| |
|
Well, the two authors do essentially say the same thing, but they come from two different angles and justify their views a bit differently.
Carroll's writings are directed towards an audience with knowledge and experience of western ceremonial magick. His justification of his views(especially in Liber Null and Psychonaut) presupposes familiarity with the established viewpoints in mainstream western occultism. Liber Kaos is just to odd to be true, as a social scientist, I find his aeonics a bit 19th century, his use of formulas arbitrary, but I like Liber KKK as a practical training manual. Phil Hine is writing to the children of the 80s self-help guides and Llewellyn magick-light products. He uses a language that is accessible to a larger audience, and more suited to humorous asides. Also, Hine do not remain that fixed to the thelemic views of original chaos magic, something I find really refreshing.
I personally like both authors, sometimes I feel like their books are exerting a bad-cop/good-cop influence on my work, which is quite effective. |
|
|
