Patrick Riviere and alchemy

foofighter

Jedi Master
I have now read Riviere's "Fulcanelli", and while it is good to read that the old man seems to be having fun in his new dwelling, I am a bit puzzled with Rivieres "take" on what alchemy is. From some of his comments I get the feeling that he is what we usually call "puffer", meaning, someone who understands alchemy in the literal rather than allegorical sense. Since it seems strange that a student of Canseliet would get this fundamental so wrong, am I missing something here? I know that hiding things in plain sight is a key concept for alchemists, so maybe it is just that, and all is well. Did anyone else get the same impression, or am I missing something? Thanks!
 

nicklebleu

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I just finished his book as well ...

He alludes to a lot of things that he doesn't further elucidate, except pointing to his numerous books. This may be the due to the Alchemists way of shrouding in veil everything they say, or it may not. Unfortunately I haven't been able to get a copy of his works (not even in French), and I think that would be the starting point of any quest into this question.

On the other side, I haven't read much alchemical texts, so I lack a lot of background information, mostly about the history of Alchemy and the symbolism involved. I have decided to read more about this, so maybe after getting more background, I'll have a clearer idea about PR. However this may take some time - and time is of the essence ...
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Have a look at this thread:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11495.0


Added: Also, this one: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=25.0
 

foofighter

Jedi Master
Laura said:
Have a look at this thread:
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11495.0
Added: Also, this one: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=25.0
Thanks. So, from these discussions it seems I didn't get it wrong. That is so sad, because the background work he did on writing "Fulcanelli" was pretty good I think, although the style it is presented in does indicate a certain lack of self-work (lots of name-dropping, referring to himself as "we" and "our" books, and other such things). It's also strange, because if I remember correctly, Fulcanelli himself spells it out in rather plain text in Dwellings what the true nature of alchemy is. Weird. I guess it is just yet another example of "people see what they want to see".
 
Top Bottom