Welcome to Gary Lachman’s pages, where consciousness and culture meet, or at least get as close together as possible.
Hi, I’m Gary Lachman (also known as Gary Valentine), the writer, journalist, and musician who, at least according to one critic, is “an increasingly prolific engine of literate, well-written, and clearheaded books about esoteric history and ‘occulture’.” (Erik Davis at Techgnosis.com, bless him) Here you can find out about my books and music, discover links to some of my writings, and read comments people have made about my work. You can also find notices for my forthcoming books, and updates on my talks, lectures, interviews, and broadcasts. You can also leave your own comments, ask questions, provide answers, or simply say hello. As the cultural historian Jacques Barzun – currently defying entropy at 102 – remarked “The finest achievement of human society and its rarest pleasure is Conversation.” Who are we to contradict him? So please, join in.
June 9, 2011 at 1:51 am
I have just finished reading blank generation and to be honest I could not put the book down. I am now looking forward to reading your other work, I like the honestly in your writting.
Kind regards Jayne
November 7, 2011 at 11:16 am
Thanks for the kind words and I hope you enjoy the other books too!
November 7, 2011 at 11:11 am
currently reading ‘new york rocker’ and felt compelled to let you know how much i’m enjoying it. i thought i’d read enough about those people and that scene to know all i needed to know but your book feels so personal and true … a completely different angle on those times … just really enjoying it so much.
November 7, 2011 at 11:14 am
Many thanks, and I’m glad you’re enjoying it. All the best, Gary
December 6, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Hello Gary
I just finished your “In Search of P. D. Ouspensky.” I read it in two days – an excellent book! Your book helped me piece together a few more pieces in my big Fourth Way puzzle. I’ve studied and tried my best to follow this teaching for about 20 years. The school, or perhaps cult, where I got to know this teaching was the Linbu Society in Sweden, a very unknown off-shoot of the American Fellowship of Friends. It’s very interesting for me to see how people who studied this teaching long ago, including Ouspensky himself, struggled with so much of the hardship and lunacy that I and my fellow students in Linbu struggled with. To me there isn’t really any Fourth Way though. Just truth. And I mean I have found a lot of truth through studying and trying to apply the 4W teaching to myself and to my life.
Hard-earned truth though. As there was so much lunacy we went through. Seems to be a human thing: Whenever someone sets themselves up as guru and people follow these gurus too blindly, a lot of bad things happen. I seem to have survived OK though.
I’ve also always been interested in what went on inside both Gurdjieff and Ouspensky and always find it interesting to get more insight into these two unusual and gifted individuals. And of course – the timeless problem of the search for truth, or the search for a *way*, is very interesting. My own sentiment today is that there is no *way* which is the right one, but with the help of, among other things, the knowledge released by Gurdjieff and Ouspensky we may develop a completely new way. We’ll see what the future will bring.
Bjorn in Norway
December 7, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Dear Bjorn,
Many thanks for your message. I’m glad you enjoyed the book and got something out of it. I think there is much we can learn from Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, and the other figures in the ‘work’, both in an esoteric and a human way. I know I did. But I believe we can learn from them without the need for gurus or groups. Sadly, these tend to repeat the same problems one finds in ‘ordinary’ life, mainly clashes of egos and the need to dominate others. If my book has helped you see your way through some difficulties, then it has served its purpose. Ouspensky was – is – a hero of mine, and it was a chastening experience to discover where he made mistakes (of course, to ‘true believers’, neither he nor Gurdjieff or any guru ever does that…)
By the way, my book on Rudolf Steiner is translated into Norwegian, and is published by Flux. I was in Oslo in September, speaking at the Litteraturhusset about the similarities and differences between Steiner and Jung, and taking part in some other events to mark the 150th anniversary of Steiner’s birth.
All the best and again, many thanks for your comments.
Gary
December 14, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Hi Gary
Thanks for your reply. Yes, one has got to love Ouspensky. If we can say that Gurdjieff is a kind of archetype of the guru, then Ouspensky is the archetype of the student and the seeker. Who do we feel the closest too? I think it’s natural for us to identify with Ouspensky as we recognize so much of ourselves in him. He’s a guy I know many of us really would want to give a good hug, drink vodka with, and have long and interesting conversations with. I hope he is prosperous and happy where he is now.
I think that when studying these matters: the esoteric itself, the quest for truth, and how this quest plays out in the student-teacher relationship and in schools/groups(and so on) we definitely touch on something timeless: something which is above and beyond the daily hustle and bustle of society. And … it’s a wonderful thing, I’d say.
Good luck with your endevours -
Greetings,
Bjorn
December 16, 2011 at 3:46 am
Hello Bjorn,
I enjoyed your two recent letters. You sound like a decent fellow who has gone about his search for truth without becoming bitter about the disappointments he may have met on the way.
I myself like material that is straight forward and sensible even if esoteric, occult, spiritual or mystical. Rudolf Steiner was always a proponent of trying to speak clearly about the most exalted of spiritual perceptions or esoteric matters and he found a good biographer in Gary.
I was intensely involved as a student and follower of Steiner for 10 years, during which time I visited the Goetheanum in Basil and spent a year studying at the Anthroposophical college (Emerson College) in Forest Row, England, in 1977, but then I was introduced to an unknown order called The Universal Order which contained everything thing Anthro-phosophy offered me and more. Over a few years I gradually changed my allegiances. The Universal Order is a private Neo-Platonic/Christain/Hermetic system of spiritual guidance, instruction and training. I studied with them exclusively for 10 years and another 15 years while continuing to investigate other “Ways”.
In 2006 I came into the possession of an archive (approximately four full filing cabinet drawers) of a hermetic (secret) brotherhood which had, at one time, influenced, unknown to me and the other members of TUO, The Universal Order itself! This archive is apparently the complete system of Teaching and Instruction of this Order, the most important parts of which did not find their way into The Universal Order. Fortunately, the last 30 years of my studies have prepared me to understand and to accept the responsibility for this body of Teaching.
This teaching is for every human being, especially for those who want something beautiful and reliable, but unfortunately most people are not willing to recognize or accept it. If you are interested in a demonstrably true teaching and instruction I can post you the first of the public, introductory papers.
Best wishes,
John Urban
December 18, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Hello John, Many thanks for this. I’ll post it but I’d like to make clear that in doing so I’m not endorsing this or any other particular ‘school’ or organization. My own approach to these things is individual and I think that is the most productive one. But I’m happy to pass this on to other readers. Cheers, Gary
December 18, 2011 at 7:20 pm
Hi John
By all means. You could email it to me: belzebob at fastmail dot fm. Or maybe post a link here if it’s OK with Gary. We have to respect that it’s Gary’s blog and not a regular bulletin board.
Bjorn
December 18, 2011 at 10:00 pm
Dear Gary,
Thanks for your comment. Absolutely, I understand you are not endorsing any particular school by accepting any particular post. My letter was mainly addressed to Bjorn since his temperment seem to connect with the character of the archive material I found. And I like to share things. I also didn’t know if I sent a post to you if it would go automaticaly to Bjorn or not. Anyway, my post seemed (now that I read it over) a bit partisan and dogmatic, but I have always had trouble like that with my enthusiasms. I think I can work on expressing myself in clear but more neutral terms or tones.
Best wishes,
John U.
December 19, 2011 at 12:18 am
Dear Bjorn,
Thanks for your reply.
I posted a copy of the initial paper to your address. I was impressed by the clarity of the writing, and interested in the claims of demonstrability. In the last 30 years I have struggled through a
number of organizations and schools, so I am pretty demanding in the standards and rigor I expect from an author or teacher while at the same time hoping for some “heart” or fervor. I have read the Neo-Platonists for years and was educated in Physics and Mathematics; Epistemology was my Philosophical area of interest.
I have copied the original exactly except for a Post Office box address that was given at the end. The papers were inexpensive mimeographs mostly in purple ink and spaced as you see it. I gather from the papers themselves that they were probably compiled and written somewhere between 1900 and 1920.
I hope you enjoy the paper. Please let me know what you think of it.
John U.
December 19, 2011 at 4:24 am
Hello Bjorn,
Thank you for your quick reply. Regarding your comment that “there’s nothing concrete/practical in this short paper”. But in the paper itself those who wrote it make the definite (concrete) claim to: (1) be “in possession of the outlines of. . . a system. . . approaching to universal knowledge”, and (2) make a definite (concrete) offer to “actually” (concretely) impart the knowledge of the system to the interested reader, and (3) definitely claim to be able to “show/ demonstrate” (logically-concretely prove) its truth to the reader.
These three items seem definite (concrete) or actual (concrete) or logically demonstrable (concrete) to me. Perhaps you have other definitions or uses in mind when you use the words “concrete” and “practical”? But this is a short paper merely to announce the existence and the availability of the system. It is an entire system of knowledge to be both presented and proven which would take numerous papers and time and effort.
Best,
John U.
May 20, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Loved your Swedenborg book!
http://swedenblogian.blogspot.com/2012/05/not-snarky-afterall.html
May 20, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Dear Susan,
Many thanks. I’m glad you did.
All the best, Gary