New Book By Simon Options

I just wanted everyone to know there is a new book coming out by our old friend Simon. Yes the same author of the Necronomicon.

The title of the new book which is Dead Names : The Dark History of the Necronomicon has been out for awhile and it is still not released as of yet BUT they have finally released a picture of the book and a quick overview.

Here is the picture of the new book:

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Frater_Nero/newbook.jpg)

and here is the Book Description:


The most feared, fascinating, and dangerous book in the history of humankind . . . Necronomicon

An ancient Arabic text -- a powerful book of spells that could, in the wrong hands, create unimaginable and irreversible devastation -- the Necronomicon featured prominently in the stories of legendary horror writer H.P. Lovecraft. For many generations, few believed it to be anything other than pure fiction.

But in 1972, a young man who, for his own protection, must be known simply as "Simon," stumbled upon an old, handwritten manuscript that ultimately proved to be an authentic edition of the unholy work.

Dead Names is the startling true account of the dark and violent history of this most fearsome of books: from its Middle Eastern origins to its reemergence centuries later; its role in pivotal events of the twentieth century, from the JFK assassination to the Son of Sam murders; and the terrible fates that befell those who helped bring the Necronomicon out of the shadows and into the light of day.

On the first bit - don't worry about it.

I will offer a point of view which has zero weight in todays society, but which I think will become quite weighty as the occult currents grow stronger in the world - namely that occult works work very much on the same principles as art, by pulling different semantic symbolic strings and hence shifting the realities of the viewer. Today the main difference is that only a small elite has access to the codes of the art world and the occult world respectively however the art world view is considered high status and written about in the prestigous papers whereas the occult world view is almost underground. To a great extent I would claim that loads of occult works have art status - except since the art people do not have access to the occult codes they have no means of recognizing that. One point is of course that occult works deserve exactly the same status art does. Full stop.

Let us assume for the sake of argument that you are correct in your belief that the Necronomicon is indeed a forgery made up by Simon and possibly some other people. Occultly speaking this would place his Nec in the tradition of almost every older occult work, since they were almost all pseudoepigraphica. In the art sphere forgery has also been a brilliant part of immensely increasing the value of some works, consider: Carlos Castaneda, Ossian. Now, if this is indeed the case, then Simon is obviously a genious. Perhaps a minor genious since occult works do not recieve the recognition they deserve - but still.

If everyone were looking at works of art and the occult from an aesthetic perspective - which, I'd admit, would be nice - then I'd buy this argument. They're not, however. People are buying, selling, and displaying these for other reasons as well, whether art for its monetary value or magic for its ability to give them a vision of a higher reality. What I find great about life is that people can find different ways to value the same thing. Deliberately not giving those people what they seek is disrespectful to their own values of what's important.

Just to make sure I understand you correctly, you wrote Clark Kent and Clark Kent wrote back, signing his letters with Clark Kent, while you believe that Clark Kent is Superman. Is this a correct understanding?

That's it.

The problem I percieve with your line of reasoning here is that it presents an impossible dilemma to anyone arguing with you. If I appeal to a higher level principle which trumps the arguments you have presented you would not percieve it as such since you live inside your own hierarchy of values.

You see, to me, as a writer, planning to publish some work under pseudonym, the mere idea that someone would consider publishing my real name ... well, it doesn't even need any arguments it is wrong. It is a breach into someone elses integrity. It is meddling inside someone elses business where one has no business and is not aware of the consequences or reasons. And demanding to know such reasons under the threat of exposure is wrong.

As per Byms instructions above I will not count the ways specificly in which I consider such behavior wrong.

One higher level principle out of many is that one should respect other peoples decisions regarding how they wish to live their lives. But arguing about such principles is sort of pointless, again, since this is what I consider a higher level principle, while if you considered this a principle of the high level it is you wouldn't be contemplating publishing Simons identity in the first place.

Divulging a pseudonym cannot be absolutely wrong - otherwise, someone could kill me to stop me telling who Simon would be, and it would be acceptable, no? ;-) We might vary on where that line is, but we cannot simply place that as impermissible under any circumstances.

I do agree that not divulging the true identity of authors is important, especially in an occult context. If someone doesn't give a reason, I'll assume that they've got good cause. Nonetheless, Simon volunteered what he says is his reason - not one of his reasons, but his reason, for remaining anonymous. He created this situation, not me.

Let's take Simon out of the picture. I have a piece of information right now that people want to know. There is a reason before me to keep that information back. I know that reason cannot be correct, which I'm sure itself is of interest to those same people. I ask for clarification of that reason, and if that is not given or is insufficient, I give that information. No threat is involved.

I do respect Simon's morality - though I'm not quite sure what it is - but I also have my own. We can't know everything about a situation, but as moral individuals we need to try to understand what's before us and make choices. Right now, I'm being asked to set that evidence aside based on nothing but speculation, and I'm not willing to do that. Simon makes his choices, and I make mine.