Occult, Esoteric, Magick, and Paranormal

392 readers

1 users here now

Discussion of weird goings-on

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-9

JK Rowling is an occultist (or possibly a group of occultists with Rowling as the figurehead), the Dealthy Hallows symbol is a sigil, and you can't convince me otherwise. (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ask me about how the Veil in OotP is the other side of a stargate to here.

Edited the image a few times bc typos.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] southsamurai 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Or, and let's be a bit more realistic about her skills as a writer, she picked symbols that looked cool while browsing things at a library with the usual entry grade books about magic.

Like, she's a mid tier writer that had next to zero world building. She would have have had to be intentionally bad at writing if she had a background in occult related studies or practices. And, considering how absolutely brain dead she often is, she's the world's best actor if she's really so devoted to whatever practice it is to seem that bone headed.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Brain dead? That is a bit harsh.

[–] southsamurai 2 points 2 weeks ago

I dunno, have you seen her reasoning for being a terf? Nobody using the arguments she's used is exactly a brain trust. I'm not talking about the fact of it, that just makes her a crappy person; it's the way she goes about it that makes me question her ability to think. Or, in another light, the lack of her reasoning since she's mostly just parroting malarkey blindly.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

If she is she isn't a very good one. You can generally tell when a writer has a solid grasp of the occult and magic and she just doesn't display any of that. She is a fantasist, and not great at that either. Or maybe she is an excellent occultist and just doesn't do any of it in her writing. She exhibits very static, very materialist thinking though so I don't think so.

I'm not familiar with Liungman's dictionary, and going by those quotes I don't think I am missing out. He seems to just list all the meanings he has heard or imagined. Maybe it's of use to an academic who wants to know what a certain mark could mean but I don't think it has much use to the practitioner. Analysing a sigil this way is entirely useless.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

No she’s just a hateful little shithead