The New York Times describes Luis Albert Urrea's novel, The Hummingbird's Daughter, as "a mix of leftist hagiography, mystical bildungsroman and melancholic Mexican national anthem."

Wow! If we hadn't read the word for the day on 26 October 1998, we'd have no idea what Stacey D'Erasmo, the reviewer, was talking about.

Holy cow. I had to look up hagiography, too. From Gurunet:
bil·dungs·ro·man or Bil·dungs·ro·man (bĭl'dʊngz-rô-män', -dʊngks-)
n.
A novel whose principal subject is the moral, psychological, and intellectual development of a usually youthful main character.

[German : Bildung, formation (from Middle High German bildunge, from Old High German bildunga, from bilidôn, to shape, from bilôdi, form, shape) + Roman, novel (from French, a story in the vernacular, novel; see roman).]

Urrea--unfortunate last name (said the non-Spanish speaker).

Doctor Bill wrote, in a PM, and wondered if a bildungsroman can be "mystical"? I'm not sure but I think that, maybe, a dose of sort of stuff written by Carlos Castaneda in the The Teachings of Don Juan: a Yaqui way of knowledge and A Separate Reality and Journey to Ixtlan might make Urrea's book a "mystical bildungsroman." The idea would be that someone moves from being a novice, seeing only the surface of the world, apprehending only what is available to the unaided senses, and progresses to see the mystical import of events, people, places and things which was inapparent as a neophyte. Works?

Your interpretation certainly makes sense to me. I have no trouble with the combination "mystical bildungsroman". The fact, however, that it is accompanied by the sneering leftist hagiography makes me think that the writer (mis)uses the word "mystical", as is often the case, to mean "irrational", "fuzzy" or "nebulous".

Mystical apparently derives from mystery which, in turn, derives from the Greek mysterion, via the Latin mysterium ... methinks. It has too many meanings! The theological one suggests that some knowledge is obtainable only through revelation (rather than through observation and logic) and that such knowledge cannot be fully comprehended. There are others, including what I would term "woo-woo" mysticism which is all about funny feelings and wild imaginations and even peyote-induced hallucinations.

> There are others, including what I would term "woo-woo" mysticism which is all about funny feelings and wild imaginations and even peyote-induced hallucinations.

so, as long as you're being mystical in a western religious sort of way, it's ok?

so, as long as you're being mystical in a western religious sort of way, it's ok?

*rimshot*

> so, as long as you're being mystical in a western religious sort of way, it's ok?

"Woo-woo" mysticism would have to be defined as anything one doesn't subscribe to personally - cause the mystical can, per definition, not be proven or refuted - only experienced. You gotta be 'woo-woo' enough to try for mystical experience though - to pray, meditate, fast, trek for months on end, spend a long time in solitude or do peyote. What you get out of it is pretty hard to pin down though. Dangerous territory here:-)

I like Descarte's mystical revelation regarding the 'mechanical universe', btw - an angel comes down to him and tells him that the world can be known through measurement and form. You gotta love the magnificent rascality of nature in that.

> Descarte's mystical revelation

excellent.

"Woo woo mysticism" produced 25 Google hits, suggesting that I am not the originator of the phrase.

When I offered one definition of mysticism in epistemological terms, I certainly did not restrict it to the Western experience. Mysticism is an epistemological category in Hunduism, Sufi Islam and Zen Buddhism. What is so westocentric about that?

you're right, of course, hence my wink. I tend to let words such as theological and revelation get in the way...

"Woo-woo" mysticism would have to be defined as anything one doesn't subscribe to personally

Reminds me of a friend's definition of "excessive" - once more than you'd do it.