2003-07-17

I greatly appreciated the review recently given me by Magick Review. All-in-all, a very nice review. I only have a few things that I think should be mentioned about it.

The first is that Witchy, the person who did the review, said she would probably not return, but did not say why. The only reason I bring this up at all is that I'm always looking for things that I can improve on to make myself a better writer. If she wouldn't return because it just wasn't her cup of tea, she could have just said so. I think perhaps she may be concerned with giving out contructive critism because of the idiots out there who aren't able to take it, and thus will flood thier guestbook with comments and whatnot. One such moron even went so far as to bother one of thier reviewers on her personal site. Now this is just pathetic. If you can't take being criticised about your diary, then don't ask to be reviewed. After all, what reviews are for is to point out any weak points in your writing. Personally, I don't think she was harsh enough with me. Especially considering all of the typos that are rampant throughout this little diary. (I really should get around to correcting some of them one of these days).

The second thing I would like to point out stems from my sense of humor. Witchy said, "but Crowley, he gives me the willis". I can imagine so, since he wasn't a particularly nice guy a lot of the time, especially to women. He also loved to create controversy around himself. Most of it was just his sick sense of humor though (at least, it was sick to most people). One must remember, everytime he talked about child sacrifice, he was really talking about masturbation. Blood was often a metaphor used for semen, and lets not forget the sacrifice of women (which really just ment having sex with them). So, of course you would be creeped out by him, for the most part it's a natural reaction. But remember, if it wasn't for him, you wouldn't be spelling magick with a 'k'. (nor for that matter, would the Equinox been published, and subsequently Regardie wouldn't have released the Golden Dawn papers, and without these things, modern witchcraft wouldn't be the same. It is no secret that Gardener borrowed heavily from these two sources to replace that which had been lost over time, just changed it enough to fit the worldview of modern Witches. Where, after all, do you think the Call of the Watchtowers comes from? These and many other rituals can be found in thier origional forms in these sources.) At any rate, he has a lot of bad press, most of it being his own fault (purposely misleading statements). As I once said to someone, Crowley was often his own worst enemy. But isn't that true of most of us?

By the way, I don't suggest attempting to read Beastly Uncle Al's work before you have a pretty good understanding of Magick in general. It's sort of like trying to read a book on Astrophysics without ever having learned long division. There are layers upon layers of meaning in every paragraph, some of which I still don't understand. Other smaller things will be pretty clear. For example, I don't know why people are still so confused about the concept of Thelema, when Liber Al vel Legis clearly stated "for pure will, unassuaged of purpose, and delivered from the lust of result, is perfect in every way". So, where is the confusion in the meaning of True Will, or "do what thou wilt" (which I have already covered fairly extensively)? Do I have to go on yet more rants about the fairly simple meaning of this? I'll say this one thing again though, it has nothing whatsoever to do with indulging in whims. I think I'll leave you with that for now. If you can't figure the rest out on your own, you never will.
~Matt Magus

0 comments so far

<<< | >>> | Random