#the references in number 5 are more superficial but the vibes feel similar and number 5 being about the military (ish) also ties back

[kustas]

your post abt the little prince is so real the emotions caused by the death in that book was so shocking when I was a little kid its stuck with me for years, later on ive now been to the little prince museum and it was magical, and the netflix movie is lame as hell

I remember seeing the "story" segments of that film (as in, the actual little prince moments) and being pleasantly surprised by the style they used, which is reminescent enough of the original, keeping the iconic designs and their charm but new enough to stand out, not feel like a copy, with its own style which is a lovely one. I have not seen the film, so my point of view cannot be perfectly accurate, but it seems to be doing this trope of "adding backstory to a simple tale" (à la 2012 Lorax Onceler) which I really dislike - it's simply unnecessary. There's nothing bad about a simple story. Why not just make a short, stop motion animation based on the book?

But in the case of the little prince and how the original writes about death - this is a book written and illustrated by an aviator in the middle of WWII, which features a stranded aviator as a POV character. The movie decided to make him part of its new invented segments now as an old man retelling the tale of the prince, so it seems. It's hard to not draw parallels between the aviator of the original book and it's author, and to think his life experiences influenced the philosophy of it. From the film, making the aviator into an old man was a poor choice to handle the original, because Saint-Ex died in his plane a year after the book was written. Looking up the film to answer this ask made me discover something I did not know, which is that it's an insanely popular book known around the world, so at this point, it might be that the international fame of the story trumps the context behind it. Still, something that feels like an oversight coming from a film adaptation...

Looking back I think I hated this book as a kid because it overwhelmed me, and I wasn't yet equipped to process what it made me feel. I'd love to reread it. Where is the museum you are talking about? If it's in my country I might come and visit. And dig up my copy if I still have it :)

[estfortis]

Book Review: You Are Magical, By Tess Whitehurst

“There is an infinite number of types of magic, and now there is even one more: your magic.” 

Whitehurst opens her ninth book by sharing a letter her mother wrote to her before she was born, reminding the future author, “Don’t be forgetting the magic.” The opening chapters read as if Whitehurst herself were attempting to write a similar letter to her readers, telling us that “Every musician’s music has its own expression and aesthetic signature. Your magic is no different.” She then ends the chapter with a series of journaling prompts designed to help the reader connect with their sense of magic and mystery in the world. Subsequent chapters have other assignments -- some written, some applied -- for a new practitioner of magic to ease into the craft. 

This book has a lot of features that I really like. It is extremely positive, with an upbeat, encouraging, and conversational tone that makes the topic very approachable, especially for new and exploring witches/other magical practitioners. Indeed, the author never calls the readers witches, except to say that some people identify as such -- so it feels safer for someone who isn’t ready to label themselves as anything. The author also emphasizes the idea that we are all connected to everything else, including the force or energy that causes magic to work. She refers to this force throughout the book as “All That Is,” and the fact that we are all connected to it means that we all have the potential to be and to work magic -- in other words, there is no lineage or ‘special something’ that anyone needs to be able to do magic, beyond the desire to tap into that energy. There’s no gate-keeping here. Finally, the author reminds the reader throughout that things may look different for them than the way she is explaining it, and the spells and rituals include reminders that they can be adapted or used for alternate purposes, as the practitioner feels is appropriate. The spells include a self-initiation rite, which includes just a few “ingredients” and is a lovely idea for self-validation. I am one of those witches who, early on, didn’t know the difference between Wicca and other forms of witchcraft, and was quite hung up on the idea that “It takes a Wiccan to make a Wiccan,” so the idea of self-initiation feels very refreshing and empowering to me. 

I do, of course, have some critiques as well. Beyond the token mention of other cultural practices (and what seems to be an emphasis on ancient cultures over living ones), the overall flavor is a sort of generic New Age vibe -- until you get to the spells section. One spell invokes the Hindu goddess Lakshmi, with little explanation of her place in the tradition, why the author chose to invoke her instead of a different deity of prosperity, or really any wider context. This feels uncomfortable and potentially appropriative to me, though since I am not from the Indian subcontinent nor am I culturally or religiously Hindu, I don’t know the ins and outs of who can or should call on those deities. Overall the way deities are handled in the book feels superficial and uncomfortable to me, without any emphasis on knowing who the deities are in their cultural context or what kind of privilege the practitioner in question might have while borrowing from various cultures. I don’t know that I would necessarily label it appropriative across the board, but it did feel like the author might not have examined her social position before borrowing bits and pieces from other cultures. This is a problem in the pagan community at large, and this book is clearly a product of that (sub)cultural milieu, so I simultaneously want to hold the author to a higher standard (because she has a bigger platform than most of us) and also not target her more than any other authors or big names in the witch world who are equally or more problematic.

The other particular critique I had was the emphasis put on the so-called “polarities” of masculine and feminine. I do not believe that masculine and feminine are opposites, for one, and the particular traits assigned to each feel superficial and frankly old fashioned. Whitehurst writes that “All is one at its core, and it manifests in the world as divine masculine and feminine polarities...the divine masculine, the cosmos, and the unmanifest potentiality... the divine feminine, the earth, and all that we perceive through our senses.” The divine masculine is further defined as the active principle and the feminine as receptive. That just feels very archaic to me and I was a little disappointed to see it further reified in this book. 

A final piece that I was unimpressed with was the statement that curses and hexes are always wrong. The author pretty specifically says that curses are always unethical and that if someone feels the need to do magic that doesn’t “align with the highest and truest good of all” then it’s their ego speaking. This, to me, is the same as saying that violence is never ok, even in self defense. There is no black and white in life, much less in magic, so I was a little disappointed in that lack of nuance. Fair enough to say that you don’t believe in curses and so aren’t sharing any in this book without saying the only reason to do so is “because you were so convinced of your own separation and smallness.” 

In sum, I’d say that this book may be a nice place to start for someone who is very new to magic but has a good critical lens through which to read. I haven’t found many books on witchcraft or magic that I would recommend without reservation, so this one isn’t particularly notable in that sense. Honestly, the feeling I was left with overall is that this book was fine with some problematic places, but mostly just unoriginal. There didn’t seem to be much that was said that hasn’t been published in several other books before, and it made me wonder why the author chose to write this particular book at this particular time. I haven’t read any of her other work so can’t compare, but it seems curious that a well-published author would come out with something this, well, basic this late in their career. 

Final assessment - 3/5 stars. Wait til it’s at the public library before you invest.