An adult education student has been charged with threatening to burn his English teacher a day after asking her if she was a witch.

Darin Najor's class at Taft Education Center in Ferndale, Mich., had been studying Arthur Miller's 1953 play "The Crucible," the Detroit Free Press and The Daily Tribune of Royal Oak reported Wednesday.

The play is based on the 1692 Salem witch trials that saw about 20 people hanged.

Apparently Najor has a problem with that play...

Najor, 20, had asked the teacher on Sept. 10 if she believed in witchcraft. She told him she didn't, and said Miller's play really was about unjust persecution, Ferndale police told The Daily Tribune.

Najor then tossed his homework on the classroom floor "and declared it was all blasphemy," detective Ken Denmark told The Daily Tribune.

"The next day he came up behind her chanting what sounded like religious verses while she was working at her desk," Denmark said.

Some type of liquid was poured on her head. He also had a cigarette lighter and wanted to, in his words, "burn the witch," Denmark added.

Najor also said he was trying to purify her with holy water, Denmark said.

Okay, so...the play is about the Salem Witch Trials, which (indeed!) happened, during a particularly unhinged period in Christendom, and...the stupid man took that as an attack on his faith, and...

God, what the hell is wrong with him?!

Like, if it had been Romeo & Juliet would he have gone into an absolute panic telling the teacher not to take the poison because OMG Romeo isn't going to get the message in time and he's going to OMG kill himself?

Or is he just an unhinged wingnut fundamentalist?

(I pick "B.")

(h/t Ed Brayton)

Each act of love foreshadows the end

On the seventh night
I think of love potions,
magic draughts to harness his passion,
curl my breath in his ear.

Spells counsel caution:
beware henbane, mandrake and monkshood;

to wake desire,
rosewood, heliotrope, a lock of hair
buried beneath a waxing moon.

Scent squares of silk with your skin,
harvest lavender, ginseng and jasmine.
Collect the tears that fall for your lover,
add honey, cloves and cinnamon.

Hail the Great Mother, the Shining One,
with equal measures of blood and brine.

Thirteen drops in a chalice of wine.
The philtre will bind you a year and a day.

Back to Sexy-Witch, I'm a bit surprised that Circe didn't show up but maybe she's just in backlog.

There is a Circe who was the enemy of Wonder Woman - she showed up in Justice League Unlimited. Still, all sexy witches owe the mythical Circe a lot.

Take a look at the photograph of the White Witch of Narnia from the Image of the Muse website. I tend to think the villainess in movies and books are more interesting that the heroine. As the blogger of Other Kids Pack Lunch puts it, "Like so many villainesses, the White Witch had a great sense of fashion."

Here's quiz to find which Disney villainess you are. I was Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty - which is fine by me. She is a bit too austere to be sexy but I loved her tormenting the hero by telling him that he'll get old. Heh. Plus, there was the whole dragon transformation thing.

The Queen in Snow White is also a bit icy but it's hard not to root for her.

Archie's Sabrina the Teenage Witch in her first comic book incarnation is missing as well. Sabrina was lots cooler than either Veronica or Betty and I think her freckles are cute.

Her new mangafied self does not appear particularly sexy but she looks tons more interesting than before.

Illyana Rasputin as Magik -a super-victim if there ever was one. But pretty sexy - if you can look past the horns and glowing eyes.

Scarlet Witch - sexy despite the weird red/pink outfit.  I think maybe she was not using magic but instead was a mutant.

Queen Narcissa, stepmother/queen/witch, of Enchanted is certainly bosomy as the animated character.

Same thing with Frieda, the Stepmother/Witch, in Happily N'Ever After. She was embarrassingly slinky for a kids' cartoon.

There is also Karla from Record of Lodoss War. Whether she qualifies as a witch or not may be arguable. I thought she was sexy in a creepy kind of way.

My ultimate favorite witch is Bunny from Charm School by Elizabeth Watasin which I've mentioned before. I have only read/purchased the first book but it turns out that there are five out now. Yeah! Bunny is the blond witch who is super cute.

The week in fundie:

1. For an example of how it is possible for Catholics to be as demented as the fundiest fundagelicals, look no further than Matt C. Abbott's column on the RenewAmerica* website, "As the 'Obama-nation' nears, priests sound alarm". There you'll hear from Father James Farfaglia, who is unhappy with the recent US bishops' statement, Faithful Citizenship, which counsels "the Church’s leaders [. . .] to avoid endorsing or opposing candidates or telling people how to vote." Farfaglia wants the Church to tell people to vote against Obama and for McCain, because, among other reasons, "McCain will appoint a pro-life Supreme Court justice; Obama will appoint a pro-abortion one." He also speaks highly of Catholic convert, long-time anti-abortion activist and theocrat Randall Terry, who in 1993 said: "I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good.... Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism."You'll also hear a goodly dose of Christian persecution mania from Father Richard Perozich. Jumping at the shadows of government spooks waiting around the corner to clap him in irons for being an ultraconservative Catholic ("we may not be in jail (at least at the moment)"), Perozich accuses the state of "encroaching on our religious beliefs, our freedom by passing laws which indoctrinate us, penalize us for non conformity, and take away our liberty." The chief agents of this anti-Catholic persecution , in his view, are (self-hating?) Catholic politicians who, by not always voting in strict accordance with Catholic dogma, have become "slaves to people with evil ideas" . . . those ideas being "abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual activity." TEH EVIL, you see, infects the souls of individuals who then force teh evil onto everyone else. How, you may ask? Perozich reaches under his cassock and pulls the following theory out of his wrinkled arse: "First evil forms people into groups to organize and express itself. [. . .] Evil then beings to take over in 4 ways: infiltration, indoctrination, intimidation, and imposition." The examples he provides are just priceless:
   

   When we know persons with same sex attractions who have not learned to master chastity, we feel sorry for them. We want them to feel better. They infiltrate by asking for tolerance. They reinvent themselves saying that this is who they are. They indoctrinate with false ideas that they are genetically created this way, that they cannot change, that their sex is just as good as, or even better than, normal people because they don't create overpopulation. They intimidate, calling us bigots, hate-filled people, intolerant. Finally they impose laws forcing us to learn about their sinful lifestyle, to accept it, to take away our freedoms if we don't accept it, to teach this as normal in schools, nursing programs, to celebrate it publicly in parades, schools, and the work place as 'diversity' when in fact it is perversity. [Emphasis added]

   Read the full article to learn more about the INFLITRATE-->INDOCTRINATE-->INTIMIDATE-->IMPOSE strategy is deployed against unsuspecting hard-right Catholics by "unrepetant" woman abortionists and "famous people with diseases" calling for embryonic stem cell research funding.

2. A cursory glance at the headlines reveals that over 26,500 children died around the world today. Climate change may be happening faster than predicted. The global financial crisis has sent stock markets plummeting from Europe to Japan. Meanwhile, the Pope has commenced a marathon Bible reading, in which 1200 people in Rome will take turns "take turns reading from the Bible until all 73 books of the Catholic edition are finished." Religion: the quintessential filler. (Norwich Bulletin)
3. Sherry Jones, author of the historical romance novel The Jewel of Medina, a first-person narrative of Mohammed's favourite wife Aisha, has decided to postpone the UK release of her book and has cancelled a book tour there. Last weekend, the home and premises of the book's UK publisher was the target of a firebomb. (CBC)
4. In the Russian city of Tamboz, officials have banned two gay rights demonstrations, deeming them an "offence to the city's traditions." (TVNZ)
5. Oklahoma State Congresswoman Sally Kern, proof that being a drool-cup fundamentalist is no barrier to high public office in the United States, has declared gay people the biggest threat to the nation. "'While terrorism has killed more than 3,000 people in the continental United States in the last 15 years, homosexual behavior has killed more than 100,000,” the Republican representative said. “It's a danger to life. It is a danger to health.'" (On Top Magazine)
6. A C Grayling and Steve Fuller duke it out over the latter's latest book, a defence of the teaching of ID creationism in the science classroom. (New Humanist)
7. After an argument over Arthur Miller's The Crucible, an adult education student poured what he called "holy water" over his teacher, holding a lighter close to her while chanting religious verses, because he thought she was a witch. (UPI)
8. In Jaipur, India, a woman accused of witchcraft was severely bashed and then forced to pick up a silver coin from a vessel filled with boiling oil. According to one villager, there are ways of telling if a woman is a witch. "Women, whosoever, labelled as a 'witch' by the villagers has to pick a silver coin from a tank filled with boiling oil, with both her hands. If her hands are burnt, her witchhood is confirmed, otherwise she is declared innocent." You think I'm joking, don't you? (The Times of India)

*RenewAmerica a Christian Right organisation founded as a support group for former Republican Presidential Candidate Alan Keyes.

If witches keep evolving their rides while restricted to staying within that family of dry floor-cleaning implements, would the modern young witch of today be saddling up on a Roomba or a Swiffer?

It's laugh or cry time, J-.  My 401k seems stuck firmly in reverse (as of today, year-to-date losses are nearly double the amount of contributions over the same period) -- expected for someone who's got a long road ahead to retirement, I suppose, and whose mix of funds leans aggressive.  But still; it takes a certain suspension of disbelief to think that we sat at work today numbly grateful that we have jobs, even with extra hours, in an economic climate like this.

And yet I remain convinced that there's some other way out of this; the solutions that are being forced on us seem like the motions of a gambling addict throwing one last chip down, put some more money into the situation, that's precisely what we need.  What did you learn the first time feeling a hot stove?

Mike

   Wicca was founded in early to mid-1950's by a man named Gerald Brosseau Gardner. If you ever hear someone say Wicca is an ancient religion, they are lying to you, or they are misinformed. It is based on ancient pagan teachings, but it is not, itself, even a century old. An unofficial contributor to Wicca's birth was a women named Doreen Valiente, and Aleister Crowley was also a beneficial source in the creation of this faith system. Both Gardner, Crowley, and Valiente published books on the subject of witchcraft and Wicca. Wicca was formed as a sort of "spin-off," if you will, of Druidry, a celtic religion that existed more than a thousand years ago. Many of the Wiccan holidays, and indeed, many Christian holidays, actually originated as Druidic holy days and were observed by the majority in the gaelic lands.

The word Wicca originates from the Anglo-Saxon wicce, and meant "to bend", and evolved into the Middle English wicche, or from masculine Old English wicca, meaning "sorceror", or the feminine wicce, meaning "witch." In some circles, Wicce is used for women and Wicca is used for men. It is where the word "witch" comes from as well. However, it is also the origin of the word "wicked." Christians often claim this as proof that the religion is evil, but they are speaking from ignorance.

Commonly Asked Questions about Wicca:

Can people be born Wiccans?

   Nobody is born a religion. Your religious preferences are decisions you make only when you are old enough to understand the implications. Just like people aren't born Christian or Muslim, or Jewish, or Buddhist, or Hindu. You can be born into a family who is Wiccan, but you can't make that decision until you are old enough to make your own choices, and no one can make that choice for you, either. Neither parents nor peers nor any authority figure can make this decision other than you.

Is there a such thing as a hereditary witch?

   No, not in a literal sense. The term "hereditary witch" is designated to people who are born into families of Wiccans or other Pagan faiths who regularly practice magic, but it implies that only certain people who are born with the capabilities can be witches, when the fact is, anyone can use magic. It is not limited to people who come from a magical lineage. If you possess energy in your body, you are capable of magic. It's that simple. The only people who cannot use magic are dead people. Just because some of your ancestors did magic, doesn't make you more special or more powerful. It just means you might know a little more than some other people, in which case, you'd be better off to educate those who do not know as much as you than to try and convince them you're more powerful than they are.

What's the difference between "Wiccans" and "witches?"

   A Wiccan is a person who has acknowledged and accepted laws and practices of the Wiccan religion as their personal belief system. They fully understand the path and faith that they have adopted and do not falter in that. A witch is any person who uses magic. Witchcraft is not a religion. A Wiccan is a witch, and a witch isn't necessarily Wiccan.

Do all Wiccans believe in karma and reincarnation?

   Most, but not all. The most common view of the afterlife for Wiccans is a place called the Summerland, which is like the Christian Heaven. However, all Wiccans believe in the three-fold law, which is one of the basic rules of Wicca, and is very much like karma.

Are Covens and Churches the same thing?

   In essence, yes. The word "church" is dated to before 12th century, derived from the Middle English "chirche," and from Old English "cirice," and means "a building for a public divine worship." The term is not singular to Christianity, meaning that any house of worship can be refered to as a church. Pagan churches are also sometimes refered to as Groves and Covensteads.

How do I join a Coven?

   You have to be initiated into the Coven to join, which is not something you can do yourself. You must be initiated into a Coven by a high ranking Priest/ess. Initiation makes you a first degree Priest/ess (which basically means you are a beginner in Coven terms). Everyone in a Wiccan Coven is considered to be a priest or priestess, or in training to become a priest or priestess, as they generally do not believe someone else has to delegate between them and their deities as Christians do. Also, initiation rites are often kept quiet among covens, so information about initiation practices can often be hard to track down.
   It often takes a Wiccan a long time to find a coven suitable to them. If they cannot find a coven and are solitary, they will often self-dedicate, which is similar to an initiation, and attach themselves to the Goddess and God, or perhaps their patron deity, until such time when they have located a coven and are properly initiated.

How do I start a Coven?

   Well, in order to start a Coven you need, at the very least, a third-degree Priest or Priestess (otherwise known as a High Priest/ess). I know in movies like "The Craft" it was just four witch chicks doing spells to be a coven, but a coven is an actual religious order, which needs a religious leader. Just like a church. It's not a church without a preacher, therefore, it's not a coven without a Priest or Priestess, and you cannot be a Priest or Priestess, dispite what some might tell you, without being ordain by an actual Wiccan Priest/ess or Minister. You must also be at least eighteen years of age to be ordained (in most states in the U.S. I'm not sure about European countries). Only someone who has been ordained can ordain you.
   You also need a license to be a religious leader and to perform religious ceremonies, like weddings, Wiccanings, and funerals as ministers must do sometimes, which must be applied for legally. Covens can be as large as necessary, but it must have at least five members to start it (a Priest/ess and four to call the Elements). Many say that a coven can only have thirteen members, but that sounds a little impractical. It is possible to be a priest/ess without a coven, but to be a Third Degree High Priest/ess, you must lead a church.

What are the different Wiccan traditions?

   The Different Wiccan traditions are as follows:

Alexandrian Wicca:

   This tradition was founded in England by Alexander Saunders, a former pupil of Gerald Gardner. It differs from Gardnerian Wicca in that it incorporates a lot of Judeo-Christian imagery in it's rituals and practices, but like Gardnerian, his Covens only work rituals skyclad, and most of it's work is done in secret. Saunders, a self-styled "king" of Wicca, broke away from Gardner shortly after the birth of Wicca and has a following of nearly 500,000. Some time back, a tradition known as "Algard," a blend of Alexandrian and Gardnerian, attempted to be recognized, but the two traditions are so similar already, and it did not differ from either Gardnerian or Alexandrian enough to be declared a valid tradition recognizable by the state. The Alexandrian tradition, just like Gardnerian, is practiced in every english speaking country across the world.

American Wicca:

   This tradition, founded by a woman named Jessica Bell (also know as Queen Sheba) was another created by a person who has labeled themself Wiccan royalty. Bell often called herself a "Witch Queen". The practice within the tradition, refered to as "The American Order of the Brotherhood of Wicca," is virtually identical to Gardnerian, except Covens work robed. They prefer couples in their priesthood; husband and wives are encouraged. Wicca was not introduced in American until the late seventies, early eighties, and the birth of American Wicca followed soon after.

The Church of Y Tylwyth Teg:

   This welsh/irish tradition was founded by Bill Wheeler in 1967, and it's members are refered to as the "Gentle People." It's practices include teaching about the balance of nature, folklore, and mythology, and is recognized by the government as a non-profit religious organization in the state of Georgia in 1977. The Church has a close inner circle of students who correspond to an outer circle of students across the United States. Their Main Church is still located in Marietta, Georgia.

Circle Wicca:

   Jim Alan and Selena Fox created Circle Wicca in 1974, and it is argued that this tradition the most active for Wiccan tolerance than any other tradition. Their headquarters publishes an annual almanac called the Circle Guide to Pagan Resource, as well as a quarterly magazine called Circle Network News. It also sponsors many seminars, concerts, and workshops both at their base of operations as well as around the country, and at least a few times a year they also hold a special program for pagan clergy, and host the National Pagan Spirit Gathering every year on the Summer Solstice.
   Circle is also recognized as a Legal Wiccan Church by State and Government. It is a well-organized and dedicated tradition, with ways that are more like American Indian Shamanism that tradtional western-European Wiccan practices.

Deboran Witchdom

   This tradition, created by Claudia Haldane, has a very fairytale-like feel to it, as it is modeled after the story of Robin Hood. Coven leaders are refered to, not as Priest and Priestess, but as Robin and Marian, and their seconds-in-command called the Maiden and the Green Man. They do not have a degree system like that of a regular coven, but instead, they have "Apprentices, Sealed and Sworn, and Elders." It has been in practice since right around 1979, and is still a relatively obscure branch of Wicca. As far as rituals, Sabbats are open to guests, but Esbuts are private to members.

Dianic Feminist Wicca

   Started by Ann Forfreedom, a common misconception is that this tradition is limited to women and that only lesbians practice it. It actually is not a seperatist tradition and does have both male and female practitioners. It is the only tradition, however, to have all women covens. It is more common for a Priestess to lead a Coven alone than for a coven to be lead by a Priest or by pairs. Dianics center their beliefs only on the Goddess in worship. Rituals are done both robed and skyclad.

Eclectic Wicca

   Eclectic Wicca is not technically a tradition as it is taken up mainly by solitary practitioners. Eclectic Wiccans are non-initiate practitioners who either do not want to join a coven, or cannot due to circumstance or location. They often adapt different things to their practice to make it easier on their lives. The difficulty with this, however, is that some believe they can mish-mash a bunch of different beliefs together and still call it Wicca. Which is, of course, not true. To be Wiccan, one must worship the Goddess and God, celebrate the Sabbats, observe the "laws" of Wicca, and follow the three fold law. If one does not follow these guidelines, they are not Wiccan.
   Eclectic Wiccans generally do not join covens, nor practice with other people. Very few are ever ordained. Most worship either large numbers of Gods or one patron deity in addition to the Goddess and God. They generally do not observe moon rituals, but do celebrate Sabbats and family rituals, such as Wiccanings. Eclectic also rarely do spells or rituals skyclad. Often many will not refer to themselves as Wiccans, though they follow Wiccan philosophies.

Frosts' Wicca

   One of many Welsh traditions, it was founded by Gavin and Yvonne Frost in the early 1970s. It presents itself as the "Church and School of Wicca." It takes on students through correspondence. The Frosts published a book titled the Witches Bible that dismayed and shocked many, as the first edition of this book refered to sexual abuse of minors and made no mention of the Goddess whatsoever. A later revision of the book did reference the Goddess, but many who had been interested in this tradition turned away after reading the first rendition of the book, which depicted pedophilia, sexual exploitation and abuse of pubescent children during initiations rites in graphic detail, which has further damaged Wicca's reputation and concreted many people's beliefs that Wiccans are evil.

Gardnerian Wicca

    This was the first tradition ever introduced to the world, and as such, many Wiccan "Traditionalists" believe it to be the only valid one, sometimes with the exception of Alexandrian. Gerald Gardner launched this tradition only a few years after the second World War, and was for many years accused of inventing Wicca out of imagination and of having Aleister Crowley write all his rituals and taking the credit himself. There are several contributors to the birth of Wicca, but Gardner is, indeed, the father of it. Jane and Steve Farrar capture the story well in their books.
   This tradition, like most Wiccan traditions, worship the Goddess and God, and often hold the female divinity with more reverence than that of the male. It's degree system does not allow for self-dedication, meaning, to belong to this tradition, you must be initiated into a Coven. The rituals are skyclad and aim to have the same number of males and females in their covens, preferably married couples, therefore, it is less practiced by homosexuals (which is also due to the fact that Gardner disagreed with homosexuality). Gardnerian is the most common practice, perhaps second only to Eclectic Wicca. This tradition is extremely secretive, and most of it's practitioners are sworn to secrecy about the work and rituals.

Georgian Wicca

   George E Patterson founded the Georgiansin 1970 and, after being chartered by the Universal Life Church in 1972, became the Church of Wicca of Bakersfield. In 1980, it became the Georgian Church. Though eclectic in nature, they still take much of their practices from Gardnerian, and encourage their members to write rituals themselves and learn from a variety of sources.

Northern Way

   Otherwise known as Asatru, which is often not seen as a form of Wicca by many people, it was created in 1980 and incorporated into a church in 1982. It is strictly Norse, not Teutonic. They follow Norse gods, and are recreationists of the old Norse way. They do not call to the elements, but they do cast circles. It is not limited to family groups, however, and any person can join. It is not an initiatory tradition, and works strictly clothed. They observe the four Solar Fire Festivals, as well as any old Norse holidays, but do not observe Sabbats.

Pecti-Wita

   This Scottish Solitary tradition was taught by it's founder, Aidan Breac, personally. The tradition closely follows the movements of the sun and moon, and the balance between the Goddess and God, with special emphasis on divination. It is hard to gather information as the founder of the tradition only took few pupils and, at the time of his death, was not seeking further students.

Seax-Wica

   This tradition was created by a very popular author by the name of Raymond Buckland in 1973, and is heavily influenced by Saxon Paganism. It is not a recreation of the Saxon practices, however. This is the only tradition that is completely open to the public, with all of it's rituals published for anyone to see. It works both skyclad or robed, and it is up to the practitioner to choose. This tradition can be practiced both in a Covens or solitary. It closely resembles Gardnerian in most ways, however.

Kemetic Wicca

   Kemetic Wiccans strictly worship Egyptian Gods and Goddesses. Most of their rituals are taken from ancient egyptian magic, however, most of them still follow the Sabbats and major Wiccan Ceremonies, such as wiccanings and handfastings. This denominations is still relatively new and have not been approved by the government, so they are still classified Eclectic.

Do I have to believe in a God to be Wiccan?

Yes. Wiccan guidelines requires that you believe in at least two deities in order to be Wiccan. Wicca is a duotheistic religion, as outlined by Gerald Gardner when he wrote the procedures for this religion, meaning that both the God and Goddess must be acknowledged, in addition to any other Gods you may follow. Being an atheist just doesn't work within the confines of this faith.

What's the difference between a pentacle and a pentagram? Aren't they both Satanic symbols?

   A Pentacle is a five pointed star surrounded by a circle. Facing upward, The star represents the five elements; earth, air, fire, water, and the fifth, often not recognized, element, spirit, and the circle surrounding it represents how each element is connected. Facing downward, it represents the earth. A Pentagram is a five pointed star without a circle. Facing upward, it symbolizes the mother Goddess, downward, the father God. Even though those are the meanings Wiccans have given them, they have had many meanings and uses over the centuries. Now, it is true that Satanists use the inverted pentagram as their personal and religious symbol, so you may not want to use it as your own in an effort to distance yourself from the stigma. Not to say there is anything wrong with Satanism; their religion has just as much meaning and validity, and there is nothing wrong in their beliefs, though it does differ greatly, but Wiccans already have enough negativity to deal with. However, wearing either symbol does not make you a Witch. The only thing you absolutely need to be a witch is knowledge.

I know someone who says she is a Christian Wiccan. Is this even possible?

   Well, first, it's against the law (as in legal law) to be two religions at once, so that blows that idea out of the water from the get-go. Here's the problem: To be a Christian, you must accept two things; Christ and the Bible. There are several passages in the Bible that condemn witchcraft and sorcery. The best example and most well-known is Exodus 22:18: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Well, it's widely known in the pagan community that the translation for that passage is wrong. The original word for witch was "poisoner", so it should actually read "thou shalt not suffer a poisoner to live." However, even thought that passage is incorrect, there are several other passages that are along the same lines, and they are not incorrectly translated. For instance:

   Leviticus 20:27: "A man or a woman who is a medium or who has familiar spirits, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones. Their blood shall be upon them."
   Deuteronomy 18:10-14: "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls upon the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the Lord, and because of these abominations the Lord your god drives them out from before you. You shall be blameless before the Lord your God. For these nations which you will dispossess listened to soothsayers and diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God has not appointed as such for you."
    Jeremiah 27:9: "Therefore do not listen to your prophets, your diviners, your dreamers, your soothsayers, or your sorcerers, who speak to you, saying 'you shall not follow the king of Babylon'."
   Revelations 22:15: "But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters and whoever loves and practices a lie."
   Numbers 23:23: "For there is no sorcery against Jacob, nor is there any divination in Israel."
   Galations 5:19-21: " Now the works of the flesh are evident, and they are adultery, fornication, uncleanliness, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissentions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like, of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in the past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God."
   Ezekiel 13:18: "And say, 'thus says the Lord God: "Woe to the women who sew magic charms on their sleeves and make veils for the heads of people of every height to hunt souls! Will you hunt the souls of my people, and keep yourselves alive"?"
   1 Samuel 15:23: For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry, because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He also has rejected you from being king."

   There are more passages, but to list them would take up quite a bit of space. The point is, to be Wiccan, you would have to ignore these passages, but to do so would mean that there are some parts of the bible you do not take seriously. To reject one part of the bible is to reject it all. Ask any priest. Also, to reject the bible is to reject Christ. Says so right in the Bible.
   Now, let's ignore that whole schpeel, and look at it from both a practical and political point of view. As a Wiccan, there are a lot of things that one is more tolerant of than a Christian would be. There are many political views that are incredibly different between the two faiths, which include gay rights, sexual liberties, war, abortion, suicide, marriage, and quite a few other things. There are things that Christians are vehemently opposed to of which Wiccans are much more accepting and supportive. One example is homosexuality. Wiccans believe that being gay is just as natural as being a heterosexual, and that it is not something you choose to be. In fact, there are a great deal of books dedicated to gay witchcraft.
   Let's examine this from a spiritual point of view. In order to be Christian, you obviously must believe in Christ, but simply believing in Christ doesn't make you a Christian. Hell, I believe Christ existed, and I'm an Athiest. There is no reason why you can't believe in Christ while being a Wiccan, and vice versa. You can believe in Christ, throw away the Bible, and live as a happy Wiccan, but that ultimately means you are not Christian. You can be a Wiccan with Christian philosophies, or a Christian with pagan philosophies, but you cannot be both. End of story.

   So, that is the study I conducted. Many people who practice Wicca will find this old news. Opinions on much of what I descovered vary greatly, so a lot of this is up to interpretation, as most religious philosophies are. Take what you will from it.

The black cat is out of the bag - the Fashion Intel loves witches and all things witchery.  We had thousands of hits for Harry Potter's Hermione in Harper's Bazaar [Emma Watson], so apparently the rest of you like witches too!  What better time of the year to celebrate pointy hats, black dresses, and ultra-designed tights?  Even better when they are designed by Luella Bartley.

It is now October, one of my favorite months of the year, so count on more Halloween treats and maybe some tricks.  For this Friday, enjoy this lovely spread from the latest issue of Lula Magazine.

See the rest of the spread behind the cut

Here's some studies of witches I did, based on Duncan Fegredo's art in Darkness Calls.

Sorry Jessy, no lesbian action for now :(

EDIT: Jessy asked for an inked one of that one on the first pic:

It looks different now. heh.

There are witches in my mailbox.

What am I to do?

I found them there this morning,

doing things they shouldn't do!!

How the witches got there,

I haven't got a clue.

But they won't be there much longer

because I'm sending them to

YOU!!!!!!

You've been Witch Kissed!

Before the warts begin to spread,

pass the kisses on instead!

Thank you for this interview, Iloz. Why don't you begin by telling us a bit about yourself and your blogs, Zombos Closet of Horror Blog and League of Tana Tea Drinkers?

I started blogging Zombos Closet of Horror a few years ago when the monsterkid in me took note of the expiring writer in me. Being a monsterkid going back to the 1960’s, I had watched lots of movies, read lots of books, but hadn’t thought about combining the two until blogging became the next big thing since sliced bread and email. I wanted to share my love for the horror genre with other fans, as well as my annoyances with it, so blogging afforded me the greatest opportunity to do so.

The first thing I did, however, was to research who else was blogging out there. What I came across, back then, were mostly thumbnail reviews as deep as a chip in dip, or snarky commentary not conducive to a serious, critical discussion on the artistry, dramatic qualities, or thematic importance of the horror genre. I didn’t want to be another fan writing superficially about his likes or dislikes, and screw what anyone else thinks. When the writing side of me exerted its influence, I decided to write about my likes and dislikes within the framework of a fictional set of characters through whom I could express my opinions, arguments, and all around zany observations on the genre and horror culture. The fictional side also helped me limber up the old gray cells for when I’ll actually start writing horror fiction (yes, I’ve got lots of notes lying around just rearing to go), and it especially made it more fun for me, and lots more fun for my readers--Bob, Carol, Ted, and Alice (thanks guys!), who tired of capsule reviews with no bite, and news, news, news promotions. Of course, since then, many informative and witty horror bloggers have come on the scene forcing me to up my standards in order to keep up.

After I settled into my blog, I started searching for ways to increase readership and visibility. Here’s where Blogcritics comes in. When I found BC I realized it would be a great way to spread the Zombos Closet insanity around, and they didn’t have many horror reviewers at the time to compete against my charm and wit, which was a plus. Of course—it seems to me, anyway—after I was accepted into their sinister cabal of superior bloggers, more and more horror reviewers started popping up. But here’s the wonderful thing about it: I learned a lot from being a Blogcritics reviewer, things I would not have picked up without this experience. Given the Hunter S. Thomson Meets the Three Stooges in the Old Dark House sensibility of my blog, I didn’t expect Blogcritics to bring me onboard in the first place. I was shocked when they did. For a minute I thought, hell, if they’d have me as a reviewer, than maybe I shouldn’t join; but it all worked out quite well.

Right off the bat, the BC editors provided me with that essential relationship of writing something to be reviewed by an editor before it hits the page. Many bloggers tend to write in a vacuum. I mean they post to their own blogs and don’t have a second pair of experienced eyes to edit or give them constructive feedback. Now, don’t get me wrong: many bloggers are either writing professionals or write at that level; but some blogs I’ve suffered through can really benefit from the editor/writer relationship BC offers. One editor wrote about the overuse of the word “that” in writing, and—hey, wait a minute, I’ve been using “that” so often that it became quite obvious that I didn’t understand that simple writing mistake. Looking over my earlier posts before BC, I realized how valuable the information was. Other Eloise-styled hints and proofing from the editors, the guidelines for posting and formatting, and just the positive feedback from various BC bloggers, really added up to a great experience, helping prep me for better, more natural writing. I also took advantage of posting to BC first, then looking at the changes an editor made, and correcting my copy on Zombos Closet before posting it there. Mwahaha! I know it’s evil of me, but hey, my stuff looks a whole lot better since I joined BC.

Now the League of Tana Tea Drinkers started on a whim, actually. I received, out of the blue, an E for Excellence from fellow horror blogger Brian at The Vault of Horror. You’ve probably seen the emblem here and there on various blog sites. Originally, I think, it was created by a mom who wanted to acknowledge good family-oriented blogsites. So Brian sends me this thing and tells me how much he enjoys my blog. I’m honored and flabbergasted at the same time. Coming from a talented horror blogger it meant a lot. Well, it started me thinking, and I realized we horror bloggers needed our very own badge of excellence. The horror genre itself tends to get enough bad press, and fans of horror are often considered to be barely holding onto the evolutionary scale between Australopithecus and Stupidiculous; so we need to show how erudite and charming we can be when discussing scream queen’s bodacious tatas, gore-soaked bodacious tatas, and how the next torture device the Jigsaw Killer uses is a metaphor for the roiling stock market, as often as possible.

So, long way around, the League, or LOTT D for short, was started to unite unique, insightful, and exemplary horror bloggers. I invited bloggers I knew and enjoyed reading to join, then we worked out some of the criteria we use for selecting new members. We have close to thirty members now, including professionals and amateurs, who express their passion for horror’s many categories and styles, whether it is the classics, or slashers, or trash-art. I’m very proud to have started it, but it’s the members who keep making it better and better.

One unique thing we do is write unity blogs, which are lengthy articles on a particular theme like torture horror or the allure of evil. Members contribute their thoughts to the topic and I compile it into one post. I don’t think anyone else is doing it or willing to do it. Many bloggers are so focused on me, me, me, they don’t unite for the common good easily. By getting all those perspectives and writing styles into one article, instead of blog-hopping to read it, you can get a broad range of commentary in one spot. I’m happy to say BC was not concerned with the length of our unity postings, which can become rather long, but focused on the quality of them and their importance to the horror and non-horror oriented reader in discussing the genre with thought-provoking candor and criticism.
 
When did your love for the dark side begin? What were your favorite books as a teenager?

I find it hard to pinpoint when the horror bug hit exactly, but ever since I can remember, I loved watching Shock Theater movies on television and The Twilight Zone, and my mom, a big horror fan herself, took me to the best and worst movies, like Night of the Living Dead, Dr. Phibes, and Frankenstein Meets the Space Monster. I was lucky to have two theaters in walking distance, so there was always something to catch on the big screen. So she either fed my genetic appetite for horror, or infected me with it. Either way, I get an emotional pull from the genre, and that’s what keeps me energized. You’ve got to be wired a certain way to appreciate horror movies.

My mom was also an aspiring writer; she ordered the Famous Writers Course Rod Serling was hawking, which got me started on the royal road to procrastination—oops, I mean writing.

As a teenager, I read lots and lots of comic books, Creepy and Eerie magazines, the various classics of literature, and my favorite author was Ray Bradbury. I also loved Lovecraft, Oliver Onions, August Derleth, Robert E. Howard, Clark Ashton Smith, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and dozens of others. So books, short stories, anything these people wrote I read voraciously. I had a copy of Dark Carnival by Ray Bradbury—his horror stories—I cherished, alongside William Hope Hodgeson’s The House on the Borderland. I read so much my dad complained I looked like a mushroom because I preferred to stay inside and read rather than play sports, or do the usual boyish things. And, of course, I read Stoker’s Dracula, Shelley’s Frankenstein, and many other classic horror novels and stories.

What would you say are some of the best horror movies ever made? The worst?

Let’s start with the worst: there are so many out there. I take umbrage with those who cram the shelves with DVD excrement just for a quick buck. It drags the genre down and loads the verbal shotguns of critics who take aim at the genre as a whole. So you can say I’m not one for the purely commercial side of exploitation. On the other hand, mainstream horror films also squander the classic heritage of monsterdom, like the poorly conceived and executed Van Helsing, to Uwe Boll’s never-ending curiosities—the man’s unstoppable—which really irks me.

So the worst? How about Cannibal Holocaust? It’s degrading. Yes, it achieves its goal of making you think it’s all real, but it panders to our basest tastes for grue. So horror films pretending to be art house, but only devote their time to sickening scenes of torture and depravity to make a quick buck, do not help the genre. Where’s the art in watching death?

In 2007 PBS’s Masterpiece Theater ran a reimagining of Dracula amounting to the absolute worst in storyline and characterizations. It took a classic work and destroyed it completely. Dracula himself was nothing more than a mercurial, long-haired rock star impersonator, showing no cunning, no evil wisdom garnered from living for centuries. And he had no accent! It was abysmal in conception and execution. Murder Set Pieces is another WTF! wonder. And Hannibal Rising is a series of ludicrous static images strung together to simulate a motion picture. The idea of providing a backstory to Hannibal Lecter was not a good one to begin with. Who wants to understand evil? By its very nature it defies understanding, which makes it frightening. Giving reasons for Lecter’s cannibalism and insanity removed the mystery. Giving the laughable reasons in this film did more to undermine the character than broaden it. Feardotcom was another exercise in incomprehensible storytelling. Interesting visuals, but incoherent story. The script writer appears to have written it while water-skiing. Roger Ebert said it best when he wrote it’s “a jumble of half-baked ideas.”

The amount of bad horror films, sadly, far outweigh the good ones, but let’s list some of the best. Halloween is one. Carpenter’s ground-breaking film is a perfect blend of scares, mood, and sustained tension. Frankenstein and The Bride of Frankenstein are stunningly effective, even today--vibrant characterizations by actors who treated horror with respect and craft. Dwight Frye as Fritz practically created the mad scientist’s lab assistant role, although it did typecast him. Dracula, with Bela Lugosi; sure, it’s slow and static, but Lugosi’s performance set the bar for the undead count. His performance is still mesmerizing. Ditto on the typecasting curse. Donnie Darko: an eerie film combining mystery, a subtle, growing chill, and pathos. Night of the Living Dead: the grandfather of zombie horror. Surrounded by the hungry undead--it still scares you. Stuart Gordon’s Re-Animator: Jeffrey Combs is perfectly over the top in an over the top masterpiece of gory delight. Shaun of the Dead: hilarious send up of zombie cliché’s. Uzumaki: an underrated film based on the Lovecraftianesque manga, bringing it to creepy life. Dead Birds: a successful exercise in the less is better school of horror with some solid scares. Psycho: another visual and story-wise masterpiece of real terror. The Last Broadcast: a few months before The Blair Witch Project, this film brought a documentary realism to chilling, totally unexpected climax. Again, it’s what you don’t see that scares you the most. The Descent: a claustrophobic nightmare of unrelenting horror with truly frightening predators.

Now there are, luckily, lots more. I recommend reading The Rough Guide to Horror Movies by Jones, and Horror 101 by Christensen for more good titles to order on Netflix.

Do you think traditional, atmospheric horrors like The Others, The Sixth Sense, Rosemary's Baby, etc., have more artistic value than slasher films such as Halloween and Scream? Which type is more popular?

No. First, artistic value, by its nature, is part objective and part subjective. The objective elements that make good horror movies are the same as those that make good dramatic movies: the “secret” many independents keep forgetting, as well as Hollywood. No matter which sub-genre of horror these elements appear in, the fact they do appear is important to the artistic integrity of the movie. Now the subjective part, the preference for the sub-genre style itself, may require some modifications to those basic objective elements to align them to most effect with the sub-genre, but as long as care is taken to put them there in the first place, it doesn’t matter if the story is about a slasher, or ghost, or zombie, or psycho chainsaw-wielding lunatic in a leather.

One of those elements, by the way, is to make sure you create an emotional attachment to the characters onscreen, otherwise they are just victims. I remember the ending to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. After putting up a hell of a good fight, the heroine, which by now has all of us cheering for her to survive, is summarily killed by Leatherface. Well, of course! She has to die. This is the beginning, right? If she survives, the whole setup is blown to hell. But the emotional attachment created had us all give a collective sigh of disappointment when she did die. That’s how effective this essential element was used. It set us up for a big letdown, but it worked as it was supposed to.

As for which is more popular, it depends on your target audience. Older horror fans tend toward slashers and more traditional horror storylines involving demons, the supernatural, and ghosts. Younger audiences tend toward the more sensational, mainly because they go to the theater with their friends, so it becomes a right of passage; who can survive without blinking and that sort of thing. Take the successful SAW series. Every Halloween, it brings in the crowds because of the group effect. It’s rare you would see a teenager watching it alone in a theater. Without his friends to cushion the visually stomach-churning sadism, it’s, quite simply, not much fun to watch.
 
Why have films like Rosemary's Baby, The Exorcist, and The Omen become such classics? What sets them apart from other horror films?

What sets them apart is serious attention to the craft of making a film first, horror second. From the actors to the director and production people, everyone took the storyline seriously. To them it was just another dramatic movie with touches of horror, not a horror movie with touches of drama. The second thing is they all had strong characterizations connecting with you emotionally, especially one central person whom you wanted desperately to win. The third thing is the classic battle between good and evil. Now unless the audience is one in a Gahan Wilson cartoon, no one in a typical audience wants evil to win. This healthy bias can be exploited by the storyline to fortify the emotional connection to the drama.
 
In order of popularity, how would you place witches, vampires, ghosts, zombies, and werewolves?

I’ll assume you mean judging by today’s standards and what contemporary horror fans like. Zombies are the darling of the moment, so they definitely are the most popular right now. They lend themselves to an awesome range of social, political, satirical, gross-out, religious, and philosophical depictions in books and movies, or just simple schlock, too. It’s also cool to dress up as a zombie and stagger around on a Saturday. Next would be vampires, as they never go out of fashion thanks to the Gothic mystique surrounding them.

Now the tougher part comes when choosing which comes next, ghosts or werewolves? There’s been a bit of a resurgence with werewolves popping up in fiction and soon the—lord help us all—reimagining of The Wolf Man. They also make perfect antagonists for vampires, so you often see them prowling around in the background of vampire-centered movies. But I would have to put ghosts ahead of them, thanks mainly to the Japanese Horror wave that’s influenced many horror films in the last few years, what with their revenge seeking ghosts or evil spirits in need of a good shampoo and rinse. Ghosts, too, lend themselves to real artistic scares. Just watch Robert Wise’s The Haunting, or Lewis Allen’s The Uninvited alone, late at night, and I promise you’ll get keep looking over your shoulder.
 
The vampire seems to be the most die-hard, popular supernatural fiend of all time. Why do you think this is? What is it about vampires that fascinate people so much?

Well, who wouldn’t want to stay up and party all night? Vampires can be depicted as sexy, sophisticated, and powerful. They lend themselves to all sorts of social situations and characterizations that make television and movie people drool over the possibilities. And they live forever. Werewolves aren’t sexy: all they want to do is devour you limb from limb and soil the carpet. Zombies stink and also want to eat you, brains and all. Who wants to live forever as a zombie? That’s a bummer.

Vampires, on the other hand, are the eternally beautiful people of the horror genre. Given a choice, who do you think readers would want to see on the cover of People magazine; Brad Pit or Tom Cruz as a cool vampire (or Charlize Theron all vamped up—yeah, my personal fantasy okay?), or some hairy guy with a mucous-filled snout barking at the moon? The whole life everlasting angle is quite enticing, especially when, unlike a zombie or werewolf or Frankenstein’s Monster you don’t have to give up your good looks for it. And don’t forget vampires get all the babes, too. Hell, Dracula had three wives, right?

On the down side, this seductive image of the vampire can get in the way of the scares, the overall horror effect they have on you. So when movies or novels depict them, you have to go the extra mile to toss in much more baggage regarding the social and political intrigue that surrounds them as opposed to the direct effect they have as “monsters.” The more successful iterations of vampires in film, television, and fiction tone down the blood-sucking fiend angle and focus more on the sociological and psychological aspects of their condition.
 
How has the vampire evolved through the decades since Stoker's Dracula?

Actually, when you look at the fundamental image of the vampire—the sensual aspect, the Gothic overtones—not much has changed except for the situations we put them in and their intentions toward us. For instance, Forever Knight made a vampire into a detective. Buffy the Vampire Slayer made Angel regret the atrocities he committed and seek to atone for them. The current take on vampires--on television you have Blood Ties, another cop-oriented vampire series-- tries to remove them from their blood-lust and put them into more likable relationships. That’s one major change from Stoker’s Dracula and Graf Orlock in Nosferatu; those guys were ugly, smelly, blood-suckers. Today’s vampires are hip, young, beautiful, and drink blood substitutes out of wine glasses.
 
What are you doing this Halloween? Do you dress up?

Do I dress up!? Does Peter Pan peanut butter stick to the roof of your mouth? I bought this Dracula cape back in the ‘80s from a trick and joke shop in Greenwich Village. I paid way too much for it so I make sure to wear it every Halloween. I make a great—short and dumpy—Dracula.

I have the most fun putting together the trick or treat bags we give away every year to the neighborhood kids. The first year we had maybe twenty kids show up. Word got around about the cool dude who gave great stuff away, and now, a few years later, I have seventy-plus bags ready to go. And I’ll probably run out again. My treat bags are big and have lots of cool swag, including classic monster stuff, along with the candy. Last year, one kid, I’d say around seven or eight years old and dressed up in a skeleton costume, screamed with delight when he found a glow in the dark Mummy (Kharis) figure in his bag. When I ran out of bags I had a few monster posters left to give out. I expected some eggs tossed my way because of it, but I was surprised by the enthusiastic response from the kids who got them. They loved them. Kids and monsters go together like peanut butter and guacamole. Oh, wait a minute, did I get it right?
 
Is there anything else you'd like to tell our readers?

Be demanding in your appetites for horror. Gore for the sake of gore is detrimental to the genre, as are the undying DVD quickies looking to capture our attention and dollars.

I was energized by Universal’s monster cycle kick-starting the genre in full-swing, and then got a steady charge from the ‘50s monsters and mutants. In the 1960’s, the jolt of unrelenting horror from Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (gee, thanks George), followed by the unstoppable slashers and now the closer-to-reality genre fare made watching horror a lot more, let’s say, uncomfortable. Ironically, the closer to reality horror movies become the less fun they are to watch. Being scared is one thing; being disgusted enough to puke up your popcorn is another. Getting an audience to puke is easy, but scaring them is hard. Don’t get me wrong: I “enjoyed” Hostel and SAW, but you can get sick to your stomach just so much before it starts to hurt. So all I’m saying is we need to keep things in perspective and not let the grimmer aspects of our genre take precedence. I don’t want kids coming to my door on Halloween dressed as the Jigsaw Killer or Hannibal Lecter; there’s just no fun in that at all. And, more importantly, we shouldn’t see it as being fun, either.

And last, thanks for inviting me to share my thoughts on a genre that has provided me with many wonderful memories (and disturbing nightmares). Happy Halloween!

Thank you so such for this insightful and enlightning interview, Iloz. I've learned a lot from it. 

Interview by Mayra Calvani