on the importance of early pagan revival texts
<@Otter> obli, would you count the Mabinogian as a pagan book?
<obli> yes
<obli> but not a book of the pagan revival
== Wulfbyrnan [~wulf@d24-141-154-71.home.cgocable.net] has quit [Quit: WE GONE]
<obli> a book that inspired the pagan revival
<@Otter> "That of Medea is, however, quite correct, even artistic, representing the sorceress as conjuring the magic bath, and was p..."?
<@Otter> oh
<obli> but the pagan revival was only really possible once books that openly trafficked in magic and cult practice could be published without facing violent backlash
<obli> and
<obli> i'd go a step further
== Redwood [~qwebirc@yosemite.yosemite.edu] has joined #paganjourney
<Redwood> good day mates
<obli> and suggest that in order to qualify unambiguously as a text of the pagan revival it has to comprise original material
<obli> hi Redwood
<Redwood> hello
<obli> like, some of thomas taylors stuff could qualify, but it's all translations of classical material, and it's only really his intent that separates it from other academic translations
<obli> like i wouldn't count betz as a pagan even though he translated the greek magical papyrii
<obli> where as this is is presenting a magical system, operating through the classical gods, that was intended to be used
<obli> by it's readers
<obli> like westlakes 'place of dionysos' is a defence of, and exoneration to Dionysian worship
<@Otter> hi Redwood
<Redwood> hey otter
<obli> the explicit intent to spread "belief" through practice is what makes these texts important
== Alusa [~Alusa@108.68.154.222] has joined #PaganJourney
== mode/#paganjourney [+o Alusa] by ChanServ
<@Alusa> hows everyone
<obli> it's the diffrence between 'witchcraft today' and 'the book of shadows' and all the sensationalist books about the history of witchcraft that came out in the interwar years
