J. Edward Cornelius

Why can't the OTO produce a Crowley bibliography at this level of depth and sophistication? Jerry is, notoriously, no longer a member. His work here exposes the poverty of all the people who make the "authoritative" claims.

The Book of the Law tells us, "Spelling is defunct". To judge from the recent crop of books on the topic of Thelema, it is not just spelling, but grammar, cohesion, style, and clarity of thought. To be fair, I only read a dozen pages of Cornelius's book before I tossed it aside in disgust -- perhaps the rest of it is brilliant.

The purpose of language is to express thought. If you don't have any, don't write a book. If you do, learn to use language to express it.

--------------------

I wrote show more the above last night in a fit of pique, and I was probably too harsh. I've read a bit more, and have decided the author falls into the latter category: he does have thoughts to express, but doesn't know how. Reading his prose is like bobbing for apples. You dive into a paragraph hoping to grasp some meaning, but the fluidity of the style contrives to snatch it away from you. Eventually you have to come up for a breather, and then you dip into another paragraph and try again. show less

This volume of the Red Flame series delves into the primary Thelemic holy book, Liber AL vel Legis, better known as The Book of the Law. It contains several short essays on the Tunis comment (which can be interpreted as banning study and discussion) in relation to the obligations incurred by initiating into one of Crowley's orders. Other essays discuss the grid, cover letter, and Crowley's apparent violation of the injunction to not change the manuscript. The crown, however, is a lengthy, show more but far from complete, discussion of the various anomalies in the manuscript (31) and how they were changed for the typescript (220). There is even a discussion of the Kill/Fill debate over a decade prior to it being an actual issue. show less