matriarchy does nothing to further the cause of feminism (which I define as improving life for everyone by working towards gender equality and support of women's concerns).
Ranting and loving it --
Andrea
__________________
"I am not contradictory, I am dispersed." (Roland Barthes)
|