I see I am not alone in my madness.

Charles, thank you for sharing ideas from your esoteric collection! That's one of the reasons I started this thread - it's about ideas. And I love to get new ideas and new directions from consulting with my fellow serious mages.

I no longer can comfortably fit bookcases in my house, which is a dilemma, as I go through several books a week on various topics. Sooner or later, I will have to accomodate the ever-growing beastie of a library with more room.

Of course, starting a thread on books and then reading all of your wonderful suggestions aren't helping me contain the beastie, but then I wouldn't want to.

Hi, I have about 3000 books, not all on magic though. Other subjects include ghosts,smugglers,pirates,secret passages,The Titanic, crime,animals (particularly reptiles and amphibians) antiques,classic cars,witchcraft and the supernatural in general, some classics, anything a bit odd really.My oldest book dates from 1621 but is a hisory of Christ and not particularly interesting.

Oh, my, some serious readers here!

I'm a theatrical designer, so my library tends to be top-heavy with stuff on art history, architecture, design, theatre, movies ("The Art of Star Wars" type of material), drawing, illustration, computer graphics, and so on. This is what I grab for every time I think, gee, what if I designed an illusion in the style of...

Over the years I've learned to rely on the local public library for fiction and other material I want to read but don't need to own. Just don't let me near the bargain tables at B&N or Borders -- it takes a heckuva lot of control to not walk away with a pile of stuff.

Interestingly (to me, anyway), is that I picked up a lot of my magic library at second-hand bookshops long before the Web or e-Bay came along. Modern Magic, More Magic, Tarbell III, several Houdinis and Elliots, and other classics all came my way in this fashion. Just took a lot of shoe leather. But it was great fun.

Besides mentalism, I have hundreds of books in animation history, neurology, cartomancy, semiotics, oddities and Cultural Studies, from automata’s evolution to neuroscience applied to baboons.

Last month I found a great book about magic, religion and science: “The Philosopher’s Secret Fire: A History of the Human Imagination”, by Patrick Harpur. I think is one of the best books I had ever read.

Sounds interesting Enrique. I just ordered it.

Mark

Yes Thanks Enrique for contributing to my book count

I really like having books that are compilations of other material. I bought Syzygy at the IBM convention and it's an interesting read. Mystery school is another one that has a lot of great thoughts in it.

Probably the most influential book that I've added to my collection in the last year would have to be "Art and Magic" by Sharpe. What a thought-provoking collection of genius outlooks.

-Christian

I find it interesting that no one has mentioned a collection of dramatic works. We are on the stage -- use stagecraft -- dramatic timing -- lightinh -- make-up -- direction and scripted action and words. Yet few magicians (ther than very successful and well known ones) I have met have studied these things or counscientiously practiced them.

Magicians also have not wrung out the wonderful magic of modern plays like An Inspector Calls, The frenetic and hilarious comedy of The Complete Works of Shakespeare (Abridged) let alone the magical strokes and ideas in Shaw (Man and Superman comes to mind and Wilde.

Recent dramatic *(live)* magic strokes blended invisibly and seamlessly in Dracula and Blythe Spirit inb theaters off and on Broadway.

So -- the works of Clayton Rawson in BOTH of his skills grace my shelves, as do the complete works of Shaw, Twain, O. Henry, Peter Ustinov, Steve Allen (my plug for skepticism) and graphic novels andf collections all the way from EC Days through the new works of Gaiman and Gonick.

In fact, Gonick's "Urban Legends" is rich fruit to juice for routines. Just add creativity.

I also find the new CD and DVD rendition of the OLD works most helpful. Right now the cycle is that things about 35 years old are not being used or revamped for modern audiences. Stuff only 20 years old is -- and is being done to death in some not so clever variations. (I think that is why vaudeville died -- recycled material.)

I also have a large "locale" collection of ghost tales and real stories of Arizona and the West. These are too messy and real -- so have to be rewokred to make them magical -- therefore my Lost Dutchman Seance is NOT a ghostride for tourists, and the Ghost in Room 318 is based upon several modern "Ghosts" that "psychics" have been investigating in the Gasden Hotel and the Copper Queen Hotel, both in Southern Arizona.

I also have one most valued book in my collection. It is a Rubber Replica of a Grymoire that has silver letters indicating magical content. A skull grows out of the faux leather. I feel it is obligatory for me to insist all visitors to my home (who pass through ny seance room into friendship at least) handle this volume and study its contents -- as they are TRUE magic.

The first three pages are the furthest galaxies ever recorded (in rendered color) as found by the Hubble Station. One is several MILLION light years away. That IS magic. The last page that I insist all get to ---- is a plate glass mirror -- reflecting the viewer to himself. that is REAL MAGIC. It is in all of us!

GC

PS - Yes I have the obligatory works of Rice, Tarbell, Bobo, Anderson, Andruzzi, Burder, et al. They let me help commit the real world to starting a search for the "magic."

I agree. As I mentioned before Magic is about 20% of my bookcases. When creating magic, my partner and I often turn to using a theme or an idea that struck us while reading a piece of fiction or from some other dramatic piece. The "how" of the effect is the second step. Of course it helps that my partner has even more books than I do and is a genius!

Philip K. Dick's 'Valis' is quite mind-blowing, and has lots of nice themes to sink your teeth into...

Also Alexandra David-Neel's 'With Mystics and Magicians in Tibet', very easy to get hold of in America I'm told. Only a few copies available in Britain, though.

I'll put that on my list. I don't see it at Amazon retail so it must be out of print.

I did notice a lot from her on Tibetian Esoterica, thanks for the note!

It's sometimes printed as 'Mystery and Magic in Tibet'.

Hope you get hold of it...

Charles offers excellent advice for any who identify with a certain Burgess Meredith character in a particular Twilight Zone episode. Nevertheless, his library list raises 'Farenheit 451' questions, at least for me.

Are there sorts of human 'knowledge' that ought not be explored? The answer, for me, is clearly yes. Two authors in Charles' list in particular stand out: Burroughs and La Vey. The former 'accidentally' shot his wife and the latter intentionally castrated his son. At the risk of commiting a genetic fallacy, it seems dubious to me whether these individuals can offer significant contributions to the spectrum of human knowledge.

Obviously, my list is subjective; others might argue that La Vey and Burroughs (and others -- fill in the blank _______) regardless of their personal shortcomings, had, and continue to have, significant literary impact.

Charles' list raises the question whether there is or should be an objective standard dividing acceptable literature from objectionable sorts. It's an uncomfortable question, one unlikely to be settled here, but one which will hopefully provoke dialogue.

All right, start the flames!

Leland

Hmmm, I see your point, but don't all records of human experience tell us something about ourselves? The key is to use our own strength to put the pieces together as we see fit. When reading 'dangerous' works it is important to have built your strength up beforehand, and take what you want from them.

But, yes, words can be dangerous, so I see your point.

So who determines this magical "standard" of acceptable and objectionable?

I think opinions are fine, but you have no right to force them on others.

I agree with that.

Who can tell others what to read? We only have the right to impose limitations on ourselves.

Yes. As a Bizarrist I may have all sorts of books of things that I think are just total BS, but there is material contained that is valuable to me in presenting my art. I don't think including something in your library is a statement on it's veracity, just it's utility. They are two different things.

Hiya, Clifford:

By claiming that I have no right to force my views on others, you are actually forcing your view on me, thus achieving the very thing you sought to prevent (that is, the restriction of expression).

In the example above, if all expression is permitted, then those who seek restriction are in effect censored and subject to exclusion; if some forms of expression are restricted, then those who seek free reign are obviously excluded.

It, therefore, isn't really a question of WHETHER one view or another prevails; it's actually a matter of WHOSE view becomes the dominant one and WHY. Are there categories of expression which should be prohibited (helpful keywords here are "fire" "Holmes" and "crowded theater")? Or should all expression be allowed? What reason do we have for adopting either position?

Sincerely,

Leland Edward Stone

So by rejecting Fascism I am impeding your "right" to enslave me. That is utterly ridiculous reasoning. You can do better than that.

Exactly! If you want to censor your library, more power to you, my friend! Just don't even think about censoring mine. Again it's a moot point as the "standards" are undefinable by anything other than a arbitrary decision which no one is qualified to make. Now you are completely straying and into free speech and disrupting theaters. Look, a basic but profound tenet that works is - Do what you will, but harm none.

Being a member of society brings responsibilities and obligations. One of which is to adhere to the society's basic requirements for behavior, and on the other hand upholding your human obligations in case the society goes astray.

Society's obligation extends to our behavior in society, not solitary behavior, nor thought.

Let's avoid another Dark Ages, shall we?

All right, you two, outta the pool!

Mark