Aleister Crowley’s Book of the Law, Magic and Obeah Simplified

In a previous blog-post, I introduced the subject of my forthcoming review of ‘Beelzebub and the Beast, by David Hall:  https://marnietunay2.wordpress.com/2024/01/12/beelzebub-and-the-beast-book-review-some-preliminaries/

In this post, I am going to address what Crowley followers, (henceforth referred to by their own preferred term: ‘Thelemites’), consider to be the foundational concept and the most important of Crowley’s books:  ‘The Book of Liber Al Legis, aka The Book of the Law.’  I will refer through-out this blog-post to this book as simply Legis. Also addressed to some degree, is the book that Hall considered to be Crowley’s foundational primer on magic, ‘Magic in Theory and Practice, Book 4, which I will refer to as MITP. Both books show a strong influence, in my opinion, with the writing style of a late-nineteenth century book called ‘Obeah Simplified, the True Wanga. http://www.caduceusbooks.com/nextlist-7-18/obeah.htm

Thelemites believe, as did David Hall, that :  “For Aleister Crowley, the dawn of the New Aeon was dated to precisely 12 noon on the 8th of April 1904.  It was then that he began to write down, at the dictation of a praeter-human intelligence, the first verse of the first chapter of Liber Al vel Legis, The book of the Law….” [Beelzebub, page 33].

According to Crowley himself, writing in his journal Equinox, in 1919, “The Law of Thelema is given in the Book of the Law [Equinox I, VII and X].”  [Equinox 3, p. 9.]

Click to access equinox3_1.pdf

Equinox 1.  VII:  https://hermetic.com/_media/crowley/equinox/equinox-ivii.pdf

There doesn’t appear to be a publishing date in this edition, but the hermetic library gives a date of ‘Fall, 1910:’  https://hermetic.com/crowley/equinox/index

The ‘expanded’ ‘account’ of how Legis came to be begins on page 365 of Equinox 1.VII.  On page 368, in the lead-up to the story of the alleged channeling of Legis by Crowley’s then-wife Rose, Crowley claims he took Rose to the Boulak museum in Egypt, to test her knowledge of Horus.  He says that this event “must have taken place before March 23…”  After several lengthy invocations, all of which emphasize Crowley’s great humility, he asserts on pages 385 – 386 of Equinox 1.VII, that Legis “is in no way “automatic writing,”” that he “heard clearly and distinctly the human articulate accents of a man.”  On page 386, he describes the names of Legis as being:  “The full title of the book is LIBER L vel LEGIS svb figvrâ CCXX as delivered by LXXVIII to DCLXVI and it is the First and Greatest of those Class A publications of A\ A\ of which is not to be altered so much as the style of a letter.”

Following all of this is an unreadable “copy” of the ‘original hand-written manuscript’ of Legis on an un-numbered page, and then Crowley’s “commentary” on the same begins on page 375.

I will now introduce some of the more interesting ‘verses’ of Legis, (together with Crowley’s first  comments on the same,) and you can follow along for free via the Internet Archive:  https://archive.org/details/CrowleyTheBookOfTheLaw

together with Crowley’s original comments [aka “Old Comment”] in Equinox 1.VII:  https://hermetic.com/_media/crowley/equinox/equinox-ivii.pdf

from 1910.

V.  21 in the second chapter of Legis states:  “We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit:  let them die in their misery.  For they feel not.  Compassion is the vice of kings:  stamp down the wretched and the weak:  this is the law of the strong:  this our law and the joy of the world…”

About this ‘verse,’ Crowley claims on page 395 of Eq. 1.VII that “17-21. This passage was again very painful to the prophet, who took it in it the literal sense.

But “the poor and the outcast” are the petty thoughts and the qliphothic thoughts and the sad thoughts. These must be rooted out, or the ecstasy of Hadit is not in us. They are the weeds in the Garden that starve the Flower...”

V.  23, in my opinion, reveals the actual identity of the ‘entity’ talking to Crowley.  It says:  “I am alone:  there is no God where I am.”

V.  48, 2^nd chapter states:  “Pity not the fallen!  I never knew them.  I am not for them.  I console not:  I hate the consoled  & the consoler.”

And Crowley says:  “48. Hadit has never defiled His purity with the Illusions of Sorrow, etc.

Even love and pity for the fallen is an identification with it (sympathy, from [? I can’t make out the meaning of the Greek word]), and therefore a contamination.”

V. 23, 3^rd chapter states:  “For perfume mix meal & honey & thick leavings of red wine:  then oil of Abramelin and olive oil, and afterward soften & smooth down with rich fresh blood.”

V. 24, 3^rd chapter states:  The best blood is of the moon, monthly:  then the fresh blood of a child, or dropping from the host of heaven:  then of enemies; then of the priest or of the worshippers: last of some beast, no matter what.”

V. 25, 3^rd chapter states:  “This burn:  of this make cakes & eat unto me…”

Of these last 3 chapters, Crowley merely says:  “23-25. This incense was made; and the prediction most marvellously fulfilled.”  And that’s it.  That’s all he says in the ‘old comment.’ [On page 399 of Eq. 1. VII.]

Crowley’s ‘old’ and ‘new’ comments were originally titled ‘An Extenuation of The Book of the Law.’  The ‘old’ comments were written in 1910.  The ‘new’ comments were written, starting in 1920, [Regardie, page 1], with amendments through 1925, according to the comments themselves.  The ‘old’ and ‘new’ comments by Crowley on Legis can be read for free online at the Hermetic Library:  https://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/index

In Beelzebub, David Hall sidesteps the grimmer verses of Legis.  Those notwithstanding, however, Hall thought that Legis was a “miracle.”  On page 74 of Beelzebub, he says, regarding ‘Liber Al’ [Hall’s name for Legis]:

“… To the resolute sceptics,  these events, plus many other factors we have not space to enumerate here, will fail to convince them of the objective origins of Liber Al. [Legis]  Such people are forever armoured against the unnerving advent of miracle.  They clamour for evidence, while at the same time never allowing anything to count as evidence; for them there is nothing that cannot be explained away.  It is a cast of mind with which it is futile to argue and we shall offer no more evidence here, though there is more to be found in the sources quoted.  But allowing the sceptic the comfort of his scepticism [ibid] , even if it cannot be adequately proved that Liber Al is totally independent of Crowley’s subconscious, it cannot be denied that he had somehow tuned in to something that was in the air or, more accurately, in the astral.”

One of the people not convinced of “the objective origins” of Legis was the occultist Israel Regardie, who was well acquainted with Crowley and served for several years as his secretary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Regardie

In his 1970 Introduction to ‘The Law is For All,’ Regardie states on page 29 that “Crowley is, then, the author of The Book of the Law…”

Moreover, Crowley’s story about the reception of Legis in Cairo had a large hole in it.  Writing in 2014, Richard T. Cole states that Crowley could not have taken Rose to visit the Boulak Museum in March 1904 to test her on the Horus stele; because, the Boulak Museum had ceased to exist in May of 1889.  [Liber L vel Bogus, page 244.]

I will now introduce the verses of Legis that set out the core ethos and the intent of the ‘miracle’ booklet:

Thelema. 

V.  39 of chapter 1 in Legis states:  “The word of the Law is θέλημα.”

[See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelema ]

In Equinox 1. V11  https://hermetic.com/_media/crowley/equinox/equinox-ivii.pdf

 Crowley states on page 390:  “39. Compare Rabelais. Also it may be translated, “Let Will and Action be in harmony.”  But θέλημα also means Will in the higher sense of Magical One-pointedness, and in the sense used by Schopenhauer and Fichte.” 

On page 391, still ostensibly talking about V. 39,  he slides in the ‘Do what thou wilt’ motto for which he has become arguably the most famous.  He says:  “Do what thou wilt” need not only be interpreted as licence or even as liberty. It may for example be taken to mean Do what thou (Ateh) wilt; and Ateh is 406 = wt = T, the sign of the cross. The passage might then be read as a charge to self-sacrifice or equilibrium.  I only put forward this suggestion to exhibit the profundity of thought required to deal even with so plain a passage.”

If ‘Do what thou wilt’ is a ‘profound’ thought, it certainly was by no means an original thought by Aleister Crowley.  The 16^th century satirist François Rabelais , whom Crowley mentions in connection with it, created a fictional Abbey of Thélème in a work of fiction called Gargantua:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Rabelais#Th%C3%A9l%C3%A8me

In the middle of the 18^th century, the British Peer Sir Francis Dashwood formed a private club which later became known as a ‘Hellfire Club.’  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellfire_Club

Its motto was Fais ce que tu voudras (Do what thou wilt) which Dashwood took from Rabelais.  Dashwood took his club to Medmenham Abbey in 1751, where they became known as the Medmenham monks.  The motto was engraved on the entrance to the Abbey.  The 2018 book on Dashwood’s Hell Fire Club, by the current proprietor of the Club, has a photo from circa 1920 of the Abbey entrance with the motto above the doorway.  [Loughran, page 50.]

V. 37 of Chapter 1 in Legis states:  “Also the mantras and spells; the obeah and the wanga; the work of the wand and the work of the sword; these he shall learn and teach.”

In Equinox 1. VII Crowley states in the ‘old’ comment that this means: “37. An entirely new system of magic is to be learnt and taught, as is now being done.”

Rad researcher Christopher Josiffe has argued persuasively that Crowley took the phrase ‘the obeah and the wanga’ from an early 1890’s Theosophical pamphlet called ‘Obeah Simplified, the True Wanga!’ [Josiffe, page 80 – 83.]

An earlier version of Josiffe’s findings with respect to Crowley is available online for free at academia:   https://www.academia.edu/7543217/Aleister_Crowley_Marie_de_Miramar_and_the_True_Wanga_Abraxas_Journal_4_

Furthermore, Josiffe has made a convincing case as regards Crowley’s motivation for referencing that pamphlet.  He says: “… Crowley genuinely seemed to believe that the Theosophical Society would inevitably have to acknowledge him as the Maitreya, or World Teacher, and published four manifestos during 1924 – 25 to that effect…”  [Josiffe, page 80.]

I accept all of Josiffe’s findings from his research.  However, I think there was a deeper influence on Crowley as regards the Obeah Simplified pamphlet, than just his ‘political’ aspiration to lead the Theosophists.

In Beelzebub and the Beast, David Hall states on page 61: “The major writing achievement of the ‘twenties was Magic in Theory and Practice, Part III of Book 4…  The theory of the subject is covered in 22 chapters of general principles, attitudes and examples, while the practice is supplied by 200 pages of rituals and texts of instruction, some new and some reprinted from The Equinox.  This latter half of the book forms a programme [sic] of magical training which, if followed through, is designed to lead to real ‘Attainment.’” 

You can download that book, henceforth labelled MITP for free here:

https://wellcomecollection.org/works/y4f9srp7

Be warned:  the book is poorly organized; for instance, Chapter VII is placed before VI, starting on page 41.  The book was digitized by the Internet Archive, with funding by the Wellcome Library and the digitized version is also available:  https://ia800800.us.archive.org/15/items/b29825064/b29825064.pdf

The book can also be read online for free, with properly ordered chapters, here:

https://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/aba3

and many of the works referenced in that book are available for free at the Canadian Thelemic order ‘The Invisible House:’  https://www.invisiblehouse.org/library.htm

I think Aleister Crowley studied Obeah Simplified quite closely; and he learned from it how to write occult material in an offhand, semi-dismissive manner, with a view to increasing that material’s persuasive power.  Crowley gives repeated demonstrations of that style in his writings, pretending he didn’t understand something he’d written, couldn’t remember the context, was skeptical  of the content.  David Hall even remarks on this tendency, but, chalks it up to the supposed miraculousness of the material.  On page 72 of Beelzebub, Hall says:  “Crowley’s obtuseness in elucidating many of the enigmas of Liber Al [Legis] is one of the strangest elements in its history and corroborative of its objective provenance.”

Here are samples from the Commentaries to Legis, from MITP, and from Obeah Simplified, that highlight that writing style and strategies used in Obeah Simplified to persuasive effect:

From Legis: 

https://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/chapter-ii#ii10

“II.10

O prophet! thou hast ill will to learn this writing.

The Old Comment

10. The prophet who wrote this was at this point angrily unwilling to proceed.

The New Comment

As related in Equinox I, VII, I was at the time of this revelation, a rationalistic Buddhist, very convinced of the First Noble Truth: “Everything is Sorrow.” I supposed this point of view to be an absolute and final truth – as if Apemantus were the only character in Shakespeare!

It is also explained in that place how I was prepared for this Work by that period of Dryness. If I had been in sympathy with it, my personality would have interfered. I should have tried to better my instructions.“

See, in Liber 418, the series of visions by which I actually transcended Sorrow. But the considerations set forth in the comment on verse 9 lead to a simpler, purer, and more perfect attainment for those who can assimilate them in the subconscious mind by the process described in the comment on verse 6.

It may encourage certain types of aspirant if I emphasize my personal position. AIWAZ made no mistake when he spoke this verse – and the triumphant contempt of his tone still rings in my ear! After seventeen years of unparalleled spiritual progress…  In any event, it is surely a most overwhelming proof that AIWAZ is not myself, but my master, that He could force me to write verse 9, at a time when I was both intellectually and spiritually disgusted with, and despairing of, the Universe, as well as physically alarmed about my health.”

Chapter VIII in MITP is a great example of the persuasive strategies used in Obeah Simplified:

https://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/chap18#chapter-xviii-of-clairvoyance-and-the-body-of-light-its-power-and-its-development-also-concerning-divination

Paragraph 01:  “Within the human body is another body of approximately the same size and shape;1) but made of a subtler and less illusory material. It is of course not “real”; but then no more is the other body! Before treating of clairvoyance one must discuss briefly this question of reality, for misapprehension on the subject has given rise to endless trouble.”

‘It is of course not “real” but then no more is the other body!’  The suggestion is made that the reader’s body is not real.

02:  “There is the story of the American in the train who saw another American carrying a basket of unusual shape. His curiosity mastered him, and he leant across and said: “Say, stranger, what you got in that bag?” The other, lantern-jawed and taciturn, replied: “mongoose”. The first man was rather baffled, as he had never heard of a mongoose. After a pause he pursued, at the risk of a rebuff: “But say, what is a Mongoose?” “Mongoose eats snakes”, replied the other. This was another poser, but he pursued: “What in hell do you want a Mongoose for?” “Well, you see”, said the second man (in a confidential whisper) “my brother sees snakes”. The first man was more puzzled than ever; but after a long think, he continued rather pathetically: “But say, them ain’t real snakes”. “Sure”, said the man with the basket, “but this Mongoose ain’t real either”.” 

A folksy parable, not particularly enlightening in and of itself, but, humorous.

And, laughing at the joke opens us up to the next thing the speaker has to say, which, in chapter VIII of MITP is an assertion that we cannot know what is true:

03:  “This is a perfect parable of Magick. There is no such thing as truth in the perceptible universe; every idea when analysed is found to contain a contradiction. It is quite useless (except as a temporary expedient) to set up one class of ideas against another as being “more real”. The advance of man towards God is not necessarily an advance towards truth. All philosophical systems have crumbled. But each class of ideas possesses true relations within itself. It is possible, with Berkeley,2) to deny the existence of water and of wood; but, for all that, wood floats on water. The Magician becomes identical with the immortal Osiris, yet the Magician dies. In this dilemma the facts must be restated. One should preferably say that the Magician becomes conscious of that part of himself which he calls the immortal Osiris; and that Part does not “die”.

The work of paragraph 03, that is, the intention, is to damage the faculty of discernment in the reader.  If “there is no such thing as truth in the perceptible universe,” it means we are being told that we cannot discern what is real and what is not.” 

04:  “Now this interior body of the Magician, of which we spoke at the beginning of this chapter, does exist, and can exert certain powers which his natural body cannot do. It can, for example, pass through “matter”, and it can move freely in every direction through space. But this is because “matter”, in the sense in which we commonly use the word, is on another plane.”  The footnote to 04 states:  “We do not call electrical resistance, or economic laws, unreal, on the ground that they are not directly perceived by the senses. Our magical doctrine is universally accepted by sceptics — only they wish to make Magick itself an exception!”

Note how the first statement in the footnote is immediately followed by a statement that is manifestly untrue.  Untrue and bizarre.

More ‘folksy’ stories, but, now, tinged with occult content:

08  “The only way to test clairvoyance is to keep a careful record of every experiment made. For example, FRATER O. M. once gave a clairvoyant a waistcoat to psychometrize. He made 56 statements about the owner of the waistcoat; of these 4 were notably right; 17, though correct, were of that class of statement which is true of almost everybody. The remainder were wrong. It was concluded from this that he showed no evidence of any special power. In fact, his bodily eyes, — if he could discern Tailoring — would have served him better, for he thought the owner of the vest was a corn-chandler, instead of an earl, as he is.”

28:  “A body of black magicians under Anna Kingsford7) once attempted to kill a vivisector who was not particularly well known; and they succeeded in making him seriously ill. But in attempting the same thing with Pasteur they produced no effect whatever, because Pasteur was a great genius — an adept in his own line far greater than she in hers — and because millions of people were daily blessing him. It cannot be too clearly understood that magical force is subject to the same laws of proportion as any other kind of force. It is useless for a mere millionaire to try to bankrupt a man who has the Bank of England behind him.”

From Chapter IV, “Use of Spells and Incantations on Men and Animals in Obeah Simplified:

“Last year in the month of March, an Obeahman called Arnaud, living at the village of Mariposa, on his recovery from a “spree” of some days’ duration, discovered that some bottles of rum had been stolen from him.  By whom, he was at a loss to think, so he employed the following characteristic and effective plan for that purpose.  He sat down in a chair, and knotting a piece of twine so as to form an endless band, passed it under one of his feet.  Then he began to chant a song ‘in a foreign language (as usual) at the same time pulling the twine band round and round his foot with his hands.  Whilst this operation was going on, a young man named Baptiste, in a house at the other end of the village, suddenly had a curious fit of suffocation, during which he managed to gasp out that Arnaud was choking him with a string!  A sister of Arnaud’s happened to be present, and hearing this ran off to her brother’s house, and entering, rushed up to him and snatched the twine out of his hands, exclaiming “What are you choking poor Baptiste for?”  Her brother replied, with a grin of satisfaction, “All right!  I know who stole my rum now!”  [Obeah, page 24]

The bulk of Obeah Simplified consists of stories like the one above, sometimes preceded or followed by edifying little occult homilies.  Here is my personal favorite of those stories.  (Note its structural resemblance to the Anglo Saxon ‘toad-bone’ ritual:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KKJniEiNJzYmdVycpmmHGUuUDlUF-Y1j/view  )

From Chapter II INITIATION – KANJI STONES – PROTECTION OF FIELDS, ETC. in Obeah Simplified:

“ The first step in all magical systems is initiation; therefore, my first illustration of Obeah operations shall be that of an initiation, which is none the worse for being incomplete.  It happened to an acquaintance of mine.  He said: –  “One Sunday in 1878, I was riding down to Platteville, and on the way met with an African called Pébù, finding he was going to Platteville too, we agreed to ride together.  This Pébù was a man who had no visible means of livelihood, but always went about well dressed, and rode a good pony.  He was said to be a great Obeahman, and I was rather afraid of him, but being very curious to know about Obeah, I asked him to teach me some of it.  He refused at first, but after a great deal of persuasion, he consented to do so.

“He directed me to meet him at a certain place on the banks of the Platte River, at 12 o’clock, on the following Wednesday night.  There he was to take me to a large stone which he knew of in the bed of the river, at that season nearly dry.  Under this stone I was to put my hand, which would be grasped hold of by another hand.  That hand would pull mine, and I was to haul against it with all my strength.  However much it might hurt me I was not to give in.  The seventh haul was to be the last, and so strong as to nearly pull my arm out of the socket, but it was to leave in my hand a small white stone, and a little of some slimy substance, both of which I was to put into a clean little bottle (which I was to bring ready with me) and to cork up securely.  This bottle I was to take great care of, and the “fellow” who held my hand under the stone was always to be at my service when I shook up the bottle, and would do, or get me anything I wanted….. But, when the time came I was much too afraid, and did not keep the appointment.”

The author of Obeah Simplified follows up this story with:  “This, it will be seen, was a method of obtaining control over a ‘nature spirit,’ a ‘familiar.’  The white stone is one of a class of objects of great importance in Obeah operations.  These stones are usually black or white, kidney or egg-shaped stones and are called “Conjir” or “Kanji” stones.  Such a stone is supposed to confer knowledge and power on its possessor, and they are used as “talismans” to which “familiar” spirits may be attached.  Real ones are very rare, and precious.  A stone of this sort, if real will if soaked for 10 minutes in Alcohol, cause the latter to become tasteless and uninflammable.”

What remains unexplained is, why any spirit powerful enough to “do, or get” one anything one wanted, would deign to meet a human for a contest of strength that was liable to end in that spirit’s enslavement.

Cassecanarie, Myal Djumboh (pseudonym of David Ewen).  Obeah Simplified, The True Wanga.  The Society of Esoteric Endeavor.  2018.

Cole, Richard T.  Liber L vel Bogus.  Privately published.  1983 – 2014

Crowley, Aleister.  Israel Regardie, Editor.  The Law is for All: The Authorized Popular Commentary to the Book of the Law by Crowley, Aleister.  New Falcon Publications.  Paperback, Sixth Printing, 1993

Hall, David.  Beelzebub and the Beast:  A Comparative Study of Gurdjieff and Crowley. 

Starfire Publishing.  2012

Josiffe, Christopher.  ‘Afterword,’ in Obeah Simplified.  Pages 79 – 102. 

Loughran, Eamonn.  Secret Symbols of the Hell Fire Club.  Hell Fire Club Books.  2018

Regardie, Israel.  ‘Introduction, in The Law Is For All, pages 1 – 41.  1970]

Online Sources:

The Book of the Law by Aleister Crowley:

https://archive.org/details/CrowleyTheBookOfTheLaw

Crowley’s 1910 comments on Legis, the ‘old comment:

Click to access equinox-ivii.pdf

The Hermetic Library has made the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ Crowley commentaries on Legis available to read online: https://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/index

Aleister Crowley’s journal ‘The Equinox’ can be read for free online at the Hathi Trust:  https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/009247709

and someone has uploaded his later journal ‘The Equinox of the Gods’ to the internet archive:  https://ia800704.us.archive.org/27/items/Equinoxs/Eq-gods.pdf

Read online for free:  ‘Magic in Theory and Practice,’ by Aleister Crowley:  https://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/aba3

The Canadian Thelemic order ‘The invisible House’ makes many of Crowley’s writings available for free here:  https://www.invisiblehouse.org/library.htm

And many of the works referenced in MITP are also available for free at the Hermetic Library; scroll down to the bottom of this link to access them:  https://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/aba3

…..

Forthcoming prelude to ‘Beelzebub:’ Aleister Crowley and the Book of the Law

The issues as I see them with respect to Crowley ‘magical practices’ and his Thelemite ‘foundational text,’ the Book of the Law, are extensive and relevant to my upcoming review of David Hall’s book, ‘Beelzebub and the Beast.’

Therefore, I have decided to split the post, with the first one being on Crowley’s ‘magic’ and the Book of the Law.

I expect to have that one published by the end of April, 2024, as I have ordered two books on the subject. I have grudgingly shelled out for a relatively reasonably priced, albeit battered, copy of Israel Regardie’s edition of ‘The Law is for All.’ This contains both the original 1920 Crowley commentary on the Book of the Law, as well as the 1921 commentary. I was going to ignore the latter one as being less valid because so much later. However, I’ve changed my mind on that score.

You can read along, albeit in parts, of the commentaries for free online here: https://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/index

or here: https://archive.org/details/lawisforallexten0000alei

but I like books, for a number of reasons.

The other book I’ve ordered is a compilation of magical practices by the Canadian Thelemite group, ‘Invisible House.’ This order has very kindly put its Crowley texts, as well as others from the Golden Dawn online for free: https://www.invisiblehouse.org/library.htm

But again, I like to work from books, not least because online links can suddenly disappear at any time.

I’ve already done extensive work for both forthcoming blogs, so I remain hopeful I will get them both done by the end of next month.

I’ve included a picture of Aleister Crowley:

png image from pngtree.com/

NEWS FLASH: I’ve been hacked.

UPDATE 10:30 AM EDM: It seems it was a Facebook issue. It seems I can log in again. If it happens again, I’ll be sure to update this here post, eh.

************

Denial of service attacks on my Facebook accounts began today. Yesterday it was my linked-in account. I cannot reach either service and I have no idea if my accounts are even still extant.

Two suspects come to mind, but it’s unlikely that I’ll be able to catch them even if I can get the services restored.

FYI, in case anyone’s wondering why I’ve gone radio-silent.

P.S. It could be Dennis Watson, of course, but my money’s on the Minstrel; his was the last page I visited this AM. I clicked on a couple of his just posted pictures, and things on FB went south after that.

….

Beelzebub and The Beast Book Review: Some Preliminaries

BEELZEBUB AND THE BEAST: A Comparative Study of G.I. Gurdjieff & Aleister Crowley.

Hall, David.

London: Starfire Publishing, 2012 

As I write this post, JD Holmes still has a deluxe edition available:  https://www.jdholmes.com/pages/books/SF-BBd/david-hall/beelzebub-and-the-beast-a-comparative-study-of-g-i-gurdjieff-aleister-crowley

‘Beelzebub and The Beast:  A Comparative Study of Gurdjieff and Crowley,’ was written by David Hall in the mid-seventies.  At that time, Hall was a ‘Thelemite,’ that is, a follower of Aleister Crowley’s, and a co-editor of the Thelemite Journal Sothis:  https://www.weiserantiquarian.com/pages/books/69191/jan-bailey-david-hall-mike-magee-aleister-crowley/sothis-a-magazine-of-the-new-aeon-volume-i-no-v?soldItem=true

…  According to the ‘afterword’ and assorted ‘reminiscences’ at the back of the book, he was also “passionately interested” in the teachings of George Gurdjieff and got one of his friends keenly involved in those, the difference being:  there is no suggestion in the entire book that David Hall was ever actually involved in any way but intellectually with Gurdjieff’s ideas or followers, himself.

Hall was certainly involved on an intellectual level.  I mean, hats off to the man, for seriously tackling the three volume set of ‘Beelzebub’s Tales to His Grandson,’ and Peter Ouspensky’s record of Gurdjieff talks and teachings ‘In Search of the Miraculous,’ as well as John Bennett’s four-volume epic opus ‘The Dramatic Universe,’ among numerous other sources.

He’s actually more invested intellectually in the Gurdjieff books than he is in the Crowley books, the latter which he skips over very lightly, saying that lots has already been published regarding those.

The difference is really striking, but then, ‘once-over-lightly’ also allows Hall to simply ignore or brush over the issues with respect to Crowley’s character.

Hall mostly selects excerpts in the Crowley and Gurdjieff materials to make a claim that both men got their teachings mainly from an archaic version of Yezidi teachings.  Among the Yezidi materials he cites is one of their myths of creation, a highly misogynistic myth that you can also read on this page here:  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/039219219904718703

“35. According to extracts from manuscripts 306 and 324 in the Bibliothèque Nationale’s Syriac collection relating to the Yezidis: ‘Adam and Eve quarrelled and there was an argument between them about the reproduction of the human race, each saying: “I shall be the one to bring it forth.” They saw the beasts reproducing by coupling of male with female. Then each one placed (the fruit of) their desire in a jar which they closed with their seals. After nine months they opened them. They saw a pair of children, male and female, in Adam’s jar, and our race originates from them; but when they opened Eve’s jar, they saw only stinking maggots, fetid and filthy. Then God made Adam grow breasts with which he suckled his children for two years; and since that time men have breasts. After that Adam lay with Eve and she brought forth twins, a male and female pair, from whom Christians, Jews and Muslims are descended. Seth, Enoch, Noah, just men, our patriarchs, come from Adam alone.‘ See J.B. Chabot (1896), Notice sur les Yézidis, Journal Asiatique, January-February, p. 118.””

Hall, a long-time Thelemite, converted to Islam “sometime during the 1990s.  However, he became steadily more critical of Islam, publishing a book [under a pseudonym] as well as several critical book reviews…” Michael Staley, page 306

David Hall died “from meningitis in August 2007” after having been “in a coma for several months.”  long-time friend Jan Magee, page 310

In an October 2006 email to long-time friend David Tibet, (to whom he left his Crowley first editions in his will), in reply to the latter’s comments regarding Kierkegaard and the importance of “the leap of faith,” Hall writes:”  “Dear David, you speak with a conviction I just don’t have… Why do some opt for belief, in a transcendent some or other and others reject it…”  David Tibet, page 321

I like John Bennett’s explanation of what it means to have faith:

“The connection between the Ideal and the Practical is the source of strength and determination in action. It shows itself as Faith. Since it is associated with creativity rather than consciousness, Faith appears in action rather than experience. This is why it so often happens that the man of faith is not aware that he has faith—he only knows that he can do what he must do…” John G. Bennett, in Vol. III, Man and His Nature, of ‘The Dramatic Universe’

In addition to addressing the contents of Hall’s book, I hope to effectively address the question, in my review of this book, (hopefully completed by the end of March 2024), of what it means to have faith, and also elucidate some sense from the book itself, of why David Hall didn’t have any faith. 

… Picture by: 

https://pixabay.com/users/mirijah_photos-16161956/

Austin Osman Spare and Aleister Crowley

On July 10, 1909, Austin Spare joined Crowley’s ‘magical order’ the A.A. as a Probationer.  [Richmond, ‘Discord in the Garden of Janus’]

At the that time there were only two other signed-up members besides Spare and Crowley himself: 

https://wanderer-exile.angelfire.com/crowley-s-magick-probationer.html

https://www.100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/books/collegii_sancti/collegii_sancti.htm

From Liber XV ‘Liber Cordis Cincti Sepente sub figura’  “The full knowledge of the interpretation of this book is concealed from all, save only the Shining Triangle. The Probationer must nevertheless acquire a copy and thoroughly [sic] acquaint himself with the contents. He must commit one chapter to memory.”

(Read it for free at ‘sacred texts}:’    https://sacred-texts.com/oto/lib65.htm

Spare’s A.A. membership soon goes off the rails.   Keith Richmond states:  “Spare’s failure to advance beyond the starting grade of Probationer does not of course pass unnoticed by Crowley.  In 1912, while going through pledge forms to review the progress of those who had joined the society, Crowley came across Spare’s, and noted dryly on the back:  ‘An artist can’t understand organization, or would have passed.’”  (Richmond, Now For Reality, page 15.)

Crowley would sing a different, and nastier tune, regarding Spare’s departure from the A.A. in his reaction to the publication in late 1913 of Spare’s ‘The Book of Pleasure.’

The Book of Pleasure was first published no earlier than September 1913.

(See Richmond, Discord, Notes 35 and 36.)

From pages 2 – 3:  “… Others praise ceremonial magic, and are supposed to suffer much Ecstasy!  Our asylums are crowded, the stage is over-run!  Is it by symbolizing we become the symbolized?  Were I to crown myself King, should I be King?  Rather should I be an object of disgust or pity.  These Magicians, whose insincerity is their safety, are but the unemployed dandies of the Brothels.

“Magic is but one’s natural ability to attract without asking; ceremony what is unaffected, its doctrine the negation of theirs.  I know them well and their creed of learning that teaches the fear of their own light.  Vampires, they are as the very lice in attraction.  Their practices prove their incapacity, they have no magic to intensify the normal, the joy of a child or healthy person, none to evoke their pleasure or wisdom from themselves.

“Their methods depending [sic] on a morass of the imagination and a chaos of conditions, their knowledge obtained with less decency than the hyena his food.  I say they are less free and do not obtain the satisfaction of the meanest among animals. Self-condemned in their disgusting fatness, their emptiness of power, without even the magic of personal charm or beauty, they are offensive in in their bad taste and mongering for advertisement…”

There’s more, but you get the idea.  Spare scholars such as Gavin Semple and Keith Richmond are agreed that the foregoing epic rant was a direct shot at Aleister Crowley.  In his 1999 essay ‘Discord in the Garden of Janus,’ Keith Richmond presents a cogent argument that the diatribe was a reaction on Spare’s part to an attempt by Crowley to seduce him. 

I agree that was a likely factor in Spare’s unmitigated hostility to Crowley in ‘Book of Pleasure,’ but the comparison of ceremonial magicians to vampires and to lice suggests to me that there was more than that to his revulsion.  Furthermore, according to Richmond and to Gavin Semple, the shots at Crowley were added “quite late” in the production of Pleasure, which speaks to an event closer in time to late 2013 than Crowley’s behavior to Spare in 1909 – 1910.  (See Richmond, Discord, Note 48.) 

I suspect that the ‘more’ pertained to Victor Neuburg and to Joan Hayes.  (There seems to be some disparity over the spelling of Victor’s last name.  I have opted to standardize all mentions of his name in accordance with biographer Jean Overton Fuller’s spelling:  ‘burg’ rather than ‘berg,’ to avoid any confusion.)

Austin Spare must have met Neuburg when he joined Crowley’s ‘A.A.’ in 1909, at which time Neuburg was also a member, with ‘neophyte’ status, one grade above Spare’s own ‘probationer’ status.  By 1910, they were close enough that Neuburg dedicated two poems to Spare in Crowley’s A.A. journal ‘The Equinox.’

In 1911, Neuburg began an affair with Joan Hayes (aka Ione de Forest), a dancer in Crowley’s stage plays, and continued it even after she married a friend of Neuberg’s, Wilfrid Merton, in December, 1911.  Six months later, Hayes left her husband, who filed for divorce.  In August 1912, she shot herself in the heart. 

According to Crowley biographer Lawrence Sutin, Crowley took credit in writing in 1929 for Hayes’ suicide, in ‘Chapter XXI Of Black Magic of the Main Types of the Operations of Magick Art and of the Powers of the Sphinx,’ in his book ‘Magic in Theory and Practice,’ wherein there is a paragraph that Sutin says refers to the death by suicide of Joan Hayes (Sutin, page 231). 

Sutin states:  “Neuburg later expressed the conviction that Crowley had murdered her through psychological or magical means.  Crowley himself corroborated this charge [in the quote below from ‘Magic in Theory and Practice.]”  [Sutin, page 231]:

“6. Works of destruction, which may be done in many different ways. One may fascinate and bend to one’s will a person who has of his own right the power to destroy. One may employ spirits or talismans. The more powerful magicians of the last few centuries have employed books.1”

“1.  In private matters these works are very easy, if they be necessary. An adept known to The MASTER THERION [Crowley’s self-bestowed title] once found it necessary to slay a Circe who was bewitching brethren. He merely walked to the door of her room, and drew an Astral T (“traditore”, and the symbol of Saturn) with an astral dagger. Within 48 hours she shot herself

“As explained above, in another connexion [sic], he who “destroys” any being must accept it, with all the responsibilities attached, as part of himself. The Adept here in question was therefore obliged to incorporate the elemental spirit of the girl — she was not human, the sheath of a Star, but an advanced planetary daemon, whose rash ambition had captured a body beyond its capacity to conduct — in his own magical vehicle. He thereby pledged himself to subordinate all the sudden accession of qualities — passionate, capricious, impulsive, irrational, selfish, short-sightedness, sensual, fickle, crazy, and desperate, to his True Will; to discipline, co-ordinate and employ them in the Great Work, under the penalty of being torn asunder by the wild horses which he had bound fast to his own body by the act of “destroying” their independent consciousness and control of their chosen vehicle. See His Magical Record An XX, Sun in Libra and onward.”

  Sutin goes on to say:  “This passage shows Crowley at his vilest and most vainglorious.”  [ibid] 

Well, yeah, it does take a special kind of person to seek the credit for furthering another person’s suicide, as means of enhancing their own reputation, ‘magical’ or not.

But wait, there’s more:  the question of Crowley’s motivation.  About that, Sutin states:  “It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that, in the case of his beloved Neuburg, Crowley, motivated by a jealousy he could not confess (as unworthy of a Master of the Temple), employed what measures he could to psychically undermine the vulnerable Hayes during the crisis of her divorce…”  [ibid, page 232]. 

However, Sutin earlier states on page 214 that, “Neuburg had, in the past, willingly placed his family funds at the disposal of Crowley and the Equinox… [During a months-long break between the two in 1911] the cutoff of funds could not have been pleasant.  There is a startling story alleging the extent to which Crowley had gone to wring money from Neuburg’s family.  According to one family friend, during one of their trips to the Sahara, Crowley had sent Neuburg’s mother a telegram reading:  Send £500 or you will never see your son again.”  Neuburg’s desertion would not be permanent, however; the two men renewed their erotic, magical and financial alliance the following year.” 

That would have been 2012, prior to the suicide of Joan Hayes in August.  Crowley must have been terrified at the possibility of once again losing his cash cow.  And all of this adequately explains Spare’s fury in late 1913 regarding “ceremonial magicians” who were blood-suckers.

In the ‘Introduction to his 1929 “magnum opus” ‘Magick in Theory and Practice,’ Crowley defines ‘magic’ as being “I) DEFINITION.

Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.”

Which would cover any contribution he may have made or thought he made to the death of Joan Hayes, whether by harassment or by ritual, as he well knew in that introduction.  He goes on to say: 

“(Illustration: It is my Will to inform the World of certain facts within my knowledge. I therefore take “magickal weapons”, pen, ink, and paper; I write “incantations”—these sentences—in the “magickal language” ie, that which is understood by the people I wish to instruct; I call forth “spirits”, such as printers, publishers, booksellers and so forth and constrain them to convey my message to those people. The composition and distribution of this book is thus an act of Magick by which I cause Changes to take place in conformity with my Will.)

In one sense Magick may be defined as the name given to Science by the vulgar.”

https://sacred-texts.com/oto/aba/defs.htm

Crowley’s definition of magic would fit any intentional act by a human being, by any means, as he clearly well knew, from that definition and the example he gave thereby of writing a book. 

Two years after the death of Joan Hayes, in 2014, Victor Neuburg finally faced off with Aleister Crowley and told him he was leaving him for good.

Years later, on August 04, 1935, Neuberg biographer Jean Overton Fuller attests she heard from Neuburg himself what Crowley’s reaction was:

“…  Vicky said to Cremers, ‘It’s strange not to have seen you all these years.  The last time I saw Crowley he cursed me.  Did you know that?’

It was the first time he had spoken the name.  So it was true.

‘No, I didn’t know,’ she said.

‘Just before he left for America.  It was done with full ritual.  In that room.  You remember that room with all those things in it?’

She nodded but said, ‘You knew a thing or two yourself!  You would have taken measures to protect yourself.’

‘I didn’t,’ he said.  ‘I was too miserable.  So I was completely open.’  He meant that it had every chance to work.  The whole ritual had occupied a long time.  ‘It was such a foul curse.  He cursed me to die… It was the malice!  I couldn’t have believed he could bear me so much hate as to wish such things upon me.  After all we’d been through together.””  (Fuller, pages 40 – 41)

(Read Crowley’s book ‘Magic in Theory and Practice’  for free here):  https://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/chap21

or download it for free from the wellcome library: 

https://wellcomecollection.org/works/y4f9srp7

Somehow Crowley got ahold of a copy of ‘Book of Pleasure,’ and made his displeasure clear therein.  Robert Ansell stated:  “There is a copy of The Book of Pleasure in the State Library of New South Wales, Australia, in which Crowley has noted his criticism of the book:  “Imitated from the works of Aleister Crowley, Kwang-Tze, and other adepts.  Their words and thoughts are misrepresented and distorted.  Spare was at the time a pupil of F. P. [‘Frater Perdurabo, Crowley’s ‘magical name’], but was kept back by Him on account of his tendency to Black Magic.  This tendency is seen in its development in this book.  Critics will note the ignorance of meanings of words, e.g. “obsession incarnating”.  One also finds sentences without verbs + fine nonsense like Neither-Neither stolen from J.M. Barries ‘Never-Never.’””

Ansell, The Bookplate Designs of Austin Osman Spare. Page 35.  The Bookplates Society with The Keridwen Press, 1988.

“Critics will note…”  says to me that Crowley was writing for posterity, and expected his remarks to be the last word on ‘The Book of Pleasure.’

THE FOCUS OF LIFE:

In ‘Now For Reality,’ Keith Richmond quotes Crowley’s remarks on The Focus of Life, published some ten years after BP:  “My Disciple has learnt much from the Book of the Law; for the rest he has drawn from the Book of Lies and William Blake, also Nietzsche and the Tao Teh King.” 3”

“3  Crowley wrote his criticism of The Focus of Life, along with his accompanying poems, in the copy that Spare presented to him in 1922.  Collection of “Frater N.””

Crowley then began to compose poems to go with the pictures in Focus.  Symond’s book ‘Now For Reality’ includes the poems side by side with the pictures they were intended to illustrate.  (Unfortunately, the poems are included in the numbering of the pages of Symond’s edition of Focus.)

The poems are aggressively, violently, sexual; here’s a sample from page 37 of Now For Reality of Crowley’s poetry: 

“Nature is a torture-house

  Frightful are the tools of fate,

And sinister the demoniac carouse

  Of the old obscene elate

  Executioner never satiate,

Allows every privilege to hate –

  O wanderer!”

Here’s another sample, from page 40 of Reality:

“Spurs the Nightmare Flank

     and belly?

  Grip thine Ankh!

  Madden by thy speed

  The screaming slut  Thy seed

  Swamp her soul with jetted life!

      On her beget

  More voluptuous bastard

  Joys – and she is mastered!”

William Wallace tries hard to make Crowley out as an influence over Spare in his ‘Afterword’  to ‘The Book of Pleasure (Jerusalem Press ‘revised and expanded’ 2023 edition, hereafter known as BP 2.0):  “Another likely volume perused by Spare was [Crowley’s] Konx Om Pax (1907) by virtue of its contents.  Even the title, deriving from a phrase spoken in the [Crowley ritual] Eleusian mysteries, may have alerted Spare…”  Wallace does not go on to spell out exactly what influence Konx Om Pax might have had on Spare, but he does say that Konx Om Pax includes the Crowley text Thien Tao (Liber XLI) and includes a quote from page 59 of the text:

“Blow the Tom-tom, bang the flute!

  Let us all be merry!

  I’m a party with acute

  Chronic beri-beri.”

Wallace calls this treating of “occult matters in a light-hearted manner.”  [BP 2.0, page 87]  Personally, I’d call it the kind of graffiti one might find in a 12-year-old’s school notebook, and not at all as being erudition in occult or any other matters. 

The only place in his Afterword to BP 2.0 where Wallace draws a specific link to a specific instance of Crowley’s supposed influence over Spare, is in the following paragraph on page 86, where Wallace says:  “Whether Spare would have admitted it or not, the influence of Crowley persisted, not just in The Book of Pleasure and its successors, but to the end of his life.  Item 221h, of the second Archer Gallery show, is a small stélé [sic], bearing the image of the Goddess [sic] Nuit arched over geometrical designs bearing sigils, with Sacred [sic] letters vertically to left and right.”

Wallace does not provide a picture of this ‘stele,’ nor enlighten us further on the contents or the provenance.  However, Spare made a number of ‘steles’ for his friends, notably for Frank Letchford and for Kenneth and Steffi Grant, which featured other Egyptian icons such as the goddess Isis; these obviously show an interest in early Egyptian art, an interest he shared with Crowley, and are in and of themselves hardly indicative of any special influence by Crowley on Spare.  Wallace is anxious to prove that such an influence by Crowley over Spare existed, but, in my opinion, his vague assertions, lacking in actual evidence as they are, tend to indicate the exact opposite.

Moreover, in his essay ‘The Neither-Neither I,’ in the 2012 Fulgur edition of Spare’s book ‘The Focus of Life, Robert Ansell shows that Austin Spare was keenly interested in early Egyptian art and mysticism years before he met Crowley.  Ansell says: “From his earliest days as an artist, Spare clearly identified with Amen, [the national god of ancient Egypt], as is evidenced in his signatures and pseudonyms…”

(Ansell’s essay pages are un-numbered.)

Ansell further notes regarding ‘The Focus of Life’ the indications in the book that Spare was seeking unity with a ‘feminine half.’

As influences on Spare in Focus, Ansell cites as “most evident Nietzche’s Thus Spake Zarathustra, “specifically the concept of the Übermensch…”  Ansell also mentions Helena Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine as being an “important influence” in Spare’s work.  Notably, Ansell, a Spare expert, doesn’t mention Crowley at all.

About Crowley’s book, The Book of the Law:

Re Richard T. Cole’s ‘Liber vel Bogus:’  From one online critic:  “… author fails to convince us that the Cairo Working occurred other than as Crowley claimed, more or less, subject to the proviso concerning the Boulaq Museum which was, most likely, simply a mistake made by Crowley’s drug-dazed brain more than two decades after the fact…”

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28085937-liber-l-vel-bogus—the-real-confession-of-aleister-crowley

However, in contradistinction to the ‘drug-crazed brain’ apologia for any anomalies between historical facts and Crowley’s claims concerning ‘The book of the Law,’  Kenneth Grant stated in his Introduction to his 1991 book ‘Remembering Aleister Crowley’ that:  “Crowley was almost, but not quite, at the end of the road.*  His mind remained keen, but ill-health, old age and the air-raids had driven him from London…”

*  Later in the Introduction, Grant states:  “He [Crowley] was sixty-nine, and replete with worldly experience; I was twenty, with hardly any.”

And further, in a note from January 1945, Grant states:  “The complications which Crowley found too fearful to contemplate concerned his need for medicaments which he was taking against his severe bouts of asthma.  His health was deteriorating rapidly and when I finally went to stay with him many of my services consisted in getting doctors and chemists to supply substances which they were far from eager to dispense.  These included veronal, heroin, ethyl oxide, and cocaine.  The state of Crowley’s health necessitated such massive doses that one doctor at Hastings hinted to me in confidence that he feared that his patient was a drug addict!  Nevertheless, despite his poor physical condition, Crowley never lost his mental elasticity and alertness.”  

However, I agree with Cole’s critics that his extreme emotionalism is grating and makes Bogus wearisome to read.  I thought impressive, however, the depth of his research.   

For anyone interested in learning more about ‘The Book of the Law,’ I highly recommend Micheal Aquino’s dispassionate examination, verse by verse, of the factual issues, re-printed in full in Don Webb’s book ‘Overthrowing the Gods:  Aleister Crowley and the Book of the Law.’                              

EPILOGUE:

From Chapter 21 in Crowley’s ‘Magic in Theory and Practice,’ first published in 1929:

[Note] “I. “The Devil” is, historically, the God of any people that one personally dislikes. This has led to so much confusion of thought that The Beast 666 [Crowley] has preferred to let names stand as they are, and to proclaim simply that Aiwaz*ne who is the hieroglyph of arcane perfection. The number of His Atu is xv, which is Yod He, the Monogram of the Eternal, the Father one with the Mother, the Virgin Seed one with all-containing Space. He is therefore Life, and Love. But moreover his letter is Ayin, the Eye; he is Light, and his

Zodiacal image is Capricornus, that leaping goat whose attribute is Liberty.  (Note that the “Jehovah” of the Hebrews is etymologically connected with these. The classical example of such antinomy, one which has led to such disastrous misunderstandings, is that between Nu and Had, North and South, Jesus and John. The subject is too abstruse and complicated to be discussed in detail here. The student should consult the writings of Sir R. Payne Knight, General Forlong, Gerald Massey, Fabre d’Olivet; etc. etc., for the data on which these considerations are ultimately based.)”

(Page 193 in the edition below):

‘Magick in Theory and Practice,’ free download courtesy of the Wellcome Collection:

https://wellcomecollection.org/works/y4f9srp7

*  The entity who allegedly conferred ‘The Book of The Law’ on Aleister Crowley, via his first wife Rose.

“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist”—Charles Baudelaire

“The second greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he is the good guy”—Ken Ammi”

SOURCES FOR THIS POST

Ansell, Robert.  The Bookplate Designs of Austin Osman Spare. Page 35.  The Bookplates Society with The Keridwen Press, 1988.

Ansell, Robert.  ‘The Neither-Neither I:  Spare’s Secret Ritual of Self-Love,’ in the Fulgur Edition of The Focus of Life by Austin Osman Spare.  2012

Cole, Richard.  Liber vel Bogus.  Privately published.  2014

Fuller, Jean Overton.  The Magical Dilemma of Victor Neuberg.  Mandrake, 1990.

Richmond, Keith.  ‘Discord in the Garden of Janus:  Aleister Crowley and Austin Osman Spare,’ in Austin Osman Spare:  Artist, Occultist, Sensualist.  Geraldine Beskin, John Bonner, Editors.  The Beskin Press, 1999.  (Beauty.  Highly recommended book, plentiful images, mostly in stunning color.  Excellent articles.)

Richmond, Keith, Editor.  Now for Reality.  Mandrake Press, 1991.

Sutin, Lawrence.  Do What Thou Wilt:  A Life of Aleister Crowley.  St Martin’s Griffin, 2000.  (Recommended biography of Crowley.  Well researched and well written.)

Wallace, William.  ‘A Grimoire for the Present Age:  Kali Sutra,’ in the Afterword to The Book of Pleasure, Revised Edition.  Jerusalem Press, 2023.

The ‘Sorcery’ of Austin Osman Spare, with a focus on ‘Theurgy’

Some Preliminaries

‘Atavistic Resurgence.’  Austin Spare never used this phrase, and it’s an example of Kenneth Grant’s having pulled a fast one over the occult world.  It’s a great phrase, mind you, and a neat pigeonhole for what Spare was trying to do – but, Spare didn’t like pigeonhole labels for his work.

Kenneth Grant did, though. 

The only time the phrase appears in Zos Speaks! , Grant’s record of his correspondence with Spare, is when Grant himself uses it retrospectively to describe Spare’s work (on pages 155, 158).  As far as I can tell, the phrase first turned up some twenty years after Spare’s death in 1956, two times in the 1970’s journal ‘Man, Myth and Magic.’  The first appearance was in Vol 04, No. 6, where it appears with single quotes, which mean ‘so to speak’ and not a direct quotation:

The second appearance was in Vol 04, No. 50, with no quote marks around it:

There is one, and as far as I know, only one, extant picture of Spare’s that uses the word ‘Resurgence,’ created some two decades before he met Kenneth Grant:

[Robert Ansell, 2012, ‘The Exhibition Catalogues of Austin Osman Spare, page 223]

There is no work of art by Austin Spare that is titled ‘Atavistic Resurgence,’ or ‘Atavistic’ anything else.

Grant uses the phrase in his essay on Spare in ‘Hidden Lore, Hermetic Glyphs,’ probably first published in the 1960’s, but, since Grant participated in the 2006 Fulgur edition, which was “revised and expanded,” it’s impossible for me to say if the phrase ever appeared in the first edition of ‘Hidden Lore.’

In the 2006 edition of ‘Hidden Lore,’ Grant asserts that:  “It is Zos’s [Spare’s] basic theory that all dream or desire, all wish or belief, anything in fact which a person nurtures in his innermost being may be called forth as a living truth by a particular method of magical evocation.  This he termed ‘atavistic resurgence’; [sic] it is a method of wish-fulfillment which involves the interaction of will, desire and belief.” [ page 21  ]

Yeah, great, and a fairly accurate general description of much of what Spare was trying to do in a ‘magical’ sense, except, Spare never said that.  It’s just barely possible he used the phrase ‘eternal recurrence,’ which shows up in ‘The Zoetic Grimoire of Zos,’ on page 222 of Zos Speaks! :  “By the conquest of fatigue Give us eternal resurgence!”  in the so-called ‘Witches Sabbath’ portion of Spare’s ‘writings.’  It’s not clear which of the two co-writers, Grant or Spare wrote that line.  If I had to call it, though, I’d say it was Grant who coined that one, too.

And this brings me to the next issue with respect to Spare’s work: the most famous work that he ‘co-wrote’ with Kenneth Grant, mostly, it would appear to me, by contributing sketches, supposedly of people at Sabbath gatherings.

“Oct. 9, 1950 e.v.

Dear ZOS :

Hope you are well and able to stomach the enclosed essay on the Sabbath. If its [sic] not what you want I’ll do another one. Its [sic] really too short but I was afraid of elaborating too much as this would make the thing too technical and the ordinary person would possibly lose interest. Please say what you think of it and send me your mss. for typing.Hope to see you on Thursday sometime – any time suits us; the afternoon would be better if possible.

Heaps of love from us both, K”  [Zos Speaks!  Page 62]

“The second section, The Zoetic Grimoire of Zos, contains magical formulae and The Witches ‘Sabbath, our collaboration mentioned in the letters.” [ibid] [Emphasis, mine.] 

[Zos Speaks!  Page 155]

INTRODUCTION

Atavistic Resurgence and Witch Paterson

Further on page 155 of the 2011 publication Zos Speaks! , Grant goes on to give a crystal-clear description of what he meant by the term ‘atavistic resurgence,’ and he also introduces the enigmatic figure of Spare’s supposed occult mentor, ‘Witch Paterson:’

“Briefly, the basis of Zos Kia Cultus is Spare’s thesis that belief (any belief) when entertained by the whole being (Kia) becomes vital or organic . If embodied in a particular form it is possible to reify wishes, dreams, desires etc , by means of an “atavistic resurgence ” of latent ability. His system derived from teachings received by him as a child from Mrs . Paterson, the elderly family acquaintance whom he described as his “second mother” and as an accomplished “witch” . He rarely spoke of her, but he never forgot her. The mechanics of this sorcery may be formulated as an ‘as if potential, latent and fictive, transforming into an ‘as now’ ecstasis, potent and actual – a threefold process involving Will, Desire and Belief. The Will, single-pointed and concentrated, probes the depths of memory until the required atavism is located. The desire for reification then clothes the Will in a form sufficiently attractive to “inspire nexus ” . The urgency of the desire’s fulfilment is thus rendered vital, or organic, after which it becomes free to activate and to incarnate the required atavism. In other words, in order vitally to believe in anything – a power for oneself, knowledge one wishes to possess, a sensation one yearns to re-live – one must be able so to visualize the belief, that it may illumine the appropriate stratum of memory charged with its vitality. Recognition ensues upon this backward-reaching, and the resulting ecstasy of identity flashes into actuality ‘as if it existed ‘as now’.  [ibid, pages 155 – 157]

I do think Kenneth Grant gives the best descriptions of Spare’s ‘magical methods;’ and I’m sure he meant no harm to Spare when he put words into his mouth.  On the contrary, he was trying to keep Spare’s legacy alive, and he understood the value of sound bites in making something memorable.  And I think he got conned by Spare sometimes, for instance, with the figure of Spare’s supposed mentor, ‘Witch Paterson.’  When you love someone, you can be a bit gullible, a bit blind to their faults.  Grant was also ever-greedy for ‘magical knowledge.’  He pushed Spare on everything, his supposed ‘magical alphabet,’ his supposed ‘system of sigils,’ and his supposed mentor, ‘Witch Paterson.’  He would push Spare relentlessly to give him more and more details, and Spare would oblige him – making them up if he had to.

WITCH PATERSON

I think the best discussion by far of Spare’s ‘mentor’ is William Wallace’s chapter ‘The Elusive Mrs [sic] Paterson’ on pages 35 – 46 in ‘The Catalpa Monographs,’ 2015, by Jerusalem Press.  It’s a fascinating and well-researched chapter, but, the single most intriguing thing Wallace says in it is a brief reminisce by Spare’s friend Frank Letchford given to Wallace in conversation with Letchford:  “… one of Spare’s abilities was a kind of creative daydreaming in which he could traverse the centuries in a form of reverie and sift through the veils of London’s stratified heritage…”  [ibid, page 39]

Wallace pretty much knocks out of the water any real possibility of Witch Paterson’s ever having been a person anywhere outside of Austin Spare’s own head; and the above comment by Letchford provides a key, in my opinion, to understanding both ‘Witch Paterson’ and also what Spare was trying to ‘do’ in an ‘occult’ sense.

It has often been suggested or said outright, even by his long-time friend Frank Letchford, that Austin Osman Spare was homosexual.  But I think it would be nearer the mark to say that what Spare wanted, was to be a woman – and a man. I think his desire to be unified with what he considered to be his feminine side manifests in picture after picture over the years, and this site has numerous examples:  https://ajl.smugmug.com/AustinOsmanSpare/Austin-Osman-Spare-Archive/

There is also https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2020/made-in-britain-2/austin-osman-spare-glossolally-of-soliloquay

and of course, in ‘Theuray aka Theurgy: 

which clearly could have also been titled ‘Life is Real, only then, when I Am.’ 

In my previous post: https://marnietunay2.wordpress.com/2023/09/17/austin-osman-spare-his-art-oracles-and-sorcery-part-01/

I introduced ‘Theurgy’ and quoted Spare’s request to Frank Letchford not to alter any of his eccentric spellings. 

Frank Letchford agreed that the actual name designated by Spare for ‘Theurgy’ was indeed ‘Theuray.’ [Michelangelo in a Teacup, p. 128]

In ‘The Logomachy of Zos,’ Spare states:  “The shifting meaning of our intertwisted nomenclature, inexact references and ambiguities, have the virtue of spatial span and are evocative by selective expressionism having an emotional quality which gives aesthetic validity, whereas more formal expression would convey far less.”  [Zos Speaks!, page 772]

In Steffi Grant’s introduction to Zos Speaks! , she states on page 20:  ““Spare sent us countless sheets of paper, covered in his distinctive hand, about these matters.  Kenneth typed and returned each section many times over. Usually Spare just invented, amalgamated or altered words to fit his meaning, often to escape ” . . . the bloody cage of words – my sphinx catacomb . . . ” . Even what may – in print – seem the most curious constructions, become perfectly lucid when one recalls such sentences being voiced by him.  But sometimes his spelling was very odd, to put it mildly, and Kenneth made a lot of tactful enquiries about the meaning of some composite words and so on. Spare did the same with some of Kenneth’s ‘creations ‘.  Spare was truthful in an absolute sense, but an inventor of details. He went in for ‘creative lying’, a practice much affected by people who believe the universe to be subjective. With encouragement the simple thread of his story wove itself into the most elaborate fabrics…”    

I would say that ‘Theuray’ is an exemplar of Joseph Derrida’s “differànce,” as quoted by Ian C. Edwards, in ‘The Chiasmata of Austin Osman Spare: “Derrida, in Margins of Philosophy (1982) writes: “Already we have had to delineate that differànce is not, does not exist, is not a present-being (on) in any form; and we will be led to delineate also everything that it is not, that is everything; and consequently that it has neither existence nor essence.  It derives from no category of being, whether present or absent…””  [ibid, page 17]

Edwards goes on to say: “Differànce is otherwise than being; it is that which exceeds being and all essentialist thinking which attempts to reduce meanings to static concepts or notions.  Derrida indicates that it cannot be appropriated by any writing system, whether that system be theological or ontological, and I would add, philosophical, psychological, scientific, or spiritual.  Differànce is itself a misappropriation, a misspelling, an “error,” it is that irreducible otherness, an alterity that transcribes.  For Derrida, it is the “very opening of the space…”  What is most important here is to note that it is not the space itself but the opening of that space through which all writing systems appear.  In an occult grammatology, it can be described as the womb of the Void, where womb and tomb are intertwined.  The silence of the Void is as the ‘a’ of differànce…”  [ibid, page 18]

All of this would suggest that the naming of the picture was no accident and that Spare had a definite purpose in calling it ‘Theuray.’

THEURGY, THEURGIA

But, before we can look at what that purpose might have been, it’s important to know what Spare understood by the word he was bowdlerizing, ‘theurgy.’  In his essay Zos Khia, Gavin Semple quotes a standard dictionary meaning.  And, there’s nothing wrong with that.

However, there is no question that, from his early twenties at least, Austin Osman Spare considered himself to be a sorcerer, until the day he died, (his demurrals notwithstanding to his disapproving friend Frank Letchford – Spare knew how to play to the crowd – of patrons.)  Gavin Semple asserts, (without any supporting data, as is his irritating wont), [Introduction to ‘Two Tracts on Cartomancy’], that Spare was familiar with many of the old grimoires, and we have seen with his tarot deck in the previous post that he was certainly familiar with the Eliphas Levi grimoire, ‘Transcendental Magic.’ 

Moreover, the British sorcerer who pioneered modern research into ‘goetic’ sorcery, the late Jake Stratton-Kent, had this to say about Spare and sorcery in the first volume of his Encyclopedia Goetica in 2009:   “From one perspective the most relevant exponent of the magical revival when considering the grimoires is Austin Osman Spare.  His use of sigils and self-devised magical alphabets has many points of contact with goetia.  It is not unlikely that he intuitively grasped some principles of goetic magic underlying the Grimorium Verum itself…”  [page 13]  And Jake confirmed at the end of 2019 that this remained his opinion, saying:  “my [sic] opinion, in True Grimoire, that Spare ‘got’ the grimoires better than Crowley, Mathers and Waite combined, remains my opinion now.”   https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10217925187374583&set=pb.1031274353.-2207520000&type=3

Therefore, given Spare’s allegiance to his life-long conviction that he was a sorcerer, I have gone first to the learned writing of Jake Stratton-Kent, a well-known and acclaimed sorcerer for some forty years before he passed away in January of 2023, for an examination of what the term ‘theurgy’ would have meant to a sorcerer. 

In Volume II of ‘Geosophia, the Argo of Magic, he has a whole chapter on the term.  The chapter is complex and difficult to reduce to sound bites.  However, the gist of it seems to be along these lines:  Theurgy was a controversial, (even back in 2^nd century C.E. Greece ), approach to invoking a communion with the ‘supernatural’ via incantation or image making, sigils, talismans and eventually, grimoires.  Moreover, there is no real distinction between classical perspectives on theurgy and those on ‘goetic sorcery’, essentially, grimoire sorcery, from the classical period and the Middle Ages.

For a more detailed description, I turned to the essay ‘Magic and Theurgy,’** by Sarah Iles Johnston, pages 694 – 719 in the book  Guide to the study of ancient magic. Religions in the Graeco-Roman world, volume 189.  David Frankfurter, Editor.  Leiden: Brill, 2019:

“So what is theurgy? ‘Theurgy’ (θεουργία) is a word that has been applied to a number of religious systems that share three traits. First, theurgy involves the performance of rituals much like those that characterize “magic,” especially in their reflection of some learned tradition. For example, theurgists were initiated into a mystery cult and acquired knowledge of its special rituals from other initiates who served as teachers—although they also relied on written sources that either were transcripts of mediumistic trances or had been composed by earlier theurgists.

“Secondly, theurgists claimed that the most important rituals they performed promoted the purification of their souls and, eventually, their ability to send them out of the material world into higher realms where they would interact with at least the lower ranks of the divine hierarchy. After death, a completely purified soul would escape reincarnation—the fate that awaited unpurified souls. Some of the theurgists’ other rituals worked on the material world: they claimed to be able to bring on rain during a drought, for example.

“And thirdly, theurgists understood themselves to pursue both their material and spiritual aims with the willing support of the gods and other benign entities such as daimones, angeloi, and archangeloi. The theurgists used this claim to set themselves apart from magoi, whom ancient critics—and sometimes, ancient magicians themselves—portrayed as coercing the higher powers. Indeed, some theurgists thought of themselves as having relatively little to do with the success of their rituals; rather, they understood that the gods (theoi) would charitably work (ergia) upon them as long as they had properly prepared themselves to receive the gods’ beneficence, which they could do by learning how to align themselves properly within the cosmos and its powers.1”

“While theurgists practiced rituals that we (or other ancient people) might identify as “magic”—that is, roughly evoking the features listed above—the theurgists themselves rejected that label. Later in this essay, I will look closely at some of the theurgic rituals that evoked the label ‘magic.’2   But the theurgists claimed that, in contrast to magoi, they worked with the cooperation of the gods rather than by coercing them, and that they worked for the higher purpose, ultimately, of purifying their souls, rather than towards quotidian purposes such as the magoi did (e.g., the incitement of sexual passion or the acquisition of wealth).”

[ibid, Pages 694 – 695].  **  This chapter has been uploaded by the author to academia.edu where you can read it for free, with a free academia account:  https://www.academia.edu/42029566/Magic_and_Theurgy

**********

In this essay, I’ve chosen to focus on the ca. 1928 picture widely known as ‘Theurgy,’ because it uses all of the ‘occult’ strategies Austin Spare utilized in his quest to encounter again what I think he saw as being his feminine ‘other,’ aka ‘Witch Paterson.’

Before I begin with a detailed description of ‘Theurgy,’ I want to clarify a couple more things about the man’s ‘magical’ endeavors, and this picture in particular.  Outside of two runes, we are never going to know for sure the meanings of the individual do-hickeys, the squiggles and the sigils, in this picture (or any others).  And the reason is, Spare never wanted us to.  In his ‘Book of Pleasure,’ he said he invented his ‘magical alphabet’ for his “foolish devotees.”  Yeah, to throw fools off the track.  I’m amazed at the people, like Kenneth Grant, who desperately tried to ‘get’ Spare’s supposed secrets of magic, and never got this:  What’s the First Principle of Magical Operations:  SILENCE.  And what happens to a worker of magic who gives out his secrets?  He/she Loses the magic for him/herself.

I think Spare used pictures like Theurgy as a kind of magical notation for himself. 

THEURGY:  A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The Runes:

In the previous post, I said there was a hitherto unnoticed rune, the Anglo-Saxon rune Dagaz, under the head of the ‘woman.’  However, after I transcribed that part of the writing not transcribed or commented on by other researchers, I realized that the rune was actually doing double duty, both as a ‘D’ with respect to the overall theme of the picture, and as a runic ‘M’ which Spare had the effrontery to strip the legs off of, in the writing.

Here is that section, which I’ve transcribed and I’ve tried to stick as closely as possible to the same lay-out as in the picture: 

“I desire that [Dagaz/Mannaz rune] incarnates the belief that

  I am [a squiggle that is either a sigil, or, possibly, ‘sacred letters’] by virtue. May the mantle of  [Sigil, with possible Wunjo rune]

 become me.  I have sacrificed my

 multiformed desires [Dagaz/Mannaz rune] all beliefs.  My aeolist

is [cluster of sigils/’letters’] my soul.  [eye possibly styled after one in the ‘Anubis’ section of the Egyptian Book of the Dead]:  https://img1.dreamies.de/img/569/b/eyfpb44zsvn.png  ]  The omen shall be

[cluster of ‘letters’] I will  Austin Osman Spare

The only part of the foregoing that Spare expert William Wallace has commented on is the sentence ‘May the mantle of [sigil] become me,’ [Cockney Visionary, page 77], and he speculates that perhaps Spare was jesting.  I don’t know why he would think that, but I see nothing that suggests to me Spare was joking when he created ‘Theurgy.’

AUSTIN SPARE’S SIGILS

From ‘Sex in Art,’ by Clifford Bax, first published in ‘Ideas and People’ in 1936, and re-published in Borough Satyr: The Life and Art of Austin Osman Spare in 2005:  “… Becoming more involved within the folds of metaphysics, he [Austin Spare] expounded a theory that a man’s conditions are caused by his subconscious desires.  The subconscious mind, being all-wise (he) [Spare] told us, wills the environment that shall strengthen the weak places of the soul : and he commented with a smile,  “I suppose my own subconscious desire is to be poor!  Whatever you really want, you can get.  The want rises first in the conscious mind, but you have to make the subconscious desire it too.  And you can do this by inventing a symbol of the thing you want – wealth, a woman, fame or a country cottage, it’s all alike.  The symbol drops  down into the subconscious.  You have to forget all about it.  In fact, you must play at hide-and-seek with yourself.  And while you’re wanting that particular thing or person, you must resolutely starve all your lesser desires.  By doing that, you make the whole self, conscious and subconscious, flow towards your main object.  And you’ll obtain it.””  [Borough Satyr, page 52]

And that’s the best explanation you’ll get, of what Spare meant by the magic of sigils.  I will just add that, Gavin Semple’s Zos Khia does a brilliant job of explaining Spare’s reasoning behind his inventive methodology for sigils, his separation of the power of belief from any object.

The Other Squiggles – Spare’s ‘Alphabet of Desire’

In BP 2.0, William Wallace asserts that Spare created and used an ‘alphabet’ based on John Dee’s ‘Enochian Alphabet’ “up to the end of his life.” [The Book of Pleasure, 2023, page 98]  Wallace’s claim regarding the importance of the connection of Dee’s work to Spare’s is debatable, (and I will be examining it in my next blog-post, on Spare and Aleister Crowley).  In any case, it’s clear from Spare’s post-war correspondence with Kenneth Grant that he had forgotten all about the ‘alphabet of desire’ [‘sacred alphabet’ was a later term, writing to Steffi Grant in 1949], and, as Spare said, he’d “lost the key” to the alphabet in the war “during the Blitz.”  [Zos Speaks! page 93]  Moreover, his attempts to resurrect the alphabet for Grant show that he did not think of his ‘alphabet’ as being letters per se, but, as concepts.  [ibid, page 108, for example]: 

[From page 115, Zos Speaks!] :  “5 Wynne Rd. S. W. 9.

Sunday [Nov 21, 1954]

Dear Ken & Steffie,

So sorry Ken has been ill – hope better by the time this reaches you. I ‘ve had a wretched cold coming & going for the last two weeks .

The enclosed ‘Ritual ‘ is the ‘rough out’ for final – when I see it typed, be able to see the weak spots etc & add to. The Stele will explain a good deal & everything on it numbered with Ref:

This is important, let me know where you think it is remiss or not sufficiently clear. . .

I’ll alter etc . As I mention a good deal relating is scattered in text – if joined up helps .

haste

Love to you both yrs ZOS.”

Compare that out-of-the blue ‘ritual’ from Spare in ’54 with the Anubis section in the 1895 E. Wallace Budge Translation of The Book of Coming Forth:

Page 192:  “…Saith the majesty of Anubis:  Art thou knowing the name of this door to declare… to me?”  Saith Osirus the scribe Ani, triumphant in peace, triumphant: 

Page 193:  this.  “Driver away of Shu is the name of this door.”  Saith the majesty of Anubis:  “Art thou knowing the name of the leaf upper and the leaf lower?”  “Lord of right upon his two feet is the name of the leaf upper; Lord of might, the disposer of cattle is the name of the leaf lower.”  “Pass then, O Osiris, the divine accountant of the offerings of the gods, all of Thebes, Ani triumphant, lord of veneration.”

Additionally, the eye in Theurgy is distinctly reminiscent of the eye given on page 13 in Budge’s ‘Table of Plates,’ from Chapter XVIII, the Anubis chapter:

Internet archive link:  https://archive.org/details/TheBookOfTheDead-Budge-1895

(Public domain)

This edition has the plates in color, download for free:  https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/budge1894bd1?sid=e3bcbebfe1d118c347a3465eb2b77593&ui_lang=eng

(Public Domain)  50 MB

I’ve uploaded it to the Internet Archive, a 25 MB download:  https://archive.org/details/budge-1894-table-of-plates

******

It’s clear that Wallace Budge’s 1895 publication of ‘The Egyptian Book of the Dead aka ‘The Book of Coming Forth By Day’ had a deep and lasting influence on Austin Spare.  [The 2015 edition by Andrews, Faulkner and Goelet, of The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth by Day, The Complete Papyrus of Ani – the same version of the Book that Austin Spare had access to – is deeply touching in the elevation of its thought, the sonorousness of its prose and the sheer beauty of its images.]

‘Transverser of the Aeons,’ (cropped slightly at the bottom):

Conclusion: 

Austin Osman Spare had a screw loose, for sure.  Two world wars and grinding poverty for most of his life didn’t help his mental or physical condition, either.

But there was more to Spare than a mental imbalance. 

I think something really happened during one of his periods of ‘creative day-dreaming.’  I think that’s when he met ‘Witch Paterson.’  Far be it from me to label what he encountered, spirit, living archetype, ghost, but the encounter(s) affected him for the rest of his life. 

When I was in grade 3, I was targeted by a boy, Keith, who was twice my size.  I don’t think I knew even back then why I was targeted, but for months he terrorized me, telling me he was going to clobber me one day.  And then, one afternoon in class, he turned to me standing behind him at the pencil sharpener, and he raised his hand to stab me with the pencil.  And my right hand moved so fast, and Keith was on the floor, staring up at me in shock and fear.  And I was staring at my hand in shock, wondering how I’d done it.  I remember I spent the next three years looking at my hand occasionally, trying to work it out.  (Keith avoided me after that.)  And then I forgot about it.

See, something out of the ordinary also happened to Austin Spare, probably in his late teens.  But, unlike me, he never gave up trying to work out what had happened to him.  Everything else came from that.  He applied that relentless focus of a Vincent van Gogh https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/collection?Q=yellow

that is one of the markers of genius, and subordinated everything else to it.

He had the true seer’s capacity to see beyond surfaces, for instance in this photo he took:  https://img1.dreamies.de/img/405/b/1sj3qq1vkd4.png

and turned into this picture, ‘woman with a dark background:’ 

The qualities in the painting Spare created, are there in the photo, but they are subtle, hard to see.  I myself am a specialist in discernment, but I wouldn’t have caught them, and I’m no artist. Spare’s powers of discernment far out-stripped my own.

In my next post, out hopefully before November’s end, I will examine the alleged influences on Spare’s art and sorcery, and the dynamic between Spare and Aleister Crowley.

Miskatonic Books – Caveat Emptor

UPDATE and EPILOGUE October 04, 2023: I was continuing to receive Miskatonic newsletters, and I was unable to unsubscribe as I just got bounced back from the site when I tried to do so. Yesterday, I contacted Larry Roberts on his Facebook profile and asked him to delete my subscription as I was unable to do it myself. This morning, I received another newsletter. This time, I was able to complete the unsubscribe request. Furthermore, it appears that my account has also been deleted. Wise choice. I really really hate to be crossed.

UPDATE: September 26, 2023: More caveats and transcripts for the emails below.

I worried about this order even after it arrived in Edmonton, particularly when I received notices from both Canada Post and USPS saying the order had “arrived” in Edmonton, and then, that it had departed again:

I was sure that if anything went wrong, I could probably go swing for my money. Turns out, my paranoia was justified. Once I was satisfied that it was staying put in my post office, I turned my attention yesterday to deleting my account at Miskatonic. But I had been blocked from my own account:

……..So I am apparently not to be allowed to delete my own account with my personal information in it. In Canada, it would be illegal for him to do that.

Caveat no 01: Do not store your credit card info with companies. I am glad I didn’t store mine with Miskatonic.

I noticed something on the web-page (I’ll get back to what in a moment), and when I went back to check what I’d seen, I got bounced out, ‘access denied.’ Bit by bit, the site dissolved in front of me.

What this tells me is that Larry put in a ‘kill’ order on any IP address visiting the Miskatonic site with ‘Edmonton’ and my ISP, ‘Shaw’ in its name. Ironically, he’s probably just banned half of Edmonton from his site, because Shaw uses ‘floating’ IP addresses as a security feature. So every time I visited the site yesterday, his ban would pounce on yet another IP address with the banned features.

What I had noticed was the price he was selling the ‘Green Mysteries’ hard-cover for. It caught my attention because I had seriously considered buying it from JD Holmes, who is selling it for about a hundred bucks U.S. cheaper than Miskatonic is:

……..

……… They’re both U.S. sellers. JD Holmes is a very pleasant and courteous seller whom I’ve been buying from for years, and he uses USPS all the way, who are very reliable.

Nor is this the only example I found yesterday of significant discrepancies in pricing. Consider the prices Miskatonic was listing the first editions of Underworld for, compared to what I paid JD Holmes for the same books:

………

My orders were this year and not special prices.

So, here is Caveat No 02: Consider carefully before you roll the dice and buy from Miskatonic. 9 times out of 10 it’ll probably turn out fine. But what about that 10th time? I suspect that there may be an underlying cause for Larry Roberts’ initial abrasiveness and his alacrity in blocking me: and it has to do with insurance. JD Holmes always insures the books he ships. It hit me today that if Larry Roberts is not insuring the books he sells, then that could account for his abrasiveness and defensiveness in the emails, and also his speed in ensuring that if my order never arrived, then I would never be able to ask for my money back. I think he probably operates this way on a personal level too. Anyone who decides to break off a relationship with him would do very well, in my assessment, to ensure they don’t leave any belongings behind under his control, if they ever want to see those things again.

End of update…

*****

Or, how to lose a customer in one day flat:

Yesterday, I became concerned when a book order from Miskatonic https://www.miskatonicbooks.com/ was apparently stalled in L.A. since September 16, not with USPS, which wouldn’t have worried me too much, but with Global Post, Miskatonix courier until it reaches USPS.

I emailed the orders person, who is also the founder of Miskatonix, Larry Roberts, https://www.facebook.com/larry.roberts.9003888

and here follows the exchanges by email:

……

My order has stalled at the border.

I wouldn’t worry about this if USPS had acknowledged it Has the order, but it appears to be stuck in some liminal space with Global Post.

Global Post is never speedy, but this particular kind of delay is unusual.

Please see if you can jump-start the passover to USPS.

Thank you.

Marnie Tunay

marnietunay@shaw.ca

…………………….

Hello Marnie,

This is quite common with Global Post. We have noticed some delays in packages even some that are coming our way from overseas. We’ll keep an eye on it on our end but in 99% of the cases it will start moving again soon. 

All the best

Larry

I don’t know what ‘soon’ means, Larry.

How long do you expect me to wait for USPS to even Accept the package that has been apparently stalled at their terminal since October 16?

I swear I’ve jinxed it; just two days ago I praised Miskatonic as a reliable shipper/

……….

……….

Hello Marnie,

I just called our Post Master and had her look into it. Looks like the package is currently waiting for Canada to release the package from customs. This is something even the US Postal Service has no control over. I know that things are slowing down again due to covid, distancing, etc which seems to be starting in Canada sooner than it is here in the states.

Also you package hasn’t been at their terminal since October 16th. You purchased the book on September 9th and it is now in customs on September 16th. 

.

………..

Hello, Larry. the data you supplied does not support the postmaster’s claim that my book order has even reached the USPS outlet, much less crossed the border into Vancouver.

I buy a lot of books, Larry, that have to cross the border, from Midian books in the UK and from JD Holmes in America.

The data you supplied is precisely what I told you, the books have Not been transferred as of yet even to USPS and they are certainly not in Customs.

I’m not going to argue with you, Larry; it’s instructive to see the Miskatonix response, when there’s an issue.

If the books don’t arrive I’m sure I can eventually get them from someone else.

I will ask Anathema Publishing if they can get me a copy.

Have a nice day, Larry.

Good to know you.

https://www.canadapost-postescanada.ca/track-reperage/en#/details/CY137876235US

If it was in Customs, Canada Post would Say so.

I base that on probably two hundred book orders over the  past several years, Larry.

…………..

Even though my books are apparently on the move now, and he was correct that they had actually arrived in Canada at least as of 13:30 today, I have zero plans to buy any more books from Miskatonix, even though I had previously bought several others with no problems.

I found his responses to be be dismissive of my concerns, and I was particularly frosted by the suggestion that Covid in Canada was somehow to blame for the delay. This tells me that if there are any more problems, I can expect Miskatonix to respond in the same manner.

It’s not a good way to keep customers. I’ve never ever had a delay to not be met with an apology or an expression of concern, before today. He was dismissive of my concern initially, even though I had specified the concern and asserted that it was not a usual concern (not for me, anyway).

Even though he turned out to be right, I wouldn’t be willing to entrust any more issues to his company.

See, you can be right, as a seller, and still be dead wrong in terms of how you handle a situation.

I was turning out to be a good customer for them. It was the first time I had ever contacted them about an order, and it’s a fairly stupid seller who’s willing to lose a good customer so easily.

I wanted to put this out there because I had just finished praising Miskatonix not three days ago as being a reliable seller and even promoted one of their books. So I feel I need to balance that picture.