(no subject)

[felis_ultharus]

In other news, there are apparently 40,000 Greek Reconstructionists living in Greece, at least according to the organization that represents them. Greek Reconstructionists are people who are trying to bring back a modernized, updated-for-the-21st-century version of the ancient Greek religion.

If those numbers are accurate (and they are comparable to growth of neo-Pagan faiths throughout the West), then that means 40,000 Greeks -- or 0.4% of the population -- have returned to Zeus, Apollo, Athena, Aphrodite, and the others.

I predict they're going to be accused of being "inauthentic", as any kind of neo-Pagan group invariably is. Which always raises the twin questions for me of a) what's "authenticity" in religion -- how is it measured? and b) what would the original Christians hiding in their catacombs think of modern Catholics, Baptists, United Church members, Pentecostals, etc?

The Greek Reconstructionist organization was recently refused the right to build a temple in Athens. I wonder if the style would have original or modern? Marble must be expensive these days.

Comments

[greekcub.livejournal.com]

Given how much of procrastinators we Greeks are, I'm surprised they found time to actually ask to build a temple.

One would think they could claim the right to use the Parthenon or Temple of Olympian Zeus :-)

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

That would be rather neat, actually.

[foi-nefaste.livejournal.com]

Do you think, though, that, as pagans, we're appropriating the Greek pagans' voices and cultural identity? That we're promoting a system of institutionalized discrimination? That we're only Pagan because we're riddled with guilt over historic offenses towards all people who aren't lilly-white?

... and yes, how can you tell that I'm still annoyed over That Class?

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

I don't think even your professor could complain in this case, as the neo-Pagans in this case are, themselves, Greek ;)

As for "appropriation of voice," it does make me nervous. There's something a little frightening about saying that ideas can't be allowed to cross cultures. Ideas have always crossed cultures, always mixed, fused, changed forms in transit.

It frightens me that Western ideas can cross the boundary, but no ideas are allowed to come back the other way -- no one ever worries that Western Anglo voices are "appropriated".

In practical effect, those who worry about "appropriation of voice" seem to want a culture where Western Anglo culture remains intact, while exporting those ideas to others. After all, if we can't borrow ideas from others, it means we have to come up with something totally original, or stick with what we have.

How different is that, in practical effect, than Victorian England's view of a white culture that had remain pure, and be imposed on others.