Wicked Whimsy

Archive for May, 2010

via fierceblackgirls on tumblr

Little late today. I was out with Amanda some today, down at Barton Springs (which was packed!). I also got sunscreen in my eyes, which, for the record, is not something I recommend. But anyways here’s your links:

• Love these tanks from ArtLab – might have to have a go at DIYing something similar.
• Check it out – Sarah Von interviewed me for her True Story series.
• I found this post on Jeph Jacque’s (of Questionable Content fame) tumblr: So you wanna start a webcomic?
• american able: why does fashion have to give us complexes?
• expand your life, take your dogma for a walk.
• Music Meets Fashion: VV Brown
• Aaaand this video of Data set to Poker Face is pretty much awesomesauce.

Hope you all had a good Memorial Day weekend!

So! Unless you’ve been living under a rock lately, you’ve probably noticed that minimalism is totally the Next Big Thing. Or, possibly, the Big Thing Now. But me, I’m not a fan of minimalism, and here’s why:

First of all, the aesthetic does absolutely nothing for me. I’ve never favored lots of white (hurts my head)  and I’ve always preferred lots of colors. Just black and white, with all those hard edges? Yuck!

Secondly, I’ve noticed a lot of times when minimalism comes up, it’s talked about with an air of moral superiority, and I don’t know if I agree with that. I definitely think mindless overconsumption is bad; buying the most/cheapest/best (or any combination thereof) of everything all the time doesn’t do anyone any good. And I think this is definitely the default in most of today’s consumption. But at the same time, I think such a thing as mindful consumption is very possible. And I don’t think it’s inherently bad just because it’s consumption, even if you’re buying purely ornamental items. Like, say, in a house, because for a lot of people, the state of their house is intrinsically linked to the state of their head.

How can we consume thoughtfully? Ask yourself lots of questions before buying something – where was this made? how will I dispose of it when the time comes? how long will I keep/use it? why do I want it? am I trying to fill an emotional hole with it? For  fashion items: I try not to buy clothing/shoes/accessories unless I can think of 2-3 outfits while I’m in the store to wear it with. If I can’t do that, I put it back on the rack & think for 24 hours. Most of the time, when the 24 hours is up, I’ve totally forgotten about the item. Obviously that’s not really something I need or even want that bad!

I don’t think buying things for the sake of buying them is a good idea by any means, but I don’t think buying things is evil in and of itself. What do you think?

So, if you recall the last installment, what we’re discussing today is one of the main themes in American Gods: that America is a bad land for gods/that there were no deities in America before non-indigenous people colonized America. I’m discussing them as one theme together because they go hand in hand – why weren’t there any gods before other people came to America? Because it’s a bad land for gods, that’s why!

One of my issues with this is that it seems like a totally arbitrary rule to me. And it’s not very well defined either – does “America” mean the United States? Or North America? Shadow and Odin never go outside of the continental US, but one of the “coming to America” chapters features the Vikings bringing over their deities. However, as far as we know, the Vikings never came to the continental US. This tends to point towards these statements being said about all of North America, not just the United States.

Which brings me to the other part; the “there weren’t any gods before non-indigenous people brought them over” part. Where am I getting this from? It’s implied a few times throughout the book (although Shadow talks to a buffalo headed man several times, who I’m guessing is supposed to be the embodiment of the land), but the main reason is this, which occurs towards the end of the book:

“Look,” said Whiskey Jack. “This is not a good country for gods. My people figured that out early on. There are creator spirits who found the earth or made it or shit it out, but you think about it: who’s going to worship Coyote? He made love to Porcupine Woman and got his dick shot through with more needles than a pincushion. He’d argue with rocks and rocks would win. So yeah, my people figured that maybe there’s something at the back of it all, a creator, a great spirit, and so we say thank you to it, because it’s always good to say thank you. But we never built churches. We didn’t need to. The land was the church. The land was the religion.”

Whiskey Jack is another name for Wisakedjak, who is the only Native character/god/culture hero (he refers to himself as a culture hero, but some of the things I’m finding online refer to him as a god) in the book. Actually, the definition of “culture hero” is kind of…off too (from the paragraph or two right before the above quote):

“I’m a culture hero,” he [Wisakedjak] said. “We do the same shit gods do, we just screw up more and nobody worships us. They tell stories about us, but they tell the ones that make us look bad along with the ones where we came out fairly okay.”

By that definition, there are lot of gods that are “really” culture heroes. The idea of myths portraying deities only in positive ways is kind of a weird one; there are plenty of myths throughout various cultures that don’t necessarily reflect 100% positively on the deities within.

Anyways – the whole speech about there not being gods beforehand is totally false. Some of what he says (there being a “creator spirit” and then other spirits which might or might not be considered deities) is true – for a few tribes. But Native cultures are incredibly varied. There was some degree of mixing between tribes that were close together, but Native cultures are not and never were one monolithic entity. Whiskey Jack’s speech implies otherwise.

There’s also the problem that a lot of information on different Native beliefs is written from a Christian and/or imperialist (I’m not sure if that’s the right word, but there are definite tinges of “their belief system is inferior by definition”) viewpoint, including this little gem – and I quote: “The belief system of the Iroquois was the closest a Native American civilization had come to the complex theology of Christianity.” Cue vomit.

Defining god vs. powerful not-god entity can be a tricky matter anyways, but if you’re factoring in “a long history of persecution and suppression by government and missionaries…misimpressions that Indian religions are quaint curiosities, exotic, strange, or even nonexistent” (1), it becomes particularly complicated, especially for someone outside the belief system who doesn’t entirely grasp all of its nuances. Either way, there were definitely deities being worshiped in North America before non-indigenous peoples moved in, and all of these factors make me wonder where the idea that there weren’t any gods here before originated from.

Another related message/theme/what-have-you is that the gods are different in America than they are in other places. At the end of the book, Shadow goes to Iceland and sees Odin. He basically tells Odin he’s an ass (which, after the events in the book? understandable), and that Odin replies that “He was me, yes. But I am not him.”. However, earlier in the novel when Shadow is talking to Jacquel/Anubis, Anubis says “So yeah, Jesus does pretty good over here. But I met a guy who said he saw him hitchhiking by the side of the road in Afghanistan and nobody was stopping to give him a ride. You know? It all depends on where you are.”. If the gods aren’t the same in different places, that wouldn’t be the same Jesus. (And wouldn’t Jesus be stronger in the middle east, the area from which he came?)

Stay tuned for next week’s post, where I’ll tackle what I see as the second theme of American Gods, also reiterated several times in Sandman, the “oh, poor old forgotten gods, nobody worships them any more” one. I know you’re excited! As always, I look forward to your comments.

1 – quote taken from Encyclopedia of Native American Religions

Fan-freakin-tastic group of links this week!

• 5 Myths About Depression That Annoy the Hell Out of Me
• Why are we willing to pay for fashion magazines, but not blogs? Good question!
• Is outsourcing exploitation? I don’t think this article is perfect, but it makes me really happy that someone is at least thinking/talking about it.
• How to Multitask – When You Have To
• How to get a better night’s sleep.  Kyeli’s tips are some of my tried and true methods.
• for the visually impaired – Alicia’s glasses are awesome & here she talks about where she got them (as well as other glasses-related-rhetoric)
• just a thought: total disclosure.
• Marzipan’s review of the Fire Starter Sessions left me really, really wanting to buy it!
• Eight Things I Don’t Need to Hear From Straight People
• 8 websites you need to stop building
• Threadbared is bringing the win this week with their posts. Body Ink, Sex Kink, and Other Matters of National History is an awesome post. On a similar note, Painted Ladies: On Tats and Trashiness is a good read.

I hope you’re all starting off your week on the right foot! <3

Lately, one of my knees has inexplicably started acting up. This means, among other things (like say, avoiding stairs and steep inclines at all costs!) that wearing heels is, at least right now, a bad idea. I’ve been looking for some cute, comfortable flats for summer, and I thought I’d share my finds with y’all…

I have a serious aversion to open toed sandals. I’m kind of weird about my feet feeling dirty (namely, in that I really do not like it!). I’m also convinced that Austin itself is trying to break me of this aversion with incredibly hot days that make anything except for sandals seem stifling by comparison. Stifled feet or dirty feet, I don’t know which is worse…either way, these Born sandals are cute enough to make me consider wearing them.

These are more like it – open weave flats are a good alternative to sandals without the grime that comes with open toed shoes.

I’m a sucker for shiny shoes. These also come in red, green, copper/bronze, and black. It’s pretty much a toss up between silver and black for me.

I’m not 100% for sure I’d ever actually buy or wear these (not least because they’re the most expensive shoes on ths list by far)…but you can’t deny that they’re awesome!

Princess Poochie requested that I do a post talking a bit more about the pagan religions so she could better understand the Sandman/American Gods series. I’m happy to oblige, so here’s my paganism 101 post! (It might get long. You’re forewarned!)

First off. My definition on paganism might not be the dictionary definition, but it’s a definition from someone on the “inside”. That definition is paganism = a non-Abrahamic religion whose adherents self-identify as pagan. I say self-identify because I don’t think most, say, Hindus call themselves pagan and I think many find the title somewhat insulting. And it sucks to be labelled something without your consent. Most pagan religions are…

• either newer religions (founded within the last 100 years or so, like Wicca, which was created in the 1950s) or attempts at reconstructing or reviving an older pathway (like heathenism, Kemetic reconstructionism, Celtic reconstructionism, etc.). The term “reconstructionist” within paganism means pretty much what it sounds like. A lot of research is done into examining how things were done then, and then the practices are adapted by modern adherents who believe the same thing as their spiritual ancestors.
• Earth centered or animistic in some way.

This is really important: paganism is not one monolithic religion. One pagan does not necessarily have the same beliefs as another pagan. Paganism, rather, is an umbrella term that covers a huge variety of different religions. Under the umbrella of paganism, we have, say, Wicca, a popular example. All Wiccans are pagan, but not all pagans are Wiccan. “Paganism” does not automatically equal “Wiccan” and many pagans will get insulted if you automatically assume they’re Wiccan – which is not necessarily a slight on Wicca, but it would be akin to someone saying “I’m a Christian” and another person replying “Oh! You’re Catholic?!”. Every. Single. Time. It gets old, trust me.

But I digress. Let’s see how different pagan religions can be.

Wicca was created in the 1950s in England by Gerald Gardner. Depending on who you talk to, to be a “real” Wiccan, you need to be initiated into an official coven, or you can be a solitary practitioner who believes in the tenets of Wicca. I would say those tenets are duotheism (all deities are facets of the God or the Goddess), the Rede, and the Law of Three/Law of Return (which basically says, think about your actions because they have reactions, some of which will affect you). Those are pretty hotly debated within the Wiccan community, though – both the basic tenets and the solitary vs. coven issue.

Then there are the aforementioned reconstructionist pagans, and there also are more eclectic pagans who might not work within a specific cultural framework. I would tentatively say that paganism today can probably be split up between eclectic pagans, newer pagan religions (like Wicca or Thelema), and reconstructionist pagan religions.

I would fall under the third category (a reconstructionist/revivalist pagan). I’m a heathen, which is kind of a catch all term for a pagan who worships the old gods of Europe and Scandinavia. That’d be Odin, Freyja, Thor, etc. I prefer the term “heathen” to the term “Asatru”, even though Asatru is the more common term. For several reasons, namely:

• the word “Asatru” is a modern invention
• the word means (or is supposed to mean, I’m not even sure if it’s proper Icelandic) “follower of the Aesir” or “one true to the Aesir”. The Norse deities are comprised of two tribes, the Aesir and the Vanir. There is, in my opinion, a tendency within modern heathenism to focus overmuch on the Aesir and ignore the Vanir (which is reflected in a lot of fiction about these deities, too…). So, given that and given that the deity I’m currently closest with is a Vanir, I’m not really comfortable with that title.
• Finally, there are a few unsavory, in my opinion, individuals that run groups with “Asatru” in the title or on their main page, and I don’t want to be associated with them.

For more discussion on the different terms for heathenism and why some people refer one term over another, check here.

My beliefs in a nutshell:

I’m a hard polytheist. “Soft” polytheism is when a person interacts with the gods as individuals but thinks they’re all part of some greater “god” or “force” – facets of it, if you will. A hard polytheist, like me, feels that all of the gods are distinct individuals. This means I also believe that, say, Zeus or Brigid or Thoth or Quetzalcoatl exists, I just don’t necessarily work with them.

I’m also an animist. Quoth Wikipedia: Animism is a philosophical, religious or spiritual idea that souls or spirits exist not only in humans but also in animals, plants, rocks, natural phenomena such as thunder, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment. In heathenism, these spirits are generally referred to as “wights” or “vaettir” (they’re different forms of the same word). A very large part of heathenism is showing respect for the local land wights – some people put more emphasis on this and ancestor veneration than on interaction with deities. For me, it’s more like the wights are my close neighbors – interaction with them on a daily basis is a fact of life, so it’s certainly a good idea to be on good terms. The gods are like friends from out of town who don’t stop by “in person” every day. Ancestor veneration is also important – we feel that our ancestors watch out for us and since we wouldn’t be here without them, we make sure to remember and honor them.

That covers the very basics – an in depth overview could take ages! If you want to learn more about my beliefs in specific, I’ll be happy to answer questions in the comments, or you can check out this website for a lot of links/information. I will give you a heads up and say that when looking for information online, there’s a good chance you’ll run into a racist group at some point. They are very unfortunately out there, but don’t represent the heathen community as a whole.

I’m pretty out of touch as far as online sources for general paganism information go, but there’s a few books that look good and have good reviews: Which Witch is Which?, Paganism: An Introduction to Earth Centered Religions, and Drawing Down the Moon. You should be able to find one or all of these at a local library (don’t forget about interlibrary loan). If not, they’re easily ordered online through Amazon, or can probably be ordered through most book stores.

When reading about paganism, you need to have a good BS detector. There is a lot of crap out there. This is one reason to read as much as you can – you’ll get a knack for which authors are full of it, which ones tend to be a mix of good and bad, and which ones are generally trustworthy. One rule of thumb? Lewellyn, an…alternative? publishing house, is not known for great scholarship or accuracy, and most of the stuff they publish (with a few exceptions) is crap. I would personally avoid most things that label themselves “new age”, as well, but that is coming from someone not interested in eclecticism and whose beliefs are fairly old age

So! There’s my overview. Like I said, kind of long, but what can ya do, right? If you have any questions, I’ll be happy to answer them in the comments.

I know people get really touchy when you talk about their favorite artists, so let me say ahead of time: I like Gaiman’s work, for the most part. I think he’s a good writer. However, after doing a lot of thinking about it, I also think there are issues in some of his work that I haven’t seen explored anywhere and so I’d like to take that opportunity to put on a miner’s cap and explore them myself!

This will be a three part series, with spoilers for American Gods and Sandman throughout – so feel free to avoid if you haven’t read them. This post serves as an intro to the series (as you may have guessed by the title!). The next post will be about what I consider one of the main themes of American Gods – that there were no deities in America before non-indigenous people moved here/that America is a bad land for gods. The third post will deal with another theme of American Gods that’s also recurring in Sandman; that nobody worships the old forgotten gods any more and that not being worshiped makes them weak.

One of the reasons I want to talk about this is because Neil Gaiman has a huge pagan fanbase (well, given the size of the community, anyways – I’ve seen American Gods referred to as required pagan reading). Aside from the fact that he writes dark fantasy, I can’t really figure out why this is so. Non-Christian deities make frequent appearances in his work, but they are often not treated very respectfully. As far as I’m aware, the only times pagans have been depicted in his work weren’t exactly positive – there’s a character in Sandman who mentions she “dabbled” in Wicca, as opposed to another character that has real power and is taken seriously. There’s also a waitress in American Gods who identifies as pagan, but when asked who Eostre is, says she doesn’t do that Christian stuff. Which is a pretty insulting – knowing the pagan origins of Easter is a fairly 101 topic. When the topic came up in the comments of a recent Juggler post, another commenter, Hamish, said:

I’m stunned more of you aren’t offended. You guys do realize that the empty-headed Pagan woman at the cafe who’s never heard of Ostara was meant to stand in for *us,* right – to suggest we have no idea who the gods are, and that our worship is empty and useless?

Gaiman clearly at some point in the novel’s conception realized that the existence of modern Pagans put a crimp in his meticulously-built world. Rather than modify his premise, he tried a lazier approach as an author. By mocking us with an atrocious straw Pagan, he preserved the integrity of his world by attacking us.

Obviously, I can’t say that that’s exactly how it went down – but I think it’s an interesting thing to think about. Of course, Wednesday/Odin later reveals that the waitress literally killed a kitten because she wanted to “bury something”, so the waitress as an example of paganism is…not a great one.

So – now you’ve got an idea of what the next few posts will be like and what they’ll cover. Look out for the next installment later this week or next week. Hope you enjoy!

• Reader Request: Making Uncomfortable Shoes Wearable. Why thank you, Sal, this is a great post! (Speaking of uncomfortable shoes, I am finally selling my Fluevog Sigourneys on eBay. Because wearing them makes my toes numb. And I have finally accepted that even though it didn’t happen the first time I wore them, they are essentially unwearable for me. Anyways, check ‘em out if you’re a size seven.)
• Problems vs. Perception
• The Pursuit of Nappiness: Why it’s not “Just Hair”
• When Making a Profit Feels Greedy and Selfish
• DIY Glitter Brogues – best idea ever!
• Ask Havi: Business Advice

I hope you all had great weekends! Mine was kind of crap, I won’t lie. Maybe this week will make up for it? I can cross my fingers!

I’m going to be completely honest with you guys. I’m struggling with the direction of Wicked Whimsy, pretty hardcore – I’m a little burnt out on style and fashion related writing, although I’m still interested in it personally…I just feel like I have nothing interesting to say about it right now. But I’m not sure I want to entirely change the content of the blog, just because I feel like I’d be cheating everyone who signed up for a mostly fashion and personal style blog!

I feel like WW has suffered, probably pretty obviously, because I don’t know what to write about or what you want to read. Some of the topics I’ve considered is more posts on cultural appropriation, things in the media (television and comics/novels), business, religion, spirituality, and more – but I know some of these are hot button issues, which means I could very well get twitchy about writing them, let alone having responses to them. So please, if you would in the comments, let me know what it is you want to read about right now or would like to see more posts on. If for some reason you don’t want to leave a comment, you can fill out an anonymous survey here. I very much appreciate your input as a reader – thank you so much!

I wore this last week to meet up with some newfound friends! Man, I love Twitter, yes I do.

• Farylrobin Visby boots – it has mostly gotten way too hot for me to wear my beloved Fluevog engineer boots. They’ve taken quite the beating this winter. This was kind of my last stand as far as boots go, I think, I probably need to get some nice flats. (I can’t wear the flat sandals, I get too grossed out at the idea of how dirty my feet would be…)
• Target pencil skirt
• Target tank top, diy bleach striped
• Secondhand…H&M, I want to say? lace top off eBay
• Secondhand necklace from that store I used to work at in Joplin

I love that lace top. It doesn’t add a ton of bulk, but it’s cut in a very flattering way and is a nice way to cover up a tank top.

Which brings me to a thought: I saw one of those ridiculous image memes within the last few weeks or so that was an image of someone holding a card. The card said “Please…don’t wear clothes that show your fat rolls, show your bra straps in public, or (insert something else obnoxious, I forgot). Signed, the Public.”

I hate that crap. I won’t even touch the fat rolls one, because I’m sure someone else could do it more eloquently, but seriously, effing bra straps? Are you kidding me? I don’t worry about my bra straps showing in public, you want to know why?

• Because that is ridiculous and the sight of a bra strap never hurt anyone.
• Because I wear a 34DDDD. Most of the bras I can find in my size look something like a dowdy horse’s harness. Not all of them, but most. Seriously, they have more coverage than the average swimsuit. If I was to try and keep the entirety of my bra covered at all times, it would involve wearing ridiculous clothes in the summer. PSA: It gets up to 105-110 F on a fairly regular basis in the summer here. I will wear whatever keeps me coolest as long as it’s legal.
• Because, seriously y’all? If you don’t like my clothes, then don’t look at them. Wow! Problem solved!

I’m really sick of people acting like what anyone wears is The Public’s business, because someone Might Get Offended (by the sight of – gasp – human bodies!). I know this is probably not a popular stance for someone interested in fashion, but really. To paraphrase Ben Franklin (just kidding! that quote is usually attributed to Voltaire, though in all likelihood was first used by Evelyn Beatrice Hall writing about Voltaire, check out my google skills), I might not like what you’re wearing, but I will defend to my death the right to wear it and not get harassed by patronizing assholes about it.

The end.