Home Forums Thelemic Culture and Crowley in the Media Crowley Clippings What’s the verdict on John Bull?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #116454

    elitemachinery
    Participant

    1923 March 10 – John Bull

    John Bull wrote the above article:

    John Bull, 10th March 1923

    “The King Of Depravity”

    I’m curious what the general verdict is about John Bull from Lashtal members? He seems to be the arch nemesis of Aleister Crowley? Wasn’t he responsible for slanderous rumors and untruths? Is he the original source of many of the lies and disinfo told about AC to this day? It looks like Crowley had some serious accusations against him and that John Bull was stoking the flames with his journalistic pulpit. Any info or opinions would be appreciated.

    #116456

    ignant666
    Participant

    John Bull is not a person but a magazine:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bull_(magazine)

    #116461

    Shiva
    Participant

    Crowley purposely fanned the fires with the “yellow press” (today we’d call them tabloids, or possibly social media (in a certain respect).

    “In 1923, the magazine was said to be ‘ultra patriotic’.” – Wiki

    In Liber Aleph, he recommended to Achad that he stir up a fuss. Then folks would put you (AC/Achad/Anyone) up on a soapbox … and thus one gained an opportunity to proclaim the Law. (my generous paraphrasing).

    The Wickedest Man in the World! The King of Depravity! It is said that he loved this stuff. It brought attention to him. It is said that the “media” did not first attack him, but that he baited the conflagration.

    And guess what? It’s still going on today. The conflagration. Even though he’s passed on, the “trend to vilify” rolls seadily onward.

    “An object in motion tends to stay in motion, unless acted upon by an outside force.” – Newton

    The power of the press has more inertia than the pens of isolated Thelemites. Besides, what could we say? “A.C. was really a nice guys with a charming persona.”

    “A.C. never did those aghoric, adulterous, sacrificial rituals.” (Goats, toads, cats)

    #116474

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    Is he [John Bull] the original source of many of the lies and disinfo told about AC to this day? It looks like Crowley had some serious accusations against him and that John Bull was stoking the flames with his journalistic pulpit. Any info or opinions would be appreciated.

    John Bull was the not so well-known overseas distant cousin of Sitting Bull, the Native American ‘Indian’ chief. He set up a magazine in his own name as one of the earliest examples of ‘vanity publishing’ and was once almost the subject of an action taken against him on Aleister Crolley’s behalf by P.R. ‘Inky’ Stephenson, one of the editors of the Mandrake Press during the ’20s. Said to be very fond of the favourite English Sunday lunchtime staple with all the trimmings, he was nicknamed “le rosbif” by the French and later this vernacular came to be applied to all Englishmen generally.

    (Not from Wiki)
    Norman J Roy Inquest

    #116503

    dom
    Participant

    John Bull?
    John Bullshit.

    The public loved these publications apparently.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by  dom.
    #116512

    Shiva
    Participant

    d: The public loved these publications apparently.

    They still do. See your local checkout counter.

    tabloids

    #116513

    kidneyhawk
    Participant

    Returning to Elite’s initial supposition that John Bull was a man….

    …he appears so in Grant Morrison’s New Adventures of Adolph Hitler:

    https://suggestedformaturereaders.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/crisis-47-image-0003-crop.jpg

    #116514

    kidneyhawk
    Participant

    Looks like the link to a two panel snippet failed to post. There is an entire blog entry reviewing the comic which also includes Bull’s bulldog (“Bully”).

    Morrissey also makes an appearance.

    If you can’t take a joke, you can piss off

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by  kidneyhawk.
    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by  kidneyhawk.
    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by  kidneyhawk.
    #116519

    elitemachinery
    Participant

    @ignant666 said:

    John Bull is not a person but a magazine:

    Silly me. The name came up a few times during my scattered reading and I was under the impression that a specific person named John Bull really hated Crowley and spread lies about him.

    So I can now assume that the writer(s) of these articles chose to stay anonymous? Or perhaps a tabloid like this never credited their writers?

    Wasn’t AC friend Col. Fuller upset that Crowley chose not to defend himself against such spurious allegations? Choosing then to distance himself from Crowley and his notorious reputation?

    @shiva said:

    The Wickedest Man in the World! The King of Depravity! It is said that he loved this stuff. It brought attention to him. It is said that the “media” did not first attack him, but that he baited the conflagration.

    If John Bull the magazine created the “Wickedest Man In The World!” tagline then you could say AC got his money’s worth of his baiting game.

    The problem comes when the allegations get more serious. Unfortunately, public opinion can be a problem in receiving a fair trial should you be accused of a crime (and it looks like the implication was that Crowley did not look after his follower at the Abbey too well.)

    Didn’t Crowley’s rep become a problem in a later trial? Where he was sued and lost?

    @shiva said:

    And guess what? It’s still going on today. The conflagration. Even though he’s passed on, the “trend to vilify” rolls seadily onward.

    Yes. Here is a recent example from the Daily Mail from just a few weeks ago on August 1st 2019:

    dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7311265/Ruined-home-Satanist-Aleister-Crowley-torched-arsonists.html

    Ruined home of real-life Wicker Man and notorious Satanist Aleister Crowley is torched by arsonists just three months after it was put up for sale for £500,000

    Derelict home of Satanist has been torched near shores of Loch Ness, Scotland

    Aleister Crowley reportedly practised black magic there between 1899 and 1933

    @kidneyhawk here is the image embedded:

    It looks like the writer has made John Bull into a character in a comic series.

    Here are some more links to John Bull articles that I found on the web:

    2 April 1910 “Letter to Aleister Crowley”

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/1910_04_02_john_bull.pdf

    5 November 1910 “Mr. Aleister Crowley’s Blasphemous and Pru-rient Propaganda”

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/1910_11_5_john_bull.pdf

    10 January 1920 “Another Traitor Trounced”

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/1920_01_10_john_bull.pdf

    17 March 1923 “A Wizard of Wickedness”

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/1923_03_17_john_bull.pdf

    JOHN BULL 24 March 1923 “The Wickedest Man In The World”

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/1923_03_24_john_bull.pdf

    There is a complete list of Crowley press articles on the 100th Monkey website. Everything from chess articles to tabloid press and so on:

    100thmonkeypress.com/biblio/acrowley/articles/articles.htm

    From what I understand, rather than defend himself, Crowley would crack jokes about the salacious rumors about him with his very dry sense of humor (flatly stating the rumors as fact) and naively thinking that the rumors were too ridiculous for any serious intellectual to believe?

    #116522

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @elitemachinery :

    The name came up a few times during my scattered reading and I was under the impression that a specific person named John Bull really hated Crowley and spread lies about him.
    [..…]
    From what I understand, rather than defend himself, Crowley would crack jokes about the salacious rumors about him with his very dry sense of humor (flatly stating the rumors as fact) and naively thinking that the rumors were too ridiculous for any serious intellectual to believe?

    “I was under the impression … From what I [you] understand” — What I don’t quite understand michael, is why you wouldn’t be able to remember yourself, given you stated you were him (A.C.) previously. How does that work again? Which bits is it you can actually remember?

    N Joy

    #116524

    christibrany
    Participant

    They call the English ‘beefs’ in Portugal too because they are always red from all the sun. And booze one would imagine. And any combo of the two.

    In regards to Bollock-y publications and the presentation there-of, the book by infamous(?) Richard T. Cole ‘The Un-magickal Record of the Beast’ is a good selection of Crowley mentions in pulp periodicals and the like. I have it but have not read through the whole thing yet:

    ‘…thirty-three facsimile reproductions of rare articles relating to Aleister Crowley, drawn from a variety of magazines published between 1939 and 1982, ‘

    Don’t know why it is so expensive now

    https://liber-al.com/product/the-un-magickal-record-of-the-great-beast-666-aleister-crowley-volume-one-sex-drugs-prophetic-roles%E2%80%A8/

    https://www.amazon.com/magickal-Record-Great-Beast-666/dp/1900962853

    #116530

    Tiger
    Participant

    go figure
    unless
    time spent

    #116531

    Tiger
    Participant

    tong init
    french

    #116532

    Shiva
    Participant

    cs: Don’t know why it is so expensive now

    Probably because it’s “Out of Print.” If it is, and there aren’t many copies, it becomes a “Rare Collector’s Item” and is priced as high as possible.

    Inside Solar Lodge-Behind the Veil is (and has been since 2012) available from Lulu at a discounted price. Yet one can find copies offered as a “Rare Collector’s Item” at three or four times the price. Since Lulu is Print-on-Demand, if the seller finds a sucker, he/she will collect the high-end price, then place the order for the book to be printed.

    In this case (Crowley Tales), I suspect it’s really Out of Print, and so one pays the piper or goes without. Being a frugal Virgo, I usually go without.

    T: tong init

    Careful, now. You’re typing in lingo peligroso (“dangerous language”).

    #116533

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    @shiva

    Since Lulu is Print-on-Demand, if the seller finds a sucker, he/she will collect the high-end price, then place the order for the book to be printed.

    Unlikely, since anyone would be able to tell the difference between the Lulu republication and the original.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.