Thoth Through A Klaiedescope Lens

[ravenest]

Hi Ravenest!
For me personally- I said in the beginning......


What was the artist's meaning in putting a family crest on the Sun? What meaning would I take from that?
The original painting that was not used showed what Crowley wrote as per previous posts. A sun. Below is a wall, in front of which, in a fairy ring, two children wantonly and shamelessly embrace.

That is not a wall visually- it is a band crown visually. The Fairies baffled me- within a ring they would not. Even Grigori saw it in a physical sense of circumcision. Now Grigori said ....and I can imagine a perverse joy being obtained by using the family crest in the pursuit of something his family would have disapproved of so vehemently.

So he did not free himself with his world view from his co-dependent attachment to the past? Why should I agree with someone who constantly acts out -Do what I say- not what I do. I grew up with that sort of hypocrisy.

Hey Ros ... we dont disagree THAT much. I too grew up with that. Please tell me where it isnt? I'd like to know. I like AC because he makes fun of it and exposes it ... in himself and others. I too have watched the parade of false gurus, sneaky teachers and molesting priests put in charge of our spiritual development. Sai-baba, guru maharaji blah- blah. Blavatski is probably the best example ... what a charlatan ... but she HAD something!!!

For me, myself alone, I am fairly PO'd with Harris for sycophancy. I actually thought her above petty ego stroking and was at pains to paint a vision.
So you and I will not agree it seems and so I leave this thread to those who wish to trot out Crowley thought- which was not the intent of the thread anyway. Consider those who have the Thoth, like I did and do and not the Crowley books and what you said......
AND a relief to encounter these teachings without the outward sniding pomposoty of many who profess occult knowledge and write those tedious books. It would seem with the Crest/Blazon the man himself held a certain pomposity. I agree he is not as tedious as Waite.

No we dont disagree that much at all.

 

[Grigori]

OH! I SO WANT to hear the answer on that one!

Well the lady drew the signs, so I guess that was the answer. Probably not the one you were wanting though

 

[ravenest]

Just thinking .... if part of this is for some to get to the artists intent ...

The artist is obviously Frieda but the artist of the whole deck and concept is AC ... he used Frieda for the actual end product art ... at his direction ... take this out, dont use that one, replace with this image. .... Okay, he was the ARTISTIC DIRECTOR then ?

But to look at the symbols and art (as it FINALLY APPEARS) is to look at the work of the artistic director ... and give his artist due credit. An artists working under an artistic director shouldnt refuse to use any image ... unless it destroys the work ... and in this case I dont think it did.

 

[ravenest]

Well the lady drew the signs, so I guess that was the answer. Probably not the one you were wanting though

No ... sigh. The answer would have probably been; "Just paint a NATURAL horoscope." (italics added )