The REALL News

Magazine Overview

Title: The REALL News
Issue: Volume 7, Number 11
Date: November 1999
Publisher: REALL

This issue of The REALL News features a critical examination of shamanism, particularly Native American shamanism, through a series of articles and questions posed by the author, Richard Petraitis. It also includes a report on a legal settlement involving a psychiatrist.

The Shaman Question: Revisited

Richard Petraitis revisits his previous article, "The Shamans of Suburbia," and addresses criticisms he received regarding his skeptical approach to Native American shamanism. He aims to build a case against the belief in magic by using historical evidence.

Question 1: Did Native American shamans have the ability to see the future?

Petraitis refutes this claim by recounting the story of Montezuma II, who imprisoned his sorcerers when they failed to explain the appearance of strangers from the sea. He also mentions Martin Ocelotl, a magician who prophesied about the Spanish but later fell afoul of the Inquisition. The article also discusses the Taino chiefs' prophecies about the arrival of white people, suggesting they were vague and adaptable to circumstances, and that Friar Ramon initially interpreted them as referring to the Carib.

Question 2: Was the Native American use of magical means to combat aggressors exaggerated?

Petraitis argues that historical evidence points to the inefficacy of magic in warfare. He cites examples such as the Aztec wizards failing to thwart the conquistadors, Powhatan priests attempting to use magic against English settlers with little success, and Nemattanew's claimed immunity from gunfire proving false. He also notes that the belief in magic, such as the Cheyenne warriors washing their hands in a magic lake, did not prevent their defeat. The article concludes that magical thinking contributed to tragedies like the Wounded Knee massacre.

Question 3: Did shamans resort to trickery?

Contrary to the idea that shamans only used spiritual power, Petraitis asserts that they were showmen who employed tricks like ventriloquism, hypnotism, and swallowing animal blood to convince their audiences of their supernatural abilities. He provides examples of Powhatan priests using mechanical illusions and the belief in the god Okeus, whose image was carried into battle but ultimately failed to provide victory.

Question 4: Were European colonizers also guilty of magical thinking?

Petraitis acknowledges that Europeans also displayed irrationality, citing Columbus's attempt to exorcise a waterspout and Cortes's retreat from Tenochtitlan based on an astrologer's advice. However, he contends that while science eroded superstition in Western civilization, magical thinking remained entrenched in Amerindian societies, leading to witchcraft purges and violence, such as the Iroquois hunting witches and the Carib executing sorcerers.

Question 5: Why is the author against the New Age interest in Native American Shamanism?

Petraitis expresses concern that New Agers are embracing shamanism despite historical evidence of magic's failure to win wars or alter nature. He points to contemporary violence in Africa attributed to beliefs in witchcraft and sorcery, questioning if Americans wish to follow a similar path. He notes that a George magazine poll indicated a third of Americans believe in witchcraft.

Bennett Braun Case Settled

This section, reported by David Bloomberg, details the settlement of a case against psychiatrist Bennett Braun by the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (IDPR). Braun, a leader in the repressed memory movement, and his colleagues were accused of misconduct. While one colleague, Elva Poznanski, had settled earlier, Braun's case was also settled prior to scheduled hearings.

The settlement prohibits Braun from practicing for two years, followed by a minimum five-year probation period during which he cannot treat patients with multiple personality disorder. He also received a $5000 fine and must undergo additional medical education. The IDPR accepted the settlement despite the lead prosecutor's initial desire for an indefinite suspension, viewing the settlement as a way to protect citizens and send a message against "hocus pocus psychiatry."

Braun's former patient, Burgus, expressed satisfaction with the outcome, noting that Braun will be unable to practice without restrictions until he is 66. She believes Braun has not learned from the experience and may still hold onto his conspiracy beliefs. A pending ethics complaint against Braun with the Illinois Psychiatric Society is also mentioned.

Interestingly, Braun filed a lawsuit against his own insurance company, claiming they settled a previous lawsuit without his consent and that he only settled with the IDPR for monetary reasons, not because he admitted wrongdoing. He stated that he could have produced evidence refuting the Department's charges but chose to resolve the matter without protracted litigation.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout the articles is a critical and skeptical examination of shamanism and magical thinking, particularly as it relates to Native American history and contemporary New Age beliefs. The author, Richard Petraitis, consistently contrasts historical accounts of the ineffectiveness and deceptive practices associated with shamanism with the romanticized view often presented by New Age proponents. The magazine's stance is clearly one of promoting skepticism and historical accuracy over what it perceives as unfounded or potentially harmful beliefs in magic and supernatural powers. The report on the Bennett Braun case further reinforces this stance by highlighting the dangers of unscientific and unproven psychiatric practices.