Atheism and Ligotti
 

I have noticed that many of Ligotti's works seem to presuppose a non-theistic, materialist worldview despite the supernatural elements that many of them contain. It seems very clear to me that Ligotti is an atheist (or strong agnostic, which is, in practice, pretty much the same thing, though whether he would label himself this way is debatable). This is particularly evident when reading TCATHR, which seems to assume that the reader already assents to such a view. For me, this seems obvious, and being of a similar mind in such matters, I had not really given it much thought. However, it has recently occurred to me that this could be part of the reason why his works do not speak to many people the same way they speak to me. In a similar way, Lovecraft was also an atheist (very clear in his writings; though he was explicit about it and even wrote an essay saying so that has been reprinted in several anthologies of antireligious writings), and perhaps this 'feature' of his writings and worldview is why it took so long for general recognition (which is still by some accounts incomplete).

In contrast to my perspective, one of the highest profile Ligotti-philes is David Tibet of Current 93, who apparently now identifies himself as a Christian. This would seem to contradict what I have just stated, although Tibet's 'Christianity' seems to be very different from most others who self-identify as Christians.

This made me wonder whether or not others here approach TL's work from a similar perspective as I do, or if there is a diversity of religious viewpoints in those that appreciate his writings. Anyone care to share?

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

I also am, to use your term, a strong agnostic. Based on what we know of the universe, I think that atheism is the most reasonable conclusion; but over-confidence in the current state of human knowledge (impressive as it is) hardly seems to be warranted, so my view is agnosticism-leaning-toward-atheism rather than atheism pure and simple.

I’m not happy with this view of things because, although literal Christianity gives me the the willies (it would be like living in a “celestial North Korea,” as Christopher Hitchens aptly puts it), it seems intolerable to me that we’re all just dying animals and that everything we ever do is ultimately for naught. It would be nice if there were some sort of benign transcendental order, but I don’t see any reason to think there is.

This gloominess separates me from some “movement” atheists who seem concerned to put a happy face on atheism; this may be a political need, a public relations need, but it doesn’t necessarily follow from the philosophy of atheism. I don’t doubt that some atheists are cheerful people, but I think this is more a matter of temperament than anything else. I have never been severely depressed, just frequently anxious and glum -- also a matter of temperament rather than philosophy. If I were a religious believer, I would no doubt be a glum, brooding believer, as some people are.

I have noticed that a number of Thomas Ligotti’s appreciators are religious believers, and I suspect they are believers of the melancholy, brooding type rather than the relentlessly-cheerful type. Some of the greatest religious writers in history have seemingly taken relish in describing the awfulness and intolerableness of the human condition; they think they have an otherworldly ace up their sleeve, and this may psychologically enable them to be more honest about the hard truths of human life than secularists who don’t fall for religious myths but can’t stand to be without this-worldly myths of their own (such as human goodness, inevitable political progress, and forthcoming technological “fixes” for all these problems). My own favorite this-worldly myth is the value of the arts and of intellectual pursuits such as philosophy and science, and I’m also somewhat optimistic about technology, although I probably won’t see any wondrous transformations in my lifetime.

I’m still thinking about these matters, trying to come up with a tolerable modus vivendi. After all, if one isn’t going to off oneself (and I’m not – again, a matter of temperament), then one might as well live as happily as one can. One of the benefits to me of reading CATHR is realizing that pessimism is a matter of degree. Call me a coward or a pragmatist: As pessimistic as I am, I don’t follow that road all the way to its end. Unlike Thomas Ligotti and Peter Zapffe, I’m quite willing to live in denial much of the time, and I think that much of what we do in these states of denial is of value, at least ephemerally. I can’t handle living on the knife-edge of psychological angst and clear-sighted terror all the time. But I can’t even begin to convince myself that religion is true, either. So I’ll have to make do (as all of us do, even the religious, and even Thomas Ligotti, I suspect) with smaller and more mundane consolations now and then as I can.

Wow. This was longer and more personal than I intended, but I guess I’ll post it anyway. Also, I don’t wish to offend anyone with the views expressed above; I understand that others have different opinions; I’m just explaining what I think.

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

I consider myself a fairly strong agnostic, and appreciate Ligotti from this perspective. For me, religious uncertainty only enhances Ligotti's horrors. Though I also found myself appreciating a lot of TCATHR, Ligotti's fiction always struck me as containing the most shocking suggestions of human existence and supernatural facets beyond.

I suppose on a personal level, I share an understanding of the Ligottian melancholy. Like gveranon, I can't go all the way in strongly embracing this 24/7. However, I do understand it since I have long kept a dour-leaning view of existence. And I'd imagine a good deal of Ligotti's admirers tilt in this direction too, religious beliefs notwithstanding.

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

I am an atheist. Certainly one of the reasons, but not the only reason, that TL's work appeals to me is his dark vision. I am also curious to know the religious demographic that composes Ligotti's readership. Robert M. Price, another skeptic who knows a little something about religion, made the observation: "Virtually all of the fiction of Thomas Ligotti enshrines and presupposes a very definite worldview." This was the first line in his essay "The Mystagogue, the Gnostic Quest, the Secret Book". I would agree that Ligotti seems to be an atheist, but he has made a few statements that hint at the possibility that he thinks there is something evil behind it all. I'll try to find a few later.

This is actually an interesting time to be an atheist. The current wave of "New Atheism" (I dislike the term, but that is what everyone is calling it) in the best selling books by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, etc. has brought a great deal of discussion to the forefront. Youtube has excellent lectures by the above named authors. Check out the Beyond Belief Conference in 06, the Atheist Tapes, and Atheist debate. (Not the one with Kirk Cameron! If you watch that, you'll never forgive yourself.)

I am a news junky when it comes to this subject, especially the stealth creationism movement of Intelligent Design. I have even read a few of their books: Darwin on Trial by Philip Johnson and The Design Revolution by William Dembski. Their main concern is not with the truth, of course, but with the implications of scientific materialism that strips away life's meaning and the special place of humanity in the universe. ID was completely defeated in the Dover Trial a year or two ago. PBS just released the program "Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial" available to view for free on their website.

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

I call myself a Buddhist but I delve much more into the practice and disciplines then into the mystical or historical aspect. I find much merit in the works of Chogyam Trungpa (despite his prediliction for showiness and strong drink). These works relate the way that ego works in the mind and how most of what we do that we call spirituality really only feeds the ego. The simplest form of meditation is to watch the breath. Through this simple act we begin to actually observe the workings of our minds and how prevalent and dominating our thoughts are. The idea is that if you do this persistently over a long period of time the thoughts you think have much less power over you. I'm still in the learning stage and my thoughts are still stumbling blocks to my growth and awareness.

However, for most religion I am very turned off by the idea that if you invest your money and effort into this vague thing - belief - dogma - call it what you will - that you will be accepted into heaven - but only if you follow OUR rules - don't you dare look into other beliefs or practices.

It is a curious thought to ponder on the Buddhist idea of realms - specifically hell realms - not quite as absolute or horrifying as the christian version - just someplace you spend a little time in - that maybe the place we're in right now may be a hell realm.

Man - sounds like a Ligotti story!

alec...

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

I am a student of religious and esoteric practices. I travel through them as a means of discovering aspects of this, so seeming, distinct human phenomena. Currently, the closest thing to my personal path is Left Hand Path Chaos Magic(k). Only a fool fails to realize that the world is made of symbols and all things end in mystery. As Ligotti said, we are the mystery making machines. As Willy Wonka said, we are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams. It is our lot, it is part of the reason we are not given the truth, to find what we will come up with on our own. Even if there is no such thing behind it.
I believe Ligotti to be a kind of shaman, whether he knows it or not, but I think he does. I present "The Order of Illusion" in Noctuary as evidence. I found it to be every bit as filled with magickal learning and occult knowledge as anything being written on the subject today. The same is true for "The Prodigy of Dreams" and really I could list several more.
Yes, maybe it is all worthless, but to who? I mean if there's nothing out there anyway, then who are we? To me, to say it is worthless and do nothing about it, is to give up your right to "Godhood". But to realize it is worthless and attack it with all your vicious wondering, that is the path of true rebellion. Creation is a blight on the purity of the void, as the void is a carbunkle on the ass of what came before it. There is no out of here. Nothing I have personally seen, says you get to leave.
I deal sometimes with anti-cosmic current thinkers who see the cosmic order as the limiter of potential and wish to return to a state of mystery or develop isolate consciousness. Not to become one with "god", but to become "god". While I do favor the individual over the group, I'm not sure it can be done, but I'm glad someone thought of it! And I love Ligotti's and Zapffe's 'pessimistic' viewpoints. With all they struggle to make low, they only serve to discover a deeper stratum of preciousness in things.
On a last note, what has brought me to the path (words are often inadequate)I'm on seems, of course, fatalistic. However, it does seem I am able to manipulate my environment through seemingly unrelated actions, which seems to reinforce the idea of the connectivity of things. This is actually represented in some new(ish) physics and hologram theory. A whole in every part. Change the part to change the whole.
And then we have Corporate Culture, the inheritors of the hermetic traditions. The rulers of today have the benefit that no other rulers have had in all of history; the accumulation of knowledge of all the rulers in history, along with the knowledge of their court magicians. All their corporate magic, positive thinking and neuro-linguistic programming.
The brain does not remember words as such. It records everything in a series of pictograms. Therefore, concepts such as sacred geometry (the shapes that make up all things) or sigilization (the fundament of modern chaos magick as put forth by A.O. Spare) seem particularly relevant in a material world, where most action revolves around acquiring, creating or trading things. They put their logos out there, specifically designed to appeal to you at an other than fully conscious level.
And, after much experimentation, the conclusion is that I seem to be able to do it, too. I am currently werking on shaping the future of some future persons who will be influenced by my impending ART, manifesting through occult film.
And if you were of mind, you could take a statement of desire, remove all vowels and repeating letters and turn what remains into a magickal symbol (sigil)and see what happens. Or you could devise your own system of magickal practice and ritual and pray to gods who are only aspects of you and of us all and explore what it means to be that and see what happens. I bet something will. So what does that mean? And so I can do magic, so what? Eventually, it comes down to "what do you want?" Then comes "How bad do you want it?"
So I ask you, what do you want? If you see nothing, but a cardboard facade propped up against a sham of reality, that's wonderful, I'd love to hear about it. If you see nothing, but rainbows and sunshine and kittens smiling at you as you pass by everyday of your life, that's terrifying, and I'd love to hear about it and what it means to you. I myself refuse to stop creating creations and dreaming dreams and honoring the gods of the mythos that lives within me, even if they are only a Doll's gods, a puppet's gods. Lord of the Living Effigy.
So please, continue to create, and I will be happy to praise and mock you for it, staring at you with my eyes spinning like mad marbles, all the while trembling with wonder.

Sin cerely,
Arthur Cullipher
The Black Ferris
Clockwerk Pictures

Omnia exunt in mysterium.

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

Mr. TBF, although you declare yourself to be an occultist, it seems that you have embraced an outlook which both mocks and emulates the more traditional. Adopting a different system of beliefs and practices strikes me as more of the same, especially the ritualistic aspect. Religion is religion is religion, is it not?

From a cathedral of Doghood,
Rover

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

Indeed, Rover.
des

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

Well, in the sense that the word, 'Religion' is a woefully inadequate word to describe a huge range of belief structures yes. Christianity is not Buddism is not Haitian Voudon is not Atheism is not Jainism is not Left Handed Chaos Magick is not Wicca is not Islam (etc etc) though. But yes, Rover, it seems you're right in what TBF is getting at if in a bit of an excitable way. Maybe because he's found a new way of looking at the world (born again in a sense). Bit dated though. Really TBF, Chaos Magick? What is this? The 1980s!!

Re: Atheism and Ligotti
 

Wow! Strange that I was checking this thread to see the answers to Adam's original question...
(This made me wonder whether or not others here approach TL's work from a similar perspective as I do, or if there is a diversity of religious viewpoints in those that appreciate his writings. Anyone care to share?)
...and I find that people are more interested in picking apart my beliefs. Which is fine, although I had no intention of doing the same to any of you. However, the door has been opened, so let's see what's inside.
"Mr. TBF, although you declare yourself to be an occultist,"
Only because of the question posed. Actually, I said I am a student of religious and esoteric practices.
"it seems that you have embraced an outlook which both mocks and emulates the more traditional."
This is true. That is what children do. I am a child in a foreign library, starving for knowledge, desperately attempting to read books written in languages I do not yet understand.
"Adopting a different system of beliefs and practices strikes me as more of the same, especially the ritualistic aspect."
Perhaps. Certainly when you study enough of them, at their core is a central theme. And there's usually a snake, a tree and a woman, responsible in some way for bringing us into the duality of existence. And in each there is the dual path. Either creation is beautiful and from "God" (it's just a metaphor, don't get uptight) or creation is horrible and is from "The Devil". And in each of those, there is the argument of which is which. However, the major point of what I'm werking with as far as ritualistic aspects go, is that there is a machination at work here and if you tinker with some of its subtler aspects, you can make things happen in your life. Just as if you tinker with the physical. A "spell" is only a gathering of related objects in order to appeal to a psychological archetype. Be it a prayer or an incantation or a sales pitch or a work of art, a spell is a spell is a spell.

"Religion is religion is religion, is it not?"

"Well, in the sense that the word, 'Religion' is a woefully inadequate word to describe a huge range of belief structures yes. Christianity is not Buddism is not Haitian Voudon is not Atheism is not Jainism is not Left Handed Chaos Magick is not Wicca is not Islam (etc etc) though."
I see this as sort of like saying all art is essentially the same. Of course, all art is either made from some animal, vegetable, mineral or some concocted amalgum of those substances. But how many different things can you make with them?
"But yes, Rover, it seems you're right in what TBF is getting at if in a bit of an excitable way. Maybe because he's found a new way of looking at the world (born again in a sense)."
Thank you for not putting one of those winking symbols at the end of your sentence when you're mocking me. I appreciate it.
" Bit dated though. Really TBF, Chaos Magick? What is this? The 1980s!!"
It's not the 1980s!?!?!
Actually, as previously stated, it is only the closest thing to what I am doing. Is there some new millenial magic I should be aware of? Yes, I'm following in some footsteps, but I'm also following ways that are overgrown, untrodden, underexplored or unfinished altogether. That's what I'm doing whether you think me foolish or not. But I am not afraid to appear foolish.

I am also a juggler, a father, a fire performer, a stage magician, a Dollmaker, a filmmaker, a published author, a special effects artist, a telemarketer, a betentacled horror movie host, a clown, help run an international independent horror film festival, and love to eat #####. I have a lot of vices.

If you'd like to comment negatively on any of those things, feel free.

However, I understand how sad it must be to think the puppet show is so boring and your puzzle book is too hard and not at all what you wanted for your birthday. But perfect voids are expensive and I just couldn't afford one for you this year.

I didn't mean to upset you so.
So now, back to the original question?
Would anyone else care to share THEIR "beliefs"?

Sin cerely,
The Black Ferris