CDSM #12 A Crash Course in Werewolf Studies Part One

Today I'm going to begin a Crash Course on Werewolf Studies. I originally wanted to do this as one post, but it seemed almost impossible to condense all the information. So let's see how long this werewolf saga takes! 

Most of the information in this post is based off of a course that I took last term taught by Dr. Renée Ward. 

At the end of the werewolf saga I will offer a Works Cited/Bibliography/Further Reading section which will include Dr. Ward's Thesis because she is awesome.

So here goes nothing:

Defining Identity: Man vs Animal

Before you read my Russian-length novel on "werewolfery" I'm going to ask you three questions, and your homework will be that you need to think about them while you read said Russian-Length Novel. 

Your homework questions: 

1. What is identity? 

2. How to you define your identity?

3. What is normal?

I know, they're pretty heavy questions. But they're important.

The werewolf is a problematic figure because it takes the definition of humanity and the definition of the animal and smashes them together to create an all new figure, one that doesn't fit comfortably in either category. 

The werewolf serves as a liminal figure, he is both human and animal and neither at the same time. Because of this the werewolf causes us to question: what is human? What is animal? What is identity?

Voluntary vs Involuntary

Kirby Flower Smith wrote A Historical Study of the Werewolf in Literature in 1984 where he argued that the werewolf arose from a bunch of different sources. Some of the examples he gave where Out Law Tales (think Robin Hood) or Medical and Physical conditions (lupus = lycanthropy). Smith divided the werewolf into two different categories: the voluntary and the involuntary.

The Voluntary Werewolf retains the intelligence and cunning of a man but is more or less clouded by his bestial nature. The Voluntary werewolf tends to possess a ravaging hunger. They're extremely violent and are partial to acts of impiety: slaughtering children, cannibalism, slaughtering innocents at will etc etc. As you can guess Smith doesn't like the Voluntary Werewolf, for them werewolfery is represented as being negative. Smith views the Voluntary Werewolf to be the true werewolf because the Voluntary werewolf chooses to give up his humanity when they know that what they are doing is evil. The other interesting aspect of Smith's argument  he doesn't see the transformation as a transformation into a different species. Therefore when a werewolf eats a human it is still a human eating another human. HUZZAH CANNIBALISM!

Other interesting facts on the Voluntary Werewolf: they can transfer at will. Transformation can either be Constitutional or Magical. Constitutional Transformation means that the werewolf has an innate ability/gift to transform. While Magical transformation tends to rely on a magical object such as a salve, a cloak or even a spell. There is nothing in Smith's descriptions about the lunar cycle. Also, the Voluntary werewolf tends to be male (most records from the Iniquity and the Medieval narratives have male werewolves).

The most important fact that you need to take away about the voluntary werewolf is free will. He chooses to change. He knows what he is doing. He just likes to eat people and be violent. 

The Involuntary Werewolf on the other hand is a victim who is devoid of malice. The transformation is not their choice, and they remain kind hearted despite the fact that they turn into a wolf. Smith doesn't see this as problematic. 

Overall Smith sees the werewolf in very black and white categories. 

Montague Summers and Why We Don't Like Him (Much)

So Montague Summers also wrote on werewolfery, and he took the categories that Smith had created and ran with them. Summers also drew on documents from the 16 and 17 Century. His major issue is that he looks at sources without their historical context. Some sources and these sources in particular are influenced heavily by their time periods.  Summer condemns the werewolf. His religious outlooks heavily influence his analysis of the werewolf. His views towards pre-Christian culture is tainted. Interestinly enough he knows he is biased and announces this. He is writing entirely from his out theological and philosophical view.

To Summers all werewolves are inherently evil:

"All such transformations are effected by diabolical power (no matter what it is somehow connected to the devil"

Some of the Methods of Transformations (According to Summers)

• A Glamour - caused by a demon seems  to be transformed but not an actual physical transformation
• Mesmeric Trance - Sorcerer in a trance and has a wolf familiar - mind goes out in the animal
• Cloaking - a casting over - aerial effigy of a beast on a witch after preparation by the witch
• the demon surrounds the witch with the effigy of the beast

In his opinion to no physical act of change ever takes place. Also werewolves are slaves of Satan.

So What Is Summer's Useful for?

Summers has one use (other than being extremely interesting to read in my opinion). He does an in-depth analysis of etymology (if you're into that thing). The werewolf is a universal creature. It is also interesting to notice the different names for the werewolf all have guttural sounds when you pronounce them.

werwulf (German)

loup-garou (Old French)

garall, garoul (Old French as well, but southern)

varulv (Norwegian)

rargr, varg-ūlfr (Old Norse)

lupo mannaro (Italian)

vir (Latin) = man

   

So Ends Part One on your journey through the history of werewolves... What's up next? Well stay tuned for more Cannibalism, Scape Goating and the Sympathetic Werewolf!