I read in Michael's presentation from one of the book launches it is actually intended to be read between mauve Zone and Ninth Arch, is that correct? I must have got distracted and missed it before.Īs Paul says, it's an extraordinarily detailed article, appropriate testimony to an extraordinarily detailed magical life! The presence of Spare is, in fact, duly and appropriately acknowledged towards the end of the article. Upon second reading, I confess that I am surprised that I said what I did above. However, this obituary wasn't intended primarily as an account of Grant's relationship with Crowley, Spare, Symonds, Germer or anyone else, but an account of Grant's life and work, into which flowed influences from a variety of sources, Spare and Crowley amongst them. As it was, the support of the Grants for Spare was made clear, as was their role in the resurgence of interest in Spare's work. There are all sorts of areas which could have been expanded upon and treated in more depth, but then it would have run to a much greater length, and that sort of space simply wasn't on offer. Given the limitation on space, I thought this obituary covered the ground rather well. This one had a page, which included a lovely photograph (not reproduced on-line) of Kenneth in his study in the mid-1970s. Obituaries in newspapers have limited space. I'd have found at least a decent paragraph for it. I'm pleased that an obituary for Kenneth appeared in such a well-read newspaper, but it hardly touched upon his association with Spare (despite the good points which it does raise).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |