Seasons of Rebellion: Kitsch-Wicca and Pseudo-Traditional Witchcraft - Written by Equanimous Rex

 

Seasons of Rebellion: Kitsch-Wicca and Pseudo-Traditional Witchcraft 

Written by Equanimous Rex, A.A.O.

As the seasons shift steadily away from the darkest days of Winter, putting the solstice behind us, a new Spring itches to burst from the earth. I catch myself contemplating that the older I've gotten, the more I find a sort of peace in the seasonal cycles, the more I find myself celebrating the Neo-Pagan so-called Wheel of the Year holidays. Ostara is right around the corner, but not nearly close enough. A pandemic rages, silent against the backdrop of frozen nature. I can almost feel the plants beneath the snow, craving their organic explosion once more. I feel in tune with the cycles, and seasons, the ebb and flow. How did this happen? For when I originally became interested in Occultism, not only was I not particularly interested in the seasonal shift, but I would have never been caught dead espousing a celebration of something like a Neo-Pagan holiday. Why? 

As a practicing occultist, for many years I shunned what I saw as the Neo-Pagan trappings and aesthetics. I had no interest in their holidays, in the gift-shop-chic qualities of their ritual tools, in their New Agey and wooly anti-intellectualism, or the Renaissance fair-esque garb one so often sees them in. For many years, I interacted with Neo-Paganism with impatience at best, despite having so many friends and acquaintances within the community. I had the stark image in my mind of supreme kitsch, velveteen robes, and tacky knick-knacks. An overzealous and overconfident young man, I deemed Neo-Paganism, and the New-Age and Neo-Wiccan practices that made up so much of it, as irredeemable. I was reacting to what I saw as a soulless commercialization of spirituality, and identified this soulless commercialization as being identical to the aesthetic surrounding witchcraft and modern Paganism. It would be fair to say I was decently prejudiced against these belief systems, for their apparent "selling-out", for a lack of depth, for a level of unironic dorkiness, and so on and so forth. As such, for many years I threw the baby out with the bathwater. 

There were many different ways to approach the Occult circa 2009, when I first became interested in the topic, but not that many digital forums to discuss it with others —or not as many as exist today— and as such many different sorts of folks who otherwise would have very little in common with one another ended up amalgamating in the same cyberspaces. This was my first exposure to not only the Occult subculture in general, but also the esoteric-exoteric split between the communities who also congregated in those same spaces. Occultists of any stripe ended up interacting with individuals who were religious, but had no interest in the mysteries or mysticism, or in exploratory or experimental practice. Exoteric Neo-Pagans, often derelicts abandoned or rejected by Christianity, but seeking a new religion to fill the gap. Or, New Agers, with their crystals and snake-oil cures for cancer, rejected by everyone except the most accepting, banding together in these spaces. Occultists of even non-Neo-Pagan varieties ended up settling in some sense into the space left by the exoteric Neo-Pagans for the esoterically inclined. 

The influence of New Ageism on Neo-Wicca, and the subsequent rise of exoteric Neo-Pagans, and the profitableness of the commercialization of these things, inevitably lead to the rise of what I always think of as "kitsch-wiccans". While, in my older age, I am less judgemental of other people's personal tastes —especially when it doesn't affect me at all— and do not hold so much youthful animosity towards these "kitsch-wiccans", and even perhaps find a bit of charm in it, despite that it offends my personal sensibilities. But the reaction that I had would go on to later be echoed by witches in the next decade, ultimately culminating in its own schism from Neo-Wiccans to “traditional witchcraft”.

By "traditional witchcraft", I mean Neo-Traditional witchcraft, a term that ought not to have any sense to it, but which does anyway. A response to the "kitsch-wiccan" aesthetic I reference above which was born from the synthesis of New-Ageism and Neo-Wicca commercialization, "Neo-Traditional witchcraft" represents an attempt for those identifying as witches to set themselves apart from Wiccans and other Neo-Pagans by appealing to pre-Wiccan practices, by appealing to "ancient and traditional practices". Similar to how, to establish credentials of sorts, Wicca-founder Gerald Gardner utilized the mythical New Forest coven, and his presuppositions regarding witchcraft as remnants of a pre-Christian, matriarchal religion —known as the Witch-Cult hypothesis, an anthropological hypothesis since debunked but popular in Gardner’s time, and still popular to this day among many Wiccans— to assert authority. An appeal to the past, to ancient practices, as a way to legitimize one's new practices in a new age. 

Just as the wave of "gritty reboots" filled the cinemas and online streaming services, so too did witchcraft undergo a cultural "gritty reboot", and what came about was called "traditional witchcraft", what I have deemed Neo-Traditional witchcraft. No more ancient in most ways than anything related to Wicca or Pre-Internet 2.0 witchcraft subcultures, but certainly trying to brand itself that way. It would be far more accurate to call the movement of “traditional witchcraft” something like “folkloric witchcraft”, “primordial witchcraft”, or “perennial witchcraft” depending on how it is practiced. The supposition of “traditional witchcraft” in the sense of an unbroken spiritual lineage instead of a sort of recurring motif and theme —and the social effects of embodying such a motif—  is unfounded. Unlike many other spiritual and esoteric traditions, including folk-magic practices often called witchcraft, witchcraft itself is overarching and ephemeral, mercurial in a way that reflects the folkloric influence over how it is perceived. 

While this marks a genuine departure from Neo-Wiccanized and New-Age inspired witchcraft aesthetics and practices in the greater Neo-Pagan subculture, it is fair to say most things being sold as "traditional" witchcraft are not traditional in any meaningful sense, and it is more akin to a marketing gimmick. That is, much of it is gleaned from folklore and pop-cultural ideas of what witches traditionally were or did, rather than any specific practices being genuinely traditional. It is, however, still witchcraft, since functional witchcraft doesn't particularly care much for exact historical accuracy and manages to remain functional in the total lack of historical accuracy. Neo-Traditional witchcraft suffers from the same anachronisms of their Renn faire Neo-Pagan predecessors, many modern conceptions of things like witchcraft being fuzzy amalgamations of aesthetic and vague beliefs —no matter how punk rock they make you feel. The aesthetics of older Neo-Pagans, along with their personal revelations, mystery cults, secret societies, ideologies, and so forth were already wildly popular in the digital Occult communities by the time I managed to get online, and they had already begun to fade out of fashionableness and popularity. The younger and edgier occultists often chose other ways of framing their worldview, and experiences.

It’s worth noting that what I call Neo-Traditional witchcraft should also not be mistaken for genuinely traditional folk-magical practices that span the world over, many originally designated witchcraft by Christians. These folk-magical systems are often touted as traditional witchcraft, but are not what I speak of above. The nuances of the anthropology and history of witchcraft is a messy, tangled one. 

In a very real sense, there is no witchcraft other than what is deemed witchcraft, except these days Neo-Pagans and witches themselves have decided to label things as such, taking it from the hands of the churches and priests. It is a confluence of both self-labeling, and being labeled, and in the collective "mythic-mind" of culture, it is comprised both of the "taken-upon" (by modern witches) and the "put-upon" (by others onto those they deem witches). The taken-upon and the put-upon have thin boundaries, as so often it is the put-upon which functions in lore, stories, urban myths, superstition, and so forth. The put-upon is often the route of intrigue that individuals follow before ever appointing themselves a witch, and only as a witch capable of taking-upon particular definitions or designations, or performing particular practices. So the very concept of witchcraft is a shifting, difficult to pin-down thing, comprising both mythic and folkloric remnants and modern innovations and inventions. 

It is also important to say that this is besides the point in regard to whether or not this witchcraft functions, how it functions, or why it functions. There is still an element of appeal-to-ancient-practices, but the fallaciousness of this appeal does not directly impede the usefulness of the overall systems that engage with it. The problems an appeal-to-ancient-practice method of establishing authority present are, however, numerous and well-documented for a variety of practical reasons. It is a powerful myth, and as such, dangerous and oft implemented by those with regressive or authoritarian impulses. The intrinsic conservatism of appealing-to-ancient-practices, especially when "ancient" is conflated with "best", is a topic for another time. 

One's aesthetic in the Occult community is almost as important as their -ism. Whether Satanist, Neo-Pagan, Wiccan, Heathen, Chaoist, Gnostic, Buddhist, Daoist, and so forth, each finds power in their own collection of associations, tools, symbols of power, and garb. This is a practical phenomena, and should not be confused as signs of insincerity or lack of depth. It is true that the trappings of any belief system can be boiled down, commercialized, turned into a series of collectible mugs. Just as it is true that a ritual practiced without the core internal states necessary for them to work may be done lacking any spirit, any personal 'oomph', that any ritual itself may be empty, and are so often empty when people perform them. Just as an artist or actor may replicate the outward manifestation of sincerity so as to convince the audience, while feeling no real love or fear at the base of their soul. 

The fact that certain belief systems become widespread and commercialized is not really a mark against their symbols, or ideas, because the reduction of the system into "empty" gewgaws, into monetarily vampiric timesucks, is possible anywhere there is mass-interest and profit to be made. Periodically, a movement or sub-culture will rebrand itself, reimagine itself, as a way to shake off the presuppositions of culture, carving out a different niche to inhabit in the desire for liberation. This is the compulsion that drives sub-cultural reboots, such as in the case of "Neo-Traditional witchcraft", the faux-traditionalism is practically not the point of the aesthetic schism, nor is the faux-traditionalism a core component to the aesthetic schism, as many have already dropped the appeal-to-ancient-practices and instead taken up a sincerity towards genuineness, or what they perceive as genuineness, as a contrast to the commercialized, New-Agey Neo-Paganism of their predecessors. 

Uncomfortable to wield dragon-handled athames purchased from "metaphysical shoppes" are being replaced by rusted and well-used scythes, polished crystal skulls for potted plants and intricate terraria, and while not entirely true, this becomes true more and more often. While easy to dismiss this phenomena as silly or superficial, and while acknowledging that everything that can be consumed into the commercialization machine will be, I think it would be folly not to note the rebellion in this phenomena. 

While the constant shifting of aesthetics and fashionableness can and does so often appear to lack any depth, it is obvious that it also serves a functional purpose— namely, to push back at the great devouring commercial machine. Indeed, it pushes back against this machine just as often as it seeks to endear itself to the self-same machine, for where there are niches to be carved out, there is money to be made. A mix of sincerity and authenticity, of fashionableness and superficiality, of rebellion and conformity. A sub-culture such as that of witches must intrinsically be capable of paradox, and the ability to be multifaceted. 

A major shifting point was, I believe, that witches felt like nobody was taking them seriously. Which, in their defense, I don't think anyone was. The gritty reboot phase of modern witchcraft was in part a push-back against the commercialization of New-Ageism / Neo-Wicca synthesis, as much as it was an assertion of themselves back into the real world of spirituality, a world where things matter, where belief has consequences, and where feet are stamped down. Common tropes included memes that spread through social media about how modern witches were in fact, quite scary, but empowered. It is perhaps important to note that many of these "gritty reboot" witches were born or cognizant of reality in a post-Satanic Panic era, or are those who do not have to be too worried about the repercussions of presenting themselves as dangerous, either due to the tolerance of those in their geographical location, or due to their own affluence. 

At any rate, the presentation of witches by witches as sexy, dangerous, and mysterious —and the tie-in to a perceived “more traditional” type of witchcraft—is certainly a response to the inverse motivation of their immediate predecessors who sought societal affirmation and as such defanged and softened their presence and aesthetic. A response to the so-called “love and light” crowd. Where their predecessors sought to endear themselves to a tolerant society, and become accepted as "normal", have their belief system accepted as "normal", the path of this new brand of witchcraft is more often seen embracing a "darker" aesthetic, an edgier aesthetic that has tie-ins to how witches are perceived via media like horror movies, folklore, and campfire tales. This re-appropriation of the witch as a symbol to fear and respect is juxtaposed between re-appropriating the symbol of the witch as being genuinely connected to the land. While exceptions abound for all of these points, such as the crystal commodification reeking of New Ageism (and social and environmental damage caused by such) still present in "Neo-Traditional witchcraft", and such as the Instagramification of "aesthetics" of power and darkness in relation to witchcraft, there is still at the roots a genuine desire made manifest to reject aspects of witchcraft and Neo-Paganism found in earlier adherents. The appeal to “tradition” a misguided attempt to achieve legitimacy in the eyes of others. 

Indeed, though there are elements of the 'regressive' in relation to Golden-Age fallacies, of claims to "ancient practices'' with the conflation of "ancient being best", the very symbol of the witch is one so steeped in social rejection, and in transgressive practices, that this intrinsic pseudo-traditionalism is hardly as widespread a facet of the aesthetic schism as one might expect. In a charitable view, one could see this attempt at a not only pre-Christian perennial folk magical practice, but a pre-Neo-Wiccan, pre-New-Age one as well, as an attempt to reclaim our ties to such nebulous concepts such as Nature, and the various cycles within it. To the ebb and flow of life and death, for us, for the co-arising webs of ecological interdependence, and for the seasons. Not so much an attempt to truly embody an "ancient as best, tradition as best" mindset —especially since there is so little genuine history or tradition involved, as much as folkloric pseudo-history— as much as a radical attempt to reconnect with the parts of reality that modern civilization seeks to trivialize and cover-up with commercialized knick-knacks and pseudo-spiritual gewgaws. It is no surprise that the shift incorporates such things as making your own ritual tools out of what you have available, a rough-shod edge to the whole operation, a replacing the individual as passive consumer into empowered creative, artist of their own witchcraft. It is also no surprise that the vast majority of these “new witches” see challenging the status quo as part of being a witch, part of what it means to practice witchcraft. 

As such, it is clear that the seasons may cycle, but just as assuredly do human proclivities shift and warp. The change of witchcraft aesthetic from harmless New-Age hippy into an ancient practitioner of dangerous maleficium is akin to the shifting of the leaves upon a tree going from winter to spring, or summer to autumn. Just like Gardnerian Wicca relied upon claims to an ancient practice for spiritual legitimacy, so too we will —and do see— the shift from "Neo-Traditional witchcraft" into its component parts sans any feelings of propriety over ancient and mystical traditions. That is, the "Neo-Traditional" viewpoint can be seen as a sort of embryonic sheathing, the witch-symbol too volatile to harbor any sincere regressivism for long. I do not expect the term to last very long, as individuals involved realize that tradition has no place for them, and indeed has cast them as an eternal, archetypal bogeyman haunting "acceptable society". The posturing of this new kind of witchcraft as, in fact, an ancient kind of witchcraft, merely a temporary vehicle with which to make sense of the underlying movement, having nothing to support itself on top of, and little to maintain it. Rather than traditional, it is the reaching out for something similar but harder to pin-down— the perennial. But just as the perennial can be approached through a plethora of methods both old and new, so too do we see this rebranding rebellion against Neo-Wicca is not really about adhering to stuffy tradition as much about re-appropriating folkloric power-symbols and archetypes. 

In a more honest sense, we can see that the so-called "traditional witches" are merely trying to exorcise the influence of commercialized "kitsch-wicca", to banish it into the nether, to limit its influence over themselves and future witches. Given that in some sense the "traditional" role of the witch is interloper, outcast, apostate, it would be more appropriate to call it "primordial witchcraft" or “perennial witchcraft” at the core. An attempt to place the individual and collective back into a place of relation with the natural, social, and spiritual world. 

I contemplate these things while watching the season slowly shift itself from the cold and dark, into the bright and warm. I expect new plants will be sprouting in the coming months, a cycle of rebirth and renewal, because they have done this before and will do so again. The archetype of the witch, being so caught up in these kinds of natural processes, must itself undergo constant change, growth, blooming, and dying. What we conceive of as divine or sacred, mundane or profane, are just as much a part of our own natural processes as those of aging and eventually dying. Our practices, our holidays, our rituals, all part of a larger web of interconnected parts. Say what you will of this new kind of witch, these rebels caught between their own penchant for self-commodification and commercialization and their rebellion against the kitschy-soft predilection of their immediate forebears, but they've got me celebrating holidays again. Got me wondering just whether the witchcraft movement is truly dead, its body divvied up and sold off to the highest bidder, or whether it truly is, as it says on the tin, a primordial —if not exactly traditional, not that this fact bothers me personally— phenomena. For an entire generation of individuals, they will be what is thought of when people utter the words "witchcraft". Not merely velveteen robes and dragon-handled gift shop athames, but something more. Something living and breathing. Something that demands recognition, empowerment, and depth. 

The seasons change, leaves drop, and are grown again.