Notifications

Magick without tears Germer vs Magick without tears Regardie  

  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
12/05/2011 5:40 pm  

What are the differences between the Germer edition and the Regardie edition?


Quote
phthah
(@phthah)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 211
12/05/2011 6:04 pm  

93,

"KingLamus" wrote:
What are the differences between the Germer edition and the Regardie edition?

IIRC, I think the Germer edition, which is the first edition of MWT, is completely unedited and has the entire typescript in full. However, it is quite rare and expensive, when you can find it. I think only 200 were printed. Regardie's version is heavily edited and I personally would not recommend it. That's just me though. Motta put out his own version called "Magick Without Tears, Unexpurgated and Commented", which points out all of Regardie's edits and some of the reasons why, according to Motta. IMO, it is the next best thing to the original. However, I would guess that the Motta version is also pretty scarce and expensive as well. It came in two parts, BTW. I hope this is helpful.

93 93/93
phthah


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 503
12/05/2011 6:13 pm  

This has been raised before. Look here:

http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-3088.phtml

OK


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1278
12/05/2011 9:11 pm  

The Regardie edition has all the early letters in the AC correspondence as well as an interesting intro.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
13/05/2011 3:57 am  

One can have a quick skim-through here of the Germer first. The expurgated (mostly antisemitism) Regardie edition is out there and easily found:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/crowley/mwt/mwt_contents.htm


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2120
13/05/2011 4:32 am  

maybe I'm just being overly general or blind, but when i scanned through my hc of llywellyns magick without tears from the seventies, with the 'full' version online i barely saw anything missing. just a paragraph here and there, and sometimes whole chapters were completely the same, so i think you arent missing much. unless you are an obsessive completest and don't care if the information is neither useful nor interesting. but thats being subjective again. im good at that 😉 just thought id share my thoughts.


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 860
13/05/2011 2:10 pm  

Actually, Motta's Oriflamme Vols. 2 & 3 (IIRC), "Magick Without Tears Unexpurgated" is (along with the Equinox Vol. V No. 4 "Sex & Magick") Motta's most useful and insightful book, in part because of his commentaries and speculations of "why" on what Regardie cut out. And what he cut out is more than "a paragraph here and there." And suggesting that most of what he cut anti-Semitic remarks is being disingenuous. Crowley *also* said some things pertaining to the O.T.O. that Regardie cut, not wishing to promote anything else than his own Golden Dawn splinter/faction/sub-group, what-have-you.


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 860
13/05/2011 2:39 pm  

I mean, look at this cut--

"But Their ways are not as our ways ..."

Motta: The remainder of this paragraph was cut off by Mr. Israel Regardie, again for obvious reasons.

"...; this question leads us on quite naturally to your next point, and the resolution of that know will unravel that querulous criticism. Just as a learned Divine might chuckle over a smoking-room story, or a heart overflowing with the honey of human kindness wish to have the housemaid "seven years a-killing," so may the greatest of the Masters—even discarnate!—have a perverted sense of humour, or a gross error in taste, (see AL I 51) "...sweet wines and wines that foam!..."—wines, bar Chateau Yquem and very full-bodied port, that I dislike and despise—or any other eccentricity. Look at Helena Petrovna Blavatsky—hot stuff, if you like!"

Motta--In spite of Besant's, Leadbeater's and the Toshosophist's frantic attempts to gloss over the facts, Helena was a heavy drinker, a chain smoker (she especially liked cigars), and an enthusiastic fucker who would take on women or men as the fancy hit her, as often as possible. She was more man and woman in one hair of her crotch than Besant, Leadbeater, or Krishnamurti in their whole bodies. She also cursed like a sailor.

See what I mean? Priceless!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
15/05/2011 12:49 am  

I have read the Motta verison of MWT online, and while I am grateful for being able to read Crowley unexpurgated, I find the comments by Motta and Bersson particularly offputting since they occur not as footnotes but in the main body of the text; Motta's in particular, since they are only differentiated from Crowley's words by being lightly italicized don't stand out as separate the way I would like them to. Bersson's notes are in a light blue and do stand out, but I would still prefer them as footnotes so I could read Crowley without being interrupted by these two. Is the printed version of the Motta presented differently?

Also, I have to say that while I have been recently finding myself very much in agreement with you in moral matters, Walterfive, I must respectfully disagree about the worth of Motta's contributions. I find them in general too vituperative and usually about people or matters I care little about; It's rather like reading a flame-filled forum thread that one wouldn't find interesting even were it conducted more civilly.

Take this anti-Semitic introduction, for example:

"We will not, therefore, try to defend ourselves against the accusations, veiled or otherwise, of animosity towards Mr. Francis "Israel" Regardie. Our main concern is now, as it has always been, that, as long as his copyrights are protected by law, Aleister Crowley should not be misrepresented in print by liars or by thieves. Mr. Regardie, as his record proves, is both. Unhappily, too many Jews these days are both, in some context or another. Some, like Mr. Menachem Begin, step further backwards, and become also terrorists and murderers. It may or may not be significant to the reader that such unworthy Jews are usually "Israelis." If there is a pun here, it is not of our making. Indeed, we doubt it is of the making of Mr. Francis "Israel" Regardie's parents."

(My Bold, for emphasis).


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
15/05/2011 1:15 am  

Also, amusingly, since he called Regardie's version of MWT "gelded", Motta changed instances of "he" to "he or she" and "him" to "him or her" and "his" to "his or her". It is a clumsy phrasing which sits badly on the page; It is not what Crowley wrote, and considering that Motta is so upset about Regardie's changes to the text, you would think he would have the sense to leave Crowley's words alone himself. It's also weird to see Motta being so sensitive to sexism issues when he is so anti-Semitic.

Motta also changes "Christianity" to "Christism"; This is just pointless meddling, in my opinion so Motta can feel as if he was part of MWT himself. What other reason can there be? It's a pointlessly small change; Why not just leave Crowley's words alone so they are purely and simply the word of the Prophet of the New Aeon? I am one hundred percent sure that if Crowley were still alive, while he might agree with some of Motta's comments he would be scathing and ascerbic towards Motta's "Christism" and "inclusive gender phrasing"; The Beast certainly ripped people apart in writing for much less.


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 860
11/10/2011 9:42 pm  

Oh, I won't argue with you about Motta's anti-Semitism, Graspee. Many of his comments are rather more illuminating about Motta's motivations, and I agree that Crowley would not have approved of the "Christism" and gender changes Motta made. But I maintain that Motta's is the most entertaining of the three editions discussed, as I find Motta's anti-Semitism to have its politically incorrect humor factor-- I've always been puzzled how various Adepts, Magi, and Ippissimus who've studied the mysteries of the Qabala and Zohar, learned to read and write the Hebrew Alphabet, and spent (presumably) hundreds of hours of study on the original Books of Moses can be so stridently anti-Semitic. A Sephardic friend of mine pointed out that all of these accusations are made against the Ashkanazi (Russian) Jews ('the Tribes of Gog and Magog'), and not the "true descendants of the 12 Tribes of Israel," but that sounds like elitist racism to me...


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 652
12/10/2011 12:03 am  

Sounds like elitist racism to me too!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
05/07/2012 8:33 am  

ok, well, here's the deal my friends.  The Jews were expert at getting around oppression from the beginning.

Jews were on the conqurere's route between Assyria and Egypt and so,  had to be subjucated.  But they had a certain way around that...and...

Centuries later, The Kabbalah was an excellent way to confuse the Christians who loved nothing so much as burning you at the stake.

Ok, said the Jew to the Christian - here's Malkuth, here's Kether.

And I know the difference.

who am I to say if you are a sucker or an initiate or not?


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5312
05/07/2012 9:58 pm  

You re-awakened a thread after 9 months to write that nonsense?

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3000
06/07/2012 12:21 am  
"ApeOfTheApeOfThot" wrote:
ok, well, here's the deal my friends.  The Jews were expert at getting around oppression from the beginning.

Jews were on the conqurere's route between Assyria and Egypt and so,  had to be subjucated.  But they had a certain way around that...and...

Centuries later, The Kabbalah was an excellent way to confuse the Christians who loved nothing so much as burning you at the stake.

Ok, said the Jew to the Christian - here's Malkuth, here's Kether.

And I know the difference.

who am I to say if you are a sucker or an initiate or not?


ReplyQuote
Share: