Sorcerers And Sorcery Options

I have a soft spot for the title Sorcerer and the art of such called Sorcery.
And yeah, I'll admit it, it goes back to that infamous Apprentice by the name of Mickey Mouse.

What I have noticed over the years in various occult literature is the use of terms mostly has been to derogate whatever magickal approach for which the writers gave low regard.

What disappoints me is: regardless of how cool the terms are, the fact remains that there really is not a specific kind of magickal approach associated with them. I do not mean one particular universal paradigm here. I mean a kind of flavor that when tasted with one's meta-sensibilities clearly indicates a Sorcerer and Sorcery just as much as certain spices, herbs, and sauces clearly indicate unique ethnic cooks and their respective cuisines.

My preference would be for Sorcery to reference pathways that lay between the traditional old school and the modern new school - brushing shoulders with the nature-based and rubbing elbows with the technological - enabling group participation and allowing fierce independence - etc...

Regardless of my preference, however, I remain surprised that no one has been able to do for Sorcerers and Sorcery what Gardner (and Alexander, Buckland, et.al.) did for Witches and Witchcraft.

Note: make no mistake with that last parallel. I am not saying that Sorcery should end up exactly like Witchcraft today. The point of making that parallel is: those authors took those terms and dared to cook and to create memorable meals for a magickal approach that has a consistency, fragrance, flavor, and ambiance not only unique - but also very recognizable - compared to non-Witchcraft approaches ... even with all the diversity within Witches and Witchcraft.

This post has been edited by Praxis: Dec 4 2008, 12:40 PM

I tend to view "sorcery" as a sort of blend of the above listed examples. In comparison to the wizard or magi, the sorcerer seems (to me) to be much more a sort of "channeled" and a fairly "direct" magick form. I think this can take the form of working intimately with a more powerful entity which conveys power to the sorcerer, or it can come in the form of using one's innate magickal/psychic ability to tap into power & energies both vast and largely unknown. When I think of a sorcerer, I think of almost a sort of blend of western magick and something more visceral and 'hands on' like tai chi. Traditional storytelling seems to cast the sorcerer in a position where they may use ritual setting and/or ritual items, but can also perform magick without them, by directly channeling the energies & forces they wish to work with, and working in a way which is more art than science. I also tend to think of sorcery as more referring to a style which works with emotional and elemental energies, and is not 'sedate'.

But all of that is just my gut-impression of the word "sorcery". My view may be horribly tainted by my own magical practice & ideals (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

As for the 'negatives' of working in a way where you garner power through a friendly entity... I think that the assumption that such a relationship *must* be a negative experience is a pretty huge leap. In a way I think this more reflects a basic human desire for the universe to be a 'fair' place, and for nobody else to get a free lunch if you're not getting one. There is no difference between that and a deity-relationship based magick style, except that one is more accepted as a part of many religious paths. Whether such a relationship would be healthy or unhealthy would depend entirely on the nature and intent of the entity in question. I don't see any automatic downside to it. Though there is some risk. And anyone deeply interested in 'self' empowerment must ask themselves whether such a relationship is in effect empowering them or atrophying them. I don't think the answer will always be the same. With entity interaction, I find that 'diversity' is the rule.

As for "skipping ahead" in magical practice. Any chaote does that as well. I daresay that if you never skip ahead, then you will be ill prepared to "pioneer" your magical path when you run out of training resources. Magical systems are just the experience & sensibilities of those who have gone before you. Sometimes they can serve as a valuable insight, other times 'not so much'. In the end it's *your* magic working path. No two are exactly alike. If it's your path to skim & skip ahead, you may miss something important... or you may just save a lot of tedious time and get where you're going quicker. Its kinda like speeding, you *might* get a ticket, but then again you *might* just get there quicker without incident. I'd venture to say that when it comes to magick, if you habitually speed ahead, you will eventually get some tickets. But I'd argue that the process of getting these tickets is a school of experience unto itself, one missed out on by those with less initiative. None of which even touches on the subject of the pitfalls of following a flawed teacher (hint, they've all got flaws). And some who choose to teach or lay down working systems for others to follow, are in fact following their own ego more than sharing valuable experience. At the end of the day, I don't think there is anyone who ever became a great explorer by following well beaten roads. Take that with a grain of salt if you like, I am very ambitious magically speaking, and I am fundamentally at odds with a "paint by numbers" approach to my art.

SO....Im just saying. I dont necessarily agree with all that....but I have always heard the term used in a derogatory way....and in every case because of the basic definition above. Its like the definition of Chaos Magic.....I always thought that a real Chaos Magician would be a person who used NO RITUALS of anykind.....instead they learned how to reach out and tap directly into the raw energy of Chaos......the energy that everything came from, and that everything will return too. Then they used the energy of Chaos itself to make changes in reality....But every single book on Chaos Magic I have seen teaches....thats right....rituals. They have just devised a new tradition of ritual magic, and dont want to call themselves ritual magicians so used the name Chaos Magic instead of Ritual Magic. To me its a croc......a REAL Chaos Mage would never use a ritual of anykind for anything. They would simply summon up a healthy burst of raw Chaos....shape it into what they want, and cast it out into the world.

Except that "chaos magick" is not definitively the art of working with "chaos energy". It's a metaparadigm, or an approach to working with paradigms, it's not a 'chaos-elemental' magick system. This is a common misconception.
That said, I could loosely be called a chaote (its debatable, given my paradigmatic adherences), and I don't typically use ritual in my magick. Chaos magick is not a system of magick, it's a system for working with other systems of magick... many of which are fairly ritual based.

This post has been edited by Kath: Oct 10 2009, 02:54 PM