Fluffy Bunny: Authenticity in a Pagan Community

Posted by Pavlor on July 26, 2008 at 6:53pm in General Discussions

Odis made a really interesting post on the What Makes a Fluffy-Bunny thread which I thought merited a thread all of its own.

For those interested, a qualitative study: Discourses of Authenticity Within a Pagan Community: The Emergence of the "Fluffy Bunny" Sanction authored by Angela Coco and Ian Woodward and published in the peer reviewed Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 2007; 36; 479 offers an interesting perspective. The online version of this article can be found at: http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/36/5/479

An excerpt:

"The commodification of the religious impulse finds its most overt expression
in the New Age movement and its subculture neopaganism. The examples we have provided suggest that although paganism may be an exemplary postmodern religion it does not follow that its adherents rest in a commodified spirituality bereft of deeper spiritual meanings and practices.
In fact, a discourse has emerged in which the “authentic” pagan is being constructed
through ongoing conversations around a series of distinctions. Issues of pagan identity, commercialization of the craft, and capitalist enterprise revealed many semiotic tensions regarding:

1. practical issues and religious ideals
2. capitalist values and spiritual values
3. naïve and experienced practitioners of the craft
4. “modern” pagans and traditionalists
5. expansionism and esotericism
6. surface and deeper meanings of the craft
7. practices that were judged to be peripheral or central to community identity
(for example the peripheral, pagan-type Harry Potter movie)
8. playful and serious engagement with the craft
9. media representations of witchcraft and pagan reality.

It should be stressed at this point that whether there is such a being as an
authentic pagan or not is not the issue. Through the production and consumption
of craft artifacts and services pagans engage in what Lamont (1992)
describes as aesthetic and moral projects of the self, by weighing their values
and judgments against those of others, perhaps renegotiating them, and developing
shared values as members of a community that calls itself pagan." (Coco & Woodward, 2007, p. 499.)

Tags: bunny, discourse, fluffy, identity, pagan, semiotics

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pavlor on July 26, 2008 at 6:57pm: This is quite a grand list of areas to be discussed, so what I'd suggest is just have a look at it and pick any points that whet your appetite or you would like to discuss.

First, do you agree that NeoPaganism is a subculture within the New Age movement and;
Second, why is Paganism classed as a "postmodern religion" when most practitioners claim it to be so ancient? I do agree, however, that it is post-modern.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Blackthorn on July 27, 2008 at 2:18pm: Or would the new age movement be a subculture of NeoPaganism?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pavlor on July 27, 2008 at 2:33pm: It's one of those "chicken-or-egg?" conundra. I think possibly New Age came first as it sounds more like an ideology, post-modern/structuralist (i.e., questioning systems within a society and looking towards the abolishment of centralised authority and established order etc.), and from this, neopaganism found a great niche in which it could flourish under the "guise" of New Age. In that sense neopaganism is a sub-culture of New Age, but I don't believe that neopaganism is entirely all New Age so can it really be called a "sub-culture" of it? They are kind of entwined but separate if you like. Thinking about it, maybe yes, neopaganism was a subculture of New Age but then it usurped New Age's position and reversed the whole culture vs sub-culture status.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by SIN on July 30, 2008 at 2:21pm: 1. ...do you agree that NeoPaganism is a subculture within the New Age movement

I do, 'Neo' indicates 'new' and while people romanticise what the 'old' pagans believed and practiced, it's just that - a romanced idea. I don't see a whole lot of people having a full grasp on what life was really like; the popular view is very 'hollywood'.

2. ...why is Paganism classed as a "postmodern religion" when most practitioners claim it to be so ancient?

It's not ancient, everything done today is new. There are even elders in the Pagan community who will correct new people to the craft, 'There are no old ways!' There's no way to be certain what the populace practiced, a lot of it is speculation.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DodiaFae on July 26, 2008 at 11:10pm: Great topic, Pavlor. I missed that post in the other thread (it did get huge quite fast, didn't it?)

I guess that NeoPaganism would be a subculture within the New Age movement... I mean, I had always just assumed it was. I should think that some of those who are a part of the New Age movement aren't necessarily Pagan. I've never really given this any serious thought. I'll will think about it and come back if I think of anything worth saying on the subject.

As for your second question, I believe that even those who claim to practitioners of an ancient tradition are actually practicing something based (sometimes very loosely) on an ancient tradition. I mean, who is to say it's done today the way it was done pre-Christianity? Even Anthropologists don't know for sure, and is there proof that the "Ancient Order of Such & Such" was really handed down through the generations, practically unchanged to this very day? Highly unlikely. Though I'll be pleasantly surprised if someone doesn't tell me how I'm wrong (and if they do, I hope they're willing to post the proof with their argument.)

BB ~DF; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Misuchi on July 26, 2008 at 11:32pm: Its kind of like that old question that everyone heard in high school. If all ravens are crows, does that mean all crows are ravens? Thus said, the question is if all of NeoPaganism is a subculture of the New Age, does that mean that all of the New Age movement is NeoPaganism? Certainly not. There are a plethora of levels bound within the New Age movement, from the superficial to the deepest and most intense wisdom of spirituality.

Is NeoPaganism post modern? Of course. Its very name says that. 'Neo' by definition means 'new, recent'. It is a conglomeration of old ways mingling with the new, to form something completely unique unto itself. It can claim roots in ancient history, but its true base is completely modern.

Once you understand those, the question becomes, what are you going to do with this new information? Will you seek wisdom, and reach for the identity of an 'authentic pagan', or will you hop around dabbling here and there as a fluffy bunny?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pavlor on July 27, 2008 at 5:16am: Once you understand those, the question becomes, what are you going to do with this new information? Will you seek wisdom, and reach for the identity of an 'authentic pagan', or will you hop around dabbling here and there as a fluffy bunny?

If I understand this, much of neopaganism is about reactionary behaviour, so ‘authentic pagan’ becomes a cline and the further one is away from norm belief-behaviour, the more authentic a pagan one becomes. This would, of course, be outside of generational traditions (i.e., those born into the religion/belief practices) and be a cline of belief/ religious conversion acting as an underground social meme (see my post on structural functionalism).

Those who are more reactionary tend to become the more pagan-authentic. Those suffering from FBS (fluffy-bunny syndrome, not that far away from IBS *lol*) are not taken seriously by the more aggressive reactionaries who see themselves as more 'authentic'.

This makes sense to me, at least.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pavlor on July 27, 2008 at 5:22am: Is NeoPaganism post modern? Of course. Its very name says that. 'Neo' by definition means 'new, recent'. It is a conglomeration of old ways mingling with the new, to form something completely unique unto itself. It can claim roots in ancient history, but its true base is completely modern.

Neopaganism seems to be a modern (“neo”) but rather post-structuralist than post-modern progressive current that is localised mainly to Western belief-ideals and a reaction to normative structural functionalism or a social systems paradigm.In all honesty, I believe neopaganism can be argued to be post-modern and/or post-structuralist depending on which angle one decides to take.

I have written a few blogs wherein I hypothesised superficially that the growing trend in Pagan converts seems more reactionary to certain societal ideologies, such as capitalist praxes and discrimination. Now, after reading the article that the excerpts were taken from article Discourses of Authenticity Within a Pagan Community The Emergence of the “Fluffy Bunny” Sanction the reaction towards majority religion seems to be based on the religious/belief social system and how it is expected to be performed in relation to society at large.

Do you believe that those who deny practising a neopagan tradition, but pagan tradition (i.e., *The Old Religion* etc.) are just deluded, and are romanticising the idea that their tradition/path has its roots in antiquity?

All very interesting stuff!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Marc on July 27, 2008 at 10:36am: Do you believe that those who deny practising a neopagan tradition, but pagan tradition (i.e., *The Old Religion* etc.) are just deluded, and are romanticising the idea that their tradition/path has its roots in antiquity?

I do. That doesn't make their religion invalid I just don't think they're practicing any kind of "Old Religion". Modern Pagans are practicing what is a very modern religion.

Marc; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Seachain Aroon on July 27, 2008 at 12:08pm: Dang, I wonder what a shaman from South America or a witch-doctor from the African jungle would say about your statement here.... not even talking about others.

Wait, or you don't consider them "pagans"?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pavlor on July 27, 2008 at 12:24pm: Seachain,

I think this is all about neopaganism, not paleo- and mesopaganism, isn't it?

What you are talking about, that is South American shamans and African witch doctors, does not belong to neopaganism.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Seachain Aroon on July 27, 2008 at 2:37pm: Erm, Pav, correct me if I'm wrong, but the question was "Do you believe that those who deny practising a neopagan tradition, but pagan tradition (i.e., *The Old Religion* etc.) are just deluded, and are romanticising the idea that their tradition/path has its roots in antiquity?"

I think it's clearly stated "do you believe that those who consider they practise pagan tradition with roots in antiquity are deluded?" with the answer "yes".

Did I miss something here?; ▶ Reply to This