Crowley's art

rogue

I was just searching the internet for the artwork of Aleister Crowley, but the search only yielded one decent result:
http://www.simoniff.com/muse/occult_art.html

Does anybody know a better link where we can get a look at more of his pictures?
 

Ross G Caldwell

lampkin said:
I was just searching the internet for the artwork of Aleister Crowley, but the search only yielded one decent result:
http://www.simoniff.com/muse/occult_art.html

Does anybody know a better link where we can get a look at more of his pictures?

The very best place to go to is the Aleister Crowley Society at LAShTAL.com
http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/module-pnCPG.phtml

the third section to the right is "Art by Aleister Crowley." They have 44 images, most can be viewed quite large.

The homepage is
http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/

The Simon Iff page you found is made by a member of LAShTAL who is also a collector of AO Spare and Crowley.

Ross
 

kwaw

There is also the film by Kenneth Anger of an exhibition of Crowley art works called 'A man we would like to hang', however I've just fast forwarded through my copy and all the works in it appear to be available on the Lashtal site Ross has alreadt linked too (you will probably need to register to access but it is quick, free and easy to do so).

Kwaw
 

rogue

Thank you for the great link Ross. These images provide valuable insight loaded with personal "coincidences" and synchronicity.

That Anger film is also of interest Kwaw. It figures that he would do a film like that, being so involved in the apocalyptic mythology of the 60's.
 

ravenest

Do you like Crowley's artwork? I dont, I think it's terrible! Although I dont mind the 3 monks carring the dead goat in the snowstorm to somewhere.

Maybe I should check that site out - there has to be better stuff than that around by him?
 

frelkins

ravenest said:
there has to be better stuff than that around by him?

let me gently say that the consensus overall for decades has been that his true talent was at, um, chess. only the most ardent fans would have even passing interest in the, well, if i must call them that, sketches.
 

Debra

frelkins said:
let me gently say that the consensus overall for decades has been that his true talent was at, um, chess.

You crack me up Frelkins. I'm doing all those things that people do from laughing too much, rolling on the floor, losing bladder control, what else is there? I'm doing it.
 

Ross G Caldwell

ravenest said:
Do you like Crowley's artwork? I dont, I think it's terrible! Although I dont mind the 3 monks carring the dead goat in the snowstorm to somewhere.

At least his art reflects his philosophy of art.

"Art is to be studied for and by one's solitary self; any teaching soever is rank poison."
("Magick Without Tears", Letter 72 ("Education")(Falcon Press edition, (1982) p. 436))

And this from a Decatur, GA newspaper article about Crowley, undated but probably from the fall of 1918, titled "Poet-Painter Who Studied Magic Under Indian Savants Visits Atlanta." (Crowley was staying with William Seabrook and his wife Kate; see Symonds "The Beast 666" pp. 243-244 (= "King of the Shadow Realm" p. 240. Symonds notes this article and quotes another passage, but does not name the newspaper.)

Crowley recounts how he began to paint:

"As a change from supernatural to everyday things Mr. Crowley showed some of his paintings, but it wasn't such a change as that. As he explained recently in the New York Evening World, he is, in the way of painting, a 'subconscious impressionist.'

"When he came to New York in 1915, he established a radical magazine in Greenwich Village called the 'International.' But he couldn't find any artist who could draw the sort of covers he wanted.

"'I got so disgusted I decided to draw the covers myself,' he said. 'I'd never studied art and never painted a picture in my life. But I got so interested in the work that I decided to give up the editorship of the magazine and to go in for art.'

"'Whatever you do, don't call me a futurist or cubist. My art really is subconscious or automatic. I'll tell you why. When I found I couldn't paint a portrait, I didn't decide to go abroad and study for thirty or forty years.

"'Instead, I walked up to a blank canvas one day and, standing very close to it, I placed the wet brush before it and shut my eyes. I had no preconceived idea of what I was going to paint. My hand simply moved automatically over the canvas.

"'I don't know how long I worked in that subconscious way, but you can imagine my astonishment when I found I had painted a likeness of a friend whom I hadn't seen in many years. It was that person's dead soul I had painted. I have it around my studio somewhere.'

"He was referring to the painting."

The earliest dated indication I can find of Crowley doing artwork is the cover of the International, October 1917. It is a sketch of two nude women holding up the title banner "The International," signed "Clara Tise" (or Tige).

Ross
 

rogue

Now that I've seen it, I do like some of his art quite a bit for personal reasons: intertwined dreams, understandings, destinies and the like. His portraits are disturbingly ugly, but that's obviously on purpose. I like the landscapes and scenes he did, though he obviously didn't have a polished hand, I don't find that to be so important as having something to say. It's too bad he didn't paint his own tarot. Aren't you supposed to do that after achieving Adeptus Minor?
 

frelkins

lampkin said:
His portraits are disturbingly ugly, but that's obviously on purpose.

let me politely disagree. there is purposely ugly -- some picasso, some of the german expressionists, damien hirst -- and then there is the simply god-awfully untalented. alas, C falls into the latter category. but of course non-beauty must probably be in the non-eye of the non-beholder. :)

on the other hand, people say he was a fantastic mountain climber. let's be honest: his poetry was terrible too.

this is why frieda had to draw the tarot for him. not, alas, that she was much above the "lady illustrator" level herself. ;)