[Aleister] Crowley

A REEVALUATION OF TI-IE LITERARY WORKS OF EDWARD ALEXANDER [ALEISTER] CROWLEY A Thesis Presented to The School of Graduate Studies Drake University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by Charles Nicholas Serra II April 1991 A REEVALUATION OF THE LITERARY WORKS OF EDWARD ALEXANDER [ALEISTER] CROWLEY by Charles Nicholas Serra Il Approved by Committee: ~~.;.,. Dean of the School of Graduate Studies Dedicated to four instrumental people: For Aleister Crowley, who quested after "the light that never shone on land or sea"; for B. H. who provided patronage and patience; for Grace Eckley, who managed to nurse me through; and for L. L., "my Gitana, my Saliya," who has all the answers I lack, now in the ineffable. Unpublished Copyright. all rights reserved. 1991 1 A REEVALVATION OF THE LITERARY WORKS OF EDWARD ALEXANDER [ALEISTER] CROWLEY Table of Contents Page Abstract ., . ............. ..... ... .......... u Section One: Yeats and the Golden Dawn . Section Two: Augoeides, Maturity and Mysticism. ...... .. ..... 17 Section Three: Literary Decline, the War Years 36 Works Consulted. ...... ...... .. ........................... 44 Notes. .......... ....... ............ 49 Textual Appendix. ......................................... IA 11 A REEVALVAnON OF THE LITERARY WORKS OF EDWARD ALEXANDER [ALEISTER] CROWLEY Abstract For the last fifty years the poetry and prose of Edward Alexander [Aleister] Crowley (1875-1947) has been systematically ignored by scholars and critics on the narrow grounds that it deals with the occult sciences, is pornographic, or simply because detractors did not agree with Crowley's personal philosophy or life. Since the mid 1970's, however, academics have become increasingly interested in the mystical and occult content of William Butler Yeats's poetry, praising it for the same characteristics which have always been labeled "defects" in Crowley's work. Section One, "Yeats and the Golden Dawn," describes the formative matrix to which both men belonged, and to a certain extent their relations with each other as members of an esoteric fraternity. It comes as no surprise that the magical system of the Golden Dawn shaped the poetry of both; however, one finds that the mystical content is much more pronounced in Crowley's poetry as typified in six pieces from this period of his life. Among these also is one which has traditionally been considered a detraction due to its "pornographic" content. A close examination is given to the topics of sex and mysticism as Crowley perceived them. Section Two, "Augoeides, Maturity and Mysticism," explores and analyzes how Crowley advanced on his own after the original Golden Dawn split into various schismatic subgroups, again as typified by six works of poetry and prose. Though iii the emphasis is on Crowley's maturation as both a poet and an adept, so that the thread of symbolism from the Golden Dawn forms a basis for comparison, other experimental pieces which are of only marginal magical significance are considered in order to portray the breadth of his interests. Section Three, "Literary Decline, the War Years," focuses on the work which Crowley did at the end of his life, and how he was influenced by the trend of world events to write in "popular" forms. It further traces the germ of the Golden Dawn magical system through the permutations of Crowley's own "magickal" belief, and gives a picture of the poet as he was at the end of his life. My thesis suggests, quite simply, that Crowley was a poet whose work demands a critical reappraisal, If modern critics still used the mores of Victorian culture as a yardstick to judge the "worth" of a piece of writing, then perhaps this would not be necessary. That this measure is not still in use is evidenced by the recent trends in Yeats scholarship. This being the case, it is obvious that Crowley's writings should be given more than a passing glance. The question of which of the two is better is immaterial to the discussion; if one applies a new standard, as has been done with Yeats and his occult interests, then all who fit under its aegis deserve like treatment. Section One Yeats and the Golden Dawn Perhaps the most debated question that faces the critic of today is "Which texts shall be accepted into the canon and which shall be relegated to the apocrypha?"1 David Richter has pointed out that out of the whole body of the canon of literature, evaluations are constantly changing; there are phases, so that writers such as Longfellow and James Russell-classics to the pre-World War II generation-are virtually unknown to students entering American schools today. Despite this apparent openness to change, the writings of the late Victorian poet and novelist Edward Alexander [Aleister] Crowley (1875-1947) have been neglected and/or ignored by serious modern critics in the nearly forty-five years since his death. A survey of eighteen representative works throughout his early association with Yeats, his middle period of maturity and mysticism, and the literary "decline" of the war years will help to clarify the merits of Crowley's literary contributions. Crowley's main obstruction to recognition comes from the fact that he has been seen, by critics, both his contemporaries and those of a later generation, as the most infamous "magician" of modern times. Thankfully, this stigma is being slowly removed by serious scholars; however, at this point, investigation of the "occult" and its place in art concerns those figures like William Butler Yeats, who already occupy a place in the canon. Statements such as this by William H. O'Donnell abound: "Today, most readers are willing to admit the existence of Yeats's interest in ritual magic, even though they only vaguely understand the implications of that admission,"? or this by Curtis B. Bradford: I said next that my work Ion Yeats's manuscripts] had forced me to discard as untenable the widely accepted notion that Yeats's esoteric interests were, 2 so to speak, the price we had to pay for his poetry; that though I could not yet define the relationship between the poetry and the esoteric studies, I was now convinced that the two were utterly involved together and could not be separated.l Modern scholars have gotten away from the so-called traditional critiques of poetry which rigidly define what does and does not constitute art on the basis of content, message, and the "inspiration of the Muse." These were the prevailing judgmental criteria when Yeats was accepted into the canon; however, as times have changed, readers must recognize that he has since been canonized for a different (but interlinking) reason: his attempt to merge art and magical adeptship, As one must concede that Yeats has been canonized for this specific reason by a widening group of critics, it is not too much to expect then that Crowley might be at least looked at in an unprejudiced light for the same reasons. Also, since Yeats and Crowley were both members of the same esoteric Rosicrucian fraternity, it seems that the surge of interest in Yeats and his occult studies is a perfect jumping off place for the modern critic of so-called "borderline" areas." Laurence Fennelly remarks: When the young W. B. Yeats joined several mystical orders in the 18805 and 18905, it is doubtful if many eyebrows were raised [His] involvement with the occult was dictated by the spirit of the age .. .. Many persons of all classes were swept up by the occult revival that occurred during the last years of the nineteenth century; this was part of the inevitable reaction against the rationalism and materialism of the Victorian culture.> 3 AU this is in spite of the blatant bias against Crowley's involvement with mystical orders. Some of the better known personalities with whom Yeats and Crowley mingled as members of the Golden Dawn were Mrs. Constance Mary Wilde, Florence Emery (an actress and mistress of Bernard Shaw), Maud Gonne, the novelist Violet Tweedale, possibly Sax Rohmer, and Annie Horniman, patron of the Abbey Theatre. None of these people are remembered primarily as practicing occultists, Yeats included. Indeed, O'Donnell notes of Yeats's work The Speckled Bird that In comparison with the vast array of symbols that Yeats encountered in occult texts and rituals, he made public use of very few. and many of those he did use are confined to incidental details that are either self- explanatory or easily accessible in non-occult traditions. The process of selection was so random that the individual items cannot be combined into a significant, comprehensible aggregate.v Despite this paucity of usage, however, one is constantly finding lauds given to him, as in the following statement by Reynolds and O'Driscoll: It is no small part of the measure of Yeats's genius that he persisted, against the intellectual current of his day, in exploration and experiment within a great tradition that, for three centuries, had had only a su bterraneous Ii fe.7 art Aleister Crowlev. conducted his own researches into a meldinz~ of with adeptship; in regard to the depth of his investigation and persistence against contemporary feelings, he far outshines Yeats. Crowley has been systematically vilified and shelved for the same reasons for which others have been awarded 4 laurels. John Symonds, writer of the most well-known biography of Crowley, has totally dismissed the worth of his poetry in saying, "He was not a great poet, although he wrote a few good poems," though the reason he is not a great poet is given as "In most of his verse there are rarely found those strains which result from a surrender to the poetic moment; instead, he mainly harnessed his talent to his occult interests ..

Load more