Earth Magic – photography of witches at play and at ritual

There has long been a tension between the witch of legend and the modern day practitioner. The former has its origins mainly in polemical Christian ideas and folktales, where the witch is a consort of the devil, brewing wicked and foul smelling potions in a cast-iron pot, and eating children.

This image of the witch -- crooked nosed hag she is -- has not been completely wiped from the popular imagination, but certainly the modern day witch movement has gone a long way to challenge these often sexist views. The rise of the Wiccan movement in the 1960s took its lessons not from the Malleus Maleficarum, but from the writings of people like Gerald Gardner and Alex Sanders. Their vision of the witch is rooted in tales of cunning folk and (sometimes) faulty anthropology regarding the existence of pre-Christian horned deity cults whose practices remained hidden, but very much alive, through the centuries. It is, of course, important that the modern Wiccan movement has elevated the image of the witch, but unfortunately a New Age character has settled in, and in so doing removed some of the mystery from a form of worship that was once practiced in quiet groves and amongst ancient megaliths. The two surviving pictures -- the storybook crone and the nature-worshipping hippie -- are both unsatisfying.

Like most things, it takes an artful eye to realize an idea that has weight, that can evoke a sense of otherworldliness, of magic. Of witchcraft. Fulgur Press, one of the most important publishers of limited edition occult and related volumes, has recently released Earth Magic by Rik Garrett, a collection of photographs of, well, witches. These are neither claw-fingered nor filk-playing neo-pagans. Garrett’s photos are studies of private moments of worship. They are erotic, but not pornographic, mysterious but not contrived, haunting but not exploitive. These are photographs of witches at play and at ritual. The photos themselves have no explanation. There are no captions or any other corresponding material (except for an illuminating introduction by Pam Grossman). The only other element is a sigil on the facing page of each image, a kind of seal or brand that only heighten the sense of strangeness. There is no denying it. Garrett’s photos are spooky. My only hesitation is that maybe these photos reveal what should have remained hidden. Thankfully Garrett’s eye is that of someone who knows they don’t belong. The photos appear to be taken furtively, shakily, with a sense of trepidation and humble awe.

See gallery of sample pages at Wink

Notable Replies

  1. Their vision of the witch is rooted in tales of cunning folk and (sometimes) faulty anthropology regarding the existence of pre-Christian horned deity cults whose practices remained hidden, but very much alive, through the centuries.

    "Sometimes" faulty? Come now. Gardner and Sanders and Margaret Murray pretty much made up their hobby from scratch.

  2. As opposed to all those other not-made-up religions?

  3. Seki says:

    The gallery of pics was very small, so perhaps it is not representative. But nude young women cavorting in the woods looks pretty 'hippie-neo-pagan' to me. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

  4. Good to see we've been able to cast aside the mistaken perception of witches as the "consort of the devil, brewing wicked and foul smelling potions in a cast-iron pot, and eating children", and replace it with the more flattering image of "something young middle class women do to disappoint their parents".

  5. Did anyone actually refer to themselves as "witches" before those legends cemented the popular image of witches in our minds? Obviously people have long slapped the "witch" label on others but I haven't seen any documentation of groups that self-identified that way which date back earlier than the 1950s. That means that the Wicked Witch from the film version of The Wizard of Oz had been part of the popular culture for well over a decade before Wicca embraced the term for themselves.

    People should be able to call themselves whatever they want, but if I referred to the adherents of my new religion as "Jedi" then it would only be fair to expect some confusion with the Star Wars franchise.

Continue the discussion bbs.boingboing.net

24 more replies

Participants