Ritual Landscapes

close
more_vert

I agree. Bollox innit (possibly).

I can't accept the 'total mother landscape'. I rarely have my flabber as gasted as I did when I saw the slepping lady that I linked to above.

I often see *very significant* hills, but they rarely have a truly female apsect. But thten you are playing with *imagery* vs *symbolism*.

The imagery one are obvious (by definition) and the symbolic ones speculative. That they probably symbolise(d) something is often plain, but I am not going to say what. How can I? How can anyone do so with authority. This is where I think Julian falls down, just as Dames and everyone else does. They assert the *truth* when they should just suggest ... but I suppose that wouldn't sell books - ooh! Cynical!

I use phrases such as 'Mother Hill' purely because people will accept and understand the metaphor, because that's what they're used to.

<makes mental note - use "Significant Hill" from now on>

Whew, thank goodness it's not just me that thinks that sometimes the emperor has no clothes. And I'm so glad it was you that said it out loud first, as you'll get the heat.

This game is plagued by speculation peddlars out to make a quick buck, and some of them get a bit close to fakery...
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/image.php?image_id=687

"I use phrases such as 'Mother Hill' purely because people will accept and understand the metaphor, because that's what they're used to.

<makes mental note - use "Significant Hill" from now on>"

I've got to say, that has been totally confusing to me. Everyone talks like that, so I've assumed that everyone thought like that. Actually, it runs through the whole site, giving it the impression that everyone is on the same side of the fence about the issue, and Julian is received wisdom, whereas clearly it's not so cut and dried.

If you talk about "significant" hills then I'm totally on message. They're everywhere. In fact they probably all were.