From: bleablah@mume.invalid   
      
   Wilford Dumont explained on 8/10/2011 :   
   > On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:24:56 -0400, Sirius Black wrote:   
      
   >> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:23:48 -0400, Wilford Dumont wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:22:02 -0400, Sirius Black wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:21:22 -0400, Chan Welbourne wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> VD wrote :   
   >>>>>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:44:00 -0400, Wilford Dumont wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:43:10 -0400, John M. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I would like to jump in here to say that the reading of an alchemical   
   >>>>>>>> text (Potter, Chymical Wedding, Flamel, others) requires a training.   
   >>>>>>>> That does not mean that simple alchemical symbols cannot be pointed   
   >>>>>>>> out as Victor is doing, understood and made relevant. Think the Bible   
   >>>>>>>> which has its inner and outer knowledge sanctums. Both are relevant.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Well said.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Yes it is and a very good point. There has to be a level of trust that   
   >>>>>> you have in any teacher which I don't purport to be, btw. Any data,   
   >>>>>> information source, has to be credible, believable and understandable.   
   >>>>>> I have read enough of John Granger, Hans Andrea, Mark McClean and many   
   >>>>>> others to feel very comfortable with their understandings of alchemy.   
   >>>>>> I know enough about Ms. Rowling to feel comfortable with her...and   
   >>>>>> with the fully valid assessment that she has written a Septology using   
   >>>>>> alchemical symbology at its literary heart.   
   >>>>>> I also believe that she understands that there may be a small   
   >>>>>> percentage of her readership that will be able to tear open the   
   >>>>>> superficial layers of HP and get at the underlying, alchemical   
   >>>>>> symbology.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Not having to be an educated alchemical expert either as long as you   
   >>>>>> have a credible source to lean on.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> What is rather depressing is that there are very few people interested   
   >>>>> in trying to find out what marvels there really are in alchemical texts   
   >>>>> and imagery. :/   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Would you mention any names like "name" who posts here? lol   
   >>>   
   >>> For one.   
   >>   
   >> Werks4Me. lol   
   >>   
   >>> We seem now to live in a world of rhetoric, where people are trying to   
   >>> win us over to their particular viewpoint and who don't care at all   
   >>> about the true facts or original meaning of something.   
   >>>   
   >>> The now defunct group of historical posters to AFHP represent this   
   >>> group.   
   >>   
   >> Their viewpoint is that this alchemy stuff is all shit.   
      
   > They're Da Vinci Code experts. It is a bit sad that people take a   
   > novel that seriously as a guide to exploring paintings or alchemy.   
      
   I suspect the writer of that novel only saw his writing as a novel and   
   never expected that people would confuse his fiction with fact and   
   research. But it seems to have left a trail of nonsense behind it that   
   we inherit and have to try to clear up. :'(   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)