 |
 |
Dave, 800K was the figure that Simon gave back in 2006, and he's had another six years of sales since. From what little information I've seen from the CoS, the Satanic Bible seems to have comparable numbers, but Simon's book also came out a decade later. I'm not sure what the situation is in the UK, but over here the Necronomicon can be purchased in just about every chain bookstore, many of which have minimal occult sections at best. I'd add one more book to the list of contenders: the Pennsylvania German charm book The Long-Lost Friend. Charting the exact "in print" data is difficult, but it's had about fifty editions and three different English translations since its appearance in 1820. Sincerely, Dan Harms Bibliographer and Instructional Services Librarian SUNY Cortland Memorial Library P. O. Box 2000 Cortland, NY 13045 (607) 753-4042 From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of kaostar Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 4:57 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] FW: [JFRR] Fairy Tales: A New History (Bottigheimer, Ruth B.) indeed, often we have no idea of the commercial pressures behind what appears in some finished products; i have heard form a couple of literary-based magical scholars in past years that publishers have asked them to add to their manuscripts to (paraphrase) "Harry Potter it up a bit, make it sexier" it may have changed since (this is from 2002) but when i was researching occult books in print the two magical books that had been continually in print the longest were The Simon Nec (a 'fake' true grimoire, arguably, although it contains a fair bit of 'real' magic, the Sumerian stuff -however one defines 'real magic'- by that in this context i mean materials that have been in historical use in the past, not whether they "work"- another difficult to define area!) and Anton La Vey's Satanic Bible which is very interesting. Barrett's The Magus should also have been a contender, i thought, but there have been gaps in publication of that over the 200 or so years since it was first issued. And a big difference between 'in print' and 'still available to buy' of course, but interesting that some other possible contenders weren't in the list. 'in print' indicates the probable demand for titles, in the days before print on demand manaufacture, and that Simon has sold a million is quite astonishing Dave E help me raise money for endangered tribes http://www.justgiving.com/shaveDaveshead ---------- Original Message ----------- From: Daniel Harms <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Sent: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:56:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] FW: [JFRR] Fairy Tales: A New History (Bottigheimer, Ruth B.) > If it helps to put Davies' piece into context, the sales of the Lovecraft-inspired Simon Necronomicon alone are pushing one million copies. I don't know the sales figures for Crowley's works, but I think we're talking about different orders of magnitude. > > As another piece of context, Davies had to cut out parts of the book that dealt with some traditions and ideas at Oxford Press's request, because they wanted him to beef up the U. S. section, thinking perhaps that we're too shallow over here to buy a book that doesn't talk about us. I don't know if that's what befell the Crowley material, but he's explained to me that this is why some sections seem rushed. > > Sincerely, > > > Dan Harms > Bibliographer and Instructional Services Librarian > SUNY Cortland Memorial Library > (607)-753-4042 > > > From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]]<mailto:[mailto:[log in to unmask]]> On Behalf Of mandrake > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 6:18 AM > To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] FW: [JFRR] Fairy Tales: A New History (Bottigheimer, Ruth B.) > > Caroline > > Maybe - the issue of authority is complex for pagans - > currently many practitioners are boasting their authority in magick on the basis of academic degrees - probably because it has had a distorting effect? > Personally I dont mind academic authority as long as it is descriptive rather than proscriptive - > practitioners sometimes feel the need to undo the work of academic studies which they feel are wrong - > so for example Owen Davies book on grimoires perhaps ignores Crowley > but reifies H P Lovecraft (just as an example of an otherwise fine book which is very reasonably priced etc) > this will no doubt be played back to me at some later point by the media who will tell me I am a follower of H P Lovecraft - > which I'm not. > > Mogg > > > Hi Mogg, > > >>When historians study magick maybe they become the experts - and sometimes lay down the lore - perhaps erroneously?<< > > Do you think this is hinting at what a lot of Pagans think about the academic study of Pagan Witchcraft? That "their" - the Pagan's - subject has been kind of hijacked by someone more eloquent, more prolific, with the ability to get more publishing deals, and even... perhaps... to understand the topic, at least its history, better then the practitioners themselves? And that's annoying? > > ~Caroline. > > > > From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of mandrake > Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2011 6:42 PM > To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] FW: [JFRR] Fairy Tales: A New History (Bottigheimer, Ruth B.) > > > Dear David et al > > "but when it comes to magic, who is the laity and who are the experts?" > > Very well put ! > > "Academics dig things up and bury them again" - Terry Duquesne > > When historians study magick maybe they become the experts - > and sometimes lay down the lore - perhaps erroneously? > > Magick is a very intellectual pursuit. > > I suppose a clear difference between practitioner and academic perspective is that academic authors often leave out important operational material. > Thus Owen Davies' book on grimoires doesn't give any useable examples. Or recently I looked at a very informative book on ancient dream incubation > only to find the long discussion was really about whether temples were used in this way before the Greek period (a typical academic obsession) > but not so relevant to the practitioner/reconstructionist. > I like academic writing that is does both. > > senebty > > Mogg Morgan > ------- End of Original Message -------