The "Mt. Shasta People," California forklore

[David M. Silver]

This is edited by me from a folklore website someone I know brought to
my attention: http://www.siskiyous.edu/shasta/fol/lem/index.htm


Perhaps the most popular example of Mount Shasta lore, and a legend
involving the first claim by non-Native Americans for a spiritual
connection with the mountain, concerns the mystical brotherhood believed
to roam through jeweled corridors deep inside the mountain.

According to William Miesse, author of _Mount Shasta: An Annotated
Bibliography_,

In the mid-19th Century paleontologists coined the term "Lemuria" to
describe a hypothetical continent, bridging the Indian Ocean, which
would have explained the migration of lemurs from Madagascar to
India. Lemuria was a continent which submerged and was no longer to
be seen. By the late 19th Century occult theories had developed,
mostly through the theosophists, that the people of this lost
continent of Lemuria were highly advanced beings. The location of
the folklore 'Lemuria' changed over time to include much of the
Pacific Ocean. In the 1880s a Siskiyou County, California, resident
named Frederick Spencer Oliver wrote _A Dweller on Two Plants_, or,
_The Dividing of the Way_ which described a secret city inside of
Mount Shasta, and in passing mentioned Lemuria. Edgar Lucian Larkin,
a writer and astronomer, wrote in 1913 an article in which he
reviewed the Oliver book. In 1925 a writer by the name of Selvius
wrote "Descendants of Lemuria: A Description of an Ancient Cult in
America" which was published in the Mystic Triangle, Aug., 1925 and
which was entirely about the mystic Lemurian village at Mount
Shasta. Selvius reported that Larkin had seen the Lemurian village
through a telescope. In 1931 Wisar Spenle Cerve published a widely
read book entitled _Lemuria: The Lost Continent of the Pacific_ in
which the Selvius material appeared in a slightly elaborated
fashion. The Lemuria-Mount Shasta legend has developed into one of
Mount Shasta's most prominent legends" (1993; 136).

According to Michael Zanger, author of _Mt. Shasta: History, Legend,
Lore_ (Celestrial Arts Press, 1992), Frederick Spencer Oliver was a
Yrekan teen (Yreka is the name of a small town in northern California)
who claimed that his hand began to uncontrollably write a manuscript
dictated to him by Phylos the Thibetan, a Lemurian spirit (1993). Meisse
points out that Oliver's novel of spiritual fiction is "The single most
important source of Mount Shasta's esoteric legends. The book contains
the first published references linking Mt. Shasta to: 1) a mystical
brotherhood; 2) a tunnel entrance to a secret city inside Mount Shasta;
3) Lemuria; 4) the concept of "I AM"; 5) "channeling" of ethreal
spirits; 6) a panther surprise" (1993; 143). The author claims to have
written most of the novel within sight of Mount Shasta, and
autobiographical telling of the story from Phylos the Thibetan's point
of view is an interesting twist.

A few reproduced pages of text from Oliver's novel, including the
reference to the mystic brotherhood that lives amid "the walls, polished
as by jewelers, though excavated by giants; floors carpeted with long,
fleecy gray fabric that looked like fur, but was a mineral product;
ledges intersected by the builders, and in their wonderful polish
exhibiting veinings of gold, of silver, of green copper ores, and
maculations of precious stones" is included on this webpage
<http://www.siskiyous.edu/shasta/fol/lem/oliver.htm> (Oliver 1905; 248).

In 1908, Adelia H. Taffinder wrote an article, "A Fragment of the
Ancient Continent of Lemuria," for the Atlantic Monthly. In her article
she links the concept of Lemuria to California, and Meisse proposses
that the article, "with its Theosophical teachings and extension of the
Lemurian Myth to California, may have been part of the research material
involved in the creation of the Mount Shasta Lemurian Myth as presented
by Selvius in 1925 and Creve in 1931" (1993; 147).

Selvius' 1925 two-page article, "Decendants of Lemuria" is, according to
Meisse, "the singlemost inportant document in the establishment of the
modern Mt. Shasta-Lemurian myth," so Selvius' full-text article appears
here: <http://www.siskiyous.edu/shasta/fol/lem/selvius.htm>.

Some of the descriptions of temples and holy men in Selvius' article are
interesting for not only "Lost Legacy" but for comparison with _Sixth
Column_.

Selvius claims that Professor Edgar Lucian Larkin viewed the Lemurian
site on Mount Shasta using his telescope: "Even no less a careful
investigator and scientist than Prof. Edgar Lucin Larkin, for many years
director of Mount Lowe Observatory, said in newspaper and magazine
articles that he had seen, on many occasions, the great temple of this
mystic village, while gazing through a long-distance telescope."

Although Selvius' article is the most historically interesting, Wishar
Spenle Cerve's 1931 _Lemuria: The Lost Continent of the Pacific_ is,
according to Meisse, "responsible for the legend's widespread
popularity" (1993; 146). Perhaps most intriging is Meisse's speculation
that "it appears from the similarity of material that "Selvius" and
"Cerve" were one and the same person" (1993; 145). Further muddying the
waters is Edward Stul's worth claim that "Wishar Spenly Cerve" is really
a letter-for-letter pseudonym for "Harve Spencer Lewis,"  first
Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order of North and South America.  Still,
it is Cerve's book, published by the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae
Crucis, that has provided the popular description of the Lemurians as
"tall, graceful, and agile," and as visitors that "would come to one of
the smaller towns and trade nuggets and gold dust for some modern
commodities" (250).

The idea of a lost continent (and the subsequent existence of Lemurians
on Mount Shasta), quickly became widely known, though perhaps not so
widely believed. In 1939, Mount Shasta botanist William Cooke was in a
Cincinati library when he was asked if he "knew anything about the
LeMurians." A few months later, in a Mount Shasta Herald article called
"Lights on Mt. Shasta: Evidences Discounted,"  Cooke questions the
legend that Larkin could have used a telescope to see any structures on
Mount Shasta. About a year later, in another Herald article, titled "Wm.
Bridge Cooke Discusses 'Lost Continent' Book," Cooke questioned the
possibility of a Lemuria or Mu (1941).

Today the belief that Lemurians inhabit the mountain is still very
popular, and anyone visiting the local bookstores will likely be
suprised by the plethora of texts on the subject.

Anyone feel there might be evidence or reason to believe that some of
this above may have provided Heinlein a good background source?

[jeanette]

No comment on the Heinlein connection, but several years ago we toured
the Shasta Caverns. I can't remember much--took a boat to some caves.
I have visited enough caves that I don't remember anything specific.
They must have been big as there was a crowd on the boat.

If the guy saw the building through a telescope many times, couldn't he
have identified where it was so people would know where to look?

Jeanette

[Ben Scaro]

Rosicrucian researcher Milko Boogaard states that 'Wishar Spenley
Cerve' and 'Frater Selvius' are only two of the pen names of Harvey
Spencer Lewis. Lewis, typically, led a merry and perhaps slightly
schizophrenic dance with the Mt Shasta myth, authoring pamphlets and
books and even instigating a film on Mt Shasta on the one hand, while
tut-tutting and strenuously denying responsibility for contributing to
the myth on the other.
He sent a copy of the AMORC publication "Lemuria,The Lost Continent of
the Pacific", to the Mt Shasta Chamber of Commerce, accompanied by a
letter, wherein the Imperator, with his usual mix of bombast and
puffery, and using what might be referred to as a 'Pontifical We'
opined loftily:

""We are oftentimes amused by the rumors that we originated these
tales or
merely accepted them as facts. The book merely relates these legends.
In the appendix of this book it refers to our sources of information
for the facts and details. We are no more responsible for the facts
than is the publisher who publishes Anderson's Fairy Tales or the
Arabian Nights."

Ben

[David M. Silver]

In article

Post by Ben Scaro
Rosicrucian researcher Milko Boogaard states that 'Wishar Spenley
Cerve' and 'Frater Selvius' are only two of the pen names of Harvey
Spencer Lewis. Lewis, typically, led a merry and perhaps slightly
schizophrenic dance with the Mt Shasta myth, authoring pamphlets and
books and even instigating a film on Mt Shasta on the one hand, while
tut-tutting and strenuously denying responsibility for contributing to
the myth on the other.
He sent a copy of the AMORC publication "Lemuria,The Lost Continent of
the Pacific", to the Mt Shasta Chamber of Commerce, accompanied by a
letter, wherein the Imperator, with his usual mix of bombast and
puffery, and using what might be referred to as a 'Pontifical We'
""We are oftentimes amused by the rumors that we originated these
tales or
merely accepted them as facts. The book merely relates these legends.
In the appendix of this book it refers to our sources of information
for the facts and details. We are no more responsible for the facts
than is the publisher who publishes Anderson's Fairy Tales or the
Arabian Nights."
Ben

Hi, Ben.

The work "Lost Legacy" by Heinlein seems somewhat unstudied to me
because in large part its setting depends on portions of our culture
that seem more akin to the esoteric than we are used to encounter in an
orthodox education, today. Some parts of Heinlein's body of knowledge
are, to use a phrase Jubal used to describe Valentine Michael, are as
"weird as snake suspenders."

The matter of paranormal or anomalous phenomena gone into by Charles
Fort is one. Fort himself is fascinating to study. One part that ought
to be paid more attention is the fact he was a satirist, like Heinlein.
Other areas of reference, sometimes very much related, are the writings
or beliefs of organizations such as the Rosicrucians, and other
believers in mysticisms. Where to start such a study is a little vague
to me.

Of course, all these bits of esoterica did provide Heinlein ready made
settings for works such as LL, and recognizing them for what they are
may be worthwhile as a beginning. The question is whether all it may
lead to is a headache for we apes if we try to push it beyond
identifying a ready made setting. Tylenol is cheap, and I'll try a
little pushing for fun, here.

[Ben Scaro]

Hi David

I have to preface anything I say that I know nothing of Heinlen.
However, more generally, the 20th century has an incredible amount of
literature heavily influenced by what what the likes of Clive James
refer to as 'occult mumbo-jumbo'.

James was talking of WB Yeats but his approach typifies the response
of so many commentators; that brusque, slightly embarrassed dismissal
of the occult dabblings (and they often did a lot more than just
dabble) of so many influential 20th century writers - from Huxley to
Tolkein to Philip K Dick. However to hurry past this area is to miss
out on exploring a huge part of what those writers regarded as their
pivotal influences.

It also leads to a sort of wilful blindness, wherein there's an
abdication of any ability to perceive the occult influences that those
writers channelled into popular culture.

In James case, in his essay on Yeats he bore the point home, going on
to quote a few lines from Yeats and to wonder at their beauty. If he
had not so hurriedly rushed past Yeats' occult side, he might have
understood that those lines were derived from the rituals of the
Golden Dawn order which was such a huge part of Yeats life. Those
rituals have been publicly available since 1937.

One of the problems is that the occult scene is honestly faring no
better than exoteric religions, this current period is a time of what
I call 'Iron in the Soul' for it, and there are very few within occult
movements with the calibre to convey occult themes to the outside
world, or to appreciate where those influences have ended up in the
outside world. They are therefore unable to address themselves to the
outside world in a relevant way. They either dumb down their teachings
and give them out to anyone, until their disciples drown in the stuff,
or they shrivel up and hide their pearls away till they turn to
paste.

You mention satire. Rosicrucianism is necessarily satirical at its
heart. It is a movement which started as a hoax by 17th century
theological students and the purest expressions of it always entail
aspects of play and make-believe, with the aim of altering mundane
reality. Borges' secret society in his short story, 'Tlon, Uqbar,
Orbius Tertius', a society which plants certain clues in order to
encourage the growth of a whole new world, is an expression of the
same idea.

Lewis's approach shows that he 'got it'. Plenty of his followers,
heirs, and especially his enemies, didn't.

Ben Scaro

Post by David M. Silver
Hi, Ben.
The work "Lost Legacy" by Heinlein seems somewhat unstudied to me
because in large part its setting depends on portions of our culture
that seem more akin to the esoteric than we are used to encounter in an
orthodox education, today. Some parts of Heinlein's body of knowledge
are, to use a phrase Jubal used to describe Valentine Michael, are as
"weird as snake suspenders."
The matter of paranormal or anomalous phenomena gone into by Charles
Fort is one. Fort himself is fascinating to study. One part that ought
to be paid more attention is the fact he was a satirist, like Heinlein.
Other areas of reference, sometimes very much related, are the writings
or beliefs of organizations such as the Rosicrucians, and other
believers in mysticisms. Where to start such a study is a little vague
to me.
Of course, all these bits of esoterica did provide Heinlein ready made
settings for works such as LL, and recognizing them for what they are
may be worthwhile as a beginning. The question is whether all it may
lead to is a headache for we apes if we try to push it beyond
identifying a ready made setting. Tylenol is cheap, and I'll try a
little pushing for fun, here.
--
David M. Silverhttp://www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29
Lt.(jg), USN, R'td- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

[David M. Silver]

In article

Post by Ben Scaro
Hi David
I have to preface anything I say that I know nothing of Heinle[i]n.

This makes it a little difficult to 'get down to cases,' as my father
might have said; but ... if I can try this without requiring too many
Tylenols.

Post by Ben Scaro
However, more generally, the 20th century has an incredible amount of
literature heavily influenced by what what the likes of Clive James
refer to as 'occult mumbo-jumbo'.

The essay-review of R.F. Foster's _W.B. Yeats: A Life: The Arch Poet_?
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200310/ai_n9333199/pg_1>

describing Yeats as "a great poet who was also the industrious adept of
batso mystical philosophy" and "he certainly added more than his share
to the flimflam cranked out by every tent-show seer from Madame
Blavatsky through Ouspensky and Gurdjieff to [Elron]" and so on?

Post by Ben Scaro
James was talking of WB Yeats but his approach typifies the response
of so many commentators; that brusque, slightly embarrassed dismissal
of the occult dabblings (and they often did a lot more than just
dabble) of so many influential 20th century writers - from Huxley to
Tolkein to Philip K Dick. However to hurry past this area is to miss
out on exploring a huge part of what those writers regarded as their
pivotal influences.
It also leads to a sort of wilful blindness, wherein there's an
abdication of any ability to perceive the occult influences that those
writers channelled into popular culture.

There's always the fact that failure to acquaint ourselves with the
basic furniture of the apartment will put us in the dark stumbling over
footstools when we try to navigate our way through the rooms the author
created.

Clive evidently doesn't have much furniture in the rooms of his mind.
and assumes no one else does, either. His loss.

Post by Ben Scaro
In James case, in his essay on Yeats he bore the point home, going on
to quote a few lines from Yeats and to wonder at their beauty. If he
had not so hurriedly rushed past Yeats' occult side, he might have
understood that those lines were derived from the rituals of the
Golden Dawn order which was such a huge part of Yeats life. Those
rituals have been publicly available since 1937.

In Yeats' poetry I suspect there a lot from the occult scene to gloss in
his works. The depth of his involvement makes it essential to have some
knowledge. Heinlein might be a bit more obscure in references, but I
doubt any detectable references to the occult or esoteric are merely
pistols hanging on walls in the first act, never to be used, to use a
playwright's image we discussed about a week ago in another thread.

Post by Ben Scaro
One of the problems is that the occult scene is honestly faring no
better than exoteric religions, this current period is a time of what
I call 'Iron in the Soul' for it,

By that you intend to allude to a death in the soul, a la Sarte's view?

Post by Ben Scaro
and there are very few within occult
movements with the calibre to convey occult themes to the outside
world, or to appreciate where those influences have ended up in the
outside world. They are therefore unable to address themselves to the
outside world in a relevant way. They either dumb down their teachings
and give them out to anyone, until their disciples drown in the stuff,
or they shrivel up and hide their pearls away till they turn to
paste.
You mention satire. Rosicrucianism is necessarily satirical at its
heart. It is a movement which started as a hoax by 17th century
theological students and the purest expressions of it always entail
aspects of play and make-believe, with the aim of altering mundane
reality. Borges' secret society in his short story, 'Tlon, Uqbar,
Orbius Tertius', a society which plants certain clues in order to
encourage the growth of a whole new world, is an expression of the
same idea.

I always wonder whether there truly is an aim beyond hoax for the sake
of fun, or whether it's all simply hoax for some to-be-disclosed
ulterior purpose. Cults, for a time at least, support their evangelists
is pretty fair style, whether named John or Albert Gallatin Mackey or
David Koresh. At a certain range I become colorblind as to distinctions
between them, and whether what they espouse is religion, fraternity,
cult or speculative fiction (to refer to writers such as Borges). Still
the systems they create allow a wealth of allusions in literature.

Post by Ben Scaro
Lewis's approach shows that he 'got it'. Plenty of his followers,
heirs, and especially his enemies, didn't.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you posit C.S. Lewis got.

[Ben Scaro]

I'll have to read more about Heinlein. Is it possible he was a member
of Harvey Spencer Lewis' group (AMORC) ? You could -and can- join and
be a member via mail order - you got sent weekly lesson booklets, for
a fairly modest fee.

Many creative types were, from Walt Disney to L Ron Hubbard and I
believe Philip K Dick was for a while.

Yeats did join a number of things but the Golden Dawn he actually ran
for a few years. The order did certainly get into its share of
silliness, though.

I think there can be an aim to the hoaxing; or at least as regards
mystical leaders, they'd justify it by saying that they understand and
use the power of myth to convey 'essential truths'.

In HS Lewis' case, he wrote about the Rosicrucians as though they were
a huge worldwide secret society (at the time he started out various
strands of their tradition were just emerging after almost dying out
in the 19th century after the last hurrah of physical alchemy,
attracting hucksters like Cagliostro, gave the Rosicrucian name a
pretty shabby reputation.)

Despite having minimal links with any real, live inheritors of
Rosicrucian traditions - I think he met some and had a vision in their
presence - Lewis created an accessible and attractive myth for his
group and eventually got what he dreamed of- a large, worldwide order
with perhaps 100,000 members at its height. His order became
synonymous with the Rosicrucian name for 50 years or more. For members
monthly dues they got a decent serve of fairly basic mystical
techniques and some more dubious ones such as borrowings from
Blavatsky's 'Great White Brotherhood', though shorn of most of it's
bizzare root-race theories that would later be so popular among nice
folk like Goebbels and co. It looks to me like the Mt Shasta is
another myth similar to the Great White Brotherhood with their refuges
in Tibetan caverns.

This idea seems to have been a powerful myth that crossed over with
alarming ease into the political philosophies of the time, and even
some fairly serious artists like Nicholas Roerich and a lot of White
Russian emigres in particular brought into it - Roerich in particular
was an associate of HS Lewis though he never actually joined his
order. You might enjoy an excursion into Roerich's story as there
are many comparisons to be made with the Mt Shasta stuff:

http://www.harrimaninstitute.org/MEDIA/00747.pdf

I wouldn't call Lewis' group , AMORC, a cult - it didn't and doesn't
try to exercise the sort of control over its members that leads to the
negative connotations of that term, but it certainly has had members
for whom it's fulfilled that role in their lives.

These are the ones who don't get the essential 'joke' at the heart of
Rosicrucianism . . . the idea of hoaxing and playing in order to
create a new paradigm. For the camp followers, what was creative for
the founder, ie, playing at being 'Pope', gradually stiffens into a
rigid orthodoxy. I guess only one person can be pope at a time . . .

Ben Scaro

[David M. Silver]

In article

Post by Ben Scaro
I'll have to read more about Heinlein. Is it possible he was a member
of Harvey Spencer Lewis' group (AMORC) ? You could -and can- join and
be a member via mail order - you got sent weekly lesson booklets, for
a fairly modest fee.

Quite unlikely as to any formal membership. His estate-authorized
biographer of a work-now-in-editorial-process informs correspondents he
hasn't found from rather extensive life-long correspondence and personal
papers files any direct membership or association by Heinlein with any
magical (or 'magickal') or occult organization during the entirety of
his lifetime; but Heinlein had well-documented and known friendships and
warm associations with those (Hubbard, Jack Parsons) who did. Almost all
the information in the the novella "Lost Legacy," as well as stories
such as Magic, Inc., and other, both earlier and later stories, could
likely come from research both in libraries and from personal
acquaintances with people who were members of such societies -- i.e.,
his acquaintance with Jack Parsons was very well documented in his
correspondence, and he knew mystics from other hermetic disciplines as
well. One of Heinlein's best friends from the 1930s until his death was
a highly-regarded American Sufi; another associated with Freemasonry;
etc. For example, American Freemasons recognize pretty clearly a form
(fairly European in style, in fact) of their own ritual in the
initiations performed on protagonists in the serialized first
novel-length story Heinlein wrote, _"If This Goes On--"_, a tale of a
Second American Revolution fomented and sustained by an organization
Heinlein's characters call the Cabel that functions a great deal like
the 1770s-era Masonic Committees of Correspondence or, more to the point
or edge of the sword and knife, the Katipunan familiar to Masonic
historians from the revolutions of the Filipino people against Spain and
the United States. These items could have been found during any period
Heinlein wrote in public libraries fairly easily, without any friend
disclosing to Heinlein matter prohibited from revelation by any oath or
obligation.

As to the mail order lesson booklets from AMORC, even I recall the
advertisements in magazines and--forgive me--comic books and the inside
of matchbook covers, in the late 1940s and 1950s or even later.

One of Heinlein's own major and acknowledged literary influences, namely
James Branch Cabell, held membership in hermetic organizations from
about 1915 onward.

Post by Ben Scaro
Many creative types were, from Walt Disney to L Ron Hubbard and I
believe Philip K Dick was for a while.
Yeats did join a number of things but the Golden Dawn he actually ran
for a few years. The order did certainly get into its share of
silliness, though.
I think there can be an aim to the hoaxing; or at least as regards
mystical leaders, they'd justify it by saying that they understand and
use the power of myth to convey 'essential truths'.
In HS Lewis' case, he wrote about the Rosicrucians as though they were
a huge worldwide secret society (at the time he started out various
strands of their tradition were just emerging after almost dying out
in the 19th century after the last hurrah of physical alchemy,
attracting hucksters like Cagliostro, gave the Rosicrucian name a
pretty shabby reputation.)

I wondered whether you were referencing him rather than the better known
Lewis, C.S., who had some associations himself, although plainly he
turned away from them at the time of his reconversion.

Post by Ben Scaro
Despite having minimal links with any real, live inheritors of
Rosicrucian traditions - I think he met some and had a vision in their
presence - Lewis created an accessible and attractive myth for his
group and eventually got what he dreamed of- a large, worldwide order
with perhaps 100,000 members at its height. His order became
synonymous with the Rosicrucian name for 50 years or more. For members
monthly dues they got a decent serve of fairly basic mystical
techniques and some more dubious ones such as borrowings from
Blavatsky's 'Great White Brotherhood', though shorn of most of it's
bizzare root-race theories that would later be so popular among nice
folk like Goebbels and co. It looks to me like the Mt Shasta is
another myth similar to the Great White Brotherhood with their refuges
in Tibetan caverns.

The argument that Heinlein was writing about a Great White Brotherhood
in "Lost Legacy" (and a few other stories) has been advanced.

So you know, in the 1941 "Lost Legacy" (collected in _Assignment in
Eternity_ (Baen paperback, 4th ed. 2000, isbn 0-671-57865-0) an
organization pre-exists in/on Shasta. It comes in contact with the three
protagonists, a psychologist (named Philip Huxley[!]) on the teaching
staff of a Los Angeles university, a surgeon from its medical school
(named Coburn), and the psychologist's girlfriend-graduate assistant
(Joan Freeman, a perennial Ph.D candidate who together with Huxley is
studying paranormal phenomena which they call "metaphysics," e.g.,
telepathy, clairvoyance, levitation, hypnosis, "anything of that sort I
can find"), when the psychologist is prevented by his university's
president from continuing his quite fruitful research into "metaphysics"
by forcing him to take an academic leave until he agrees to discontinue
it, and declining to renew his contract when he refuses. The three take
an auto trip vacation to northern California and wind viewing Shasta,
whereupon the already-proven clairvoyant lady grad assistant is
compelled to climb the thing. They get caught in the same sort of sudden
snow storm John Muir found himself when he climbed it but rather than
locating and burrowing into the warm mud of a fortuitously located hot
springs to keep from freezing, Coburn slips on the ice and breaks his
leg, stranding them in the storm. While they argue about who goes for
help and who stays with Coburn, they are rescued by a tall, elderly man
wearing nothing but a light shirt who suddenly appears behind them in
the storm with a mane of white hair and bushy eyebrows who, it is later
revealed, calls himself Ambrose Bierce [!], even though he looks more
like Mark Twain. He hypnotizes Coburn with a glance and a word to
relieve the pain of the fracture, picks him up in arms like a child and
carries him off, the two others trailing behind also like children, to
the shelter of a strange room in the middle of living rock off a branch
in the trail that they hadn't noticed there when they passed that way
before.

The rest of the story consists of revelations to the three by the
inhabitants of this "Lost Horizon" sort of lamasery that the university
president and others are engaged in a ages-old conspiracy to keep
knowledge and ability to engage in "metaphysics" from mankind to enslave
them, a debate over whether these adepts should remain secluded as they
have in past ages, a decision against that, and the eventual
organization of a successful revolution that crushes the conspiracy and
frees humanity which advances to a higher state from which it leaves
earth behind, vacant for the next evolution.

The epilogue tells of an ape from ages in the future who climbs to that
same high space and there has headaches and a need for release from that
pain. [Hence, my allusions to Tylenol.]

Note: the date of publication. By November 1941, Heinlein pretty clearly
expected Pearl Harbor; he predicted an attack by the Japanese on the
weekend of December 7 in a letter that month to his ASF editor John
Campbell; moreover, the USS Rueben James, on convoy duty, was sunk by a
German U-boat the previous month. Written earlier (and published in
another magazine), "Lost Legacy" was created in a period of debate over
whether the United States (and the Navy to which Heinlein, a regular
officer, who expected a recall to some form of active duty despite his
state as a "cured" tuberculosis patient) should actively engage in the
ongoing World War II already broken out in Europe and China (or try to
continue to remain in its "lamesery" between the two oceans).

Post by Ben Scaro
This idea seems to have been a powerful myth that crossed over with
alarming ease into the political philosophies of the time, and even
some fairly serious artists like Nicholas Roerich and a lot of White
Russian emigres in particular brought into it - Roerich in particular
was an associate of HS Lewis though he never actually joined his
order. You might enjoy an excursion into Roerich's story as there
http://www.harrimaninstitute.org/MEDIA/00747.pdf

I probably will. The Internet is rather busy today, and excruciatingly
slow due to the holiday, so it may take me a day or so to get to it.

Post by Ben Scaro
I wouldn't call Lewis' group , AMORC, a cult - it didn't and doesn't
try to exercise the sort of control over its members that leads to the
negative connotations of that term, but it certainly has had members
for whom it's fulfilled that role in their lives.
These are the ones who don't get the essential 'joke' at the heart of
Rosicrucianism . . . the idea of hoaxing and playing in order to
create a new paradigm. For the camp followers, what was creative for
the founder, ie, playing at being 'Pope', gradually stiffens into a
rigid orthodoxy. I guess only one person can be pope at a time . . .

Unless one picks up and moves to Avignon and sets up a competing shop.

Post by Ben Scaro
Ben Scaro

[Ben Scaro]

Quite unlikely as to any formal membership. His estate-authorized

Post by David M. Silver
biographer of a work-now-in-editorial-process informs correspondents he
hasn't found from rather extensive life-long correspondence and personal
papers files any direct membership or association by Heinlein with any
magical (or 'magickal') or occult organization during the entirety of
his lifetime;

Ben: Well that would settle it. AMORC sends you thousands of bits of
paper, for an 'Invisible College' they seem to churn out reams of the
stuff !- and if he was in it, the biographer would have found
something.


but Heinlein had well-documented and known friendships and

Post by David M. Silver
warm associations with those (Hubbard, Jack Parsons) who did.

Ben: There's an interesting book called 'The Unknown God: WT Smith and
the Thelemites' that discusses that era though I don't recall Heinlein
being mentioned, not that it means much- the OTO magickal group in LA
were pretty promsicuous in all senses of the word and many people
passed through their world for a time.



Almost all

Post by David M. Silver
the information in the the novella "Lost Legacy," as well as stories
such as Magic, Inc., and other, both earlier and later stories, could
likely come from research both in libraries and from personal
acquaintances with people who were members of such societies -- i.e.,
his acquaintance with Jack Parsons was very well documented in his
correspondence, and he knew mystics from other hermetic disciplines as
well. One of Heinlein's best friends from the 1930s until his death was
a highly-regarded American Sufi; another associated with Freemasonry;
etc. For example, American Freemasons recognize pretty clearly a form
(fairly European in style, in fact) of their own ritual in the
initiations performed on protagonists in the serialized first
novel-length story Heinlein wrote, _"If This Goes On--"_, a tale of a
Second American Revolution fomented and sustained by an organization
Heinlein's characters call the Cabel that functions a great deal like
the 1770s-era Masonic Committees of Correspondence or, more to the point
or edge of the sword and knife, the Katipunan familiar to Masonic
historians from the revolutions of the Filipino people against Spain and
the United States.

Ben:
I don't know much of that but believe Jose Rizal was a Freemason.

'Avignon' in America's small but optimistic and expectant Rosicrucian
world of the early 20th century was Beverly Hall, PA, where resided
the group of HS Lewis' rival, Reuben Swinburne Clymer, and his group's
mythos is largely to do with the esoteric connections of Franklin,
Lafayette and other founding fathers etc. Mainly for reasons of
snobbery, Clymer and Lewis, both new kids on the block, wished to see
themselves as the inheritors of part of that tradition, and both of
them postured and huffed and puffed about the Rosicrucian influence on
the Revolution as though no one could ever doubt it at all!

Post by David M. Silver
As to the mail order lesson booklets fromAMORC, even I recall the
advertisements in magazines and--forgive me--comic books and the inside
of matchbook covers, in the late 1940s and 1950s or even later.

Ben: Don't worry on my account. I was in AMORC one time only and I
only stayed briefly. They have revised HS Lewis' lessons out of
existence now, sadly removing a lot of the colourful stuff such as his
interest in Lemuria. I've studied his lessons in another group and
they aren't bad at all, all things considered. While an incredible
charlatan when it came to what you might call historical truth, Lewis
had an intuitive knowledge of how to make mysticism of practical use,
and he was entirely shameless in advertising AMORC everywhere he
could. His European connections looked down their collective nose at
him for doing this, but could not help but note his success. So they
did what you might expect, blasting the American interloper for being
'too commercial' and 'not serious', then turned around and copied just
about everything he did.

Post by David M. Silver
The argument that Heinlein was writing about a Great White Brotherhood
in "Lost Legacy" (and a few other stories) has been advanced.

Ben:
In AMORC's case it lifted the GWB whole-cloth from Theosophy, even to
the extent of Lewis changing the name of one of the ascended masters
slightly to avoid copyright and other issues when he fell out with a
Theosophist in his group in the early years. Morya-El became El-Moria-
Ra! Madame Blavatsky must have had some smoke in her ears and
misheard the name obviously.

So Heinlein could have picked up that just as easily from the
Theosophical Society or one of its offshoots, or even Steiner's
group.

I am going to have to start reading him . . . I've never been much
into SF though I enjoyed Dick's 'The Man in the High Castle' a few
years back. The trouble was the cover of the Penguin edition had a US
flag with small swastikas replacing the stars . . . I was reading it
on a train in Germany and had to be kind of discreet!

Ben Scaro

[Bill Patterson]

�Quite unlikely as to any formal membership. His estate-authorized

Post by David M. Silver
biographer of a work-now-in-editorial-process informs correspondents he
hasn't found from rather extensive life-long correspondence and personal
papers files any direct membership or association by Heinlein with any
magical (or 'magickal') or occult organization during the entirety of
his lifetime;

Ben: Well that would settle it. �AMORC sends you thousands of bits of
paper, for an 'Invisible College' they seem to churn out reams of the
stuff !- �and if he was in it, the biographer would have found
something.
but Heinlein had well-documented and known friendships and

Post by David M. Silver
warm associations with those (Hubbard, Jack Parsons) who did.

Ben: There's an interesting book called 'The Unknown God: WT Smith and
the Thelemites' that discusses that era though I don't recall Heinlein
being mentioned, not that it means much- the OTO magickal group in LA
were pretty promsicuous in all senses of the word and many people
passed through their world for a time.
Almost all

Post by David M. Silver
the information in the the novella "Lost Legacy," as well as stories
such as Magic, Inc., and other, both earlier and later stories, could
likely come from research both in libraries and from personal
acquaintances with people who were members of such societies -- i.e.,
his acquaintance with Jack Parsons was very well documented in his
correspondence, and he knew mystics from other hermetic disciplines as
well. One of Heinlein's best friends from the 1930s until his death was
a highly-regarded American Sufi; another associated with Freemasonry;
etc. For example, American Freemasons recognize pretty clearly a form
(fairly European in style, in fact) of their own ritual in the
initiations performed on protagonists in the serialized first
novel-length story Heinlein wrote, _"If This Goes On--"_, a tale of a
Second American Revolution fomented and sustained by an organization
Heinlein's characters call the Cabel that functions a great deal like
the 1770s-era Masonic Committees of Correspondence or, more to the point
or edge of the sword and knife, the Katipunan familiar to Masonic
historians from the revolutions of the Filipino people against Spain and
the United States.

I don't know much of that but believe Jose Rizal was a Freemason.
'Avignon' in America's small but optimistic and expectant Rosicrucian
world of the early 20th century was �Beverly Hall, PA, where resided
the group of HS Lewis' rival, Reuben Swinburne Clymer, and his group's
mythos is largely to do with the esoteric connections of Franklin,
Lafayette and other founding fathers etc. �Mainly for reasons of
snobbery, Clymer and Lewis, both new kids on the block, wished to see
themselves as the inheritors of part of that tradition, and both of
them postured and huffed and puffed about the Rosicrucian influence on
the Revolution as though no one could ever doubt it at all!

Post by David M. Silver
As to the mail order lesson booklets fromAMORC, even I recall the
advertisements in magazines and--forgive me--comic books and the inside
of matchbook covers, in the late 1940s and 1950s or even later.

Ben: Don't worry on my account. I was in AMORC one time only and I
only stayed briefly. �They have revised HS Lewis' lessons out of
existence now, sadly removing a lot of the colourful stuff such as his
interest in Lemuria. �I've studied his lessons in another group and
they aren't bad at all, all things considered. �While an incredible
charlatan when it came to what you might call historical truth, Lewis
had an intuitive knowledge of how to make mysticism of practical use,
and he was entirely shameless in advertising AMORC everywhere he
could. �His European connections looked down their collective nose at
him for doing this, but could not help but note his success. So they
did what you might expect, blasting the American interloper for being
'too commercial' and 'not serious', then turned around and copied just
about everything he did.

Post by David M. Silver
The argument that Heinlein was writing about a Great White Brotherhood
in "Lost Legacy" (and a few other stories) has been advanced.

In AMORC's case it lifted the GWB whole-cloth from Theosophy, even to
the extent of Lewis changing the name of one of the ascended masters
slightly to avoid copyright and other issues when he fell out with a
Theosophist in his group in the early years. Morya-El became El-Moria-
Ra! �Madame Blavatsky must have had some smoke in her ears and
misheard the name obviously.
So Heinlein could have picked up that just as easily from the
Theosophical Society or one of its offshoots, or even Steiner's
group.
I am going to have to start reading him . . . I've never been much
into SF though I enjoyed Dick's 'The Man in the High Castle' a few
years back. �The trouble was the cover of the Penguin edition had a US
flag with small swastikas replacing the stars . . . I was reading it
on a train in Germany and had to be kind of discreet!
Ben Scaro- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Interesting that The Man in the High Castle should be the one you
recollect -- Dick told Heinlein that book was a tribute to him.

Confirming what David Silver passed on, I haven't been able to find
direct or indirect evidence of membership in any esoteric organization
for Heinlein, or even any possible mentor relationship that existed
for any length of time, though he had several acquaintances who were
associated with esoteric groups.

Of Rosicrucianism he made several comments over the years, mostly
dismissive; of AMORC specifically, he told a correspondent in 1958 "I
know nothing about AMORC. But I strongly doubt that they have any
verifiable truths which are not already widely known outside their
circle."

This subject (possible esoteric connections in Heinlein) was the
subject of my first research article for The Heinlein Journal ("The
Hermetic Heinlein" in the first issue. My conclusions in 1997 were
that the level of familiarity he shows with various esoteric strains
is a little greater than pure library research would account for, but
there are no definite markers that identify him with any specific
organization or tradition, though markers of 19th century hermeticism
(including a paraphrase-restratement of some Golden Dawn doctrines)
seems the strongest influence, used for more than ornamental purposes
in his writing. In most of the cases where he has to bring up a
creation myth, it is not the Judeo-Christian myth he uses (there are a
couple of prominent exceptions), but the hermetic creation story found
in The Divine Pymander. I also dealt with the subject with specific
reference to what he might have taken from Cabell in the 2000 Cabell
Prize essay "The Heir of James Branch Cabell," which is available on
the Commonwealth University of Virginia's Cabell LIbrary website.
There is no documentation on the point, but the familiarity he
casually displays with the "esoteric underground" of Los Angeles in
the 1930's suggets he could have had access to Manly P. Hall's
Philosophical Research LIbrary, which lay between his home in the
Laurel Canyon and the EPIC offices in downtown Los Angeles.

I didn't know abut the mail-order teaching of AMORC, but found it
curious. The best-studied of the 19th century hermetic traditions is
the Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor, because they taught by mail order
and there are several caches of their teaching documents in libraries
around the world. The HBofL is sometimes studied because of the input
of Beverly Paschal Randolph's "Mysteries of Eulis" in particular into
the (exoteric) sex radicalism of the late 19th century, which was
available, in the form of collections of Lucifer and The Dial and
other radical liberal publications coming out of Kansas during the
Comstock era, for the young.Robert Heinlein working at the Kansas City
Public Library. See also The Sex Radicals by Sears.

[Ben Scaro]

Hi Bill

I really *will* have to start reading Heinlein. He seems to be the
missing ingredient to the jigsaw, if you will.

I wonder if any AMORC members might have showed him their lessons.
The order of course tells you not to, but it would hardly be the first
time and one cannot expect too much when one is prepared to mail out
lessons to just about anyone for money.

The lessons are not the stuff of high occult magic or mysticism, given
they were designed to be used by individual practitioners in their own
homes, but they might have sparked a bit of interest. AMORC's books
though were for sale to the general public.

Heinlein was certainly right in his guess that, apart from Lewis and
his son's individual take on things, and what members added over the
years by way of lectures etc, you couldn't get anything in AMORC that
you could not get elsewhere. Its teachings are largely borrowed from
early 20th century publications on 'electrical psychology', yoga and
the New Thought movement. None of it is even very old, though Lewis
trumpeted his order as heralding from the time of Akenhaten. Some of
his material is plagiarised word for word from other sources such as
occult writer Franz Hartmann- Crowley complemented Lewis for this as
he thought making folk pay for the stuff was the only way of getting
them to read and apply it!

I think Manly Palmer Hall's PRS is a likely source. Hall was a good
deal more erudite than most AMORC people and its more likely that
Golden Dawn themed stuff and the Divine Pymander would have originated
from Hall rather than AMORC. AMORC didn't publish much in the way of
occult classics at all in the early days, it was aiming at a 'Readers
Digest' type level of reader. Another possible source might be Paul
Foster Case's Builders of the Adytum group which had bought a temple
in LA in 1943 on North Figueroa St; they were essentially a schism
from the Golden Dawn and certainly published the Divine Pymander.

Lewis's arch-rival RS Clymer claimed to be PB Randolph's successor but
in reality was not; he only went to the second degree in a Randolph
temple before leaving or being thrown out. However he bought
Randolph's archive from his widow and published much of Randolph's
work, allegedly editing the sex magic out (one wonders what of
interest would have been left.)

It is kind of puzzling, though if you feel Heinlein had something more
than just library research . . . he may have had an individual teacher
from one of the associates mentioned above.

Ben Scaro

Post by Bill Patterson
This subject (possible esoteric connections in Heinlein) was the
subject of my first research article for The Heinlein Journal ("The
Hermetic Heinlein" in the first issue.

[Bill Patterson]

Post by Ben Scaro
Hi Bill
I really *will* have to start reading Heinlein. �He seems to be the
missing ingredient to the jigsaw, if you will.
I wonder if any AMORC members might have showed him their lessons.
The order of course tells you not to, but it would hardly be the first
time and one cannot expect too much when one is prepared to mail out
lessons to just about anyone for money.
The lessons are not the stuff of high occult magic or mysticism, given
they were designed to be used by individual practitioners in their own
homes, but they might have sparked a bit of interest. �AMORC's books
though were for sale to the general public.
Heinlein was certainly right in his guess that, apart from Lewis and
his son's individual take on things, and what members added over the
years by way of lectures etc, you couldn't get anything in AMORC that
you could not get elsewhere. Its teachings are largely borrowed from
early 20th century publications on 'electrical psychology', yoga and
the New Thought movement. None of it is even very old, though Lewis
trumpeted his order as heralding from the time of Akenhaten. �Some of
his material is plagiarised word for word from other sources such as
occult writer Franz Hartmann- Crowley complemented Lewis for this as
he thought making folk pay for the stuff was the only way of getting
them to read and apply it!
I think Manly Palmer Hall's PRS is a likely source. �Hall was a good
deal more erudite than most AMORC people and its more likely that
Golden Dawn themed stuff and the Divine Pymander would have originated
from Hall rather than AMORC. �AMORC didn't publish much in the way of
occult classics at all in the early days, it was aiming at a 'Readers
Digest' type level of reader. �Another possible source might be Paul
Foster Case's Builders of the Adytum group which had bought a temple
in LA in 1943 on North Figueroa St; they were essentially a schism
from the Golden Dawn and certainly published the Divine Pymander.
Lewis's arch-rival RS Clymer claimed to be PB Randolph's successor but
in reality was not; he only went to the second degree in a Randolph
temple before leaving or being thrown out. However he bought
Randolph's archive from his widow and published much of Randolph's
work, allegedly editing the sex magic out (one wonders what of
interest would have been left.)
It is kind of puzzling, though if you feel Heinlein had something more
than just library research . . . he may have had an individual teacher
from one of the associates mentioned above.
Ben Scaro

Post by Bill Patterson
This subject (possible esoteric connections in Heinlein) was the
subject of my first research article for The Heinlein Journal ("The
Hermetic Heinlein" �in the first issue. �- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I tend to doubt any systematic study in any of the esoteric
disciplines, which seems to preclude a mentor, He seems to have a
feel for the White Brotherhood, but with a strongly Wellsian secular
overlay, and no real feel for the initiatic experience in the way, for
example, that it comes through Cabell's short stories and The Rivet in
Grandfather's Neck. Nor does he seem to have any interest in the
cutting edge of hermetic/esoteric theory at the time, which was
defined by Crowley's concordance of esoteric systems and is embodied
in Hall's Encyclopedia of Symbolical Philosophy (completed, ISTR, in
about 1927 or 1928).

I'd say Heinlein must have gotten an awful lot by exoteric reading in
Ouspensky (whose Tertium Organum and New Model of the Universe are
referenced in an early (1939) story, "Elsewhen." By the time Tertium
Organum was written (1912-1914 for the first edition, though the first
English edition was in 1920 with first American publication in 1922),
the touchstone issue that separated Theosophy from the parent hermetic
groups (HBofL I think specifically) had cooled off so Heinlein in
"Lost Legacy" shows what looks like an approving reference to
Stirner's anthroposophy (there's an octagonal room in the Shasta
Lodge) at the same time he is making story use of the Akashic records
on the one hand but the hermetic/masonic version of the priestly/
esoteric splitoff from the open, "teach-all-those-who-are-worthy"
tradition. (the Priests were the bad guys for the hermetics because
they wanted to keep esoteric knowledge to themselves and dominate the
nescient; the same story is used in the theosophical end, but the
Priests are the good guys, preserving benevolent knowledge).

If I had to define the nuance, I'd say his attitudes were fairly
mainstream for his time -- the generation after Cabell and Yeats (and
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Machen in this context) -- that
yearned for social engineering, and "that esoteric stuff" belonged in
the mix of informal and anecdotal estimony of what you could to by
systematic application of intelligent Will.(though, in fact, you could
reasonably interpret his World As Myth concept as a straightforward
application of a Golden Dawn teaching scroll on magic as impressng the
will on external reality, combined with Wheeler-Everett Quantum
Mechanics in a strange way).

His tastes might have run to sex magic, but he doesn't show anything
more than superficial familiarity with the outer doctrines. Any
random entry from Crowley's journals, for example, will give you a
greater richness and depth of involvement than you find anywhere in
Heinlein. I ran across samples of Parsons' poetry (unknown, it turned
out, and almost certainly in Parson's own hand so Pendle got me to
pass it along to the proper people) in Heinlein's working files, and
Parsons clearly is a sex magick-worker just from the language.

It just doesn't strike me that Heinlein had the personality for magick-
working, but he seems to hve been a fellow-traveler in spades, and
I've seen people from all manner of ancillary disiplines try to claim
him as one of their own. I can show a strong input of general
hermetic lore, but have been unable for going on ten years now to pin
him down to a specific hermetic tradition . . . and then there are
these other odd little bits that show up now and then . . . like the
ending of I Will Fear No Evil which follows the reverse reading of the
sephiroth in the feet-to-crown reading of Adam Cadmon. . .

[David M. Silver]

In article

Post by Bill Patterson
Interesting that The Man in the High Castle should be the one you
recollect -- Dick told Heinlein that book was a tribute to him.

That's interesting as well, Bill. When? In what form? Oral or a letter?
Did he say how? [he says, a copy of _Four Novels of the 1960s_, the
Penguin Library of America edition, which includes "High Castle," not
unsurprisingly, in hand].

The volume contains, of course, in its "Chronology" (pp. 801-16) of
Dick's life, confirmation of Robert Heinlein's lending Dick funds in
1975, according to the chronologist and editor of Four Novels, Jonathan
Lethem. Heinlein is described in that note as Dick's "idol and mentor."

It doesn't refer to the Heinlein purchased a typewriter for Dick when he
was down-and-out story that Gary Westfahl referred to in the Locus March
2005 feature article Westfahl wrote, however. See,
http://www.locusmag.com/2005/Features/03_Westfahl_RAH_PKD.html

[David M. Silver]

Post by David M. Silver
It doesn't refer to the Heinlein purchased a typewriter for Dick when he
was down-and-out story that Gary Westfahl referred to in the Locus March
2005 feature article Westfahl wrote, however. See,
http://www.locusmag.com/2005/Features/03_Westfahl_RAH_PKD.html

The story, not fully elaborated, together with that about the loan,
comes from Dick himself:

Accordingly to
<http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Philip_K_Dick_-_Early_life/id/537613
0> in the introduction to the 1980 short story collection "The Golden
Man," Dick wrote:

"Several years ago, when I was ill, Heinlein offered his help, anything
he could do, and we had never met; he would phone me to cheer me up and
see how I was doing. He wanted to buy me an electric typewriter, God
bless him--one of the few true gentlemen in the world. I don't agree
with any of the ideas he puts forth in his writing, but that is neither
here nor there. One time, when I owed the IRS a lot of money and
couldn't raise it, Heinlein loaned the money to me. I think a great deal
of him and his wife; I dedicated a book to him in appreciation. Robert
Heinlein is a fine looking man, very impressive and military in stance;
you can tell he has a military background, even to the haircut. He knows
I'm a flipped out freak and still he helped me and my wife when we were
in trouble. That is the best in humanity, there; that is who and what I
love."

[David M. Silver]

Post by David M. Silver
In article

Post by Bill Patterson
Interesting that The Man in the High Castle should be the one you
recollect -- Dick told Heinlein that book was a tribute to him.

That's interesting as well, Bill. When? In what form? Oral or a letter?
Did he say how?

I'd hoped for a bit of an answer here, but none appears forthcoming.
Perhaps whatever Mr. Patterson uses for a newsreader failed to reproduce
the question and follow-up.

Post by David M. Silver
[he says, a copy of _Four Novels of the 1960s_, the
Penguin Library of America edition, which includes "High Castle," not
unsurprisingly, in hand].

Nevertheless, the basic question may be important. How did Phillip Dick
make _The Man in the High Castle_, a Hugo winner, a tribute to Robert
Heinlein? Let me try a partial answer with my own resources, having just
read it.

As important a question as how is why did Dick pay tribute to Heinlein.

The story I got from Ginny, years ago, is probably missing some
elements. We were chatting about how Robert helped Ray Bradbury
originally got published, initially, a conversation that spun out from a
mention of that small short story known as "Heil!" or "Successful
Operation" that Heinlein let Bradbury publish in a fan magazine in 1940.
Ginny mentioned that Bradbury wasn't the only other young writer that
Heinlein helped over the years and mentioned Phil Dick as another; and
she told me a version of the "bought him a typewritter" tale. She and
Robert had met the Dicks somewhere, at a convention perhaps, or meeting,
she didn't say which one; and liked what they saw, with some
qualifications. They'd liked the wife, whichever one it was (probably
from the date of the later loan "Tessa" -- Leslie Busby, Dick's fifth
wife who married him in 1973, had his son Christopher, and divorced him
in 1977). Ginny implied that Dick definitely needed a "keeper," or
enabler as we call it these days, and Tessa apparently tried to fulfill
that role. Ginny implied she liked Tessa a lot more than Dick, although
she did like him. Ginny spent her life enabling Robert to wrote as well
as he did.

Sometime after the meeting, a letter arrived from the wife telling
Robert and Ginny, who read it initially of course, about the Dicks'
troubles. There had been some medical problem, and bills were unpaid,
but the main concern the wife had was Dick wasn't writing. Ginny said
Robert's solution was to send Dick an electric typewriter and letter,
and make some encouraging telephone calls to him. Why the typewriter was
sent is a little confused--Ginny thought it had something to do with
getting Dick's manuscripts into decent form to be considered by agents
or publishers; but some other Internet research I've done indicates Dick
had some problem with his arm. Robert also offered to loan the Dicks
some money to tide them over the dry spell that would be resolved once
Dick started writing again. Ginny said that at first they refused to
accept the money offered, but later the wife wrote again and a loan was
made.

All that, with the addition of the typewriter tale, is consistent with
what Dick wrote in his 1980 dedication to _The Golden Man_ short story
collection, that I quoted in the follow-up to my original question.

Post by David M. Silver
The volume contains, of course, in its "Chronology" (pp. 801-16) of
Dick's life, confirmation of Robert Heinlein's lending Dick funds in
1975, according to the chronologist and editor of Four Novels, Jonathan
Lethem. Heinlein is described in that note as Dick's "idol and mentor."
It doesn't refer to the Heinlein purchased a typewriter for Dick when he
was down-and-out story that Gary Westfahl referred to in the Locus March
2005 feature article Westfahl wrote, however. See,
http://www.locusmag.com/2005/Features/03_Westfahl_RAH_PKD.html

So it's pretty clear that Dick owed Heinlein some gratitude, and from
other items considered Heinlein an "idol and mentor." Some interviews
published reflect that Heinlein also took the trouble to explain to Dick
how the major publisher at the time using the Book Club method severely
reduce royalties paid SF authors. Money was always a problem for Dick.

That brings us to "how" the tribute was written.

_The Man in the High Castle_ is an alternate reality story. Go obtain a
copy if you haven't read it. It's available in a trade paper edition for
about $10. ISBN-10: 0679740678 (Vintage, June 1992). Spoilers follow:

Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:




Spoilers follow:


It's America sometime in the 1960s. America lost what was World War II
in our timeline. Nazi Germany owns the East Coast and industrial North
to the Mississippi. After Speer, Todt, and Rommel rebuilt the area the
Nazis claimed, the exterminations began, and its a nice white enclave.
Japan owns the West Coast. The South rose again and home grown racists
are running it independently, and in the Western and Mountain States
what remains "free" is what is left. The POV is mainly five characters.

The South and the Japan claimed parts regularly ship Jews back to the
Nazis to keep their ovens warm. One POV character named Frank is
"passing" as a gentile in San Francisco, where he works as a metal
worker, making, among other things forgeries of relics of "Americana"
for his boss, such as the old single action Colt (sold in both .45 and
.44-40 Winchester so you could use the same ammunition in both rifle and
pistol) sometimes called the Frontier Six-Shooter. There's a big market
among the victorious Japanese for Old Americana, analogous to the market
in Samuri swords and Japanese antiques in our timeline after our
occupation of Japan after our successful World War II. The next POV
character is a civilian administrator named Tagomi, who spent the war
twenty years ago in Shanghai doing whatever the Japanese found necessary
to amalgamate China (apparently not too many heads were lopped off, at
least not as many as Nankin or at least after Nankin). Now he's in
charge of a trade mission in San Francisco. He collects Americana,
including a ".44 Colt," he bought from the third POV character, an
antiques dealer named Childan. The .44 is a forgery made by Frank.
Childan is trying to "get along" with the conqueror and is doing pretty
submerging himself into a subservient conquered race. Lots of bowing and
scraping.

Tagomi is expecting two visitors: one, some Swede (which remained
neutral in this timeline's WW II as it did in ours) whose over to make a
deal with the Japanese regarding injection moldings that they cannot get
the Nazis to sell them; and the other some old retired Japanese general
or admiral from WW II whose purpose is mysterious. Tagomi decides to buy
a gift for his visitors from his dealer, Childan, but finds that Childan
is dealing in forgeries, witting or not. He has his own .44 tested and
finds it is a forgery.

Meanwhile, we find the last POV character, Frank's ex-wife, has left San
Francisco and is now teaching martial arts to women in Colorado in
what's left of the good ol' US of A. She's having an affair with an
Italian truck driver.

Oh, yeah, before I forget: There's this fiction book written by some guy
from Wyoming that everyone's reading. It's about an alternate world in
which the US and Great Britain defeated Italy, German, and Japan in
another World War II, not exactly ours, and Great Britain and the US are
now striving in competition to see who comes out on top, the British
Empire (Churchill still in charge--there was no divestment of empire
after 1945), or the Red, White and Blue. He lives in Colorado, opps,
Wyoming, so the book jacket says, surrounded by guns in a high castle
for protection.

The book has been banned in the Nazi-occupied Eastern United States (and
gets you killed if you are found to possess it) and, it is inferred by
most, the author is on some hit list by the Nazis; but Japan lets it
circulate freely in its zone of conquest. This author's name is
Hawthorne Abendsen, and he's got a bright, vivacious and very competent
red-haired wife named Caroline.

Before I go on, would anyone who has troubled to read this far, whether
you've read _The Man in the High Castle_ or not, care to comment on it
or anything therein?

[David M. Silver]

Post by David M. Silver
_The Man in the High Castle_ is an alternate reality story. Go obtain a
copy if you haven't read it. It's available in a trade paper edition for

Okay, to the major aspect of Dick's alternate reality plot now. (I hope
someone besides myself has read the work.) Hitler, at some time after
the Axis victories over the world, becomes disabled due to syphilis, and
Nazi party chancellor Martin Bormann assumes leadership. Bormann
continues as head of the Nazi government while the Nazis create a
colonial empire in all of Europe, Eastern North America and Africa
(while mounting massive genocide not only against Jews but other
non-Aryans particularly including almost all the Slavs and inhabitants
of Africa) and also developing commercial rockets used for
intercontinental travel and begin colonization of the Moon, Venus and
Mars. The Japanese, whose economy and science lags behind Germany's, do
not participate in this space effort.

As the novel opens Bormann dies in office; and there's a struggle back
in Germany to see who succeeds him. Joseph Goebbels is one leading
candidate; another is Reinhard Heydrich, chief of the SD and SS
(Heydrich was not assassinated in 1942 by British-trained Czech soldiers
in this alternate reality).

The Swede trading merchant Mr. Tagomi, the Japanese trade minister in
San Francisco, expects to visit about injection mold technology turns
out to be not a Swede at all but actually an agent of the Abwehr, German
naval intelligence. His mission is solicit Japanese support against
Goebbels for the supposedly "lesser evil" of Heydrich, the leader of the
1942 Wannsee conference, which finalized plans for the extermination of
all European Jews in what is now referred to as the Holocaust, by
disclosing to the Japanese a plan supported by Goebbels known as
Operation Dandelion to preemptively strike the Japanese Home Islands
with hydrogen bombs (which the Nazis have but Japan does not) to
complete world conquest by the Nazi empire, eliminating Japan.

Tagomi foils an attempt to assassinate the Abwehr agent, who
subsequently meets with the old Japanese general and reveals Operation
Dandelion to him (and Tagomi). The old general heads back to Tokyo to
let Tojo or whomever is in charge know what's coming, soon.

Tagomi, who had to personally kill two assassins who invaded his office,
using his forged but effective relic, the .44 frontier Colt, is quite
upset, near suicidal from all appearances, over the encounter, the Nazi
plans to destroy Japan, as well as other facts revealed to him about the
Nazis' genocides in the colonies of their empire.

Meanwhile, everyone's been reading Hawthorne Abendsen's novel, _The
Grasshopper Lies Heavy_, about the alternate history in which Great
Britain and the US defeated the Axis. The title of _The Grasshopper Lies
Heavy_ comes from _Ecclesiastes_ 12:5, in context usually translated as:

12:1 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the
evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have
no pleasure in them;
* * * *
12:5 Also [when] they shall be afraid of [that which is] high, and
fears [shall be] in the way, and the almond tree shall flourish, and the
grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail: because man goeth
to his long home, and the mourners go about the streets:
* * * *
12:8 Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all [is] vanity

"Everyone" includes the supposed Italian truck driver in Colorado with
whom Frank's wife is having an affair. This guy is supposed to be an
English-speaking veteran of the Italian Army, originally sent the the
East Coast to help put the newly-conquered territory back into order
after bombings, etc., but he's quite disenchanted with the New Order of
things, since the Nazis have been treating the Italians and their leader
as very junior partners indeed, particularly the dark-featured Italians
of which he is one, and, now that their empire is "alles ist in Ordnung"
they are way down on the totem pole, frex, still driving trucks. He lets
Frank's wife read his smuggled copy of the book.

They decide to take a few days off for a weekend in Denver and the
bright lights. Once there, they decide to take a run over to Wyoming to
drop in the author, Abendensen, and tell him how much they like his
book, since somehow word has come to the Italian driver that Abendensen
really doesn't live in a High Castle surrounded by guns after all, but
is accessible to the public just like anyone else who lives in an
ordinary house as Abendensen does.

Ooops, once in Denver, the wife finds the Italian truck driver isn't
Italian after all, but a German or Swiss German assassin hired by the
Nazis to take out Abendensen. When she tries to leave he tries to
prevent this, so she kills him, using her martial arts techniques.

She then heads for Abendensen. Before the meeting occurs, it's again
appropriate to ask for comments, if any, from anyone.

What do you expect to find about Avendensen?

[David M. Silver]

She then heads for [Abensen]. Before the meeting occurs, it's again
appropriate to ask for comments, if any, from anyone.
What do you expect to find about [Abensen]?

While we're on the subject, there have been threads over the years
discussing various appearances of characters supposed to be tributes to
Heinlein in other writer's works, e.g., http://tinyurl.com/2xuk4t

Generally, what do you think about those characterizations?

[MajorOz]

Post by David M. Silver

She then heads for [Abensen]. Before the meeting occurs, it's again
appropriate to ask for comments, if any, from anyone.
What do you expect to find about [Abensen]?

While we're on the subject, there have been threads over the years
discussing various appearances of characters supposed to be tributes to
Heinlein in other writer's works, e.g.,http://tinyurl.com/2xuk4t
Generally, what do you think about those characterizations?
--
David M. Silverhttp://www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29
Lt.(jg), USN, R'td

I am currently reading Varley's _Golden Globe_. He is dropping names
more than the chickens in the yard drop used corn. One of the
earliest is Manny Garcia.
Of course, the protag is right out of _Double Star_.

cheers

oz

[jeanette]

Oz--Golden Globe is my favorite non-Heinlein Heinlein.

Jeanette

[Vance P. Frickey]

Post by David M. Silver
In article

Post by Ben Scaro
Hi David
I have to preface anything I say that I know nothing of
Heinle[i]n.

This makes it a little difficult to 'get down to cases,'
as my father
might have said; but ... if I can try this without
requiring too many
Tylenols.

Post by Ben Scaro
However, more generally, the 20th century has an
incredible amount of
literature heavily influenced by what what the likes of
Clive James
refer to as 'occult mumbo-jumbo'.

The essay-review of R.F. Foster's _W.B. Yeats: A Life: The
Arch Poet_?
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200310/ai_n9333199/pg_1>
describing Yeats as "a great poet who was also the
industrious adept of
batso mystical philosophy" and "he certainly added more
than his share
to the flimflam cranked out by every tent-show seer from
Madame
Blavatsky through Ouspensky and Gurdjieff to [Elron]" and
so on?

Post by Ben Scaro
James was talking of WB Yeats but his approach typifies
the response
of so many commentators; that brusque, slightly
embarrassed dismissal
of the occult dabblings (and they often did a lot more
than just
dabble) of so many influential 20th century writers -
from Huxley to
Tolkein to Philip K Dick. However to hurry past this
area is to miss
out on exploring a huge part of what those writers
regarded as their
pivotal influences.
It also leads to a sort of wilful blindness, wherein
there's an
abdication of any ability to perceive the occult
influences that those
writers channelled into popular culture.

There's always the fact that failure to acquaint ourselves
with the
basic furniture of the apartment will put us in the dark
stumbling over
footstools when we try to navigate our way through the
rooms the author
created.
Clive evidently doesn't have much furniture in the rooms
of his mind.
and assumes no one else does, either. His loss.

Post by Ben Scaro
In James case, in his essay on Yeats he bore the point
home, going on
to quote a few lines from Yeats and to wonder at their
beauty. If he
had not so hurriedly rushed past Yeats' occult side, he
might have
understood that those lines were derived from the rituals
of the
Golden Dawn order which was such a huge part of Yeats
life. Those
rituals have been publicly available since 1937.

In Yeats' poetry I suspect there a lot from the occult
scene to gloss in
his works. The depth of his involvement makes it essential
to have some
knowledge. Heinlein might be a bit more obscure in
references, but I
doubt any detectable references to the occult or esoteric
are merely
pistols hanging on walls in the first act, never to be
used, to use a
playwright's image we discussed about a week ago in
another thread.

Post by Ben Scaro
One of the problems is that the occult scene is honestly
faring no
better than exoteric religions, this current period is a
time of what
I call 'Iron in the Soul' for it,

By that you intend to allude to a death in the soul, a la
Sarte's view?

Post by Ben Scaro
and there are very few within occult
movements with the calibre to convey occult themes to the
outside
world, or to appreciate where those influences have ended
up in the
outside world. They are therefore unable to address
themselves to the
outside world in a relevant way. They either dumb down
their teachings
and give them out to anyone, until their disciples drown
in the stuff,
or they shrivel up and hide their pearls away till they
turn to
paste.
You mention satire. Rosicrucianism is necessarily
satirical at its
heart. It is a movement which started as a hoax by 17th
century
theological students and the purest expressions of it
always entail
aspects of play and make-believe, with the aim of
altering mundane
reality. Borges' secret society in his short story,
'Tlon, Uqbar,
Orbius Tertius', a society which plants certain clues in
order to
encourage the growth of a whole new world, is an
expression of the
same idea.

I always wonder whether there truly is an aim beyond hoax
for the sake
of fun, or whether it's all simply hoax for some
to-be-disclosed
ulterior purpose. Cults, for a time at least, support
their evangelists
is pretty fair style, whether named John or Albert
Gallatin Mackey or
David Koresh. At a certain range I become colorblind as to
distinctions
between them, and whether what they espouse is religion,
fraternity,
cult or speculative fiction (to refer to writers such as
Borges). Still
the systems they create allow a wealth of allusions in
literature.

Post by Ben Scaro
Lewis's approach shows that he 'got it'. Plenty of his
followers,
heirs, and especially his enemies, didn't.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you posit C.S.
Lewis got.

I think Ben was referring to the Rosicrucian First Imperator
Harvey Spencer Lewis, not the sage of Magdalen College.

However, some evidence indicates that Clive Staples Lewis
was involved, from his public school days to not long prior
to his conversion to theism (thence to Christianity) briefly
with theosophy. One of Lewis' friends after his conversion,
Charles Williams, was similarly involved in such
organizations as the Order of the Golden Dawn, and Williams'
novels not infrequently deal with the occult - he also
authored a succinct but erudite work, Witchcraft, which is
an excellent popular-audience historical survey of the
subject from immediately pre-Christian times (i.e.,
Apuleius' "The Golden Ass") to the Enlightenment.

Perhaps C.S. Lewis' most entertaining novel, the last book
of his "Space Trilogy" but extremely enjoyable on its own
merits, was "That Hideous Strength," which has been
described as "a Charles Williams novel written by C.S.
Lewis" and which is strongly dependent on theosophical and
occult themes for much of its dramatic impact (while on a
deeper level also unabashedly a work of Christian
apologetics).

[Bill Patterson]

Post by Vance P. Frickey

Post by David M. Silver
In article

Post by Ben Scaro
Hi David
I have to preface anything I say that I know nothing of
Heinle[i]n.

This makes it a little difficult to 'get down to cases,'
as my father
might have said; but ... if I can try this without
requiring too many
Tylenols.

Post by Ben Scaro
However, more generally, the 20th century has an
incredible amount of
literature heavily influenced by what what the likes of
Clive James
refer to as 'occult mumbo-jumbo'.

The essay-review of R.F. Foster's _W.B. Yeats: A Life: The
Arch Poet_?
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200310/ai_n9333199/pg_1>
describing Yeats as "a great poet who was also the
industrious adept of
batso mystical philosophy" and "he certainly added more
than his share
to the flimflam cranked out by every tent-show seer from
Madame
Blavatsky through Ouspensky and Gurdjieff to [Elron]" and
so on?

Post by Ben Scaro
James was talking of WB Yeats but his approach typifies
the response
of so many commentators; that brusque, slightly
embarrassed dismissal
of the occult dabblings (and they often did a lot more
than just
dabble) of so many influential 20th century writers -
from Huxley to
Tolkein to Philip K Dick. �However to hurry past this
area is to miss
out on exploring a huge part of what those writers
regarded as their
pivotal influences.
It also leads to a sort of wilful blindness, wherein
there's an
abdication of any ability to perceive the occult
influences that those
writers channelled into popular culture.

There's always the fact that failure to acquaint ourselves
with the
basic furniture of the apartment will put us in the dark
stumbling over
footstools when we try to navigate our way through the
rooms the author
created.
Clive evidently doesn't have much furniture in the rooms
of his mind.
and assumes no one else does, either. His loss.

Post by Ben Scaro
In James case, in his essay on Yeats he bore the point
home, going on
to quote a few lines from Yeats and to wonder at their
beauty. �If he
had not so hurriedly rushed past Yeats' occult side, he
might have
understood that those lines were derived from the rituals
of the
Golden Dawn order which was such a huge part of Yeats
life. Those
rituals have been publicly available since 1937.

In Yeats' poetry I suspect there a lot from the occult
scene to gloss in
his works. The depth of his involvement makes it essential
to have some
knowledge. Heinlein might be a bit more obscure in
references, but I
doubt any detectable references to the occult or esoteric
are merely
pistols hanging on walls in the first act, never to be
used, to use a
playwright's image we discussed about a week ago in
another thread.

Post by Ben Scaro
One of the problems is that the occult scene is honestly
faring no
better than exoteric religions, this current period is a
time of what
I call 'Iron in the Soul' for it,

By that you intend to allude to a death in the soul, a la
Sarte's view?

Post by Ben Scaro
and there are very few within occult
movements with the calibre to convey occult themes to the
outside
world, or to appreciate where those influences have ended
up in the
outside world. �They are therefore unable to address
themselves to the
outside world in a relevant way. They either dumb down
their teachings
and give them out to anyone, until their disciples drown
in the stuff,
or they shrivel up and hide their pearls away till they
turn to
paste.
You mention satire. �Rosicrucianism is necessarily
satirical at its
heart. �It is a movement which started as a hoax by 17th
century
theological students and the purest expressions of it
always entail
aspects of play and make-believe, with the aim of
altering mundane
reality. �Borges' secret society in his short story,
'Tlon, Uqbar,
Orbius Tertius', a society which plants certain clues in
order to
encourage the growth of a whole new world, is an
expression of the
same idea.

I always wonder whether there truly is an aim beyond hoax
for the sake
of fun, or whether it's all simply hoax for some
to-be-disclosed
ulterior purpose. Cults, for a time at least, support
their evangelists
is pretty fair style, whether named John or Albert
Gallatin Mackey or
David Koresh. At a certain range I become colorblind as to
distinctions
between them, and whether what they espouse is religion,
fraternity,
cult or speculative fiction (to refer to writers such as
Borges). Still
the systems they create allow a wealth of allusions in
literature.

Post by Ben Scaro
Lewis's approach shows that he 'got it'. �Plenty of his
followers,
heirs, and especially his enemies, didn't.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you posit C.S.
Lewis got.

I think Ben was referring to the Rosicrucian First Imperator
Harvey Spencer Lewis, not the sage of Magdalen College.
However, some evidence indicates that Clive Staples Lewis
was involved, from his public school days to not long prior
to his conversion to theism (thence to Christianity) briefly
with theosophy. �One of Lewis' friends after his conversion,
Charles Williams, was similarly involved in such
organizations as the Order of the Golden Dawn, and Williams'
novels not infrequently deal with the occult - he also
authored a succinct but erudite work, Witchcraft, which is
an excellent popular-audience historical survey of the
subject from immediately pre-Christian times (i.e.,
Apuleius' "The Golden Ass") to the Enlightenment.
Perhaps C.S. Lewis' most entertaining novel, the last book
of his "Space Trilogy" but extremely enjoyable on its own
merits, was "That Hideous Strength," which has been
described as "a Charles Williams novel written by C.S.
Lewis" and which is strongly dependent on theosophical and
occult themes for much of its dramatic impact (while on a
deeper level also unabashedly a work of Christian
apologetics).
--
Vance P. Frickey
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they
infect the soul with evil." -- Socrates
remove safety from Email address to use- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Second the recommendation for That Hideous Strength. Gotta remember,
though -- its grounded in medieval (instead of 19th century revival)
Arthurian romance Christianity (I mean, the return of Merlin-under-the-
hill . . . ) which was a lot closer to things now regarded as
"occult." For anyone who hasn't read Lewis' "Deep Heaven" trilogy
(Out of the Silent Planet, followed by Perelandra, then That Hideous
Strength), there's a giggle in the series -- the principal antagonist
is based largely on Arthur C. Clarke.(though he always sounded to me
more like Professor Challenger in an uncharacteristically quiet mood).

[Vance P. Frickey]

On Dec 19, 1:38?pm, "Vance P. Frickey"

Post by Vance P. Frickey

Post by David M. Silver
In article

Post by Ben Scaro
Hi David
I have to preface anything I say that I know nothing
of
Heinle[i]n.

This makes it a little difficult to 'get down to
cases,'
as my father
might have said; but ... if I can try this without
requiring too many
Tylenols.

Post by Ben Scaro
However, more generally, the 20th century has an
incredible amount of
literature heavily influenced by what what the likes
of
Clive James
refer to as 'occult mumbo-jumbo'.

The
Arch Poet_?
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200310/ai_n9333199/pg_1>
describing Yeats as "a great poet who was also the
industrious adept of
batso mystical philosophy" and "he certainly added more
than his share
to the flimflam cranked out by every tent-show seer
from
Madame
Blavatsky through Ouspensky and Gurdjieff to [Elron]"
and
so on?

Post by Ben Scaro
James was talking of WB Yeats but his approach
typifies
the response
of so many commentators; that brusque, slightly
embarrassed dismissal
of the occult dabblings (and they often did a lot more
than just
dabble) of so many influential 20th century writers -
from Huxley to
Tolkein to Philip K Dick. ?However to hurry past this
area is to miss
out on exploring a huge part of what those writers
regarded as their
pivotal influences.
It also leads to a sort of wilful blindness, wherein
there's an
abdication of any ability to perceive the occult
influences that those
writers channelled into popular culture.

There's always the fact that failure to acquaint
ourselves
with the
basic furniture of the apartment will put us in the
dark
stumbling over
footstools when we try to navigate our way through the
rooms the author
created.
Clive evidently doesn't have much furniture in the
rooms
of his mind.
and assumes no one else does, either. His loss.

Post by Ben Scaro
In James case, in his essay on Yeats he bore the point
home, going on
to quote a few lines from Yeats and to wonder at their
beauty. ?If he
had not so hurriedly rushed past Yeats' occult side,
he
might have
understood that those lines were derived from the
rituals
of the
Golden Dawn order which was such a huge part of Yeats
life. Those
rituals have been publicly available since 1937.

In Yeats' poetry I suspect there a lot from the occult
scene to gloss in
his works. The depth of his involvement makes it
essential
to have some
knowledge. Heinlein might be a bit more obscure in
references, but I
doubt any detectable references to the occult or
esoteric
are merely
pistols hanging on walls in the first act, never to be
used, to use a
playwright's image we discussed about a week ago in
another thread.

Post by Ben Scaro
One of the problems is that the occult scene is
honestly
faring no
better than exoteric religions, this current period is
a
time of what
I call 'Iron in the Soul' for it,

By that you intend to allude to a death in the soul, a
la
Sarte's view?

Post by Ben Scaro
and there are very few within occult
movements with the calibre to convey occult themes to
the
outside
world, or to appreciate where those influences have
ended
up in the
outside world. ?They are therefore unable to address
themselves to the
outside world in a relevant way. They either dumb down
their teachings
and give them out to anyone, until their disciples
drown
in the stuff,
or they shrivel up and hide their pearls away till
they
turn to
paste.
You mention satire. ?Rosicrucianism is necessarily
satirical at its
heart. ?It is a movement which started as a hoax by
17th
century
theological students and the purest expressions of it
always entail
aspects of play and make-believe, with the aim of
altering mundane
reality. ?Borges' secret society in his short story,
'Tlon, Uqbar,
Orbius Tertius', a society which plants certain clues
in
order to
encourage the growth of a whole new world, is an
expression of the
same idea.

I always wonder whether there truly is an aim beyond
hoax
for the sake
of fun, or whether it's all simply hoax for some
to-be-disclosed
ulterior purpose. Cults, for a time at least, support
their evangelists
is pretty fair style, whether named John or Albert
Gallatin Mackey or
David Koresh. At a certain range I become colorblind as
to
distinctions
between them, and whether what they espouse is
religion,
fraternity,
cult or speculative fiction (to refer to writers such
as
Borges). Still
the systems they create allow a wealth of allusions in
literature.

Post by Ben Scaro
Lewis's approach shows that he 'got it'. ?Plenty of
his
followers,
heirs, and especially his enemies, didn't.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you posit
C.S.
Lewis got.

I think Ben was referring to the Rosicrucian First
Imperator
Harvey Spencer Lewis, not the sage of Magdalen College.
However, some evidence indicates that Clive Staples Lewis
was involved, from his public school days to not long
prior
to his conversion to theism (thence to Christianity)
briefly
with theosophy. ?One of Lewis' friends after his
conversion,
Charles Williams, was similarly involved in such
organizations as the Order of the Golden Dawn, and
Williams'
novels not infrequently deal with the occult - he also
authored a succinct but erudite work, Witchcraft, which
is
an excellent popular-audience historical survey of the
subject from immediately pre-Christian times (i.e.,
Apuleius' "The Golden Ass") to the Enlightenment.
Perhaps C.S. Lewis' most entertaining novel, the last
book
of his "Space Trilogy" but extremely enjoyable on its own
merits, was "That Hideous Strength," which has been
described as "a Charles Williams novel written by C.S.
Lewis" and which is strongly dependent on theosophical
and
occult themes for much of its dramatic impact (while on a
deeper level also unabashedly a work of Christian
apologetics).
--
Vance P. Frickey
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they
infect the soul with evil." -- Socrates
remove safety from Email address to use- Hide quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -

Second the recommendation for That Hideous Strength.
Gotta remember,
though -- its grounded in medieval (instead of 19th
century revival)
Arthurian romance Christianity (I mean, the return of
Merlin-under-the-
hill . . . ) which was a lot closer to things now regarded
as
"occult." For anyone who hasn't read Lewis' "Deep Heaven"
trilogy
(Out of the Silent Planet, followed by Perelandra, then
That Hideous
Strength), there's a giggle in the series -- the principal
antagonist
is based largely on Arthur C. Clarke.(though he always
sounded to me
more like Professor Challenger in an uncharacteristically
quiet mood).

I always thought that Professor Weston was based on J.B.S.
Haldane, who had published a satirical/critical essay ("Auld
Hornie, F.R.S.") denouncing the "Space Trilogy." Lewis
wrote a reply to Haldane's essay which was only published
posthumously with some of Lewis' other lesser-known work in
a couple of anthologies, most notably "Of Other Worlds," but
a more fully developed discussion of Lewis's disagreement
with Haldane and other Logical Posivitists/Scientific
Marxists appears in Lewis' excellent book "The Abolition of
Man" (for whoever's interested).

But Lewis does have Weston delivering an unintentionally
comic defiance before the Oyarsa of Malacandra (Mars) which
could have been lifted directly from Arthur C. Clarke or
RAH's works. The closing paragraph of RAH's "This I
Believe" resembles Weston's big wind-up quite strongly. And
the question "What happens to the people who are already ON
these other worlds Man has to conquer?" raised by Lewis in
"Out of the Silent Planet" STILL hangs in the air. Arthur
C. Clarke, as late as when he rewrote "Songs of Distant
Earth," tends toward the same dismissive reply which Lewis
lampooned in Weston's speech.

One of C.S. Lewis' funnier SF short stories. "Ministering
Angels," takes direct aim at an article, "The Day after we
Land on Mars", by Dr. Robert S. Richardson (Saturday
Review, May 28, 1955). Dr. Richardson had suggested that
we would have to send "some nice girls to Mars at regular
intervals to relieve tension and promote morale." I think
that we have RAH's take on that question from "All You
Zombies," and another story or two. Could be what MG Lord's
shorts are in a twist about....
-
Vance P. Frickey

"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they
infect the soul with evil." -- Socrates

remove safety from Email address to use

[Quadibloc]

Post by David M. Silver
Anyone feel there might be evidence or reason to believe that some of
this above may have provided Heinlein a good background source?

Reading "Lost Legacy" again, what impresses me most about it isn't
that it includes some fairly standard notions about Atlantis and the
like.

Rather, the fact that this is very early Heinlein, with politics that
are liberal rather than libertarian, stood out the most. Not that
Heinlein really changed as much as his detractors would claim, but
this novelette has preachers and school boards and the (apparently)
hidebound as its villains. A little infodumpy at the start, one could
cavil, but the master's craftsmanship is still there - including a
prediction that people sometimes wouldn't carry their cell phones with
them!

John Savard

[Bill Patterson]

Post by Quadibloc

Post by David M. Silver
Anyone feel there might be evidence or reason to believe that some of
this above may have provided Heinlein a good background source?

Reading "Lost Legacy" again, what impresses me most about it isn't
that it includes some fairly standard notions about Atlantis and the
like.
Rather, the fact that this is very early Heinlein, with politics that
are liberal rather than libertarian, stood out the most. Not that
Heinlein really changed as much as his detractors would claim, but
this novelette has preachers and school boards and the (apparently)
hidebound as its villains. A little infodumpy at the start, one could
cavil, but the master's craftsmanship is still there - including a
prediction that people sometimes wouldn't carry their cell phones with
them!
John Savard

Oh, it's even more interesting than that: the original plan was to
wind up with a full-scale presidential campaign starring an avatar for
Jerry Voorhis.

And it is also a very early story -- begun in the summer of 1939, so
it's roughly contemporary with the revisions to Misfit. It was
Heinlein's earliest favorite story, "my pet," he said of it, much more
pleasure to write than "If This Goes On." Heinlein also regarded it
as an "important" story in the way Campbell thought ITGO was important
-- as, indeed, ITGO is important for the development of SF.

It was also the first thing he wrote after returning from managing his
last political campaign in October-November 1939, at Governor Olson's
direct request.

I haven't checked this one specifically, but I imagine the file for
"Lost Legacy" is online through the Heinlein Prize trust.