From: REjohnmartin@akapost.comDIRECTEDEMAIL   
      
   On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:45:13 -0400, Chan Welbourne wrote:   
      
   > 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. :'(   
      
   That is a real time problem, alchemy being rather obscure and arcane   
   is wide open to be exploited in this way. To get past the Tarot and   
   Ouija board inspired reader is a serious issue. The only way is this   
   style of discussion.   
   --   
   http://youtu.be/xQVbBjgBS6A   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)