Page 3 of 3
Re: Newly Translated Grimoires
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:29 pm
by Cerastes
obnoxion wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:02 pm
I'd be happy to! One thing has been the debunking of the misconception that Victorian wordiness means a sort of emptiness of meaning, or that much of the words are mainly decorations meant to fill the formal requirements of the poem. Actually, as we can read from their correspondences, Victorian poets often agonized for months over the appropriateness of single words in their poems. And for people who've been thought in schools that Victorian poetry is second-rate, can now read that poetry as first-rate where every word counts. And that can be a changing experience.
For me, the reading of Tantric texts and their commentaries really changed the way I read grimoires. And if one thinks how these grimoires seem to be relevant century aftet century, one realizes that these must be classics - these must be for all times. But they are no easy reading, they take time, dedication and independent thought. And these are very intimate texts, by which I mean that you need to spent time with them alone.
Mh, I can relate to that.
There are poems that become a little more meaning everytime you read them so the reading itself does create meaning.
By the way, I remember an article from a very brainy author in UF1 which describes a form of
divine reading on the example of a passage from Exodus and applies this to the mystery of Azazel.
That would be a good way to read and gain a deeper understanding of a Victrorian poem, dont' you think?
Re: Newly Translated Grimoires
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:31 pm
by obnoxion
Cerastes wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:29 pm
obnoxion wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:02 pm
I'd be happy to! One thing has been the debunking of the misconception that Victorian wordiness means a sort of emptiness of meaning, or that much of the words are mainly decorations meant to fill the formal requirements of the poem. Actually, as we can read from their correspondences, Victorian poets often agonized for months over the appropriateness of single words in their poems. And for people who've been thought in schools that Victorian poetry is second-rate, can now read that poetry as first-rate where every word counts. And that can be a changing experience.
For me, the reading of Tantric texts and their commentaries really changed the way I read grimoires. And if one thinks how these grimoires seem to be relevant century aftet century, one realizes that these must be classics - these must be for all times. But they are no easy reading, they take time, dedication and independent thought. And these are very intimate texts, by which I mean that you need to spent time with them alone.
Mh, I can relate to that.
There are poems that become a little more meaning everytime you read them so the reading itself does create meaning.
By the way, I remember an article from a very brainy author in UF1 which describes a form of
divine reading on the example of a passage from Exodus and applies this to the mystery of Azazel.
That would be a good way to read and gain a deeper understanding of a Victrorian poem, dont' you think?
Hah ha - yeah, I think one could say every reading is divine and all writing is a form of the eternal absolute. But I think that for practical purposes it is a question of a degree. Much of the 19th Century poetry, I think, is more concerned with the sphere of the Soul than of God. So I think there are more twists and turns to God from Charles Swinburne than from William Wordsworth, because Swinurnes soul rests heavier on his words. Then again, the Divine rests heavier on Homer's than on Wordsworth's.
Then there is a figure like William Blake, who was more deserving to have his books in the Bible than St. Paul.
But texts change with times, and I suppose the living god is always met in a strange place. All in all, eternity might be more difficult to see in a complex construction such as a text, than in simple entity like grain of sand.