The field of magic is a contentious one, rife with forceful personalities who maintain strongly held opinions and sometimes claim access to secret or hidden knowledge. It is a field characterized by numerous debates over esoteric minutiae, many of them pointless and reductive to the point of absurdity. Theories and facts may contradict, and even historic sources will differ wildly at times. When entering into a formal attempt to analyze or study something within this field, it is best to get a few things out of the way, lest you become bogged down in one of these arguments and lost in a wilderness of mirrors.
Magic or Magick?
Aleister Crowley popularized the use of “magick” to differentiate ceremonial magery from the more popular and recognized fakery of stage magic. This term has become the standard usage among most magicians, as such alternative spellings are seen to free one from the burdens associated with traditional spellings and create a separation between the illusory effects of the stage magician and the real effects produced by an occult magician.
However, I find this spelling pretentious and unnecessary for a consideration of the history and practice of magical operations. From the outset, we know we are not discussing stage magic or its practitioners, so there is no need to remind ourselves of this distinction. If it does become necessary to discuss stage magic and its place in occult magic, then I trust the reader is intelligent enough to maintain a distinction, even if the two are spelled the same.
Magic or Magick?
Aleister Crowley popularized the use of “magick” to differentiate ceremonial magery from the more popular and recognized fakery of stage magic. This term has become the standard usage among most magicians, as such alternative spellings are seen to free one from the burdens associated with traditional spellings and create a separation between the illusory effects of the stage magician and the real effects produced by an occult magician.
However, I find this spelling pretentious and unnecessary for a consideration of the history and practice of magical operations. From the outset, we know we are not discussing stage magic or its practitioners, so there is no need to remind ourselves of this distinction. If it does become necessary to discuss stage magic and its place in occult magic, then I trust the reader is intelligent enough to maintain a distinction, even if the two are spelled the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment