![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moonvoiceAmong other things, I’m an animist with very strong totemist leanings. I suppose a lot of you could say a great big ‘duh’ to that, I run the internet’s most comprehensive totem animal dictionary (certainly in terms of word count). It may – actually – frighteningly be the most comprehensive dictionary even when compared with published works. Not only that, but I illustrate totems. And I aspect with totems. And I invoke totems and...well...you get the idea.
I used to hate basic 101 totem dictionaries. I've written articles and long essay-like responses on pagan forums about the shittiness of totem dictionaries. I own quite a few, but I was always like ‘man, these things don’t teach people the skills they need to engage with totems or to make their own dictionaries,’ and ‘they’re recycling a lot of the same information,’ and ‘cultural appropriation FTL,’ and ‘wait a minute, that’s actually completely inaccurate biological information about that animal. WTF?’
Two of these things really piss me off still; the first regarding cultural appropriation. The second regarding teaching people inaccurate information about animals. That’s poor form on behalf of the writer, but it’s also poor form on behalf of the editor, whose job it is to help qualify research in non-fiction material. It’s just poor form all around. The pagan industry can suffer from a bit of poor form at times, it’s not just totemism that cops it, as many of you know.
However, the first two points, no longer bother me. Let’s investigate why:
1. Man, these things don’t teach people the skills they need to engage with totems or to make their own dictionaries.
Firstly, not everyone has the privilege or luxury of time (or, for that matter, being able to encapsulate their experiences into written form). There’s a reason we use word dictionaries instead of making our own dictionaries in whatever language we speak. Part of that reason is a) we don’t know the definitions, b) it’s good to have a launching point for further discussion, c) not everyone has the luxury to make their own definitions for words, sometimes they have to go to another source. There is a luxury of time inherent in being able to spend hours or weeks or months with a totem animal in a way that goes beyond simply communing with it, and enters into ‘writing down the information into a file for future reference.’ Not all spiritual people can do this; nor should they be expected to. There’s also the presumption that this is somehow a more valid way of being a totemist, which skirts dangerously close to needing to regulate the practices of others, by people in positions of authority determining what is valid totemic practice, and what is not. Suddenly people who refer to 101 dictionaries for their information are invalidated, and those who have the luxury of time to make their own dictionaries are validated. It creates a vicious cycle of elitism, and – in no uncertain terms – I believe this is one of those other ‘poor form’ things you can find in the pagan industry (and just about everywhere else).
Secondly, just because it’s a dictionary with a basic knowledge, doesn’t mean people are suddenly completely unable to negotiate meanings with the content. Everyone who’s ever had a discussion on semantics knows that it’s not only possible to really expand upon the definition of a word, but to even disagree with dictionary definitions, or to pick say, one meaning out of the four offered as their preferred meaning. Most dictionaries aren’t designed to provide you with philosophical information on how to construct your own word dictionary. They’re dictionaries. Why we’ve been expecting something from totem dictionaries that resembles more – say – a philosophical ‘how to’ guide, when they’re dictionaries just seems to me to be a little ridiculous. Do you also want the new remodelled kitchen and the free knife set? Maybe we can set that poor dictionary up to work a third and fourth job as well. At some point, a dictionary just has to be a dictionary. People hating on totem dictionaries because they’re not teaching the skills people need to make their own dictionaries, should probably be hating on regular dictionaries, probably ALL dictionaries. Because it misses the point of what a dictionary is.
Thirdly, yes, they actually do teach people the skills they need to be a totemist. For someone who really wants to be a totemist, it’s not hard to realise that just about every totem information file or entry on the planet is based off a handful of things:
1. Researching the animal itself and applying symbolic or metaphorical interpretation to the animal’s biological habits.
2. Researching cultures that worship the animal and looking at their pre-existing stories and sayings for that animal (respectfully, ideally, and no – not all totem dictionaries teach this).
3. Learning basic visualisation techniques and contacting the archetype of the animal itself, and learning some UPG to throw in with that mix. Most 101 totem dictionaries do provide basic visualisation outlines on how to do this.
4. Learning some journeying skills and contacting the deva/god/actual totem itself and learning some UPG to throw in with that mix.
People who haven’t picked this up from totem dictionaries yet, probably aren’t as compelled as some of us, to write their own totem files. But the totem dictionary kind of shows everyone how to do it simply through existing. People – through their own agency – learn to build and construct through observation. If they’re still choosing not to do it, there’s reasons for that, that likely exist outside of ‘totem dictionaries suck.’ When does it become the fault of the totem dictionary, and shift to a personal decision made by someone who has totems come into their lives, but who isn’t a dedicated totemist, or – more importantly – isn’t a dedicated totem file writer? Because, simply put, the latter isn’t required and shouldn’t be required, to be a valid totemist.
2. They’re recycling a lot of the same information
This can be a drag, but so do a lot of dictionaries. Generally speaking, there’s a lot of the same fundamental information going around, and if you look up the word ‘horse’ in any dictionary (except maybe the OED), you’re going to get a lot of the same information. Why is that? Are these people just being lazy, and copying each other? It’s not that simple; there’s a reason why some information gets chosen over other information to describe something, especially abstract concepts such as emotions or totems. Just because they’re abstract concepts, doesn’t mean dictionaries suddenly have the time, space, or purpose to elaborate on those abstract concepts.
Similar and often fundamental information gets chosen, with other information being pushed aside. This other information could be truly integral to the person looking up the word or totem, but it’s not necessarily the fault of the dictionary if this information isn’t there. I’ll repeat: a dictionary is supposed to be a dictionary, it’s not supposed to a long, ambling treatise on how to teach you to make your own dictionary. And the longer the information files get per entry, the more your dictionary starts to resemble a collection of exploratory essays, and that’s a totally different animal.
That same information may be generic, and sometimes it’s even culturally appropriated, but that doesn’t mean it’s suddenly invalid. It also doesn’t mean that someone who listens to it, is suddenly going to be unable to change their minds or renegotiate the meaning as they keep working with a totem animal. A lot of the totemists who hate totem dictionaries, started with totem dictionaries, built their knowledge with totem dictionaries, and then grew past them as they learnt the critical skills necessary to no longer need them, and then, as the final blow, hated totem dictionaries for what they were. I was certainly in this camp. And I know I’m not alone.
Sure, some people engage with totems superficially; some people engage with dictionaries of all kinds superficially. I might enjoy words as a writer, and I have dictionaries, but I don’t have time to semantically discuss the complex meanings of each word I use, and then write my own dictionary about it. That doesn’t mean my experience with words is or should be invalidated. Nor should the dictionaries I own. Likewise, someone might enjoy totems, as a totemist, and they have dictionaries, but they don’t necessarily have time to discuss the complex meanings of each totem they encounter, and then write their own dictionary about it. Sometimes the generic information is all someone needs. That doesn’t mean it lacks power.
*
Totem dictionaries have their problems; certainly. Some of the most popular, feature heavy cultural appropriation and misunderstandings of Indigenous/native cultures (like common misconceptions that all Native Americans believe in totems). And some of the most popular do copy from other people in a way that makes you wonder the point in purchasing more than one (i.e. those that copy from Jamie Sam’s animal medicine books). And some of course, have inaccurate information about the animal itself.
Some of this is a result of poor editing. Some of this is a result of a once-popular pagan paradigm which said it was okay to appropriate from Indigenous cultures, because it wasn’t okay to use our own cultures, or to create our own spiritual culture. There are things not to like about totem dictionaries which are actually not totem dictionary specific, but found throughout all of paganism – particularly some parts of pagan publishing. And in this, I choose not to hate on totem dictionaries anymore, because it seems like an arbitrary target when I consider that my most fundamental objections are either a) untrue, or even based from a position of elitism, b) found in all of paganism, and are a problem everywhere.
I’ve met people who are genuinely ashamed of owning totem dictionaries, as a result of encountering respected pagans and totemists (including – I am sad to say – myself) who bag the totem dictionaries for not doing things that dictionaries aren’t really supposed to be doing in the first place. A shame culture set up on judgement, is not something I enjoy seeing in paganism, and it’s not really something I enjoy experiencing either.
So, let me say it; I own totem dictionaries (I have at least 5). I no longer use them, but I do have the luxury of time to write totem animal files, and more than that – I’m compelled to, it’s part of my contract with the animal and plant kingdom. I became a specialist; but I don’t expect anyone else to, which is why I make the information available to others.
I write a totem dictionary. Some totemists who get their hate on about totem dictionaries, have excused my dictionary as being ‘better’ than the others as a way of accepting it, because I try and research my information and I introduce rare or unknown totems to people; but I’m using exactly the same methods as everyone else, I just do it my way. My way works for some people, it doesn’t for others. It’s just another totem dictionary.
I don’t think totem dictionaries are – of themselves – a bad genre (or at least, no worse than any other in mainstream pagan publishing). I like that there’s quite a few to choose from, just as I can choose from different dictionaries for slightly different spins on things. I like that it raises the profile of certain animals, because even totem dictionaries that focus on an all-US profile, are at least raising the profile of animals and allowing people to notice them more; and that’s a powerful thing. I like that totem dictionaries have been growing in the direction of either becoming more comprehensive, showing the diversity of totems (and usually in increasingly respectful ways); or morphing from dictionaries into a collection of exploratory essays instead, showing the depth in which one can engage with those animals.
I could write more and more and more, but ultimately my point is this – I’ve made peace with totem dictionaries, with people owning them, and using them, and with me being someone who writes one. I’m okay with it. I’m not okay with some of the problems of totem dictionaries, but I recognise that is not totem dictionary specific, and that’s problems I have with the whole ‘pagan industry’ in general. So I'm no longer going to target 'totem dictionaries' as an arbitrary focus for a problem found throughout the industry. I’m tired of getting my hate on about a specific genre and more than that, I’m tired of that invalidating the practices of people with valid practices. Just because I do it one way, doesn’t mean anyone else should.
I used to hate basic 101 totem dictionaries. I've written articles and long essay-like responses on pagan forums about the shittiness of totem dictionaries. I own quite a few, but I was always like ‘man, these things don’t teach people the skills they need to engage with totems or to make their own dictionaries,’ and ‘they’re recycling a lot of the same information,’ and ‘cultural appropriation FTL,’ and ‘wait a minute, that’s actually completely inaccurate biological information about that animal. WTF?’
Two of these things really piss me off still; the first regarding cultural appropriation. The second regarding teaching people inaccurate information about animals. That’s poor form on behalf of the writer, but it’s also poor form on behalf of the editor, whose job it is to help qualify research in non-fiction material. It’s just poor form all around. The pagan industry can suffer from a bit of poor form at times, it’s not just totemism that cops it, as many of you know.
However, the first two points, no longer bother me. Let’s investigate why:
1. Man, these things don’t teach people the skills they need to engage with totems or to make their own dictionaries.
Firstly, not everyone has the privilege or luxury of time (or, for that matter, being able to encapsulate their experiences into written form). There’s a reason we use word dictionaries instead of making our own dictionaries in whatever language we speak. Part of that reason is a) we don’t know the definitions, b) it’s good to have a launching point for further discussion, c) not everyone has the luxury to make their own definitions for words, sometimes they have to go to another source. There is a luxury of time inherent in being able to spend hours or weeks or months with a totem animal in a way that goes beyond simply communing with it, and enters into ‘writing down the information into a file for future reference.’ Not all spiritual people can do this; nor should they be expected to. There’s also the presumption that this is somehow a more valid way of being a totemist, which skirts dangerously close to needing to regulate the practices of others, by people in positions of authority determining what is valid totemic practice, and what is not. Suddenly people who refer to 101 dictionaries for their information are invalidated, and those who have the luxury of time to make their own dictionaries are validated. It creates a vicious cycle of elitism, and – in no uncertain terms – I believe this is one of those other ‘poor form’ things you can find in the pagan industry (and just about everywhere else).
Secondly, just because it’s a dictionary with a basic knowledge, doesn’t mean people are suddenly completely unable to negotiate meanings with the content. Everyone who’s ever had a discussion on semantics knows that it’s not only possible to really expand upon the definition of a word, but to even disagree with dictionary definitions, or to pick say, one meaning out of the four offered as their preferred meaning. Most dictionaries aren’t designed to provide you with philosophical information on how to construct your own word dictionary. They’re dictionaries. Why we’ve been expecting something from totem dictionaries that resembles more – say – a philosophical ‘how to’ guide, when they’re dictionaries just seems to me to be a little ridiculous. Do you also want the new remodelled kitchen and the free knife set? Maybe we can set that poor dictionary up to work a third and fourth job as well. At some point, a dictionary just has to be a dictionary. People hating on totem dictionaries because they’re not teaching the skills people need to make their own dictionaries, should probably be hating on regular dictionaries, probably ALL dictionaries. Because it misses the point of what a dictionary is.
Thirdly, yes, they actually do teach people the skills they need to be a totemist. For someone who really wants to be a totemist, it’s not hard to realise that just about every totem information file or entry on the planet is based off a handful of things:
1. Researching the animal itself and applying symbolic or metaphorical interpretation to the animal’s biological habits.
2. Researching cultures that worship the animal and looking at their pre-existing stories and sayings for that animal (respectfully, ideally, and no – not all totem dictionaries teach this).
3. Learning basic visualisation techniques and contacting the archetype of the animal itself, and learning some UPG to throw in with that mix. Most 101 totem dictionaries do provide basic visualisation outlines on how to do this.
4. Learning some journeying skills and contacting the deva/god/actual totem itself and learning some UPG to throw in with that mix.
People who haven’t picked this up from totem dictionaries yet, probably aren’t as compelled as some of us, to write their own totem files. But the totem dictionary kind of shows everyone how to do it simply through existing. People – through their own agency – learn to build and construct through observation. If they’re still choosing not to do it, there’s reasons for that, that likely exist outside of ‘totem dictionaries suck.’ When does it become the fault of the totem dictionary, and shift to a personal decision made by someone who has totems come into their lives, but who isn’t a dedicated totemist, or – more importantly – isn’t a dedicated totem file writer? Because, simply put, the latter isn’t required and shouldn’t be required, to be a valid totemist.
2. They’re recycling a lot of the same information
This can be a drag, but so do a lot of dictionaries. Generally speaking, there’s a lot of the same fundamental information going around, and if you look up the word ‘horse’ in any dictionary (except maybe the OED), you’re going to get a lot of the same information. Why is that? Are these people just being lazy, and copying each other? It’s not that simple; there’s a reason why some information gets chosen over other information to describe something, especially abstract concepts such as emotions or totems. Just because they’re abstract concepts, doesn’t mean dictionaries suddenly have the time, space, or purpose to elaborate on those abstract concepts.
Similar and often fundamental information gets chosen, with other information being pushed aside. This other information could be truly integral to the person looking up the word or totem, but it’s not necessarily the fault of the dictionary if this information isn’t there. I’ll repeat: a dictionary is supposed to be a dictionary, it’s not supposed to a long, ambling treatise on how to teach you to make your own dictionary. And the longer the information files get per entry, the more your dictionary starts to resemble a collection of exploratory essays, and that’s a totally different animal.
That same information may be generic, and sometimes it’s even culturally appropriated, but that doesn’t mean it’s suddenly invalid. It also doesn’t mean that someone who listens to it, is suddenly going to be unable to change their minds or renegotiate the meaning as they keep working with a totem animal. A lot of the totemists who hate totem dictionaries, started with totem dictionaries, built their knowledge with totem dictionaries, and then grew past them as they learnt the critical skills necessary to no longer need them, and then, as the final blow, hated totem dictionaries for what they were. I was certainly in this camp. And I know I’m not alone.
Sure, some people engage with totems superficially; some people engage with dictionaries of all kinds superficially. I might enjoy words as a writer, and I have dictionaries, but I don’t have time to semantically discuss the complex meanings of each word I use, and then write my own dictionary about it. That doesn’t mean my experience with words is or should be invalidated. Nor should the dictionaries I own. Likewise, someone might enjoy totems, as a totemist, and they have dictionaries, but they don’t necessarily have time to discuss the complex meanings of each totem they encounter, and then write their own dictionary about it. Sometimes the generic information is all someone needs. That doesn’t mean it lacks power.
*
Totem dictionaries have their problems; certainly. Some of the most popular, feature heavy cultural appropriation and misunderstandings of Indigenous/native cultures (like common misconceptions that all Native Americans believe in totems). And some of the most popular do copy from other people in a way that makes you wonder the point in purchasing more than one (i.e. those that copy from Jamie Sam’s animal medicine books). And some of course, have inaccurate information about the animal itself.
Some of this is a result of poor editing. Some of this is a result of a once-popular pagan paradigm which said it was okay to appropriate from Indigenous cultures, because it wasn’t okay to use our own cultures, or to create our own spiritual culture. There are things not to like about totem dictionaries which are actually not totem dictionary specific, but found throughout all of paganism – particularly some parts of pagan publishing. And in this, I choose not to hate on totem dictionaries anymore, because it seems like an arbitrary target when I consider that my most fundamental objections are either a) untrue, or even based from a position of elitism, b) found in all of paganism, and are a problem everywhere.
I’ve met people who are genuinely ashamed of owning totem dictionaries, as a result of encountering respected pagans and totemists (including – I am sad to say – myself) who bag the totem dictionaries for not doing things that dictionaries aren’t really supposed to be doing in the first place. A shame culture set up on judgement, is not something I enjoy seeing in paganism, and it’s not really something I enjoy experiencing either.
So, let me say it; I own totem dictionaries (I have at least 5). I no longer use them, but I do have the luxury of time to write totem animal files, and more than that – I’m compelled to, it’s part of my contract with the animal and plant kingdom. I became a specialist; but I don’t expect anyone else to, which is why I make the information available to others.
I write a totem dictionary. Some totemists who get their hate on about totem dictionaries, have excused my dictionary as being ‘better’ than the others as a way of accepting it, because I try and research my information and I introduce rare or unknown totems to people; but I’m using exactly the same methods as everyone else, I just do it my way. My way works for some people, it doesn’t for others. It’s just another totem dictionary.
I don’t think totem dictionaries are – of themselves – a bad genre (or at least, no worse than any other in mainstream pagan publishing). I like that there’s quite a few to choose from, just as I can choose from different dictionaries for slightly different spins on things. I like that it raises the profile of certain animals, because even totem dictionaries that focus on an all-US profile, are at least raising the profile of animals and allowing people to notice them more; and that’s a powerful thing. I like that totem dictionaries have been growing in the direction of either becoming more comprehensive, showing the diversity of totems (and usually in increasingly respectful ways); or morphing from dictionaries into a collection of exploratory essays instead, showing the depth in which one can engage with those animals.
I could write more and more and more, but ultimately my point is this – I’ve made peace with totem dictionaries, with people owning them, and using them, and with me being someone who writes one. I’m okay with it. I’m not okay with some of the problems of totem dictionaries, but I recognise that is not totem dictionary specific, and that’s problems I have with the whole ‘pagan industry’ in general. So I'm no longer going to target 'totem dictionaries' as an arbitrary focus for a problem found throughout the industry. I’m tired of getting my hate on about a specific genre and more than that, I’m tired of that invalidating the practices of people with valid practices. Just because I do it one way, doesn’t mean anyone else should.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 12:58 am (UTC)To each their own path. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 03:14 am (UTC)Me too, actually. But others do, and more power to them. Not everyone has equal capacity or desire to learn how to critically engage with texts, and I don't see why they should have to be pressured to do it.
As for my dictionary, some things change as research changes; and sometimes it's more miss than hit, and that's okay too. It is what it is (shamefully neglected, right now! Lol).
To each their own path, indeed!
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 12:59 am (UTC)I give a lot of leeway to a lot of books, not just pagan-based, and tend to read them with a healthy dose of salt. But I don't begrudge someone their right to own and use those books as they need to. Everyone comes to things with different goals, and if we were all the same, the world would be fucking boring!
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 03:10 am (UTC)They do; and they've been getting better over time. A lot of the arguments focusing on hate and negative attention are often dealing with books that were published 10 or 15 years ago. It's not like books are getting less respectful with time, they actually tend to be going in a better direction as we evolve past needing to appropriate so heavily.
And yet a lot of people - including myself - were more focused on judging things negatively, than say; constructively critiquing and then moving on. What have totem dictionaries ever personally done to me to make my life awful? Not a great deal. At worst, it's brought some people into my life who were hung up on dictionary definitions and couldn't move past them.
I'd like to give enough credit to people to know that this is about the person themselves, and not necessarily some totem dictionary nefariously brainwashing them into closed-mindedness (which wasn't exactly credit I was giving them before). People who want to be closed-minded about totems will continue to be regardless; and that's not the fault of a totem dictionary. People who want to be open-minded about totems will continue to be regardless; and that's also not the fault of a totem dictionary.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 05:38 am (UTC)False Advertising
Date: 2011-08-24 03:16 am (UTC)What makes me gripe about Wicca 101 isn't so much that there are hundreds of Wicca 101 books out there... I know not everyone is going to pick up Buckland's big blue book as their starter kit. What gripes me is when books that specifically promise 'more advanced witchcraft' or 'beyond Wicca 101' turn around and rehash everything in the Wicca 101 books.
At least most correspondence books (which to me include totem dictionaries in that they list animals & what those animals 'mean') out there are just honest rehashes of one another and don't promise anything truly groundbreaking.
Re: False Advertising
Date: 2011-08-24 03:17 am (UTC)I haven't encountered any books like that (not that they're not out there, I just stopped purchasing books on Wicca when I stopped practicing); but that is misleading. False advertising is frustrating at best.
Re: One Stop Resource Source
Date: 2011-08-24 04:49 am (UTC)(I've also been on this 'is Wicca continuing to evolve' kick lately. If the things I've been reading & seeing are any indication, it hasn't, which is why more & more Wiccans are becoming 'former Wiccans').
Re: One Stop Resource Source
Date: 2011-08-24 05:42 am (UTC)*hopes this is making sense, as I should probably be in bed*
Re: False Advertising
Date: 2011-08-24 05:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 02:49 am (UTC)I do see yours as an outlier that shows what could be, if people thought outside the box. Do I think that things could change? Sure. I would love to see more discussion in this vein, TBH.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 03:01 am (UTC)But they're in the genre of being a reference book, a dictionary. Dictionaries by their nature don't tend to evolve past being a handy reference, and maybe this is the reason why it's been s difficult for people to write totem books that branch outside of this if they base it off the dictionary format. Trying to force a genre into becoming another genre because people are mis-reading the books isn't really the fault of the genre.
Dictionaries don't generally evolve into something more advanced; they're dictionaries. The most evolved form of a dictionary (generally believed to be the OED), is still just a dictionary. That's kind of my point. If publishers stopped publishing only dictionaries, and looked for say - collections of essays, meditating with totem books, and so on, we'd get totemism represented in other genres (as we've started to), vs. trying to force the dictionary/reference genre to become 'everything' and therefore become kind of a poor form version of a jack of all trades. It just doesn't work. It shouldn't even be expected to work. It speaks of a misunderstanding of what the dictionary and reference genre does; it's amazing - imho - that totem dictionaries even offer meditations in the first place. It's not like my Webster and Merriam dictionary teaches me how to come up with my own definitions of words. I don't even want it to. It's a dictionary.
I don't think this is about getting the dictionary genre to evolve. I think it's about putting totemism out there in pre-existing genres that would greatly expand what totemism is about; if people wrote for other genres, like you have. But expecting the dictionary genre to be able to do everything and then attacking that genre because it realistically can't; is not really going to solve any problems about the totem dictionary 'problem.'
Unfortunately so many people just blindly follow what's in the books that it's tough to promote them, IMO.
People blindly follow what's in regular dictionaries too. It's tough to promote these as well. I don't see many bookstores putting their dictionaries on their endcaps and hawking how wonderful the OED is. I love my thesaurus reference book, but it was on the bottom corner of a shelf and I don't know that it can truly be called 'popular.' Again; it's not really a function of a dictionary, and I feel like the pagan industry has put too much expectation and pressure on a genre that has never - in any way or form - been suited for promotion or for creating a great deal of further debate and discussion; again, it's amazing that totem dictionaries can promote further debate, and DO try and facilitate meditation and visualisation in their readers.
Attacking a dictionary for being a dictionary just seems counter-productive to me. I don't understand anymore why the focus is on genre hate vs. embracing other genres. So we have a lot of totem dictionaries; invalidating them and the genre because we want to be represented in other genres just seems... I don't know - again, counter-productive.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 04:03 am (UTC)I do believe we can do without the psuedo-Native American flavored totem dictionaries out there. I also feel that, much like good word dictionaries, good totem dictionaries should touch on the "etymology" of the meanings contained in them.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 04:04 am (UTC)I also feel that, much like good word dictionaries, good totem dictionaries should touch on the "etymology" of the meanings contained in them.
That would be lovely, wouldn't it?
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 09:54 pm (UTC)I was just linked to this conversation from
A dictionary that has that will be my instant friend. If anyone can recommend one, I will jump on it. I don't think of it as "totems", but, I do bring energy of different animals into my work a lot (because I am therian, and because animal symbolism is traditional to my practice also as Hermetic), and, I would like to know more about the associations with each animal and where these come from, instead of just taking it from the popular understanding without knowing.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:43 pm (UTC)Which is fair, but it's also worth noting that most non-linguistic dictionaries don't do this. My field-guide to the birds of Australia, doesn't tell me the etymology of every name, nor does it explain where the information about bird behaviours came from, or who collected that information about bird behaviours. My book on tools around the house doesn't explain the etymology of the word hammer, what cultures it came from, why people use it for hammering nails instead of say; kneecaps, and offer alternative readings. Neither does my Thesaurus. Outside of the field of Linguistics, it's actually extraordinarily rare to find a dictionary that will explain the etymology of meanings. And, within the field of Linguistics, most pocket or regular dictionaries won't either. They may touch on the etymology of the word itself, however.
So while it would be lovely if dictionaries did these things, it's actually not a trait commonly associated with dictionaries. That's more associated with encyclopedias, which are generally larger projects that marry people from many different specialisations.
A dictionary that has that will be my instant friend.
Does this mean you're ruling out the others for not doing something that most dictionaries (especially most outside of the field of Linguistics; but certainly plenty within the field as well) don't do? Dictionaries usually define through popular understanding, after all.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 12:06 am (UTC)And, a book about tools around the house, if it is aimed for "helping you to know what tool to use", doesn't need to tell you the history of hammers, but, if something is for magical use, knowing the history of why something is done that way can be useful, to make sure the symbolism you are drawing from is creating the right energy. (For example... I am making this one up, but, if there is a dictionary that lists a common association with Horse as "helpful servant", because they carry humans, and I want to work with Horse for a ritual involving wild and free energies, I don't want to invoke that... and, that one is obvious and I can pick it out on my own, but, hidden in a symbolic association with an animal, could be some clashing connection somewhere back in the origin of the meaning, that I don't know.)
I guess, I'm not saying a dictionary is bad for being a dictionary, but, I do think this is something that it would be useful to have a book about, whether you called it a dictionary or not. Does that makes sense?
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 12:09 am (UTC)Another user pointed out that there are people who purchase totem animal dictionaries who aren't totemists, or who aren't even interested in totems beyond 'general interest' or archetypal representations. Although, I have to wonder if the serious magic practicioners know not to completely trust a book anyway. Casual magic practicioners are probably always going to be - sometimes - poorly engaging with misunderstood energies.
but, I do think this is something that it would be useful to have a book about, whether you called it a dictionary or not. Does that makes sense?
Yes, I completely agree. It would definitely be useful to have a book about it. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 04:07 am (UTC)Attacking a totem dictionary for being a general work is sad, because those dictionaries become a launching place for a deeper connection to totems, just like Wicca 101 books give us a launching pad to move into deeper levels of experiential spirituality.
My Webster taught me to seek out and understand how words are constructed and how we use them, and how they change. I don't see why totem dictionaries can't invite us to understand how totems evolved and how they have changed over time from culture to culture. And like other dictionaries, give us the references/footnotes to explore a totem more completely.
Admittedly,not everyone will want to explore that deeper connection. But a dictionary is a start.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:45 pm (UTC)Thank goodness for that! One of the upsides of practicing in isolation, not realising how 'bad' something perfectly normal and fine that you do is, until you enter other groups and realise that judgements are being made about it.
And like other dictionaries, give us the references/footnotes to explore a totem more completely.
Would be lovely. Most general knowledge dictionaries don't do this outside of the field of Linguistics, but it would be lovely.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 05:21 am (UTC)But I DO think it can be problematic when people rely on totems exclusively rather than trying to use their own intellect, intuition or research to go further in their study. I mean, this is of course insinuating that everyone who buys a totem dictionary is even interested in becoming a totemist. Many people are fascinated by totems in a rather superficial or curious way, not as a form of spiritual practice. I've heard people talk about power animals/totems conversationally without any spiritual context.
I suppose, personally, when I find that people have New Age books, I'm like, "CONVERSATION TOPIC!" and find out that they're only superficially interested in those things, or aren't serious about their practice.
I guess totem dictionaries aren't indicative or anything - particularly how serious one takes totemist or any such thing. It's just an object of reference, like a normal dictionary. :/
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:51 pm (UTC)Absolutely; I completely and utterly agree with this. While I don't attribute this responsibility to the dictionary (unless the dictionary is outright lying and saying something like 'this is your one stop shop for all your totem needs!'), and I attribute it to the person; I do think it can be problematic when people overtly rely on any resource rather than trying to use their own intellect/intuition to go further in study. Kind of like people who think Wikipedia is the be all and end all of research.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 08:15 am (UTC)I hope that changes - it will have to for the rock book I want to write.
I agree with what you have written. And I'm not ashamed for owning those books, just I know that I cannot take them at face value :) Thank you for writing this.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:52 pm (UTC)I think... me personally, I'd like to give more people the benefit in the doubt. In the past I would've been 'most people take them at face value,' and these days I think that most dedicated totemists do not. And everyone else was never going to engage with totems in an in depth manner anyway.
Crystal books kind of remind me of that; the people who are really dedicated 'crystal workers' will get multiple dictionaries and learn information about the stones from the stones themselves, and eventually (hopefully) research the actual stones and where they've come from. Everyone else just wants a superficial reference, which suits the dictionary well.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 02:59 am (UTC)An angle I'm working with, I might add (don't know if it will go in this book, but there might be enough for another). I am working on putting together comparisons of the information found in some of the titles of crystal dictionaries. I believe some information gets regurgitated but with the lack of referencing, it's hard to prove. Literally, several of these books have no bibliographies.
So even if they are copying each other, there's no proof.
There's other little bits that frustrate me about these books, and it's what prompted me to write my own. Now I only hope that my momentum keeps rolling.
Apologies if this sounds disjointed, not sure if my attempt to go back over it was successful.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 03:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 12:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:53 pm (UTC)Thank you.
I'm still trying to figure out if I agree with myself! ;) Years of being on the opposite side of the fence has made this position an awkward one.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 01:06 am (UTC)The truth is that we all get a bit elitist or snobby about the things that we have a specialized interest in and have to pull ourselves back a peg from time to time, I think.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 08:52 pm (UTC)You're right, dictionaries are just that--dictionaries. And while that's all they can be really, people need to understand that they ARE just a "jumping off" point. No dictionary can offer all the information on a certain animal--researching the actual animal and interacting with it (thus gaining UPG) is also needed.
I notice you mentioned you run one of the largest totem dictionaries on the net. Is there a link to it? I'd like to browse/read it if I may~!
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:56 pm (UTC)Yes! I linked above, but you can find it here: http://www.wildspeak.com/totems.html
247 animals represented so far, about 70 with full-length essays.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-26 02:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 10:07 pm (UTC)Hope you're well.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:57 pm (UTC)*nods* If only we could get this without all the cultural appropriation. But that's not a 'dictionary' thing, that's 'pretty much ever genre in paganism and elsewhere' thing.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-25 12:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 10:23 pm (UTC)People have to start from somewhere, though and as long as people are aware that there are flaws in what they are reading, then there's no problem with them. (It's kind of like some Asatru people complaining about Marvel's Thor comics.) I know what you mean about the focus some take on the Native American culture and I think it's a result of people feeling guilty about the destruction and treatment of those people in the past and are trying to preserve the culture in some way. I became interested in Native American culture when I became interested in Grey Wolves but an interest is not the same as practicing it and it is not something I would do. I'm interested in animal totems of species that are native to the British Isles (which are either still with us or extinct) because they are part of the environment of where I live.
As for Wicca books, I've never been inclined to pick those up anyway as I've always been interested in druidry and Norse mythology. I probably bought one or two introduction into paganism books that were very Wicca centric because the authors were but I soon realised that Wicca wasn't the path I wanted.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:58 pm (UTC)I agree with this. If only children were taught that there are flaws in every book, and every website, no matter how popular it is, or how well-written it seems. That would be a good starting point for critical thinking.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-27 03:08 pm (UTC)Wow. I guess I learned something today - I sort-of assumed that everybody felt similarly about similar animals!
no subject
Date: 2011-08-27 03:51 pm (UTC)