How to respond to Crowley-bashers?
-
Personally, I agree with the first answer. I nearly always ignore them. Or, if they're openly trying to pick an argument, I give a conversation-stopping answer such as: Shrug, say either that they don't have their facts right or (depending on my mood in the moment) that they are confusing the author with the work, and then - this is important! - I walk away.
'Cause here's the main point: If someone isn't interested in listening and being changed, then there is no conversation to have. Most people saying this sort of thing aren't ready to learn anything, they're interested in making a statement and not having it contradicted. Until they are (implicitly or explicitly) inviting input from you, you will be wasting your time and looking needy and pathetic. However, if there is a small part of them actually wanting to hear something, then walking away usually draws that out (if anything is going to).
-
Actually the couple times it's come up recently, the person had no idea that I study Thelema; we are at an event at the local occult bookshop and she just brought it up out of the blue: what an evil man Crowley was, he treated women badly, she won't have anything to do with thelema, etc. I said "That's a bit simplistic." or something to that effect, and then the host of the meeting diverted the discussion in a different direction, which I appreciated. I wasn't needing to start a big battle, but I didn't feel right sitting there not saying anything at all.
I kinda wish I had something cool and witty to say.
The other person was a facebook acquaintance, and I did "walk away" figuratively speaking, I shut off notifications from her, without getting into any discussion. She wasn't addressing her remarks to me, they were just on her wall, and I knew it would just be one of those stupid facebook fights that go nowhere, so I shut her off and withdrew.
-
Try these:
-
Oh, they were uptight in Edwardian times. Today he'd seem like most of my friends.
-
Isn't it wonderful how far we've come? In his day her got crap from people for being such a feminist.
-
(This one is from Marion.) Wow, so it's not just the Christian Right that has uptight moralistic bigots!
-
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"1. Oh, they were uptight in Edwardian times. Today he'd seem like most of my friends."
Comparatively speaking I am a bigger asshole than Crowley ever was, yet most people consider me a prety nice guy
-
Most people with a casual opinion about Crowley only know what was said about him by the gutter press, or authors who were intentionally assasinating his character. They probably don't realise that this is where their information has come from so maybe bring it to their attention. Ask them why as a Pagan or occultist they are swallowing nonesense from the Christian Right elements in the press.
-
You could always ask them why they feel the way they do about it him.
I think a more interesting question to engage in would be what bothers you about people who are Crowley bashers
-
I don't know anyone who doesn't have depraved, selfish, immature, hypocritical aspects in their personality.
-
I resemble that remark!
-
That's half of what I love about you, Jim.
-
Crowley has the desired effect, they're just not paying attention to themselves
-
Bite them in the neck!
-
I don't think Crowley would have really cared at all so if they're trying to attack his character it doesn't really matter. If they're attacking the practices that you want to talk about then you can talk about the practices and Crowley doesn't have to come into it.
I found this really cool essay on him by Phil Hine in Prime Chaos:
"Madness and suicide trailed in his wake. Scandal dogged his footsteps, yet he was not dragged down by the failures of his fellows. His modern-day admirers seek to explain his contradictions and justify his acts of moral outrage. Yet Crowley was interested in neither explanations or justifications. The fact of his existence was enough. With the absorption of a child playing his own game, the rules known only to himself, he wandered the world, immune to disaster and oblivious to the possibility of failure."
The rest of the essay starts on p. 28 (zalbarath666.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/phil-hine-prime-chaos.pdf), I found it really well-written and just fucking cool.
"At no point does he seem to be saying "this isn't the real me." He does not argue his position or distance himself from his life, he presents himself with a matter-of-factness which both attracts and repels."
I think Regardie said he considered Crowley an avatar of Pan. You can't argue with Pan, he is what he is.
-
On this general note, a few days ago I got into a conversation with a kindly old gentleman while perusing this forum in a cafe I frequent in godforsaken Agoura Hills. We were chatting about this and that and he asked what I was doing on the computer. At a loss for words, I made a mistake I usually don't make and I told him the truth, phrasing it thus: I am conversing on an internet forum that has to do with the Occult, or more specifically "Scientific Illuminism." I talked about how this included yoga, meditation, personal development, and so forth, and how the word "Occult," merely meant "hidden." At this point his soft, rheumy blue eyes started a bit, and he went back to his own table. Returning with a look of concern, he asked if I had ever read the Bible. I laughed heartily (turning a few heads) and proceeded to explain that my mother had made me write out the Book of Proverbs a number of times in my youth. I proceeded to let off a few bits of Bible History that would have rattled a seminary student. I explained further that I thought all religions and systems of thought had something to teach us, from Hinduism to Rastafarianism to whatever. He didn't quite agree with this, but we proceeded to have a genial conversation anyways, turning to other things.
I have had hour-long conversations with Irish priests in convertibles about the merits of comparative religion, and I've been denounced in public as a Heathen for reading "The Book of Thoth." I react always with candor, bemusement, and on rare occasion, pure, undiluted wrath.
-
@kasper81 said
"
@AliceKnewI said
"I've been running into pagans/magicians/wiccans who hate Crowley and dismiss all of his work because of some of his personal behavior.How do you respond to this?
"Maybe you should keep it all to yourself"
"and to each man and woman that thou meetest, were it but to dine or to drink at them, it is the Law to give. Then they shall chance to abide in this bliss or no; it is no odds." - AL III:39
"He shall everywhere proclaim openly his connection with the
A.'. A.'. and speak of It and Its principles (even so little as he
understandeth) for that mystery is the enemy of Truth."- The Task of the Probationer of the A.'.A.'.
Shall we hear further from the uninitiated non-lineage proclaimers about what is true and correct? Or shall they stand aside, listen and learn for once?
-
@kasper81 said
"
yeah but she obviously isn't ready to "give the Law" if it's stressing her out? Once again I own thine as.s"Nope. Alice is giving the Law, she's asking how to deal with people who judge an artist's work based on the personality of the artist. I'd own your arse, but you're all arse and I am not that into slaves of because.
-
Right now I'd say something like this: according to the conventional world view where you need to be a conformist person with no soul, but have a house and bank account instead, do what you're told and play nice, chase what the tv tells you to chase and all that crap, Crowley was indeed a bad, bad man.
-
I only respond to the one thing that surrounds the reason for his alleged drug addiction to heroin, I decided to do some research on it only to have it stated that as a child it was prescribed to him medically for asthma during a time that the addictive qualities of it may not have been completely understood.
To those who completely and with an all bias opinion of him being Satanic and will press for something in reference to that from me... I usually will reply that we don't nessessarily even believe in the existence of such a being and if he does why would anyone follow a deity whose only purpose is the total destruction of humanity if they maybe referring to the Christian anti archetype.
Most of the time I just let it roll off my shoulders but almost all the time I always qualify that Crowley was a genius. -
And a question about the o.p. I have never met anyone in those circles that have ever bashed Crowley or any spiritual teacher. I believe it is one of the thirteen principles of Wiccan belief written by a Wiccan counsel of some sort sometime back in the seventies..
-
-
I sort of see him as the Freud of Western esotericism. Correct, but politically incorrect. You'll run into plenty shallow flakey feminist 'pagans' and whatnot who don't like him. That's just how it is. I was just arguing with a Christian on youtube (fuck me) about Crowley. He started by saying Crowley wrote the Satanic Bible. Proved that one wrong. Then moved onto allegations of Crowley performing ritual animal and human sacrifice. Also said the Abramelin ritual is 'Satanic' because it's meant to "open the gates of Hell". Oh and his parting argument was that Crowley had a pet dog named "Satan". Haha. It's just funny when if your theology doesn't account for or acknlowedge the existence of Satan, a Christian can and will at times use that in itself to call you or your views Satanic. So, not believing in the devil is devilish. I think we've all heard that "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people he didn't exist." Or something like that.
It is pretty well-established that Crowley advocated, at least at one point in his writings, that children be exposed to every sexual act under the Sun, basically. Not having it done to them, but witnessing it. I suspect this was Crowley's idea in order to make sex less taboo and possibly lessen repression in adulthood. Not sure, though. But, people I end up debating, or rather arguing with never cease to use wingnut sources for their information on Crowley. I suggest reading his own works for themselves, and give them a link to Liber Al with the commentaries on Hermetic.com . But, no, that would be too close to the person whose character they're trying to kill. Makes no sense and at best I think engaging with bigoted Christians is only good for entertainment anymore.