Notifications
Clear all

A Lecture on the Philosophy of Magick By Aleister Crowley  

  RSS

ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
29/06/2015 8:54 am  

A Lecture on the Philosophy of Magick By Aleister Crowley

[Ed. note: Bro. Richard Kaczynski, a serious student of Crowley's unpublished work who recently completed his biography of Crowley, obtained this lecture from Christina Foyle, a member of the English bookdealing family renowned for her leterary luncheon lectures. Her family's London shop remaindered Crowley's Magick in Theory and Practice. He noted in his diary for August 17, 1932 "Saw Foyle - asked to speak at lunch Sept. 15 on "The Philosophy of Magick." His hope was, as he wrote an aquaintance a few days later, "to sell a few hundred sets of my treatise Magick." Christina Foyle told Kaczynski that she arranged the luncheon at Grosvenor House even though many people warned her off because of Crowley's reputation (her usual fare was Auden, Eliot et al.). One attendee, Rode Macaulay, remarked "I don't mind what he does, as long as he doesn't turn himself into a goat." Crowley's diary for Sept. 15, the day of the luncheon, records "Made a good speech!!!!!" - HB]

http://gorish.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/a-lecture-on-philosophy-of-magick-by.html


Quote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
30/06/2015 4:02 pm  

were those four short paragraphs the extent of it?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
30/06/2015 4:43 pm  

You’re quite right William: now you come to mention it, it doesn’t seem to have been a particularly long speech.  Perhaps there was a big question time?  Or maybe the actual business of the “luncheon” itself lasted for quite a while in those days?

Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
01/07/2015 3:32 pm  

the magical theory of the Universe is that we have all come to the particular star or planet we hapen to be living on in order to get experience. We all go through stages in that experience. Some of those stages are pleasant and some rather unpleasant, but they are all necessary in order that we may obtain the full comprehension of ourselves.

so the question becomes: "R U Experienced"

[flash=420,315:pi0deeps] https://www.youtube.com/v/qonTIZGu27w[/flash:pi0deeps]


ReplyQuote
obscurus
(@obscuruspaintus)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 315
01/07/2015 4:04 pm  

From another angle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA88x6X8x8M


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
02/07/2015 10:25 am  

You’re quite right William: now you come to mention it, it doesn’t seem to have been a particularly long speech.  Perhaps there was a big question time?  Or maybe the actual business of the “luncheon” itself lasted for quite a while in those days?

It's clearly a fragment.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
02/07/2015 3:01 pm  

You appear to know more than most about this lecture, michael – so on the basis of this, if it’s “clearly a fragment” can you possibly inform if this fragment would come from the beginning or the end, or somewhere in the middle?  Where might the rest of it be, and why did it become separated from this portion of it?  And if you should somehow have access to the full text, perhaps you could kindly upload it for the benefit of the Society?

Maybe Dr Kaczynski, if he happens to be reading this, could also affirm or deny accordingly?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 501
03/07/2015 12:50 am  
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
were those four short paragraphs the extent of it?

This lecture is reproduced in The Revival of Magick, New Falcon , 1998 and has exactly the same content except that a new paragraph is started part way through the last but one paragraph and starting with the words "We are in the middle of a world crisis.........."

There is no extra content.

OK


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
03/07/2015 7:16 am  

thanks for squashing my hopes OK!


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
03/07/2015 5:04 pm  
"OKontrair" wrote:
There is no extra content.

If this was the entire lecture, maybe for various reasons Crowley read.  Very slowly.  Enunciating the words.  Clearly and at.  Length.  (Possibly. ;D)

I wonder, did this interview with Ms Foyle get recorded?  And even if it was not, perhaps there might be a full transcript available of what took place?  Coming from someone who had direct dealings on a seemingly reasonably amicable basis with the Beast, I imagine that her testimony might be quite revealing.

A Lecture on the Philosophy of Magick By Aleister Crowley

[...] One attendee, Rose Macaulay, remarked "I don't mind what he does, as long as he doesn't turn himself into a goat."

This doesn’t really work well as a witticism – perhaps she meant to say “as long as he doesn't turn me into a goat!”?  And yet, if A.C. was capable of turning anyone into a goat I would have thought that would have been fascinating & well worth the price of admission on its own!

N Joy


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/07/2015 8:28 pm  

Hi everyone,

In the late 1980s, I wrote to Christina Foyle asking after Crowley, and she very kindly replied including from her files a photocopy titled "Copy of Mr. Aleister Crowley's speech at the Foyle Literary Luncheon given in his honour at Grosvenor House, London in September, 1932." It was very exciting to uncover a previously-unknown piece of Crowleyana!

It consisted of a two-page, single-spaced typescript with pages numbered 1 and 2, and a clear ending marked by the characters " - - - - - - -" centered just over halfway down the second page. So no pages appear to have been omitted from the copy sent to me. The talk as printed in The Magical Link and The Revival of Magick is the entirety of the text that as shared with me. Rest assured not one particle of dust was held back.  😉

Christina Foyle additionally informed me that, "This was the twenty-third Literary Luncheon. It was held at Grosvenor House and was attended by 500 guests. Sir Denison Ross was in the chair, and the other speakers were Mr. Arthur Rackham and Mr. J. D. Beresford." Given there were multiple speakers, I suppose it's possible that each had a limited amount of time to speak.

I hope this helps,

Richard


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1021
04/07/2015 9:38 pm  

Thanks very much, Richard.

It occurred to me that other Literary Luncheon speeches must be published, which we could use as a comparison. I found this one, given by the anarchist Emma Goldman at the 29th such luncheon, March 1, 1933 -

http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/goldman/pdfs/Speeches-AnAnarchistLooksatLife.pdf

It is merely two typescript pages, so about the same length as Crowley's.

I read Crowley's out loud, as if giving the speech, and I finished it in just under four (4) minutes. My guess is that speakers were instructed to make it no longer than five minutes, so that, with the introduction and other speakers, the talking part of the luncheon would not take up more than a half an hour or so, the rest of the time (half an hour or an hour?) could be spent in eating, drinking, and socializing.


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
05/07/2015 12:49 pm  

wonder what Mr. Arthur Rackham and Mr. J. D. Beresford spoke on.  Oh, to have been a fly on the wall at the speaker's table...


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
06/07/2015 8:42 pm  

Thank you for the supplemental information Richard.

Your remark

"rkaczynski" wrote:
In the late 1980s, I wrote to Christina Foyle asking after Crowley, and she very kindly replied

appears to clear up at least one point of uncertainty: I wasn’t sure whether you might have interviewed her face to face, and thought that in that case she might have supplied one or two more anecdotes about awful aleister.  But I suppose that, even if she had, knowledge about it would have circulated around by now as there doesn’t seem to be much truly fresh original material left to unearth any longer.

N Joy


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
07/07/2015 8:41 am  

93!

"rkaczynski" wrote:
It was very exciting to uncover a previously-unknown piece of Crowleyana!
"jamie barter" wrote:
there doesn’t seem to be much truly fresh original material left to unearth any longer

Jamie, I hope you will be proven wrong and I am confident it will be so. It was as late as 2003 when I also simply wrote to the "Eastbourne Gazette" and was promptly served with copies of (what must have been) Crowley's very first published work from 1894, his weekly chess column written as "Ta Dhuibh". While someone surely also had these in private (or OTO) collection, I had never seen these published or even quoted of, so I truly felt VERY important at that time.

Now, when in many countries the digitisation of newspapers and periodicals has begun and is rapidly expanded, I am sure that some unknown gems of Crowley will surface soon.

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
07/07/2015 5:13 pm  
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
93!

"rkaczynski" wrote:
It was very exciting to uncover a previously-unknown piece of Crowleyana!
"jamie barter" wrote:
there doesn’t seem to be much truly fresh original material left to unearth any longer

Jamie, I hope you will be proven wrong and I am confident it will be so. It was as late as 2003 when I also simply wrote to the "Eastbourne Gazette" and was promptly served with copies of (what must have been) Crowley's very first published work from 1894, his weekly chess column written as "Ta Dhuibh". While someone surely also had these in private (or OTO) collection, I had never seen these published or even quoted of, so I truly felt VERY important at that time.

Now, when in many countries the digitisation of newspapers and periodicals has begun and is rapidly expanded, I am sure that some unknown gems of Crowley will surface soon.

Love=Law
Lutz

Of course it would give me great pleasure to be proved wrong in this instance Lutz.  No doubt there will still be the odd items which come to light, and some of these may even rightly come to be described as gems.  However, with all due respect to your personal taste in the matter I imagine there would be more people hanging bunting in the streets & celebrating over some unknown-about or undiscovered magickal Liber - e.g. Liber CMXXXIV, “The Cactus" - which comes to light, rather than over similarly unearthed chess columns or mountaineering reminisces or somewhat crap limericks, etc., interesting to niche readers as they may be.

I think in terms of such “truly original” material, what I was trying to say was that if anything further was going to turn up it probably would have done by now, nearly seventy years after Crowley’s death.  Richard unearthed this particular item back in the '80s, over a quarter of a century ago.  There are about up to a dozen known libri which seem to have vanished without trace, but it’s always possible there’s a chance that any one of these may turn up in a loft or stashed in the lining of a suitcase somewhere else or in another location equally unlikely and unexpected.

We live in hope.
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Share: