Crowley biographies. Just read Sutin...

Aeon418 said:

2000+ pages was the last I heard. That sounds very juicey to me. But that page count makes you realise what a hatchet job Symonds and Grant did!

Click to expand...

I'll wait to judge - the new format may be quite different. The Symonds and Grant edition is 42 lines per page, 10 to 15 words (75 characters) per line, so between 400 and 600 words per page - that's a pretty dense page.

I don't doubt that some interesting rambles have been abridged, but I doubt that more than half of what he wrote was.

Ross, this is a little off topic, but has the OTO's Crowley copyright expired? I've started seeing lots of non-OTO sanctioned editions of Magic in Theory and Practice and The Book of the Law just lately that leads me to believe it has.

Click to expand...

I don't know, to be honest. I don't think the US OTO's (Caliphate) copyright claims are de facto applicable in other countries. I don't know if those claims have been tested in a foreign court.

Breeze writes some things about copyright that seem a little odd to me. For instance, in the introduction to The Drug and Other Stories (Wordsworth, 2010), he says: "Wordsworth excels at affordable editions of public domain literature, but, whilst Crowley's works published before 1923 are public domain in America, in Europe the works authorised in his lifetime are in copyright through 2017, and his posthumous works through 2039." (p. xiv)

Those are bold statements. First, who in "Europe" claims Crowley's copyright?

Second, 2039 is 92 years after Crowley's death - I have never heard of such a copyright provision. "Posthumous" works? They may trickle out forever - how is there a pre-ordained limit on their copyrights?

It's murky, and the only way to settle it is to test it in court - something most potential publishers are unwilling to do.

Aeon418 said:

900 pages? My copy has 705 numbered pages. The text itself runs from page 1 to page 562. The remaining page count consists of notes, references, and the index.

Click to expand...

So my answer is, No, it's presently not as long as A Dance with Dragons' 1013 numbered pages. Any audio-book version would therefore probably be just over half as many CDs. Wonder who could be enlisted to read it? (Not that I think there is the remotest possibility of that happening . . . unless you know something I don't.)

Ross G Caldwell said:

Breeze writes some things about copyright that seem a little odd to me. For instance, in the introduction to The Drug and Other Stories (Wordsworth, 2010), he says: "Wordsworth excels at affordable editions of public domain literature, but, whilst Crowley's works published before 1923 are public domain in America, in Europe the works authorised in his lifetime are in copyright through 2017, and his posthumous works through 2039." (p. xiv)
.

Click to expand...

Dwtw

I believe Breeze is right about the 2017 date; in Europe, copyright is generally life of the author plus 70 years.

The 2039 date seems a little odd at first, as it is not related to his lifetime, but 'works authorised by Crowley to be published, but which were not published until after his death', would have been subject to the old rule, which was 50 years after first publication (regardless of year of death).

I quote someone from another forum on this point:

"The 50 year rule was changed in the 1988 copyright act. From 1 August 1989, unpublished works only have copyright for lifetime+70 years. But there is a fifty year transition period. For unpublished works by authors who died before 1969, the copyright expires at the end of 2039."

So by 2039, ALL authors will be subject to the 'lifetime + 70' rule, regardless of the date of publication.

There's a flowchart here, it pertains to the UK but I think it's basically true of the EU as well:
http://www.museumscopyright.org.uk/private.pdf

From this I gather that the posthumous works of Crowley published from 1968 to 1988, (and I believe this would certainly include the Thoth Tarot deck), will have their copyright expire in 2018 to 2038, depending on the year of publication. Since the Thoth was first published in 1969, the copyright should expire in 2019.
The one thing about the Thoth, though, is that the card images were published in 1944; Weiser took this fact to insist that they could publish the deck in 1969, because they claimed that the Book of Thoth was in public domain in the US, and this included the cards. Llewellyn and OTO, rather than fight them on this point, decided to jointly publish the deck.

Interestingly, if this claim (that the BoT was a publication of the cards) is valid, then the copyright for the Thoth deck would actually expire *sooner*, because the copyright would lapse in 2017, which is 70 years after the author's death.

So in 6 years, or maybe 8 years at the most, it's a free-for-all with the Thoth deck.

anybody confused yet?

Litlluw
RLG

I'm not confused at all, I just have the same outstanding questions.

If Weiser actually used "public domain" as their argument, then it cannot be retroactive - it was public domain in 1969, and it is STILL public domain. They didn't buy the copyright from anyone - they claimed public domain.

The death+70 law is fine, but the issue is - WHO claims to be Crowley's copyright holder in Europe - all of it? AFAIK, there is no such person/entity. It is an area that remains untested in any court, probably because the stakes are not high enough.

I'll have to check into this "50 year transition period" - thanks for informing me of it. But it is still subject to the query above - who claims to hold the rights to Crowley's posthumous works in all Europe?

Edited: the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was passed in the UK, not in the EU.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents

So any of Crowley's unpublished works that are published in the UK will be protected in the UK until 2039 (benefitting what copyright holder I don't know, but surely nobody related to Crowley), but for the rest of the EU it has not been tested, and for the rest of the world probably is irrelevant.

The thing about the new editions that are being released is that they are not exactly new. All of them seem to be photo-facsimile reprints of the original publications, just like the current Weiser edition of, The Book of Thoth.

I've seen a copy of, Magic in Theory and Practice, that claims to be a facsimile of the 1929 edition. And a copy of, Book 4 (Parts 1 & 2), that is a facsimile of the 1913 edition. But surely these are still covered by the OTO's copyright?

Has the OTO decided it's not worth the hassle to enforce their copyright anymore? Or has a loop-hole been found?

Edit: These editions are on sale in the UK and USA.

From Sutin to Kaczynski

Well I have now read the first five chapters of Perdurabo and have just started Chapter 6 which I think is going to be about the O.T.O.

It really is very different from Sutin, much ampler in its vision, more entertaining and up to date in its references. Very readable and filled with detail. It was quite difficult for me to get excited about Crowley's early poetic writings and Mountaineering but in this book, there is invariably some fascinating detail which keeps you reading.

The first chapter (about the ale brewing family history and railways) was really very dull indeed, but necessary. One always hopes that biographies won't start off with the great great grandfathers but they always do. However, I dutifully read it. The chapter about the Book of the Law and the happenings in Cairo is such a moving episode I find, the way one feels that Rose almost slipped into this (both trance and marriage) rather unwittingly. But the creation of the Book of the Law reads like the creation of any great masterwork. The poetry of the accidental. You feel that it so nearly might not have happened.

The only problem with the book is that it is mighty heavy. Really heavy to sit on the beach holding this book in your lap and trying to get comfortable. I was thinking this morning; "how wonderful it would have been if this biography had been issued in 5 seperate volumes!"

But like all great biographies it uplifts me, makes me realise what dedicated humans can achieve when they go against the grain, and just not care about social mores. My inner Wanderlust is revived reading about Crowley and his adventures.

And then you wonder - invariably (or is it wrong to?)- did all this stuff happen? Did he really master invisibility and manage to flee that scuffle in Egypt, did he really stroll through Mexico city outlandishly dressed and not be seen because he invoked invisibility? Did astral light really descend in the great chamber? And that episode of figures materialising in smoke? And - let's face it - the messages through Rose and Aiwaas in Cairo. I am endlessly fascinated by this. Drugs? How much of his magical achievements are we right to really doubt? It is curious - and admirable - how Kaczynski simply relates and doesn't judge...

Are we allowed to ask here; how much do we really believe?

Ross G Caldwell said:

I'm not confused at all, I just have the same outstanding questions.

If Weiser actually used "public domain" as their argument, then it cannot be retroactive - it was public domain in 1969, and it is STILL public domain. They didn't buy the copyright from anyone - they claimed public domain.

The death+70 law is fine, but the issue is - WHO claims to be Crowley's copyright holder in Europe - all of it? AFAIK, there is no such person/entity. It is an area that remains untested in any court, probably because the stakes are not high enough.

I'll have to check into this "50 year transition period" - thanks for informing me of it. But it is still subject to the query above - who claims to hold the rights to Crowley's posthumous works in all Europe?

Edited: the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was passed in the UK, not in the EU.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents

So any of Crowley's unpublished works that are published in the UK will be protected in the UK until 2039 (benefitting what copyright holder I don't know, but surely nobody related to Crowley), but for the rest of the EU it has not been tested, and for the rest of the world probably is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Dwtw

Of course, my 'confused' comment was totally tongue-in-cheek; didn't mean to suggest that you are confused in any way, just that the subject itself is confusing.

I'm with you on wondering what entity claims Crowley's copyrights in Europe. I would *assume* that the OTO claims all copyrights to Crowley's materials, but do not know for sure.

As for Weiser claiming public domain for TBOT, that claim is certainly questionable, but you're right, IF it were true, then it would still be true, and thus no one has ever had copyright on the Thoth deck. I find that a bit hard to believe. also, AC did not own full copyright to the book and cards in the first place; Frieda Harris owned a third. If Frieda left her portion of the copyright to Gerald Yorke, he may have ceded it to OTO, but I've never seen any proof for that, or claim to it. Of course, AGMuller can claim copyright to *their* printing of the deck, but that would not exclude others from printing it as well; the sticking point is that they would need photos of the paintings, and the OTO is the only one to have ever had possession of such a thing. Thus a pirate edition has always just copied existing cards.

Thanks for the correction on the 1988 Act; I should have specified that it was in the UK,not the EU. But I was under the impression that the EU follows basically the same copyright durations.

I guess we should have created a separate thread for copyright issues?

Litlluw
RLG

Thanks for sharing and keep on please.
I was wondering about the mountaineering.

LeFanu said:

And then you wonder - invariably (or is it wrong to?)- did all this stuff happen? Did he really master invisibility and manage to flee that scuffle in Egypt, did he really stroll through Mexico city outlandishly dressed and not be seen because he invoked invisibility? Did astral light really descend in the great chamber? And that episode of figures materialising in smoke? And - let's face it - the messages through Rose and Aiwaas in Cairo. I am endlessly fascinated by this. Drugs? How much of his magical achievements are we right to really doubt? It is curious - and admirable - how Kaczynski simply relates and doesn't judge...

Are we allowed to ask here; how much do we really believe?

Click to expand...

I asked once and nobody bit my head off.
For me it is like the Santa Claus syndorome. I kind of want to believe. Just in case my pentagrams can actually flame someday. It's about the possibilities for me.


AW

Aeon418 said:

The numbers are the exact degree within each sign that tradition says the planets are exalted. Using Aries as our example again we see that the Sun is exalted in the 19th degree of Aries. From a Tarot perspective that bit of trivia is of no great importance, other than it lies within the second decan of Aries which is attributed to the 3 of Wands.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I am exploring astrology away from tarot some, so this helps.

AW

Barleywine said:

Be careful what you wish for, I noticed yesterday that the audio-book version of Dances with Dragons has 38 CDs. If Perdurabo is anything approaching its 900+ pages, you'd be in for a looonng listen.

Click to expand...

So, is it like Book Four big? My book stand won't hold Book Four. None of the bookstores carry it around here and I can't tell from Amazon.

But thanks to Le Fanu, I might have to get a sturdier book stand.

AW