Talk:Personalities in Thelema

(Difference between revisions)

Current revision

Do we really want to put the women into the "Scarlet women" category as distinct from past OTO and AA members? I would be far more comfortable with the latter option.

I second that. There can be a separate listing of the historical "Scarlet Women" in the Scarlet Woman article! --Paradoxosalpha 05:59, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

Table of contents

1 Overlap

2 "in" Thelema?

3 Category Changes

4 Living Members: Data Reliability and Confidentiality

[edit]

Overlap

Part of the Scarlet Woman problem that Craig notes is the issue of overlap, which is even more true of notable OTO and A.'.A.'. initiates. There's Jane Wolfe, Wilfred Smith, Jack Parsons, C.S. Jones--all in both orders, and those just off the top of my head.

[edit]

"in" Thelema?

What does it mean to be "in" Thelema as specified in the title of this article? The only initiates of the original Golden Dawn order who considered themselves Thelemites were Crowley and George Cecil Jones, as far as I know.--Paradoxosalpha 06:20, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

These are good critiques. I can see this article's list growing quite long, so I think we need some basic categories. By all means, let's work this out and come up with logical ones that can carry new additions without inappropriately holding the current ones.

The more I think about it, the more it seems to me is that the only reasonable solution is to retitle the page simply "Personalities" (leaving "in (or near) THelema" implicit given it's a page on Thelemapedia), and on that page list everyone in alphabetical order by last name. Perhaps each name could be followed by a list of affiliations, like

Smith, Wilfred T. (OTO, AA)

--isomeme

I think we need some categories, or it might get unwieldy. I myself like the OTO Past Masters category and the Golden Dawn category. We could make one that is "Notible members of OTO and AA". I am also thinking about lists of people who Crowley mention promenently, but who aren't Gnostic Saints. Finally, I am thinking about adding the ancestors of Thelema, so to speak...the mystics and philosophers that influenced Thelema (but again, aren't GSs). Ideas? Ash

I really think any attempt at linear categorization is doomed. Where does Theodor Reuss go? (Past Master of OTO, member of OTO, Gnostic Saint.) If it were possible to link within a page (is it?), I could see a bunch of category listings that just listed names as links, pointing to the full entries in the format I proposed above. --isomeme

I don't see any real problem with putting an individual in multiple lists. The short description might even vary, based on the context. See, for example, the two entries for Charles Stansfeld Jones.--Paradoxosalpha 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)

[edit]

Category Changes

"O.T.O. Past Masters" really meant "O.T.O. Past Grand Masters," so I fixed the heading. I narrowed the focus of "Scarlet Women" to "Crowley's Scarlet Women," which had the result of moving a bunch of the entries into other categories. One of the benefits of the change, is that it no longer looks as if all of the "notable" members of OTO and A.'.A.'. were men.--Paradoxosalpha 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)

[edit]

Living Members: Data Reliability and Confidentiality

In my recent big revision to this page, I added Regardie to the "Notable O.T.O." section because he was in fact a IX° OTO initiate, as testified by surviving correspondence from Crowley. Now, during his lifetime, Regardie never advertized that fact. So my question is about Kenneth Anger. I know that he is rumored to be an OTO member, but has he publicly proclaimed himself to be one? If not, whether the rumors are true or not, they are unverifiable (due to OTO confidentiality policies), and I think Anger should be left out of the OTO category, while still being a Thelemite of unquestionable note. --Paradoxosalpha 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)

Retrieved from "http://thelemapedia.org/index.php/Talk:Personalities_in_Thelema"

 Part of the Scarlet Woman problem that Craig notes is the issue of overlap, which is even more true of notable OTO and A.'.A.'. initiates. There's Jane Wolfe, Wilfred Smith, Jack Parsons, C.S. Jones--all in both orders, and those just off the top of my head.
+== "in" Thelema? ==
+What does it mean to be "in" Thelema as specified in the title of this article? The only initiates of the original Golden Dawn order who considered themselves Thelemites were Crowley and George Cecil Jones, as far as I know.--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 06:20, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)
+:These are good critiques. I can see this article's list growing quite long, so I think we need some basic categories. By all means, let's work this out and come up with logical ones that can carry new additions without inappropriately holding the current ones.
+::The more I think about it, the more it seems to me is that the only reasonable solution is to retitle the page simply "Personalities" (leaving "in (or near) THelema" implicit given it's a page on Thelemapedia), and on that page list everyone in alphabetical order by last name.  Perhaps each name could be followed by a list of affiliations, like
+::Smith, Wilfred T. (OTO, AA)
+::--[[user:craig berry|isomeme]]
+:::I think we need some categories, or it might get unwieldy. I myself like the OTO Past Masters category and the Golden Dawn category. We could make one that is "Notible members of OTO and AA". I am also thinking about lists of people who Crowley mention promenently, but who aren't Gnostic Saints. Finally, I am thinking about adding the ancestors of Thelema, so to speak...the mystics and philosophers that influenced Thelema (but again, aren't GSs). Ideas? [[User:Ash|Ash]]
+::::I really think any attempt at linear categorization is doomed.  Where does Theodor Reuss go?  (Past Master of OTO, member of OTO, Gnostic Saint.)  If it were possible to link within a page (is it?), I could see a bunch of category listings that just listed names as links, pointing to the full entries in the format I proposed above.  --[[user:craig berry|isomeme]]
+:::::I don't see any real problem with putting an individual in multiple lists. The short description might even vary, based on the context. See, for example, the two entries for Charles Stansfeld Jones.--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)
+==Category Changes==
+"O.T.O. Past Masters" really meant "O.T.O. Past <b>Grand</b> Masters," so I fixed the heading. I narrowed the focus of "Scarlet Women" to "<i>Crowley's</i> Scarlet Women," which had the result of moving a bunch of the entries into other categories. One of the benefits of the change, is that it no longer looks as if all of the "notable" members of OTO and A.'.A.'. were men.--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)
+==Living Members: Data Reliability and Confidentiality==
+In my recent big revision to this page, I added Regardie to the "Notable O.T.O." section because he was in fact a IX° OTO initiate, as testified by surviving correspondence from Crowley. Now, during his lifetime, Regardie never advertized that fact. So my question is about Kenneth Anger. I know that he is rumored to be an OTO member, but has he publicly proclaimed himself to be one? If not, whether the rumors are true or not, they are unverifiable (due to OTO confidentiality policies), and I think Anger should be left out of the OTO category, while still being a Thelemite of unquestionable note. --[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 22:11, 18 Feb 2005 (CST)