Home Forums Aleister Crowley Biography Evidence presented in ‘Liber L vel Bogus’ by R T Cole

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 137 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #9479

    lashtal
    Keymaster

    Member WilliamThirteen in another thread made what I consider a very sensible proposal:

    For those plebs among us not important enough to be receiving a [review/pre-publication] copy, might someone who is be kind enough to post a brief outline of the actual arguments & evidence?

    The other thread extends now to 765 posts and has been viewed more than 55,000 times. Doubtless this will prove useful when the book is published, at least in respect of sales, but frankly the thread has become unwieldy and rather too full of comment and light on facts. Bearing in mind that LAShTAL.COM is home of The Aleister Crowley Society, dedicated to study of the man’s life and legacy and that it is not an occult or Thelemic site, discussions relating to the spiritual merits or otherwise of Liber AL vel Legis are of no more than peripheral relevance. There are other sites out there better suited to such material.

    So, for the avoidance of doubt, strict rules apply on this thread:

    1. This thread is solely for the discussion of evidence presented in Cole’s book. That evidence must be quoted accurately or stated clearly. It is only fair to the author that his evidence isn’t subject to precis or summary.
    2. Discussion of the evidence must itself be evidence based, referencing, where appropriate, relevant standard biographical and other works. Again, it doesn’t help anyone reading this thread to read that ‘Cole says Crowley did X but I think I remember Symonds saying he didn’t.’ We need to up our game on this thread in respect of academic rigour.
    3. Irrelevant posts and content will be deleted without delay and subjected to moderation as described in the Guidelines. The previous thread is now locked, infected as it was from the start with hype, hysteria, sock-puppetry and hubris.
    #90598

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    I suggest that those who already have access to an advance review copy of  Richard T. Cole’s book Liber L vel Bogus, and are willing to facilitate and make possible the discussion of evidence presented in Cole’s said book, according to the rules stated in the Original Post of this thread, can present themselves in this thread.

    And I also suggest, that those who are willing to facilitate and make possible the discussion of evidence presented in Cole’s said book, if they were lent a copy of it, can present themselves in this thread. belmurru? lashtal?

    #90599

    Azidonis
    Participant
    "lashtal" wrote:
    • This thread is solely for the discussion of evidence presented in Cole’s book. That evidence must be quoted accurately or stated clearly. It is only fair to the author that his evidence isn’t subject to precis or summary.

    What about reviews?

    Steven Ashe’s review says,

    "Steven Ashe wrote:
    Early in the book, Richard T Cole discusses Crowley’s psychological state, stating that a conservative appraisal of his autobiographical confessions would award him 38/40 on Robert D Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist. The author points out that, over thirty years after the event, Crowley is still, when discussing his ‘Confessions’ with Jackson Burke in 1938, taped for a later broadcast by a San Fransisco radio station, bragging about raping a servant girl at knife-point and obtaining an alibi at the tobacconists to avoid retribution. He proudly notes the girl’s genuine accusations were disbelieved against the word of a young gentleman and she was cast out onto the street and made homeless for her ‘lies’, later dying a paupers death after turning to Prostitution. Although Mr Cole never brings up the instance of a young Crowley torturing a cat to death in nine different ways to explore the popular myth of its having nine lives, this cannot be far from the minds of those who know a little about Crowley’s psychology. At the root of this callous psychological pathology, Mr Cole suggest the incident of the accident with fireworks and two pounds of gunpowder which put the just turned lad of sixteen in a coma for ninety six hours and most likely damaged his brain’s pre-frontal lobes leaving him with the moral responses normally associated with those of a psychopath or sociopath.

    I found this to be an interesting tidbit, considering how near-death experiences are in many ways related to mysticism and accounts of mystical experiences.

    #90600

    jamie barter
    Participant
    "Azidonis" wrote:
    Steven Ashe’s review says,

    "Steven Ashe wrote:
    Early in the book, Richard T Cole discusses Crowley’s psychological state, stating that a conservative appraisal of his autobiographical confessions would award him 38/40 on Robert D Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist. The author points out that, over thirty years after the event, Crowley is still, when discussing his ‘Confessions’ with Jackson Burke in 1938, taped for a later broadcast by a San Fransisco radio station, bragging about raping a servant girl at knife-point and obtaining an alibi at the tobacconists to avoid retribution. He proudly notes the girl’s genuine accusations were disbelieved against the word of a young gentleman and she was cast out onto the street and made homeless for her ‘lies’, later dying a paupers death after turning to Prostitution. […]

    Wasn’t there a variation of this where the servant-girl in question after becoming a Prostitute somehow became involved in the Jack the Ripper murders? (although these being in 1888, at the time A.C. would have been just thirteen.  Even though he was known to have been in many ways precocious for his age, her “descent” into destitution – sorry, Prostitution – must have been sudden and rapid indeed…)

    This is assuming that Jackson Burke’s testimony is valid.  There was a thread discussing his feature – which has so far only appeared in reprint in Richard T Cole’s fascinating and well-brought-together compendium The Unmagical Record of The Beast 666 – a few months back on the forums which went into matters of his (Burke’s) accuracy there (or rather lack of it), and so on and so forth.

    Norma N Joy Conquest

    #90601

    William Thirteen
    Participant

    indeed Jamie, the discussion of the (in)accuracy of the Burke article is here. Thanks for picking that up.

    http://www.lashtal.com/forum/http://www.lashtal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=42.msg87685#msg87685

    #90602

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    The following claims, quoted from the following amazon.com “review” of Liber L. Vel Bogus – the Real Confession of Aleister Crowley: The Governing Dynamics of Thelema Parts One & Twohttp://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R3JEBIXDY4LTLX – are quoted in the Original Post in the now closed thread Liber L. vel Bogus – The real confession of Aleister Crowley – http://www.lashtal.com/forum/http://www.lashtal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=79432#p79432

    “Liber L. vel Bogus – The Real Confession of Aleister Crowley. Compiled by Richard T. Cole. Edited by Sadie Sparkes. […]

    In February 1904, Edward Alexander Crowley returned to Egypt with a single objective in mind – An audacious and insane scheme to usurp his nemesis, Mathers, gain control of the Golden Dawn and assume the role of sole terrestrial mouthpiece of gods governing all life on Earth. He intended to topple the ‘old order’ with an updated aversion of Golden Dawn’s own mythology, by recreating the ‘discovery’ of its founding documents.

    Crowley was afflicted by a pathological need for acceptance and adulation. In furtherance of his delusions of grandeur, he forged a document, inserted this discretely into his published works and intended to subsequently reveal it as unquestionable proof that a New Aeon had dawned, with Crowley at his helm. Over the next eight years, circumstances compelled Crowley to significantly revise his plans for world domination. During this period he took considerable pains to obligate his deceptions from the record, but failed. Liber L. vel Bogus offers a definitive, point-by-point (comprehensively referenced to unpublished source documentation) proof demonstrating beyond all doubt that Aleister Crowley DID NOT receive Liber L. vel Legis on 08, 09 & 10 April 1904.

    There is no ‘cross-examination’ of Rose. No visit to the Boulak. No “praeterhuman” entity. No “Aiwass”. No Book of the Law. No Thelema. All are fantasies conjured from the mind of an obsessive psychopath, in furtherance of his grand delusion of ‘I, Crowley , the Chosen One’…And the deception does not end with Crowley! …”

    Among the claims made in the above quoted text, I am especially interested in the following two in particular, namely the claim that Crowley’s one single objective with writing The Book of the Law, was “An audacious and insane scheme to usurp his nemesis, Mathers, gain control of the Golden Dawn and assume the role of sole terrestrial mouthpiece of gods governing all life on Earth.”, and the claim that “He intended to topple the ‘old order’ with an updated aversion of Golden Dawn’s own mythology, by recreating the ‘discovery’ of its founding documents.”

    My question is thus the following: What evidence is presented in Cole’s book for the latter said two claims, and will someone accurately quote, or clearly state, this evidence?

    #90603

    OKontrair
    Participant

    Wellreadwellbred,

    I got the impression that this book was not published yet. Amazon reviews are notoriously self serving. Why not wait until the book is published, acquire a copy, read it and – only then – develop an opinion?

    OK

    #90604

    William Thirteen
    Participant

    rather than again repeat ad nauseam the book’s marketing boiler plate (refer to the first post) please restrict yourself to the claims made and the evidence for or against.

    #90605

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant
    "lashtal" wrote:
    So, for the avoidance of doubt, strict rules apply on this thread:

    1. This thread is solely for the discussion of evidence presented in Cole’s book. That evidence must be quoted accurately or stated clearly. It is only fair to the author that his evidence isn’t subject to precis or summary.
    2. Discussion of the evidence must itself be evidence based, referencing, where appropriate, relevant standard biographical and other works. Again, it doesn’t help anyone reading this thread to read that ‘Cole says Crowley did X but I think I remember Symonds saying he didn’t.’ We need to up our game on this thread in respect of academic rigour.
    3. Irrelevant posts and content will be deleted without delay and subjected to moderation as described in the Guidelines. The previous thread is now locked, infected as it was from the start with hype, hysteria, sock-puppetry and hubris.

    In respect of point 1. in the first post of this thread, quoted at the top of this post, my point is the following question: Are some claims made in a “review” of Richard T Cole’s book Liber L. Vel Bogus – the Real Confession of Aleister Crowley: The Governing Dynamics of Thelema Parts One & Two, quoted in this thread’s Reply #5, reflected in the evidence presented in the advance review copy of this book, that Richard T. Cole has given to some persons?

    And if this is the case, my point – also in respect of point 1. in the first post of this thread, quoted at the top of this post – is further the following question: Will anyone among the persons that were given an advance review copy of Richard T. Cole’s said book, accurately quote or clearly state the relevant evidence?

    The aforementioned questions can already now be answered, as there are already now some persons who were given an advance review copy of Richard T. Cole’s said book.

    #90606

    Shiva
    Participant
    "wellreadwellbred" wrote:
    … my point is the following question: … etc

    You have been injecting your opinions and questions into this thread, and they have nothing to do with what’s actually in the book.

    You are re-hashing old “reviews” that we all have read. This thread is reserved for EVIDENCE that is taken directly from the book … from those who have a pre-publication copy. Please knock pgg the rambing and repeating and defensive tactics, and just wait for someone to post some real EVIDENCE.

    #90607

    lashtal
    Keymaster

    Moderator’s Note

    Wellreadwellbred: Please re-read the particular rules of this thread. If you don’t understand them, don’t post here. No need to reply to this post.

    #90608

    lashtal
    Keymaster
    "Steven Ashe wrote:
    Although Mr Cole never brings up the instance of a young Crowley torturing a cat to death in nine different ways to explore the popular myth of its having nine lives, this cannot be far from the minds of those who know a little about Crowley’s psychology.

    What a bizarre ‘review’! Call me old-fashioned, but it’s customary to actually read the book you’re reviewing. Mr Cole not only ‘brings up’ the cat killing episode, he quotes pretty much the entire section from The Confessions, filling nine lines of text on page 36, before going on to consider the implications for a further eight lines.

    This is exactly why serious consideration of the evidence is required here, rather than copy-and-pasting extracts from hurried ‘reviews’.

    #90609

    Azidonis
    Participant
    "lashtal" wrote:
    "Steven Ashe wrote:
    Although Mr Cole never brings up the instance of a young Crowley torturing a cat to death in nine different ways to explore the popular myth of its having nine lives, this cannot be far from the minds of those who know a little about Crowley’s psychology.

    What a bizarre ‘review’! Call me old-fashioned, but it’s customary to actually read the book you’re reviewing. Mr Cole not only ‘brings up’ the cat killing episode, he quotes pretty much the entire section from The Confessions, filling nine lines of text on page 36, before going on to consider the implications for a further eight lines.

    This is exactly why serious consideration of the evidence is required here, rather than copy-and-pasting extracts from hurried ‘reviews’.

    Thanks.

    Want book. Will wait for book.

    #90610

    Hamal
    Participant

    I look forward to reading it. There are some who will condemn it and never read it of course. I am not threatened by a book, if a book threatens you then you should look to yourself for faults not blame the book!

    😀

    #90611

    jamie barter
    Participant
    "Azidonis" wrote:
    What about reviews?
    "lashtal" wrote:
    What a bizarre ‘review’! Call me old-fashioned, but it’s customary to actually read the book you’re reviewing. Mr Cole not only ‘brings up’ the cat killing episode, he quotes pretty much the entire section from The Confessions, filling nine lines of text on page 36, before going on to consider the implications for a further eight lines.

    This is exactly why serious consideration of the evidence is required here, rather than copy-and-pasting extracts from hurried ‘reviews’.

    This seems to clear up any uncertainty around the question of the relevance of stand-alone ‘reviews’.

    "wellreadwellbred" wrote:
    […]

    To you, well, I can only say regarding your enthusiasm to stick it to the Prophet: “down, boy!” & bide your time …

    "Hamal" wrote:
    I look forward to reading it. There are some who will condemn it and never read it of course. I am not threatened by a book, if a book threatens you then you should look to yourself for faults not blame the book!

    😀

    Or if it threatens somebody that much, maybe it would be wisest for their own peace of mind to destroy it, burn the wretched thing, after the first reading (or even before actually bothering to read it at all – although some might consider it to be a nonsensical waste of money to go to the trouble of buying it to begin with?!  However, if instead you borrowed it the original owner may not take too kindly to your conflagatory, inflammatory course of action).  ??? 😮 :-[

    Precedents have been known for this, after all…

    Would anyone happen to know how many of these ‘review’ pre-publication copies have been sent out?  And if/ is anyone intending to therefore review Liber Bogus itself?!

    N Joy

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 137 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.