Dear all
interesting discussion - thought maybe a bit hard on Alex Sanders, ie you
say:
'kind of a hustler and maybe a con-man. He
certainly engaged in a lot of media relations and appearances in the English
tabloid
press. He named himself *King of the Witches* when few if any ordinary
English
citizens imagined that there were witches to be king of. '
It's this business of the 'charlatan & the magus' which
many famous practitioners seem to be - including Gurdjieff, Crowley, Alex
etc.
I thought Alex Sanders was probably from quite a humble background - yes he
played the media game - which created some glamour - that has drawn many
into the magical life. The books are full of rubbish for media consumption
really - but behind the scenes there are many very committed and skillful
practitioners - some of whom are now key figures in the craft (they still
talk of Alex's charisma and 'power') - if you have a chance to listen to
Maxine's lecture - what emerges is quite an intense in-group - almost a
magical commune - with a great deal of training going on behind the scenes.
I always thought Sanders opened up wicca a lot - introducing many
interesting occult elements - including angel magick and hermeticism. He
also led the way to reclaiming of the woods - encouraging people to go work
magick outside and visit sacred sites.
He is maybe of his time - and perhaps the current batch of wannabees don't
quite measure up - but I'd certainly raise a glass for Alex Sanders - and
indeed from a publishing perspective - those wonderful covers and
illustrations - so different to the current vogue for po-faced chocolate
boxes ; )
'Love and do what you will'
mogg
PS: I'm sure academic presses are also not adverse to jumping on the
popularist bandwagon -
OUP for example has many books that look like pot boilers to me (The Oxford
Book of Goobledegook)- of course they are notorious for scrapping their
poetry list presumable
because it wasn't earning its keep?
|