From: "Alice K. Turner"
Subject: Re: (urth) Crowley Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 03:07:35 -0400 bee, >>Little, Big can be especially bewildering if >>you are not familiar with the symbolic devices >>he develops in his earlier novels. Hmm. By this time I suppose I'm pretty conversant with Crowley but I don'= t know what you mean by this. LB does not seem to me to pick up on themes f= rom his three earlier books, other than details like cards and games. Not do they seem to have a lot in common. What am I missing here? Going back through our correspondence, the only other (possibly) relevant thing I said was >>Although Crowley is certainly intrigued, >>if not obsessed, with occult matters (you urthlings have convinced me that Gnostic themes in particular are explored in his novels), >>I find it hard to pinpoint >>where his actual sympathies lie. Smoky, like >>the protagonist of the =C6gypt series, frequently >>encounters strange goings-on--even falls in love >>with a semi-fantastic creature or two--but never >>really buys into the whole supernatural mindset. >>I suspect that one of the reasons Crowley mines >>the occult so heavily is because it is such a >>convenient metaphor for fiction in general. If >>there is a single dominant theme in Crowley's >>work it is the creation and perpetuation of >>stories. Crowley may believe in certain things >>that others consider fiction; he may not. I dunno. Crowley emphatically does not. So he says with considerable vigor in the interview printed both in mantis's chapbook and in the booklength -Snake's-hands- and also, slightly differently, in Locus of 20= 01 or so. But you are correct that he finds it a useful and even beautiful metaphor. -alga --