>>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
>>I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places >>where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches >>of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but >>that those particular spots are dangerous.
>The roadside memorial nearest to me has a particularly poignant and
>frustrating history. A few decades ago a new road was built as a bypass
>to a built-up area. It goes through a gap between two residential areas.
>There was a footpath between the two areas so a pedestrian crossing with
>lights was provided so that people could cross the road safely. The
>speed limit on the road is 50 mph. The planners expected trouble from
>local kids so the lights were enclosed in strong metal mesh protection.
>This protection did not deter the local young vandals who managed to
>repeatedly put the lights out of action. Eventually the authorities ran
>out of funding - a new set of lights a few times a year is not cheap. So
>for several years there were no traffic lights. It was during that time
>that the fatal accident occurred. New traffic lights were installed and
>have not been vandalised since. Sometimes when I drive past I wonder
>whether the child killed was a close relative of, even a child of, one
>of the original young vandals.
>It is just a few hundred yards North-ish of the factory where the
>Delorean cars were built.
We have a road situation similar to that. No deaths, but to cross it
they built a long tunnel instead of a pedestrian bridge. The lights in
the tunnel were constantly being broken. There have been so many
muggings and attempted interference with women and girls in that tunnel
that they've had to replace it with traffic lights, which interrupt the
constant flow of heavy lorries to the many industrial estates around
here.
-- Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
On 2 Oct 2012 20:16:16 GMT, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
[...]
>The sea of tributes outside Kensington Palace was certainly spectacular,
>and got a lot of press attention.
The small community at St Clears in West Wales hired a couple of
coaches "to see the flowers", but I think there was a more serious, if
perhaps not conscious, ritual just below the surface.
>But I'm sure I can remember flowers
>being laid at the site of fatal car crashes when I was a child, in the
>1950s (in Devon and Cornwall). Flowers would also be placed outside, or
>inside, the home of someone who'd died - even if they'd died somewhere
>else.
>The association of flowers with death seems to be ancient. The cellophane
>wrapping is just something modern florists do to make the flowers easier to
>transport - and when you get to the place, if you take off the wrapping,
>what's going to stop the flowers from blowing away, and what are you going
>to do with yards of damp crumpled crinkly stuff?
>'Votive lamps' are a new addition, which I don't remember from before about
>1970; possibly something influenced by 'hippy' practices, although of
>course use of lamps and candles in religious ceremonies is another ancient
>thing.
>The soft toys, plastic 'windmills', balloons, and other tokens, are recent
>additions - but there may be a link with pagan customs (which still persist
>all over Britain) associated with particular trees, springs, wells, rocks,
>bridges, and so on.
It's rare to see a fountain, however new and plain, without coins in
it: I find it hard to resist the idea that there's some subconscious
thing going on. I once had the privilege of showing an Australian
Aboriginal a delightful and very secluded little Welsh sacred spring:
he loved it, and was delighted to see that even barbarians like us
could still have sacred places (we whites often vandalise theirs: he
had some cruel photographs).
>Once a place has become 'special', people do there what they do at special
>places. Future historians and ethnologists and so on may be interested to
>see how long some of these new special places remain special, and what
>explanations are offered by those who can't remember the original event.
On 2012-10-03, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> On 3/10/12 4:16 AM, Whiskers wrote:
>> The soft toys, plastic 'windmills', balloons, and other tokens, are recent
>> additions - but there may be a link with pagan customs (which still persist
>> all over Britain) associated with particular trees, springs, wells, rocks,
>> bridges, and so on.
>> Once a place has become 'special', people do there what they do at special
>> places. Future historians and ethnologists and so on may be interested to
>> see how long some of these new special places remain special, and what
>> explanations are offered by those who can't remember the original event.
> Sacred sites in the making.
Yes. One near here, I noticed today, has gained earthenware vases wired to
the fence, for holding bunches of flowers, and the variety of wreaths seems
to be diminishing - perhaps a standard design is evolving? There is a lot
less cellophane there now. Of course, that could be purely economic.
> On 2 Oct 2012 20:16:16 GMT, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
[...]
> It's rare to see a fountain, however new and plain, without coins in
> it: I find it hard to resist the idea that there's some subconscious
> thing going on. I once had the privilege of showing an Australian
> Aboriginal a delightful and very secluded little Welsh sacred spring:
> he loved it, and was delighted to see that even barbarians like us
> could still have sacred places (we whites often vandalise theirs: he
> had some cruel photographs).
It's being exploited for charitable purposes; I know of a supermarket and a
'garden centre' both of which have indoor pools which are used to collect
coins - one has a bell over it, which some people like to throw their coins
at to get a public announcement of their marksmanship (or something).
Sadly, both have been fitted with stout wire mesh lids to prevent
opportunistic removal of the money.
>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
>I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places >where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches >of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but >that those particular spots are dangerous.
Except that many of the ones I see are in ordinary spots where the
accident can only have been the result of something extraordinary
happening. That is, the road itself is not a factor.
There is some element of "not letting go" about the monuments that
saddens me as much or more than the original misadventure. I feel
sometimes that my nose is being shoved into what should be someone's
private grief.
-- Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
> I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places
> where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches
> of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but
> that those particular spots are dangerous.
While that is certainly true of some, most of the crosses and flowers I see are not at dangerous places at all and are mainly monuments to foolish teenage driving.
One I pass almost every day is placed at the foot of a lamppost on the footpath of a major road opposite a small side-street:
| |
| |
| -----------
X|
| -----------
| |
It seems fairly likely that someone shot out of the side-street in an attempt to turn right (we drive on the left here) and didn't make it. I don't recall reading about the incident; it must have been at least twenty years ago, but someone is keeping fresh flowers there all the time.
-- Robert Bannister
> On 3/10/12 11:08 AM, LFS wrote:
>> On 02/10/2012 21:43, Vinny Burgoo wrote:
>>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
>> I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places
>> where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches
>> of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but
>> that those particular spots are dangerous.
> While that is certainly true of some, most of the crosses and flowers I
> see are not at dangerous places at all and are mainly monuments to
> foolish teenage driving.
> One I pass almost every day is placed at the foot of a lamppost on the
> footpath of a major road opposite a small side-street:
> It seems fairly likely that someone shot out of the side-street in an
> attempt to turn right (we drive on the left here) and didn't make it. I
> don't recall reading about the incident; it must have been at least
> twenty years ago, but someone is keeping fresh flowers there all the time.
The one I pass most often is fixed to a lamppost at the side of the very busy ring road which at that point, as it approaches a very busy interchange, has three lanes in each direction with a central reservation.
The interchange has been reconfigured: at the time of the fatality commemorated it was a roundabout but now traffic lights slow the traffic down on the approaches. There is a rather nasty pedestrian subway and a crossing with pedestrian controlled lights but both of these are some distance away and many people, particularly children late for school, prefer to take their chances and cross through the traffic, breaking their transit on the central reservation. This is now less dangerous than it was when a teenager known to us attempted this many years ago with fatal results. The flowers have appeared every week ever since, although his family moved away from the area a long time ago.
<la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
>On 04/10/2012 05:02, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 3/10/12 11:08 AM, LFS wrote:
>>> On 02/10/2012 21:43, Vinny Burgoo wrote:
>>>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>>>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>>>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>>>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
>>> I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places
>>> where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches
>>> of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but
>>> that those particular spots are dangerous.
>> While that is certainly true of some, most of the crosses and flowers I
>> see are not at dangerous places at all and are mainly monuments to
>> foolish teenage driving.
>> One I pass almost every day is placed at the foot of a lamppost on the
>> footpath of a major road opposite a small side-street:
>> It seems fairly likely that someone shot out of the side-street in an
>> attempt to turn right (we drive on the left here) and didn't make it. I
>> don't recall reading about the incident; it must have been at least
>> twenty years ago, but someone is keeping fresh flowers there all the time.
>The one I pass most often is fixed to a lamppost at the side of the very >busy ring road which at that point, as it approaches a very busy >interchange, has three lanes in each direction with a central reservation.
>The interchange has been reconfigured: at the time of the fatality >commemorated it was a roundabout but now traffic lights slow the traffic >down on the approaches. There is a rather nasty pedestrian subway and a >crossing with pedestrian controlled lights but both of these are some >distance away and many people, particularly children late for school, >prefer to take their chances and cross through the traffic, breaking >their transit on the central reservation. This is now less dangerous >than it was when a teenager known to us attempted this many years ago >with fatal results. The flowers have appeared every week ever since, >although his family moved away from the area a long time ago.
The problem seems to be that a decision not to perpetuate such a
memorial by renewing flowers can be interpreted as a deliberate act of
disrespect.
>>> Has anyone yet suggested that, outside of conventionally pious cultures,
>>> roadside cellotaphs are mostly an expression of anger? Roads are
>>> dangerous; they kill our children*; so watch your speed. They are
>>> intended, at least in part, to be yet another distracting road sign.
>>I think that's a very good point. Around here there are several places >>where people have lost their lives and the (frequently renewed) bunches >>of flowers serve as a stark reminder not only of the individuals but >>that those particular spots are dangerous.
>Except that many of the ones I see are in ordinary spots where the
>accident can only have been the result of something extraordinary
>happening. That is, the road itself is not a factor.
Agreed. Most of the markers around here are a result of someone
running a red light or driving when intoxicated. There's no road fix
for those kind of accidents.
> On 2012-10-02, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>> On 1/10/12 10:10 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 03:14:16 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>>> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> What's odd about the behaviour is not the leaving of flowers, which is
>>>> understandable, but the leaving of them in their wrappers, so that
>>>> they, inevitably, go off.
>>> It is a matter of custom rather than practicality.
>> But surely a relatively new custom. Perhaps it started when Diana died.
> The sea of tributes outside Kensington Palace was certainly spectacular,
> and got a lot of press attention. But I'm sure I can remember flowers
> being laid at the site of fatal car crashes when I was a child, in the
> 1950s (in Devon and Cornwall). Flowers would also be placed outside, or
> inside, the home of someone who'd died - even if they'd died somewhere
> else.
I'm confused now. Is the custom which supposedly started with Diana's death the placing of flowers (in large numbers) or leaving the wrappers on?
Because eight years before Diana a *huge* number of floral tributes were placed at Anfield (home of Liverpool FC) in memory of those who died in the Hillsborough disaster. They covered half of the pitch.
-- Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
> "Whiskers" <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote in message > news:slrnk6mitt.gt.catwheezel@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
>> On 2012-10-02, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>>> On 1/10/12 10:10 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 03:14:16 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>>>> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What's odd about the behaviour is not the leaving of flowers, which is
>>>>> understandable, but the leaving of them in their wrappers, so that
>>>>> they, inevitably, go off.
>>>> It is a matter of custom rather than practicality.
>>> But surely a relatively new custom. Perhaps it started when Diana died.
>> The sea of tributes outside Kensington Palace was certainly spectacular,
>> and got a lot of press attention. But I'm sure I can remember flowers
>> being laid at the site of fatal car crashes when I was a child, in the
>> 1950s (in Devon and Cornwall). Flowers would also be placed outside, or
>> inside, the home of someone who'd died - even if they'd died somewhere
>> else.
> I'm confused now. Is the custom which supposedly started with Diana's death > the placing of flowers (in large numbers) or leaving the wrappers on?
Neither. I think. The thread has forked in several directions since the
OP asked about the word (rather than the practice).
> Because eight years before Diana a *huge* number of floral tributes were > placed at Anfield (home of Liverpool FC) in memory of those who died in the > Hillsborough disaster. They covered half of the pitch.
>"Whiskers" <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote in message >news:slrnk6mitt.gt.catwheezel@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
>> On 2012-10-02, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>>> On 1/10/12 10:10 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 03:14:16 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>>>> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What's odd about the behaviour is not the leaving of flowers, which is
>>>>> understandable, but the leaving of them in their wrappers, so that
>>>>> they, inevitably, go off.
>>>> It is a matter of custom rather than practicality.
>>> But surely a relatively new custom. Perhaps it started when Diana died.
>> The sea of tributes outside Kensington Palace was certainly spectacular,
>> and got a lot of press attention. But I'm sure I can remember flowers
>> being laid at the site of fatal car crashes when I was a child, in the
>> 1950s (in Devon and Cornwall). Flowers would also be placed outside, or
>> inside, the home of someone who'd died - even if they'd died somewhere
>> else.
>I'm confused now. Is the custom which supposedly started with Diana's death >the placing of flowers (in large numbers) or leaving the wrappers on?
>Because eight years before Diana a *huge* number of floral tributes were >placed at Anfield (home of Liverpool FC) in memory of those who died in the >Hillsborough disaster. They covered half of the pitch.
In article <ad4g2tFtqv...@mid.individual.net>,
Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
>While that is certainly true of some, most of the crosses and flowers I >see are not at dangerous places at all and are mainly monuments to >foolish teenage driving.
There's a ghost bike at an intersection I pass through twice each work
day. A student was killed there by a truck failing to yield when
making a right turn.
-GAWollman
-- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
woll...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
On Oct 5, 3:46 am, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
> In article <ad4g2tFtqv...@mid.individual.net>,
> Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:
> >While that is certainly true of some, most of the crosses and flowers I
> >see are not at dangerous places at all and are mainly monuments to
> >foolish teenage driving.
> There's a ghost bike at an intersection I pass through twice each work
> day. A student was killed there by a truck failing to yield when
> making a right turn.
> The problem seems to be that a decision not to perpetuate such a
> memorial by renewing flowers can be interpreted as a deliberate act of
> disrespect.
I wondered whether perhaps, having acquired a degree of sanctity through custom, these spots continued to have flowers bestowed on them by total strangers seeking blessings from the gods long after the bereaved have stopped.
There seem to have been a number of Gods of Roads:
Greece: Hermes or Artemis or Hecate
Egypt: Min
China: Lu Shen
D&D: Fharlanghn
Rome: Adeona or Fortuna Redux
Polynesia: Hina
Tibet: Lam Lha
Ireland: Rhiannon
In fact, once I started investigating I found many more without even including St. Christopher, so leaving floral or monetary tributes at wayside shrines is a long established custom. Give it time, and we'll start seeing food or precious oils and spices being left there.
-- Robert Bannister
Thinking of starting up a frankincense business
> On 4/10/12 7:47 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> > The problem seems to be that a decision not to perpetuate such a
> > memorial by renewing flowers can be interpreted as a deliberate act of
> > disrespect.
> I wondered whether perhaps, having acquired a degree of sanctity through
> custom, these spots continued to have flowers bestowed on them by total
> strangers seeking blessings from the gods long after the bereaved have
> stopped.
> There seem to have been a number of Gods of Roads:
> Greece: Hermes or Artemis or Hecate
> Egypt: Min
> China: Lu Shen
> D&D: Fharlanghn
> Rome: Adeona or Fortuna Redux
> Polynesia: Hina
> Tibet: Lam Lha
> Ireland: Rhiannon
I'm surprised to see Hecate in that company - wikipaedia says that
she's more a crossroad and entrance goddess, rather than one for the
road in general.
> In fact, once I started investigating I found many more without even
> including St. Christopher, so leaving floral or monetary tributes at
> wayside shrines is a long established custom. Give it time, and we'll
> start seeing food or precious oils and spices being left there.
There are quite attractive roadside shrines in Greece.
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 11:41:29 +0800, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
wrote:
>On 4/10/12 7:47 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> The problem seems to be that a decision not to perpetuate such a
>> memorial by renewing flowers can be interpreted as a deliberate act of
>> disrespect.
>I wondered whether perhaps, having acquired a degree of sanctity through >custom, these spots continued to have flowers bestowed on them by total >strangers seeking blessings from the gods long after the bereaved have >stopped.
I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
(un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
-- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
> On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 11:41:29 +0800, Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com>
> wrote:
> >On 4/10/12 7:47 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> >> The problem seems to be that a decision not to perpetuate such a
> >> memorial by renewing flowers can be interpreted as a deliberate act of
> >> disrespect.
> >I wondered whether perhaps, having acquired a degree of sanctity through
> >custom, these spots continued to have flowers bestowed on them by total
> >strangers seeking blessings from the gods long after the bereaved have
> >stopped.
> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
individual?
>On Oct 5, 7:22=A0am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
>> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that som=
>eone
>> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
>> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
>Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
>individual?
I imagine you need to acquire a bit of the target's hair....r
On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
<peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 5, 7:22 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
>> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
>> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
>> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
>> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
>Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
>individual?
It does have the "target's" name on it.
-- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
> On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Oct 5, 7:22 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
> >> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
> >> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
> >> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
> >> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
> >Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
> >individual?
<peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 6, 8:48 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Oct 5, 7:22 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> >> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
>> >> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
>> >> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
>> >> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
>> >> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
>> >Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
>> >individual?
>> It does have the "target's" name on it.
>Oh, I see, just as well magic can read then.
It's the spirits. There was a magic spring in Wales whose owner would
charge a modest fee to any who wanted to drop in a curse on somebody.
He would then discreetly suggest to the victim that a counter-curse
might be advisable, and collect another modest fee. (Not unlike the
armaments industry, it occurs to me.) The reason I was able to read
about this particular one was that he ended up being prosecuted; there
must have been others.
> On Sat, 6 Oct 2012 04:31:10 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Oct 6, 8:48 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
> >> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Oct 5, 7:22 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >> >> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
> >> >> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
> >> >> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
> >> >> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
> >> >> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
> >> >Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
> >> >individual?
> >> It does have the "target's" name on it.
> >Oh, I see, just as well magic can read then.
> It's the spirits. There was a magic spring in Wales whose owner would
> charge a modest fee to any who wanted to drop in a curse on somebody.
> He would then discreetly suggest to the victim that a counter-curse
> might be advisable, and collect another modest fee. (Not unlike the
> armaments industry, it occurs to me.) The reason I was able to read
> about this particular one was that he ended up being prosecuted; there
> must have been others.
Prosecuted for what? Whatever it was, I'd imagine that they'd be able
to do other organised god-bothering under the same terms.
<peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 6, 10:53 pm, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Oct 2012 04:31:10 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Oct 6, 8:48 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT), Peter Brooks
>> >> <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Oct 5, 7:22 am, Steve Hayes <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> >> >> I recently indicated an example with photograph, in one of my blog posts.
>> >> >> Now someone has left a comment suggesting that it may be an example of
>> >> >> (un)sympathetic magic -- not that the corss and flowers indicate that someone
>> >> >> died there, but rather that someone wishes they would, and is placing the
>> >> >> cross and flowers there as a means to bring that about.
>> >> >Isn't that a rather non-specific misanthropy? How would it target an
>> >> >individual?
>> >> It does have the "target's" name on it.
>> >Oh, I see, just as well magic can read then.
>> It's the spirits. There was a magic spring in Wales whose owner would
>> charge a modest fee to any who wanted to drop in a curse on somebody.
>> He would then discreetly suggest to the victim that a counter-curse
>> might be advisable, and collect another modest fee. (Not unlike the
>> armaments industry, it occurs to me.) The reason I was able to read
>> about this particular one was that he ended up being prosecuted; there
>> must have been others.
>Prosecuted for what? Whatever it was, I'd imagine that they'd be able
>to do other organised god-bothering under the same terms.
Witchcraft? Fraud? I don't remember; but it was in the 19th C, I
think.
