Last Week’s Discussion:
Witches: The Variable
We’ve discussed vampires, werewolves, and zombies, but what about witches? They’re quite the classic supernatural creature and have come in many different forms throughout the centuries. Yet is there one specific type of witch? Does one definition seem better than others? Let’s see what the disucssioners had to say!
“I don’t mind witches. I mean, I’ve studied Wicca before, and I find Wicca/paganism quite fascinating. But I wouldn’t say I go out of my way for witches.”
“Witches are boring. I mean, the possibility of magic is cool, but in terms of supernatural, they’re a bit dowdy.”
“I think witches were pagans and druids and while they are supposed to have practiced evil rituals I suspect a lot of it may have been propaganda from the early church trying to gain power.”
“I like that they have a history but at the same time there are few things you can change around. That’s why I think I liked Charmed so much. It kept with the traditional family line with magic but it had a Buffy the Vampire Slayer feel with them fighting off evil creatures and demons of darkness.”
“[My teacher in grad school] said that the Catholic church, in Medieval times, often called someone a witch because it could legally confiscate their land. So it was more of a cash grab than any kind of social or spiritual issue. That was her argument, anyhow.”
I find it rather fascinating that many of the discussioners focused on the real-world terminology of witch and their history. What’s more, the discussioners who did focus on the supernatural, fiction-based witch ended up not being a huge fan of witches. I wonder why that is. Are they too plain? Are they too boring? Are they too… human? It’s hard to say, but this has been quite an eye-opening discussion.
Check out this week’s discussion on Thursday at 10am EST: