On the Nature of Magic

I have been reading with interest Damien Walter's Guardian article entitled 'Why English culture is bewitched by magic'. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/feb/23/english-culture-magic-merlin-harry-potter
      If I might take the liberty of summarising the resulting debate, Damien suggests England is more into magic than other places, and the commenters largely disagree, citing Scotland, Wales, Germany, USA and Haiti as more deeply  into it.
      At one point he states 'magic is essentially a metaphor for power'. Yet this is an over-simplification. The conventional sources of power are outwith the realm of magic. The world is ruled by force, wealth, and persuasion. Nothing magical there. Magic is miraculous power.
      Why is the public so fascinated by miraculous power? I think this becomes clear when we examine the other movies people flock to see. Cop shows and violent action thrillers, where the hero miraculously survives blizzards of bullets and bombs, while the baddies are mown down like wheat. These movies are equally as magical as Harry Potter, but in a different way. They show a person, often isolated and abandoned, going up against enormously powerful malign forces and prevailing against impossible odds, as though his heroism and virtue endowed him with a spell of invulnerability. This is actually a kind of parable that is intentionally being retold over and over, even though its authors must know it lacks plot credibility.
       Ordinary people feel powerless, and fantastic stories enable them to escape from those feelings briefly.
       Whether they achieve that by vicarious means at the cinema, or by joining a witches coven and prancing around in the woods, is a matter of taste.
        Does magic really exist? We would like to think that it does, and we might someday get our hands on magic powers. What kind of world would we live in if magic powers became commonplace? What if an angry neighbour could make us sick by casting a spell in the privacy of his own home? Perhaps we should count our blessings, and be grateful for the regularities of Natural Law.
        Do modern people really believe in magic? I saw some young Christians being interviewed  on TV a few years ago, and they seemed to believe that if they prayed for something God would give it to them. This magical ritual is quite different from prayer as interpreted by many other religious believers, who see it as a form of thanksgiving, a way of trying to become closer to God, of bringing their lives into alignment with His will. Yet some believe that prayers of supplication will be successful.
       Many people seem to believe in Luck. The word luck has two directly opposed meanings. One is as a synonym for random chance. The other is as a magical personal quality which people are born with, and which enables them to defeat the laws of probability. Sometimes this belief is accompanied by a magical ritual, such as carrying a good luck charm, but often this is thought unnecessary, the magic power is 'built-in'. I met a young man some years ago who had worked as a croupier in a casino. Even he believed he was born lucky, though you would have thought the casino experience would have disillusioned him. He worked in a successful Asian family shop, and was later replaced by the boss's girlfriend. The shop declined, and he concluded that its success had been due to his Luck, rather than thinking the girlfriend might have driven customers away through poor service, or that a rival shop might have opened.
       Studies into habitual gamblers show that they typically do not have an accurate assessment of their success. Those who think they are winners are usually only breaking even, while those who think they break even are usually suffering small but steady losses. They remember their winners better than their losers, allowing them to continue to believe in their luck.
       A scientific experiment was recently performed into belief in luck, and reported on the BBC website. Volunteers were told the experiment was being performed in another building, and given directions to walk to it. A £20 note had been planted on the pavement they were to use. Those who believed they were naturally lucky turned out to be three times more likely to see and pick up the money, compared with those who believed they were unlucky! The scientists concluded that people who believe in their luck are more alert to opportunity, and braver at taking advantage of it.
       This suggests it is a completely irrational magical idea which may nonetheless carry a biological advantage. 
       Is it possible that there could be a gene for this belief? If so it could be selected for by evolution. Such a gene might have all sorts of other related effects of inducing irrational beliefs whose disadvantages could be outweighed by the benefits of belief in one's own luck. Such as belief in the efficacy of magic spells.
       This idea reminds me of John Corrie, MP, formerly the Member for North Ayrshire where I used to live. He repeatedly told the local newspaper that he possessed psychic powers. He claimed to be able to predict the future, and made a series of inaccurate forecasts. He also claimed that he had an unusually high level of bodily electricity, and could draw sparks from his knuckles. He seemed an obvious lunatic, yet he clung to political office for many years. Could the benefits of his exaggerated belief in his own powers have outweighed his eccentricity and propelled him up the political ladder? Political leaders have often damaged their countries through gross overoptimism, such as Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union.
       There is no guarantee that evolution will always favour reason over unreason, unfortunately.

Down with the pseuds!

I've been talking to a friend over the Net. He has had some problems, and has joined something called 'The Social Inclusion Programme". They have been taught to use poetry as a method of expressing their emotions. Apparently, all their poems are about how angry they are with JobCentrePlus. Oh well. I read somewhere recently that all you have to do to write a poem is to have an emotion.
       If that is the case, why are we taught that poetry is the province of intellectuals? Specifically, literary intellectuals. They are hell-bent on persuading us that poetry is reserved for them, and they should be paid large quantities of taxpayer's money for reading it and discussing it with their friends. And if it's not 'intellectual' enough for them, they are quite happy to sneer at the writer. Why not? After all, if anybody can write poetry, and all you need is an emotion, then why should the 'intellectuals' be allowed to laze about at taxpayer's expense, jawing with their mates, and looking down their noses at the rest of us from an enormous altitude? Clearly they need to stifle that idea at birth.
        If the public were to grasp that anyone can write poetry, and it is a natural method of expression like prose, the grip of the professoriate on the taxpayer's wallet might loosen, and the lazy snobs might have to get a proper job.
        English, after all, is not naturally a university-level subject. You shouldn't really be at university if you aren't reasonably fluent in your mother tongue. So they teach Literature rather than English. All over the country, housewives are forming book groups and discussing what they are reading. They do it for fun, and do not expect to be paid. Isn't their activity essentially the same as that of a university English department?
        No doubt the professors will argue that their sneers at other people's scribblings are somehow more profound than those of the housewives, rather than merely more acerbic. Is it true though? And is it relevant? Writing is about communication. It is not like chess, where it is an advantage if your strategy is too rarefied for other people to understand.
        What is the essence of pseudo-intellectualism? I can recommend a subscription to Private Eye where it is regularly exposed. It is certainly the case that pseuds use jargon differently than real professionals like engineers, doctors and lawyers. Serious people use jargon for abbreviation, and a translation to plain English would be enormously longer. If the arcane witterings of the pseuds were translated, they would become shorter.

Legion of the Damned

In the Middle East the crisis grows,
A brooding evil lurks and knows.
The Devil's Legion craft their plot,
For truth they do not give a jot.

The danger menaces us all,
In recent days it is not small.
The greedhead scum do plot and scheme,
Toward killing is their natural lean.

For peace our hope does slowly wane,
A Furtive Power will be our bane.
God damn all those who go along,
Their foul reward will not last long.

Those swine who lord it over us,
For traitor's pay betray our trust.
Sly minions of a foreign power,
They'll stab our backs in fateful hour.

Hypocrisy's their middle name,
For bribes they play their dirty game.
On Persia they place canting blame,
Nuke-armed they seem quite without shame.