Books of magic versus books about magic

by skirlhutsenreiter

It is a common trope in fantasy that there are some books that are magical, and therefore dangerous, and other books that are just about magic, and therefore not. (And not just fiction — my in laws take this idea quite seriously with certain books inherited from my FiL.) Just how old is this idea?

grantimatter

The idea that there’s a link between writing and magic is very old indeed (it’s no coincidence that magic usually takes the form of “spells” in English).

Mythologically, gatekeeping figures like Ganesh and Thoth and Eshu Elegbara (thanks, Henry Louis Gates, The Signifying Monkey) are all linked to the act of writing, and, in the 138th chapter of Havamal, the European god Odin gains wisdom by hanging upside down for nine days to learn the runes – a system of writing that, as the text explains, gives you power to win women’s hearts, speak to the dead, learn how things grow, how to forge agreements or heal war wounds.

Some of the oldest physical writings we have, period, are texts used for divination, probably derived randomly from cracks in bone or turtle shells and then clarified or elaborated by soothsayers – the Shang Dynasty oracle bones.

Within the Hebrew Bible, there are also numerous passages identifying creation and the Creator with Memra, the Word (most of those texts are probably post-exilic, so around 2,500 years ago or so). There’s also this sense of God as the God of the Covenant – a deity that kind of exists inside contracts or agreements (the miracle in Genesis 15:17 alludes to a rite of sealing an agreement by walking in between two halves of a slaughtered animal, for example) as well as being a deity of breath/spirit… in other words, a particular kind of speech.

So the idea of words and writing being magical goes way back – helped along by the fact that, as printing takes off, the first mass-produced books tend to be holy ones. People who might not yet have learned to read would take pride in owning a Gutenberg Bible or the Diamond Sutra.

Prior to that, books are handmade objects – unique. Even the sheets on which they’re written are idiosyncratic: vellum shows pores from the animal’s hide, parchment and silk have their own textures. They’re much closer to living things, in a way. This copy of a codex and that copy might have the same text inside, but they’ll feel a little different, the words will be in different hands, the pages will have their own character…. If you've held a medieval manuscript in your hands, you might know what I'm talking about.

That said, some of the very oldest bits of writing we have seem to be chits or clay pieces used to tally grain in what would eventually become Sumer. That’s not to say those might not have been seen as somehow magical – a great deal of mythology is dedicated to the progress of seasons and the mystery of crops springing from the Earth. (Someone else should talk more about that – it’s outside my experience, mostly.)

But there’s also this ancient use of writing for the most mundane tasks – keeping counts of things or people. That’s sort of magical (aiding memory) but also kind of… not.

I’m not sure, though, I agree with the idea that in fantasy there’s that clear a divide between books that are magic and books that describe magic. Maybe I’ve read too much Lovecraft, but it seems to me that reading about magic in most fictional contexts is a sure way to get some magic turning up in your life.