The Wicker Man

DISCLAIMER: I have never seen either version of “The Wicker Man”, either the original version from 1973 or the allegedly inferior remake from a couple of years ago starring Nicholas Cage. Nor does it matter, as this isn’t so much a review of the movie as it is my feelings as to the known subject matter. The validity of my viewpoint as expressed here is pretty much tantamount to not having to taste shit to know I wouldn’t like the taste of it.

I never could quite understand what the attraction was for Pagans and Wiccans for the old 1970’s movie “The Wicker Man”. After all, this movie culminates in a multi-generational community of pagans, in the course of a festival and religious ritual, burning a man alive. Okay, I get it that the guy was not only a Christian police officer dedicated to uncovering some ugly truth about the community. I understand that this character, “Neil Howie” (Edward Woodward), was a “bigot”, and as one person put it to me, a “prissy prig”.

However, I repeat-they burned the guy alive, in a fertility rite amounting to a human sacrifice to their "Sun God".

For people in a community made up in large part of people intent on getting along and living in peaceful co-existence with the Christian community, and winning acceptance as a legitimate religion, this seems contradictory.

Then, I finally got an explanation, from pagan author Charles Clifton, whom I paraphrase-

It’s the very idea of the movies portrayal of a successful, multi-generational pagan community that is so attractive. In fact, pagans who have seen and appreciate the film, by the time it is over, simply close their eyes to the last ten minutes of the movie.

So there you have it, this longing, amounting to a craving, for a pagan community, where successive generations engage in worship of The Great Goddess and God, openly observe the Sabbats and Esbats, practice magical rituals and all the while form a bonding, caring, cohesive community. This is what the film displays that touches such a deep cord. And, evidently, the film is an accurate portrayal of many cultural aspects of modern neo-paganism.

Okay, now that I get it, I’m still not impressed. All I see is a film where not just one “bigot” and “prissy prig” is sacrificed to pagan deities by way of immolation-which would be bad enough-but where this seems to be an acceptable practice, for the purposes of insuring the continuing fertility of the island known as "Summerisle".

In fact, Lord Summerisle (Christopher Lee) is made to remark on the many different aspects of Howie that make him such an exceptional candidate for sacrifice. He is not only a virgin, but a representative of the crown (thus symbolically a "king"). In fact, Howie was lured to the island to investigate the disappearance of a missing young girl, who in fact turns out to be alive and well by the end of the film-presumably a willing accomplice and knowing participant to the atrocity.

Nevertheless, the film gets high marks amongst many if not most pagans due to it's otherwise realistic and in fact objective portrayal (barring this one element) of a pagan community. The filmmakers in fact set out to do just that, and researched modern paganism in order to achieve this effect. Therefore, it is understandable that the film would be accurate in some respects, from the rituals, to the music, on down to the festivals, the important one hear being Beltane.

On the other hand, I was never that attracted to the idea of a pagan community. To me, the ideal community is an American community where people of all religious faiths (including but not limited to pagans) can live side by side. A place where they can practice their respective religions, and otherwise not only tolerate each other, not merely get along with each other, but can live and love and work together in friendship and mutual respect, and acceptance of each others different beliefs.

The hope of a pagan community that isn’t totally insulated from mainstream society (which, in the film, Summerisle pretty much is, in fact) is just unrealistic. Fiction is fine, and I do not suggest censorship or politically correct whining and posturing. Still, this is far from ideal, in my opinion.

Of course, it goes without saying that I love fiction. It can be compelling, entertaining, and have meaning on a symbolic level and on a practical one as well. But real life should be something else again. After all, I love horror novels, but I don’t want to constantly live one.

The problem is in the thought process of religious people, and their leadership. It has been allowed to become way too important in everyday life. A persons religion should be looked upon as being no more important than what sort of movies or music or television shows they like, or what kind of clothing styles they prefer, or what their favorite foods are. In my humble opinion, it is of no more actual importance than that.

I’m sure there are many who will take exception to this. But after all, there are many who will take exception to those who do not subscribe to their religious viewpoints. Why should that be taken personally? A member of any religion can be an ethical, moral person who is a positive member of society. An atheist can likewise do the same.

In fact, the key is not religion, but community. Religion can be a part of that, true. But, so can the annual fish fry. So can support for the school basketball or football team. So can attendance at city council meetings. So can Fourth of July fireworks, or Homecoming Day, or the Saint Patrick’s Day Parade. Of all the things that make community, religion has little if anything at all to do with most of them. We just tend to give it more importance than what it has, needs, or in fact deserves.

If anything, religion, though of course it can be a force for good, can be at the same time, destructive to community. And let's face, a totally homogeneous religious community of any sort is a placebo at best. You will still have the town ne'er do wells, the burglars, drug addicts and town drunks, and the crazy and/or perverted uncles, whores and con artists. You will still have the petty jealousies, adulteries, and even murders. Pretty soon, the illusion of Utopia leaves a bitter taste in any event.

Of course, all those other things by which we identify ourselves as well have importance, as they say something to an extent about the people we are, how we express our creativity and thence ourselves, and how we view life. It’s all about our own selves, both as individuals and as parts of a group. And that is also true of religion. However, it is not in and of itself the be-all and the end-all. The only difference is, the makers of Guess Jeans don’t have a Priesthood brainwashing you into believing the lovers of Levi Strauss are doomed to burn in hell for eternity.

In other words, until people start looking at religious beliefs in the proper context-not just others religions, but their own as well-we are all really better off just keeping our beliefs to ourselves.

Otherwise, I see us eventually all going down the same road as all the others. Not good.

The real lesson of The Wicker Man has also been explained to me as the danger of fanaticism. The Christian, Neil Howie, was a Christian fanatic. Though portrayed as a loathsome hypocrite, he nevertheless was a Bible-believing Christian who deep down wanted his life to be a sacrifice in honor of his Lord. The pagans of the village portrayed in The Wicker Man wanted a human sacrifice for their annual pagan festival, in a grim determination to restore the fertility of their island. Both got what they wanted in the end.

Not exactly a model for either community or faith, in my view, but a movie that should be seen in a different light-not as a hopeful vision, but as a nightmarish warning.