I read this book as part of my long self-education in religion and mythology. Modern Druidry is a really fascinating subset of Neopaganism that focuses on respect towards nature and personal contemplation, with rituals, symbols, and myths reaching back into ancient Celtic culture.
As an atheist studying religion, I like being able to snatch little nuggets from different faith traditions if I find them useful. For example, I loved much of the advise here for gaining a better connection with nature. And as someone who already has a daily meditation practice, I tried out some of the Druidry-specific meditation techniques, because why not.
That being said, there were some parts of this book that I found frustrating and eye-roll-inducing. For someone who allegedly cares deeply about the Earth and its environment, this author proved to be ignorant of important, evidence-based issues around environmentalism (he speaks against nuclear energy, for example, which just drove me up the wall).
And of course, Druidry as Greer presents it is ripe with all sorts of magical thinking nonsense, which is normal for most religions, but I somehow found myself especially annoyed with it here. I think it's because of Greer's strange justification for it all; he talks about how "modern materialism" is "barren," "nihilistic," and "meaningless." Here's a longer quote:
"Founded on a materialism that was just as dogmatic and rigid as the religions it opposed, the new vision of a clockwork universe set in motion by an absentee god threatened to empty the world of meaning and make humanity lose touch with its own spiritual possibilities. Reduce the cosmos to lifeless atoms colliding in a void, insightful people had already realized, and every human and spiritual value gives way to a universe ruled by blind necessity and brute force." (page 15, emphasis mine)
He then of course presents Druidry, a mystical tradition that believes in things like magic and "Earth energies," as an alternative to people who "couldn't stomach either the rigid dogmatism of organized Christianity or the equally rigid nihilism of emerging modern science."
I just............ LOOK. THERE IS NOTHING INHERENTLY RIGID, NIHILISTIC, OR MEANINGLESS ABOUT A SCIENCE-BASED WORLDVIEW!
I'm genuinely baffled... how do you write something like that and not develop cognitive dissonance? Do people not hear themselves when they say this sort of thing? You find an evidence-based view of the world boring or uninspiring so you... what? Embrace one not based on evidence?! How does that work, cognitively?
More importantly, it's just not true! How can you say a science-based view of the world is uninspiring? I'm tempted to think people who say this have not fully lived. Have you never sat under a full night sky and marveled at ancient light reaching you over eons of time? Have you never pursued a goal you cared about? Helped someone less fortunate than you?
The world — the REAL world — is full of wonder, beauty, and possibility. You don't need to embrace a worldview of magic or mysticism to find meaning, fulfillment, and awe in your day-to-day life. I can confirm that personally.
Anyway, my major frustrations aside, it was really interesting reading this and learning more about a lesser-known spiritual tradition.