Notifications
Clear all

Dennis Wheatley  

  RSS

wulfram
(@wulfram)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 137
02/06/2008 11:14 pm  

93

I've read Peter Lavenda's claim that Wheatley was initiated by Crowley into either the A:.A:. or OTO. Does anyone have knowledge of any documentation of this?

93/93


Quote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
02/06/2008 11:23 pm  

It's not something I recall from any reputable source although recent research into British Intelligence - more than just a shared interest - means it really wouldn't surprise me greatly.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
wulfram
(@wulfram)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 137
02/06/2008 11:26 pm  

Nor I, Paul. I'm just trying to dot some i's and cross some t's on a new project. If nothing substantial turns up then I'll let my imagination fill in the gaps.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 4:18 pm  

Wheatley apparently consulted Crowley on the subject of Magick, obviously to "flesh" out his books, in regards to his Black Magic villians, but apart from that, I doubt it very much. Regards.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 4:35 pm  

Wheatley certainly knew the A.'.A.'. Grade structure and did know Crowley. There was a recent documentary about Wheatley and he seems to have been a despicable character, only interested in money and a con man early in his life. He boasted of knowing Crowley, but I doubt Crowley ever thought it worth mentioning.

From what I remember from a bio of Wheatley elsewhere, he did undergo some sort of initiation derived from the G.'.D.'. but this could have been via Dion Fortune or the A.E.Waite group that Charles Williams belonged to, though I doubt someone of Williams' character would have wanted much to do with Wheatley either.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 5:46 pm  
"sethur666" wrote:
There was a recent documentary about Wheatley and he seems to have been a despicable character, only interested in money and a con man early in his life. He boasted of knowing Crowley, but I doubt Crowley ever thought it worth mentioning.

What was this recent documentary and why do you regard Wheatley as a "despicable character"? And where is the evidence of him boasting of acquaintance with Crowley?


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
28/06/2008 6:28 pm  
"sethur666" wrote:
he seems to have been a despicable character, only interested in money and a con man early in his life.

What an astonishing remark! "Despicable"? However, given that at the moment it's just an opinion and we have no access to the information on which you've based that opinion, perhaps you could provide us with references to evidence your assertion?

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 7:19 pm  

Considering Wheatley gave Hammer Films the rights to all his books for free ((According to Christopher Lee in special features of "To the Devil a Daughter")) ... I'd say he wasn't "despicable",
Furthermore, he only withdrew the rights after Hammer botched the ending to "Daughter"... another plus for artistic integrity.
ps:I'm biased as I love the Hammer films and Wheatley's books.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 7:47 pm  
"sethur666" wrote:
despicable character

He came across [in the recent documentary] as being a bit of a snobbish Old Tory... despicable in some peoples eyes.

One great quotation from Wheatley's diaries in that programme was [given the planning regulations in Britain, and the wartime materials restrictions] "I can't even put a shelf up in my own house without getting permission!"


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
28/06/2008 8:57 pm  

Ok, fair enough... But to declare someone as "despicable" on a public forum on the basis of shelving bureaucrats? Nah!

"jcyn" wrote:
I'm biased as I love the Hammer films and Wheatley's books.

Seconded...

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
28/06/2008 10:29 pm  

OK, the documentary was on BBC4 and the boast about knowing Crowley was from an interview filmed during his life that was shown in the same documentary. His "manifesto", the discovery of which was the spur for the new documentary being made, was a call for a fascistic uprising. I consider fascism despicable.

More info here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2005/10/01/bvlost01.xml

Of course, this is the Daily Telegraph's view, at the time they probably agreed with him. The same documentary outlined his behaviour regarding his family, particularly when his father died and he rushed to get to his mother to make her hand over all the money to him, along with many other such tales - recounted by other family members. He also apparently despised Crowley for not having much money, which his descendants gleefully agreed with.

So that's the basis of my opinion. I stand by it.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 12:14 am  

he doesn't seem like a fascist to me from reading the controversial 'letter to posterity':

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/wheatley_letter.pdf

echoes of mystical platonism and Liber Oz yes, but not fascism. if i was to have a stab at defining him from the views outlined in the letter, it'd be as a stalinaphobic neoplatonic libertarian monarchist.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 12:30 am  
"sethur666" wrote:
OK, the documentary was on BBC4 and the boast about knowing Crowley was from an interview filmed during his life that was shown in the same documentary. His "manifesto", the discovery of which was the spur for the new documentary being made, was a call for a fascistic uprising. I consider fascism despicable.

Oh, you're referring to that old "Letter to Posterity"? Hardly a call for "despicable fascistic uprising" - it was discussed on this very site back in November 2005: http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-475-highlight-wheatley.phtml where the whole of the text was presented.

At the time, I noted that: "Crowley's influence on Wheatley is apparent and one can infer that Wheatley was more impressed by Thelema than he cared to admit in interviews." Perhaps more succinctly, rabrazier responded with the pithy observation: "Standard pre-Thatcher tory with a few bits borrowed from Jung..."

So that's the basis of my opinion. I stand by it.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 12:47 pm  

It's clear from Wheatley's autobiography that he admired, and to a degree, respected Crowley. He writes "We had Crowley to dinner several times. His conversation was fascinating. He gave me much useful information and several of his books, but never attempted to draw me into his occult activities. Later, when Driberg asked me what I thought of him, I replied, "Intellectually I think he is quite wonderful, but I don't think he could harm a rabbit." (The Time Has Come, p.605).

I posted in a different thread a link to a bookseller's catalogue in which there was a book by A.C. from Wheatley's library. I think it was The World's Tragedy and it contained an inscription by Crowley, which seemed to suggest the two were reasonably friendly.

I saw the silly BBC documentary. I don't remember hearing Wheatley being boastful of having known Crowley. I remember him saying he knew Crowley, Montague Summers, Rollo Ahmed "and all those boys" as he put it, but I'd hardly call that "boasting".

The allegation of him calling for "fascistic uprising" is pure nonsense. Wheatley had spent the war years fighting fascism. The last thing he wanted was to inflict it on his own country. In my humble opinion, the Letter to Posterity reads like some hasty ebullition brought on by a little too much wine after a hearty Sunday dinner. Maybe that's why it was stuffed in an urn. Having said that, I thoroughly agree with his sentiments.

And let's not forget that Wheatley personally answered all of his readers' correspondence. Hardly the actions of a "despicable character".

And, yes, I too love Hammer films and Wheatley's books!

One totally irrelevant comment: the other day on Amazon I happened upon a copy of The Beast 666 by Symonds which was being offered for £4.50 and described "as new but with some damage". The damage turned out to be some very minor scuffing to the dust jacket, other than that the book is pristine. I'm so pleased that I just had to mention it.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 12:55 pm  

Thanks for a very interesting and informative post.

"seeyouintheentity" wrote:
the other day on Amazon I happened upon a copy of The Beast 666 by Symonds which was being offered for £4.50 and described "as new but with some damage". The damage turned out to be some very minor scuffing to the dust jacket, other than that the book is pristine. I'm so pleased that I just had to mention it.

Good for you! It's by far the best of the many editions of Symonds' Crowley biography, in my opinion, and was the finest biography available until the publication of Kaczynski's masterwork.

Mind you, I have to "big it up" as my copy is signed by Naylor and Symonds and I might need to sell it for the pension fund one day!

😉

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 1:28 pm  
"seeyouintheentity" wrote:
And where is the evidence of him boasting of acquaintance with Crowley?

I take it this question has been answered 🙂


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 1:31 pm  
"seeyouintheentity" wrote:
I saw the silly BBC documentary. I don't remember hearing Wheatley being boastful of having known Crowley. I remember him saying he knew Crowley, Montague Summers, Rollo Ahmed "and all those boys" as he put it, but I'd hardly call that "boasting".

The allegation of him calling for "fascistic uprising" is pure nonsense. Wheatley had spent the war years fighting fascism.

"Boasting an acquaintance" is an English phrase not necessarily implying showing off. As for Wheatley fighting fascism, what he was fighting was foreigners, as were large numbers of right-of-centre Brits during WWII. Enoch Powell used the same argument. It does not convince.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 3:07 pm  

Ok, sethur666, those involved in fighting on the side of the allies are now, ipso facto, simply doing it, not for noble purposes, but simply to "fight foreigners" and quite likely closet "fascists" (whatever that term really means)?

Just as a matter of interest, Powell used what argument, precisely? I see little in Wheatley's Letter that would link him directly with the racist Powell, and even less in his many novels (yes, I've read most of them). In "Strange Conflict" and others, it's clear that Wheatley objected to the Nazis, for example, not because they were "foreigners" but because they opposed the freedoms he held dear. Quite the libertarian, in many ways.

Actually, looking back on your posts here over many months, you do seem to have an unfortunate tendency to shoot your mouth off without thinking first.

Your right to post without pre-moderation is hereby revoked and you will submit future posts for pre-moderation.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
wulfram
(@wulfram)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 137
29/06/2008 8:11 pm  
"sethur666" wrote:
There was a recent documentary about Wheatley and he seems to have been a despicable character, only interested in money and a con man early in his life. He boasted of knowing Crowley, but I doubt Crowley ever thought it worth mentioning.

Despicable? Spoken by someone with no knowledge of the man, save perhaps a single disparaging documentary that sounds to me to be little more than a hatchet job, I'd say.

Wheatley's generosity and amicable nature, particularly in regard to the fans of his writings, is well known and documented.

I'm appalled to hear you dismiss him so readily.

And gentlemen, you might also count me as a fan of both the works of Mr. Wheatley and of all things Hammer. I consider them both to be tremendous influences on my own writing. Neither seem to get the credit they are due, I'm afraid. Much like Crowley himself.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 8:48 pm  

You're right, Bob... You're so right.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 10:24 pm  
"lashtal" wrote:
those involved in fighting on the side of the allies are now, ipso facto, simply doing it, not for noble purposes, but simply to "fight foreigners" and quite likely closet "fascists" (whatever that term really means)?.

The English were a funny old bunch around that time: only a few really rabid anti-fascists still see Enoch Powell as properly "racist" these days. He really belonged to a particular generation of Englishman that had a somewhat "John Major-ish" view of England, all cricket on the village green on a sunday afternoon etc, and wanted to keep it that way. He saw the influx of immigrants as potentially eroding that way of life, but wasn't particularly against them for their colour or creed, which is what defines a proper "racist". Misguided maybe, out of touch perhaps, but Powell really can't be tarred with the same brush we use to describe some skinhead who kicks a Pakistani shopkeeper to death. Wheatley sounds like he was cast from a similar mould, as indeed were an awful lot of English people, especially the middle-to-upper classes.

Now, if you really want to point the "racist" finger, how about J.F.C. Fuller, the fanatical fascist sympathiser, secret Nazi agent, and rabid anti-Semite?
Fuller, like Powell, fought for England too....


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 10:39 pm  

Oh, for goodness' sake, Robert, we've done the "Fuller was a fascist" topic to death now... Was he a fascist? Yes, he probably was.

Thanks for taking the trouble to defend Powell, though: I certainly wouldn't have bothered to do so, given the following statements he made:

Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants...

[A lady who writes to Powell] finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies [pl. Offensive: a small Black or Aboriginal child]. They cannot speak English... Like the Roman, I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood'.

Still, if you want to defend him as "a particular generation of Englishman that had a somewhat John Major-ish view of England, all cricket on the village green on a sunday afternoon" then that's your own affair.

I'd rather you didn't do so on LAShTAL.COM, though - it makes me feel a little bit like I should be washing my hands...

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/06/2008 11:01 pm  

Oh, so once mentioned, way back whenever, we're not allowed to mention any topic ever again are we? Sorry, best not mention Crowley, magick, Babalon, Grant, Spare etc etc... either then eh?:) Been there, done that... don't get your knickers in a twist, Paul:)

As for Powell, I wasn't defending him. Merely pointing out that he's not really regarded as a racist: history has judged him, not I. See his Wikipedia entry.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
29/06/2008 11:25 pm  
"Alastrum" wrote:
Oh, so once mentioned, way back whenever, we're not allowed to mention any topic ever again are we? Sorry, best not mention Crowley, magick, Babalon, Grant, Spare etc etc... either then eh?:) Been there, done that... don't get your knickers in a twist, Paul:)

My knickers remain defiantly untwisted, Robert! I believe the "Fuller as fascist" assertion has been discussed at length and "to death", to be frank. A search of the Forums will reveal what I mean. I don't, however, believe that "Crowley, magick, Babalon, Grant or Spare" have been explored in sufficient detail. Perhaps you do, Stafford Stone? If so, you're posting on the wrong site.

As for Powell, I wasn't defending him.

That's not true: you were defending him, bizarrely enough. To be honest, if I were you I'd withdraw my previous post.

Merely pointing out that he's not really regarded as a racist: history has judged him, not I.

You judge him with rather more leniency than has history.

See his Wikipedia entry.

Thanks. I did.

Now, back to the altogether more interesting Denis Wheatley...

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/06/2008 12:53 am  

No, I repeat, I'm not judging Powell one way or the other; merely pointing out that those who have the knowledge to judge such things, the political commentators, historians, etc, have decided that Powell didn't deserve the "racist" tag. I once again refer you to the Wikipedia article where this is made plain. This is in direct contradiction to where you yourself labelled him a racist in your earlier post, and it was this I was responding to. In doing so, I was merely upholding the Forum Guidelines, where it says "Posts should NOT contain false or misleading information. " I was therefore correcting you Paul, rather than defending anyone, in the hope that those members who know nothing of Enoch Powell will not be mislead by your untruthful and out-dated labelling of Powell.

Now, maybe we can get back to Dennis Wheatley... the man who wrote ""For a white woman to allow a coloured man to lay his hands on her is to demean herself." (in his book 'Dangerous Inheritance'.)


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
30/06/2008 1:51 am  

Fiction.

It means making shit up.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/06/2008 12:03 pm  

Denial.

It means not seeing the shit in front of you:)


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/06/2008 12:27 pm  

What a seedy little thread this has become! Won't you lock it, Paul? - I think your responses just goad him on...

o


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/06/2008 12:27 pm  

Moderator's Note: Post deleted as not submitted for pre-moderation. See http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=28048#28048


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/06/2008 12:28 pm  

Moderator's Note: Post deleted as not submitted for pre-moderation. See http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=28048#28048


ReplyQuote
wulfram
(@wulfram)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 137
30/06/2008 1:53 pm  
"Alastrum" wrote:
Denial.

It means not seeing the shit in front of you:)

As an author myself, this is something I run into quite frequently, especially as a writer in the horror genre (more specifically the sub-genres of the paranormal detective and gothic horror, but that's beside the point).

When I write a character I ascribe to them personalty traits and world views that are not necessarily my own. A fictional character is just that, fictional, but to give them some semblance of life we build into them a whole host of attributes that we, the author, do not adhere to or even believe.

One can not use quotes from a fictitious work as proof of an author's ideology. That way of thinking leads to madness.


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 501
30/06/2008 2:17 pm  

The common feature of these long dead personalities - Wheatley, Fuller, Crowley, Powell - seems to me that their full and varied lives, combined with their independence of thought, leads them outside of the mainstream received opinions of their day. Everybody is sure to take a different view on which of their foibles is so unforgivable as to cloud their remaining achievements but none of them are likely to jump out of an alley and thump us on the nose.

But as for Wheatley being in the A.'.A.'. here is something form ‘The Ghost Hunters’ by Peter Underwood, (Robert Hale, London, 1985), Chapter 7, pp.120-133:

"He treated the subject of the occult cautiously and carefully, turning out one book on the subject every four years – and not from first-hand knowledge, he was careful to add! 'I've never attended any magical ceremony in my life,' he told me. 'Although by all accounts there is plenty of black magic practised at the present time. I don't intend ever to play a personal part in the subject; I am convinced that it can be dangerous.' "

Hale does not accept this uncritically, he goes on to recount various occult experiences of Wheatley but none relevant to Crowley. The single contribution by Wheatley to the Crowley myth is the demonstrably false tale of the fatality during an invocation of Pan in Paris.

In the inscription to Wheatley in Mortadello Crowley began the letter 'Dear Wheatley...' rather than any fraternal opening and signed it 'Aleister Crowley'. All in all I would deduce that Wheatley was not in the A.'.A.'. or OTO.

OK


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
30/06/2008 4:56 pm  

Thanks, OKontrair, as so often, for bringing wit and some facts back into the thread.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
16/07/2008 12:36 am  

I read somewhere that Wheatley on his death bed had found God and disassociated himself with his occult books. Apparently I also read that the Catholic Church had sought his help with information for its exorcists. Not sure whether any of this true, but if somebody here could offer their comments on these'myths" I'd appreciate it.

The death bed thing is a little like the Charles Darwin story where on his death bed he had told those around him that his theory of evolution of wrong and that he finally accepted God. Turned out that the whole story was fabricated by a couple of "Christians" who vowed that this actually happened. Those the facts are totally the opposite and the myth a lie pepertuated by Christians as propaganda.


ReplyQuote
dvd464
(@dvd464)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 15
10/03/2009 11:40 am  

Greetings Lashtal. Dennis Wheatley tells this story, Crowley‘s interest in the occult dated from his days as an undergraduate at Cambridge. It is said that, while there, he wanted to put on a bawdy play by Aristophanes, but Master of St. John’s forbade it. Thereupon Crowley made a wax figure of the Master and, with a group of youngster, took it out into a meadow one night at the full moon. While they stood in a circle around him, he recited an invocation and prepared to stick a long needle into the liver of the image. One of his companions was seized with qualms, broke the ring and grabbed his arm to stop him. The needle pierced the images ankle instead of its liver. Next day the Master fell down the steps of the college and broke his ankle’ (The Devil and his Works).
This maybe actually happened, and the participants just grew old and forget about the magic that took place that night. Maybe it is a youth thing? Even if Crowley became a cynic at later days, it is true that at an earlier age he was a full believer in things we would term magical. Maybe scepticism robs us of something beautiful. It might be that at a certain age, my age, some still need to believe that there is something more out there, part of us remember how to be children .First you took Santa away and now you, especially Erwin, robbed us of the goblins. The only idea that I still believe in is my Holy Guardian Angel, the part of my brain that is beyond me. Call it the idiot savant, the fool magus, zero and one, but it only occurs at a certain stage of life. I do not know what lies before me but I got my needles, I got my dolls. I think of Aiwaiz as part drug, part real, half good/half evil, but in my current manifestation I cannot lean my mind more towards one more than the other. Does the kind of voodoo magic above actually works? That is the scary part! We do not know neither will we make some kind of a laboratory rats out of ourselves. Stories should speak for themselves.

Love/Lucius Y king


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/03/2009 5:22 pm  
"wulfram" wrote:
93

I've read Peter Lavenda's claim that Wheatley was initiated by Crowley into either the A:.A:. or OTO. Does anyone have knowledge of any documentation of this?

93/93

You could flip a two-headed coin to decide who is a more unreliable source of information; Lavenda or Wheatley.

Remember, Wheatley was also the source of the story about AC sacrificing his son - the son who didn't exist who died in the event that never happened.

To the best of my knowledge Wheatley may have been a conservative, but he was not a Fascist. I have also never seen anything to imply he was involved with AC or his organizations beyond knowing AC socially.

JFC Fuller on the other had was a member of AC's organization and was also a member of Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists and was actually a Fascist party representative in Parliment if I'm not mistaken.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
10/03/2009 8:15 pm  
"Poelzig" wrote:
was actually a Fascist party representative in Parliment if I'm not mistaken.

I didn't know that, Poelzig. I mean, I know he stood for parliament, but I didn't know he was elected.

Unless, of course, you're making this stuff up as you go along?

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/03/2009 8:17 pm  
"lashtal" wrote:
"Poelzig" wrote:
was actually a Fascist party representative in Parliment if I'm not mistaken.

I didn't know that, Poelzig. I mean, I know he stood for parliament, but I didn't know he was elected.

Unless, of course, you're making this stuff up as you go along?

I was not 100% certain on that point, which is why I said "If I'm not mistaken."


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
10/03/2009 8:37 pm  

And the problem I experience as owner and editor of LAShTAL.COM is precisely this sort of misinformation. Members post streams of consciousness on the Forums connecting nonsense such as "Bush", "Crowley" and "Grandmother", or "Fuller", "Crowley" and "Fascist", or "Crowley", "Paedophile" and "Ipsissimus"and we end up hitting Google search results... Which means that it's the job of the moderator here to correct baseless assertions, usually in as polite a manner as possible, such as "I didn't know..."

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
10/03/2009 8:52 pm  

The English were a funny old bunch around that time: only a few really rabid anti-fascists still see Enoch Powell as properly "racist" these days. He really belonged to a particular generation of Englishman that had a somewhat "John Major-ish" view of England, all cricket on the village green on a sunday afternoon etc, and wanted to keep it that way. He saw the influx of immigrants as potentially eroding that way of life, but wasn't particularly against them for their colour or creed, which is what defines a proper "racist". Misguided maybe, out of touch perhaps, but Powell really can't be tarred with the same brush we use to describe some skinhead who kicks a Pakistani shopkeeper to death. Wheatley sounds like he was cast from a similar mould, as indeed were an awful lot of English people, especially the middle-to-upper classes

Although, I find the above description rather crude, simplistic and generalising; I do think that Wheatly's books are of their time - but only to a degree. I like the descriptions of ''black magic'' ritual, especially in that particular historical context.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/03/2009 8:52 pm  
"lashtal" wrote:
And the problem I experience as owner and editor of LAShTAL.COM is precisely this sort of misinformation. Members post streams of consciousness on the Forums connecting nonsense such as "Bush", "Crowley" and "Grandmother", or "Fuller", "Crowley" and "Fascist", or "Crowley", "Paedophile" and "Ipsissimus"and we end up hitting Google search results... Which means that it's the job of the moderator here to correct baseless assertions, usually in as polite a manner as possible, such as "I didn't know..."

No problem here! 😉


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/03/2009 9:03 pm  
"lashtal" wrote:
Unless, of course, you're making this stuff up as you go along?

I don't do that.

That would be Peter Levenda and Dennis Wheatly.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/03/2009 2:45 am  

I read all of Wheatley's books as a teenager. I seem to remember he painted the whole London occult scene as "satanic". As I grew up and learned more of AC I also learned that some of the "history" in his books such as Crowley's alledged invokation of Pan in Paris that led to the death of his son and resulted in AC having a nervous breakdown were blatantly untrue.

Ironically it was his books that first interested me in the occult and AC - however I have always had him pegged as someone who made good money from sensationalist pulp fiction by playing up to public hysteria during the occult revival.

Sadly it seems most of his books are now out of print - It would be good to now re-read them 30 years later.


ReplyQuote
Share: