In the beginning of things men were animals and animals men. ~ Algonquin saying

"For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much — the wheel, New York, wars and so on — whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man — for precisely the same reasons." ~ The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Monday, September 26, 2011

Frontiers of Zoology: Chupacabras SOLVED

In-depth, insightful, and very interesting, and goes way beyond the pop culture, pedestrian, and  non-esoteric attempts by skeptic Benjamin Radford:Frontiers of Zoology: Chupacabras SOLVED, by Dale Drinnon.

There's much there, and this is just a little bit from Drinnon's post:
For the most part, the traditional creatures later being CALLED chupacabras in Mexico are referred to under the blanket terms of 'Nahual' or 'Nagual.' This was originally the name of an Aztec magical practitioner and healer but more usually means the same thing as witch or demon any more. The term 'Brujo' is also used. The idea behind Naguals originally was that they had certain animal totems, which granted them powers and allowed the practitioners to assume animal form - any of a number of different forms. I suppose even hairless coyote would count. So more recently the term includes shapeshifters in general AND the totem power animals as well. The name also has a more positive meaning of protective spirits in animal form. In the case of the reptilian chupacabras, I am not certain as to what the native name of the totem power animal supernatural lizard originally was, but different recent references call it the King Lizard or King Iguana, Dragon or Dragon Lizard, Cipactli and possibly Chan. 

I chose the above because it resonated with me: totem animals, Naguals, shape-shifters. Note Dale's remark about shape-shifters: "...allowed the practitioners to assume animal form ... I suppose even hairless coyote would count." Interesting take, given the number of hairless canine creatures seen, and all too often killed, that fit this description. I've always looked at the two types of chupacabra from a more social-folkloric perspective concerning the way language (names and labels) change. But Drinnon's theories go further, and deeper, presenting us with a parallel esoteric, or living myth via symbolism in the shape of a chupacabra.

No comments:

Post a Comment