 |
|
|
OPAL MOONWOLF: Merry Meet! Goddess bless you, Sannion. SANNION: Uh, yeah . . . hello, Opal. How are you . . . uhm . . . doing? OPAL: I'm great. How are you doing? SAN: Well, I'm a little busy, working on my site, you know. All my effort these days seems to go into the thing. OPAL: I've been to your site. I didn't really like it. SAN: Gee . . . that's too bad. OPAL: Yeah, I get the impression you don't really care for Wiccans that much. SAN: You got that from my site? Wow, I didn't think I was being that obvious about it. OPAL: All those links on your site. "Why Wicca isn't Celtic"; "Keep Wicca Traditional"; "Why Wiccans Suck". That's just mean. SAN: Did you actually read those sites, or are you just going by the titles? They're quite excellent sites, really: thought-provoking and insightful. And at any rate, those are just links. I may agree with them, but they're not my words. OPAL: Yeah, but you've written some stuff against Wicca too. Like your "Interview". There were some really mean things in there. (And some gross stuff, too. What was up with the under-aged prostitute and her pet goat?) SAN: Heheh. That was a joke, Opal. An attempt at levity in an otherwise serious piece. OPAL: Yeah, well it wasn't funny. I mean, what's funny about prostitutes, and drug-use, and bestiality? SAN: The fact that people like you would ask that question. OPAL: Oh, I see. Real mature. SAN: I would say that most of our problems these days are caused by people being too mature, too serious. Perhaps if people could laugh at themselves more, see the faults and foibles that they share with other people, there would be fewer instances of war, bigotry, hate-motivated violence, and just random outbursts of stupidity. To quote the Principia Discordia, the Holiest Text ever produced, "The human race will begin solving it's problems on the day that it ceases taking itself so seriously. To that end, POEE proposes the countergame of NONSENSE AS SALVATION." OPAL: Oh, so if we all start laughing more, all of our problems will disappear. The hole in the ozone layer will vanish, the forests will come back, people will stop going hungry, wars will cease, and hatred will be a thing of the past. SAN: No, but a man who is weighted down with unnecessary burdens can only perform half of the work that his freer brother can. So, by putting down our egos, not taking ourselves so serious, not getting so bent out of shape over pointless stuff - without all that we will better be able to apply ourselves to the task at hand. OPAL: I think you're just using that as an excuse to be stupid and immature. SAN: I'm not surprised that you don't get it. Wiccans aren't exactly known for their sense of humor. OPAL: Oh, we have a sense of humor. We just don't need to laugh at everything. We live in very serious and dangerous times. With Shrub in office, it's only a matter of time before the Christians start rounding us up and burning us at the stake like they did at Salem. With us out of the way, there won't be anyone to stop him from raping the Earth, plundering the riches of Nature for the sake of the Almighty Dollar, exploiting and enslaving all of the other species on the planet! And just what are you laughing at??? SAN: Uh . . . no one was burned at Salem. Twenty people were executed as a result of the trials; one man was pressed to death with a heavy stone, the rest were hung. None of the individuals executed were, in fact, Witches - the only magic-user was Tatuba, who escaped the scrutiny of the Salem authorities altogether. OPAL: Well, plenty of Wiccans were burned to death back in Europe. So excuse my mistake. SAN: I hate to interrupt you again: but no Wiccans were ever burned at the stake. Wicca is a modern Pagan religion, dating back only about 50 to 60 years. The last person convicted under the Witchcraft laws in Britain (for correctly predicting the sinking of a naval ship) was merely incarcerated. There was no torture, and definitely no hanging or burning. OPAL: Oh Goddess! You really don't know what you are talking about, do you? Witchcraft/Wicca - just different names for the same thing, really - is the oldest religion known to man. How can you say it's only 50 or 60 years old? SAN: Wicca is quite distinct from Witchcraft. Witchcraft is, simply put, the use of folk magic. Folk magic employs charms, herbs, incantations or simple rituals to cause a desired effect - usually to create, protect, or destroy something. Witchcraft is a near universal practice, found in every culture, throughout the whole of history. It is not a distinct religion with distinct rituals and beliefs of it's own - but exists symbiotically within the context of a larger cultural or religious complex, making use of its rituals, symbols, and customs. Wicca, on the other hand, is a distinct religion, with a set theology, rituals, and customs that differentiate it from other religions, and from our secular society. That Wicca employs Witchcraft and draws its name from an obscure word for Witch, is no grounds to confuse the two terms. And Wicca can only be traced back with any kind of certainty to just before the repeal of the Witchcraft Laws, to the 1920s and 30s if you really want to stretch things a bit. OPAL: You are not suggesting that Gerald Gardner invented Wicca are you? SAN: Well, that is what the evidence suggests. OPAL: But he himself said that he was Initiated into a Coven. How could he be Initiated into a Coven if he invented Wicca? SAN: In 1899 Aradia: The Gospel of the Witches, was released by Charles G. Leland, followed in 1921 by Margaret Murray's The Witch-Cult in Western Europe. These books, though filled with highly dubious information, were incredibly influential, and filled a gulf caused by the Positivist and Industrial trends of the previous century. This was the age of Madame Blavatsky's Theosophical Society and the chair-rattling seances of the Spiritualist movement, of which such luminaries as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and C. G. Jung were, at least for a time, avid supporters. Of considerable influence on the development of Wicca was the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, a Western Esoteric Society which counted W. B. Yeats, A. E. Waite, and Aleister Crowley as members. Here was an age when the accepted notions of Science and Church and Society were all being radically questioned (as they would be again in the 60s and 70s), and the lure of the mysterious and the irrational was strong. Now Ascended Masters and levitating tables are all right, but there is something infinitely more romantic about being a Witch. So, onto a scene nurtured by an interest in all things Occult and counter-culture, came Aradia and The Witch-Cult and almost overnight small groups that had previously been studying Theosophy and Spiritualism began calling themselves Witches' Covens - and some of these groups actually studied and practiced folk magic, in addition to Spiritualist healing techniques. I believe that this is the sort of group that Gerald Gardner came upon in the New Forest Coven. Now Gardner was a Mason, a member of the O.T.O., and a British Civil Servant who had studied Eastern religions while stationed in Asia. All of these influences can strongly be felt in the rituals and philosophy of what became Gardnerian Wicca. The graded system of Initiation, the garter, the calling of the Watchtowers, the elements, karma and reincarnation, the use of a ritual sword, the binding and blindfolding of the Initiate, the use of the term Craft - all of these betray strong Masonic and Ceremonial influences that I doubt were present before Gardner. OPAL: My Grandmother was a Witch, and she never once mentioned Gardner. SAN: That doesn't surprise me. Wicca, as I'm sure you know, is a very diverse religion, with many different traditions. Although all of them can be traced back, if not through an actual lineage, than through successive influences that can be traced back to Gardner, much diversity exists as far as ritual and belief and history are concerned. There was a huge boom in the 1970s and 80s, especially with feminist and Dianic forms of Wicca developing. Characteristic of these traditions is a revisionist view of history, and a strong trend to de-emphasize the influence of the masculine within their religion. It is doubtful that they would admit that Wicca as they know it owes a great debt to Gerald Gardner. Since then, there has been an even greater explosion of interest in Wicca, with "do it your own way" and InstaWitch approaches proliferating. When all it takes to become a Third Degree Initiate and High Priestess of your own Coven is to have read a book - I do not believe that the actual history and authentic practices of Wicca are commonly known. And anyway, as I've said before, there's a difference between Witch and Wiccan. Your Grandmother could have been a folk magic user and still have been a Southern Baptist of good standing with her Church. OPAL: Oh no! She was a Wiccan, a Pagan, just like me. It has been in our family for thirteen generations, and much farther back. We have always held to the Old Religion and the Goddess. SAN: Dear Zeus! Does this girl not hear a word that I say? Tell me, Opal, about this Old Religion of yours, and the Goddess. OPAL: It's not a religion founded by Gardner or any man, for that matter, I can tell you that. I don't know what silly books you've been reading, but the Old Religion is real and it stretches back to the dawn of history. It is man's first religion, practiced everywhere and at all times. It is the attunement with nature, the seasons and solstices and natural rhythms of the Earth, which is the Goddess whom all men have honored, though under different names. The same Goddess worshipped in Greece, and Ireland, and Turkey, and Asia, and here in the Americas - One Goddess, with many Names, just as Her Consort, the Horned One, has many names as well. The Christians tried to stop us from worshipping the Goddess and Her Consort, so they made up the Devil to look like our Horned God, and they told all kinds of lies about us. And they killed and tortured and burned us. The Church killed 9 million of us - but they couldn't get us all. We survived them, and kept on worshipping the Goddess, as we'll do for ever, no matter what they do to try and stop us! SAN: That is an incredibly rousing speech, Opal - and incredibly inaccurate. OPAL: Oh? And just how am I mistaken, oh all-wise Sannion? SAN: Well, to begin with - it's impossible to reduce the great variety of human religious experience into a single category. To do so denies the fundamental diversity and uniqueness of the vision. Two factors contribute greatly to the development of a religion. The first is environment, which includes such things as geography, climate, technology, culture, and things of this sort. The religion of desert nomads will be substantially different from that of the inhabitants of a settled community in a rain forest. The rain forest community tends to value harmony, interconnectedness, the cycles of fertility and decay. The desert nomads on the other hand, tend to be legalistic, valuing submission to authority, a strict moral code, and place worth outside of the harsh material world. These religions make sense within the environments that produced them - but not always when they are transplanted out of that context. Secondly, one must consider the Gods, spirits, etc that reveal themselves to the individual and the community. All authentic religious experience is a two-way street: man striving for an experience of, and connection with the Gods, and the reciprocal action of the Gods themselves. This is called grace or revelation or the epiphany of the God. Whatever God or spirit appears and takes part in the ritual invariably alters that ritual. His presence leaves an indelible mark on the festivities, affecting the individuals present, and the whole outcome of the proceedings. Further, certain actions, dances, sacrifices, incantations, etc tend to attract specific Gods. This is not a constant rule - and some Gods and spirits can come totally unbidden - but generally, the rites performed for Allah will not attract Dionysos. OPAL: Yes, but all Gods are One God, and All Goddesses are One Goddess - twin expressions of the Single Unknowable Source. So while certain actions may bring the aspect of Dionysos, it's still the same God as if it had been Allah who was called. SAN: At some point it becomes impossible to adequately discuss the issue, because it is dependent upon personal experience. It doesn't matter how nice your theological arguments are, how firmly based your beliefs are in sound logic and philosophical principles - if a person has had an experience that runs counter to what you are saying, nothing short of them having another but opposite experience will change their mind. That said, theological opinions are like venereal diseases - everyone has them, and wants to share. So here are mine: I view the Gods as distinct and independent Beings, not just parts of a single Transcendent Unity, or as archetypal masks of the One True God. The reason that I do not view them as archetypes or masks is that the Gods themselves are dynamic, complex individuals, with many aspects of their own. To say that Dionysos simply represents wine and drunkenness is to deny those parts of him which are reflected in other areas - for instance, he is also Aigobolos: Slayer of Goats; Arsenothelys: the Bisexual; En Limnais: Of the Marshland; Euanthes: the Blossomer; Kissos: The Ivy; Lyaeus: He Who Frees; Mystes: the Initiated; Orthos: the Erect; Zagreus: the Great Hunter. Obviously, most of these have nothing to do with wine or drunkenness - yet all of them were either names or epithets of the God, representing integral aspects of his personality. And while Dionysos is no doubt one of the most complex of Gods, he is not alone in this. For instance, we have Hera Pais (Girl) Teleia (Bride) and Chera (Old Woman). We have Artemis as a chaste huntress and guardian of forests, as well as the many-breasted Asiatic Mother of Ephesos. Hermes was God of thieves, travelers, magicians, and philosophers. Apollon presided over solar light, poetry, music, medicine, science, archery, disease, death, virtue in excellence - the list could go on and on and on. So it is rather simplistic to say that so-and-so is an archetype of such-and-such. For me, it is not just simplistic, but insulting and almost blasphemous - though I leave it up to the Gods themselves to decide what is blasphemous and what is not. OPAL: Jeez - I thought you didn't take this stuff serious. SAN: No - Philosophy is very serious business - though Wiccans treat it like it is a joke. Now where was I? Oh yes! The Sacred Stories not only show us that the Gods are distinct and multi-faceted individuals, but that like individuals, they can disagree and act either with or against each other. Hence, they are independent beings. The Trojan War was caused by dissent arising among the Gods, and during the war, a number of the Gods took sides against each other: Ares and Apollon siding with the defenders of Ilios while Hera, Poseidon, and Athena aided the Greeks. The disagreements between Hera and Zeus were so numerous and widespread that Zeus was mockingly (and impiously in my opinion) presented by the writers of Comedies as being something of a cuckold. And also, there is the story of Adonis, the beautiful youth whom Aphrodite loved. Now fearing that some of her partners might find the youth as lovely as she did - and might not be as gentle as she in their loving - Aphrodite placed him inside a chest and gave him into Persephone's care. The Goddess happened to peak inside the chest, and discovered the boy - and was just as smitten with him as Aphrodite had been. She refused to return him to Aphrodite and a bitter fight ensued. Now, if, as you maintain, all Goddesses are One Goddess - this myth makes no sense. For if Persephone was the same as Aphrodite, then the boy already belonged to her. She would have already known how beautiful he was, there would have been no need to steal him, and there could be no bitter fight - unless she was fighting against herself, which is a laughable proposition. OPAL: Well yeah, but that's like a myth. It's not real. I mean - nobody in their right minds could believe that kind of stuff. SAN: Mythology is not just failed science or bad history. It is, as David Adams Leeming has described it, "a marvelous world of metaphor that breathes life into the essential human story: the story of the relationship between the known and the unknown, both around and within us, the story of the search for identity in the context of the universal struggle between order and chaos." OPAL: But certainly you don't believe that Cronus actually ate his children, or that Zeus really appeared in a shower of gold. I mean that's just silly. SAN: I do not see that it is. Why shouldn't they have done that? Because it would be unseemly for us mortals to do such things? The Gods are not mortals: a different standard applies to them. That said, I do not believe that all myths are to be taken literally, that such-and-such actually happened. Some are completely metaphorical, but nevertheless true, in the sense that they are meaningful. Others can only be understood within the context of the culture at the time. And some are just whimsical fancies to delight the listener. But others are authentic descriptions of things that actually happened, if not here on earth, then in Olympus the home of the Gods. OPAL: But how do you tell the difference, and know which one is to be interpreted in which way? SAN: The Gods gave us discernment and intelligence for a reason: they do not desire that we grovel in ignorance before them like sheep, but that we come into our full inheritance as men, that is to say, that we discover the innate nobility, freedom, and excellence that exist within the human heart. What takes away from that, what diminishes that quality within us is an evil: what adds to it, gives it free expression, is a good. Hence, the Greeks did not demean themselves by abasing themselves before the Gods in their temples. Instead, they stood at prayer, and included musical and sporting competitions among their rituals, for in competition excellence is revealed, and the Gods as well as the Greeks delighted in the beauty of the human physucal form. And the sacrifice is a joyous thing of true community. OPAL: Sacrifices? Oh, gross. That has no place within Paganism. SAN: Excuse me? Sacrifice has always been the central feature of Pagan religions. It is a means of bringing the community together, and involving the Gods in our lives. By offering them the proper portions of the animal, we reaffirm the essential covenants between mankind and the Gods, show them the degree of our appreciation, and acknowledge our dependence upon them. Further, the sacrifice is like a barbecue, with feasting and songs, dances and races and dramatic presentations. By having a good time, by enjoying ourselves, by putting on a good show for the Gods - we affirm that the central religious experience is one of joy in living. OPAL: So why does an animal have to die for that to happen? SAN: There are two reasons. First, because there is also suffering and pain in the world. The animal reminds us that we live in a world where all things exist by the death of other things. It is a primitive, violent, disturbing - and fundamentally beautiful arrangement. This joy in living is not a denial of the hardship and ugliness of things. It is a statement that because things suffer, they also feel pleasure. We are here a short time, and then we become food for something else. But during that brief sojourn there are countless wonderful experiences: sunsets, lovers, good books, the laughter of children, overcoming obstacles, noble self-sacrifices and so much more. Take away the hurt and the separation, and none of the positive is possible. Therefore, life is good, mixed as it is with pleasure and pain, gains and loss, fear and contentment. Secondly, most people enjoy eating meat, especially if their diet, as it was with the Greeks, is one primarily of grains, fish, and vegetables. There is a visceral, physical pleasure that comes with the eating of meat, and though as a vegetarian I do not take part in it, I do not deny the pleasure that others might experience through such things. Also, the Gods have ordained it so, setting out the parts reserved for them. Who are we to deny them what is rightfully theirs, just because we decide that it is unpleasant? OPAL: The Gods don't require sacrifice. As it says in the Charge of the Goddess, "Nor do I demand aught of sacrifice, for behold, I am the mother of all things." Everything already belongs to the Gods. How can we offer to them what belongs to them already? SAN: The Gods have placed certain things into our hands to be used by us as we see fit. And if we choose to offer them back to the Gods, it gladdens their hearts. Imagine if a mother gave money to her child, and the child either gave part of the money back to the parent or used the money to do good for others. Wouldn't that please the mother exceptionally? This is why sacrifice is so effective: it is a reciprocal relationship. OPAL: I just don't see how the Gods or anyone could take pleasure in the suffering of living creatures. SAN: Do you eat meat? OPAL: Well . . . uhm . . . yeah. But that's different. SAN: No, it is not. The animals suffer far more today than they ever did at the hands of the sacrificial priests. Further, only the best and purest animal was fit to be offered to the Gods. Today, even sickly and diseased creatures get butchered and turned into Big Macs. There is incredible pain, suffering, and cruelty involved in the meat industry. It's just that you're separated from it. You get your meat at nice, clean, respectable grocery stores or restaurants. And while that separation allows you to gorge yourself on the corpses of animals with a clean conscience, because you don't see how the animal was raised, how it was slaughtered, what processes it went through afterwards - you are just as much a part of it as if you had done the killing yourself. Sacrifice, on the other hand, allows you to look death in the eyes, face the fact that you are part of the terrible cycle, know exactly what the animal gave up and went through so that you could go on. It's a much more wholesome and holy approach than is favored by our modern society. And I'm not surprised that you dislike it so much, that you are profoundly bothered by the notion of sacrifice, coming, as you do, from a religion so deeply rooted in the modern ethos. OPAL: Because I don't get off on killing animals, my religion is modern? How stupid can you get? SAN: Just because a religion is modern, doesn't mean that it is somehow inferior. It is the relevance of beliefs that matter - not how old they are. OPAL: Well, you say that dismissively, and you won't listen when I try and tell you that Wicca is the Old Religion. SAN: Because it's not! Look, Opal, everything about Wicca betrays the fact that it's a thoroughly modern religion, from it's theology to its rituals to the basic assumptions it has about people and society. The nostalgic way that it looks back to bygone ages. A longing for connection with the natural world and its cycles, as opposed to the isolated, disconnection of modern existence. The high regard it has for women and ecological concerns. Its distrust for hierarchies and complex ritual structures. Its liberal ethics and philosophy. Its attempt to discover the underlying unity of all cultures and beliefs. The value that it places on a scientific and positivist outlook. The high regard (almost to the point of a psychological obsession) that it places upon health and healing. Its insistence that God/dess can and must be found within. These are not the concerns of Medieval European peasants. They are, however, the very ideas that thoughtful men and women have been struggling with since the Enlightenment, particularly in America and Great Britain where Wicca flourishes. Because it addresses these fundamental issues, it is uniquely suited for our experience today as members of Western Industrialized societies. Consequently, it is one of the fastest growing religions on the field today. OPAL: Well, then why aren't you a Wiccan? SAN: Although Wicca may be suitably adapted to the modern environment, it does not necessarily provide the only answers to the questions of modern existence, nor does it represent the full potentiality of the NeoPagan movement. For me, I believe that there is still value in the rituals, cultural practices, and beliefs of the ancients. I believe that Hellenic Philosophy - particularly that of Seneca, Plutarch, and the Neoplatonists - is much deeper, much fuller than Wiccan Philosophy, or Philosophy in general today - with the notable exceptions of William James, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Robert Anton Wilson whom I admire as much, if not more than the originals. Further, it has been my experience that most Wiccans tend to be ignorant, paranoid, and generally intolerant of people from other paths. OPAL: What? How can you say that? It was the Christians who burned us, who persecute us even to this day! How can we, a powerless minority, ever persecute others? SAN: Dear Zeus! She makes this too easy. Look at what you just said. You blamed all Christians for the actions of a disturbed minority. Not only does the average Christian not have it in for you, chances are they've never even heard of Wicca. And if they do, they are apt to meet it with curiosity and a genuine eagerness to learn more about it. They may not embrace your beliefs themselves - seeing as they belong to God's own religion - but the vast majority of them will fully support your right to practice whatever strange cult it is you practice, no matter how misguided you are. Some of the kindest, most tolerant people I have ever met have been of the Christian faith. OPAL: But what about the ones that knock on your door to share the Gospel, that demonstrate outside of Open Circles, the kind that cause us to lose our jobs and our children, and who kill doctors who work at abortion clinics? SAN: Those are misguided fucks, the worst sort of human rubbish to ever take up space of the Gods' green earth. They are extremists, fanatics, and have nothing at all to do with the Gospel Message of Jesus Christ. Well, the more violent and unpleasant of them at any rate. Sharing the Word of God is ingrained in Christianity. The Great Commission is one of the central obligations of all those who accept Jesus. As such, it is to be expected and tolerated in Christians, the same way that one makes allowances for the severely handicapped. When a retarded child lets out with a burst of profanities, you don't become shocked and wash out his mouth with soap as punishment. You ignore it, and continue with your conversation, uninterrupted. Likewise, when a Christian tries to pimp his God, you smile politely, say, "That's nice," and wait for the spell to pass. It eventually does, and once the obligation is out of their system, you can begin to have a normal, and often fruitful relationship with them. One should really be pleased. It shows that they care enough to try and save your soul - even if they don't know enough about spiritual matters to recognize the plurality inherent in the universe. Such insanity, however, is not limited to Christianity - even though it is inherent in the system. Many Wiccans share this madness. OPAL: We do not! SAN: Yes, you do. The fact that you came here to talk to me, to tell me that I was wrong, and that I should be nicer to Wiccans reveals that you, yourself, are prone to this affliction. In conversations that I've had with Wiccans, every time that I've mentioned that I do not believe in the Wiccan Rede, the 3-Fold Law, or Karma; that I believe the Gods to be both multiple or various; that I have problems with the idea of reincarnation; that magic isn't just whatever you want it to be - any time that these subjects have come up, I've been treated to lengthy, unpleasant orations about just how mistaken I am. Further, whenever the Devil is mentioned, Wiccans hasten to point out that they are not Satanists, they don't hurt animals, have wild orgies, or eat babies. OPAL: Well, we don't. SAN: But do Satanists? The implication in that statement is that Satanists, in fact, do do those things. Which is insulting to Satanists. I mean, yeah, most LaVeyans are worthy of contempt - but I have known some serious Occultists, and generally pleasant individuals who followed the Left-hand path. I can assure you that they were some of the kindest, gentle-hearted, most well-behaved individuals that I've ever met - and they never once claimed that Wiccans did such things. And Wiccan intolerance runs deeper than that. Most of my On-line friends happen to be Thelemites, and the greeting of Thelemites is 93, symbolizing the Law of Thelema, which is: 'Do what thou Wilt' shall be the Whole of the Law. Upon entering a Chat, this curious greeting is offered, and it almost always elicits the response, "What does 93 mean?" when we are in a Wiccan chat. When they take the time to explain what the greeting means, and other preliminaries about Thelema, they are often met with, "Oh, Crowley was a charlatan, who didn't know anything about the Occult." or "Thelema is petty, egotistical, and evil." There is a profound and unreasoned hatred among many Wiccans concerning Aleister Crowley and Thelema. And when they are asked what the extant of their familiarity with Crowley is, for instance, what books have they read or just why they believe Thelema to be evil - the answers are usually dismissive or evasive. "That one . . . uh Magick and something or other. I couldn't understand it. Crowley was stupid. " or "It just is. EVERYONE knows that." When you have had experiences like this with depressing regularity, it tends to sour ones thoughts about Wicca and certain Wiccans in particular. OPAL: Well, I've listened to you bash Wicca long enough. I don't think your appraisals are fair, and I think you are just as bigoted as the Christians are. You accuse us of being intolerant - when it's really you who are that way. So I'm leaving, and I'm never visiting your site again. SAN: Wow - that's too bad. So I guess you, me, and your pet goat are out of the picture, eh? OPAL: You think? SAN: Well damn, that was a major waste of my time. I
could have been working on my web-site instead of talking
into the wind. I'm sure I heard my voice echo a couple times
through the cavernous empty place where that girl's brain
should have been! And I'll never get that time back, either.
I'm so depressed . . . hey wait. That might make an
interesting dialogue. A bitter Hellenic Polytheist and a
saccharine sweet fluff bunny Wiccan discussing the nature of
Wicca. Hmm . . . I like it. Maybe I can end it with her
converting. She could repent of her fluffy ways and become
an Hellenic Polytheist, and it could end with us sneaking
off into the hills to honor Dionysos and Aphrodite in
nocturnal orgies. Oh, I like that last part. Definitely have
to include that last part! |
