Another Stolen Child

With profound apologies to WB Yeats and the hope that he will understand and approve of this small filking of a fragment of one of his works.

"Come with me, Fairy Child.
To the World, Wide and Wild
With a Human, hand in hand.
For there is far more Magic
than you seem to Understand."

(no subject)

Definitions are words which bind... they cage in a concept, set its borders and defend them tenaciously from the encroachment of other ideas which may or may not be related. Over time, some of these borders may fall... indeed, at times they collapse completely and the meaning of a term changes forever. But where does this leave those who do not think in boxes? Can there be a definition which leads one to a concept but does not lock that concept in place. Can a definition be a doorway, a threshold leading to a vast new world of possibility?

I ask because I find myself reconsidering my definition of otherkin once more. I used to define it as anyone who feels that they are in some way not entirely human and allows that difference to have an effect on the way they presently live their life. Broad, but still it seemed to strictly seperate us from the human race itself. And therein lies the problem I currently have with it. I am coming to believe that humans... pure humans with no other aspects, no memories of being other races, even no magic *as we know it* can in truth be otherkin as well.

I came to this thought by a fairly roundabout line of reasoning... the subject of starseeds. Starseeds, for those unfamiliar with the term, are more or less otherkin who believe themselves to be alien rather than mythical. Many of them also work with what humanity would consider magic, and there is a strong overlap with the newage community. But it got me thinking.... would we accept someone who believes he is an alien soul in a human body to be otherkin if his race never worked with magic, only with science? What quality is it which serves as the threshold between the concept of otherkin and the concept of not otherkin?

It took a lot of thinking, a great deal of reading of otherkin sites, Malcolm's essay about the Shadow of Myth, a quote from the first graphic novel in the Books of Magic series, and a full science fiction anthology to lead me to an answer to that question which I could accept. And it's implications are truly staggering.

Otherkin are the children of dream. They are the figures of stories, myth, legend, dream, fantasy, and nightmare. From the creatures of ancient legend of what exists just out of sight to those of modern speculation into what exists among the stars, and further into creatures glimpsed only in the minds and fancy of other living beings, otherkin are the beings which inspire, which terrify, which delight and enchant, which awe and panic, which bring hope and despair.

Seen from that perspective, it becomes evident that there are humans who could be described thus as well, even if they may never have walked this earth as flesh and blood. Robin Hood. King Arthur. Merlin. More historically Alexander the Great, Rasputin, and King Tut. Even into more modern times with such men as Martin Luther King, Albert Einstein, and Mother Teresa. Those men who not only have a Dream, but live it and pass it on to others.

And, after all... restricting ones view of otherkin solely to those beings who use magic as you define it not only limits those beings who you can easily relate to, but seems to be a serious underestimation of the potential of magic to manifest in new and vastly different ways. Humans have walked on the moon and let the harnessed power of fire carry them there and back... if that's not a kind of magic, then I don't know what is.