Aloha,
On 2/6/2006 at 4:11 AM steve ash wrote:
>Of course le Vey was actually reacting against the
>60s, for instance the famous example of crushing the
>LSD sugar cube and inverting pictures of Leary. Many
>of his followers being 'decadents' from mainstream
>society rather than from the Bohemian art community,
>many of whom were attracted to his extreme right wing
>politics. I think he was viewed as a weird eccentric
>by most in the art and countercultural world.
Well, as far as I can tell, LaVey was regarded by the San
Francisco new media as a local eccentric celebrity. Topless
dancing had recently started up in North Beach clubs,
and I suspect some of the publicity surrounding the
Satanic Masses had that background in mind.
I have no real sense of LaVey's effect on the mid-60s core
SF art and literary scene. It was probably not very big.
I do think that some of the artists and writers and followers
of the scene probably did appreciate the Satanic Masses as
performances with some *shock* value.
Honestly, I hadn't thought much about the politics or political
stance of the Church of Satan. But I'd guess now that the
right wing stance would not have fit well with the overall
liberal to radical left stance of the San Francisco art and
literary scene that I was talking about in my posts on this thread.
It's pretty clear that the Church of Satan did not emerge from
the SF art or literary scene. Poets like Diana DiPrima took a
different approach to magic and occulture and presentation.
Musing Brimstone By The Golden Gate! Rose,
Pitch
<<Never play strip Tarot.>>
--anonymous, from *How to Be a Cultist*
|