Grist to Whose Mill

[nyar261]

This was the hardest of the Nightside Narratives for me to read, betraying as it does a very "first novel" roughness, but it turned out to be a "good yarn" by the end.    

The most surprising thing about it was the incredibly averse portrayal of the character obviously based on Crowley, and of the Book of the Law, etc.   Was this a conscious attempt to portray the nightside aspect of the "Demon Crowley," or did Grant have a temporary aversion to Crowley at the time the novel was conceived, or is there another reason for this portrayal?   Certainly the "roman a clef" aspect of it is akin to Crowley's "Moonchild," but as far as I know, AC was pretty straightforward in casting his "enemies" in a negative or satirical light.  I'm puzzled as to Grant's intent in giving AC and the concept of the New Aeon such a seemingly negative spin. 

[Michael Staley]

It's my opinion that there were several reasons for this. At the time that Grant wrote this novel, he was steeped in Advaita, and was I think a little disillusioned with magick. More details of Crowley's somewhat colourful life were coming to light via the diaries and other documents which Yorke was collecting at the time, and of which Grant was making typed copies. Then I think there is a playful element in the depiction of some of the characters; some of it is quite riotous, and not necessarily to be taken at face value.

The typescript of Grist to Whose Mill? was mislaid for decades, and only re-discovered a few months before Kenneth's death. It being such an early work, had Kenneth been up to it, he would have gone through it again with a fresh eye and perhaps revised aspects of it.

[Ariock]

If Henrik B is on here, he has a great "cheat-sheet" matching the characters in Grist to their real-life counterparts.

[nyar261]

Thanks for the insight, Michael! And thanks, Ariock - I've seen a couple of helpful "cheat sheets."

[kylefite]

Personally, I can't help but think that Grant had a blast warping his real-life impressions into these fictitious characters. Crowley's reputation as the embodiment of evil was the perfect springboard for a disincarnate villain. I also suspect that Grant would have anticipated Crowley's appreciation of such appropriation. After all, Crowley was the ongoing cause of all his own bad press and, for better or worse, used it to keep himself (and thus his writing) in the spotlight. We find a similar approach in Bruce Dickinson's Chemical Wedding. "Tabloid Therion" is just too good not to have fun with. In fact, I have sometimes wondered if Crowley himself didn't come up with the description "The Wickedest Man in the World." I have imagined him suggesting it to an unwitting press connection as another publicity stunt. As discussed on Lashtal threads, Crowley seems to have overestimated the tendency of his audience toward intelligent inquiry and perhaps more people know that title than have read a single book.

But back to Grist, I thought it was wonderful and I'm not sure I totally agree with Nyar on the "first novel roughness." In between the extremely colorful characters, there are some gloriously poetic and profound passages which dazzle as they dance between Ineffable Reality and Sensual Illusion. It IS a "good yarn," weaving wisdom throughout the patchwork of mystery, history, horror and hilarity.

[noctivagus]

I myself just ordered the book and I'm looking forward to read it

[Michael Staley]

One of the interesting things about Grist to Whose Mill? is that it foreshadows a period of disillusionment on Grant's part with Crowley in particular and magic in general. Grant relates in Remembering Aleister Crowley how Eastern mysticism was and remained his first love. It was a current in which he immersed himself in the early 1950s, becoming a contact-point in the UK for Haranath devotees, taking an increasing interest in the work of Ramana Maharshi, and writing a number of articles which were published in several Asian magazines. Something reignated Grant's passion for Crowley and Thelema, though, because otherwise he would not have launched New Isis Lodge in 1955, let alone embarked on his subsequent body of work.

Not only is advaita not incompatible with Thelema, but it is at the very heart of it via, for instance, the 0 = 2 formula, exemplified best perhaps in the extended final section of Crowley's Liber V vel Reguli, and in many other places in his work. It's my opinion that immersion in advaita sensitised Grant to this affinity, resolving his period of disillusion.

[Sarah MacKenzie]

Jul 26, 2014 12:54:00 GMT Michael Staley said:

Not only is Thelema not incompatible with Thelema, but it is at the very heart of it via, for instance, the 0 = 2 formula, exemplified best perhaps in the extended final section of Crowley's Liber V vel Reguli, and in many other places in his work. It's my opinion that immersion in advaita sensitised Grant to this affinity, resolving his period of disillusion.

Hi Michael.

Possibly a typo. Shouldn't the start of this paragraph read "Not only is advaita not incompatible with Thelema....."

Regards,

Sarah

[Michael Staley]

Thanks for pointing that out Sarah. Now corrected.

[Nalyd Khezr Bey]

Strangely I bought a copy of Grist to Whose Mill? not long after it came out and for some reason I've still not read it. The timing just never felt right somehow. After looking over this thread though I feel I probably should give it a read so that I can contribute something more meaningful to the discussion.

I can say something about my initial impression of the physical book itself when it first came out. Even though I do like the uncommon picture of Grant on the cover and the addition of the similar photo next to the title page, for me the cover almost detracts from the collective aesthetic of the other "Nightside Narratives" as well as the trilogies with their usual Steffi cover art. I kind of have to tell myself that this choice of cover is a tribute to the man himself by placing him front and center and saying "here is the man responsible for this body of work you've all been inspired by for so many years". As I said though, I've not read the book yet so maybe the cover photo will prove to have a context within the story.

[artilect]

Oct 4, 2013 18:49:32 GMT Michael Staley said:

The typescript of Grist to Whose Mill? was mislaid for decades, and only re-discovered a few months before Kenneth's death. It being such an early work, had Kenneth been up to it, he would have gone through it again with a fresh eye and perhaps revised aspects of it.

Interesting.  This does beg the question as to why a typescript found so late was deemed fit to publish whilst Monolith, having been worked on for a longer period of time and presumably being more developed, was pulled.  We know the answer to this...it was Kenneth's wish for it to be shelved, which is completely understandable.  Nonetheless it's still puzzling and tantalizing that this work, or even a synopsis of its content, will never see the light of day.   Fitting then that it will forever live up to its title as a mysterious looming presence lurking somewhere out there, observed but imperceptible to us. 

[Michael Staley]

Feb 28, 2015 5:55:22 GMT artilect said:

Oct 4, 2013 18:49:32 GMT Michael Staley said:

The typescript of Grist to Whose Mill? was mislaid for decades, and only re-discovered a few months before Kenneth's death. It being such an early work, had Kenneth been up to it, he would have gone through it again with a fresh eye and perhaps revised aspects of it.

Interesting.  This does beg the question as to why a typescript found so late was deemed fit to publish whilst Monolith, having been worked on for a longer period of time and presumably being more developed, was pulled.  We know the answer to this...it was Kenneth's wish for it to be shelved, which is completely understandable.  Nonetheless it's still puzzling and tantalizing that this work, or even a synopsis of its content, will never see the light of day.   Fitting then that it will forever live up to its title as a mysterious looming presence lurking somewhere out there, observed but imperceptible to us. 

There's not really any comparison here. Grist to Whose Mill? was a finished novel, the typescript of which Grant had mislaid until coming across it a few months before his death. After it was discovered, he invited me to consider it, I offered publication, and contracts were exchanged.

The situation with Monolith is quite different. It was a novel which Kenneth had started many years earlier, but which he couldn't complete to his satisfaction. He took it up again after publication of the final Trilogies volume, and felt confident enough of its development to ask that it be listed as 'Forthcoming' in several books that came out subsequent to The Ninth Arch. I discussed the novel with him several times in those years, by letter as well as during meetings, and he was very enthusiastic about it. At one stage, around 2007, he was about to pass me a "publisher's copy" of the typescript, but in the event decided that he wasn't happy with it as it stood, and embarked on a substantial redevelopment. This, though existing in a combination of manuscript and typescript, was never completed, and shortly before his death he indicated that he did not want it to be published.

Kenneth never submitted his work to publishers before he was happy with it, and that's the way it will stay with Monolith. I'm aware that there is a great deal of interest in this work, and many would love to read it, but the author's wishes in the matter will be observed. I'm sorry, but there the matter stands.

[Gregory Peters]

With somewhat recent news of the 70,000 year old Python cult in Africa (https://www.apollon.uio.no/english/articles/2006/python-english.html), this bit in Grist to Whose Mill? gave me chills:

"There is a certain Serpent mentioned by the Ancients -- and even they mention it but rarely -- which was known to the dwellers in these Isles before the people who came from  Sumer arrived here. It was a thing abhorrent to them, but nontheless they themselves had legends concerning it and knew of its existence in Egypt and in Inner Africa[...]. 
[...] in the oldest Temple in the world [...] certain of the higher and most secret Priests of the infernal Cult prepared a chamber wherein as many as possible of their beloved Serpents were to be preserved, sealed off for centuries -- aeons is need be -- from the outer world."

Great book, I have thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Took some time as it sat on my shelf since it had been released. I tried to read it then, only to set it aside. Recent events brought it back to the forefront and I am not sorry! One of my favorites of Grant's fiction, with enough layers of subtlety that it will require multiplet re-visits in order to get as much of the Initiatic current out of it as possible!

[Gregory Peters]

Another note on this wonderful book as it is fresh in my mind. This is one of the clearest demonstrations of the the magical world and mind of Grant himself, how we walked the world of samsara and yet lived in other realms, and two often intersected in amazing and dramatic ways. Absolutely loved this tale!