I'm fascinated by occultists, though I don't believe in anything they say. What does /his/ think of Crowley, Gardner, and their ilk? Egotists building up cults of personality around themselves or quacks who genuinely believe what they teach?
Not knowing alot about Crowley, one can be both. Deguchi Onisaburo would be a good example. He most certainly delved into some very legitimate shamanistic practices, Yet he definatly built up quite a cult and was even charged with Lèse-majesté
I've always found the arcane sciences of Evola and his cultists more interesting than Crowley's work. More plausible.
Considering Crowley published somewhere over 5,000-10,000 books in his lifetime and only one deals with Tarot to begin with. No, he didn't base "most" of his work off of Etteilla.
You are thinking of Eliphas Levi, the French occultist, who Crowley claimed to be reincarnation of.
Evola held Crowley in high regard.
I never understood how someone who is a literal satanist can call himself "gnostic"
Anyone who considers Crowley as "satanist" has not read Crowley.
Like Julius Evola says; "If we are to associate Crowley with Satanism, it is because he himself invites us to do so."
This, you're conflating two different definitions of "satanist".
There's the theological and/or philosophical worship of Satan as a figure/idea (not around in Crowley's time), and "satanist" in the sense of "oh, this set of practices isn't Christian, so it's of the devil, just like all non-Christian religions". The latter definition was applied to the spiritualist and occult movements occurring at the turn of the century by Christian detractors, but didn't mean literal satanism.
Its basically modern, reformulated mythology. You are not really going to find anything new in occult works as in ancient legends, besides different sophistics. They all want to convey the same message.
>oh, this set of practices isn't Christian, so it's of the devil,
well, to be honest, it was more 'oh, this set of practices isnt sane, rattional, safe or even precisely consensual, so its a deranged form of decadence'