![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
My take on 2009's The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves by Nathan Robert Brown
Being a werewolf enthusiast, when I spied The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves by Nathan Robert Brown in the metaphysical books section, I had to pick it up. I knew it would be bad, given that the cover boasted a coyote yapping at a full moon when they undoubtedly intended it to portray a wolf howling at the moon. I hoped it would be a funny read at least, maybe something along the lines of the amazing dry wit of The Werewolf's Guide to Life: A Manual for the Newly Bitten by Ritch Duncan. Alas, no. The attempts at levity fall flat, particularly after having finished The Werewolf's Guide to Life: A Manual for the Newly Bitten prior to reading The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves.
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves is a clumsy mixture of Cliff'sNotes type versions of oft-cited historical facts and lore, urban legends, descriptions of a few werewolf-themed movies, books, comics, anime, and games, "Native American werewolves and shapeshifters", relatives of the werewolf, therianthropes of the East, clinical lycanthropy, physical illnesses that may have spurred the idea of werewolves, and two chapters tossed in the mix that are attempts at humor (and boast prominent warnings that they are, in fact, humor, and not intended to be enacted on) -- Chapter 15. Once Bitten... Then What? and Chapter 16. How To Kill a Werewolf. These chapters are jarring, as suddenly it's goofy fantasy sandwiched between non-fiction chapters. I implore anyone who wants the subject matter of those two chapters presented in a skillfully written, witty, and thorough manner, that never breaks character and broadcasts no warnings (because--duh!--it's a parody), please order the amusing and vastly superior The Werewolf's Guide to Life: A Manual for the Newly Bitten by Ritch Duncan.
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves offers a few references, but not as many as most well done Complete Idiot's Guides do. Is this a book of personal conjecture? Is this a work of fiction? Is this a serious expose of werewolves in history and pop culture? The book vacillates awkwardly between all three. The back of the book states it provides:
A brief history of werewolves around the world.
Beyond-beastly explanations of werewolf phenomena.
A selection of savagely entertaining werewolf facts and stories.
A fascinating look at how humans transform into werewolves.
I suppose it does what it says, but without proper references it's difficult to cross-check. Much of it can easily be discovered on-line. This is why I was dismayed when certain "facts" were offered that can be easily disproved, or at least called into question, if one does a good web search. How hard is a thorough Google search for both pro and con sites for each factoid/myth/urban legend/etc.? I just did so for a few days while writing this.
I could seriously spend weeks nitpicking each chapter and giving references to either discount the "facts" presented or to offer more widely accepted, different, or more thorough lore. Instead, I'll merely address a few things that made me scoff:
Chapter 2: An American Werewolf in... America.
As always, whenever you read a book about monsters or the paranormal that espouses any supposed American Indian (or any ethnicity that one isn't and hasn't been raised in the culture) spiritual beliefs or superstitions, either don't trust its accuracy, gloss over it completely, or take it as pure camp, fantasy, or personal interpretation. I forgive fiction authors who take liberties with ethnic beliefs (within reason), because fiction isn't fact, and fantasy is just that: fantasy, not reality. Unfortunately, a lot of folks aren't critical thinkers or skeptical readers, and they immediately believe what they read, be it fiction or presented as non-fiction. Just because a myth or story is repeated in several books and websites doesn't mean they're a true representation of Tribal thought or practices.
I had American Indian friends read this chapter. My answers are not baseless.
According to the book (on page 14), "the First Tribes of the Northwest Coast -- namely the Nootka, Quileute, and Kwakiutl -- are known to still actively teach certain forms of traditional lycanthropic rituals to their young men".
Um, no. No, no, and no. Lycanthropy is not an American Indian concept at all. Despite the mega-popularity of the "Twilight" book series and films, the Quileute Tribe aren't werewolves. Physical shape-shifting is fictional. "Twilight" is fantasy. And, as an aside, I found this article on the anti-feminist and racial stereotypes of the "Twilight" book/film series.
(On page 20), (this relates to the above statement) -- "The tribes of the Pacific Northwest are known to still teach spirit lycanthropy, though almost nothing is known about the details."
Simple -- the details aren't known because they DON'T teach lycanthropy, spirit or otherwise.
(Also on page 20), "Skinwalkers are primarily therianthropes, not lycanthropes."
No. Skinwalkers are not therianthropes or lycanthropes. Those things are not American Indian concepts. Skinwalkers are not werewolves, nor were-animals, and are not the equivalent of such.
This relates to a box on page 16, "Therianthropy is a term that is related to lycanthropy. It refers to the "were-state," in which a human assumes the form of an animal or a human-animal hybrid. Basically, lycanthropy is a specific form of therianthropy."
Heh. There is no term therianthropy in the dictionary. There are therianthropic (also therianthropism), and it's root, therian:
the⋅ri⋅an⋅throp⋅ic Pronunciation [theer-ee-an-throp-ik]
–adjective 1. being partly bestial and partly human in form.
2. of or pertaining to deities conceived or represented in such form.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
1885–90; < Gk thērí(on) beast + anthrop- + -ic
Related forms:
the⋅ri⋅an⋅thro⋅pism Pronunciation [theer-ee-an-thruh-piz-uhm], noun
Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------
the⋅ri⋅an Pronunciation [theer-ee-uhn]
–adjective 1. (in some classification systems) belonging or pertaining to the group Theria, comprising the marsupial and placental mammals and their extinct ancestors.
–noun 2. a therian animal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
< NL Theri(a) name of the group (< Gk thēría, pl. of thēríon wild beast) + -an
Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
One can easily extrapolate the definition of therianthropic, or therianthropism, into the term therianthropy or therianthrope and adopt the same characteristics to it. In that case, the definition given on page 16 for therianthropy is barely correct, and entirely misleading.
This suits this chapter well, though it's not specifically about it (it's from answers.yahoo.com):
"Answer: Kinda hard to answer your question because there is no such thing as a Native American "Shaman". And stay away anyone claiming to be American Indian shamans , talking about tarot cards and Wiccan/pagan things, or talking about crystals and New Age things. I've got nothing against shamanism, paganism, or the New Age, but a cow is not a horse: none of these things are traditionally Native American. Shamanism is a Russian mystic tradition, Wicca is a religion based in pre-Christian European traditions, Tarot readings are an Indo-European divination method, and the New Age is a syncretic belief system invented, as its name suggests, in the modern era. None of them have anything to do with authentic Indian traditions, and anyone who thinks they do is likely to be wrong about anything else he claims about Native American religions as well. Wiccans and New Agers don't have any more knowledge about actual American Indian beliefs than you do.
Second we DO NOT believe in werewolves or vampires.
Source(s):
enrolled tribal member, Eastern Cherokee"
Moving on...
Chapter 5: Relatives of the Werewolf.
(On page 46), "Were-cats are sometimes referred to in popculture as bastets."
Um, no. Hell no. Referring to a feline shape-shifter as a "bastet" is purely a World of Darkness invention created by the White Wolf Publishing role-playing game company. See this for detailed information on the Bastet breeds, character, and game mythology.
(on page 47), "Interestingly enough, were-cats are almost entirely absent from the folklore of Europe."
That's simply not true. See here and here, for European were-cat references. In some instances it took a fair deal of digging to uncover the information, but that's what research entails.
(on page 49), "A bruxsa, or cucubuth, is a creature that is both werewolf and vampire, though opinions differ on which came first."
Ironically, on an unrelated site (www.mythicalrealm.com), there was this reply to the same subject, from someone born and raised in Portugal:
"This page has something that I never heard of, the names given to werewolf-like creatures in Portugal.
Bruxsa is a word that I never had heard or seen in all my life. If we take the strangely located "s" then we get "Bruxa", and that is "witch" in Portuguese.
Cucubuth is obviously a word that is not Portuguese, and I would like to know where did they get that information. In fact, after a little search, I found some sites saying that Cucubuth was the name Avicenna gave to lycanthropy.
What I know about the Portuguese version of werewolves (lobisomens), is that they are shape-shifters like in many other European tales, and that they can change shape by rubbing themselves on the ground of some cross-roads, as my grandmother told me."
(also on page 49), "Were-cats, popularly referred to by some enthusiasts as bastets,"
Again, no. No, no, no. Referring to a feline shape-shifter as a "bastet" is purely a World of Darkness invention created by the White Wolf role-playing game company. See this for detailed information on the Bastet breeds, character, and game mythology.
Moving on...
Chapter 8: Werewolf Hysteria in Medieval France
Emphasis is made repeatedly that no one knows what the Beast of Gevaudan was. Perhaps it was a pack of dire wolves? Perhaps it was a loup-garou?
I'm stunned the author didn't make the effort to research beyond the records of the attacks and a smattering of the political intrigue at the time. Despite the conspiracy theorists and cryptozoology devotees who continue to believe the Beast of Gevaudan case remains unsolved, all I can say is--*snicker*--stop beating a dead Beast.
(from Coleman's, Cryptozoology A-Z)
"In 1960, after studying a notary report prepared by two surgeons who had examined the carcass in the 1700s, one authority determined that the creature's teeth were purely wolflike. But during the summer of 1997, discussion of the fur of the Beast of Gevaudan resurfaced. Franz Jullien, a taxidermist at the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, discovered that a stuffed specimen similar to the Beast of Gevaudan that had been shot by Jean Chastel had been kept in the collections of the museum from 1766 to 1819. It had been definitely identified, a fact that all researchers had overlooked. It was a striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena).
Novelist Henri Pourrat and naturalist Gerard Menatory had already proposed the hyena hypothesis, based on historical accounts, since Antoine Chastel (Jean Chastel's son) reportedly possessed such an animal in his menagerie, a hypothesis now supported by a zoologist's identification. While Jullien's rediscovery must be congratulated, questions remain about the role of the Chastels as creators of a false story involving an escaped hyena in order to cover up the rumors of one of the Chastels being a serial killer.
As to the 'other' beast of Gevaudan - the one buried on-site in Versaille - this was assuredly not responsible for the slayings (which continued after its death) and was identified at the time as a large, diseased wolf."
(From Wikipedia's Beast of Gevaudan entry):
"Richard H. Thompson, author of Wolf-Hunting in France in the Reign of Louis XV: The Beast of the Gévaudan, contended that there can be satisfactory explanations based on large wolves for all the Beast's depredations.
Another explanation is that the beasts were some type of domestic dog or crosses between wild wolves and domestic dogs, on account of their large size and unusual coloration. This speculation has found support from naturalist Michel Louis, author of the book La bête du Gévaudan: L'innocence des loups (English: The Beast of Gévaudan: The innocence of wolves) and an episode of Animal X. Louis wrote that Jean Chastel was frequently seen with a large red coloured mastiff, which he believes sired the beast. He explains that the beast's resistance to bullets may have been due to it wearing the armoured hide of a young boar, thus also accounting for the unusual colour. He dismisses hyenas as culprits, as the beast itself had 42 teeth, while hyenas have 34.
In October 2009, the History Channel produced a documentary called The Real Wolfman. Renowned cryptozoologist Ken Gerhardt and (a very skeptical) veteran criminal profiler George Deuchar, performed a thorough modern-day forensic investigation in an attempt to reveal the truth behind a mystery built upon a century of exaggerated claims. Travelling to Gevaudan, the two (who often challenged each other's tentative theories) spoke with various local officials, researched local archives of original hand written accounts, and even questioned an expert researcher on wolf behavior.
Meeting with the direct descendants of Jean Chastel, they had the opportunity to listen to family accounts handed down, as told by Jean Chastel himself, as well as the chance to examine and actually use the original rifle (in the supposed exact location) where 'the beast' was killed. Later on, extensive forensic testing of the reported 'silver bullets' used versus normal bullets in various ranges and angles would reveal their inability to accurately and effectively kill anything, including 'the beast'. Some people believed that the Beast might be a surviving remnant of a Mesonychid seeing how some witnesses described it as a huge wolf having hooves rather than paws.
Their research would also prove that wolves were incorrectly identified, as they are physically incapable of having enough bite force to easily cut through bone; decapitating or shearing off of limbs (as reported in the original archives). They also discovered through that area's museum that aside from the wolves originally and mistakenly presented to the king (as the culprits), that there is written record of an Asian Hyena being presented at the correct time, coinciding with the end of the killings. Not only did the local archive descriptions of the beast accurately depict what is an Asian Hyena, but researchers and caregivers of the animals today confirm that Hyenas are one of the few animals with known bite pressure, easily capable of biting through bone as described in the archived records. It was also determined that at that period in time, there are accounts of conflict and strife between Jean Chastel and members of the village. He also apparently was once in favor, but then had a falling out with the Church. He apparently became an outcast and kept to himself much of the time.
The investigation concluded that 'the beast' was no more than an (at the time very common) exotic animal in the form of an Asian Hyena (long haired species of Hyaenidae, now extinct), with a possibly bitter, vengeful human caretaker by the name of Jean Chastel. This is what would also explain why Jean Chastel was able to supposedly kill the animal with a silver bullet, which would be only possible at close range in a vital area (most likely after it was called by name). According to the King's museum curator, the records indicate that this original Asian Hyena is still in the museum's possession, but most likely today was used to complete other partial specimens. An actual Asian Hyena (Hyaenidae) specimen is shown, (with a shot of the tag listing the species Phylum) during this section of the show for the curious."
Moving on...
Chapter 11: Werewolves in Film.
(In a box on page 135 discussing "An American Werewolf in London"), "In 1997, a similarly styled film, An American Werewolf in Paris, was released. In many ways the film pays homage to the original. With only a few differences in setting and plot, however, many consider these two movies to be identical."
Whoa nelly. Negatori! The two are vastly dissimilar. Both films share the theme of the werewolf being haunted in oft amusing fashion by the specters of their victims, and that's the sole similarity that I found between them. Rent them both and compare. Or read the Wikipedia description of "An American Werewolf in London" and then the Wikipedia description of "An American Werewolf in Paris".
Better yet? Skip "An American Werewolf in Paris" entirely, pretend it never existed, and immerse yourself in the joy of "An American Werewolf in London".
(on page 136, discussing "Silver Bullet"), "Marty lived with his sister, Jane, and Uncle Red in the quiet rural town of Tarker's Mill."
Not quite. The characters Marty and Jane lived with their parents. The character Uncle Red came to stay for the summer and only when it came to finding (and later fighting) the werewolf did they convince the parents to take a vacation. Here's the film's synopsis.
Moving on...
Chapter 13: Werewolves in Gaming.
On pages 161, the description of the NES video game "Werewolf: The Last Warrior" (from 1990) isn't accurate. The hard-to-miss fact that your werewolf form's arms are hooked blades isn't something you forget to mention (it's not just the bad guy's werewolf form at the end, as stated by the author). For a precise and funny description of the game, with graphics from it and an option to download the actual game, click here.
(On page 164, regarding White Wolf's Werewolf RPG series), "Probably the most popular werewolf-based role-playing game in history began with Werewolf: The Forsaken from White Wolf Publishing."
Wrong! It began with in 1992 with Werewolf: The Apocalypse by White Wolf Publishing. The popular game, a part of the World of Darkness, continued until 2004. Then the entire World of Darkness games were discontinued. Certain titles were refurbished and brought to light in 2005, including a very different version of Werewolf called Werewolf: The Forsaken.
(On page 165), "In recent years White Wolf has phased out the original Werewolf game guides and replaced them with a new, more universal system called GURPS: Shapeshifters."
Nope. GURPS, or Generic Universal RolePlaying System, isn't new; it's been around since the '80s. Since the '80's, it's provided adaptations that can be used with most popular game titles, such as Dungeons & Dragons, Advanced D&D, and Werewolf: The Apocalypse to name a few. However, White Wolf's current crop of revamped games are White Wolf Publishing's own.
Moving on...
Chapter 14: Werewolves and Urban Legends.
(On page 181, under The Black Hounds of Britain). "Many black dog legends claim that the number of times one saw a hellhound dictated what would happen. Most commonly, one time means joy, two times means ill fortune, and a third time is a sign of untimely death."
This didn't seem right to me, and something about it niggled at me. I looked up more than eight sites on hellhounds/black dogs/padfoot/shuck/etc., and found nothing to substantiate this. The closest thing I found was:
"As legend goes, if one happened to see the hellhound three times directly in the eyes, he or she will die an abrupt and unseen death.", which was given in other sites as well. Personally, I'm fond of this article I found on black dogs in folklore. I think what might have happened was the author threw in old folkloric bird-count rhyming and applied it to hellhounds. The similarity to what he wrote and this is curious:
"In the Annotated Mother Goose:
"In most European countries, it is thought to be lucky to meet 'one' magpie, raven or crow:
One's lucky,
Two's unlucky"
An aside -- for more awesome bird-count rhymes, check out Surlalune Fairy Tales board archives.
Moving on...
Then, jarringly, Chapter 15: Once Bitten... Then What? and Chapter 16: How To Kill a Werewolf switch to attempts at humorous fiction laced with a few popular folkloric tidbits. Following are Chapters 17 (Explanations for Werewolf Phenomenon, including sections on hypertrichosis, ergot poisoning, porphyria, rabies, hysteria, cryptids) and 18 (Werewolves and the Psyche, including sections on clinical lycanthropy, Freud's interpretation of one man's wolf dreams, and the Jungian werewolf archetype), which return to the supposed non-fiction of all of the chapter prior to 15. It makes Chapters 15 and 16 stand our like a sore thumb and the transition to them and then back to Chapters 17 and 18 awkward at best.
Moving on...
In Appendix B, Further Reading: Suggested Nonfiction/Reference Books, there were five I was familiar with. Of the 15 other titles given, the publishing dates were between 2001 and 2009 (the majority between 2003 and 2009). Not that newer non-fiction on lycanthropy can't be thought-provoking (I highly suggest the 2009 release Werewolves: A Field Guide to Shapeshifters, Lycanthropes, and Man-Beasts by Dr. Bob Curran, which details many old histories and information from other sources I've read through the years. The black & white illustrations by Ian Daniels have a Gothic bent to them that aesthetically appeals to me [and--refreshingly--no stereotypically "Native American"-looking ones]. The only word of warning about the book's information: the few statements on Navajo cultural beliefs are wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. But that didn't surprise me. The best thing to do (well, what I do, that is), whenever you read a book about monsters or the paranormal that espouses any supposed American Indian spiritual beliefs or superstitions, either don't trust its accuracy, gloss over it completely, or view it as pure camp, fantasy, or personal (IE, ignorant) interpretation. Don't let that deter you, it's otherwise a wonderful book); I suppose it just renders me suspicious, if not curious, when I'm unfamiliar with so many of the books. I do plan to look them up on amazon.com and order used copies in the future.
I don't think I'll be placing The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves by Nathan Robert Brown on my shelves of werewolf/shape-shifter non-fiction or fiction. To me it deserves a place of rest among neither, nor will I be lending it out to anyone with an interest in the subject.
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves is a clumsy mixture of Cliff'sNotes type versions of oft-cited historical facts and lore, urban legends, descriptions of a few werewolf-themed movies, books, comics, anime, and games, "Native American werewolves and shapeshifters", relatives of the werewolf, therianthropes of the East, clinical lycanthropy, physical illnesses that may have spurred the idea of werewolves, and two chapters tossed in the mix that are attempts at humor (and boast prominent warnings that they are, in fact, humor, and not intended to be enacted on) -- Chapter 15. Once Bitten... Then What? and Chapter 16. How To Kill a Werewolf. These chapters are jarring, as suddenly it's goofy fantasy sandwiched between non-fiction chapters. I implore anyone who wants the subject matter of those two chapters presented in a skillfully written, witty, and thorough manner, that never breaks character and broadcasts no warnings (because--duh!--it's a parody), please order the amusing and vastly superior The Werewolf's Guide to Life: A Manual for the Newly Bitten by Ritch Duncan.
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves offers a few references, but not as many as most well done Complete Idiot's Guides do. Is this a book of personal conjecture? Is this a work of fiction? Is this a serious expose of werewolves in history and pop culture? The book vacillates awkwardly between all three. The back of the book states it provides:
I suppose it does what it says, but without proper references it's difficult to cross-check. Much of it can easily be discovered on-line. This is why I was dismayed when certain "facts" were offered that can be easily disproved, or at least called into question, if one does a good web search. How hard is a thorough Google search for both pro and con sites for each factoid/myth/urban legend/etc.? I just did so for a few days while writing this.
I could seriously spend weeks nitpicking each chapter and giving references to either discount the "facts" presented or to offer more widely accepted, different, or more thorough lore. Instead, I'll merely address a few things that made me scoff:
Chapter 2: An American Werewolf in... America.
As always, whenever you read a book about monsters or the paranormal that espouses any supposed American Indian (or any ethnicity that one isn't and hasn't been raised in the culture) spiritual beliefs or superstitions, either don't trust its accuracy, gloss over it completely, or take it as pure camp, fantasy, or personal interpretation. I forgive fiction authors who take liberties with ethnic beliefs (within reason), because fiction isn't fact, and fantasy is just that: fantasy, not reality. Unfortunately, a lot of folks aren't critical thinkers or skeptical readers, and they immediately believe what they read, be it fiction or presented as non-fiction. Just because a myth or story is repeated in several books and websites doesn't mean they're a true representation of Tribal thought or practices.
I had American Indian friends read this chapter. My answers are not baseless.
According to the book (on page 14), "the First Tribes of the Northwest Coast -- namely the Nootka, Quileute, and Kwakiutl -- are known to still actively teach certain forms of traditional lycanthropic rituals to their young men".
Um, no. No, no, and no. Lycanthropy is not an American Indian concept at all. Despite the mega-popularity of the "Twilight" book series and films, the Quileute Tribe aren't werewolves. Physical shape-shifting is fictional. "Twilight" is fantasy. And, as an aside, I found this article on the anti-feminist and racial stereotypes of the "Twilight" book/film series.
(On page 20), (this relates to the above statement) -- "The tribes of the Pacific Northwest are known to still teach spirit lycanthropy, though almost nothing is known about the details."
Simple -- the details aren't known because they DON'T teach lycanthropy, spirit or otherwise.
(Also on page 20), "Skinwalkers are primarily therianthropes, not lycanthropes."
No. Skinwalkers are not therianthropes or lycanthropes. Those things are not American Indian concepts. Skinwalkers are not werewolves, nor were-animals, and are not the equivalent of such.
This relates to a box on page 16, "Therianthropy is a term that is related to lycanthropy. It refers to the "were-state," in which a human assumes the form of an animal or a human-animal hybrid. Basically, lycanthropy is a specific form of therianthropy."
Heh. There is no term therianthropy in the dictionary. There are therianthropic (also therianthropism), and it's root, therian:
the⋅ri⋅an⋅throp⋅ic Pronunciation [theer-ee-an-throp-ik]
–adjective 1. being partly bestial and partly human in form.
2. of or pertaining to deities conceived or represented in such form.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
1885–90; < Gk thērí(on) beast + anthrop- + -ic
Related forms:
the⋅ri⋅an⋅thro⋅pism Pronunciation [theer-ee-an-thruh-piz-uhm], noun
Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------
the⋅ri⋅an Pronunciation [theer-ee-uhn]
–adjective 1. (in some classification systems) belonging or pertaining to the group Theria, comprising the marsupial and placental mammals and their extinct ancestors.
–noun 2. a therian animal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
< NL Theri(a) name of the group (< Gk thēría, pl. of thēríon wild beast) + -an
Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
One can easily extrapolate the definition of therianthropic, or therianthropism, into the term therianthropy or therianthrope and adopt the same characteristics to it. In that case, the definition given on page 16 for therianthropy is barely correct, and entirely misleading.
This suits this chapter well, though it's not specifically about it (it's from answers.yahoo.com):
"Answer: Kinda hard to answer your question because there is no such thing as a Native American "Shaman". And stay away anyone claiming to be American Indian shamans , talking about tarot cards and Wiccan/pagan things, or talking about crystals and New Age things. I've got nothing against shamanism, paganism, or the New Age, but a cow is not a horse: none of these things are traditionally Native American. Shamanism is a Russian mystic tradition, Wicca is a religion based in pre-Christian European traditions, Tarot readings are an Indo-European divination method, and the New Age is a syncretic belief system invented, as its name suggests, in the modern era. None of them have anything to do with authentic Indian traditions, and anyone who thinks they do is likely to be wrong about anything else he claims about Native American religions as well. Wiccans and New Agers don't have any more knowledge about actual American Indian beliefs than you do.
Second we DO NOT believe in werewolves or vampires.
Source(s):
enrolled tribal member, Eastern Cherokee"
Moving on...
Chapter 5: Relatives of the Werewolf.
(On page 46), "Were-cats are sometimes referred to in popculture as bastets."
Um, no. Hell no. Referring to a feline shape-shifter as a "bastet" is purely a World of Darkness invention created by the White Wolf Publishing role-playing game company. See this for detailed information on the Bastet breeds, character, and game mythology.
(on page 47), "Interestingly enough, were-cats are almost entirely absent from the folklore of Europe."
That's simply not true. See here and here, for European were-cat references. In some instances it took a fair deal of digging to uncover the information, but that's what research entails.
(on page 49), "A bruxsa, or cucubuth, is a creature that is both werewolf and vampire, though opinions differ on which came first."
Ironically, on an unrelated site (www.mythicalrealm.com), there was this reply to the same subject, from someone born and raised in Portugal:
"This page has something that I never heard of, the names given to werewolf-like creatures in Portugal.
Bruxsa is a word that I never had heard or seen in all my life. If we take the strangely located "s" then we get "Bruxa", and that is "witch" in Portuguese.
Cucubuth is obviously a word that is not Portuguese, and I would like to know where did they get that information. In fact, after a little search, I found some sites saying that Cucubuth was the name Avicenna gave to lycanthropy.
What I know about the Portuguese version of werewolves (lobisomens), is that they are shape-shifters like in many other European tales, and that they can change shape by rubbing themselves on the ground of some cross-roads, as my grandmother told me."
(also on page 49), "Were-cats, popularly referred to by some enthusiasts as bastets,"
Again, no. No, no, no. Referring to a feline shape-shifter as a "bastet" is purely a World of Darkness invention created by the White Wolf role-playing game company. See this for detailed information on the Bastet breeds, character, and game mythology.
Moving on...
Chapter 8: Werewolf Hysteria in Medieval France
Emphasis is made repeatedly that no one knows what the Beast of Gevaudan was. Perhaps it was a pack of dire wolves? Perhaps it was a loup-garou?
I'm stunned the author didn't make the effort to research beyond the records of the attacks and a smattering of the political intrigue at the time. Despite the conspiracy theorists and cryptozoology devotees who continue to believe the Beast of Gevaudan case remains unsolved, all I can say is--*snicker*--stop beating a dead Beast.
(from Coleman's, Cryptozoology A-Z)
"In 1960, after studying a notary report prepared by two surgeons who had examined the carcass in the 1700s, one authority determined that the creature's teeth were purely wolflike. But during the summer of 1997, discussion of the fur of the Beast of Gevaudan resurfaced. Franz Jullien, a taxidermist at the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, discovered that a stuffed specimen similar to the Beast of Gevaudan that had been shot by Jean Chastel had been kept in the collections of the museum from 1766 to 1819. It had been definitely identified, a fact that all researchers had overlooked. It was a striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena).
Novelist Henri Pourrat and naturalist Gerard Menatory had already proposed the hyena hypothesis, based on historical accounts, since Antoine Chastel (Jean Chastel's son) reportedly possessed such an animal in his menagerie, a hypothesis now supported by a zoologist's identification. While Jullien's rediscovery must be congratulated, questions remain about the role of the Chastels as creators of a false story involving an escaped hyena in order to cover up the rumors of one of the Chastels being a serial killer.
As to the 'other' beast of Gevaudan - the one buried on-site in Versaille - this was assuredly not responsible for the slayings (which continued after its death) and was identified at the time as a large, diseased wolf."
(From Wikipedia's Beast of Gevaudan entry):
"Richard H. Thompson, author of Wolf-Hunting in France in the Reign of Louis XV: The Beast of the Gévaudan, contended that there can be satisfactory explanations based on large wolves for all the Beast's depredations.
Another explanation is that the beasts were some type of domestic dog or crosses between wild wolves and domestic dogs, on account of their large size and unusual coloration. This speculation has found support from naturalist Michel Louis, author of the book La bête du Gévaudan: L'innocence des loups (English: The Beast of Gévaudan: The innocence of wolves) and an episode of Animal X. Louis wrote that Jean Chastel was frequently seen with a large red coloured mastiff, which he believes sired the beast. He explains that the beast's resistance to bullets may have been due to it wearing the armoured hide of a young boar, thus also accounting for the unusual colour. He dismisses hyenas as culprits, as the beast itself had 42 teeth, while hyenas have 34.
In October 2009, the History Channel produced a documentary called The Real Wolfman. Renowned cryptozoologist Ken Gerhardt and (a very skeptical) veteran criminal profiler George Deuchar, performed a thorough modern-day forensic investigation in an attempt to reveal the truth behind a mystery built upon a century of exaggerated claims. Travelling to Gevaudan, the two (who often challenged each other's tentative theories) spoke with various local officials, researched local archives of original hand written accounts, and even questioned an expert researcher on wolf behavior.
Meeting with the direct descendants of Jean Chastel, they had the opportunity to listen to family accounts handed down, as told by Jean Chastel himself, as well as the chance to examine and actually use the original rifle (in the supposed exact location) where 'the beast' was killed. Later on, extensive forensic testing of the reported 'silver bullets' used versus normal bullets in various ranges and angles would reveal their inability to accurately and effectively kill anything, including 'the beast'. Some people believed that the Beast might be a surviving remnant of a Mesonychid seeing how some witnesses described it as a huge wolf having hooves rather than paws.
Their research would also prove that wolves were incorrectly identified, as they are physically incapable of having enough bite force to easily cut through bone; decapitating or shearing off of limbs (as reported in the original archives). They also discovered through that area's museum that aside from the wolves originally and mistakenly presented to the king (as the culprits), that there is written record of an Asian Hyena being presented at the correct time, coinciding with the end of the killings. Not only did the local archive descriptions of the beast accurately depict what is an Asian Hyena, but researchers and caregivers of the animals today confirm that Hyenas are one of the few animals with known bite pressure, easily capable of biting through bone as described in the archived records. It was also determined that at that period in time, there are accounts of conflict and strife between Jean Chastel and members of the village. He also apparently was once in favor, but then had a falling out with the Church. He apparently became an outcast and kept to himself much of the time.
The investigation concluded that 'the beast' was no more than an (at the time very common) exotic animal in the form of an Asian Hyena (long haired species of Hyaenidae, now extinct), with a possibly bitter, vengeful human caretaker by the name of Jean Chastel. This is what would also explain why Jean Chastel was able to supposedly kill the animal with a silver bullet, which would be only possible at close range in a vital area (most likely after it was called by name). According to the King's museum curator, the records indicate that this original Asian Hyena is still in the museum's possession, but most likely today was used to complete other partial specimens. An actual Asian Hyena (Hyaenidae) specimen is shown, (with a shot of the tag listing the species Phylum) during this section of the show for the curious."
Moving on...
Chapter 11: Werewolves in Film.
(In a box on page 135 discussing "An American Werewolf in London"), "In 1997, a similarly styled film, An American Werewolf in Paris, was released. In many ways the film pays homage to the original. With only a few differences in setting and plot, however, many consider these two movies to be identical."
Whoa nelly. Negatori! The two are vastly dissimilar. Both films share the theme of the werewolf being haunted in oft amusing fashion by the specters of their victims, and that's the sole similarity that I found between them. Rent them both and compare. Or read the Wikipedia description of "An American Werewolf in London" and then the Wikipedia description of "An American Werewolf in Paris".
Better yet? Skip "An American Werewolf in Paris" entirely, pretend it never existed, and immerse yourself in the joy of "An American Werewolf in London".
(on page 136, discussing "Silver Bullet"), "Marty lived with his sister, Jane, and Uncle Red in the quiet rural town of Tarker's Mill."
Not quite. The characters Marty and Jane lived with their parents. The character Uncle Red came to stay for the summer and only when it came to finding (and later fighting) the werewolf did they convince the parents to take a vacation. Here's the film's synopsis.
Moving on...
Chapter 13: Werewolves in Gaming.
On pages 161, the description of the NES video game "Werewolf: The Last Warrior" (from 1990) isn't accurate. The hard-to-miss fact that your werewolf form's arms are hooked blades isn't something you forget to mention (it's not just the bad guy's werewolf form at the end, as stated by the author). For a precise and funny description of the game, with graphics from it and an option to download the actual game, click here.
(On page 164, regarding White Wolf's Werewolf RPG series), "Probably the most popular werewolf-based role-playing game in history began with Werewolf: The Forsaken from White Wolf Publishing."
Wrong! It began with in 1992 with Werewolf: The Apocalypse by White Wolf Publishing. The popular game, a part of the World of Darkness, continued until 2004. Then the entire World of Darkness games were discontinued. Certain titles were refurbished and brought to light in 2005, including a very different version of Werewolf called Werewolf: The Forsaken.
(On page 165), "In recent years White Wolf has phased out the original Werewolf game guides and replaced them with a new, more universal system called GURPS: Shapeshifters."
Nope. GURPS, or Generic Universal RolePlaying System, isn't new; it's been around since the '80s. Since the '80's, it's provided adaptations that can be used with most popular game titles, such as Dungeons & Dragons, Advanced D&D, and Werewolf: The Apocalypse to name a few. However, White Wolf's current crop of revamped games are White Wolf Publishing's own.
Moving on...
Chapter 14: Werewolves and Urban Legends.
(On page 181, under The Black Hounds of Britain). "Many black dog legends claim that the number of times one saw a hellhound dictated what would happen. Most commonly, one time means joy, two times means ill fortune, and a third time is a sign of untimely death."
This didn't seem right to me, and something about it niggled at me. I looked up more than eight sites on hellhounds/black dogs/padfoot/shuck/etc., and found nothing to substantiate this. The closest thing I found was:
"As legend goes, if one happened to see the hellhound three times directly in the eyes, he or she will die an abrupt and unseen death.", which was given in other sites as well. Personally, I'm fond of this article I found on black dogs in folklore. I think what might have happened was the author threw in old folkloric bird-count rhyming and applied it to hellhounds. The similarity to what he wrote and this is curious:
"In the Annotated Mother Goose:
"In most European countries, it is thought to be lucky to meet 'one' magpie, raven or crow:
One's lucky,
Two's unlucky"
An aside -- for more awesome bird-count rhymes, check out Surlalune Fairy Tales board archives.
Moving on...
Then, jarringly, Chapter 15: Once Bitten... Then What? and Chapter 16: How To Kill a Werewolf switch to attempts at humorous fiction laced with a few popular folkloric tidbits. Following are Chapters 17 (Explanations for Werewolf Phenomenon, including sections on hypertrichosis, ergot poisoning, porphyria, rabies, hysteria, cryptids) and 18 (Werewolves and the Psyche, including sections on clinical lycanthropy, Freud's interpretation of one man's wolf dreams, and the Jungian werewolf archetype), which return to the supposed non-fiction of all of the chapter prior to 15. It makes Chapters 15 and 16 stand our like a sore thumb and the transition to them and then back to Chapters 17 and 18 awkward at best.
Moving on...
In Appendix B, Further Reading: Suggested Nonfiction/Reference Books, there were five I was familiar with. Of the 15 other titles given, the publishing dates were between 2001 and 2009 (the majority between 2003 and 2009). Not that newer non-fiction on lycanthropy can't be thought-provoking (I highly suggest the 2009 release Werewolves: A Field Guide to Shapeshifters, Lycanthropes, and Man-Beasts by Dr. Bob Curran, which details many old histories and information from other sources I've read through the years. The black & white illustrations by Ian Daniels have a Gothic bent to them that aesthetically appeals to me [and--refreshingly--no stereotypically "Native American"-looking ones]. The only word of warning about the book's information: the few statements on Navajo cultural beliefs are wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. But that didn't surprise me. The best thing to do (well, what I do, that is), whenever you read a book about monsters or the paranormal that espouses any supposed American Indian spiritual beliefs or superstitions, either don't trust its accuracy, gloss over it completely, or view it as pure camp, fantasy, or personal (IE, ignorant) interpretation. Don't let that deter you, it's otherwise a wonderful book); I suppose it just renders me suspicious, if not curious, when I'm unfamiliar with so many of the books. I do plan to look them up on amazon.com and order used copies in the future.
I don't think I'll be placing The Complete Idiot's Guide to Werewolves by Nathan Robert Brown on my shelves of werewolf/shape-shifter non-fiction or fiction. To me it deserves a place of rest among neither, nor will I be lending it out to anyone with an interest in the subject.