I first heard about Bridget Cleary when I read At the Bottom of the Garden: A Dark History of Fairies, Hobgoblins, Nymphs, and Other Troublesome Things specutlates that Bridget had an affair with a man called Simpson. The authors of this book dismiss that and put forward another man, a fellow egg seller (no, eggs from chickens). They reject Simpson because he was protestant and, therefore, he and his wife must lack fairy belief. Yet later, his wife takes part in one of the rituals to free Bridget from the fairies.What I also was slight confused and upset about was the repeating of rumor, a story that seemed current only after Bridget's death. They admit that there is no proof that it happened, but since it fits what they see to be Bridget's character (and we really don't know much about Bridget), they'll treat it as fact.Huh?But what really got me was the bit in the note section. The authors say that they dismiss the idea of spousal abuse because they didn't want to present Bridget as a victim. I'm sorry, but wasn't she burned, wasn't she killed by her husband, doesn't that make her a victim? Additionally, if the majority of fairy stories they relate have to do with women and child who do not act normal, and if Bridget challenged the status quo as they claim, then perhaps there was a bit of spousal abuse there? They seemed to have not fully ingested the work that is based on folklore.
Chris' Fish Place
Thoughts on things, mostly books.
I first heard about Bridget Cleary when I read At the Bottom of the Garden: A Dark History of Fairies, Hobgoblins, Nymphs, and Other Troublesome Things specutlates that Bridget had an affair with a man called Simpson. The authors of this book dismiss that and put forward another man, a fellow egg seller (no, eggs from chickens). They reject Simpson because he was protestant and, therefore, he and his wife must lack fairy belief. Yet later, his wife takes part in one of the rituals to free Bridget from the fairies.What I also was slight confused and upset about was the repeating of rumor, a story that seemed current only after Bridget's death. They admit that there is no proof that it happened, but since it fits what they see to be Bridget's character (and we really don't know much about Bridget), they'll treat it as fact.Huh?But what really got me was the bit in the note section. The authors say that they dismiss the idea of spousal abuse because they didn't want to present Bridget as a victim. I'm sorry, but wasn't she burned, wasn't she killed by her husband, doesn't that make her a victim? Additionally, if the majority of fairy stories they relate have to do with women and child who do not act normal, and if Bridget challenged the status quo as they claim, then perhaps there was a bit of spousal abuse there? They seemed to have not fully ingested the work that is based on folklore.
