A Crowley Options

Hello , I was wondering what you guys think of A Crowley and if its any worth reading his books ?

Hello , I was wondering what you guys think of A Crowley and if its any worth reading his books ?

(Previous excessive ranting deleted)

From what I've seen, it's worth reading if you can be bothered wading through the rather titanic degree of arrogance...which personally, I can't.

If I'm going to view someone as a mentor, personally, their level of purely technical skill alone isn't enough. I also need them to display a decent level of humility as well, or to at least be reasonably real about themselves. Confidence to a certain level is fine; viewing yourself as an incarnate godform isn't.

I don't respect Bym or the other people I've read on this site as much as I do purely because of what I've seen of their level of ability; I also do because every one of them that I've seen manages to avoid arrogance, and remember that they are human. Crowley, in my observation, had enormous difficulty doing that, and for that reason, the size of his contributions notwithstanding, I find it equally difficult to have serious respect for him.

This post has been edited by Petrus: Sep 29 2008, 01:51 AM

Could you point to some specific instances of this arrogance that has turned you off to Crowley? I ask to know if you mean things said about him and his life, or things he said himself.

"Magick in Theory and Practice" was written by Mary Desti and Leah Hirsig based on conversations with Crowley. Though it is obvious he supervised the book closely, it is not his directly. Crowley's own thoughts on Magick Art, when put down by his own hand, are somewhat different in character and content. Compare for example the Aquae Contemplationis or Liber Jugorum to the relatively simplistic chapters in Liber Aba. The "holy books" also are of a different sort, a stand-alone set of texts, whereas "Magick in Theory and Practice" is a summary and expansion of existing occult ideas.

Whether or not you admire Crowley or his writing, his influence on modern occult practices is immense, and there is viritually no concept of older occultism that he does not discuss at some point in his writings. I believe this makes his books worth reading, even if you prefer to ignore his opinions and refute his ideas.

If you want a more "humble" Crowley, try Magick Without Tears.

..."Magick in Theory and Practice" was written by Mary Desti and Leah Hirsig based on conversations with Crowley. Though it is obvious he supervised the book closely, it is not his directly....

Um...

I think what you mean by this is that Crowley spoke out loud and had someone write his words down while he was speaking.

I think what you mean by this is that Crowley spoke out loud and had someone write his words down while he was speaking.

No, that isn't what I meant. Credit is due to the women mentioned, perhaps more than to Crowley, for the writing of "Magick."

As is said in the book, the Beast was a bit too obscure in relating some of his subject matter, so these women wrote what they thought would be a more friendly-to-the-public version of the same ideas. When one became exapserated with the project, and probably Crowley too, the other took over the writing.

"Soror Virakam" claims that she took notes from his lectures in Naples, then re-arranged, edited, and altered them to suit her audience for Parts I and II of Liber ABA.

Part III, Magick in Theory and Practice, follows a similar line from "Soror Agatha," who claims to have received it from Crowley before her own editing.

The very first sentence:

"This book is intentionally not the work of Frater Perdurabo.