Teheuti said:
Granted that you find it worthless, but a great many others do not find her work worthless. There are many faults with her book. Yes, the history is often wrong. Crowley also made many mistakes - for instance, confusing a Tibetan vajra and a dorje. Angie's book is not for everyone and should never be thought of as replacing Crowley's. The fact that they are so radically different is part of what can be gained through reading both. That said, once I "got" what Angie had to say, it is Crowley's Book of Thoth that I come back to again and again, with ever more admiration.
Scion, have you met Angie Arrien? Have you studied with her? She is a powerful modern shaman (raised, in part (biculturally), within a shamanic heritage) whose best work comes through poetry, prophecy and an indescribable energy transference while she struggles to operate within a scientifically-rational verbal cultural. In a sense she's an inspirational bridge-maker who doesn't deserve to be denigrated by someone who has no knowledge of what she really does.
Hey Mary,
As I've said above in the thread several times. I know that Arrien has admirers and I know about her practice and teaching background. I have my own opinions about the use of the word "shaman" in a modern, postindustrial context which don't bear discussion in this thread. All of that is irrelevant in the context of a discussion of her book about the Thoth. By definition shamanism is preliterate and indigenous, so I don't really understand how it factors here. I have met a few powerful wonderworkers and have respect for most of them... but that doesn't mean I'd defend their right to talk bollocks in print, even if they wanted to... (an unlikely proposition in any case)
It's wonderful that Arrien manifests a personal potency that effects change in the world and elicits loyalty, but that cannot be captured between pages, nor should the attempt be made. I can appreciate that her "bridgebuilding" is admirable and that she represents a moment in time authorially. But surely Arrien would not defend her mistakes and misdirection as somehow "inspired" or "purposive." She didn't
plan to screw up so much and so often. She didn't carefully map out every place she'd get the facts wrong or just wing it based on her own grasp of pop psychology. And the fact that this book was printed in bales and continues to circulate just means that someone has the responsibility of calling attention to the out-and-out problems when beginner's start looking to them. Aren't we all trying to stagger towards some truth?
I understand your desire to defend Arrien personally, but my only interest is in the content of her book and the way that content does or does not help people studying the Thoth. I can respect your feelings for her, but I am under no obligation to share them, nor will I gloss over her book's shortcomings for fear someone might discover her foolishness with regard to Crowley's deck. I see no need to tiptoe around error to spare her feelings. With all due respect, I didn't buy the book for her feelings. I bought it for the content. And while Crowley's mistakes are the result of a vast lifelong study crowned with the creation of the deck in question, her mistakes are the result of New Age sloppiness and inattention. That doesn't make her a bad person, it just makes
The Tarot Handbook a bad book.
Now, obviously I can only offer my opinion of her book. It is
my opinion. I did not say the book was worthless, but that I found it "virtually worthless"; You'll notice that I went on to add that if anyone can glean some kind of value from it then they must have oceanic patience and much more time than I'd be willing to invest. I was responding above the Ligator's suggestion that Arrien's book provides some kind of "guidance" or "framework" for study of the Thoth. I shouldn't
need to take Arrien's class or know her intimately for her book to be of value. And just because I find her book silly and pointless doesn't mean I have any feelings about her; I shouldn't
need to have feelings about her to find worth in her book. Why should I? I keep saying it: I'm not standing in anyone's way. Everyone should of course feel free to drink at whatever wells they choose.
Whether or not Arrien's book deserves denigration is another topic. Frankly, it is impossible to denigrate something that spends so much time unwittingly belittling itself with no help from anyone... I have only stated facts and opinions based on those facts. I'll stick to my guns there. If I read bullshit I'm going to name it so. If that bullshit is adamant and arrogant, double ditto. I won't roll over just because she's "really nice" in person. Despite your protestations, Arrien most certainly DOES intend her book to replace Crowley's; in her introduction she states pointedly that his
Book of Thoth "hindered" study of the deck and that he is merely an interpreter of the Tarot he
created.
She takes pains to let us know how nasty, complex, misguided, and vestigial she finds Crowley and insists that the entire deck is the result of Harris' vision. Whether or not she is a bridgebuilder, her book on the Thoth remains a hopeless clutter of mistakes and supposition based on virtually no researched grasp of the material.
Let me say it again, clearly and respectfully: I'm not trying to convince any of Arrien's fans that they shouldn't love her; I am only trying to warn the innocent and unwary that when it comes to the Thoth she has a habit of offering mistakes and fabrication, then spinning them into a foolish idiosyncratic meringue. Some people may find infinite wisdom and possibility in that. But Ligator characterized the thread's early
supported criticism of Arrien's
Handbook as rash and unfair. It was neither, as even you've admitted. I only posted the above response to point out that people had offered hard evidence of her mistakes and impatience with the way these mistakes enter discussions of the Thoth because of the book's ubiquity. I wasn't proselytizing; I just felt it deserved comment.
Scion