Reflections on the Title
should, perhaps, be curious what the hell the title of the book is supposed to
mean. We have already discussed a bit concerning Zos, so that part should be clear
enough or, at least as clear as I can make it which might be very different from
"clear". However, what in the name of Kia is a Logomachy and why does
Zos (or Spare) need one?
= Logos + Machy (ancient Greek)
Logos = word, rational discourse, governing
principle (thought, speech, account, meaning, reason, proportion, principle, standard,
Machy = war, battle, fight
Logomachy = Generally understood as a
"Battle of Words" or "Battle with Words" but the full pluralistic
sense of Logos allows for a lot more meanings than this. We might have "Battle
of thought" or "Battle of reasons". Perhaps we witness a "battle
between governing principles" or a "battle of meanings and standards".
However, it surely
takes two to battle. With whom is Zos (and/or Spare) fighting? Shall we presume
an unknown interlocutor? This is an interesting line of interpretation, what enemy
do you want to presuppose? Crowley and Spare knew each other and eventually had
a dislike for each other, might Zos be waging the first battle in the war between
Thelema and Chaos Magic?
Perhaps the battle is internal to the text, and
here Zos battles with himself? Or rather, the words, reasons, meanings, principles,
standards battle betwixt themselves. Perhaps a plurality of desires, giving rise
to the "ten thousand things" as the Tao Te Ching puts it, fight it out
in this sea of words all the while pointing the way to Kia and the shelter of
the Neither-Neither. This would suggest that we shouldn't necessarily demand or
expect a consistent unified interpretation whereby each statement in the text
can fall into an appointed place.
The Logomachy of Zos, then, might be the
endless words of the infinite flesh battling for all eternity for all words are
the words of Zos, and Kia is silent. In this sense at least, everything is the
Logomachy of Zos.