“Was not their mistake once more bred of the life of slavery that they had been living?—a life which was always looking upon everything, except mankind, animate and inanimate—‘nature,’ as people used to call it—as one thing, and mankind as another, it was natural to people thinking in this way, that they should try to make ‘nature’ their slave, since they thought ‘nature’ was something outside them” — William Morris
5 comments:
I just ordered a book called The Sacrament of Abortion. I'm going to put Dark Ecology next to it on my shelf. In Witch-bitch-scholar-magician solidarity, Dana
Interesting, I spent my PhD researching feminist, Dianic and hedge witchcraft, and I now teach this, with my religious studies hat on, alongside ecological philosophy and existentialism, with my philosophy hat on. I look forwards to seeing how you weave this together. The affinities and convergences are fairly obvious: witches are dark ecologists par excellence, and it's clear that Stengers too saw alliances with Starhawk and her feminist wicca. But I'm excited to see your take on this. I have been thinking a lot about Starkawk's book, Dreaming the Dark, while you have been plugging Dark Ecology recently, so it was strange to see this post appear today.
You may appreciate this blogpost:
http://paganmetaphysics.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/the-stickiness-of-fossil-fuel-age.html
You may appreciate this blogpost:
http://paganmetaphysics.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/the-stickiness-of-fossil-fuel-age.html
I used to consider myself Pagan, know Starhawk personally and still have friends who call themselves pagan, witches or Wiccan. My own experience has given me the sense that many of your ideas would be profoundly disturbing to their worldview, and that their subculture is mainly another example of the rebranding of ecomimesis. With one difference: they mostly care enough about ecology that they are likely to be more open to dark ecology, and I will certainly share it with my friends once I've read it.
Post a Comment