THE MISADVENTURES OF AN ESOTERIC INVESTIGATOR

This is actually a tattoo design for a friend. Good call :P

From:

3starsinmyeyes.livejournal.com

my tattoo is similar to that, with out the otter and salmon
:)

From:

It's lovely, but it's upside-down, and being a Celt myself, it's appropriate to turn it rightside-up.

From:

I originally had it that way, but It looks better this way, I thought :P

From:

Oh don't get me wrong, it looks good, and I do know some Celts who do turn it that way to do away with the Christian associations of the triquetra to their trinity. I think, though, the reason I don't turn it in that direction, is because it still has associations with (though the celtic knotwork takes away from that theme).

From:

The traditional representation is with the otter's head and feet downwards. I've seen it several places in this depiction, and it's what I wanted (being a design for my tattoo. ;)

From:

Oh, and as I've stated before, I will take no offence whatsoever if you chose not to use it :)

From:

Though you were probably referring to the triskelion, not the otter's body. Oops. :)

From:

So, my question is, do you like the design? Would you like me to deliver the drawing to you before you vanish again? :)

From:

I'm in awe of the design. I love what you did with the otter's body and the salmon. The only criticism I have (not of the design, but of the design as it relates to incorporation/symbolism for my tattoo) is that the triskelion aspect of the image is very strong, almost stronger than the otter, and that it IS upside-down, which might need to be modified for tattoo-age. This is so much closer to what I want than what I originally showed you, though, and I'm so excited. Did I tell you I have to get it done in Madison? I don't think I'll have the money to do it in Vermont now. So It'll probably be the week I come back and move in. I was starting to waffle a little on it but now I'm so damned excited it's not even funny.

From:

No, you didn't tell me it's going to be done in Madison :)

I didn't know that the triskelion had a particular direction it had to go in :P I was also worried I made the triskelion too big, but that can be slimmed down. If you look closely, the triskelion is actually the otter's tail. As for turning it right-side-up, hmmm.. I'll have to ponder that one to see how I would do such a thing.

I'm glad you're exicted. i basically did what you asked, you liked the otter design, but said it was plain, so I complicated-it up a bit :)

Have a safe trip! I'm sorry I didn't get to see you this week; I've missed you!

From:

Actually the above image is mistakenly called the triskel or the triskelion. However, the above image is a triquetra. The triskel is the symbol I usually wear, like this one: http://www.wagnermania.com/Mitos/imagenes/28/Triskel.jpg

From:

Triskelion is just greek for any symbol that consists of a symmetrical symbol with three protruding appendages.

From:

Forgive my splitting hairs, but that's incorrect. The word triskelion is Latin, originating from the Greek "triskeles" which means "three-legged." It is very specific. Symbolism goes back in several countries, s/a Sicily, Greece, Ireland, etc. Typical use of this symbol was of the a man with three legs, to represent the cycle of life; I wear the depiction of the spirals for the legs, which gives it a Celtic flavor, to separate myself from other Wiccans and Pagans.

From:

Actually, we're both correct. I know a bit more about this than you seem to think I do. Its typical greek reference is to the three-legged symbol, but it can also be used as a term to refer to any other tri-radiant symbol. I'm not a Celtic pagan (though I spent a good many years following that path and) but I did choose the design very specifically because of its personal and traditional associations, my own ethnic and spiritual background, and lot of research. I'm not one of those people who chose a random tribal design because it "looks cool." I appreciate your wanting to educate others, however, because that's a very strong tenet of my own faith and personal code of ethics.

From:

Let me explain my side on this, which has nothing to do with you, at all. Just myself.

When it comes to magick, symbols, spiritual significance, if I can see a grey area in definitions, I will accept it. However, there are certain things which must be accepted as an either/or, without a gray area. One degree off in calculating an astrology chart, can be the difference in misinterpreting an individual's ascendant from being a capricorn or aquarian rising. One degree off can miscalculate a square between two planets, or a planet in a house.

And in magick, using the wrong symbol in a certain way, could mean the difference between success, and failure. And a tattoo symbol which has religious significance, which you will put on your body, with certain meaning, is to be taken into consideration because being wrong about it, might not be a good idea. Some people tatty certain runes on their body a certain way, not knowing the assigned meaning wasn't something they should've put on themselves.

Placing a triskel upside down (like the one on my user info page), is no big deal. But having a triqueta like the one Jeremy etched, is a much different meaning. For triquetra means three - corners, and triskel means three - legged. Triquetra is associated with the Norse symbol, as well as the Christian trinity.

And just as there is a difference between a hexagram and a pentragram, as well as a pent being turned upright, or upside down, there is a difference between the triskel and the triquetra.

Triquetra:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskel

Triquetra:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triquetra

Both have their own unique origins and meanings. It's modern day symbolism is associated with a) Neopaganism and the Triple Goddess (which is a Robert Graves concept originally), and b) The Norse and c) The Christians. You can accept that, or say "We're both right," and believe it if you whilst. Call a spade something other than a spade. Respect the symbols uniqueness, and accept you've been corrected, and move on.

From:

Added: top is triskel. Now back to work I go.

From:

I just find you to be presumptuous in your approach- you honestly haven't told me anything I didn't know. Anyone who knows me could tell you that I love learning for its own sake and am happy to accept new information- it's why I've chosen the path that I have. In fact, I orignially corrected myself AND included the reorientation in my critique of the design to Jeremy- its the otter figure that's usuallyr represented that way traditionally, not the triquetra. I've studied quite a bit of greek and so that crept into my language when I referred to the image. I have no problem with anything you've stated except the fact that you seem to be getting slightly more defensive as this conversation moves on. I return, likewise, that you can do what you like- it has nothing to do with me. You don't know me, and you're obviously misinterpreting my meaning, and this is obviously not the right forum for this discussion if it's going to turn from a discussion into an arguement.

From:

My friend, you're going overboard in this discussion. We will have to agree to disagree, and I did explain why I am specific when it comes to symbols. Origins and meaning are an important factor, as I explained with the difference between a hexagram and a pentagram.

Splitting more hairs though ;) the otter is a modern rendition. Because the Celts saw the otter as a sacred creature, and during the Christian times the triquetra was represented with fish, Recon Celts replaced the creature with the Otter -- still a sea creature, but not the original creature of the symbol.

Ah my dear: corners vs legs vs appendages. The issue is not worth it to me. You can either take the information and learn from it, it's your body, and tattoos are permanent. Believe as you whilst, but please understand, any offense you feel from me is your own doing. Have a good day.

From:

I would just like to state that all I meant when I said "we're both right" was to accept everything you said as true and to point out that, as triskelion is greek for a three-legged symbol and triquetra is latin, the two have different language origins completely- it's like apples and oranges, or agua and water, if you will.

Jeremy's incorporation of the triquetra into the otter was entirely his own creation. I didn't ask for it, but rather said I wanted the otter's body to be more stylized with Celtic knotwork than some of the traditional designs I'd seen. I wanted the otter, which has historically been revered by the Celts for its playfulness and its dual nature (being a creature of the earth and the water). The salmon of knowledge, which is the fish in its mouth, predates Christianity in origin as well.

To split some hairs of my own: I'm certainly not a purist, simply because none of these symbols or traditions are "pure" in the sense that many would understand. The modern rendition and interpretation of most of these symbols has been so heavily infuenced throughout their history by numerous cultures, and most of the original Celtic culture (or Irish Celtic, as "Celtic" refers to a number of island and continental cultures as well) is completely lost to history. Yes, they incorporate Christian elements. But so does Christianity incorporate pagan elemants from a number of other traditions, including the Celts. One of the reasons I stepped away from paganism in general is that I found many people to be very presumptuous and judgemental about what in many ways is a modern faith.

I merely observe that, while you state the issue is not worth it to you, you are the one who felt the need to persue this line of arguement, and have been rather judgemental in your tone. This is of course understandable, as issues of spirituality are deeply personal. I likewise wish you a wonderful day. :)

From:

I merely observe that, while you state the issue is not worth it to you, you are the one who felt the need to persue this line of arguement, and have been rather judgemental in your tone. This is of course understandable, as issues of spirituality are deeply personal. I likewise wish you a wonderful day. :)

I will have a wonderful day despite this last paragraph of condescending drivel on your part. You have issues with being corrected. Rather than admit you were wrong -- to save face -- you tried to blur the lines of truth, by calling a triquetra a triskel, and use "appendages" in place of legs. I'm well aware numerous religious borrowed from each other. Shall the world simply forget about origins then, and everyone call on the name "Loki" and invoke him, when they meant to invoke St. Germain, instead? Why not? Nice gray area of nonsense. I apologize, m'dear, but I'd prefer to split some hairs, and wound some delicate egos if necessary. Because someone might take a listen, and not fry their mind on screwing up in magick, by being a little discerning, and accepting the specific meanings within symbols and words.

And lastly, I'll split a few more hairs, you should've spelled the word as "argument," and you're the one being presumptuous, stating I'm being judgemental. There is no judging on my part. There is being direct, specific, particular,: because the truth is important to me. So is history. So is magick.

For it is the blurring of the lines which worked to integrate into the Celts (however peacefully) Christianity. Not an issue if the people wanted the change, but we lost a bit of history along the way.

Now, I'm going back to work. I anticipate seeing you gracing my inbox again, squeezing in one last word. You are welcome to it. You are also welcome to tat an upside-down goblin on yourself, and call it George Bush for all I care. But I will correct you if you call George a goblin too.

From:

Well, you were correct about my responding- I'd say we're both equally guiltyof needing to get the "last word in," as you say. In my case I feel the need for one last attempt at responding to your comments, which are self-evident in their display of judgement (calling a perfectly tame statement "drivel" and pointing out an error in spelling that is completely irrelevent to the "argument," as well as the condescending usage of the terms "m'dear" and "my friend"). I also am a firm believer in truth, and all of your comments to me have been condescending- it's not about me having a tender ego. You have been making assumptions about my choices and intentions when you know nothing about me- that's judgemental. I'm not a postmodernist- I do believe that meaning is very important, and understanding the history of symbols is valid. I also believe it's personal, and if it's a grey area it's simply because it's also not black-and-white, either. Spirituality and spiritual traditions are shrouded in mystery, historical patchiness, and also permeated with the intention of the practitioner. In the end, what it comes down to is that I'm one individual who is making a choice for completely spiritual reasons. A symbol is only imbued with the energy of the user, and whatever my intentions and whatever the origins neither you or I will ever get any closer to an "authentic" representation because a) it's never existed as a fixed entity in time, being ever-changing and b) there is no way for us to know most of its history. I am choosing to put a symbol on MY body for MY own reasons, not for display or affectation. It's not even going in a public place. In the end, whatever I choose will be meaningful to ME for my own reasons. I appreciate the learning experience you've afforded me. I'm sorry if I've offended you in any way, because it's not my intention. Feel free to respond however you like, but I've said said everything that I feel is needed on my part at this point. It seems that you are determined to misunderstand me. which makes me sad, as I feel that these kind of conversations are important, though this has shifted from the realm of debate into the realm of hurtfulness, so I withdraw. That was never my intention.

From:

I will attempt to be gentle. Let's just use this moment as a learning experience in some form, as all things happen for a reason.

Assumptions on your part:

" I know a bit more about this than you seem to think I do."

"I just find you to be presumptuous in your approach- you honestly haven't told me anything I didn't know."

"I have no problem with anything you've stated except the fact that you seem to be getting slightly more defensive as this conversation moves on."

"I merely observe that, while you state the issue is not worth it to you, you are the one who felt the need to persue this line of arguement (sic), and have been rather judgemental in your tone. This
is of course understandable, as issues of spirituality are deeply personal. I likewise wish you a wonderful day. :)"

All because you couldn't google and admit: "Hey. You're right. That's a triquetra, not a triskel?"

Here, I'll refer you to my story called Shattered Perception. http://www.livejournal.com/users/niamh04/96317.html Read that.

I digress, this whole argument is silly. I am correct in what I stated, and google the symbols and you will see this truth. I still think you have issues with being corrected, and this is probably circumstance to being born on the cusp of the best sign of the zodiac, and the most rebellious. Now I must get back to work, as I have bills to pay.

From:

That's a lovely story.

However, being an unbiased observer in this debate, I would like to state that judging from tone, (something terribly ambiguous in writing) it appears that you were the one who get, well, a bit snippy and condescending in the first place. I'm not going to get into who's right or wrong, but merely stating that it is unlikely anyone will be receptive to new ideas or changes in their current ideas if the teacher loads the lesson with negativity, no matter how right they are.

Again, I could be completely mistaken since tone is very much due to the readers interpretation, but I felt I should give my 'outsiders' perspective on these goings-on. Actually, I find the whole thing a bit silly since 1) it's my fault the symbol is upside down and 2) she didn't even like that part of the design as much and we've discussed changing the design.

Yes, you're correct in your definitions, but again, it's best to present these things objectively, without venom, darling.

antarcticlust is no Fred, and undeserving of your condescension. And I've never known her to be condescending about anything except Hot Pockets. So please, girls, give it a rest? I am sure under any other circumstances, you two would get on fabulously. You're both very lovely, intelligent and spiritual people who I respect with utmost admiration.

From:

It's all your fault Jeremy. If you'd have posted it right-side up...just kidding ;)

No one is as bad as Fred. You've seen stoney and I in action with that one. You should know by now this was nothing in comparison. I know I may sound harsh, but I've seen enough blunders in this world, because people wanted to believe something could be used this-or-that way, or interpreted a certain way, when they were in error. It could make the difference between performing a ritual and getting a good night's sleep, then having the peskys taunting someone due to their error.

I think the both of us are done now, though. I bear no animosity for this discussion. It was probably a learning experience for both of us in some way.

From:

I'd say that last statement was a judgement if I've ever heard one. :) I'm in graduate school- I get corrected all the time. If you knew anything about me you'd know that I follow a scholar's path as a way of life AND as a spiritual aesthetic.

You're right- the symbols are traditionally referred to in the way that you describe. I never said that wasn't the case. All I said was that "triskelion" was a greek word that refers to a three-appendaged figure, and that "triquetra" is a latin word that refers to a triangular figure. And I even googled, just to be sure. That's when I wrote the "we're both right" post. The fact that you feel the need to make judgements of me based on my birthdate (did a little research, huh?) just reinforces my point. I stand by all of the statements of mine that you quoted, and I honestly don't see anything wrong with any of them.

Don't we tend to dislike in others what we dislike in ourselves? :)

From:

Sue me for checking out birthdates, I've been an astrologer for over eleven years -- I cannot help it. My entire chart is buried on my lj if you want to see I am a) capricorn with b) virgo moon conj the midheaven c) scorpio rising with d) 12 house mars in scorpio, therefore, yes, I am a goddess and a bitch all in one. I agree.

My apologies for this, least on my part. I'm still right about the symbols, but not right in being that harsh. That part is a judgement call, on myself. *nods* That's the nicest you'll get out of me today though, as I'm running on lack of sleep and caffene. Truce?

From:

Absolutely! Some of my best friendships have begun in argument. I really admire people who can get me thinking. Thanks! :)

From:

But George IS a goblin.

SEE!

From:

I knew someone was going to say that, you know? Heh.

From:

Ah, but I bet you weren't expecting visual proof!

From:

It was actually I who chose to put the two symbols together. This (http://www.custom-cufflinks.com/images/celticottercflk.jpg) is the traditional Otter design. I liked it, but found it to be a bit plain, speaking soley from a design perspective. I chose to change the tail into the three-pronged design to add a bit more to it, not thinking about meaning, but again, merely from a design perspective. Otherewise, I am not familiar with any traditional otter + triskel/triquetra design. As far as my limited research has gone, I'm the first to put the two symbols together.

From:

Oh, the otter has been woven in celtic knotwork. I don't have one in front, but I've seen the creature depicted in three, forming a triangle. But I've seen some which have replaced the fish with otters, or included both otter and salmon in the artwork.

From:

Damn, if you find those, send them my way. I've been scouring the internet for otter designs to reference, and I've been remarkably unlucky in finding them.

From:

anubis75.livejournal.com

that rocks and would make a killer tattoo

From:

Hehe, it IS a tattoo. A friend,

antarcticlust might get it done. She told me the idea she had for her first tat, and I said I'd give it a shot. I still haven't heard from her to see if she likes the idea or not :P

From:

book-of-lies777.livejournal.com

very well done!

From:

Thanks!

From:

kiwikat.livejournal.com

that is VERY impressive, especially for a first try

From:

I spent a lot of time (well, two days at work) pouring over Celtic-knot drawings and deciding exactly what to do, then last night it took almost my entire shift to draw it. I even made stencils to get proportions right sice I didn't have a compas or rulers or anything.

From:

redheadedlawyer.livejournal.com

Beautiful and exceedingly cool! Thanks for sharing!

From: