Golden Dawn Thoth Color Scales Study Group - Introduction

Zephyros

As far as I know, the original color scales were devised by Mathers together with his artist wife Moina, and probably others fluent in color theory. DuQuette intimated that some of the colors were arrived at by astral projection, meditation (read:tripping out). Is there any source by Mathers himself explaining why those colors and not others were used?
 

Richard

I don't know whether this is relevant, but I read somewhere that the Mathers used Goethe's color theory rather than Newton's spectral theory. Goethe was more interested in the subjective impressions of colors than their objective physical characteristics.
 

ravenest

I don't know whether this is relevant, but I read somewhere that the Mathers used Goethe's color theory rather than Newton's spectral theory. Goethe was more interested in the subjective impressions of colors than their objective physical characteristics.

And that leads to Rudolf Steiner (who adopted the same color theory) and his 'astral' art (eg, colored drawings of things like 'nitrogen' ie, his artistic imaginative attempts to portray the energies behind chemical reactions in the plant kingdom - see his illustrations that go with his agricultural lectures {on the foundations of bio-dynamics} ). The Anthroposophical society also worked with color theory/therapy, projective geometry, co-masonry and our friend Frieda.
 

Richard

And that leads to Rudolf Steiner (who adopted the same color theory) and his 'astral' art (eg, colored drawings of things like 'nitrogen' ie, his artistic imaginative attempts to portray the energies behind chemical reactions in the plant kingdom - see his illustrations that go with his agricultural lectures {on the foundations of bio-dynamics} ). The Anthroposophical society also worked with color theory/therapy, projective geometry, co-masonry and our friend Frieda.
I sometimes wonder whether there is anything about Goethe that Steiner didn't admire. Of course, I'm probably in the same boat as Steiner with regard to Goethe.
 

Barleywine

I don't know whether this is relevant, but I read somewhere that the Mathers used Goethe's color theory rather than Newton's spectral theory. Goethe was more interested in the subjective impressions of colors than their objective physical characteristics.

This sounds a little like the conundrum about the sound of a tree falling in the forest. What objective reality does color have that would make much difference to human beings if we didn't have eyeballs to perceive it and brains to process and sort out its variations? Perhaps light-and-heat-related properties (reflection, absorption, etc.) but not much else that I can think of. I'm with Goethe.

(Regarding the tree, I would submit that there are physical vibrations that move through the atmosphere, but can we call it "sound" if it doesn't impinge upon eardrums before fading out?)
 

ravenest

How eye see it.

This sounds a little like the conundrum about the sound of a tree falling in the forest. What objective reality does color have that would make much difference to human beings if we didn't have eyeballs to perceive it and brains to process and sort out its variations? Perhaps light-and-heat-related properties (reflection, absorption, etc.) but not much else that I can think of. I'm with Goethe.

(Regarding the tree, I would submit that there are physical vibrations that move through the atmosphere, but can we call it "sound" if it doesn't impinge upon eardrums before fading out?)

Makes perfect sense to me ( "Mathers used Goethe's color theory rather than Newton's spectral theory. Goethe was more interested in the subjective impressions of colors than their objective physical characteristics." ) in that, magick / Mathers / Goethe is more interested in subjective IMPRESSION (i.e. the observer recieves an impression AND that impression trigggers an association {and perhaps a reaction/response} in the subject via the dynamics I outlined in posts above) as opposed to (an attempt) to objectivly, (using principles of 'modern' science {the non-hermetic type} ) observe the' scientific' phenomena.

It sounds pretty rediculous doesnt it? On one hand we have Goethe (the 'Hermeticist' )acknowledging the subjective nature of the observer and on the other, Newton the scientist claiming an objective view for the observer. Obviously both are observers and both will form a subjective view. But Newtons seems 'more' subjective as his eperiments were resticted to and limited by the narrow method of his experiments ie. observing how light behaves when travelling through a prism with one set beam length and one set focus point. Goethe observed light in a much larger feild by varing the beam, focus and media (not just prisms).

Perhaps Goethe was more of a 'scientific observer' than Newton was? People like Mathers and Steiner (and many others) agreed with Goethe's observations (they were not presented as theories or evidence) in that he seemed a better scientists and, at the same time, offered an Hermetic and natuarlistic approach?

Regarding same tree; Newton / 'objective' science would measure and record the physical vibrations moving through the atmosphere with an apparatus 'outside' of his own nervous system to show that the 'sound' had an objective existance and he would make further experiments to discover the nature of those vibrations while Mathers / Magic would observe (and catagorise) the effect the 'sound' had on the psyche of the subjective observer.

But who understands the nature of light anyway? - Well .... aside from King Krimson :)
 

Richard

It is not generally known that in addition to being a brilliant mathematical physicist, Newton also was a dedicated alchemist and bible scholar. He believed that his scientific discoveries were revealed to him by a higher supernatural power. His theory that color is transmitted by certain frequencies of light is correct and is the basis of things like color TV, movies, photography, and modern printing techniques. It also inspired many artists of the impressionist period.
 

Zephyros

But the scales aren't meant to accurately portray the "true" colors, which don't, strictly speaking, exist on this plane, but merely to serve as an X factor to us lowly humans. Even by their own admission, the tables don't portray the "Limitless Light" (the purest they get is the unportrayable "brilliance" of the King scale) but a representation of a representation.

I have often heard people on LSD "hear" color and "taste" sound, although my own limited experience in the area showed no such results, unfortunately (although colors did seem "newer" somehow, but that's a story for another time). It is highly probable Mathers experimented with such things, and that the scales were influenced by these experiments.
 

Richard

....I have often heard people on LSD "hear" color and "taste" sound, although my own limited experience in the area showed no such results, unfortunately (although colors did seem "newer" somehow, but that's a story for another time). It is highly probable Mathers experimented with such things, and that the scales were influenced by these experiments.
Aldous Huxley in The Doors of Perception described some interesting color effects induced by mescaline. I never noticed colors being affected very much by hash or weed except for increased clarity. I only tried mushrooms a couple of times at night, and it made everything a ghastly orange, extremely unpleasant, and inducing a bit of paranoia.
 

ravenest

It is not generally known that in addition to being a brilliant mathematical physicist, Newton also was a dedicated alchemist and bible scholar. He believed that his scientific discoveries were revealed to him by a higher supernatural power. His theory that color is transmitted by certain frequencies of light is correct and is the basis of things like color TV, movies, photography, and modern printing techniques. It also inspired many artists of the impressionist period.

Well ... sure. Most 'great' scientists (back then - before modern science would not 'embarrass' itself with association to alchemy) did venture into other fields and , if not acknowledging a higher 'supernatural' power at least acknowledged or described a 'supra-intellectual' power - something above or beyond their 'normal everyday' consiousness. Great artists or inventors often describe a similar process, one example is Tesla. Newton's discovery focused upon the behaviour of light in certain mediums and within those mediums he was correct, and from that basic theory the technology (and art) developed. But Goethe observed and postulated questions about light that came from observations he made and outlined in other areas (and again he never offered them as a theory) - but I am not aware of any inventions that developed from it :)

It seems Newton was saying 'light' is a blend of those frequencies between the infrared and ultraviolet and color is specific groups of those frequencies (and I still dont get why some are listed as a negative frequency ??? ) and 'dark' is absence of light (or shadow) and Goethe seems to be saying that light and 'dark' is a polarity of one thing, like electric charge or magnetism, posative or negative and their interaction as they pass through media causes colors generated by the two basic colors (not three) that come from that polarity.