Heartland

I don't normally enter into discussions about faith, for fairly obvious reasons, but in this case I think I'll make an exception to the rule.

The Wicker Man was based on Gardnarian Wicca (the original form of Wicca), which was created as a feminine sex cult at the behest of a certain Mr. A. Crowley shortly before his death. Modern Wiccan tradition bears little or no resemblance to it at all and most of it's claims of ancient lineage are completely false, I hasten to add that this is not a deliberate falsehood, just a rather unfortunate mistake. It is also coloured by 20th/21st Century morality and so bears even less resemblance to anything ancient. (It's something that irks my scholarly side in the same way that constant references to vomitariums as being rooms where Roman elites would go to vomit during an orgy do).

As for Druids, well, most of the common images of them come from Victorian romanticism and are equally as misleading as some of the descriptions from (the notorious self publicist) Gaius Julius Caesar, Strabo (who was mostly quoting from Poseidonius) and the (slightly) more accurate Tacitus.

However, there is good archaeological evidence for some forms of human sacrifice practiced by the Celts, but none involved mass sacrifice as portrayed by the Roman and Greek scholars.

As for the film itself...well, I do think some people take it far more seriously than the cast did.

Syberberg wrote:As for the film itself...well, I do think some people take it far more seriously than the cast did.

I find the film highly entertaining rather than great, although I do think Edward Woodward did a remarkable job as the staunch puritan - his accent in partuclar was surprisingly convincing. The film was classic 70s high camp, complete with cheesy soundtrack and over the top storyline. I think Christopher Lee still considers it his favourite role, partly because he got the chance to sing in it as well.

I take it the leg stumps stolen from the site where the sacrifice was filmed were never found!

Heh. I get the sneaking suspicion that the goddess that a lot of wiccans worship is just Jahweh in a dress.

markfiend wrote:Heh. I get the sneaking suspicion that the goddess that a lot of wiccans worship is just Jahweh in a dress.

I say nothing...

The other thing about modern Wicca (aka Americanised Wicca) is that a lot of the books are written by psychologists (see Llywellyn Books) as self help books for (predominantly) white, middle-class, insecure, female teenagers, mostly from the Bible Belt.

Unlike pretty much all true paganistic/shamanistic and occultic faith systems, there is no balance between light and dark. In fact in a lot of cases, the darker side of things is completely ignored. The same can be said of a lot of the New Age (rhymes with "sewage") stuff as well. All "love and light", fluffy, feel-good rubbish.

What really, really annoys me about a lot of the Wiccan stuff is the constant referral to "our sisters in the burning times." Utter crap of the highest order, particularly as every single "confession" was extracted by torture and they never once, in all the documentation recorded by both the Inquisition (who needed to justify there existence after finishing off the Cathars and other Heretics) and Church officials in Britain and elsewhere, was that even after several thousand cases and extensive torture, there is not a single shred of evidence regarding worship of a female deity at all. All these alleged "witches" were actually proto-Satanists., if you give any credence to information garnered from torture.

On the other hand, I did meet someone on the Internet who worshipped the Greek pantheon. At least I think he was serious...

markfiend wrote:On the other hand, I did meet someone on the Internet who worshipped the Greek pantheon. At least I think he was serious...

You better know it, or almighty Zeus will strike you down!

Andy Christ 666 wrote:Is it just me or does 'Hot Fuzz' resemble parts of the 'Wicker Man'?

I kind of agree, but so did The League of Gentlemen.

Syberberg wrote: particularly as every single "confession" was extracted by torture

Not by any means. Torture certainly existed but wasn't used nearly as frequently as is generally believed. For instance, the Inquisition is estimated to have used torture in only about a third of cases. Most witch trials didn't involve any form of torture, and certainly not in England, where it was illegal.

Syberberg wrote:and they never once, in all the documentation recorded by both the Inquisition

The Inquisition (which never, by the way, came to Britain) didn't usually conduct witch trials; most were under the jurisdiction of the secular courts did. For a long time the Inquisition didn't even acknowledge the existence of witchcraft as to do so would have been heresy. Witch hunts were far more popular in Protestant countries than in the Catholic homelands of the various Inquisitions.

Syberberg wrote:The Inquisition (who needed to justify there existence after finishing off the Cathars and other Heretics)

Only the Episcopal Inquisition was concerned with Cathars. Others were variously concerned with Jews, Moslems, protestants, Templars and a variety of other heresies. The theory that they turned to witchcraft to justify their existence was disproved by various historians (principally Cohn and Kieckhefer) in the 1970s. Witch hunts originated amongst the common people, who pressed the secular courts for support.

Syberberg wrote:All these alleged "witches" were actually proto-Satanists., if you give any credence to information garnered from torture.

Well, hopefully we don't. As far as I'm aware, there's no evidence that any form of Satanism existed until very recently, whatever people said. Most witches were variously herbalists, healers, petty thieves, deformed, eccentric, senile, suffering from epilepsy, psychological disorders or learning difficulties etc. Depending on the region, many were either Catholics or Protestants, followers of some non-Christian belief system or just didn't go to church. And many were just falsely accused by neighbours with grudges. There were people who did claim to be witches, but it's thought that this was essentially a common scam at the time as it allowed them power, notoriety, access to extortion and protection rackets etc.

stufarq wrote:Most witches were variously herbalists, healers, petty thieves, deformed, eccentric, senile, suffering from epilepsy, psychological disorders or learning difficulties etc.

I didn't realise I knew so many witches

But how many have you brought to trial?

Interesting points moses, ones I have never really thought of to be honest!

Being of the Pagan persuasion I am obviously a bit biased and love the film to bits, to the extent that myself and a few friends put a singing group together and learnt a few of the songs to sing at a LARP event a few years ago [/nerd alert]

Interestingly this film was what got me interested in the whole Pagan thang to be honest, I was brought up to go to church and sunday school every week and I had no idea that things like Paganism really existed, or rather I did but lumped it in with Satanism and the like in my ignorant (at the time) mind.

Thinking about it I do agree that Lord Summerisle is a bit controlling, but I have to watch the film again with this in mind to back it up.

What I love about it the most is the fact that the "baddies" win, which you don't usually get.

Oh, and if anyone has a copy of "Ritual" by David Pinner floating around, fling it in my direction would you?