Witches: True Encounters with Wicca, Wizards, Covens, Cults, and Magick:
by Hans Holzer © 2006 Black Dog & Leventhal ISBN 1-579124771
672 pages Paperback $14.95 (U.S.) $17.56 (Canada)
Okay, I have to be totally honest here. I am NOT a fan of Hans Holzer.
He
has published w-a-y too many books with w-a-y too many errors over the
years. He has also shown, in my opinion, a massively inflated sense of
his
own im****tance. He claims initiation into a number of Pagan and Craft
traditions, but shows little regard for checking out what he is told.
In spite of decades of writings by active practitioners, and their
definition of the words particular to their practices, Professor Holzer
define "warlock" as "A magician, a sorcerer.", ignoring its accepted
definition as "an oath-breaker; one who betrayed the coven to the
Inquisition." He also states that witchcraft does not "include in its
service any element even remotely similar to actual Christian practice or
wor****p." As any Witch (or Wiccan) can tell you, there are strong
similarities between "cakes and Wine" and the Eucharist.
I'm going out on a limb here, but I am going to assume that, as an
accomplished author, an alleged parapsychologist, and (apparently) a
photographer, Professor Holzer must have (at the very least) read the
captions of his illustrations. How then could he have allowed the caption
on page 20 to get into print? It says: "A valley in Tunisia is littered
with urns like this, containing the ashes of sacrificed infants. The
disparaging myth that witches sacrifice children derives from the
13th-century Roman practice of sacrificing children to Baal."
Thirteenth-century Roman practice? Excuse me, but wasn't Christianity the
dominant religion in Rome at that point in time? And, while I am no
scholar, I seem to recall Baal as a deity wor****pped in the Middle East
prior to the establishment of the Jewish kingdoms. So how did that
practice
become common in Rome during the 13th century? If nothing else, this is
evidence of sloppy editing, if not shoddy scholar****p. Granted that
Professor Holzer was in his 80s when this book was published, that is no
excuse for sloppiness.
He leans on the evidence of Margaret Murray, whose work on the witch cult
has been largely discredited by both the academic and the Wiccan
community.
Her assertions were based on testimony extracted during torture and have
not
been independently corroborated by other researchers.
One other thing really disturbs me about the contents of this book. Far
too
many of the late members of the occult community are referred to in the
present tense4, even though they passed over to the Summerlands long
before
this book was published (Anton LaVey, Sybil Leek, etc.); while other
practitioners are mis-identified (Morning Glory Zell is called "Mountain
Glory" and Yvonne Frost is called "Alice" among other mistakes). I would
hope that any serious author (Professor Holzer has authored over 100
books)
would at least make sure of identities.
I very strongly suspect, although I can't prove it at this point (my older
books are in storage and not easily accessible) that much of the
information
in this book has been recycled from earlier works.
In fact, I am sure that I have read large amounts of this book, word for
word, in previous works by this author. While that isn't totally
unexpected, it would seem more honest (to me) to let the readers know that
these events are not current events.
Before I was 70 pages into this book (less than 10%), I knew for sure that
much of it was recycled as he referred to a coven in Chicago, headed by
two
individuals, which I knew had disbanded over 25 years ago. There were
also
a few relatively recent updates (Ray Buckland in Ohio, Odun in New
Orleans),
but the vast majority of the material - more than 75% would be my guess -
is
rehashed from his earlier works. So, if you want to know about some of
the
personalities of the Craft and how they presented themselves "in the day,"
you will find this book interesting. If you are looking for up-to-date
information this book won't be of much help, I am afraid.
Had the differentiation between the current material and the older items
been made clear, it might have enabled this book to be used to give a
historical understanding of the development of the Craft in the mid- to
late-20th century. The gods know that it is large enough, and inspiring
enough to look good on a library shelf. However the blurring and
inconsistencies lead me to recommend that the average reader give this
book
a pass.
Professor Holzer's writing style is entertaining, if a trifle egocentric.
There isn't mush chance of misunderstanding what he is saying, although
his
statements are sometimes in error when it comes to some verifiable
details.
The editing of this book leaves room for improvement, as I found a number
of
typographical errors, as well as questionable captioning on some of the
illustrations.
Professor Holzer waxes indignant about ".Susan Roberts who.many years
later
used the same material without bothering to.update it in any way." (Page
211) Which is rather like the pot calling the kettle black, since that is
what large chunks of this book accomplish. His accounts of the
practitioners he interviewed could, at least, have contained notations
indicating when they occurred (Tim Zell hasn't been known as Tim [or
married
to Julie, for that matter] for decades).
Professor Holzer does include nearly 50 pages of ritual and poetry,
provided
to him, by the founders of Ferferia, which was one of the more prominent
Pagan groups in the '70s. I have always liked the imagery used by this
group, so it was a pleasant surprise to find this trove of information
offered.
The captioning of many of the photos is confusing. After stating, in the
text, "They are not witches." (Page 389), two pages later, the caption
reads
".a witch summons the spirit of Baal who.is often invoked by the O.T.A. to
deliver prophecies." If the members of the Order of the Temple of Astarte
are NOT witches, why are they identified as such in the caption?
Overall, the editing of this book is horrendous. There are numerous
instances of dropped letters or even entire words, as well as apparently
inserted (or repeated) words. Misspellings are frequent. Considering the
number of books produced by this author, I was hoping for better.
To end this book he publishes ".my own Book of Shadows consisting of
material I gathered during my visit and interactions with the late
Alexander
Sanders in England." I don't need to go out on a limb here. As an
Alexandrian initiate myself, I had trouble recognizing some parts of this
work. Oh, I know that the BoS is an ever-changing work, and I know that
Alex made changes during his life-time, but there are massive chunks
missing
and somehow that pesky part of the oath comes back to haunt me - in
Professor Holzer's own words ".I will ever keep secret and never reveal
the
secrets of the art except it be to a proper person properly prepared
within
a circle such as I am in now."
Oh, I know that the rituals have been published in dozens of books, but to
put your own Book of Shadows into print just seems like oath-breaking to
me.
To quote a bit here and there, without saying "This is the entirety of it
all," may be acceptable and/or justifiable, depending on your point of
view.
This just makes me uncomfortable on a lot of levels..
Professor Holzer includes segments on poltergeists and possessions which
do
not belong in a book subtitled True Encounters with Wicca, Wizards,
Covens,
Cults, and Magick. These add 100 or more pages to the book and could
have,
in my opinion, been omitted without adversely affecting the book.
Would I recommend this book for the casual reader? Only with extreme
reservations. It does serve as a historical record of the Pagan movement
during the last three or four decades of the last century, and for that
reason it is useful. However, without putting it in its proper historical
context it =conveys a false impression of the current state of Paganism.
It also serves as an omnibus of Professor Holzer's works on Paganism and
witchcraft, thus removing the need to haunt used book store in hope of
finding these works, In fact, in my opinion, it would have served the
casual reader to simply collect those earlier works and reprint them as a
single edition, retaining all the contents, and thus making its historical
basis more obvious. The slight amount of new material could then have
been
put in a single section.
|
