Tuesday, July 13, 2010

a book review

So over the long weekend at my sister-in-laws wedding, I read a book, well two actually. The one I wanted to talk about tonight is "Magical use of Thought Forms" by Dolores AShcroft-Nowicki and J.H. Brennan. I knew that these two were Cerimonial Magicians. I have always been curious about thought forms. I have done some reading about them on the internet and tried an exercise or two. What these two had to say was very enlightening and thought provoking. It is well written. However the firs half of the book is all about stories that prove the whole point of thought forms, but in a way that isn't always made clear to the reader. I found myself asking...why am I having to read this story? I don't see how a story about people who thought they were wearwolves has any thing to do with it. In time the book gets around to instructing what to do in the Astral plane to build thought forms. However the book is completely lacking in any explanation on HOW TO GET TO THE ASTRAL IN THE FIRST PLACE. The authors at least have the decency to pretty much come out and say we expect you to know how to get there without us telling you, but yet never quite say it. The book takes you through a series of exercises. These were all well and good until I get to the one about creating "god forms", such as Artemis, or appolo or maybe Lugh, or the morrigan, and then putting your consciousness inside it and acting a god. This is however closely followed by a warrning to NEVER do this with an angel, as angels are much too powerful and will some how mess you up....excuse me? what did I just read? Really? Uhm...it's ok to pretend to be a greek god, but not an angel? uhm....ok some one hasn't been paying attention to the greek myths latel now have they? In fact, I don't know about you dear reader, but I would consider it the hight of folly to impersinate a god. Just sayin. Not only that, but as a pagan, I find it rather insulting to insinuate the idea that my gods, the gods I worship and pray to. The gods that speak to me and help me day to day are some how impotant in this? That they are some how less potent then mere angels? Wow. I realize many Cerimonial Magicians are christians, but to be so blatently callus toward others gods. I found it a huge slap in the face and almost put the book down there. I guess I expected more from Cerimonials. I did persist and push through the book. I did learn some things here and there, but nothing earth shattering. Though the book is titled magical use of thought forms when it's all said and done, after 203 pages I can tell you only two uses for thought forms. 1. as a means to be a memory aid, and 2. as a way to create a guardian for a sacred space. As a non-sequater there is an entire detailed chapter on how to create a familier and curses. Oh and another part I feel is note worthy is how the authors go into detail on how to create an elemental guardian but in the very begging tell you they don't recomend it. Then go on to tell you how to create an "angelic" guardian which of course they recomend. In the end, if your a pagan, or a shaman, don't bother with this book. If I wanted to spend $17.00 just to be pissed off and annoyed, I'd take my wife to see a sparkly vampire teenage angst movie...at least I'd have the chance to get laid in the end.


  1. LOL

    CM is very guilty with that whole idea of "no further explanations". In my opinion its a tool to #1) make you dig deeper for the information rather than handing it to you on a silver platter and thereby, empowering you #2) to provide for a means of, once you do find information, to figure out what's right for you because you can make an educated decision.
    The "no further explanation" still pisses me off though.
    Christians are just callous and hypocritical in the first place (its their illness :))so I keep that in mind when I read Christian CM stuff.

    Which brings me back to the angel magick. I feel a particular affinity to angels in general and they are not just a christian construct. they have been prevalent in many societies and religions. Are they better? I answer that question from my heart with a resounding, "No", they are just different. I dont feel a particular affinity to any of the celtic gods but thats me. I cannot relate to them. Its sorta like disliking the color blue but loving the color purple. Blue is not bad, its just you wont wear it when you go out on that date with your wife and even if you did wear blue, you'd probably still get laid...

  2. I keep hearing how angels are not just a judeo christian construct, and yet, never once has any one shown me anything that has angels outside of a judeochristian construct! PLease..Where's the beef?!

  3. ...okay, now that sounds like a challenge! so how do you define an angel so I can limit the beef to just a few examples :)

  4. Angel
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
    This article is about the spiritual beings. For other uses, see Angel (disambiguation).

    Angels are messengers of God in the Hebrew Bible (translating מלאך), the New Testament and the Quran

    and from Dictionary.com:

    one of a class of spiritual beings; a celestial attendant of god. In medieval angelology, angels constituted the lowest of the nine celestial orders (seraphim, cherubim, thrones, dominations or dominions, virtues, powers, principalities or princedoms, archangels, and angels).
    2. a conventional representation of such a being, in human form, with wings, usually in white robes.
    3. a messenger, esp. of God.
    4. a person who performs a mission of God or acts as if sent by God: an angel of mercy.