Talk:Hag

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mythology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Women's History (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Links[edit]

Since so few links link here, it might be good to provide links to 'Famous hags of history' or somesauch. If no one finds an entry, it isn't much use. Wetman 00:26, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It's not even very accurate. According to dictionary.com, "hag" can refer to a witch with magical powers also. DopefishJustin (・∀・) 06:21, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Disambiguation[edit]

I really think that there should be a separate "Crone" page (rather than have Crone redirect here), since there is a modern movement among women of a 'certain age' that specifically uses the term "Crone" and "croning," as distinct from "Hag."

See:

http://www.croning.org/pages/534083/index.htm

http://www.cronechronicles.com/

http://www.waningmoon.com/guide/library/lib0015.shtml

It appears to be a specific aspect of Paganism, but I'm not sure about this. I'd be willing to do the research and write the "Crone" page.

Minerva9 06:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Neuroscience?[edit]

Unless someone can make a really good argument, I'm removing this article from Category:Neuroscience. The tentative semantic link to sleep paralysis does not seem to constitute enough of a connection to keep this category. Semiconscious (talk · home) 06:53, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

See: Sagan, Carl (1997). The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.
  • Could you give me a synopsis please? I don't exactly have time to read an entire book to figure out what the link between a creature of folklore is to neuroscience. In a neruoscientific setting I have never once heard anyone refer to a hag. Semiconscious (talk · home) 08:48, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Also, this is like linking the car model Mercury to category greek mythology because the product name derived from a greek deity. It just doesn't make sense. Semiconscious (talk · home) 08:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
The hag, mara, incubus, succubus, and hundred of other "entities" appear to dreamers during episodes of the "nightmare (in the original meaning of the term)" which frequently is currently called "sleep paralysis with hypnagogic hallucinations", more frequently abbreviated to "sleep paralysis" or "hypnagogia". Mary Shelley called it with a better term: "waking dream". Jones wrote a whole book about linking mythology to his, superseded by now, interpretations. Carl Sagan has chapters linking neural events to the folkloric "entities". For their relationship to religious expressions see the work of William James. The common link is not the names but the images generated and their neurobiological substrate. Jclerman 10:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't doubt the link. But you don't address my Mercury analogy, which I believe to be most accurate. At the very most the best connection you could make would be to add this to Category:Sleep disorders, which is much more specific (and not even appropriate in this case). You "in neurobiology" section should refer to the nightmare and sleep paralysis article, as the "hags" themselves have nothing to do with the neurobiological phemonmena of sleep disorders. Semiconscious (talk · home) 16:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
And clearly I can already tell you won't be satisfied with this so I've requested administrator arbitration so we can avoid revert-warring. I'm completely willing to concede I may be incorrect and out of line here. Semiconscious (talk · home) 16:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

This is a disambiguation page. The term "old hag attack" is being disambigated from the more common uses of hag. I would not support the use of those categories on a disambig. JFW | T@lk 18:07, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, more specific cats are better, and sleep disorder seems to fit pretty well- Jclerman, the rough corners where sleep disorder would rub uncomfortably in this category seem minor and fairly pedantic. I'd suggest a compromise on Category:Sleep, or something like that, since you could make a case the hags and sleep paralysis are fairly important in the history of the understanding of sleep but... --Maru (talk) Contribs 17:53, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Illustration[edit]

Is a Japanese illustration (which in all likelihood actually depicts a Japanese monster called a yama-uba) really the best choice for an article about a similar but distinctly European character? I wouldn't know where to find a good replacement, but just a heads up. Kotengu 小天狗 22:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Name[edit]

One could add a note reagarding the name, that the german word for 'witch' is 'Hexe', since old german and old english are of the same origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.64.123.40 (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Hag Ride[edit]

I don't think I see any mention of hag riding - where they control mortals and run them around when they should be sleeping - which I think is the origin of the phrase 'they are looking a bit hagridden today' ie they look like they have been up and running around all right unable to get any rest.EdwardLane (talk) 11:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok just spotted it is mentioned but only as sleep paralysis - the versions I recall have the human ensorcelled - but only 'used' while they are asleep, then turned ito a horse/goat/not and then used to carry the witch/hag or to draw the cart for the witch - mostly with a 'forgetful' state in the morning - and only by putting pins in their shoes and thus waking themselves up do the heroes of the tales then pretend that they have been 'controlled' and go along with the hag's bidding waiting for the opportunity to kill/defeat the witch. Maybe that's just tales I've ehard though rather than 'proper old myth' anyone able to find a citation to corroborate that style of hagriding? EdwardLane (talk) 11:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate "See also" inclusions[edit]

In the "See also" section, I think that some of the inclusions are marginal at best, but I can see where some people might include them, I guess. However, I really question the inclusion of Fag hag and Freddy Krueger. The over-riding theme of the inclusions is mythology, but those two articles fall down there. So-called "fag hags" are living women who befriend gay men. There is no mythological connection and no implication of malevolence. As the article states, the label can be considered a slur in many cases, but has no relationship whatsoever with the Hag discussed in this article. At best, it might be included on a disambiguation page. Then there's "Freddy Krueger". He is a constructed character in a fictional horror movie with absolutely nothing to do with historical mythology. Nor is he even a female! These two inclusions pad the "See also" section, but do not contribute illumination to the Hag article. Thanks for your time, Wordreader (talk) 16:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

I don't have the authority to update the url for the "External links" section of "Henry Fuseli's painting of a hag, from the Met collection". I found this: The Night-Hag Visiting Lapland Witches, 1796, by Henry Fuseli at <http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/110000864>. If this isn't the painting you had in mind, then it's apparently gone from the Met's website. Yours, Wordreader (talk) 16:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)