PDA

View Full Version : Traditional vs. Neopagan totemism



Lupabitch
November 28th, 2007, 04:16 PM
One thing I've noticed in the pagan community is a lot of confusion as to what a totem traditionally is/was considered in indigenous societies, versus what neopagans understand totems to be. A lot of people will pick up Animal Speak by Ted Andrews (which I do like, just FTR) and assume that what he's talking about is "just like the Native Americans!"

There are a couple of problems with that argument. First, totemism isn't limited to Native American cultures (though the term "totem" is Ojibwe in origin). Indigenous cultures around the world have totemic systems. Claude Levi-Strauss (no relation to the jeans) wrote a classic text called, simply, Totemism. In it he detailed the systems of a number of cultures, including not only the Americas, but also Australia.

However, the other problem is that neopagan totemism isn't the same as traditional totemism. Traditionally, totems represented groups, not individuals. Clans, families and tribes had totems that served not only to teach certain morals, but also to help facilitate exogamy, the process of determining who could and could not marry as a way of avoiding accidental incest. Men and women might also have had individual totems, and totems were often passed either matrilineally or patrilineally. Totems were usually animals, though they occasionally were plants or other objects. The totem could impart mysteries upon its chosen group, as well as be the basis for certain social taboos; however, in some cultures the totem was merely a figurehead, no more important than a last name. There were a few rare cases where totems were seen on a more individual basis, but overwhelmingly it was a group phenomenon.

Neopagan totemism combines traditional totemism with the concept of the individual spirit guide, and the power animal of the shaman (by the way, not all shamanic systems have power animals). It takes the practice of associating certain qualities with animals from totemism, combines it with the one on one relationship of spirit guides, and throws in the magical aspects of the power animal.

This doesn't make it less effective or true! I've worked exclusively with neopagan totemism for over a decade. It's wonderfully adapted for most pagans' situations--we tend to live in cultures where the individual is emphasized over the group, we are aware of animals beyond our geographic boundaries and can work with their totems, and because neopaganism tends to be fluid, we can adapt neopagan totemism as we see fit. It is a unique system that has come out of the bubbling cauldron of neopagan ingenuity, and I think it's awesome.

If you want to read more extensively, I've elaborated in these two articles:

http://www.spiralnature.com/magick/tradvsneopagantotemism.html
http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usor&c=words&id=12039

As for sources, you can see all the books I've read and reviewed on this topic here:

http://lupabitch.wordpress.com/category/animal-magic/

Specific sources that may be of interest for traditional totemism:

Levi-Strauss, Claude, Totemism
Morris, Brian The Power of Animals: An Ethnography and Animals and Ancestors: An Ethnography
Campbell, Joseph, The Way of the Animal Powers, Vol. I and II
Vitebsky, Piers, The Shaman (includes information on power animals from an anthopological viewpoint)

If you compare these to modern texts on neopagan totemism, you'll notice the distinct differences. Again, neopagan totemism is NOT inferior, just different.

Let me just finish by saying--we all do totemism differently. Even traditional cultures have their own systems for totemism and so forth--there's no such thing, for example, as "Native American totemism". So take what I say here with however much salt you like. I just tossed it up for conversation purposes, and since it didn't seem like anybody had addressed the idea here.

Always open for discussion :)

Zephyrstorm
December 7th, 2007, 08:51 PM
One of the problems with assuming that Neo-Pagan Totemism is similar to Native American Totemism is that there is often an assumption that all the various tribes of both have viewed the animals in these monolithic ways.

And its just not the case. Different cultures throughout the world have had different ideas about animals through time. And that goes for differing tribes of Native Americans, no matter that they may have had some syncreticism creep in during the damages that have been done to their cultures over the past two hundred plus years.

It'd be like assuming that the Celtic neo-Pagans view the snake the same way that the Hittites, or Sumerians, or Egyptians did.
Just like some of us relate to various animals differently than our friends or family, so too the ancients and modern pagans and traditionalists.

I can't believe no one has responded to this thread! *pokes the community* ;)

HedwigHarfang
December 9th, 2007, 03:45 PM
Thanks, just seen the thread myself.

I do believe that a lot of different societies see parts of the same whole. Native American tradition concentrates on one of the many stages of totem development, whereas in Britain discussions among the people I learned from are mostly geared towards initial stages - like Wombat-Boi, onlyhaving one animal spirit (therianthropy, the first stages of human spiritual development where the animal has reincarnated directly from its animal life to a human life so only has one totem with one guide). Native American lore has probably been learned from a particular time or place where the therianthrope proportions were less (though they are always in the majority, at different stages of history this majority has oscillated from barely half, as it was at the turn of the 19-20th centuries, to now over 3/4 of the global population) and human spirit development higher.

I can explain people's totems on a case-by-case basis but really it would take a long time for me with my tendency to verbosity to explain my knowledge of the system of nine therianthropic lives completely, so perhaps we should leave individuals to work out their own structure at their own point in their development. I am fairly confident that I have three permanent totem guides (one of which I share with Louise, my soul-mate; none of which I shared with my first wife Sandra who was a first life human being directly incarnated from a raven last time round) and one "slot" which from time to time I fill with whatever animal fits my needs. (I borrow Sandra's totem guide Lenore quite often when I need the stability of Raven to keep my temper (or even prevent myself from crying) in public; it has the awkward side effect of making me appear more craggy rather than as tight in the face as most Owls are.) This works pretty well as my own system based on my own level of development.

So I really don't discuss different traditions because they usually only have one piece of the whole jigsaw. Putting together a comprehensive guide would need a lot more openness - working directly with spirit and a wide range of experiences rather than just beliefs - and willingness to look at it scientifically rather than through the filters of tribal lore. I am not saying lore is invalid, just that as someone with more experience of the early stages of therianthrope development a lot of what is written by various ancient/early modern societies can be misleading because it would stem from the shaman, priest's or medicine man's own perspectives and ignore the gradations to be found at each level of a spirit's development, from animal spirit to ancient evolved human existence.

Lupabitch
December 11th, 2007, 04:47 PM
One of the problems with assuming that Neo-Pagan Totemism is similar to Native American Totemism is that there is often an assumption that all the various tribes of both have viewed the animals in these monolithic ways.

And its just not the case. Different cultures throughout the world have had different ideas about animals through time. And that goes for differing tribes of Native Americans, no matter that they may have had some syncreticism creep in during the damages that have been done to their cultures over the past two hundred plus years.

It'd be like assuming that the Celtic neo-Pagans view the snake the same way that the Hittites, or Sumerians, or Egyptians did.
Just like some of us relate to various animals differently than our friends or family, so too the ancients and modern pagans and traditionalists.

I can't believe no one has responded to this thread! *pokes the community* ;)

I know *sniffle* I was beginning to think nobody loved me :wah2:

But in seriousness, I actually like the diversity of approaches. I just think it's important to know what's traditional and what isn't, as well as what works for you and what's doesn't. Not only does this give credit where it's due, but who knows? Perhaps your interest in a particular way of doing things will lead you to research more practices and beliefs that you agree with.

Zephyrstorm
December 11th, 2007, 04:52 PM
I know *sniffle* I was beginning to think nobody loved me :wah2:

But in seriousness, I actually like the diversity of approaches. I just think it's important to know what's traditional and what isn't, as well as what works for you and what's doesn't. Not only does this give credit where it's due, but who knows? Perhaps your interest in a particular way of doing things will lead you to research more practices and beliefs that you agree with.

Exactly. :)
Diversity is a good thing - its part of what helps nature keep trucking no matter what hits it.

Lupabitch
December 11th, 2007, 04:56 PM
Thanks, just seen the thread myself.

I do believe that a lot of different societies see parts of the same whole. Native American tradition concentrates on one of the many stages of totem development, whereas in Britain discussions among the people I learned from are mostly geared towards initial stages - like Wombat-Boi, onlyhaving one animal spirit (therianthropy, the first stages of human spiritual development where the animal has reincarnated directly from its animal life to a human life so only has one totem with one guide). Native American lore has probably been learned from a particular time or place where the therianthrope proportions were less (though they are always in the majority, at different stages of history this majority has oscillated from barely half, as it was at the turn of the 19-20th centuries, to now over 3/4 of the global population) and human spirit development higher.

I can explain people's totems on a case-by-case basis but really it would take a long time for me with my tendency to verbosity to explain my knowledge of the system of nine therianthropic lives completely, so perhaps we should leave individuals to work out their own structure at their own point in their development. I am fairly confident that I have three permanent totem guides (one of which I share with Louise, my soul-mate; none of which I shared with my first wife Sandra who was a first life human being directly incarnated from a raven last time round) and one "slot" which from time to time I fill with whatever animal fits my needs. (I borrow Sandra's totem guide Lenore quite often when I need the stability of Raven to keep my temper (or even prevent myself from crying) in public; it has the awkward side effect of making me appear more craggy rather than as tight in the face as most Owls are.) This works pretty well as my own system based on my own level of development.

So I really don't discuss different traditions because they usually only have one piece of the whole jigsaw. Putting together a comprehensive guide would need a lot more openness - working directly with spirit and a wide range of experiences rather than just beliefs - and willingness to look at it scientifically rather than through the filters of tribal lore. I am not saying lore is invalid, just that as someone with more experience of the early stages of therianthrope development a lot of what is written by various ancient/early modern societies can be misleading because it would stem from the shaman, priest's or medicine man's own perspectives and ignore the gradations to be found at each level of a spirit's development, from animal spirit to ancient evolved human existence.

I think you've got a good point in that we all have different pieces of the puzzle. That's why I like learning different systems of totemism and animal magic, because each culture adds its own context to the concepts at hand. A lot of the time people say that neopagan = not as good, just because it's newer. Yet we simply add our own pieces to the ever-growing puzzle.

The only thing that bothers me is when people try to say that all the puzzle pieces are the same. This causes them to cast off the context under which each totemic system was created, which drastically reduces one's understanding of how the perspectives came about. IMO, it's not enough to know what something is; we also need to know how it got that way. It's not just the ending of the story that's important.