From: bleablah@mume.invalid   
      
   It happens that Wilford Dumont formulated :   
   > On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:48:24 -0400, John M. wrote:   
      
   >> 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.   
      
   > Dix has been on AFHP enough time that he is very credible. If readers   
   > of this newsgruppe don't want to take in the information, it's their   
   > heads in the sand, they have no excuses.   
      
   None except for the ones who don't have enough upstairs to comprehend.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)