No contact that I can recall. However, he might have been in touch with Kenneth Grant, or he might have worked directly from source material.

Neat!  Of course, I'm gonna get this one!

In the next few days I'll dig out the Sinister Forces Trilogy for all of the Grant references. Meanwhile, those interested may want to read this article: http://nypress.com/the-doom-that-came-to-chelsea/

The author claims Levenda is Simon - a claim Levenda has denied over the years. A photo of Simon appears in James Wasserman's In the Center of the Fire, facing page 176, at the bottom, righthand corner. Comparing that with the photos of Levenda online, I'm convinced they're the same person. Also, both Simon and Levenda refer to Lovecraft as the godfather of gothic horror, but how can Lovecraft be the godfather to a genre that was already around for approx 150 years? There are other errors/literary conceits shared between the two, I'll try to dig those up while sifting the Grant references in SF. Also, some of the biographical data supplied by Wasserman, re; Simon, overlaps with Levenda's story, spread over the course of his books, particularly in Unholy Alliance, Sinister Forces and Ratline. I haven't read Tantric Temples yet, but I've been told there's plenty in there as well.

That's all for now.

509.

One of the best, overwhole surveys of things necronomical is "The Necronomicon Files: The Truth Behind the Legend" by Daniel Harms & John Wisdom Gonce, reprinted in pb by Weiser in 2003 e.v.  It not only contains much information on the provenance of the Simon NECRONOMICON - in which Peter Levenda appears to have played a central role - but a couple of very juicy quotes from unpublished HPL correspondence, in which he has some less than complimentary things to say about AC.  Some of the book is available online courtesy of Google.

I acquired my copy of the Simon NECRONOMICON when it was first published, courtesy of Askin Publishers distribution in the UK.  I think it cost me something outrageous like £17.00 !  It certainly looks impressive and I've even read it a couple of times; still have it.

Kenneth Grant began quoting from it fairly consistently in "Outer Gateways".  I remember writing to him shortly afterwards pointing out that the book was largely a Lovecraftian elaboration of substantial portions of the Babylonian Creation Epic and other related poems and liturgies, and queried whether it wouldn't be better to stick to these originals in the elicidation of a Sumerian Tradition.  He was probably aware of this anyway and continued to make use of the Simon tome in line with his theory that occult hoaxes often expressed more esoteric validity than they ever realised.

To what extent is 'Sumerian Magick' a valid expression of the Typhonian Tradition ?  Well, thats an interesting question.

Just found a link to an audio interview with Peter Levenda:

http://irnfiles.com/audio/SOT_PeterLavenda3292013.mp3

Haven't had a chance to listen to it yet. The book should be available next week!

Listened to the interview this afternoon.  It was alright, I guess.  Too bad that other fella' was unable to join in on the conversation. 

I was surprised to hear Simon, er Lavenda say that he hadn't seen any references by H.P.L. about A.C., though.  There's a link around here in a thread somewhere that shows a scan of a letter written by H.P.L. that mentions our dear Aleister.  Then there's the "very juicy quotes" mentioned by S.A. from
"The Necronomicon Files: The Truth Behind the Legend" by Daniel Harms & John Wisdom Gonce.  I certainly hope Simon, er Lavenda's research will be more thorough when it comes to the Typhonian material.....

I was thoroughly disappointed with the interview.

The two interviews with Peter Lavenda discussing his new book The Dark Lord were, frankly, ridiculous!  It seems that none of the hosts of either interview were familiar with the works of Crowley or Grant.  In the newer interview one of the hosts repeatedly mis-pronounces "Crowley" even after Lavenda correctly pronounces  it many times throughout the interview!  The whole thing is fucking laughable!  I'm really concerned over this book and how it will correctly present the Typhonian Current.  I don't doubt Peter Lavenda's sincerity and ability as a writer and researcher, but after he mentioned that Jim Wasserman wrote the Forward to the book, I was just baffled, to be perfectly honest.  Why not get someone like Michael Staley or another senior member of the Typhonian Order to write the Forward?  This whole thing is starting to just seem very dodgy.....

Havent recently read his book about Hitlers escape to Indonesia, where he lived out the twilight years of his life.... don't hold much faith in an accurate portrayal of KG.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ratline-Soviet-Priests-Disappearance-Hitler/dp/0892541709

Whilst the "Ratline" escape routes via Red Cross and Vatican back streets and monasteries where fact and documented... the Hilter ran away to and here is his photo and grave, does not hold up for me. Lacked real evidence and ruined a interesting book IMHO.

Anyways, I would not expect a best seller in his latest outing.

It will eventually come out in paperback and be obtainable rather cheap for the curious. The Amazon listing now has a "Look Inside" preview, where it lists the sources of Grant's system of magick, with emphasis on... YOU GUESSED IT... the Schlangekraft (Simon) Necronomicon.

I'm reading it now and will post a review once I'm finished.

I had pre-ordered a copy a while ago, but based on general feelings as well as comments in this thread cancelled my order. I think it was a good decision as I wanted to wait for reviews, there are currently two up on amazon if anyone's interested.

I wasn't expecting too much from this book.  Nothing particularly new, anyway.  I'm just getting it because I'm also collector of Typhonia.  It's funny, Zac, that you mention two reviews on Amazon as one is by Jim Wasserman, and reads more like an endorsement!  😉

I still don't really understand why Lavenda didn't consult any members of the Typhonian Order when writing this book.  It's a bit like writing a book about Paris without ever going there.

N.O.X - Jim Wasserman wrote the introduction to this book, in which he speaks about his friendship with the author. That being the case, I think it is OK to disregard his five-star review. I'm quite sure our dear LAShTALians will post some feedback in the coming weeks...

sounds like it was just written to make a few sales....I mean if the writer can't even be bothered to consult current members......it's not going to have much value.

Seconded michaels opinion..or thirded..since we all seem to feel the same. I really like Lavenda's Sinister Forces series, its very good historical/occult/conspiracy research writing, but sometimes I think he should stick to the more concrete/historically weird stuff and leave the more current occult stuff alone, as he seems obviously out of touch with occultism for the last decade or two.  Could be wrong, just what it seems like from reading and listening to him.  Not really interested in spending money on this one as I think I would not be learning anything new.

Usually I would have pre-ordered this sight unseen but after consulting here I think i will wait.  I thought Sinister Forces was a great high weirdness conspiracy trip,as well...but ill wait for a paperback, or cheap used version of The dark lord

I think some may be "jumping the gun" a bit here.  I'm sure the book will be good.  I'm getting it.  I think the book will be a nice addition (and edition ;)) to anyone's collection of Typhonia.

N.O.X is right: some here are "jumping the gun". I am currently reading the book and enjoying it much. The book has a good perspective on Typhonia with many nuggets of excellent information.

I don't know if I am sure but so far I think I didn't see anybody who actually read the book commenting anything about it here (except Zin)... it is like others' opinions would influence even if someone will or will not read the thing.

I'm sorry, but I see no point about issuing an opinion (negative or positive) about the book before reading it, especially for the book being centered in such a scarce subject (apart from Grant's own work). It is really a shame that he did not invite senior members for a foreword, but would he get it?

I would be happy enough if Levenda bothered to read Grant and Lovecraft before writing. If he used their work in his survey, I would not discard the book, his own interpretation and the conclusions or questions it might raise before reading it.

I'm personally anxious for the comments of someone who actually read The Dark Lord.

I'm personally anxious for the comments of someone who actually read The Dark Lord.

I would at least want to see the book and inspect the contents - and read a few chapters - before buying. I still think that it's scope is going to be very limited it if is based singly on secondary sources - which it is.

Perhaps it should have been called something like 'When I read Kenneth Grant' or something like that. It simply can't claim to be about the Typhonian tradition if it has failed to consult any followers.

I heard from a friend the other day who had read it, and thought it good in parts.

There are many people outside the portals of theTyphonian Order who are interested in the work of Kenneth Grant and in the Typhonian Tradition, and their work is not diminished or lacking because of it. Similarly, one could write about Crowley without consulting OTO; or about Blavatsky without engaging with the Theosophical Society; or about Gurdjieff without contacting Fourth Way groups; etc.

I found that radio interview initially interesting but the second half really dragged on. Everyone has a valid point of view to express. But at times it did sound like a couple of guys walking around motor car speculating on how it might work whilst no more than yards away a group of automative engineers and mechanics stood by wondering why they didn't simply ask them.

I’m about to finish reading this work and can only wish now that such a book were available when I first started reading/studying Kenneth Grant’s Trilogies.  Of course, that would have been impossibility in 1972. The Dark Lord puts so much of Grant’s writings into perspective and understanding that I consider this book as a Primer to KG’s books and Typhonia.  If you have read, are reading, or considering delving into KG’s books, do yourself a favor and read The Dark Lord.  It will help you to “get it”, so to speak, and smooth the course on those 9 eloquent volumes that you’ll appreciate even more.

This is not meant as a “book review” per se… just my thoughts and opinion of the book from an old-timer.

Interesting. Amazon allows you to read a few pages and from my brief read I got the feeling that the concepts were a bit simplified almost as if the book was written for an audience not familiar with K.G / A.C. Is this not the case? Perhaps I was a bit hasty, or maybe just chose the wrong pages to read. As it goes though there was another book I needed for $30 so it worked out. Will keep my ears out for any more feedback.

Zac,

I think Lavenda presented the concepts in a simplified manner, because Grant's books are very complex.  Surely, he knew that most copies of the book were going to end up in the hands of those already familiar with Grant's works.  Lavenda, obviously, knows what he's talking about.  I'd bet that he's even a practitioner of the Typhonian Tradition (but not in the Typhonian Order, and there's nothing wrong with that)! 

Seems appropriate to incorporate this here.  The August edition of 'Fortean Times' came my way last evening and it contains two nicely illustrated articles, each of two pages, on H.P. Lovecraft.  Both of them are highly stimulating and enjoyable:

"Lovecraft resurgent" by Roger Luckhurst, editor of the recently published Oxford University Press Classic Horror Stories edition of HPL and "File under 'Science fiction'" by David Hambling, science writer for the 'Guardian'.  The best passage occurs in the latter:

"But what about the groups who believe in the reality of Lovecraft's beings from other planes?  British occultist Kenneth Grant matched Lovecraft's mythos with established lore, then blended it with Aleister Crowley's work to create an unholy melange known as the Typhonian Cultus (sic).  In Chicago, voodoo practitioner Michael Bertiaux established a coven that claims to have made contact with the (sic) Lovecraft's aquatic Deep Ones at a lake in Wisconsin.  The Esoteric Order of Dagon is based directly on Lovecraft's work, asserting that he unconsciously channelled cosmic forces".  (FT, p.56)

I have to admit that reading that made my night and I'm sure that Kenneth Grant would have found it immensely entertaining.

Luckhurst's central assertion is that Lovecraft's fiction is essentially science fiction and that he was a complete materialist "with not a shred of credence in any form of supernaturalism - religion, spiritualism, transcendentalism, metempsychosis, or immortality".  Here he is quoting HPL himself in a 1925 letter to Clark Ashton Smith.  Certainly, I agree with this, but Luckhurst in turn seems to have a science writer's rather limited and somewhat cliched conception of what makes a contemporary magickal group or order actually tick.  We Typhonians and Dagonists (if I may invent the latter term) appear to be categorized as New Religious Movements who actually worship Cthulhu !? (As I said the articles are very entertaining).

I'm not sure how easy it is for our American colleagues to obtain FT - and I can sense N.O.X's mouth watering already - but if you can go out to a decent newsagents, go and get a copy now.

As an added bonus, Phenomenomix is doing the job on Arthur Machen.  And the magazine contains all of the usual weird shit as well.

You have a keen sense of intuition, my friend!  My mouth is indeed watering!  I've never seen an issue of FT in any stores around my neck o' the woods, but Chris was able to score me the issue with KG's obit, so perhaps I can ask him to find this issue for me!  If all else fails could you send me one, SA? 

93/23

In the arms of Father Dagon and Mother Hydra,
N.O.X

I've been looking for how you edit a post, but have not managed to find it, therefore I'll correct the fifth paragraph of my previous post here:

"Hambling's central assertion is that Lovecraft's fiction is essentially science fiction and that he was a complete materialist "with not a shred of credence in any form of supernaturalism - religion, spiritualism, transcendentalism, metempsychosis, or immortality".  Here he is quoting HPL himself in a 1925 letter to Clark Ashton Smith.  Certainly, I agree with this, but Hambling in turn seems to have a science writer's rather limited and somewhat cliched conception of what makes a contemporary magickal group or order actually tick.  We Typhonians and Dagonists (if I may invent the latter term) appear to be categorized as New Religious Movements who actually worship Cthulhu !? (As I said the articles are very entertaining)."

Luckhurst is the author of the other article "Lovecraft resurgent" which is in fact the more interesting of the two.

Actually N.O.X, I have not bought a copy for myself as yet.  Still deciding whether to go into town and see if I can still locate a copy, or whether to just settle for photocopying the relevant pages of the one in my possession before I pass it on as usual.  (Don't tell Paul that I just said that).  'Fortean Times' does have a website of course, which you might care to check out.

Tentacular Regards Also,

Satan's Advocaat.

"I've been looking for how you edit a post, but have not managed to find it."

jamie barter said, on August 14, 2013, 04:55:26 am:
" I ... am not conversant with the ‘Edit’ arrangements ... "

This topic was just covered 2 days ago for jamie, and now it's repeated:

There's a little doo-dad icon image link button down towards the bottom of your recent post (any recent post) that might resemble a piece of paper with an arrow tip, but you must be signed in (otherwise any old wikiup could come along and change your postage). But it's only there for a few minutes ... then it disappears and the writing hand, having writ, moves on ... leaving us all with a permanent record – just like an infallible, unchangeable memory  8)

But the “edit” doo-dad only remains viable for a few minutes (5? 15? I dunno). So if you clickit quik, you get your postage back on screen and then you can wiki it up, or make other changes – and then select “Save.” Your message is thus modified, the trick being that you only have a short time to review your oracle and make changes. Long-term editing ability has been foresworn due to the possibility of some fraudulent fellows re-writing history … or otherwise “covering their tracks.”  😮

Was that a case of déjà vu or was that a case of déjà vu? (or was that a case of déjà vu, or was that a case of déjà vu?)

Norma N. Joy Conquest

I was going to repeat the above post all over again only very slightly edit it, BUT the *Edit* option has already vanished! It certainly does not remain very long, so I am afraid you will not have the opportunity of being able to savour my little joke…
 
N. Joy

You can edit posts 'invisibly' (i.e. without the 'edited' footnote appearing) up to 10 minutes after posting. You can edit posts - with the footnote - up to 30 minutes after posting. Seems about right to me.

10/30. We'll all try to remember that.

10/30 good buddy… yes, that shouldn’t be too hard to store away in the old memory banks…

10-4 breaker breaker Roger & out,
N. Joy

Many thanks for the advice and elucidation on this editing business.  In my particular case it would not have made any difference apparently.  I had logged off, left the library and returned home before realising that I had used the wrong writer's name in the wrong place.  Sorted anyway.

"I had used the wrong writer's name in the wrong place."

Please report to your nearest Temple of Thelems, as soon as possible, to explain why you should not be charged with heresy, error and blasphemy (stage 3).  😮

By using "the wrong name," an act of impersionation 8), in "the wrong place, an act of trespass  :o, you have completely and permanently altered the future course of potential events. At least everyone learned how to "EDIT" properly.

Aaarrgh!  No one expects the Shivan Inquisition !  😮

Uncle Al's life's work was a Monty Python sketch?

This explains EVERYTHING!

Greetings. I just became a member and this is my first post; I just wanted to say a few things in response as this is my primary interest. First off I fully respect Kenneth Grant, have read all 3 Typhonian Trilogies, am into the fiction of Lovecraft, Clark Ashton Smith, Machen, Blackwood, and others...I feel that artforms can transmit occult knowledge despite the conscious intent of the creator. If an evolutionary event is in fact taking place in the human race, called a New Aeon, then it would make sense that the energies would effect people and their creations possibly without their knowledge. Lovecraft isnt just about tentacle monsters: "That which we call substance and reality is shadow and illusion, and that which we call shadow and illusion is substance and reality. Time...is motionless, and without beginning or end...it is itself really an illusion. All that was, and is, exists simultaneously." Thats a bit far from Bram Stoker or Poe, or John Carter of Mars, etc. Im not sure what sources he could have used for those sort of ideas in the 20s but most people just werent talking like that. Either he took it from the Secret Doctrine (which I never read) or something was being transmitted to him, which he relayed to us through fiction.

Ive heard that Levenda is Simon, and I also heard from the underground actor Johnny Link that Levenda used to teach Ceremonial Magick classes at the Magickal Chylde bookstore in NYC in the 70s. Apparently he was strong enough to "evoke to visible appearance" When I heard that I was like "What the fuck is this guy up to..." Seriously, does he have an agenda (material or spiritual) of any kind that hes made public? I read Unholy Alliance and the first of the Sinister Forces books, then called it quits. What useful information is he really putting out there? These conspiracy books are like gossip, this guy was friends with this guy, etc. Who cares? Satanic Masons hired Charles Manson to infiltrate Scientology or something? Who Cares. My point is that I think one (if so inclined) should read Crowley, Kenneth Grant, Lovecraft, etc as well as books on yoga, meditation, tantra, etc, and piece together the puzzle for themselves instead of letting someone else do it, who may be doing it wrong. Its frustrating to see these concepts misrepresented frequently. No offense to Levenda but I just dont understand what hes about. The Simon Necronomicon is an awesome piece of writing, and again has value despite the intent of the creator (whatever that was).

Or he was influenced -- perhaps unconsciously -- by Plato.

Paul Barton,
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but yours is a bit hostile.  In the beginning, I too had some reservations about this book.  Not really about his presentation of the Typhonian content.  He's an intelligent guy and let's face it, he wants to sell as many copies as possible, so I'm sure that he knew before even beginning this book that he had to do a really good job on it.  Besides, who knows more about the Simon Necronomicon than the man who wrote it?  The only real issue I had with it I've already went on about elsewhere in the thread.  I was also kinda surprised that he didn't send Mick an advance copy to go over.  I, personally, would have done some things a bit differently than he did, if I were in his place.  That doesn't really matter, though.  It's his book and his will so I cannot say nay  All this aside, it's only fair to give the book a good study before ranting about his "agenda" and such.  Though the forces he details, in The Dark Lord, may seem sinister to some, there's no dark agenda and conspiracy here.  His "agenda" is obvious, to me, it's to write about a subject that is dear to him, and make money.  Nothing sinister about that!  Quite the opposite, actually!  Getting rich doing what you love.....seems great, to me! (Well, it would to most everyone, now wouldn't it?)

Why would hearing of his supposed ability "to evoke to visible appearance" evoke such a response from you as ""What the fuck is this guy up to...."?  Can't you see that, right here in front of your own eyes, your post is proof that he, indeed, has such an ability!  Secondly, many magicians, even some that you admire, Crowley, Grant, etc. have made the same claim.  Is your response to this claim a result from you believing such a thing is impossible?  How do you know?  Have you tried and were unsuccessful?  Still, that doesn't necessarily follow that it's impossible.  Only that, for you, at that time, it only seemed impossible.  Or, do you doubt that Lavenda has such an ability?  If neither of these, then, please by all means, help me understand your response, and why you felt that his claim might have implied some kind of "Agenda"....cue the Bond villain music, for some atmosphere, while I await your answer.

You say his "conspiracy books are like gossip.  Who cares?"  Well, he cares.  He wrote them!  The people who have bought and read them care. 

I'm only pointing these things out to you because you close your post with "no offence to Lavenda, but" and that just seems disingenuous.  If you want to contribute nothing on topic and useful to the thread, and just talk shit about Lavenda and his books, in your very first post here, at least, OWN IT.

Oh, and welcome to lashtal.com!  I'm not, normally, such a dick as this post might suggest.  But, sometimes, when frustrated by watching perfectly good threads go to shit, I am.  At least, I can OWN IT!  Please don't take my post the wrong way.  I'm not picking at you.  We share many of the same interests, and I think we''ll get on just fine.

Can we, for Elder Gods sake, return to the topic, and discuss the book, now?  Anyone else read it, and care to share their thoughts?  Anyone?  Anything?  How about your favourite part of the book?  Is there anything that struck you as being especially insightful or new.  What's your least favourite part of the book, and why?  I've not read it yet, as other books are ahead of it on the "to read" list.  Eventually, I'll get around to actually posting on the topic, myself. 

Have just discovered that there is an incisive and informed review of the book by Stephen Sennitt, posted on amazon.co.uk on 5 August.

Headed "Good on the Whole..." it is well worth a look.

I've been slowly reading this book for the past week now. I will chime in later with a few remarks, impressions and opinions when I finish it. All I'll say right now is that I've enjoyed what I've read so far. Like someone above mentioned it's the kind of book I wish I had had 20 years ago when I first began reading Grant's works. Levenda's books are always welcome in my collection.

Didnt mean to come off so hostile to Levanda, and i do believe in him as a magician. I just dont understand his motives. In all probability i will end up reading the book anyway; I actually liked Unholy Alliance and the other stuff I read by him. Perhaps Im overthinking it but I dont understand what change hes trying to effect on this planet by putting this stuff out; perhaps its none of my business. As I said the Simon Necronomicon is awesome; it has been an influence on my life and is a masterpiece of strange language and ideas. If Levanda did in fact write this, which i think he did, my main problem would be that he should continue putting out books of dark evocations instead of conspiracy books. Just my opinion. When I said no offence, I meant it believe me. Thanks for the welcome though and i will try to be a bit more precise in the future. Also, I was trying to emphasize that Lovecrafts work contains more references to metaphysical states and esoteric philosophy than he is usually given credit for.

I have seriously thought about buying this book, and to this end, I have read most of the reviews in this thread. I should say that I have recently reduced my spending on books - although the number of *really* interesting quality books has more or less remained the same over the past 50 years i.e. exceedingly small.

On balance, I think would prefer to spend my money on other things than this particular book. No matter how imaginative the writing, it is essentially derived from secondary sources - books we all have, in fact - and so defeats it's own title. Consequently, it holds very little interest for me. There are other, far better things I would prefer to spend the money on.

Care Paul, or sumerian131, (whichever you prefer  :))

Think you had a bit of a harsh welcome from N.O.X, but he is an admirably passionate fellow. Anyway, you've clearly bounced back.

Personally, I have no interest in Levanda's conspiracy theory books - Pauwels and Bergier did it all for me, and the rest is an extension of ill-informed and occasionally entertaining distraction land.

Will I make an effort to obtain the Levanda book in question, probably not.  Simon's NECRONOMICON (of which, I have stated previously, I am pleased to own a copy of the original publication) was in many respects a response to Kenneth Grant's explicit references to the 'Sumerian Tradition' on the bases of Crowley's own enthusiams for this concept after his communications with his 'Assyrian' correspondent from Bridgeport, Connecticut.  KG responded to this affirmation of his own work by an enthusiasm for referencing this NECRONOMICON in his later Typhonian volumes.  This is not a put-down, KG was ever sensitive to intimations of the awareness of 'Typhonian' otherness (for want of a better immediate term); he was ever an active occultist, a communicator with fellow explorers.

I'm aiming here at a serious consideration of the whole 'Sumerian Tradition' concept, and its valid interaction, if any, with Lovecraft's cosmic conceptions of Great Old Ones, ciphers of inter-dimensionalty and vistas of potential cosmic becoming.  More than a book review, I hope.

Love is the law, love under will.

Satan's Advocaat.

I read what is written here with interest. Should I own a copy of the NECRONOMICAN? I've almost bought it a few times, but have had second thoughts. I suppose along the lines of "but my library is a serious library full of genuine books". That said I understand the concept of a magical landscape and being able to draw on things that might otherwise be catagorised as fictional. Is this SIMON a true practitioner, does this book contain material of true value or is its ownership symbolic in some way... would it be better if its pages were blank? I am a big fan of H.P. Lovecraft and a magickal practitioner... I'd be really interested to hear anyones thoughts on this.

93
Hamal