The Four Authenticities
The world is filled with misinformation and propaganda. The world of the occult is perhaps doubly so. It’s a good thing then that people are seeking out what is authentic. Correcting of factual errors or deliberate lies should be a no brainer. No more time for that nonsense.
Sometimes though the quest for authenticity becomes a kind of crusade for people, and like most crusades, once the first targets are conquered, other less-offensice target are chosen.
When warriors of authenticity crusade, I think its important to clarify the parameters by which they are judging something as authentic or not. If we don’t make the standards by which we deem something authentic or not, we tend to just talk past each other.
HISTORICAL AUTHENTICITY
I think it’s important to be keep our understanding of history as accurate as possible. When history gets mis-represented it’s good to correct it. The problem is that often the crusade for historical authenticity in magic is not about correcting an error but enforcing a fetish for what is old.
Some Witches think of Hekate as a Crone. This is actually a fairly new concept, but new is not synonymous with “wrong”. Hesiod describes her as youthful, but well, that was 2300 years ago. She might indeed be a bit older by now 😊. The Chaldean Oracles are 1700 years old, and describe her as a transcendent and cosmic savior figure, which is lot different than how she is portrayed by Virgil who describes her has howled at by night at crossroads. So are the Ancient Oracles wrong because Virgil is 300 years older.
Is this all we care about? Whatever is older is truer? Some people say yes, but I can’t think of any endeavor where this is the primary parameter for judging authenticity. Thank gods we don’t treat medicine this way! Heck, even religion isn’t treated this way.
Now, if your thing is authentic reconstruction of a time and place that you are particularly interested in, that’s awesome! I am interested in what you do and come up with. Its cool, and however authentic you get to that is great for you, but that doesn’t mean its universally correct.
CULTURAL AUTHENTICITY
Culture is another mode of authenticity. This most often comes into play when there is a living tradition being adapted by members of a different geographic area or ethnic group. The history police might be quick to tell John Q Thelemite he isn’t doing Goetia right because he is not following the older ways of conjuring, but no one would tell a Haitian Mambo in Jacmel that she is doing Vodou wrong because she is isn’t doing it the way it was done 200 years prior. She is doing what is culturally relevant in a living tradition.
Just like I am more concerned with deliberate historical mis-representation than I am with how old something is, I am a lot more concerned about cultural mis-appropriation than I am about the flow of one cultural into another. In other words, if you claim to be making an authentic Nganga or using a Phurba in a traditional manner, there are initiations and knowledge that you need to possess. If you do whatever “spirit tells me too” and claiming that is culturally authentic: you are lying. If however you tell everyone up front that you are inspired by Ngangas or Phurbas and are doing something of your own making – that’s quite different. Transparency is key. People may still get upset, but at least you are not lying or misrepresenting something.
Then again, I would say that, wouldn’t I? I am a white dude. I don’t mean that sarcastically, I mean it truthfully. Different people have different views based in who and where they are. I can’t decide for someone else how they feel about white people doing Hoodoo, or Chinese folks doing Vodou, or any other damn thing.
For my money, we live in the most culturally porous time in history. If the magicians of the past had access to jet travel and the internet, I would bet that almost any of them would be soaking in as much occult wisdom as they possibly can from all over. I have been lucky enough to have people of other ethnicities and cultures share some of their knowledge with me and pass on initiations and teachings. Other people think that because I am not from those cultures, nothing I do in those field is authentic. I respect those feelings, but I respect the people I was in the room with more.
Suffice to say, things change when they move from one culture to another. This movement is natural, and in my opinion, authentic. What is not authentic is when people completely disregard culture of origin in an effort to bypass difficult protocols, claim authority and titles that they have not earned, or simply gloss over the history and culture that gave birth to traditions they engage in, and spirits that they claim to love and serve.
FUNCTIONAL AUTHENTICITY
If we are talking about magic, and on this blog we are, there is another kind of authenticity we need to discuss: that of functionality. Does it work? If so, how well? How often? How potently? How regularly?
Let’s imagine that there is a cure for cancer known to Nepalese Shaman that has been passed down and changed slightly from generation to generation. The person seeking historical authenticity wants to know the earliest form of this because it must be best. The person seeking cultural authenticity wants to make sure that the cure is delivered according to the most culturally correct rituals by a person with unquestionable lineage and initiation. The person seeking functional authenticity cares about how effective the medicine is against cancer. If there are changes that make it more effective, work faster, or produce it at scale then those changes will be made even if it’s not culturally or historically authentic.
Magic is not a matter of historical curiosity or cultural ritual. It is an act that is meant to produce a result, so from the practitioners point of view the magic that is most authentic is the magic that works best. There are those who insist that whatever is oldest or most culturally authentic will work best. This would simplify things, but experience shows me that’s not necessarily true.
I think that magic, like everything else, develops over time and while it occasionally takes a step or two backward, it can also make innovative leaps forward. At times the demands of functionally might run counter to historical or cultural tradition. Countless conflicts and schisms have spawned this way.
“The proof is in the pudding” is the rally cry of functional authenticity. It works, therefore it’s right and how dare you question me?!
The problem is most acts of magic work on some level, so you can almost always claim functional authenticity. It’s a bit too easy to just kiss off history and culture in the name of function. Of course, function gets ignored in favor of tradition often enough, so this tension is perhaps just sort of a check and balance that must go on. And on. And on.
AUTHENTICITY OF MEANING
When I was a teenaged I read something Neil Gaiman wrote that changed by view of authenticity forever: “Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and adventures are the shadow truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes and forgotten.”
Magic and the occult are filled with modern thoughts attributed to ancient sources, tall tales of cults, and occurrence, and even people that probably never existed. Magicians sometimes draw connections between cultures and practices that historically have nothing to do with each other. Magic and Witchcraft are just like this. So is Religion for that matter.
The fallen Lucifer, Son of Morning in Isaiah is almost certainly referring to a Babylonian king, yet for nearly 2000 years this has been a cornerstone of the story of the Devil. There is a meaning that people drew from this, even though its a misunderstanding, that rings true and has become an edifice that is stronger, more influential, and longer lasting than the facts of the verse.
When we talk magic and mysticism we are dealing with ineffable powers and subtle perceptions. Make no mistake, spirits are real beyond what we think of them but that doesn’t mean that everything attributed to them, every name we give them, every image we hold of them, is factually correct in some cosmological way. There is more to them than we know, and likely more than we can know, so sometimes authentic meaning comes from things that lack historical authenticity, or modify and change what is cultural authentic. This is the story of the world.
YET, that doesn’t mean we have no responsibility to historical fact or cultural tradition. My warning here is similar to the warning for functional truth: don’t use this as an excuse for sloppiness. Be transparent and respectful. Don’t colonize things because you can get away with it. Don’t invent nonsense and act like its established fact. If the word of a conjured Archangel is the only evidence you have of it being true, do not act like its established fact.
You can perform a ritual that calls upon ancient Atlantean spirit guides, and if you find meaning in that great. You may even find that functional. That doesn’t make it factual.
CONCLUSION
I wanted to write this because I think it might help people communicate better. If someone is arguing that Baphomet is inauthentic because the name is likely a pun on Mohammed and rooted in Templar conspiracies, they are arguing historical authenticity. If someone else says that Baphomet must be authentic because they called upon him and the spell worked they are arguing functional authenticity. I am gonna step in and say that when I look at the image of Baphomet I think of Baph, which can mean dipping in water, tempering a blade, or dyeing a color; and Metis which is the virtue of cunning wisdom. So there is an Authentic Meaning to be derived from this is that is likely not historically accurate, but nonetheless moves me and is also functional.
Keeping these categories in mind might also help people to think clearer about what they do and believe. Finding out the Maiden Mother and Crone is only as old as Robert Graves doesn’t necessarily rob it of its meaning. Finding out the “wheel of Hekate” symbol has absolutely no connection to Hekate older than the 1980’s doesn’t mean that its not a perfectly functional seal for her today, or that Hekate herself is not behind the attribution.
It’s ok to value some of these parameters over others. Pagan reconstructionists care more about historical sources than anything else. Others care more about cultural authenticity – particularly those whose cultures are being preyed upon or in danger of disappearing. Sorcerers like me care most about function. Some pious or mystically oriented souls care more about meaning. Even if you favor one of these over others, I hope that all four of these get held in the mind as important and worthy of consideration.
Then again, maybe this won’t help. After all it’s a lot more fun for people to be right when everyone else is wrong.