Grant et al
Well - doing the right thing is never straighforward - and yes the
commercial imperative of any rights holder is
bound to be uppermost in the COTOs mind - and it just so happens it
gives them nine more years to establish their brand in the marketplace -
before other, i'd say, more diverse players are allowed back in. But its
not always the way religious groups play it especially give the previous
custom and practice.
But it was probably always going to go this way _whoever_ the rights
holders were, in this final decade of control.
At the moment much of Crowley material seems to be disappearing from UK
bookshops - as out of print -
stuff by Duckworth, Penguin, RKP, even some of the Weiser Stuff such as
the Equinox. (and AFAIK no publisher in the country of Crowley's birth
is licensed to publish any)
These are slowly being replaced by the "branded" versions coming from
USA & COTO - these are often longer, what I called "critical editions" -
and consequently a lot more expensive and IMO not an improvement.
Incidentally you ask why anyone would prefer the Symonds/Grant ABA -
I'm sure I'm not the only person who has several different editions of
Liber ABA - all of which get used in different ways -
but my favourite is still the Symonds/Grant - which as a book I find
much more elegant
(you'd expect that from professionals like RKP) - it has most
everything I want.
It also has what for me is a very evocative cover - designed by Steffi
Grant I guess a good illustration of why in the end - their magick is so
attractive.
The new weisers edition, has a lot of extra stuff, which I hardly ever
look at, then loads of footnotes and various indexes, most of which I
haven't found that enlightening thus far.
I think the first printing was slightly larger - but obviously the
commercial burden of printing such a overstuffed book has reduced the
size and paper quality - so that you just need the other editions
sometimes.
I know the new man has to reveal himself somehow - but i'd be more
interested if he produced his own monograph, perhaps with his beloved
"deleted scenes" etc.
So I'd think there is plenty of room for several editions, there are
secondhand ones around and i suspect it will be reprinted when the
current copyright expires in nine years.
I assume we agree Liber Al is not covered by the copyright - but there's
an good example of a book where the self publication and destruction has
a special religious meaning.
"Love and do what you will"
Mogg
ps: On the topic of "nice" COTO people of which there are many. It's
rare to find anyone in COTO who completely approves of the current
leaderships "persecution" of other Thelemites -
I just wonder - maybe its none of my business - whether there is some
internal mechanism , whereby you can bring your leadship to account -
and if you are able to talk about that?
In my own order which is called AMOOKOS - we have some sort of peer
review of things - in 1989 we met and decided to ignore some
instructions from our guru -
which has caused a little bit of trouble - but just thought i share that
- its a question for me about how magical orders are to be managed in
the modern world
- which i see as the different between "masonic" and "rosicrucian" models.
> Mogg,
>
> mandrake wrote:
>> granted a license to republish. If you _know_ different then please
>> say - (For example - there are plenty who would prefer the Symonds /
>> Grant edition of Liber ABA)
>
> I don't know of this being any different--but I don't see it as much
> different then any copyright holder that issues critical editions not
> allowing republishing of earlier editions. The copyright holder of
> any edition is unlikely to allow earlier versions to be reprinted,
> purely with respect to the market. And it is harder for a holder to
> convince a publisher to put the cost of producing and distributing an
> edition when competing editions are on the market.
>
> I'm not suggesting that there is no ground for criticism of OTO here.
> What I contest is that there is evidence of any type of coordinated
> effort to suppress other views of Thelema. There does seem to be an
> effort to hold certain copyrights and trademarks, but that is different.
>
> As for releasing new critical editions being an attempt to somehow
> mediate conflicting views, such an argument would be better with a
> clear discussion of how a newer edition suppresses particular takes on
> Thelema. I'd love to know why people prefer the Symonds/Grant
> edition, and how it would produce a different take on Thelema; but
> those aren't the types of arguments I am seeing here.
>> I know the COTO, perhaps the majority, is full of very nice people,
>> such as yourself - but in the end - they either have no influence or
>> choose not to exercise any.
>
> I don't think this is about I or other people being "nice," but rather
> about a specific claim, one that I'm willing to entertain, but which I
> have yet to see evidence for, that OTO is holding its copyrights and
> trademarks in an attempt to suppress alternative strains of Thelema.
> As I've suggested, there are potentially many grounds to critique
> OTO's moves here, but I don't see the accusation of suppression as
> holding much water, based on my own observation of members and
> officers, and where I do see that argument it seems rooted primarily
> in insinuation or speculation--neither of which have much weight in
> reasoned discourse.
>
> I'm not seeking to defend the order's actions here, by the way. My
> own personal take on that is a different matter, and probably not
> really that important to this list. What I am suggesting is that
> particular claims put out on this list don't seem to have substance,
> and that my own experience both as a member and as a researcher seem
> to run contrary to the general strain of these claims. As a
> researcher, I'm certainly interested in other interpretations, though
> I don't find ones primarily rooted in insinuation, speculation, or
> hypothetical scenarios particular significant for an academic
> understanding of the situation.
>
> Regards,
> Grant
>
>
|
