- Joined
- Sep 1, 2023
- Messages
- 744
- Reaction score
- 2,095
- Awards
- 17
I was going to post this as a reply to @stratamaster78 but it was in someone's diary thread and would have been a bit of a hijack
So: I like and respect Damien Echols a lot. This isn't meant as a teardown.
But I don't like his approach to Sumerian religion. I've seen a few videos of him talking about it, and in particular his version of a Sumerian LRP, and there's a lot I disagree with
In some cases it's just personal taste - the pentagram is a symbol of Venus* and therefore Inanna, so I don't see a reason to replace it with the dingir (a cuneiform star that goes before a deity's name to indicate they're a deity)
* Venus traces a pentagram in the night sky over its 8 year cycle
Also personal taste: I don't like calling gods to the quarters in place of archangels, that feels presumptuous. Using divine names to charge the quarters, yes, but calling them to appear as directional guardians doesn't sit well with me. Lots of pagan LRPs do this, it's not unique to Echols, I know, but it feels off to me
(My approach is to call sukkals here, minor gods who serve as the major gods' emissaries. That is much more of an "angel" equivalent imo. Another good option would be to call in protective Sumerian monsters like the lamassu and the kusarikku, a half-man half-bull who works as a door guardian)
Less of a taste issue:
In other cases there is some forced syncretism with Christianity that I really don't like. He says that their myths (eg the flood) are the same as the Christian ones, when what's really interesting is the ways in which they're different. (For eg, humans were not given dominion over the earth - earth belongs to the gods and we are its stewards. Whether you agree with that or not, the difference between Christian and Sumerian myth is meaningful and shouldn't be erased)
Some of his interpretations of the myths are just pure Christianity. Of course we all interpret myths through our own cultural lens, but it means his interpretations are quite different from mine, in ways that sometimes grate
His directional attributions are also very strange. Original Golden Dawn didn't treat the directions in the LRP as elemental, but Echols typically has. He gives:
East: Anu - sky god, father of actively worshipped gods but more or less superceded, like a Titan. Doesn't really fit with the rest.
South: Enlil - air & wind god and chief of the gods, Zeus-ish
West: Inanna - she has no elemental affinity but her key traits are ambition and impulsivity; hunger for power; sex but never motherhood. It's hard to think of a less "watery" personality.
North: Enki - God of water with air-like personality traits of cleverness, invention and tricksiness. His name means "Lord of Earth" which might be why he's in the north, but nothing beyond that "ki" in the name is earthish about him.
There is a straight up god of fire, and multiple earth gods/goddesses, so it's not like he didn't have other options; there are also gods of water and of healing who would go better in the West
I think there's a lot of UPG going into his Sumerian stuff. I don't mean that cynically - he was in prison, he didn't have access to much except UPG, and it served him admirably, and he was right to place great trust in it. And it's not like there's any official directional attributions that he's "getting wrong". Sumerian gods don't align well to the elements (cf Enki being a god of water with air personality traits) so it's impossible to apply Ceremonial Magic attributions without something not fitting
But still, his interpretations seem REALLY ill-fitting and jarring to me, so I think he's probably basing them on communication experiences he's had rather than on the mythology
I have enormous respect for Echols, and I definitely don't have an issue with him practising this way! Hence why this is a post on WF where he will never see it, not a comment on his YouTube videos.
But I think he's probably going to put out a book on this and everyone is going to treat his idiosyncratic take as the gospel on Mesopotamia, and I'm going to be petty and annoyed about it and have to bite my tongue a lot
(future-me through gritted teeth "if it's helping people... it's a good thing... let people enjoy things")
In the original thread, Stratamaster said:
That is 100% true and I am aware of how I sound when I say "you're doing creativity WRONG"
So: I like and respect Damien Echols a lot. This isn't meant as a teardown.
But I don't like his approach to Sumerian religion. I've seen a few videos of him talking about it, and in particular his version of a Sumerian LRP, and there's a lot I disagree with
In some cases it's just personal taste - the pentagram is a symbol of Venus* and therefore Inanna, so I don't see a reason to replace it with the dingir (a cuneiform star that goes before a deity's name to indicate they're a deity)
* Venus traces a pentagram in the night sky over its 8 year cycle
Also personal taste: I don't like calling gods to the quarters in place of archangels, that feels presumptuous. Using divine names to charge the quarters, yes, but calling them to appear as directional guardians doesn't sit well with me. Lots of pagan LRPs do this, it's not unique to Echols, I know, but it feels off to me
(My approach is to call sukkals here, minor gods who serve as the major gods' emissaries. That is much more of an "angel" equivalent imo. Another good option would be to call in protective Sumerian monsters like the lamassu and the kusarikku, a half-man half-bull who works as a door guardian)
Less of a taste issue:
In other cases there is some forced syncretism with Christianity that I really don't like. He says that their myths (eg the flood) are the same as the Christian ones, when what's really interesting is the ways in which they're different. (For eg, humans were not given dominion over the earth - earth belongs to the gods and we are its stewards. Whether you agree with that or not, the difference between Christian and Sumerian myth is meaningful and shouldn't be erased)
Some of his interpretations of the myths are just pure Christianity. Of course we all interpret myths through our own cultural lens, but it means his interpretations are quite different from mine, in ways that sometimes grate
His directional attributions are also very strange. Original Golden Dawn didn't treat the directions in the LRP as elemental, but Echols typically has. He gives:
East: Anu - sky god, father of actively worshipped gods but more or less superceded, like a Titan. Doesn't really fit with the rest.
South: Enlil - air & wind god and chief of the gods, Zeus-ish
West: Inanna - she has no elemental affinity but her key traits are ambition and impulsivity; hunger for power; sex but never motherhood. It's hard to think of a less "watery" personality.
North: Enki - God of water with air-like personality traits of cleverness, invention and tricksiness. His name means "Lord of Earth" which might be why he's in the north, but nothing beyond that "ki" in the name is earthish about him.
There is a straight up god of fire, and multiple earth gods/goddesses, so it's not like he didn't have other options; there are also gods of water and of healing who would go better in the West
I think there's a lot of UPG going into his Sumerian stuff. I don't mean that cynically - he was in prison, he didn't have access to much except UPG, and it served him admirably, and he was right to place great trust in it. And it's not like there's any official directional attributions that he's "getting wrong". Sumerian gods don't align well to the elements (cf Enki being a god of water with air personality traits) so it's impossible to apply Ceremonial Magic attributions without something not fitting
But still, his interpretations seem REALLY ill-fitting and jarring to me, so I think he's probably basing them on communication experiences he's had rather than on the mythology
I have enormous respect for Echols, and I definitely don't have an issue with him practising this way! Hence why this is a post on WF where he will never see it, not a comment on his YouTube videos.
But I think he's probably going to put out a book on this and everyone is going to treat his idiosyncratic take as the gospel on Mesopotamia, and I'm going to be petty and annoyed about it and have to bite my tongue a lot
(future-me through gritted teeth "if it's helping people... it's a good thing... let people enjoy things")
Post automatically merged:
In the original thread, Stratamaster said:
That is 100% true and I am aware of how I sound when I say "you're doing creativity WRONG"
Last edited:
