[UA] Illuminatus! (Was: Historical Ascensions)

[Doubting Eric]

On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Ian Young wrote:
> Michael Daisey comments on ILLUMINATUS! (or "The Illuminatus Trilogy"):
> 
> > </editorial on>
> >
> > God I hope not, as I consider it an incredibly self-indulgent
> > exercise in poorly written tripe that is bloated, confused and
> > declared "great" based more on the concept of its existence than
> > other terribly poor line-by-line writing.  It's a sophomore English 
> > assignment run amuck.
> >
> > </editorial off>
> 
> Whoa!  Editorial or not, put a leash on that hyperbole.
> 
> ILLUMINATUS! is *definitely* not everyone's cup of tea.  Like many
> gonzo/crackpot/in-yer-face books, or movies, or ice cream flavors, opinions
> are pretty polarised -- people are either going to love it or hate it, and
> very few people who've tried it will fall in the middle.
> 
> That said, ILLUMINATUS! is hardly required reading, but it would prove a
> pretty useful quarry for knocking off unrefined inspiration for your UA
> game.  Plenty of clued-in cabals, clueless cabals, renegade loners, and
> maverick crackpots, duking it out over a plot to initiate The End of the
> World.  And, as I've mentioned before, The Naked Goddess herself makes a
> guest appearance or two.
> 
> I think that as far as simple inspiration for your UA game goes, who gives
> a hang whether the source material is good or not?  Steal what you can,
> strip it down, build it up, and tune it for speed.  Why, hell, I have a
> plot for a UA game based on "My Dinner With Andre" bewing in my brain even
> as I write this...
> 
> Gone,
> Ian

Actually, I would recommend 'Masks of the Illuminati' (RAW without Bob
Shae) as another excellent example of UA writing. A gleefully muddled mix
of paranoia and true conspiracy. And well, the image of Einstein and James
Joyce investigating Aleister Crowley is just too perfect to pass up.

Eric