Z. left a really good comment on my article about reverse-engineering culture back down to it’s underlying “source” reality. Well, I should clarify that while I think it’s “good”, I’m not sure I agree with it. I guess I’m learning that I don’t have to agree with something for it to be good. Anyway, Z. took issue with a bit of my conjecture in that article:

In fact, in a sense, the occult seems to be entirely devoted to the “endless shells of interpretation” - or at least on the surface.

Anyway, Z. writes:

Well … I’d disagree. Of course, it might appear that way if all one does is listen to or read endless debates on or about occultism in general, but occultism - or at least magick - is centered around actually doing things, instead of getting caught up in “reason”, which always contains within itself the germ of its own self destruction.

I’m not sure if this is supposed to be a “dig” against me of some kind, but I’m not too worried about that. In any event, I feel like I pretty much delved into the exact argument Z. describes above in my piece on Reason & The Hidden Will. So I feel like I can probably articulate a half-way decent response to the whole thing.

I have one major criticism of Z.’s argument. Z. also pulled in a quote from Crowley’s Liber O. Basically, the point I’m trying to make with this whole thing is that culture, even occult culture, mediates between us and our experience. When I suggest this idea of “endless shells” maybe what I mean is this endless loop of mediation. Even though Crowley’s work may have been somehow intended to liberate one from these shells, pulling him in as a reference just proves what I’m talking about. Saying “Well Crowley said to experience things directly” immediately removes both you and I from the equation. It’s no longer a direct interaction between you and I (which of course doesn’t exist online). It becomes once removed, or rather once more removed.

This seems to be the name of the game almost in the occult. How quickly do most conversations about it immediately bring in a thousand and one different references to “prove” some incredibly arcane and probably unimportant point? And I mean shit, if anybody’s guilty of it, I am. I wonder in some way if occult writers (or any spiritual authorities) don’t do more harm than good on some weird level. While maintaining possibly the best of intentions, they inadvertently say: look at my ideas about my experience. And then people begin to discount their own experiences, except according to how they match the authority. In one sense, I’m almost tempted to say: who cares what Crowley did or said? What does it matter?

But then at the same time, I can’t imagine what my life would be like at all were it not influence by other people. From the excellent people on this website to friends or family or even strangers on the street? What do we have unless we share with one another? That can’t just all be mediated experience or “endless shells of interpretation.” Maybe the thing to keep in mind is the difference between authentic sharing and authority-worship, the difference between making your own points and just repeating what you heard somewhere and took to be true. I don’t know. I don’t really have the answer. I guess that’s the point. Or rather, I have it just as much as anybody does. How much does any of us have it I guess is the real question. Or maybe it’s not. Whoo! Uncertainty!