Customer Reviews

At the Bottom of the Garden: A Dark History of Fairies, Hobgoblins, Nymphs, and Other Troublesome Things

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Faery lore is a complicated thing--a mishmash of myths, beliefs, and tales that don't always add up to a coherent whole. Much has been written about the connection between faeries and half-remembered indigenous gods, and about the possibility that faeries were actually an ancient race of humans banished to the wilds. The market is filled, today, with books of beautiful and sweet faeries. But there is no other book like this one.

Diane Purkiss's theory is that the faeries are reminiscent of the demons of the Mediterranean culture--the lamashtu who steals babies away into death, the lamia who seduces and devours men--and that faery lore deals with the same issues as these earlier myths. The faeries, she contends, were an explanation for why beautiful young people were taken away in illness and death. She tells heartbreaking stories of women who tortured and abandoned their sick babies, thinking them changelings; she disturbs us with the tale of Michael Cleary, who killed his wife and honestly seemed to believe his *real* wife would return to him now that he had disposed of the faery impostor. A far-fetched belief? Perhaps not; fairy stories of the time seemed to advocate just such actions. Purkiss takes us on an uncomfortable journey through the most brutal of faery myths, then into the Victorian age, when faeries became a symbol of idealized childhood. But there was a dark side to this as well--onstage "faeries" were played by street orphans who lived incredibly hard lives, and Barrie's _Peter Pan_ takes on a very different undertone when it comes out that the children in the play were based on children Barrie had known, who had *died young* and therefore stayed forever young.

I would have given this book five stars for its unique and disturbing perspective--it ought to be on the shelves of faery enthusiasts if only for balance--but I subtracted a star because Purkiss insists that her theory is the only valid way to look at the fairy-faith. There are many different beliefs that shaped the concept of the faery; I applaud Purkiss for digging into some of the darkest ones. But, as I said before, balance...balance...balance.

A fantastic resource for skeptics and believers in the hidden world alike, At the Bottom of the Garden tracks the reasons behind the fairy mythos from ancient roots to present day UFOs. Despite criticisms of Purkiss's scholarship, the book sheds more light on the human condition than anything else, and is an excellent resource for writers and others who are trying to understand the way human need creates myths.

I picked up this book thinking it would be an light-hearted, fun history of fairies, and was certainly not prepared for the author's rather darker take on the subject. However, I was willing to give it a try, despite the heavy academic tone.

Purkiss starts off well, drawing interesting parallels between the demons of the ancient Mediterranean world and later Celtic and European fairy beliefs. However, she skims right over the Middle Ages, a time which, to my mind, really represents fairy lore at its most prototypical, and launches into a rather tedious examination of the role of fairy stories in the Scottish witch trials. It was not until I looked up Purkiss' bibliography that I realized this was a subject she was very well-versed in, and it is at this point that the book really suffers.

Throughout the rest of the book, Purkiss insists on tying everything back to these Scottish tales, though I do not think they are particularly representative of fairies in general. Even at the end, she is still remarking upon stories which are "like Bessie Dunlop's", despite the fact that fairy beliefs existed long before Bessie did, and therefore it is not really correct to use the Scottish stories as a measuring stick for all fairies.

However, this is the period of time in which she chooses to fix her idea of the "real" fairy, and this is the problem with the book. Purkiss is obviously disgusted with the modern concept of sweet, tiny flower fairies, which has its roots in Victorian times. Instead, she believes the "real" fairies were the dark, malicious, death-bringing fairies of medieval Scotland, and does not fail to let us know this by continually dismissing literature and folk beliefs throughout the ages as not true to her "real" fairies. She disparages Shakespeare and Spenser for modifying older fairy beliefs, and spends the latter part of the book exploring what is "wrong" with fairy lore as it evolved.

The problem with this, of course, is that there *is* no One True Belief in fairies. That's like saying that because the Christian religion started out differently, we should all worship exactly as they did in the 1200's. Beliefs are evolving and changing, and the current folklore of fairies is that they are small, sweet, and occasionally mischievious. Purkiss may not find that view to her liking, but it's just as silly to ask us to see the cruel Scottish fairies as the "real" belief as it would be to restore the practice of indulgences, or exorcism.

She's erudite and knowledgeable, and some of her parallels, such as comparing fairy abduction to alien abduction, are original and thought-provoking, but she heaps endless criticism on those who stray from "real" fairy beliefs while letting her own views prejudice her exploration of fairy history, rather than simply letting the tale tell itself without judgement.

It seems as though Diane Purkiss tried to do too much. There are a lot of interesting tidbits here, and she starts off strong with an interesting thesis that the origin of fairy-type myths is actually in the demons of the Mediteranean, etc. rather than in Celtic beliefs. Unfortunately, while I think her purpose here was to provide a clear continuum of fairy beliefs to the present, her arguments get a bit muddled as she tries to gather together a lot of different fairy types/stories in one place, organized by historical time period, without exactly explaining where or how they fit with one another. There are no strong conclusions to tie the book together - if anything one ends up rereading the introduction to try and keep her chain of reasoning straight. I had difficulty getting through it and I am very interested in this kind of material. Try Katharine Briggs' Encyclopedia instead, if you can find it.

This satisfactorally fat book kept me happily occupied for two days. I read the last chapter first, for some reason, but then began at the beginning and read straight through. Since I had a smattering of knowledge on the subjects covered, I was delighted to find out more. The scholarship is never allowed to become overbearing, and I found the style enjoyable. The matters were heavy enough for me to feel pleasantly stretched, but not swamped. Whether or not you agree with all the conclusions reached, this is an excellent buy for anyone interested in historical perspectives.

I may have misjudged this book at first. It is a heavier read than I expected and so I wouldn't recommend it unless you are seriously interested in the subject - HOWEVER reading this book has its share of rewards. Diane Purkiss diligently explores fairy myths through history and the most interesting aspect of her work is that she links them with the perspective and concerns of WOMEN - especially in terms of childbirth and death, both of oneself and/or the child. Read it, but be prepared to lose your romantic notions. I had quite a bit of knowledge of fairy lore and I still had to come to terms with losing mine - which may have led me to rate it more harshly than was deserved on the first read. Little did I realize the sorrow and fear at the base of fairy lore - an important lesson that the author teaches with patience and thoroughness.

This book does not tell the story of the degeneration of the ancient and scary legends that gave birth to the Victorian flower fairies familiar to most people today. The author tends to begin sections with very (very) poor attempts at narrative to draw the reader in but that's it, the rest is analysis. However, I would like to emphasize that it is not scholarly analysis of any kind. The book is mostly a long and boring rant trying to look academic. The author keeps getting sidetracked into complaining about things she doesn't like which I wouldn't mind if it was at all interesting. It is also extremely repetitive. I made it to the chapter on nymphs before I realized that every single section was saying the exact same things over and over. I flipped to a random spot later and the book and saw the exact same statements and gave up trying to read it.

In short this book tries to do everything and so succeeds at nothing. It doesn't have the pull of a narrative, the academic pretensions spoil the ranting and the ranting discredits the attempt at scholarship.

I would love to read a good book, academic or otherwise, on the darker aspects of magical creatures. This is not it.

i didn't know too much about fairy lore when i read this book. i knew the basics, a bit of tinkerbell, shakespeare's fairies, the fairy picture scam... and the like, but after reading diane purkiss's book, i feel a bit more aqauinted with the fairy world.

it's an interesting history, and i have nothing to compare it to in terms of thoroughness etc. i wasn't too particularly keen on her writing style, her asides were not very funny (i think she was trying to be humorous) and were jarring intermingled with the material. some of the sections were tedious to read, instead of retelling the old stories in a lot of places she had excerpts from the material, and they were annoying to trudge through (i've never been a fan of reading olde english).

for strict enjoyment purposes i would say don't get this, but if you are interested in fairy lore and really want to learn about it, then i say go ahead and get it. (i checked it out of the library...)

I'm surprized that some reviewers found this book "scholarly." I suppose it is, by the worst of current standards. Ms. Purkiss has some interesting insights into the history of fairy lore, but her book loses them in a mish-mash of affectation and Paglia-would-beism. Too bad. In one chapter Purkiss tries to take a photo in a "Fairy Store". The shop owner objects, "I won't let you take pictures! You'll just use them to open your own shop.' In vain I said that I had no intention of opening a fairy shop; in vain I flourished academic credentials. 'Anyone could say that!' she spat." Ms.Purkiss goes on to judge the "lady's" (arch condescension) values as "commercial." Hmm. (contact her literary agent for more info.) If you are interested in the debunking of fairy cuteness, try instead Sylvia Townsend Warner's wonderfully written "Kingdoms of Elfin."

A MUCH BETTER READ IS "THE WORLD GUIDE TO GNOMES, FARIES, ELVES, AND OTHER LITTLE PEOPLE" BY THOMAS KEIGHTLEY. ALSO K.M. BRIGGS HAS GREAT BOOKS ON FARIES THOUGH MOST OF HER BOOKS ARE OUT OF PRINT. TO KNOW THE DARK SIDE OF FARIES IS EASY JUST READ ANY BOOK ON CELIIC LORE OR FOLK TALES FROM THE LATE 1600'S WHICH THOMAS KEIGHTLEY HAS MANY OLD DARK TALES IN HIS BOOK. DIANE PURKIS SAYS NOTHING NEW IN THIS BOOK AND TRIES HER BEST TO MIX HER FEMINIST SWING INTO EVERY PAGE.