Wumming of Threads
 
Notifications
Clear all

Wumming of Threads  

Page 1 / 2
  RSS

Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
24/04/2010 2:00 pm  

So another, potentially interesting thread is locked because it's thrown off-topic.

Threads will diverge in the course of their brief existence, and I'm certainly no fan of observing rigid on-topic criteria. But on the other hand, if what you have to say is not relevent to the thread, why not post elsewhere - for instance, the Babble-On Box, or start a new thread in the "Stuff" forum; or, even better, go and find a chat-room. There is a diversity of threads on Lashtal for a reason. Otherwise, we'd just have the one thread entitled "the thread" to which anybody could post any passing thought streaking through what passes for a brain.

Best wishes,

MS.


Quote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
24/04/2010 2:17 pm  

It's irritating, isn't it. Unfortunately on this occasion things developed while I was forced to away from the site for a couple of hours sleep, ahem, and the stupid posts had become enmeshed in the more reasonable posts quoting them. I'm then left, as moderator, with a difficult choice: do I remove an individual from the site or caution her about posting when intoxicated (the individual in question's usual 'excuse')? Or do I draw attention to inappropriate posts in an attempt to shame or embarrass the writer into improvement? Do I just delete the offending posts and risk making other participants just look stupid by the excision? Or do I just lock the thread and allow the site to move on?

I'm open to suggestions! 😉

But it's a lovely weekend here and I've got better things to do than page through threads looking for the latest silliness.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
24/04/2010 2:21 pm  

Michael,

As far as I can see, Cerne/Craig -- the person who started the topic in question -- was the first to become personally abusive by responding to a post not actually addressed to him, and then you, Michael, and some other people joined in a collective rant mostly about someone else which did nothing to help matters. You are as much responsible for the death of that thread as anyone, although obviously there were some highly bizarre posts there too. Why not just start another thread on that topic?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
24/04/2010 2:25 pm  

I very much have to agree with Michael on this one. It is sad how some potentially interesting threads are being destroyed by insults and randomness. When I saw that Cerne posted my preface for Karlsson´s book, I thought it would be an interesting possibility to discuss various approaches to the Qliphoth, self-deification etc. but instead the thread degenerated into off-topic personal infights. Remarkable also how the ´Grant question´ was thrown in there again, although he was not even mentioned in the text Cerne posted.
Now time for coffee, catch you all later!


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
24/04/2010 2:25 pm  
"ianrons" wrote:
As far as I can see, Cerne/Craig -- the person who started the topic in question -- was the first to become personally abusive by responding to a post not actually addressed to him, and then you, Michael, and some other people joined in a collective rant mostly about someone else which demanded a response. You are as much responsible for the death of that thread as anyone, although obviously there were some highly bizarre posts there too. Why not just start another thread on that topic?

You are mistaken. Far from engaging in a "collective rant" as you put it, I suggestd that people not respond to provocation.


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
24/04/2010 2:28 pm  

Michael,

You were actually provocative yourself, though perhaps you don't realise it:

"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Some people are wind-up merchants, and love nothing more than being antagonistic and provoking responses.

The whole thread was a total mess, unfortunately, and was perhaps always doomed to failure. It also had nothing to do with Crowley, but that's a constant complaint I have about a lot of these threads.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
24/04/2010 2:30 pm  

Ian,

I fail to see how your posts were not directed at me? You were very keen to highlight a simple error in a very vocal way. You contribution was not only completely irrelevant to the topic, but personally rather insulting.

Kind regards,

Craig.


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
24/04/2010 2:40 pm  

Craig,

The second post was in response to alysa. I realise the original comment was hardly my finest ever post but you took it totally the wrong way -- think "Pedantry Corner" in Private Eye. Interesting to hear your private opinions of me though: "jumped-up pretentious prick", am I?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
24/04/2010 2:46 pm  
"ianrons" wrote:
"jumped-up pretentious prick", am I?

No, that'd be Yoda.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
24/04/2010 2:49 pm  

can you take this to PM's ian? thanks.

"lashtal" wrote:
I'm open to suggestions!

Paul, I think it's only fair to start the thread again starting with the final post by matus.simkovic, the thread at this point was begining to turn into something worth reading, and I was looking forward to David's reply - to lock it and leave it and not take anything from it would be a huge waste.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
24/04/2010 2:51 pm  

I was about to request the same thing onefivesix.

Regards.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
24/04/2010 3:01 pm  

Done: http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-4263.phtml

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
gurugeorge
(@gurugeorge)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 456
24/04/2010 11:59 pm  

Suggestion: why not have a "Rants" and/or "Off-topic" sub-forum ("Stuff" seems to be still restricted to being on-topic)? I've often seen forums have a sort of "bucket" where people can express themselves totally wildly and freely and not mix up informative threads with ranting. Any brain farts can then be quickly moved to that sub-forum so that informative threads don't need to be locked because they've been contaminated (and meanwhile the brain farting can continue, if it's entertaining enough). I've seen it working quite well on a forum I'm subbed to that's about another fairly "technical" subject.

Mind you, I guess that's a lot more work for the mods 🙁


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
25/04/2010 12:04 am  

Oh, I don't mind more 'work'! ("Mod", not "mods", by the way.)

Interesting suggestion; I'll give it some consideration.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
25/04/2010 1:00 am  
"lashtal" wrote:
I'll give it some consideration.

Paul: You might consider reviewing the membership status of people who have proven repeatedly that they are unhinged just beneath the surface? I do not mean people such as Ian, either, who is at times quite emotional. I mean unhinged. Perhaps the line is too difficult to define, but I'd hate to see this site become another asylum for former inmates of alt.magick.

But, it's your site, of course.


ReplyQuote
phthah
(@phthah)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 210
25/04/2010 1:03 am  

93,

"gurugeorge" wrote:
Suggestion: why not have a "Rants" and/or "Off-topic" sub-forum ("Stuff" seems to be still restricted to being on-topic)? I've often seen forums have a sort of "bucket" where people can express themselves totally wildly and freely and not mix up informative threads with ranting. Any brain farts can then be quickly moved to that sub-forum so that informative threads don't need to be locked because they've been contaminated (and meanwhile the brain farting can continue, if it's entertaining enough). I've seen it working quite well on a forum I'm subbed to that's about another fairly "technical" subject.

Mind you, I guess that's a lot more work for the mods 🙁

That's not a bad idea. As a side note, I see there is a similar thing at the TOT forum. However, it doesn't appear to have been used much.

93 93/93
phthah


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
25/04/2010 1:44 am  
"phthah" wrote:
As a side note, I see there is a similar thing at the TOT forum. However, it doesn't appear to have been used much.

93 93/93
phthah

Don't they also flag members with some sort of probationary status there when they've 'gone astray,' as a warning to them and to other members to be wary of them?

(Just discussing these things when necessary often inspires better self-control, but only temporarily.) 😉


ReplyQuote
phthah
(@phthah)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 210
25/04/2010 2:04 am  

93 Camlion,

"Camlion" wrote:
"phthah" wrote:
As a side note, I see there is a similar thing at the TOT forum. However, it doesn't appear to have been used much.

93 93/93
phthah

Don't they also flag members with some sort of probationary status there when they've 'gone astray,' as a warning to them and to other members to be wary of them?

(Just discussing these things when necessary often inspires better self-control, but only temporarily.) 😉

Actually, I don't frequent the place enough to know many details. I just happened to notice that they have an off topic sub forum, which doesn't seem to be used much. Anyway,I prefer to hang out here! 😀

93 93/93
phthah


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
25/04/2010 3:11 pm  

93
Oh, I think a 'bucket' of some sort that would contain all the messy and mad threads is a wonderful idea! Possible name for such a place - 'The Loony Bin'? They are very entertaining and revealing, if silly. Isn't locking a thread equivalent to limiting another's Will? Slight exaggeration, I know, but I like when one's Will leads one into being an ass (- this too is Holy). You learn from that more than being a polite little pious saint sometimes. I know I do 🙂
93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
26/04/2010 3:27 am  

I can't see how opening an area of the forum for this kind of thing will be effective in the long term, even if it was privately viewed. It would make it worse. It will always spill over. - My recommendation for Paul would be to have a formal post used within the longer threads to warn, before pulling the plug.~~ However, another area such as a chess club with chatting could do wonders. Something activity based, with a competitive edge.


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
26/04/2010 11:36 am  

. . . I have another idea, Paul: This is to change the front page Forum window portal; to expand it & bring in the categories, so that one must first enter the category of interest to see the new thread & others contained therein. Bring the back up to the front. Then, you will have a new reader maybe say "Wow!- I never knew AC was a Secret Agent", as an example. I could expand on this, but I know that you have already considered changes in this area, & problems it could solve.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
26/04/2010 11:43 am  

Back to the point, don't we love each other!?


ReplyQuote
gurugeorge
(@gurugeorge)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 456
26/04/2010 8:48 pm  
"RemeaviThantos" wrote:
Back to the point, don't we love each other!?

I love you all as potentially infinitely fascinating manifestations of The Unique - sometimes nice, sometimes scary, sometimes to be cleaved to, sometimes to be avoided, but never less than existent, and therefore holy and equal all, by virtue of the Being (that is No-Thing) that you all share.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
27/04/2010 10:00 am  

i love you too George. I have to say your posts are consistently (unlike mine, I'm sure!!!), very to the point and pertinant.
Lets make it clear I support your posts , and wish you were standing in this election.
Publish your election Maniesto and come to the Lakes soon, along with all others who feel that GB needs leaders of the type who will promote a pro CW attitude to life. Shall we lead or shall we follow!
Regards,
As always,


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
27/04/2010 7:04 pm  
"RemeaviThantos" wrote:
GB needs leaders of the type who will promote a pro CW attitude to life. Shall we lead or shall we follow!

What is "pro CW," RT?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
27/04/2010 7:08 pm  

Country & Western? 😆


ReplyQuote
gurugeorge
(@gurugeorge)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 456
27/04/2010 8:48 pm  
"RemeaviThantos" wrote:
i love you too George. I have to say your posts are consistently (unlike mine, I'm sure!!!), very to the point and pertinant.
Lets make it clear I support your posts , and wish you were standing in this election.
Publish your election Maniesto and come to the Lakes soon, along with all others who feel that GB needs leaders of the type who will promote a pro CW attitude to life. Shall we lead or shall we follow!
Regards,
As always,

*tap tap* *looks to aides* "Is this thing on?" *looks at audience* Thank you for your kind words of support Brother Rem, we will be putting a RESOLUTION before the COMMITTEE very soon. (<-silly reference to old UK tv sitcom)


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
27/04/2010 9:01 pm  

Simple solution -- have a forum section that doesn't appear on the Forums block on the home page. Then Paul can simply move blacklistead threads there and the contributors can thrash it out in relative obscurity. Forum purgatory.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/04/2010 5:58 am  

I suppose it depends on the purpose which Paul has in mind for the site. Is it intended as a community-building device, or just a repository of factoids? Is it a Thelemic site, or just a site about a Dead White Male named Aleister Crowley? Or all of the above?


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
28/04/2010 4:41 pm  

I'll go for the "All of the above" option, if that's okay.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/04/2010 5:39 pm  

Thank you for the confirmation, Paul, and please accept my apologies for any perceived impertinence.

I just thought that, after the initial suggestion about remaining on-topic, several other suggestions had (rather ironically!) been made by various members which appeared to be doing something else – namely, suggesting ways to change the site itself. I was thinking about these (I personally do not think that anything needs to change on this site apart from an improvement in mood and intention in some instances, and I'm as guilty as anyone of transgressions here), and thought it might be helpful, purely for the purposes of abstract cogitation, to have a framework wherewith to evaluate these suggestions, as in my benigted noob-hood I wasn't entirely sure about the criteria I mentioned above. These elements are not explicit - the guidelines say nothing about it being a Thelemic site, for example. Though exactly what I could mean by that, I suppose I'm not entirely sure, either. I suppose the difference is that calling it a Thelemic site suggests (to me, anyway) a “spiritual” dimension (of whatever kind) to the “mission” of the site, as opposed to a purely “A.C. fan site” type of thing, which is something entirely different. Sorry, this is probably a can of worms no-one wants to bother with on a fine evening such as this.

Best regards
N.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
30/04/2010 5:17 pm  

Just for the clarity you seek, I should point out that LAShTAL.COM really mustn't be considered a "fan site". How anyone could declare oneself a 'fan' of Crowley is entirely beyond my comprehension. Admirable though many of his characteristics might be, excellent though much of his creative work most defintely was, he behaved abominably to those that loved him most and was a classic example of "do as i say, not as I do".

Well, that's my personal feeling.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
30/04/2010 5:35 pm  
"lashtal" wrote:
Just for the clarity you seek, I should point out that LAShTAL.COM really mustn't be considered a "fan site". How anyone could declare oneself a 'fan' of Crowley is entirely beyond my comprehension. Admirable though many of his characteristics might be, excellent though much of his creative work most defintely was, he behaved abominably to those that loved him most and was a classic example of "do as i say, not as I do".

Well, that's my personal feeling.

Not to be just another apologist for AC's behavior, but...

Sometimes I like to question the origins and validity of the standards of behavior against which we judge others, Crowley included. Paul, what are the origins of your own standards? What makes one person 'quite decent' and another 'abominable,' and what are the sources of the standards upon which you make these judgments?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
30/04/2010 6:52 pm  

Greetings!

Thank you for asking this question Camilion!

It takes heart to run a website like this, and it’s difficult for me to understand how one can do such a great job without having one’s heart open to the person it is dedicated.
I probably miss something, so it would be enlightening indeed if Mr. Lashtal shared with us his views about the subject.

On the other hand, I realize that Lashtal.com is far from being a mere fan-site, since this would mean that its members have idolized Aleister Crowley, something rather incompatible to the law of Thelema itself.
Perhaps the key word is not "idolization", but "love"?

Regards
Hecate


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/05/2010 2:57 am  
"lashtal" wrote:
Just for the clarity you seek, I should point out that LAShTAL.COM really mustn't be considered a "fan site". How anyone could declare oneself a 'fan' of Crowley is entirely beyond my comprehension. Admirable though many of his characteristics might be, excellent though much of his creative work most defintely was, he behaved abominably to those that loved him most and was a classic example of "do as i say, not as I do".

Well, that's my personal feeling.

Thanks for sharing this Paul. I wondered what your personal angle on all this was. But, if you're not a "fan" of A.C., might one ask - what is it that drives you, personally, to maintain this site - the home of the A.C. Society? I mean, it must be a labour of love, surely?

One can be both critic and fan?

I have to say, I would call myself a fan of Aleister Crowley's virtues, though not of his many great defects. He was certainly a hypocrite, and despite his many pretentions, even his works are far from perfect, as many here can attest. I'm a fan of those things you mention, his writing talent, his libertine spirit, his "arriviste" character, his intellectual prowess, his moral courage, his mystical insight, his uniqueness, and his sense of style. What I admire perhaps most of all though is his purpose, which, flawed as his Will might have been in realising it, was admirable, where it wasn't merely serving his pain-wracked Romantic ego, as was often the case.

I also think that "do as I say, not as I do" is perfectly okay for a teacher to say. If you're teaching a three year old how to ride a bike, for example. Training wheels, not on the road, etc.


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
01/05/2010 5:06 am  

My thoughts are that you can be "a fan" of someones work, or certain aspects of it, without knowing much about the artist (or what have you) in question. Similarly, you can know a great deal that you do not like about this person, & still be "a fan" of their work. It is a simple term, & a broad one;- perhaps an unsatisfactory one for some.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1838
01/05/2010 5:38 am  

Cam-

You asked:

Paul, what are the origins of your own standards? What makes one person 'quite decent' and another 'abominable,' and what are the sources of the standards upon which you make these judgments?

I think he already answered the inquiry, when he wrote:

that's my personal feeling.

It is also my own feeling on the matter. Aside from Kenneth Grant, who amongst the living can say they knew Crowley? In a sense, I think we're fortunate in this regard: we get the "gold" and don't have to sort through the "dross" in a personal relationship with the man.

I do believe the work and "message," if you will, of the Great Beast is not only unique to his personality but continues to have a more "universal" appeal. Hence the wide and varied topics we find perpetually rising on the Lashtal.com forums.

I do not, for a minute, believe AC is the "end all" regarding anything, including the "Aeon." He certainly would liked to have been.

The thing is: once we've smashed through our being taken with AC's "allure," we are in a place where we can extract the great value in his legacy. What a genius! What a man! What gems of wisdom we can find in his writing!

But Do What Thou Wilt Shall Still Be The Whole Of The Law and AC's value will be determined by how it fits into and fuels our own starry course.


ReplyQuote
newneubergOuch2
(@newneubergouch2)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 287
01/05/2010 6:11 am  

Great Post Mr KidneyHawk. Plain, simple and full of sanity.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/05/2010 7:31 pm  
"kidneyhawk" wrote:
Cam-

You asked:

Paul, what are the origins of your own standards? What makes one person 'quite decent' and another 'abominable,' and what are the sources of the standards upon which you make these judgments?

I think he already answered the inquiry, when he wrote:

that's my personal feeling.

Not really, Kyle, but it might as well have been a rhetorical question, it seems.

The question is, what is the actual source of the criteria by which we arrive at these standards, the ones such as 'common decency'? 'Common' in the sense that we tend to adopt these standards pretty much collectively, by consensus, but usually without anyone really questioning their source or validity for themselves first, or questioning one another about them.

With the passage of time, and with these arbitrary standards having been adopted so tacitly, we tend to judge things, sometimes important things, by automatic reference to what really might as well be completely arbitrary criteria. Centuries may have passed since anyone really bothered to question these ideas; they have automatically become 'the way we feel personally,' and that's the end of it.

When it comes to important matters, and I personally consider Thelema and Aleister Crowley's ideas to be important matters - but any important matters pertain to this, we judge things based not upon an appropriate application of scrutiny by each individual for themselves, but by reference to antiquated and virtually untested ideas such as 'common decency.'

I happen to think that many of Crowley's ideas relate directly to this sort of inquiry into the formulation of our personal value judgments, and I find it ironic when he is judged in this way himself. As I see it, a very important part of Crowley's collective message is that everything must be questioned before being accepted as valid to us as individuals.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
01/05/2010 9:46 pm  
"Camlion" wrote:
As I see it, a very important part of Crowley's collective message is that everything must be questioned before being accepted as valid to us as individuals.

I could be misinterpreting your point, but… Do you not perhaps think that I might just possibly have questioned my own responses?

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
02/05/2010 12:20 am  

As those of us who have gone deeply into his biography know, this expedition is accompanied eventually with the knowledge of the heartbreak & devestation he brought to someone like Leah. I hate this about him.~~ The deeper you go into his life, the more a first impression matters;& indeed, his public image has carried his legacy. For instance: the Satanism. Ianron's comments are spot on. Yet, his Works are often far from this.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 3:13 am  
"lashtal" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
As I see it, a very important part of Crowley's collective message is that everything must be questioned before being accepted as valid to us as individuals.

I could be misinterpreting your point, but… Do you not perhaps think that I might just possibly have questioned my own responses?

I had not really doubted that you had, Paul, but was hoping that you'd share your thoughts.


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
02/05/2010 3:42 am  

Same with me Cam. I love to read Paul's posts. We all dig the Webmaster. I am waiting, patiently, for his first book. 🙂


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 9:10 am  

You can reserve a Deluxe edition for me, Paul. I definitely am really looking forward to your book. You have a projected release date that you could tease us with? When I have my Novella and Grimoire published there will be signed and dedicated Deluxe's for you as a gift, Paul. Showing my appreciation for this site which has actually been important for me along my Path. If it were not for this site I might not have become a member of the Order that I am in, I definitely wold not have as many Tomes on my bookshelves, and most importantly I wouldn't have the relationships with a few on here that I consider to actually be my friend. Yes, I may not have met these people face to face but I consider them my friends nonetheless! Thank you, Paul. I'm grateful for this site that, without I would not be where I am along the Path today.

In the Night of Pan,
____________________
He who is illuminated with the Brightest Light will shine with the Darkest Shadow. -Andrew Chumbley


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5320
02/05/2010 12:48 pm  

I'll have to finish writing the thing, first!

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 2:40 pm  

Looking forward to reading it, Paul! I assume that when you do finish "we'll be the first to know". 😉 😆


ReplyQuote
gurugeorge
(@gurugeorge)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 456
02/05/2010 2:49 pm  

I think the thing that's annoying is that people give other great thinkers and doers a free pass when it comes to their foibles and nastinesses and real life mistakes, because of the great things they did; but when it comes to Crowley, suddenly for some reason his bad side is supposed to outweigh the greatness of his work.

Plain and simple, it's not fair. Either we put all geniuses on a level and ignore their work if they've been c**ts in their real lives, or we take their work on its own merits and set aside their real life foibles.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 3:06 pm  

Good points, gurugeorge.

The special problem Crowley presents, however, for me, is that his genius, or his claims to genius, were "spiritual" in nature. If Einstein (for example) was a c*nt, it's less of an issue because his genius was not supposed to deal with the human heart, mind, or soul. Ditto Beethoven, etc. They can get away with being freaks (though I'm not saying they were - just random examples). Once you're claiming to be a better "person", it's a whole new playing field. Most people like to think that, if you're "spiritually advanced" beyond the usual level, then you shouldn't come across as having a damaging personal influence upon those you spend time with, who depend on you. Proof of the pudding, etc. This is not the same as just being beyond the cage of social mores due to seeing through the game.

That's what, to me, is Crowley's biggest liability and is certainly a source of embarrassment to me, as an admirer of his great many strengths (and he had human qualities which were good, too, as well as his weaknesses; in abundance, in fact). I can't recommend him unreservedly. I just can't. I want to, but I can't. But maybe there is a point to this uncomfortable fact, too? Time for us to grow up and stop looking for perfection outside of ourselves (I once thought when meditating on this), and do the work ourself?

Ultimately, even the most divine amongst us are merely human.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 3:46 pm  

Noctifer, GG;

Don't you think that equating the man with the Work is a tangent? I'm thinking that the Work should stand aside of OUR judgment or moral premise. For instance, can we judge an historical someone on the their moral choices based upon the mores of contemporary 21st century? No, of course not. Medieval beggars thought nothing of sleeping in a dung heap (to put it politely) to keep warm and I *think* that if we today were homeless we might try finding something more sanitary in which to sleep:- though the need and impulse are the same.

How does the cult of personality drive the Work forward?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/05/2010 4:39 pm  
"Noctifer" wrote:
That's what, to me, is Crowley's biggest liability and is certainly a source of embarrassment to me, as an admirer of his great many strengths (and he had human qualities which were good, too, as well as his weaknesses; in abundance, in fact). I can't recommend him unreservedly. I just can't. I want to, but I can't. But maybe there is a point to this uncomfortable fact, too? Time for us to grow up and stop looking for perfection outside of ourselves (I once thought when meditating on this), and do the work ourself?

Yes, and there is the fact that AC left the closet holding the skeletons virtually unlocked. That is very uncommon and curious.

And still, if we feel embarrassed for him, and he apparently did not, we should understand why we feel embarrassed. Our own perspectives and value judgments are the ones that matter, these are our operating platforms as individuals, and we should be conscious of each factor that composes them, and discriminating in whether we embrace or reject them as our own based on this self-analysis. Many people still seem to neglect the self-inventory part of the process and proceed with passing judgment on others based upon common convention. In this day and aeon this seems quite odd to me.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: