Talk:Barbara G. Walker

Comments
I've added a little more information, and took out the description of Walker as a believer in the Goddess because she is an atheist. My source for this is her autobiographical book, The Skeptical Feminist. Ekpardo


 * I'm confused by this assertion. The Sceptical Feminist is a book by Janet Radcliffe Richards, and English anaytical philosopher. 12:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You're both correct. I found reference to The Skeptical Feminist: Discovering the Virgin, Mother, and Crone by Walker at Amazon.com, and also to Radcliffe's book. Scarlet Lioness 15:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

There are no references to the source(s) of the criticism of Walkers work. This would be useful to verify its authenticity.220.233.168.223 00:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

This article does not meet the Wikipedia requirements for biographies of living persons because there are no sources provided for the criticisms of Walker's work. It's been six months since a request for sources was made, and policy requires poorly sourced information to removed immediately. I am therefore forced to remove the material in question. Thank you.BambooFence 06:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Transferred Comment from Main Article
"The above information concerning Barbara G. Walkers' claim concerning the origin of the term Ferris Wheel in her book "The Secrets of Tarot" is wholly inaccurate. There is no mention of the Fenrir or the Fenris Wolf in "Secrets of Tarot"; and although there are a few references to Managarm, that other mythological wolf of Norse tradition, no wolf is mentioned in conjunction with the Ferris Wheel. This said, it must be admitted that her works do make unverified and often unverifiable assertions, employ footnotes and source citations in unreliable and misleading ways, and often phrase things so as to create a fallacious interpretation on the part of the reader.  Other information comes from questionable or inaccurate sources; while still other references come down to issues of historical interpretation that will not be settled until historians themselves settle their own issues and disagreements. Despite all of this, there are also accurate references in her works, and a great game may be made of finding truth amid fiction. Mostly her work finds interesting parallels in imagery and symbol and, seemingly, constructs an ad hoc history to explain it in terms of patriarchal oppression and deliberate misrepresentation by the Christian Church. I do not pretend to know whether the errors, misleads and inaccuracies which occur are deliberate or honest errors on Ms. Walkers part.

Returning to the matter of the Ferris Wheel; she does discuss it in "The Secrets of Tarot", in the section concerning the Wheel of Fortune trump. She actually leads the reader to believe that Ferris Wheel is derived not from "Fenris" (which, at any rate, would make no sense whatsoever), but from the phrase "Fairy's Wheel". She actually, never even claims that this is the etymology of Ferris Wheel, but rather creates an illusion that seduces the unwary reader into jumping to that conclusion. After citing a number of images of people and/or fairies riding up and down on enchanted wheels, found in myths, legends, fairy lore, folk tradition, carnival entertainments and traditions, together with some images derived from questionable reconstructions of mythology, she describes these as "the Fairy's Wheel" and then says that the modern carnival and amusement park Ferris Wheel is today's counterpart or heir to the older Fairy's Wheels and Oar Wheels. Her phrasing simply suggests a relation between Fairy's Wheel and Ferris Wheel without ever making such a connection herself.

Likewise, she never actually goes so far as to say that the Ferris Wheel was in fact directly derived from these older legendary, allegorical, and festival Wheels; yet her wording seduces the reader into assuming that is what she just said. While this particular example is remarkable for its skill in letting the reader make historical errors without making them herself, other passages in her work are not necessarily so free of direct inaccuracy. While there is much of value in her work, it requires careful reading and constantly checking her sources to sift the wheat from the chaffe.

It is interesting that, despite the ease of finding misleading statements, questionable interpretations, unverified claims and outright errors in her books, many critics of her work give false examples (such as the above Fenris wolf citation). Some of these erroneous criticisms are simply the result of careless reading of leading passages in her works, as I myself have accused her of incorrectly claiming that the Ferris Wheel derives, etymologically, from the Fairy's Wheel. It is only recently, upon careful re-reading, that I discovered she makes no such claim and merely leads the reader to make that jump on his or her own. Another example of a false criticism occurs in Ian Hancock's rather negative review of her "Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets," published in the Newsletter of the Gypsy Lore Society, 7(1):4 (1984). Here he attempts to show the numerous problems and inaccuracies of that work by stating:

"The shakiness of Walker’s scholarship, and her zeal to find sexual symbolism in almost everything, could probably be illustrated by statements taken from anywhere else in the book. Just one that this reviewer chanced upon was the suggestion that Cinderella’s glass slipper “perhaps stood for the Crystal Cave by which pagan heroes entered the uterine underworld” (p. 186). Continental versions of the Cinderella story have her wearing fur slippers, not glass ones, the English version resulting from a misinterpretation of French vair “squirrel fur” as verre “glass” (Smythe-Palmer 1883:145)."

While this passage has absolutely no relevance to the accuracy or inaccuracy of Ms. Walker's claims about "Gypsy Lore", it does call into question the accuracy of Mr. Hancock's own research. While it is true that her interpretation of the glass slipper as relating to the "Crystal Cave" is unlikely, at best, and should only be suggested as an analogy and not as having direct historical relation; the origin of the glass slipper as a misinterpretation of the French vair is equally false. It is an oft-repeated error and was once a popular theory, although one based on little more than mere conjecture. This is where Mr. Hancock's own work must be tarred with the same pitch as Ms. Walkers. The oldest and most common versions of the Cinderella story and its Fairy Tale cognates had the slippers, sandals or shoes composed of some rare and valuable, and often improbable, material. Gold was a very common substance for it. In Perrault's day, glass was valuable, and glass and crystal lend an aura of enchantment, certainly. Few versions of the story have fur slippers. The earliest known Cinderella story (the Chinese tale of Yeh-hsien)already has the impractical but marvelous gold slippers. Most authorities on the subject believe that Perrault did in fact intend glass and that it is the attempt to read "vair" (fur) which is in error. (See Maria M. Tatar's "the Annotated Classic Fairy Tales", for instance). The scholarly work on fairy tales at the website SurLaLune discusses the rarity of glass slippers in fairy tales, but gives a number of examples (most, though not all of which, are influenced by the French glass slipper tradition). In addition to glass, we find "blue glass", crystal and diamond slippers in various stories and not all of them are specifically tellings of Cinderella, but share the traditional motifs of monosandalism, finding the foot to match the slipper, and similar material. In Perrault's day, glass was a highly valued commodity, produced by skilled artisans, and much coveted by the aristocratic.

It is interesting that Mr. Hancock seems particularly bothered by Ms. Walker's belief that traditional Gypsy sexuality could have been anything other than priggish in nature. She would have us believe that Gypsies maintained a sort of matrifocal tantric sexuality going back to their origins in India. He would have us believe that they would never have engaged in such activities and that they live by the same sexual morality as is espoused by the white, western Judeo-Christian status quo. He uses Barbara Walker's sexual interpretation of the Prince's slipping of the slipper on Cinderella's dainty foot (the act that confirms their love and brings about their marriage in the story) as proof that Ms. Walker would go to absurd lengths to force sexual interpretations into her subject matter. Unfortunately for his argument, many respected scholars on Fairy Tales have agreed that there is a blatantly erotic element to this part of the story. Indeed, prior to the 1800's, erotic material was quite common in the fairy tale genre, as was the most graphic of violence (see Marina Warner's "From the Beast to the Blonde," for leads on this aspect of Fairy Tale research). The annals of psychology, anthropology, folklore, urban legend and popular slang and superstition are rife with analogous examples of the eroticizing of feet and footwear, often with them standing in as blatant, or implicit, genital references or as having direct connection to the genitals. Such examples are too well known to need citation here. Again, this having been said, Barbara Walker's belief that the Cinderella foot in slipper eroticism is indicative of its being part of an underground pagan counterculture and her implication that it derives from the sex rites of the Mysteries of Eleusis, cannot be supported in any literal sense.

It remains fascinating, however, that so many false criticisms of her work crop up when there are perfectly legitimate criticisms that are readily made."

Not my words, just uncluttering the article. Icarus of old (talk) 05:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Notability & research
I fully beleive in Barbara G Walker's notability, if only for her contributions to knitting. There's hardly a modern knitter in America that doesn't know of or use her Treasuries. She's also associated with Elizabeth Zimmerman, arguably the most influential American knitter ever. I'm doing more research on her and am working up an article - though it will take me some time. It will mainly deal with her textile arts, as I already own several books on this and have easy access to more - though I will try and cover her feminist writings, as well.

Galeforcewind (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I went back and re-read the notability guidlines and I beleive she qualifies under the significant number of reliable and secondary sources (I have 6 books - not about her - that talk about BGW just laying around, not to mention what I found at the library!)

Also under the Notability Guidelines for articles on People, she qualifies under (at least): Any biography 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. (Many designers use her stitch patterns, Her treasuries are on many "Recommended Reading" lists, etc.)

Creative professionals 1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors. 2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. (Mosaic Knitting, she unified charting of patterns)

OK - that's it, thanks! Galeforcewind (talk) 20:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Barbara G. Walker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060509174839/http://www.ffrf.org:80/day/?sel=1&day=2&month=7 to http://www.ffrf.org/day/?sel=1&day=2&month=7

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)