On Feb 18, 2008 6:26 PM, David Waldron <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

In any case Lovecraft didn't really have a systematized mythos per se. It was put onto his work retrospectively by fans and, of course, August Derleth. I think it tends to problematise the kind of hermetic reading some chaos magicians etc give to his work. Personally I find the use of the fictionalised characters a little odd and exist because he is an esoteric writer who is gothic and cool from a late 20th C point of view. It seems to me pretty much the same as some D&D pagans I knew a while back who used Takhisis and Paladine as imago die. I wonder if people follow David Eddings deities. :-P It would be all cutesy idealized rural New England. I've heard of a group using Star Trek characters for that matter. I am sure the Discordians would love that sort of thing and it makes my recon friends and contacts burst out laughing.
David

Daniel Harms wrote:

I wouldn't put it quite in those terms.  I see there being numerous different "Lovecrafts" - the Lovecraft of "The Dunwich Horror", the Lovecraft of "The Hound", the Lovecraft of "At the Mountains of Madness", the Lovecraft of his letters (who could in turn be several Lovecrafts) - and different people take the Lovecraft they want.  Sure, Lovecraft says in "At the Mountains..." that the Old Ones are aliens, but you don't have to listen to him.
 
Plus, it might not be quite so much of a tension.  Lovecraft himself used his mechanistic materialism to justify his personal aesthetics - if the universe really doesn't have a special place for humanity, then seeking out enjoyment and fulfillment in art is perfectly justifiable.  I think the chaos magicians differ from him insofar as they do not turn to traditional forms as Lovecraft did, and that they believe their art work on a level other than the artistic.
 
Dan Harms
Coordinator of Instruction Librarian
State University of New York - Cortland
Memorial Library B-110
(607) - 753-4042

________________________________

From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic on behalf of Justin Woodman
Sent: Sun 2/17/2008 5:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Lovecraft- was A question about Ganesh



I pretty much agree with much of the below  - the use of the
Derleth-influenced Simon Necronomicon as the 'authoritative' text on the
Lovecraft mythos being a case in point.

Although I tend to think of Lovecraft as being either misread or
misunderstood in many occultural recensions of his work, I do think that a
tension exists between Lovecraft's mechanistic materialism and a kind of
romantic Gnostic sensibility sometimes found in his letters and fiction 
-  a tension which inadvertantly allows for a more 'supernaturalist'
interpretation of his work.

Justin

I've noticed that those enthusiastic about Lovecraftian magical
activities often disregard the considerable and growing body of Lovecraft
(literary) criticism.
And, although I
tend not to look to an author's intentions for an appreciation of her or
his works, Lovecraft seems not to have been successful at getting the
supernatural out of his stories, as far as many of his readers are
concerned.

Another observation. The version of the Mythos that magical
practitioners (that I've met) often turn to is not strictly Lovecraft's. It
is the later expansion and reorganization carried out by August Derleth and
the Arkham House editions. Derleth had no issue with the supernatural in
the Mythos, and regularized the Mythos pantheon according to widespread
occultural notions.

Musing I Have Met Yog-Sothoth & ........ Rose,


Pitch

--
Dr. Justin Woodman
Course Convenor
Integrated Degree in Social Anthropology
Department of Professional and Community Education
Goldsmiths College
New Cross
London SE14 6NW