[UA] Post-Modern...really?

[Joshua Knorr]

> than at "UA itself". Still, i would like to have more basis 
> on it. I "feel"it as a PM stuff, but can't really pin point what.

Here's one way to look at it: UA magic is fragmented, paradoxical and
intensely personal.  What's more, that applies not just to the nature of
magick itself but to the people that practice it.  Most adepts are
freaky, malajusted loners who have managed to turn a disjointed view of
the universe into a viable occupation.  Those who have banded together
into cabals or magical societies haven't gotten over these dysfunctions
so much as found people who are compatible with them.  They sacrifices
they make for magical power are weird and bizarre, and turn the prospect
of having a normal life into just another fantasy between trips to the
porno store.

And they're OK with that.

The concept that power corrupts, and magic has its price, isn't anything
new.  But as opposed to droning on about the bitter harvest they reap
for the spells they wield, they're fine with who they are.  They embrace
it.  They don't bitch and moan, they accept their nature and move
forward.  They're empowered by their dysfunction, not held back by it.

And that, as a stylistic message, is regarded as one of the things that
differentiate modernity from pomo.

> And talking about it...how is possible to classify UA magic 
> concept? Or simple isnt? For someone that will not play or 

Check out the discussion of the "Three Rules of Magic" that's in the
core book.  It's still in the 2nd Ed book, right?  To summarize, magic
in UA revolves around the concepts of paradox, sacrifice, and symbolism.
Magic is not studied by an individual so much as defined by that person.
And you always, Always pay a price in the end.

- Josh



_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua