Book Discussion Drop That Book!

[Xenophon]

...and step slow-w-wly back from the tome. Then turn and run like h*** outta the book store.

That's the drill we all go through when perusing volumes of magick and the occult, at some point. What's your tip-off that the promisingly entitled book there on the shelf isn't for you after all? Me, I gots two litmus tests:
1) if the introduction contains words like "nurture," "healing journey," "loving god(s)" or any other vocables that sound as if molded from form rubber.
2) when the list of props and implements is longer than the rite using them and consists solely of objects rarer now than in the days of ol' Mansoor Hallaj, when they were already scarcer than phoenix-egg omelettes. E.g., a sable-black (not jet-black!) robe of Peruvian spider silk, a burnished rhodium triangle inscribed with the original Enochian in the penmanship of Edward Kelly (NOT Dr. Dee!), a scrying mirror fashioned from the laminated carapaces of Transvaal scorpions.

These may be personal idiosyncrasies of mine, but y'all fess up. What makes you cut 'n run when you gawp at that ol' grimoire there in Mistress Miskatonic's Occultated Arcanium & Book Store?

 

[KjEno186]

Mistress Miskatonic's Occultated Arcanium & Book Store

If only I should be so lucky as to have such a book store to peruse. I used to spend a lot of time at a local university library back in the '90s. Unfortunately, that was when I was quite the materialist. Back then I found a book on the shelf of the library which "proved" how things like astrology and divination were simply psychological phenomena and "worked" because people are gullible and could read into the results whatever they wanted. Which leads me to...

3) These days I avoid books that attempt to prove that magic is just psychology because they miss the point that magical thinking isn't something that can be proven the way one can calculate the trajectory of a space probe around the Solar system. Unfortunately, a lot of the chaos mages tend to justify their magical practice with 'science.' There are so many things that science (observation, hypothesis, experimentation, theory) has explained that the process itself is now assumed to be capable of proving anything. It is the "Tower of Babel" for our times. According to the legend, the Tower was a physical thing used to try to reach the realm of the gods. Once again, humanity is trying to reach god-like status using technology. I recoil when a chaos book author calls magical ritual a "technology."

As for your first example, I guess I was never into those kinds of books. They all sounded kind of sappy. And when magic books want me to make lists of my emotions and categorize them, I get annoyed. Hey, that's an emotion for ya. Pre and post morning coffee: yet more emotions! I could get the hang of it after all.

As for your second example, that's why we have WF, in my opinion. I mean, sure, I'd love to have that private room with the altar and lighting just so. I'd love to have the perfect tools. However, there is also something to be said for 'window shopping' and biding one's time. The new mage has far more choices than he or she might initially know, and those first few years can be used to 'sample the buffet' before making the longer term commitments that would justify the investments demanded by some classic grimoires. Thus, I see the appeal of books by the Gallery of Magic or classics by Ophiel. Even if their magic doesn't work that well, one can still learn quite a lot from them with persistence over time.

 

[Xenophon]

If only I should be so lucky as to have such a book store to peruse. I used to spend a lot of time at a local university library back in the '90s. Unfortunately, that was when I was quite the materialist. Back then I found a book on the shelf of the library which "proved" how things like astrology and divination were simply psychological phenomena and "worked" because people are gullible and could read into the results whatever they wanted. Which leads me to...

3) These days I avoid books that attempt to prove that magic is just psychology because they miss the point that magical thinking isn't something that can be proven the way one can calculate the trajectory of a space probe around the Solar system. Unfortunately, a lot of the chaos mages tend to justify their magical practice with 'science.' There are so many things that science (observation, hypothesis, experimentation, theory) has explained that the process itself is now assumed to be capable of proving anything. It is the "Tower of Babel" for our times. According to the legend, the Tower was a physical thing used to try to reach the realm of the gods. Once again, humanity is trying to reach god-like status using technology. I recoil when a chaos book author calls magical ritual a "technology."

As for your first example, I guess I was never into those kinds of books. They all sounded kind of sappy. And when magic books want me to make lists of my emotions and categorize them, I get annoyed. Hey, that's an emotion for ya. Pre and post morning coffee: yet more emotions! I could get the hang of it after all.

As for your second example, that's why we have WF, in my opinion. I mean, sure, I'd love to have that private room with the altar and lighting just so. I'd love to have the perfect tools. However, there is also something to be said for 'window shopping' and biding one's time. The new mage has far more choices than he or she might initially know, and those first few years can be used to 'sample the buffet' before making the longer term commitments that would justify the investments demanded by some classic grimoires. Thus, I see the appeal of books by the Gallery of Magic or classics by Ophiel. Even if their magic doesn't work that well, one can still learn quite a lot from them with persistence over time.

Yeah the books that try to drag in half-understood science can get tedious quickly.

 

[stratamaster78]

I sort of hate to admit it but books that heavily feature ‘new age woo’ terminology really turn me off and I’m not even sure why.

Stuff like ‘raising your vibration’….and for some reason I’m blanking on more examples but I kind of just know it when I read it.

Also from time to time I like to look for new Herbal books… usually ‘Green Witchcraft’ or Hoodoo and I recently looked through one that had really good info but it referred to plants with feminine pronouns.

Like ‘she aides in sleep’ ‘she improves digestion’ etc.

I just said to myself ‘I just can’t with this’ and put it down.

It’s not even that any off that stuff is wrong but it just turns me off for some reason…lol

 

[Robert Ramsay]

My personal favourite was when a friend of mine lent me a book on the Tarot. Got about 15 pages in and encountered the sentence "And of course the gypsies came from Atlantis"

YEET!

 

[KjEno186]

"And of course the gypsies came from Atlantis"

It's that kind of bald assertion that makes my eyebrows do a Mr Spock.

"There's a multi-legged parasite on your head."

Good fiction requires the suspension of disbelief. A mage knows that the story might not be "true" in the absolute sense, but goes along with it to perform the ritual. A poor writer comes across as a child who is learning that some of the adults in the room will nod and smile when she makes up nonsense assertions. Some of those assertions can have a ring of truth, as it were, much as ChatGPT can scrape "facts" off the internet, but the kind of person who makes shit up to get attention most often has little talent for arranging a coherent narrative.

Occultists like John Michael Greer, Lon Milo Duquette, and Dion Fortune are/were prolific writers. One certainly doesn't have to agree with the 'facts' of all of their occult writings to appreciate the fine narrative webs they weave. Greer made Lemuria sound plausible. Duquette's sense of humor made learning Qabalah funny. Fortune's Cosmic Doctrine was a masterpiece of modern occult literature despite its seeming density. So, I guess I judge a writer as much by presentation as I do by content.

1) if the introduction contains words like "nurture," "healing journey," "loving god(s)"

I think you forgot "karma"! It is fast becoming one of those words that mean whatever squishy concept of justice and redemption that the writer wants to promote. And then you get those sorts of people asking whether eating meat is "hurting their karma." Well dammit, cupcake, your hominid ancestors got those big brains you refuse to use by hunting in packs like wolves, so one could surmise that the universe doesn't care beyond your ability to survive in this simulation.

 

[Xenophon]

I find DuQuette one of those rare souls who can be humorous without trivializing what he's discussing.

Post automatically merged: Oct 14, 2023

My personal favourite was when a friend of mine lent me a book on the Tarot. Got about 15 pages in and encountered the sentence "And of course the gypsies came from Atlantis"

YEET!

Didn't Marian Kotleba, the Slovak politician, just get four years in the slammer for publicly wishing they'd go back?

 

[pixel_fortune]

Mentions of quantum and "actually, science has proven magic is real, with this [already debunked] study"

No it hasn't, and since they've just demonstrated they have poor reading comprehension when it comes to science, I no longer trust what they have to say about magic

It also comes across as insecure, like they need societal validation of their beliefs and experiences with magic

And then: opening with a misattributed quote (one of those ones that gets passed around self-help books without analysis)

I just started reading The Little Work [a tongue in cheek reference to the Great Work] and it opened with a famous quote, credited to "author disputed" and I thought, "oh my god, you actually looked up the quote instead of repeating it uncritically. You cared about getting the source right. You didn't take your info for granted" and I had so much more trust in the writer from that point on

 

[DiLoco_DelEted]

...and step slow-w-wly back from the tome. Then turn and run like h*** outta the book store.

That's the drill we all go through when perusing volumes of magick and the occult, at some point. What's your tip-off that the promisingly entitled book there on the shelf isn't for you after all? Me, I gots two litmus tests:
1) if the introduction contains words like "nurture," "healing journey," "loving god(s)" or any other vocables that sound as if molded from form rubber.
2) when the list of props and implements is longer than the rite using them and consists solely of objects rarer now than in the days of ol' Mansoor Hallaj, when they were already scarcer than phoenix-egg omelettes. E.g., a sable-black (not jet-black!) robe of Peruvian spider silk, a burnished rhodium triangle inscribed with the original Enochian in the penmanship of Edward Kelly (NOT Dr. Dee!), a scrying mirror fashioned from the laminated carapaces of Transvaal scorpions.

These may be personal idiosyncrasies of mine, but y'all fess up. What makes you cut 'n run when you gawp at that ol' grimoire there in Mistress Miskatonic's Occultated Arcanium & Book Store?

For me:
Anything strictly demonic or "shadow self integration" isn't my thing.
Anything that requires use of my blood or other DNA is a no for me.
Anything that is newage.
Anything that requires me to be a corporate CEO to be able to afford all the "implements".

 

[Xenophon]

Mentions of quantum and "actually, science has proven magic is real, with this [already debunked] study"

No it hasn't, and since they've just demonstrated they have poor reading comprehension when it comes to science, I no longer trust what they have to say about magic

It also comes across as insecure, like they need societal validation of their beliefs and experiences with magic

And then: opening with a misattributed quote (one of those ones that gets passed around self-help books without analysis)

I just started reading The Little Work [a tongue in cheek reference to the Great Work] and it opened with a famous quote, credited to "author disputed" and I thought, "oh my god, you actually looked up the quote instead of repeating it uncritically. You cared about getting the source right. You didn't take your info for granted" and I had so much more trust in the writer from that point on

BRAVO! Quantum physics was never meant to be a blank check to the intellectually impatient. (Kenneth Grant, please listen.) And science "proves" nothing. It simply asserts what it deems an alleged preponderence of evidence to say.

You have a healthy sense of smell and can definitely follow where the bulls wander from the spoor of their scat. This is an ability too rarely cultivated by would be mage in these "truth is a social construct" times.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

BRAVO! Quantum physics was never meant to be a blank check to the intellectually impatient. (Kenneth Grant, please listen.) And science "proves" nothing. It simply asserts what it deems an alleged preponderence of evidence to say.

I remember reading one (well respected paranormal author) who invoked quantum physics twice - once to assert that the 'collapse of the waveform' meant that we created our own reality, and a second time to assert that 'many worlds' quantum physics meant we could choose our own reality.

Well, matey-chops, which is it?

 

[Vandheer]

I just run to the other side full sprint when I hear the words quantum/annunaki/dimension. Usage of that word makes it clear Iam just reading ramblings of a 'know-it-all'.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I had an annunaki once, but I drank a large glass of salty water and it cleared up.

 

[Xenophon]

I remember reading one (well respected paranormal author) who invoked quantum physics twice - once to assert that the 'collapse of the waveform' meant that we created our own reality, and a second time to assert that 'many worlds' quantum physics meant we could choose our own reality.

Well, matey-chops, which is it?

I guess we can each of us choose the scientific fact we want. "Everyman his own physicist," as it were.

Post automatically merged: Nov 7, 2023

Another "drop 'n run" trigger: the author warns you about an entity over several paragraphs full of forebodings that might've come out of H.P. Lovecraft. Tells you that this entity will cause upheavals in your magic and non-magic spheres of life. THEN concludes by saying 'enjoy your visit' and don't forget to say goodbye to Snufflepox Daemon Empowress of the Abyss "lovingly and with nurturing thoughts."

I mean, come on now. Can't we have one---just ONE---kick-ass Qlippoth out there who is NOT into pastel colors, rainbows, and unicorns?

Post automatically merged: Nov 7, 2023

For me:
Anything strictly demonic or "shadow self integration" isn't my thing.
Anything that requires use of my blood or other DNA is a no for me.
Anything that is newage.
Anything that requires me to be a corporate CEO to be able to afford all the "implements".

BRAVO! Quantum physics was never meant to be a blank check to the intellectually impatient. (Kenneth Grant, please listen.) And science "proves" nothing. It simply asserts what it deems an alleged preponderence of evidence to say.

You have a healthy sense of smell and can definitely follow where the bulls wander from the spoor of their scat. This is an ability too rarely cultivated by would be mage in these "truth is a social construct" times.

I ran across one rite the other day where one was supposed to be holding TWO "magical weapons" in one hand, two other implements in the other and be gesturing and chanting the while. Heck, even Rambo used separate hands for his M-16 and M-79. Hung other gear on a bandolier. I guess the idea here was to wow your HGA with all the neat-o gear you had invested in.

Post automatically merged: Nov 7, 2023

As long as I'm on a rant, also drop any book that tells you that demons require no payment. "The opportunity to manifest their power is payment enough." Yeah, right. I'm the occult Hugh Hefner and The Lesser Key is my own li'l demon-harem. Lucifer & the Hidden Demons is an example of the kind of thing I'm talking about.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I guess we can each of us choose the scientific fact we want. "Everyman his own physicist," as it were.

In this case, you could have one or the other, but having both makes no sense, if you are trying to be scientific at all. And if you're not, why bother mentioning quantum physics?

"I choose cake and not-cake"

 

[Xenophon]

In this case, you could have one or the other, but having both makes no sense, if you are trying to be scientific at all. And if you're not, why bother mentioning quantum physics?

"I choose cake and not-cake"

I think the aim is to paint oneself with a patina of science. Call it a craving for credibility on both sides of the street.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I think the aim is to paint oneself with a patina of science. Call it a craving for credibility on both sides of the street.

I think you are right.

To get this thread back on track, I just hope that my book doesn't fall into the "run away" category

 

[Xenophon]

I think you are right.

To get this thread back on track, I just hope that my book doesn't fall into the "run away" category

There are certain readers who one wishes would ignore one.