Stay Connected

Readers: 279

Followers: 730

Fans: 293

Two more recent books on Ida Craddock

By | November 17, 2010 | Print This Post | E-mail This Post | Comments Off

On Friday I posted about Sexual Outlaw, Erotic Mystic: The Essential Ida Craddock, written by Vere Chappell and published by Weiser Books on December 1st, 2010.

Two other titles are also being released around the same time, the first in late October, and the second shortly after the publication of Sexual Outlaw, Erotic Mystic.

Teitan Press recently published Lunar and Sex Worship, which was written by Ida Craddock and includes an introduction by editor Vere Chappell.

From the publisher’s description: Continue reading »

Comments: Comments Off | Trackback

Save & Share: Digg Facebook Reddit Stumble it! Twitter

New biography of Ida Craddock to be published by Weiser

By | November 12, 2010 | Print This Post | E-mail This Post | 7 Comments

Sexual Outlaw, Erotic Mystic: The Essential Ida Craddock, written by Vere Chappell, with a forward by Mary K. Greer, will be released in December by Weiser Books.

Not just a biography, in Sexual Outlaw, Erotic Mystic the author has compiled  “the most extensive collection of Craddock’s work including original essays, diary excerpts, and suicide letters”.

The keywords associated with this book are hot: “Sex, Magick, Aleister Crowley, Orgasms, Erotic Dances, Angelic Beings, Revolutionary Activism, Liberation, Persecution, Defiance, and Suicide.” Intense.

From the book’s description on the publisher’s website: Continue reading »

Sexism in tarot? Not how I read

By | September 3, 2010 | Print This Post | E-mail This Post | 8 Comments

Washroom Fe/MaleI have to call out Barbara Moore for a recent essay in the Llewellyn Journal titled “Gender and Age in Tarot Cards“.

Longtime readers can probably guess where this is heading, sexism in occulture is something we’ve looked at before, and in Moore’s essay it rears its ugly head once…more. (Sorry.)

Moore begins by acknowledging that, in her view, tarot is based on archetypes which are “not too many steps removed from stereotypes”, and further,  “our” (I’ll deal with this in a sec) “history and our culture [sic] have created stereotypes of masculine and feminine behavior, energy, and characteristics”.

We then get the typical (read: sexist) breakdown of these characteristics:

A female figure represents what we think of as feminine qualities, such as nurturing, passiveness, receptiveness, and integrated worldviews. A male figure represents what we think of as masculine qualities, such as leadership, assertiveness, activeness, and linear thinking. We know that actual men and women have a combination both feminine and masculine qualities.

If you acknowledge upfront that this has no basis in reality, why continue to perpetuate stereotypes? It quite simply doesn’t make any sense.

Further, “our” history and culture also includes things like feminism, gender equality and evolving gender studies. This has had a far greater impact on my life than outdated notions that I should be regarded as (mystically!) passive. To ignore that “our” society’s views on sex and gender have changing significantly over the past two hundred years is a disservice to all of us.

I reject this interpretation of “feminine” and “masculine” qualities in the tarot. If, for example, the Emperor is to represent some of the qualities identified above, such as leadership, assertiveness and linear thinking, I think we can do quite well with this as it stands without introducing some inaccuracy about this being (esoterically!) “male” behaviour.

What is really lost by reading this way? And how much more is gained?