Julius Evola

JULIUS EVOLA TIMELINE

1898 (May 19):  Giulio Cesare Andrea (mainly known as Jules or Julius for most of his life) was born in Rome, Italy.

1914:  Evola met Giovanni Papini, who in turn introduced him to the founder of the Futurist movement Filippo Tommaso Marinetti.

1915:  Evola began painting. His Sensorial Idealism period began.

1916:  Tristan Tzara, Hugo Ball and others created the Cabaret Voltaire in Zurich.

1918:  Upon returning from WWI, Evola had a spiritual crisis and contemplated suicide. Reading the early Buddhist text titled Majjhimanikàjo helped him recover temporarily.

1919:  Evola exhibited his Futurist works at the Grand National Futurist Exhibition.

1920:  Evola adhered to the Dadaist movement and corresponded with Tristan Tzara.

1920:  His adherence to Dada was the beginning of his Mystic Abstract period. Interior Landscape, 10:30 and Abstraction belong to this period.

1920 (January):  The first exhibition focusing solely on Evola’s paintings took place at the Bragaglia Art House.

1920:  Evola published a pamphlet, Abstract Art, in the Collection Dada series.

1921 (January):  Evola’s first exhibition abroad, at Berlin’s Der Sturm Art Gallery

1921 (May 9):  Evola’s art was exhibited at the Grotte dell’Augusteo in Rome.

1923:  More fascinated by philosophy and mysticism, Evola abandoned painting altogether.

1925:  Evola’s Philosophical Period began.

1925:  Evola published Essays on Magical Idealism.

1934:  Evola published Revolt Against the Modern World. 

1945:  In Vienna, Evola was hit by shrapnel during a Russian bombing and remained paralyzed from the waist down.

1958:  Evola’s book Metaphysics of Sex was published, and Evola began painting again, this time on themes connected to sex and women.

1963:  Art historian Enrico Crispolti organised a retrospective of Evola’s work at La Medusa gallery in Roma.

1974 (June 11):  Evola died in Rome, in his home (197, Corso Vittorio Emanuele).

BIOGRAPHY

Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola (1898-1974), [Image at right] known to most as Julius Evola, was an occultist, philosopher, expert on Eastern religions and political thinker, who characterised Italian conservative thought throughout the twentieth century. Born into a Catholic family, son of Sicilian parents. Vincenzo Evola (1854-1944) and Concetta Mangiapane (1865-1956), Evola seems to have opposed Christian religion since his early teenage years, when he discovered the writings of Otto Weininger (1880-1903) and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). In his own words, he “spent entire days in [his] library, in a dense but free reading regime” (Evola 1963:5).

By going through a process of de-gentrification, through the Florentine avant-garde movement, Evola discovered Giovanni Papini (1881-1956), author, poet and editor of several journals, which attempted to defy the Italian status-quo at the beginning of the century. It is through journals such as Leonardo (established in 1903) and the Futurist Lacerba (1913), both edited by Papini, that Evola first encountered two milieus which would heavily characterise his early years: art and occultism (Giudice 2016:115-22). Through Papini, Evola was introduced to the founder of Futurism, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti (1876-1944), and to Futurist painter Giacomo Balla (1871-1958), who in turn encouraged the young Evola to begin his artistic career as a painter. Evola’s first steps in the world of fine arts, then, may safely be dated to 1915, under the tutelage of two of the greatest representatives of the Futurist movement (A.M. 1920:3).

Evola’s involvement with the occult establishment in Rome was also very precocious. His first encounter with members of that milieu can be found in his collaboration with the Theosophical journal Ultra (established in 1907); his speeches at the Lega Teosofica Indipendente (Independent Theosophical League), an Italian splinter group of the Theosophical Society; and his friendship with the editor of Ultra and future member of Italian parliament, Decio Calvari (1863-1937). Evola remembered Calvari as a “personality of real value” who would introduce him to “the first notions of Tantrism” (Rossi 1994:44).

Evola’s deep interest in spirituality began in 1917-1918, when, having returned from World War One, he faced a spiritual crisis so profound that he contemplated the idea of suicide. Evola recovered from this crisis between the end of 1919 and the beginning of 1920, after having read a passage of an early Buddhist text, which he refers to as Majjhimanikàjo, obviously alluding to the Majjhima Nikaya (III c. BCE – II c. BCE). The passage in question reads: “He who, accepts death as death, and having accepted death as death, thinks about death, and thinks ‘Mine is Death’ and rejoices, he, I say, does not know death” (Batchelor 1996:12).

Evola’s brief painting career may be divided into two precise periods, the first one beginning just before leaving for the war in 1915 and ending with the overcoming of his spiritual crisis in 1920. This first period, which Evola himself called Idealismo Sensoriale (Sensorial Idealism), was marked by the Idealism propounded by journals such as Leonardo and by the pictorial techniques of Futurist painters such as Balla and Arnaldo Ginna (1890-1982), author of the Futurist Cinema Manifesto and member of the Theosophical Society (Ginna:1916).

Sensorial Idealism, according to art curator Enrico Crispolti, “represented the need for something more solid [than earlier Futurist painting] of a more precise aesthetics as well as a more synthetic technique, fresher and less chaotic” (Crispolti 1998:23). That Evola was interested in a more spiritual approach to painting may already be noticed in one of his 1917 articles dealing with art, “Ouverture alla Pittura della Forma Nuova” (Oeverture to the Painting of the New Form), in which the author argued for a necessity to reach a new spirituality unattainable by Futurism (Lista 1984:142). Spirituality, even in the Futurist period of Sensorial Idealism, was thus very prominent in Evola’s artwork: “The form is called spiritual in that it does not imply an intellectual representation of the object, nor the transcendental interpretation of the object […], rather, it is something absolutely foreign to the object, which is locked deep down within us” (Lista 1984:142).

The spiritual dimension of Evola’s Futurist period was attested to by Ginna, who remembered the exchange of books between himself and Evola in the following passage: “Evola, like me, was interested in occultism, reaching, according to his own inclination, his own conclusions. I do not know how to precisely define Evola’s studies and experiences, I only know that each of us held in our hands Theosophical books by Besant and Blavatsky and, later on, the Anthroposophical works of Rudolf Steiner” (Ginna 1984:136).

Of this period, Evola’s most characteristic paintings are without a doubt Fucina, Studio di Rumori (Forge, a Study on Noises, ca. 1917), Five o’clock tea (ca. 1918), [Image at right] and Mazzo di Fiori (Bouquet of Flowers, 1918). In 1919, Evola was invited to showcase his artwork at the Grand National Futurist Exhibition. There, the ideas derived from Sensorial Idealism were clearly manifested:

The paintings relating to Evola’s first phase of his research […] manifest, though a notable inclination towards a synthetic intention, an attention towards a dynamic ‘sensorial’ exaltation, still strongly conditioned by certain eventual correspondences rather than by an evocative-representative urge or by an abstract analogical resolution.

In his “Ouverture,” Evola wrote: “New form = spiritual form exclusively – greatest synthesis = beauty of the individual against the beauty of nature = architecture of thought. With regards to technique = abolition of flatness (decorative) + dynamic volumes of the three dimensions with lines that represent forces only” (Lista 1984:143).

At the end of 1919, Evola discovered the work of Tristan Tzara (1896-1963) and wrote his first letter to the Romanian artist, adhering to the Dadaist Manifesto Tzara had written in 1918. His wholehearted embrace of Dadaism signals at once the abandonment of the Futurist milieu and the need for a new expressive medium that only Dada could seem to provide Evola with. As art historian Federica Franci rightly pointed out, “while pre-war avant-gardes had a direct link to the art of the past (the expressionists with Van Gogh, the cubists with Cézanne, the futurists with Divisionism and Neo-impressionism), only the Dadaists drastically severed every bond with art’s old paradigms” (Iannello-Franci 2011:45).

His correspondence with Tzara began with a letter dated October 7, 1919, from which the reader can glean the florid condition of the vibrant Italian avant-garde scene, and the blossoming of a collaboration between the Italian and the Swiss/French avant-garde: “I am creating a Modern Art Journal in Rome (Govoni, Marinetti, Onofri, d’Alba, Folgore, Casella, Prampolini, Tirwhytt, Depero etc.). If it were possible to get in touch, as I wish, I would be most happy to ask you to be the first collaborator and to make this journal a source of Dadaist propaganda in Italy” (Valento 1991:16). 1920 was Evola’s annus mirabilis with regards to his artistic career. His “mystical abstract” period can be said to begin in this year, which was marked by two important events in Evola’s life: his first personal exhibition at the Bragaglia Art House in January, and the publication of his short essay Arte Astratta (Abstract Art) in the prestigious Collection Dada series. In a letter dated February 21, 1920, it is Evola himself who certifies the beginning of his mystical abstract period, writing to Tzara: “I have exhibited some Dadaist paintings in Rome” (Valento 1991:21).

In Arte Astratta, Evola’s spiritual tension, which was creating a gulf between him and his Futurist colleagues such as Balla, Marinetti and Enrico Prampolini (1894-1956), was analysed even more deeply than before. “Modern art will fall soon,” Evola concluded at the end of his essay, “and this will be the sign of its purity. It will fall, moreover, because it has been created with a method from the outside / because of a gradual elevation of sickness over partly passionate reasons / rather than from the inside / mystically.” Evola’s idea of art in this important essay is that of the artist’s work as a tiny fragment of light in a world of darkness:

Abstract art may never be historically eternal and universal: this, a priori – PLOTINUS, ECKHART, MAETERLINK, NOVALIS, RUYSBROEK, SVEDEMBORG [sic], TZARA, RIMBALD [sic]… all of this is but a brief, rare and insecure lightning through the great death, the great nocturn reality of corruption and disease. In a similar way, it is the rarity of unspeakable gems among the enormous muddy [G]anges (Evola 1920:14).

The spiritual nature of Evola’s abstract paintings may be gleaned by the titles of his works of the period going from 1919 to 1921: Paesaggio Interiore, [Image at right] IIlluminazione (Interior Landscape, Illumination), 1919-1920; Paesaggio Interiore: Apertura del Diaframma (Interior Landscape: Opening of the Diaphragm) of 1920-1921; Paesaggio Interiore, Ore 3 (Interior Landscape, Three o’Clock), 1920-1921; La Fibra si Infiamma e le Piramidi (The Fibre Inflames Itself and The Pyramids), 1920-1921; La Parola Oscura (The Obscure Word), 1921. Evola exhibited fifty-six works at another event at the Bragaglia Art House in 1921, alongside fellow artists Aldo Fiozzi (1894-1941) and Gino Cantarelli (1899-1950). He then showed sixty of his paintings at Berlin’s Der Sturm gallery. During the first of these events, Evola also read some Dadaist compositions he had written about the subject of what being a Dadaist artist meant to him: “Instead of simplicity, he chooses fiction; against passion, a whim; against the idol, himself, infinite and unspeakable nothingness […]. He lives only to deny and destroy and has no other function, because of his suffering in living. This is Dada” (Valento 1991:40)

However, Evola’s suffering, his spiritual crisis, which had plagued him from the end of the Great War, did not abandon him. In a letter dated July 2, 1921, the Roman painter wrote to Tzara:

I live in a state of constant tiredness, in a state of still stupor, in which all activities or desires are frozen. It is terribly Dada. Every action disgusts me: even having feelings I see as a malady, and I only have the terror of passing the time in front of me, of which I don’t know what to do with […] Such a state of mind, even though with different intensity, already existed within me: like in a show: I mean to say, there was someone on the outside looking, and he took notes on this strange occurrence: hence my art and my Dadaist philosophy. Nowadays, I realise that there is nobody left in the theatre, that everything is useless and ridiculous, that every expression is a disease (Valento 1991:40-1).

At the age of twenty-three, in 1921, Evola decided to end his career as a painter to try and solve the problems of his soul through a more spiritual approach.

The first book to be published by Evola after his crisis was Saggi sull’Idealismo Magico (Essays on Magical Idealism 1925), which contained an appendix dedicated to art entitled “Sul Significato dell’Arte Modernissima” (On the Meaning of Hyper-Modern Art). In it, Evola still seems to follow the developments in the contemporary art world and has his personal criticism towards abstract art in general, and Futurism and Dadaism in particular. Conscious that the subject matter would be alien to most who would buy a text on magical idealism, Evola used terms that are at once more understandable and immediate for both the art connoisseur and the profane. It is very hard to give an idea of the spiritual state, which corresponds to the latest works of abstract art,” he wrote,

as is to have a possibility to not only penetrate and live them in any way, but also to just realise their value, if one is not very familiar with the technique of ‘pure art’, and if one doesn’t have within him already a certain stage of extremely interior and rarefied consciousness, to which the author has arrived (since only like may understand like). He who, not being equipped with these conditions, approached abstract art as he would approach for example [the art] of a Shelley or a Beethoven, would not find but an incoherent and incomprehensible whole, and therefore would be disgusted and shocked by the very possibility of such manifestations (Evola 1925:193-194).

In other words, arte modernissima was closely linked to spiritual development, the lack of which would keep the viewer outside of the artist’s realm.

For the following thirty years, Evola wrote about esotericism and politics, and did not devote any special attention to art. More than thirty years after Essays on Magical Idealism, however, Evola published his Metafisica del Sesso (Metapysics of Sex 1958), a text with wide-ranging topics such as sex and inhibition in the bourgeois modern world; sexual techniques in initiatory contexts; and the sexual role of woman as initiator of spiritual awakening. Evola, enthused by the subject matter of his book, began painting again: a third period, entirely dedicated to women and womanhood. Written in a historical period when feminist battles for women’s rights were on the rise in Italy, Metaphysics focused instead on the transcendent sacralisation of sex. His then publisher, Vanni Scheiwiller (1934-1999), helped organise an exhibition of Evola’s paintings at the prestigious Medusa gallery in Piazza di Spagna, Rome. Enrico Crispolti was the curator of the event, which Scheiwiller described as “a success: everything sold out” (Scheiwiller 1998:17). Of this later period in life are the Nudo di Donna (Afroditico) (Female Nude, Aphroditic, 1960-1970), Cosmos (1965-1970), and the most famous painting of the period, La Generatrice dell’Universo (The Generatrix of the Universe, 1968-1970). [Image at right]

Julius Evola died in his home in 1974 at age seventy-six.

IMAGES**
**All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1: Julius Evola at the Casa d’Arte Bragaglia, 1921.

Image #2: Julius Evola, Fucina, Studio di Rumori, 1917-1918.

Image #3: Julius Evola, Paesaggio Interiore, Apertura del Diaframma, 1920-1921.

Image #4: Julius Evola, La Genitrice dell’Universo, 1968-1970.

REFERENCES

A.M. 1920. “Il Pittore Futurista J. Evola.” Roma Futurista 3:3.

Batchelor, Stephen. 1996. “Existence, Enlightenment, and Suicide: The Dilemma of Nanavira Thera.” The Buddhist Forum 4:9-33.

Carli, Carlo Fabrizio. 1998. “Evola, la Pittura e l’Alchimia: Un Tracciato.” Pp. 49-60 in Julius Evola e l’Arte delle Avanguardie, tra Futurismo, Dada e Alchimia. Rome: Fondazione Julius Evola.

Crispolti, Enrico. 1998. “Evola Pittore. Tra Futurismo e Dadaismo.” Pp. 19-31 in Julius Evola e l’Arte delle Avanguardie, tra Futurismo, Dada e Alchimia. Rome: Fondazione Julius Evola.

Evola, Julius. 1963. Il Cammino del Cinabro. Rome: Scheiwiller.

Evola, Julius. 1958. Metafisica del Sesso. Rome: Atanòr.

Evola, Julius. 1934. Rivolta contro il Mondo Moderno. Milan: Hoepli.

Evola, Julius. 1925. “Sull’Arte Modernissima.” Pp. 139-52 in Saggi sull’Idealismo Magico. Rome and Todi: Atan òr.

Evola, Julius. 1920. Arte Astratta: Posizione Teorica. Rome: Maglione e Strini.

Ginna, Arnaldo. 1984. “Brevi Note sull’Evola nel Tempo Futurista.” Pp. 135-37 in Testimonianze su Evola, edited by Gianfranco De Turris. Rome: Mediterranee.

Ginna, Arnaldo. 1916. “Il Cinema Futurista.” L’Italia Futurista 9:2-4.

Giudice, Christian. 2016. Occultism and Traditionalism: Arturo Reghini and the Antimodern Reaction in Early Twentieth Century Italy. Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet.

Iannello, Andrea A., and Federica Franci. 2011 Evola Dadaista: Dada non Significa Nulla. Caserta: Giuseppe Vozza Editore.

Lista, Giovanni. 1984. Balla le Futuriste. Lausanne: L’Age d’Homme.

Marinetti, Filippo Tommaso. 1909. “Le Futurisme.” Le Figaro, February 20, p. 1.

Nanamoli, Bikkhu and Bodhi Bikkhu, trans. 1995. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya. Somerville: Wisdom Publications.

Rossi, Marco. 1994. “Julius Evola e la Lega Teosofica Indipendente.” Storia Contemporanea 25: 39-56.

Valento, Elisabetta. 1994. Homo Faber: Julius Evola tra Arte e Alchimia. Rome: Fondazione Julius Evola.

Valento, Elisabetta, ed. 1991. Lettere di Julius Evola a Tristan Tzara (1919-1923). Rome: Fondazione Julius Evola.

Post Date:
15 March 2017

Share

Oberto Airaudi

OBERTO AIRAUDI TIMELINE

1950 (May 29):  Oberto Airaudi was born in Balangero, in the province of Turin, Italy.

1967:  Airaudi published his first book, Poesie dei miei sedici anni (Poems of a sixteen years old). He also produced his first painting, Pensiero già arrivato ai primi segni ritrovati, collaudati in verità (My thought has just arrived to the first symbols, and they have been rediscovered and proven true).

1969:  Although the legal age in Italy at that time was twenty-one, Airaudi successfully petitioned the Court of Turin to be recognized of age at nineteen and marry.

1975:  Having abandoned his activity as an insurance broker, Airaudi founded in Turin the Centro Ricerche e Informazioni Horus (Horus Research and Information Center), devoted to esotericism, naturopathy, and parapsychology.

1970s:  Airaudi became part of the artistic avant-garde milieu in Turin, and was particularly influenced by the Concrete Art Movement and by painter Filippo Scroppo.

1975-1977:  Airaudi first conceived the idea of an esoteric community and started purchasing land in the Valchiusella valley.

1979:  The first community of Damanhur was inaugurated.

1980 (ca.):  Airaudi started producing his signature “Selfic” paintings.

1992:  The Temples of Humankind, kept secret for years, were “discovered” through the revelations of a disgruntled former member, and they became public knowledge.

1996:  With the settlement of the corresponding legal cases, Airaudi and Damanhur became legally entitled to open the Temples of Humankind to visitors.

2004 (September):  The “selfic cabin,” where Airaudi’s paintings were exhibited, was inaugurated within the Niatel art gallery in Vidracco, Piedmont.

2011 (May):  The first “selfic cabin” outside Italy, known as the Hawks Hill Cabin, was inaugurated in a private home in the Scotts Valley, near Santa Cruz, California.

2013 (June 23):  Oberto Airaudi died in the nucleo-community of Aval, located in Cuceglio, in the province of Turin. His followers believe that he continues to paint through students-mediums whom Airaudi himself prepared.

BIOGRAPHY

Oberto Airaudi (1950-2013) [Image at right] is mostly known as the founder of Damanhur, a federation of communities with distinctive spiritual teachings inspired by Theosophy, the religion of ancient Egypt, and Western esotericism. Some 600 “citizens” of Damanhur live in more than twenty communities scattered around the Valchiusella valley, located thirty miles out of Turin, Italy, and another 400 live nearby, with “centers” catering to those who are interested in Damanhur’s worldview in several Italian and European cities, in the United States, and in Japan.

Airaudi was born in Balangero, in the province of Turin, Italy, on May 29, 1950. According to his autobiographic writings (Airaudi 2011) and to his followers, as a child he already experienced visions and prodigies, and was able to heal his friends. He was certainly precocious, as at age seventeen he published his first book of poems and produced his first known painting. He gave it the title Pensiero già arrivato ai primi segni ritrovati, collaudati in verità (My thought has just arrived to the first symbols, and they have been rediscovered and proven true). [Image at right]

Although at that time the legal age in Italy was twenty-one, at nineteen Airaudi successfully petitioned the court if Turin to be recognized of age and marry. He became the youngest licensed insurance broker in the region, but he also maintained a strong interest in alternative spirituality and healing. In 1975, having abandoned his activity as an insurance broker, Airaudi founded in Turin the Centro Ricerche e Informazioni Horus (Horus Research and Information Center), devoted to esotericism, naturopathy, and parapsychology, and became a popular esoteric lecturer in the region. Between 1975 and 1977, Airaudi first conceived the idea of an esoteric community and started purchasing land in the Valchiusella valley. In 1979, the first community of Damanhur was inaugurated and Airaudi’s social and spiritual experiment eventually grew to become the largest New Age-esoteric commune in Europe. It includes now schools for children (Introvigne 1999a) and a sizable number of second generation members. In Damanhur, Airaudi took the name of Falco Tarassaco. In Italian, Falco means “hawk,” and “Tarassaco” is Italian for Taraxacum officinale, the common dandelion, which has healing properties.

While the community, or rather communities, of Damanhur have been frequently described by scholars of new religious movements and intentional communities and journalists (see e.g. Berzano 1998; Merrifield 1998; Introvigne 1999b), Airaudi’s artistic activity has received less attention. Airaudi, however, always regarded himself as an artist as wells as a community leader, and art maintains a central role in Damanhur’s spirituality (Zoccatelli 2016).

Before founding Damanhur, Airaudi became part of Turin’s artistic avant-garde. He was particularly influenced by the Concrete Art Movement. This Italian movement was founded in 1948 to promote non-figurative art, in particular art with a strong emphasis on abstraction, free from imitation and reference to the outside world. The term “Concrete Art” had been coined in France by the Dutch artist Theo van Doesburg (born Christian Emil Marie Küpper, 1883-1931), closely associated with the De Stijl (The Style) art movement, also known as Neoplasticism, and strongly influenced by Theosophy. Although van Doesburg was not a member of the Theosophical Society, he knew about Theosophy through the most important artist and theorist of De Stijl, fellow Dutch painter Piet Mondrian (1872-1944), who was a member of the Society for all his life.

An examination of Airaudi’s early paintings evidences the influence of Filippo Scroppo (1910-1993), a pastor of the Waldensian Church, the oldest Italian Protestant denomination, and a prominent representative of the Concrete Art movement in Turin [Image at right]. This is not surprising, as the young Airaudi and the Concrete Art painters were part of the same Turin avant-garde milieu and shared a common interest in Theosophy. After the foundation of Damanhur, Airaudi’s artistic creativity was mostly devoted to direct the construction of the underground Temples of Humankind, whose existence was kept secret by Damanhur for more than twelve years. Only in 1992, through the revelations of a disgruntled ex-member, did the media and the Italian authorities discover the underground temple. Tax and zoning authorities claimed that it had been built illegally and threatened to destroy it. The legal cases, however, were settled in 1996, and from then on Damanhur was legally entitled to keep its temple and to open it to visitors. In the first years of media attention after the discovery of the temple, Damanhur welcomed 50,000 visitors per year. More recently, the number has stabilized around 20,000 (see Esperide Ananas and Stambecco Pesco 2009).

The Temples of Humankind are a huge subterranean complex comprised of a fantastic collection of richly decorated rooms and galleries. It is an underground work of art, completely built, or rather excavated, and decorated by hand. It includes rooms known as the Hall of Water, the Hall of Earth, the Hall of Spheres, the Hall of Mirrors, the Hall of Metals, the Blue Temple, and the Labyrinth. As Introvigne and Zoccatelli noted in 2010, “for Damanhur’s citizens, the temple is much more than a means of expressing their artistic creativity; it is a ‘mystical pole,’ at which ritual work takes place for the benefit of the whole of humanity. A number of different rituals express a worldview based on the sanctity of nature, karma, reincarnation, and the tradition of Western esotericism” (Introvigne and Zoccatelli 1010:853). [Image 4 at right]

Art in general is of central importance in the spiritual experience of Damanhur. In the philosophy of Airaudi, art is perceived as a unique carrier of spiritual teachings. “I produce paintings,” Airaudi said, “because there are things I can only write in this way. With my ‘Selfic’ Paintings I try to give an aesthetic idea of my esoteric message” (Arciere Aglio 2006:5).

“Selfic painting” is the name Airaudi gave to his own art. In fact, Selfica is one of the most peculiar beliefs within the philosophical and spiritual system of Damanhur. The words “Self” and “Selfica” are not part of the Italian language. “Self” is, of course, an English word. Airaudi borrowed it, but changed its meaning to designate the spiral as a fundamental form of life. For the Damanhur community, Selfica is also a field of spiritual research and a science, by which Damanhurians try to contact energies and intelligent beings from other dimensions and planets. They use rituals and “Selfic machines” to mobilize the special energy associated with the spiral form. They believe that the science of Selfica was known in the ancient Egyptian, Etruscan, Celtic and Minoan cultures.

The basis of Selfica is the notion that the spiral form is endowed with special powers. Devices and “machines” (“Selfs”), based on the spiral form and constructed of certain metals, colors, special inks, and minerals, are built in Damanhur to be used as catalysts to attract forces and beings from other planes of existence. Building a Selfic structure, Airaudi taught, is like constructing bodies that these forces and beings may claim as their own and use. It is also an aesthetic and artistic experience.

Airaudi’s Selfic paintings, in turn, are not merely works of art. According to Damanhurian Esperide Ananas (born Silvia Buffagni), Damanhurians take the names of flowers and/or animals when the join the community). These works are “defined as ‘Selfic paintings’, because they are based on what he [Airaudi] claimed was an ancient art that conveys ‘intelligent’ energies through two-dimensional forms created by signs and colors” (Esperide Ananas 2004:A II). Selfic paintings are believed to have their own auras that affect the space around them. The size of the Selfic painting is important, as it determines the scope of the aura’s effects. [Image 5 at right]

In Airaudi’s Selfic paintings, the function that spirals made of wire perform in the “Selfic machines” are performed by colors, which translate three dimensions into two. Selfic paintings, Airaudi believed, “are kept active by light and the attention of their observers. The colors, forms and signs are alive, animate and in constant transformation. They project signals and information to the surrounding environment and the viewer” (Esperide Ananas 2004:A II).

The key for reading Selfic paintings is given by Airaudi’s combination of colors, forms, and titles, with the latter always expressed in poetic form. Almost all Selfic paintings manifest various characteristics when viewed under different conditions of light. For example, daylight and ultraviolet light reveal different layers, and as a consequence, different meanings in each painting. When Selfic paintings are placed alongside one another, they create effects different from those of a single painting, because they “live” in symbiosis and interact with one another in the mind of the viewer.

Damanhurians explain that a maximum amplification of the paintings’ functions can be obtained within a Selfic cabin. It is a structure created by the display of at least thirty-three Selfic paintings, if possible from different periods, with different themes and sizes, along with a spherical Selfic machine called a “Spheroself.” The Selfic machine consists of wire spirals and a sphere that contains a “special alchemical liquid” (Selet online catalog n.d.). The Niatel gallery, located in the town of Vidracco, in the arts and wellness center open by the communities to the public called Damanhur Crea, houses a permanent exhibition of Selfic paintings. Known as “Niatel, Galleria dei Quadri Selfici di Oberto Airaudi” (Niatel, Gallery of Oberto Airaudi’s Selfic Paintings), it is the most complex “Selfic cabin” in the world. According to Esperide Ananas, who has been living in Damanhur for over twenty years, where she conducts research in the field of Selfica, “a Selfic cabin is a true gateway to higher energies and intelligences, a space for amplifying therapeutic effects and the ideal place to work on perceptions, dreams, and to reach a state of increased integration and mental harmony” (Esperide Ananas 2013:189).

In addition to the cabin created at Damanhur from the permanent exhibition of Airaudi’s Selfic paintings, there are other cabins worldwide, located in the United States, Japan, and Croatia. The first one outside of Italy, known as the Hawks Hill Cabin, opened in late May 2011 in a private home in Scotts Valley located in the mountains behind Santa Cruz, California. The Hawks Hill Cabin is becoming the heart of a Damanhurian community that meets regularly for meditation and research, and is called the “Selfic Temple” by its Californian users.

Although Airaudi produced thousands of paintings, he never offered a direct explanation of their meanings. However, he always wrote a “narration” on the back of a painting’s canvas, which goes beyond being a mere title and guides the viewer in reading and interpreting the work. In 2000, Airaudi painted what I personally consider his masterpiece and his best Selfic work. [Image 6 at right] It now greets visitors in the permanent exhibition of Selfic paintings located in Damanhur. The title, or narrative, reads as follows:

All the heavens in your hands, just as the shadows owned by the universes. We will have new equilibriums, and powers to explore. The geometries, in movement, will have adventure, the stars will shine in the extreme and cold darkness, heating new worlds. In you, synchronic moves, reflected thought, magic acts will develop. I am the visible key, the mystic door to the inner heavens. I welcome and reflect, pulsate and combine frequencies until I reach outside of times, of time. Aeonian intelligences assist to brief acts, hesitations, hints of power difficult to understand, for now. Liquid densities wait from above, impatient spiritual beings come and go from this birth-room, they attract waves-soul, for you. The hearts (where there are hearts) beat appropriate rhythms, ritual, moving, they ordered thought and theurgic magic. I am, observed, the door-frequency that half-closes itself, and that the sensitive knows how to dance, still hesitating. It is this the right behavior. All the heavens in your hands, now, just as the shadows owned by the universes… (Tempia Valenta 2004:AIII).

Oberto Airaudi’s Selfic paintings may be read on two levels. On the one hand, Airaudi was not an amateur artist and his work is a legitimate part of the Turin avant-garde of the twentieth century, expressed in such movements as the Italian version of Concrete Art. Airaudi’s paintings are open to iconographic readings of colors and forms, which find parallels in the Concrete Art style originating with Theo van Doesburg and passing through Filippo Scroppo and others. On the other hand, the emic reading by Damanhurians of the Selfic paintings is less interested in their artistic style and sources. For the members of the Damanhur community, Airaudi’s Selfic paintings are spiritual artifacts and ritual objects. Similar to the complicated Selfic machines, Airaudi’s paintings are regarded as portals capable of attracting intelligent energies and, ultimately, of saving the world from impending doom through the mystical power of the spiral form.

The creation of Selfic paintings in Damanhur did not end with Airaudi. Before dying, Airaudi instructed a selected group of students, to act as mediums and paint together guided by his spirit after his death. The paintings they produce are signed by “Oberto Airaudi through his mediums.”

IMAGES**
**All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1: Photograph of Oberto Airaudi.

Image #2: Photograph of Pensiero già arrivato ai primi segni ritrovati, collaudati in verità (My thought has just arrived to the first symbols, and they have been rediscovered and proven true).

Image #3: One of Airaudi’s early paintings evidencing the influence of Filippo Scroppo on his work.

Image #4: Photograph of one of the rooms in The Temples of Humankind, a huge subterranean complex comprised of a fantastic collection of richly decorated rooms and galleries.

Image #5: Photograph of one of Airaudi’s Selfic paintings.

Image #6: Photograph of one of Airaudi’s most notable Selfic paintings.

REFERENCES

Airaudi, Oberto. 2011. Stories of an Alchemist: The Extraordinary Childhood Years of the Founder of Damanhur in 33 Tales. Vidracco, Italy: Niatel.

Arciere Aglio [Gianluca Gallerani]. 2006. I Quadri Selfici di Falco. Raccolta ragionata delle conoscenze attuali, dalle serate e i corsi di Oberto Airaudi. Unpublished typescript for internal circulation in the Damanhur community.

Berzano, Luigi. 1998. Damanhur. Popolo e comunità. Leumann. Turin: Elledici.

Esperide Ananas [Silvia Buffagni]. 2013. Spirals of Energy: The Ancient Art of Selfica. Vidracco: Devodama.

Esperide Ananas [Silvia Buffagni], and Stambecco Pesco [Silvio Palombo]. 2009. The Traveler’s Guide to Damanhur: The Amazing Northern Italian Eco-Society. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.

Esperide Ananas [Silvia Buffagni]. 2006. Damanhur: Temples of Humankind. New York: CoSM Press.

Esperide Ananas [Silvia Buffagni]. 2004. “La Pittura Selfica – Selfic Painting.” Pp. AI-AII in Tempia Valenta 2004.

Introvigne, Massimo. 1999a, “Children of the Underground Temple: Growing Up in Damanhur.” Pp. 138-49 in Children in New Religions, edited by Susan J. Palmer and Charlotte Hardman. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Introvigne, Massimo. 1999b. “Damanhur: A Magical Community in Italy.” Pp. 183-94 in New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response, edited by Bryan Wilson and Jamie Cresswell. New York: Routledge.

Introvigne, Massimo and PierLuigi Zoccatelli. 2010. “Damanhur.” Pp. 852-54 in Religions of the World: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and Practices, Volume II, edited by J. Gordon Melton and Martin Baumann, Second Volume. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.

Merrifield, Jeff. 1998. Damanhur: The Real Dream. London: Thorsons.

Selet. n.d. “Spheroself.” In Selet, online catalog. Accessed from http://www.sel-et.com/en/products-eng/high-technology-selfica/spheroself-detail on 12 March 2017.

Tempia Valenta, Eraldo, ed. 2004. Quadri Selfici di Oberto Airaudi. Turin: Il Mettifoglio.

Zoccatelli, PierLuigi. 2016. “‘All the Heavens in Your Hands:’ Oberto Airaudi and the Art of Damanhur.” Pp. 145-62 in Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions 19:145-62.

Post Date:
18 March 2017

Share

Katherine Augusta (Westcott) Tingley

KATHERINE TINGLEY TIMELINE

1847 (July 6):  Katherine Tingley was born Catherine Augusta Westcott in Newbury, Massachusetts.

1850s:  As a child Tingley was greatly influenced by nature, New England Transcendentalism and the Masonic background of her grandfather Nathan Chase.

1861:  Tingley attended to those wounded in the Civil War while her family was in Virginia

1862–1865:  Horrified at her response to the suffering soldiers, Tingley’s father sent her to Villa Marie Convent in Montreal, Quebec, over objections from her grandfather.

1867:  Tingley briefly married Richard Henry Cook, a printer.

1866–1887:  There is little or no documentation for this period, but Tingley had two unsuccessful, childless marriages. During part of this time, she was in Europe working in a travelling stage/drama group.

1880:  Tingley married George W. Parent, an investigator for New York Elevated. The marriage ended by 1886.

1880s:  Tingley adopted and raised two children, from her former husband, Richard Henry Cook’s, second marriage.

1887:  Tingley formed the Ladies Society of Mercy to visit hospitals and prisons.

1888:  Tingley married Philo B. Tingley in the spring. Philo B. Tingley joined the Manhattan, New York City Masonic group that year, where William Q. Judge was the almoner.

1888–1889:  Katherine Tingley met William Q. Judge during a cloakmakers strike, somewhere between fall of 1888 and winter of 1889. Judge investigated her work for the Manhattan Masonic Lodge. The Lodge provided funding for some of Tingley’s Do Good Mission efforts.

1890 (April):  W. Q. Judge was ill with gradually progressing tuberculosis and Chagres fever. He sent Tingley to Sweden on secret mission to meet King Oscar II, arranged through Masonic connections.

1888–1891:  Tingley established various social work outreach projects, which included the Do Good Mission and the Women’s Emergency Relief Association, which arranged and provided a soup kitchen, clothing and medical needs in New York City for the Upper Eastside and for striking immigrant garment workers.

March 1896:  William Q. Judge died.

April 1896:  At the second annual convention of the Theosophical Society in America an announcement was made of the prospective founding by Tingley of the School for the Revival of the Lost Mysteries of Antiquity (SLRMA), generally referred to later as the School of Antiquity. Tingley was elected as head for life of Theosophical Society in America.

1896 (June 7):  A ten-month World Theosophical Crusade was inaugurated to visit Theosophical centers, form new branches, and hold Brotherhood Suppers for the poor.

1896 (June 13):  World Theosophical Crusade sailed from New York City, landed in England and then went to Ireland, Continental Europe, Greece (stopping to feed hundreds of Armenian refugees), then to Egypt (October), India (November/December), Australia (January 1897), New Zealand and Samoa. While on board the ship Tingley gave Theosophical talks for the steerage underclass passengers; while at various stops in Great Britain and Europe she held Brotherhood Suppers for the poor,

1896 (September):  While in Switzerland, Tingley received information that the Point Loma, California location, which appeared to her in a vision, was available. She met Gottfried de Purucker (who would become her successor) who drew a map of Point Loma. Tingley sent the cable to purchase the land at Point Loma.

1896 (October/November):  Tingley described her meeting with Helena P. Blavatsky’s young Tibetan “Teacher” in Darjeeling.

1897 (January):  Tingley purchased 132 acres on Point Loma in San Diego, with option to buy an additional forty acres.

1897 (February 13):  Tingley arrived at Point Loma.

1897 (February 23):  Tingley officially laid the cornerstone for the future School for the Revival of the Lost Mysteries of Antiquity. More than 1,000 people attended the ceremony.

1898:  Tingley formally changed the name of her group from The Theosophical Society to The Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society.

1898 (November 19):  Tingley produced a benefit performance in New York City of the Greek tragedy by Aeschylus, The Eumenides, for American soldiers and Spanish and Cuban sufferers in the Spanish American War. The New York Tribune reviewed the performance favorably.

1899 (February):  Tingley met with large group from all over Cuba upon her arrival in Santiago, Cuba. She encountered Emilio Bacardi Moreau, the mayor of Santiago, Cuba and grandmaster of Masonic lodges in Cuba.

1899 (April 13):  The first Universal Brotherhood Congress convened at Point Loma, with two performances of the Eumenides featuring a cast of two hundred.

1899 (September 13):  The second Universal Brotherhood Congress convened in Stockholm, Sweden, with a reception attended by King Oscar II. There was another large gathering in Brighton, England, on October 6.

1899–1900:  Extensive remodeling of the preexisting large sanatorium building into the Academy and Temple of Peace, along with extensive development of the Point Loma site, began.

1900:  Raja Yoga school founded at Point Loma with first five students at Point Loma, including Iverson Harris Jr. and four daughters of Walter T. Hanson from Georgia: Coralee, Margaret, Estelle, and Kate.

1900:  Tingley held a debate with Christians at the Fisher Opera House in San Diego. The Christians, who verbally attacked her and the Theosophists, declined to participate, and so Tingley presented both sides at the debate. She then purchased the Fisher Opera House and renamed it the Isis Theater after the Egyptian goddess.

1901:  Tingley built the first Greek-style theater in America at Point Loma.

1901:  Tingley produced a Greek symposium, The Wisdom of Hypatia, performed at the renamed Isis Theater. That same year saw dramatic productions of The Conquest of Death and a children’s drama Rainbow Fairy Play.

1901 (October 28):  The Los Angeles Times headlined a sensationalized column: “Outrages at Point Loma: Women and Children Starved and Treated like Convicts. Thrilling Rescue.” Tingley’s subsequent suit for libel against the publisher Otis Gray, one of the most powerful people in California at that time, was successful and she was awarded $7,500.

1902:  One hundred students were now enrolled at the Raja Yoga school. Two-thirds were Cuban, including children of Emilio Bacardi Moreau.

1903:  Twenty-five Raja Yoga students were sent to Cuba to help launch schools there. Three schools were established. Nan Ino Herbert was the principal.

1903:  Tingley journeyed to Japan with Gottfried de Purucker. She was impressed with Japanese discipline and ethic and invited Japanese educators to visit Point Loma.

1907:  A Midsummer Night’s Dream was produced at Point Loma and performed in the Greek Theater, featuring original music, costumes, and set. Dozens of plays, mostly from Shakespeare and Aeschylus were produced at Point Loma over the next thirty years.

1907:  Tingley had a private visit and meeting with King Oscar II of Sweden, who died a few weeks later. She purchased government land to establish a Raja Yoga school on Visingso Island in Sweden.

1909:  The Raja Yoga schools were closed in Cuba due to financial strain. Tingley had been diverting Point Loma funds there, which was not sustainable.

1909:  Kenneth Morris, Welsh poet and fantasist, moved to Point Loma.

1911:  The first issue of The Theosophical Path appeared, with Gottfried de Purucker as acting editor. This journal was issued monthly in the same format from 1911 until 1929.

1911:  Pageant and symposium, The Aroma of Athens, was written and performed by the Theosophists as a dramatic production at Isis Theater.

1911 (November):  After a very moving visit to San Quentin, Tingley began to publish The New Way, an eight-page newsletter directed at prisoners and edited by Herbert Coryn. The newsletter stated that it was published by “The International Theosophical League of Humanity for Gratuitous Distribution in Prisons.”

1913 (Midsummer):  1913 (Midsummer): Tingley organized, with Swedish members, and attended with a group of Raja Yoga students from Point Loma, the Theosophical Peace Congress at Visingso Island.

1913–1920s:  Tingley’s anti-war peace activities were pervasive from this time through the 1920s with many events and activities organized in San Diego and in Europe.

1914:  Tingley inaugurated the Peace Day of Nations. Telegrams peace and anti-war messages were sent to President Woodrow Wilson.

1914–1915:  Tingley lost part of an inheritance from A. B. Spaulding in a lawsuit brought by his heirs.

1915:  Tingley suggested to plein air impressionist artist Maurice Braun, who had come to join the Theosophists in 1909, that he establish his art focus in San Diego, rather than at Point Loma. Braun became one of the founders of the San Diego Art Guild, which later became the San Diego Art Institute.

1914–1917:  Tingley successfully campaigned against capital punishment in Arizona, supporting and collaborating with then-Governor George W. P. Hunt.

1917–1920:  Tingley headed anti-vivisection animal rights efforts.

1919 (January):  The Spanish Influenza, which raged throughout the nation, saw only a single case at Point Loma.

1920:  Through a large publicity campaign Tingley successfully influenced the California governor to commute the sentence of Roy Wolff, who was seventeen at the time he killed a taxi driver.

1920s:  At its height, Point Loma had residents from twenty-six nations.

1922:  Katherine Tingley’s talk on Theosophy: The Path of the Mystic was printed and published at Point Loma.

1923:  Adventure novelist Talbot Mundy took up residence at Point Loma, and there wrote his most mystical adventure story, Om the Secret of Ahbor Valley, in which the Lama protagonist is patterned after Tingley.

1923:  Tingley met Rudolf Steiner, founder of the Anthroposophical Society, in Germany and proposed that the two groups merge. Tingley’s stroke later that year and Steiner’s death precluded this potential merger.

1923:  Tingley lost a lawsuit that relatives brought in the Mohn family inheritance.

1925:  Katherine Tingley’s talk on The Wine of Life, which outlined the ideal of the Theosophical home life, was printed and published at Point Loma.

1926:  Katherine Tingley’s talk on The Gods Await was printed and published at Point Loma.

1927:  Katherine Tingley’s talk on The Travail of the Soul was printed and published at Point Loma.

1929:  Tingley had premonitions of her impending death, described by Elsie Savage Benjamin.

1929 (July 11):  Katherine Tingley died in Sweden while on a European tour, following an auto accident in Germany.

BIOGRAPHY

Katherine Augusta Westcott was born in Newbury, Massachusetts on 6 July 1847. She grew up in New England, her childhood spent wandering along the banks of the Merrimac River near Newbury. The first years through her mid-teens appear to have been idyllic. She found the companionship of her grandfather, Nathan Chase, to be inspiring. She observed that she was drawn to the outdoors and described a nature-loving, interior, and more spiritualized orientation from early childhood. She portrayed her childhood experience and wonderment with the natural world, writing that “in my love of Nature and in my love of the true and the beautiful, in my love of this Eternal Supreme Power, my views broadened and I felt there is still greater knowledge and more wonderful meaning to human life” (Tingley 1925:286). Additionally, she was also drawn to the visitors and friends of her family, who were participants in the New England Transcendentalist movement. She wrote that she tried many philosophies, including Ralph Waldo Emerson, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and though they stirred her, they “did not quite satisfy.”

The first major transition in her life came in 1861 during the American Civil War. Her father was a regiment captain, stationed with the Union Army in Virginia, and there she witnessed the suffering and wounded soldiers. After the second battle of Bull Run, she saw “the ambulances returning with the dead and dying, followed by the files of Confederate soldiers, ragged and half starving” (Tingley 1926:36–37). Unable to bear the sight, Tingley and her African American servant went out among the soldiers and tended their wounds late into the night. However, her father’s reaction to Katherine’s impulse to aid the suffering and wounded was not a positive one. Out of concern for Katherine’s well-being he quickly sent her off, over the protests of her grandfather, a member of the Masons, to a Catholic boarding school administered by nuns at Villa Marie Convent in Montreal, Quebec. This was a highly regimented and structured environment, a drastic change from the free-spirited life in New England. She appears to have lived there until she was eighteen, and upon completing school, for reasons not clear, she did not return to her parents’ home.

From 1865 until 1880, there is almost no information on Tingley’s life, although she was briefly married to Richard Henry Cook, a printer, in 1867. From 1880 to 1888 all that is known is that she married a second time: George W. Parent was an investigator for New York Elevated. The marriage ended by 1886. By the mid-1880s, for a short time, she adopted and raised two children who were from her first husband’s second marriage. Tingley gave little information about these marriages other than that they were times of great suffering for her.

Living in New York City brought her into contact with the horrible conditions of those living on the East Side, and in 1887 she established a women’s group to visit prisons and hospitals, called the Ladies Society of Mercy. In 1888, she married Philo B. Tingley, a steamship employee and inventor, who would be Katherine’s connection to what would become the most world-changing event in her life, namely meeting William Q. Judge (1851–1896), president of the American Section of the Theosophical Society. The same year he married Katherine, Philo Tingley had joined the Manhattan Masonic Lodge, where Judge was the bursar. Katherine’s work with the poor and particularly with the plight of striking garment workers and their working conditions was suggested as a charitable project. Judge, as the Masonic Lodge treasurer, was sent to check on it, view the project in action and determine if it was worth supporting. Historical documents discovered in 2015 clearly indicate that Judge first saw Katherine in late 1888 at her “Do Good” outreach mission, when, as she would describe later, she saw an unusual gentleman within the crowd of the downtrodden, “strikingly noble of expression, with a look of grave sadness and of sickness too” (Tingley 1926:79). They met in person for the first time in early 1889. “It was then, when I came to know him, that I realized that I had found my place. I was face to face with a new type of human nature: with something akin to that which my inner consciousness had told me a perfect human being might be” (Tingley 1926:79–80). It is remarkable that both Judge and Tingley kept her connection with him and the Theosophical Society totally secret until 1894, even though revealing it would have greatly benefited her position with those Theosophists who were critical of her.

During 1894 and possibly earlier, Katherine took Judge to warmer weather and hot springs in Texas and Arkansas for rest and recuperation from his progressing tuberculosis and Chagres fever. At the same time, she formally joined the Theosophical Society and a month later Judge admitted her to the private Esoteric Section. As it became clearer that Judge’s chronic illness was more serious, Tingley [Image at right] was introduced to a few Theosophists in 1895. Tensions and differences had been building between William Q. Judge and both Annie Besant (1847–1933) and Henry Steel Olcott (1832–1907), who had remained with the parent Theosophical Society headquartered in Adyar, India. There were a complex and contentious series of events, which turned acrimonious at times. This finally came to a head when Judge led the American Section to secede from the Theosophical Society in 1895. Declaring autonomy, the Theosophical Society in America was established and William Q. Judge was elected president for life (Ryan 1975). At that time, Katherine Tingley rapidly moved to the center of governance as Judge’s health declined further.

Upon Judge’s death in 1896, Tingley was elected president for life. Conflicts and schisms followed, but Tingley forged ahead. She quickly shifted the direction of the Theosophical Society in America to create an educational and living community where Theosophy could be practiced in daily life and not only for abstract study of metaphysics or the exploring of visionary realms. It was her aim to make Theosophy “intensely practical” and rooted in a deep altruistic ethic. At the January 13, 1898 convention, she would rename it the Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society (UBTS). For the direct application of her philanthropic work she also established the International Brotherhood League, which carried on a very large relief effort in Cuba in 1898 after the Spanish-American War, and also served the sick and wounded soldiers returning from the war. President William McKinley authorized the use of U.S. Government transport to take Tingley, her physicians and other workers to Cuba with large supplies of food, clothing, and medicines (Ryan 1975:348).

In 1896, she gathered together a few supporters for a Theosophical Crusade and headed off around the world, beginning in Europe. In Switzerland she met a young Theosophical Society member, Gottfried de Purucker (1874–1942) for the first time. He had joined the Theosophical Society and met Judge who admitted him to the Esoteric Section without the usual probationary period. De Purucker had been to California a few years before and lived in San Diego in 1893, working on a ranch and leading study groups in the Secret Doctrine by the co-founder of the original Theosophical Society, Helena P. Blavatsky (1831–1891). De Purucker helped Tingley identify the land at Point Loma in San Diego for purchase for the UBTS project (PLST Archive). Meanwhile, the Theosophical “crusaders” traveled through the Middle East and sailed on to India. [Image at right] Early one morning near Darjeeling, Tingley evaded her companions and slipped off up into the foothills. She would return a day or so later, stating she had visited one of Blavatsky’s “Teachers” referring to the encounter as “life transforming” (Tingley 1926:155–162; and Tingley 1928). Some years later Tingley would reflect that her encounter with Blavatsky’s young Tibetan “Teacher” in India had given her the courage to continue with establishing and developing the Point Loma community and the gradual alleviation and reversal of symptoms of her chronic Addison’s kidney/adrenal disease. For Katherine Tingley this was a much needed and spiritually life-changing experience, that brought her the energy and motivation to bring her vision of a “White City in the West” into manifestation.

The Point Loma community began in 1897 with Tingley’s arrival. Great enthusiasm and energy accompanied construction and transformation of the grounds, which were called Lomaland. By 1899, the first five students were enrolled in the Raja Yoga school, and by 1902 there were a hundred, of whom about seventy-five were from Cuba. Collaborating with Emilio Bacardi Moreau (1844–1923), mayor of Santiago, Cuba, she began a mission to build schools in Cuba and to bring Cuban students to the Raja Yoga School at Point Loma. By 1915, the school in San Diego reached its peak with 500 students (Greenwalt 1978). The Raja Yoga curriculum evolved quickly, with its emphasis on the creative arts: the classics, music, drama, art, and literature, as well as science, sports and agriculture. The overarching view that the Point Loma community manifested was what Tingley called the School of Antiquity. According to Tingley’s secretary, Joseph H. Fussell, the purpose of the School of Antiquity was to revive a knowledge of the Sacred Mysteries of Antiquity by promoting the physical, mental, moral and spiritual education and welfare of the people of all countries, irrespective of creed, sex, caste or color; by instructing them in an understanding of the laws of universal nature and justice and particularly the laws governing their own being: the teaching them the wisdom of mutual helpfulness, such being the science of Raja Yoga. (qtg Tingley, Fussell 1917:12).

The School of Antiquity and the entire vision and form of the Point Loma community was patterned after Tingley’s conception of an ancient mystery school, drawing a great deal of her inspiration from Plato and Pythagorean ideas. Elsie Benjamin described the mission as being to replicate an ancient Mystery-School:

In the ancient Mystery-Schools, the pupils were more like children: they have instinct, they have intuition, but they didn’t have full self-consciousness. . . . Because Judge had told K.T., that it is not your mission to teach them technical Theosophy. Your mission is to teach them morals, ethics, universal brotherhood, humanity and self-discipline (Benjamin).

Tingley’s vision of “practical Theosophy” encompassed all of the arts, and much more. For her, the architecture of Lomaland needed to express the sacredness of home and place, as both receptacle and expression of a higher divine source. Her inspiration culturally was, at least in part, Greek and Pythagorean harmonics. Of the unique buildings designed and built at Lomaland, the Greek Theater remains as the single purely classically Greek structure. Other structures, such as the Temple of Peace or the home of Elizabeth Mayer Spaulding, wife of sporting goods magnate Albert G. Spaulding, reflected influences from India and Persia.

Drama played a significant role, not only to develop community esprit d’corps, but for the individual transformational elements involved. From 1903 into the 1930s, the Point Loma Theosophical community produced scores of plays. Tingley chose Greek tragedy and Shakespeare’s dramas for what she viewed as their philosophical perennialism and universal Theosophic ideas, combined with the participatory opportunity that drama has for inner psychological and spiritual development. There were also productions of their own plays, including one based on Socrates’ dialogues in Plato, called The Aroma of Athens. Another, based on the life of the fourth-century Alexandrian neo-Platonist woman philosopher Hypatia, featured Katherine Tingley in the lead role. Reviews in the San Diego Union reflected the central role that the Theosophical productions played in San Diego’s cultural life.

Well-known artists from the U.S. and abroad came to live and work at Lomaland and there developed a unique mystical style. The late 1890s view of art held by Reginald Willoughby Machell (1854–1927), presaged a later twentieth-century phenomenological view found in philosophers like Kitaro Nishida, Maurice Merleau-Ponty or Ananda Coomaraswamy, where an understanding of how the awareness of observer and object are experienced as highly interdependent with the art object and its creation. Said Machell:

Beauty is really a state of mind. The senses only register vibrations, which are translated by the mind into colour, form, sound. . . . It would be more true perhaps to say that beauty is in both observer and observed, but not in one apart from the other (Machell 1892:4).

Another artist who developed a Theosophical style was Maurice Braun (1877–1941). According to Emmett Greenwalt, “Braun was not hesitant in crediting Theosophy with sharpening his insight into nature. To him art was for ‘the service of the divine powers in man,’ or as he otherwise phrased it, ‘art for humanities sake,’ and he saw in Theosophy ‘the champion and inspirer or all that is noble and true and genuine in art’” (Greenwalt 1978: 129–31).

In addition to her devotion to the arts, Katherine Tingley worked for social justice and peace throughout her life. She had been involved in a prison ministry project which involved corresponding with prisoners. She was engaged in movements to abolish capital punishment in California and Arizona. She also organized an anti-vivisection program to protect animal welfare.

In 1922 or 1923, Tingley, around age seventy-six, [Image at right] suffered a minor stroke. It did not cause any noticeable physical debility, but from then until her death, she suffered a kind of emotional agitation at times when under stress. When it became severe, her office staff would call for Gottfried de Purucker to come, given his very calming influence on her in general, and his presence would usually resolve Tingley’s anxieties.

The last seven years of her life can be seen as a gradual decline of the Point Loma experiment, after the dynamic growth and successes of the 1910–1922 period. Her important financial backers of the earlier period had almost all died, and the expenses for maintaining Lomaland had stayed the same. Over this time, significant debt was incurred, even to mortgaging part of the property to maintain the community. The drama, art, music and Raja Yoga school continued, but the income was less. Some long-time residents also left Point Loma at this time, including Hildor and Margueite Barton, Montegue Machell and his wife Coralee (one of the Hanson sisters), and E. August Neresheimer and his wife Emily Lemke. Tingley expressed her dismay and felt that she had not lived up to supporting her committed residents and partisans, especially Reginald Machell.

By late spring of 1929, and approaching the age of eighty-two, Tingley was ready to travel to Europe yet again. Elsie Savage Benjamin, then her secretary, was helping with preparations and sharing her concerns with Tingley about the European trip. She was especially concerned about driving with an inexperienced young man whom Tingley had chosen to be her chauffeur for the tour. Tingley, with her darting, penetrating eyes rapidly responded to Elsie with extraordinary prescience: “Don’t you know, he’s going to be in a car crash and kill someone” (Benjamin n.d.). On May 31, 1929, driving in the fog near dawn on a winding road in Germany about fifty miles from the Dutch border, the chauffeur crashed the car into a concrete bridge pier (Greenwalt 1955:192). Tingley had a double fracture of her right leg and much bruising. Others in the car were also injured. Tingley insisted on being taken to Visingso Island in Sweden rather than to a hospital. Staying in command until the last, and in considerable pain, she even dismissed her doctor rather than be moved to where she could receive better medical care. Katherine Tingley died on Visingso Island, what she considered sacred land, July 11, 1929.

TEACHINGS/DOCTRINES

Tingley saw Theosophy, not so much as a body of philosophic or other teaching, but as the highest law of conduct, which is the enacted expression of divine love or compassion” (Tingley The Theosophical Path :3). This divine love could be realized only in a communal setting in which people lived and worked together to express their best selves.

For Tingley, educating children’s minds so that they recognized the Immortal Self was “the truest and grandest thing of all as regards education” (Tingley The Theosophical Path:175). Toward this end she founded the Raja Yoga system in order to develop children’s character so that their true nature would emerge from within. “The real secret of the Raja Yoga system is rather to evolve the child’s character than to overtax the child’s mind; it is to bring out rather than to bring to the faculties of the child. The grander part is from within” (Tingley The Theosophical Path:174). The essential divinity of humanity served as the foundation for this kind of education, with a curriculum integrating body, mind, and spirit, in which all participated. Physical cultivation along with intellectual training were required, so that the intellect would be “the servant, not the master.” Thus, the Raja Yoga system, which Tingley called a “science of the soul,” would pervade all life and activity, becoming “the true expression of soul-ideals” so that art would no longer be extraneous to life, but rather an integral part of the environment (Tingley The Theosophical Path: 159–75). This view toward the arts as the means to develop the whole person helps explain Tingley’s passion for theater, since drama, in her view, reached the heart of everyone.

Clearly influenced by Blavatsky’s writings on education, Tingley nevertheless created a practical program not envisaged by her predecessor. She outlined it as follows:

The basis of this education is the essential divinity of man, and the necessity for transmuting everything in his nature which is not divine. To do this no part must be neglected, and the physical nature must share to the full in the care and attention which are required. Neither can the most assiduous training of the intellect be passed over; it must be made subservient to the forces of the heart. The intellect must be the servant, not the master, if order and equilibrium are to be attained (Emmett W. Small n.d.:93–94).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

While there was no group liturgy at Lomaland, there were daily community practices. Tingley spoke of “the sacredness of the moment and the day” and sought to make Theosophy intensely practical as “the enacted expression of divine love or compassion” (Tingley 1922:3) According to her, “The ideal must no longer be left remote from life, but made divinely human, close and intimate, as of old. NOW is the day of resurrection” (Tingley 1922:94). The daily life practice at Lomaland could be compared to the group spiritual practice in the monastic traditions of east and west, yet with unique differences. The Lomaland practice was based on the creative arts within the context of the wisdom traditions of East and West. Daily group activity was ritualized in common endeavors that were creative, contemplative and inspirational, encapsulated within an altruistic ethic. As she expressed it, “Intellectualism has no lasting power without the practice of the highest morality” (Tingley 1922:98). It was a community, the center of which was the education of children.

The entire community gathered together daily at sunrise at the Greek Theater or in the Temple of Peace. Inspirational phrases were read from literature such as the Bhagavad Gita, the Buddha’s life story in Edwin Arnold’s poetic rendition in The Light of Asia, from Theosophical sources, including Light on the Path by Mabel Collins (1885) and the Voice of the Silence by Blavatsky (1889). This was followed by silent contemplation. Meals were eaten in a group setting and in silence, with a brief recitation before each meal and upon entering the refectory eating area; men and women were grouped together. Idle talk was discouraged and the overall quality of the community was to “do well the smallest duty . . . then joy will come” (Tingley 1927:274–75).

The following invocation, given to the students by Katherine Tingley, was recited in unison primarily at meetings held in the Temple, but also on many occasions elsewhere.

Oh my Divinity! Thou dost blend with the
earth and fashion for thyself Temples of mighty power.

Oh my Divinity! thou livest in the heart-life
of all things and dost radiate a Golden Light
that shineth forever and doth illumine even the
darkest comers of the earth.

Oh my Divinity! blend thou with me that
from the corruptible I may become Incorruptible;
that from imperfection I may become Perfection;
that from darkness I may go forth in
Light.

In addition to the morning gatherings in silence and meditation with devotional readings, there was also community music, both instrumental and choral. Everyone sang in the chorus and played a musical instrument. Tingley considered music to be of central value for inner transformation and life harmony: “The soul power which is called forth by a harmony well delivered and well received does not die away with the conclusion of the piece” (Tingley 1922:178). She would attract to Point Loma the renowned director of the Amsterdam Conservatory of music, Daniël de Lange (de Lange 2003), from 1910 to 1915, who transformed the Raja Yoga orchestra into a symphonic quality musical group.

There were frequent gatherings on cultural and Theosophical subjects for presentations in the Temple of Peace. Regular Point Loma visitors, like art historian Osvald Siren (1879–1966), would give lectures in the Temple illustrated by lantern slides of photos from his recent journeys in China or Asian or European art history (Carmen Small n.d.). Lomaland was an oasis of sophistication in the cultural wasteland that was San Diego at the turn of the twentieth century.

LEADERSHIP

Katherine Tingley’s leadership began in 1896, when she was elected amidst some controversy to succeed William Q. Judge as leader for life of the Theosophical Society in America. This resulted in a number of outer changes, including the change of name to the Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society and also the shift of primary focus from lodges to the establishment of the community at Lomaland. These alterations also provided a shift in the internal culture within Tingley’s Theosophical movement at the time, which could be described as a shift from discursive metaphysics to Theosophy in daily activity. There was the practical work for Universal Brotherhood, e.g. promoting global peace, prison outreach, capital punishment abolition and so on, but there was also a new modality, where cultivating an inner ethic of altruistic motivation and awareness was primary. This change opened the door, to what could be described as contemplative Theosophy. As Tingley declared:

Wisdom comes not from the multiplication of spoken or written instructions; what you have is enough to last you a thousand years. Wisdom comes from the performance of duty, and in the silence, and only the silence expresses it (Tingley 1925:343).

As a self-proclaimed dictator, Tingley appeared to wield the primary power in the organization, but as the Point Loma community developed, that control was progressively counterbalanced by her delegating responsibilities to others. There was a complex of interconnected departments and committees at Lomaland, which managed everything from maintaining the extensive agricultural gardens with fruit orchards, to supervising school curriculum, Theosophical programs and running a large communal endeavor. The one area in which Tingley immersed herself was her personal direction and management of the dramatic productions in the Greek Theater at Lomaland and at the Isis Theater in San Diego. She felt most at home in the role of guide to the students’ inner development of character and spirituality when she was absorbed in the dramatic productions. In this context, she would exclaim to one student, “I work best in utter chaos” (Harris n.d.).

Tingley was definitely not a micromanager. This is evidenced, for example, by her giving a free hand to Gottfried de Purucker in 1911 in the editorship of The Theosophical Path. She never read or indicated what or what not to print in it and would read the issues, as time permitted, only after they were published (Emmett W. Small n.d.). When she requested a couple of the resident artists to make some Christmas cards by hand for her, it was left to their creativity to work out the design and quotes used (Lester n.d.). Clearly the rapid development and success in establishing the Point Loma community and Raja Yoga school with all its activities of art, music, drama etc., was the result of her delegating and giving others the reins. In addition, she was away travelling almost every summer for a few months, though she made use of letters, cards and telegrams daily while away, keeping a close connection with everyone, including young students and administrators.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Throughout the Lomaland period of her life, Tingley faced several lawsuits and filed one of her own against the Los Angeles Times for libel, which she won. There was more than one attempt on her life. On one occasion, a man with a loaded pistol attempted to reach where she was seated at the Isis Theater, but was stopped by a quick acting police guard (Harris n.d.). In the later 1920s, Tingley mortgaged part of the Lomaland property, over de Purucker’s pleas not to do so (Emmett W. Small n.d.; Harris n.d.). Most of the long-term residents had given everything they had when arriving at Lomaland in exchange for lifetime residency. Yet their contributions were spent on either maintaining the community or on Raja Yoga School projects in Cuba and Europe, especially since the income from the Raja Yoga School was insufficient to maintain expenses.

After Tingley’s death, the financial condition of Lomaland was precarious, but under the leadership of her successor, Gottfried de Purucker, and thanks to frugal cutbacks and voluntary reduction of residents to around 125, the overwhelming debt had been paid off by the mid-1930s. From 1929 through the 1930s, more than half of the donations received to support Lomaland were coming from Europe. By 1938, while the political conditions in Germany were rapidly deteriorating, donations from European members dried up. De Purucker sent out an urgent letter asking everyone to eliminate any expense possible to save on the monthly outlay (PLST Archive).

During de Purucker’s period, dramatic productions had continued with creative success under the direction of Florence Collison, though the dramas were reduced in pageantry compared to the Tingley era. Also, the Raja Yoga School still had significant numbers of children from San Diego residents, but the entire scope of both community activities and outreach, compared to the peak around 1920, was greatly diminished. There was insufficient income without the outside donations.

By the end of 1941, the community was hard pressed financially, with additional stress nearby when the U.S. government placed large military bunkers with artillery both north and south of the property and out on Point Loma itself. Tension was heightened with the U.S. declaration of war with Japan over the bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. De Purucker had already sent out individuals scouting California for a smaller less encumbered property and developed a plan to shrink the number of residents yet again. He had found a property in Cupertino that he preferred, but it could only accommodate a small staff of fifteen or so. In January 1942, the decision was made to sell the property and move to Covina, east of Los Angeles, where a boys’ school facility was purchased. The move in spring of 1942 was followed by de Purucker’s sudden death from a heart attack at Covina on September 27. De Purucker left no indications of a designated heir, but he did write out a letter giving advice and direction for interim governance and recommendations for the cabinet to follow for electing a president for the society (PLST Archive).

Internal conflict within the group amidst questions and assertions of spiritual authoritative power would break out in 1945 over the cabinet’s election of a new leader. As Yeats expressed it poetically, “Things fall apart; the center cannot hold,” and amidst dissension the magic of Point Loma had ceased and withdrawn, leaving antagonists with varying assertions and claims to inheriting the earlier holy grail. Despite the hopeful move to Covina, the qualities nurtured and grown at Point Loma could not endure. The sacred architecture was gone, music and the arts had faded, and the daily community group activities were radically reduced.

IMAGES
Image #1: Photograph of Katherine Tingley in the in the early 1900s.
Image #2: Photograph of Katherine Tingley on the way to meeting with one of Helena P. Blavatsky’s teachers in India.
Image #3: Photograph of Katherine Tingley in the mid-1920s.

REFERENCES

De Lange, Daniël. 2003. Thoughts on Music: Musical Art as Explained as One of the Most Important Means of Building up Man’s Character. The Hague: International Study Centre for Independent Search for Truth; reprinted from The Theosophical Path where it was published in ten installments between November 1916 and May 1918.

Fussell, Joseph H. 1917. The School of Antiquity: Its Meaning, Purpose and Scope. Point Loma, CA: Aryan Philosophical Press.

Greenwalt, Emmett. 1955, revised 1978. California Utopia: The Point Loma Community in California, 1897–1942. San Diego: Point Loma Publications.

Machell, Reginald. 1892. Theosophical Siftings. Volume 5.

Ryan, Charles. 1937, revised 1975. H. P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Movement. Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Writings by Katherine Tingley

1922. Theosophy. The Path of the Mystic. With Grace Frances Knoche. Point Loma, CA: Woman’s International Theosophical League.

1925. The Wine of Life. With preface by Talbot Mundy. Point Loma, CA: Woman’s International Theosophical League.

1926. The Gods Await. Point Loma, CA: Woman’s International Theosophical League.

1928. The Voice of the Soul. Point Loma, CA: Woman’s International Theosophical League.

1978. The Wisdom of the Heart: Katherine Tingley Speaks. Edited by W. Emmett Small. San Diego: Point Loma Publications.

Tingley, Katherine, ed. 1911–1929. The Theosophical Path [Theosophy periodical].

Primary Archival References

Point Loma School of Theosophy Archive. Accessed from http://www.pointlomaschool.com on 5 March 2017. (PLST Archive in text).

Recorded Interviews, Oral Histories, and Personal Writings.

Benjamin, Elsie Savage. n.d. Recorded Interviews. [Secretary to Katherine Tingley].

Harris, Helen. n.d. Notebooks. [Lomaland Resident].

Harris, Iverson L., Jr. n.d. Oral History. [Lomaland Resident].

Lester, Marian Plummer. n.d. Oral History. [Lomaland Resident].

Small, Carmen H. n.d. Oral history. [Lomaland Resident].

Small, W. Emmett. n.d. Oral History. [Lomaland Resident].

Post Date:
8 March 2017

Share

Christian Science and the Visual Arts

VISUAL ARTS TIMELINE

1821 (July 16):  Mary Baker, later Mary Baker Eddy, founder of Christian Science, was born in Bow, New Hampshire.

1850 (date unknown):  Painter James Franklin Gilman was born, possibly in Woburn (Massachusetts).

1874 (June 10):  Painter and muralist Violet Oakley was born in Bergen Heights, New Jersey.

1875:  Mary Baker published the first edition of her main theoretical work, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, which includes several comments on the visual arts.

1879:  The Church of Christ (Scientist) was founded.

1893:  Mary Baker Eddy started the construction in Boston of the Mother Church, Christian Science’s architectural masterpiece.

1893:  Eddy and Gilman published the illustrated book Christ and Christmas.

1893 (December 21):  Winifred Nicholson was born in Oxford.

1902-1927:  Oakley produced a key work in the history of American muralism by decorating the Pennsylvania State Capitol in Harrisburg.

1903 (December 18):  British painter and muralist Evelyn Dunbar was born in Reading, United Kingdom.

1903 (December 24):  Joseph Cornell was born in Nyack, New York.

1910 (December 3):  Mary Baker Eddy died in Newton, Massachusetts.

1920:  Canadian artist Lawren Harris painted The Christian Scientist, a portrait of his future second wife Bess Housser.

1920:  Lawren Harris founded in Toronto the Group of Seven, whose members were either Theosophists, including Harris himself, or Christian Scientists.

1920 (November 5):  Winifred Nicholson married in London Ben Nicholson, also a Christian Scientist.

1925:  Joseph Cornell converted to Christian Science.

1929:  James Franklin Gilman died in Westborough, Massachusetts.

1938:  Ben and Winifred Nicholson divorced.

1938 (November 17):  Ben Nicholson married in London sculptor Barbara Hepworth, in turn raised a Christian Scientist.

1960 (May 12):  Evelyn Dunbar died in Hastingleigh, United Kingdom.

1961 (February 25):  Violet Oakley died in Philadelphia.

1972 (December 29):  Joseph Cornell died in New York.

1981 (March 5):  Winifred Nicholson died in Carlisle, United Kingdom.

VISUAL ARTS TEACHINGS/DOCTRINES

“Divine Science, rising above physical theories, excludes matter, resolves things into thoughts, and replaces the objects of material sense with spiritual ideas” (Eddy 1934:123). Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910) wrote these words to indicate the very core of Christian Science spirituality. They could also serve as an aesthetic and artistic program. “The crude creations of mortal thought,” Eddy added, “must finally give place to the glorious forms which we sometimes behold in the camera of divine Mind, when the mental picture is spiritual and eternal. Mortals must look beyond fading, finite forms, if they would gain the true sense of things” (Eddy 1934:123).

Eddy mentioned explicitly the visual arts in her most important work, Science and Health. “The artist,” she wrote, “is not in his painting. The picture is the artist’s thought objectified” (Eddy 1934:310). An artist devoted to Christian Science, she claimed, would be in a position to state: “I have spiritual ideals, indestructible and glorious. When others see them as I do, in their true light and loveliness, – and know that these ideals are real and eternal because drawn from Truth, – they will find that nothing is lost, and all is won, by a right estimate of what is real” (Eddy 1934:359-60).

Christian Science never dictated a formal aesthetics. However, Eddy’s idea that a more perfect divine world existed beyond the illusion of matter guided several artists who were committed Christian Scientists. Each of them translated the Christian Science inspiration into his or her own artistic language. In Eddy’s thought, “once matter is recognised as nothing more than an illusion, (…) it can be transcended, returning the believer to a state of perfect health and harmony with the universe” (Kent 2015:474). Christian Science artists try to depict this state of ideal harmony: a state that, for a Christian Science, is in fact more real than the material illusion of daily life.

NOTABLE MEMBERS ARTISTS 

Carline, Hilda (1889-1950). British painter.

Chabas, Maurice (1862-1947). French painter, later a Theosophist.

Cornell, Joseph (1903-1972). American assemblage artist.

Dunbar, Evelyn (1906-1960). British painter and muralist.

Gilman, James Franklin (1850-1929). American painter.

Grier, Edmund Wyly ( 1862-1957). Canadian painter.

Hepworth, Barbara (1903-1975). British sculptor.

Johnston, Frank Hans (Franz) (1888-1949). Canadian painter.

Nicholson, Ben (1894-1982). British painter.

Nicholson, Winifred (1893-1981). British painter.

Oakley, Violet (1874-1961). American painter and muralist.

MOVEMENT INFLUENCED NON-MEMBER ARTISTS

Harris, Lawren (1885-1970). Canadian painter.

Li Yuan-Chia (1929-1994). Chinese painter.

MacDonald, James Edward Hervey (1873-1932). Canadian painter.

INFLUENCE ON ARTISTS 

Christian Science built, from its very beginnings, impressive churches. The founder, without imposing one particular style, recommended remaining faithful to the Christian tradition. The first Christian Science churches were neo-Romanic or neo-Gothic, sometimes with Renaissance or classic elements (Ivey 1999). Later, modernist architects were also hired, such as Hendrik Petrus Berlage (1856-1934) for the church in The Hague (Ivey 1999, 200-201). The stained-glass windows oChristianScienceAV1f The Mother Church in Boston [Image at right] were prepared by the local company of Phipps Slocum & Co., under the direction of Christian Science leadership (Pinkham 2009), in a rather conventional style. Some comments emphasized the prevalence of female characters, which was somewhat typical of early Christian Science imagery. The artists, however, were not Christian Scientists.

James Franklin Gilman (1850-1929), an itinerant artist who came from Vermont to Massachusetts, was the first professional painter who became a Christian Scientist (Gilman 1935). In 1893, Gilman worked with Mrs. Eddy to illustrate her poem Christ and Christmas (Painting a Poem 1998). The illustrations largely told the story of Mrs. Eddy, although she wrote that they “refer not to personality, but present the type and shadow of Truth’s appearing in the womanhood as well as in the manhood of God, our divine Father and Mother” (Eddy 1924:33).

Christ and Christmas [Image at right] was an extraordinary cooperative enterprise between a religious leader and an artist, as  ChristianScienceVA3evidenced by the changes Eddy requested for subsequent editions (Painting a Poem 1998). What Mrs. Eddy sought from Gilman was, at that time, a didactic art illustrating the truths of divine science. But what about an art inspired by Christian Science principles but not directly illustrating its textbook? This was a challenge for a subsequent generation of artists. In 1900, Violet Oakley (1874-1961) started a process that led to her conversion to Christian Science. She was a member for sixty years of her Christian Science church in Philadelphia, where she also served as one of the two readers (i.e. lay ministers conducting the service). Together with Jesse Willcox Smith (1863-1935) and Elizabeth Shippen Green (1871-1954), Oakley was one of the three “Red Rose Girls.” All well-off socialites and all pupils of the famous Swedenborgian illustrator Howard Pyle (1853-1911), the three young women decided to live together in Philadelphia’s Red Rose Inn between 1899 and 1901 and to seek a place in a profession dominated by men (Carter 2002).

Oakley became famous as the first American woman to receive a public mural commission. [Image at right] The forty-three murals in Harrisburg’s Pennsylvania State Capitol, executed between 1902 and 1927, were masterpieces of American muralism and led to several other commissions. They included the decoration of the Vassar College’s Alumnae House Living Room in Poughkeepsie, New York, where she introduced images dear to Christian Scientists, such as the Woman Clothed with the Sun and the crown of Christian glory (Mills 1984). We read in the main monograph about Oakley that “her firm Christian Science beliefs strongly influenced her life and work” and that art was for her “a way to teach moral values that would elevate the human spirit.” “Sometimes her wholeheartedly devotion [to Christian Science] was refreshing, but some of her associates resented her proselytizing lectures” (The Pennsylvania Capitol Preservation Committee 2002:28)ChristianScienceVA6

Yet, we may still ask ourselves in what sense Oakley was a Christian Science artist. She worked for Christian Science publications and painted two portraits of Eddy, now at the Mary Baker Eddy Library in Boston. She claimed, however, that Christian Science inspired her non-religious work as well. Oakley considered her best work the mural called Unity, celebrating the end of Civil War and slavery, in the Pennsylvania Senate Chamber. It expressed, she said, “beauty and harmony and inspiration and the effect of these: Peace in the mind of the beholder” (The Pennsylvania Capitol Preservation Committee 2002:133). Some of Oakley’s murals tried to summarize more explicitly the tenets of Christian Science. They include Divine Law: Love and Wisdom, her first mural for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Angels carry the letters forming the words “Love and Wisdom” and the Divine Truth, half-concealed, half-revealed, looms in the background (The Pennsylvania Capitol Preservation Committee 2002:89).

Coincidentally, British Christian Science painter Evelyn Dunbar (1906-1960) also started her career as a muralist, working under her Royal College of Arts teacher Charles Mahoney (1903-1968) in the Brockley County School for Boys, South London. Mahoney and Dunbar’s otherwise close relationship was always plagued by the fact that he was an agnostic, while she was born into Christian Science and very committed to her religion. Hailed as one of the most promising British young painters, in 1940 Dunbar was commissioned to work as the only official UK woman war artist. She focused on the home front and became well known during the war for her realistic and unsentimental paintings, focusing on how the war affected British women. After the war, Dunbar settled in the Warwickshire with her husband, the economist Roger Folley (1912-2008). Folley is depicted in one of her most famous paintings, Autumn and the Poet (1958-1960), typical of Dunbar’s late more metaphorical style.

Dunbar was a very committed Christian Scientist throughout all her life. “Her Christian Science beliefs pervaded much of her work” (Clarke 2006:163). Dunbar herself explained that she wanted to show that “all that is made is the work of God and all is good” (Clarke 2006:163: actually a quote from Eddy 1934:521), even in the most difficult circumstances.

Both Winifred Nicholson (1893-1981) and Hilda Carline (1889-1950) expressed similar feelings towards nature. Carline is mostly well known for her stormy marriage and divorce with fellow painter Stanley Spencer (1891-1959). Critics, however, increasingly recognize her art as a significant voice in British post-impressionism, quite apart from the relationship with Spencer. Carline’s firm belief in Christian Science was not shared by Spencer, and contributed to the crisis of their marriage (Thomas 1999).

Nicholson, a celebrated neo-Impressionist British painter, converted to Christian Science in the 1920s. She attributed to Christian Science her almost miraculous recovery after a fall during her first pregnancy in 1927. Christian Science “gradually became central to her thinking and to her art” (Andreae 2009:66). Nicholson was one of the best colorists in modern British art. She infused new life to the painting of flowers. Her flowers showed the world as the perfect work of God and a demonstration of divine beauty. For instance, Daffodils and Bluebells (1950-1955) is a highly symbolic painting, where the beauty of the flowers directs the gaze towards a church window and divine light.

In 1954, Nicholson wrote in The Christian Science Monitor that these paintings represented “the still order behind turmoil,” “a place where the harmony of space is giving its verdict” (Nicholson 1954). Nicholson did not paint flowers and landscapes only. She found the same spiritual beauty in family life, children, and simple joys of the countryside. By her children’s accounts, “she couldn’t have been a better mother” (Andreae 2009:92) and this loving relationship found a place in her art.

Nicholson also experimented with the abstract as a way of capturing the essence of world’s beauty and goodness as early as ChristianScienceVA81935. The title of her most well-known non-figurative work, Quarante Huit Quai d’Auteuil, refers to her address in Paris, where she started a lifelong friendship with Dutch abstract painter Piet Mondrian (1872-1944). From the abstract experiments, however, Nicholson consistently returned to flowers. Later in life, she formed a close association with Chinese abstract painter Li Yuan-Chia (1929-1994). Under his influence, she experimented with prisms, producing a whole series of painted meditations about light, a symbol of Christ and of Divine Science dispelling the errors of the mortal mind. [Image at right]

Winifred used throughout her whole artistic career the last name Nicholson, that she acquired at age twenty-six when marrying fellow artist Ben Nicholson (1894-1982), although they were divorced in 1938 after eighteen years of marriage. Ben was also a Christian Scientist, and moved from landscapes to abstract art under the decisive influence of Christian Science and its idea that a perfect world exists beyond the material illusion. He stated repeatedly that without considering the influence of Christian Science, critics would run the risk of not understanding his art at all, and “Christian Science was a driving force in his life” (Kent 2015:474).

After his divorce from Winifred, Ben married sculptor Barbara Hepworth (1903-1975), who had been raised as a Christian Scientist and kept being influenced by Eddy’s idea about transcending matter in her whole career, although in later years she became closer to the Church of England (Curtis and Stephens 2015).

After she divorced Ben, Winifred Nicholson found a congenial spirit in Mondrian, a very committed Theosophist (Introvigne 2014). Artists who were respectively Christian Scientists and Theosophists often befriended each other, and some went from Christian Science to Theosophy. The Theosophical Society was founded in New York in 1875, only two weeks after the first publication of Science and Health. Both movements were created by women, and found followers in the same urban and progressive milieu. The two teachings were, however, as Stephen Gottschalk (1941-2005) noted, “wholly irreconcilable” (Gottschalk 1973:156). Theosophy’s founder, Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891), attacked Christian Science as a wrong interpretation of human psychic and occult powers, and Mrs. Eddy regarded Theosophy as a particularly malignant form of animal magnetism, i.e. of the malicious attempt to control other human minds.

Notwithstanding this doctrinal conflict, relationships between individual Theosophist and Christian Scientists were often good,particularly in the artistic milieu. The well-known British composer Cyril Scott (1879-1970), who was first interested in Christian Science and later became a Theosophist, claimed that he was introduced to Theosophy through Christian Science friends (Chandley 1994, 38). The French symbolist painter Maurice Chabas (1862-1947) [Image at right] “called himself a Christian Scientist” (Reiss-de Palma 2ChristianScienceVA10004:82) during World War I, before joining the Theosophical Society in 1917 (Reiss-de Palma 2004:93). Christian Science influences, together with his Catholic heritage, help explain the persistence of Christian themes in Chabas’ work well after he became a Theosophist.

A case in point is the Group of Seven, Canada’s most significant twentieth century group of artists. The founder, Lawren Harris (1885-1970), had a Christian Science mother but later moved to Theosophy. Among the members, James Edward Hervey MacDonald (1873-1932) was a Theosophist with a Christian Scientist wife, and Frank Hans (Franz) Johnston (1888-1949), was a Christian Scientist. Harris’ beloved second wife Bess Housser (1891-1969), was a Christian Scientist who later became herself a Theosophist. In 1920, long before they got married, Harris painted her as The Christian Scientist. Almost all members of their circle of friends were either Theosophists or Christian Scientists.

Although firmly committed to Theosophy, Lawren [Image at right] and Bess Harris continued to rely on the key Christian Science ChristianScienceVA12concept of animal magnetism. Harris became concerned that art could inadvertently become a vehicle of animal magnetism, when it tried to influence through symbols. This eventually contributed to the passage from his signature Canadian landscapes to the abstract works of his later years (see Introvigne 2016).

Johnston was the only member of the Group of Seven who “remained a faithful and devout follower [of Christian Science] all his life. He started each day with a prayer and Bible reading” (Mason 1998:21). Johnston was persuaded to join Christian Science by Sir Edmund Wyly Grier (1862-1957), an academic portrait painter who would go on to become in 1929 the president of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts. Although his “traditionalist” style quickly went out of fashion, Grier should be added to the list of recognized artists who were loyal Christian Scientists.

Harris’ implication that somewhat parallel conclusions about the arts may be deduced from Christian Science and Theosophy, as theoretically irreconcilable as the two systems may be, leads us again to the question of what kind of aesthetics an artist may derive from Christian Science. This was a lifelong problem for Joseph Cornell (1903-1972), perhaps the most important Christian Science artist.

Cornell came from a well-to-do New York family, but the premature death of his father when he was fourteen left him as the breadwinner for his family, including mother, two younger sisters, and a brother who suffered from cerebral palsy. Joseph himself was tormented by severe stomach pains.

In 1925, he turned to Christian Science, experienced a significant “physical healing experience” (Starr 1982:2) and became a lifelong active and enthusiastic member of the church (Solomon 1997). Cornell’s journals (Caws 2000) make abundantly clear that Christian Science became a primary interest in his life. He credited Christian Science with “the supreme power to meet any human need” (Doss 2007:122). He turned to art in the 1930s as a way to affirm his faith, and “in 1951-1952 he considered giving up art, if necessary, in favor of working in a more pragmatic matter in the practice of his beliefs” (Starr 1982:1). He started preparing collages and “boxes” in order to “organize the sensual world (the world of matter) into the conceptual realm advocated by Christian Science” (Doss 2007:115).

Mistaken for a Surrealist because of his dreamy boxes, and included in an exhibition of Surrealists at MoMA, the New York Museum of Modern Art, in 1936, he wrote to curator Alfred Barr (1902-1981) that he was not one and did not “share in the subconscious and dream theories of the Surrealists” (Starr 1982:21). For a fervent Christian Scientist, these were dangerously close to animal magnetism. His boxes were not celebrating chaos but imposing order on it (see Blair 1999).

Particularly at the time of the hundredth anniversary of his birth (2003), some critics tried to downplay the Christian Science element in Cornell and his boxes. But in fact “all [his] work is ultimately a variation on the single theme of Christian Science metaphysics” (Starr 1982:2), according not only to interpreters but to Cornell himself. He always described Science and Health as his book “most read of all, exc. Bible” (Starr 1982:1). “To separate Cornell’s aesthetics from the metaphysical ideas to which they bear witness is to deprive the work of its vitality” (Starr 1982:7).

In the assemblage of objects The Crystal Cage (1943), [Image at right] Cornell included references to Charles (Émile) Blondin (1824- 1897), the French acrobat who crossed more than three hundred times the Niagara Falls on a tightrope. Blondin epitomized for Cornell the Christian Science idea that a trained mind can triumph on physical and material limitations. Blondin was forgotten in the twentieth century, but Cornell found a reference to him in Mrs. Eddy’s Science and Health: “Had Blondin believed it impossible to walkChristianScienceVA14 the rope over Niagara’s abyss of waters, he could never have done it. His belief that he could do it gave his thought-forces, called muscles, their flexibility and power which the unscientific might attribute to a lubricating oil” (Eddy 1934: 199).

For the pathologically shy Cornell, the same ability of subduing mental fears was demonstrated by the evolution of ballerinas and actresses before an audience. Ballet, in particular, demonstrated for Cornell the “flexibility and power of the thought-forces called muscles” mentioned by Mrs. Eddy. He was a great collector of ballet memorabilia. Later, Cornell became particularly interested in Marilyn Monroe (1926-1962). He started preparing a “dossier” on her when he learned that she had been raised Christian Scientist, first (shortly) by her mother Gladys Baker (1902-1984) and then for five years by her beloved “Aunt Ana,” i.e. Ana E. Lower (1880-1948), a Christian Science practitioner with whom she lived between 1938 and 1942. As a grown-up, Monroe left the faith. She never acknowledged receipt of a box Cornell sent to her. After her tragic death, however, the artist, in his own words, “experienced a totally unexpected revelation.” He acquired a new certainty of “Christian Science’s faith in the infinity of divine mind, in death as a pathway to eternal life” and came to believe that Monroe attained in death “an escape from the worldly realm of matter; the triumph of divine spirit” (Doss 2007:134-35).

A famous Cornell box, The Pink Palace (1946-1950) was a reference to the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale (and ballet). The princess awakens after hundred years of sleep, yet she has remained young and beautiful. For Cornell, this related to Christian Science teaching about “the error of thinking that we are growing old, and the benefits of destroying that illusion” (Eddy 1934:245). Mrs. Eddy told the story of a British girl who, “disappointed in love in her early years, […] became insane and lost all account of time. Believing that she was still living in the same hour which parted her from her lover, taking no note of years, she stood daily before the window watching for her lover’s coming. In this mental state, she remained young. Having no consciousness of time, she literally grew no older” (Eddy 1934:245). “Years had not made her old, because she had taken no cognizance of passing time nor thought of herself as growing old. The bodily results of her belief that she was young manifested the influence of such a belief. She could not age while believing herself young, for the mental state governed the physical” (Eddy 1934:245).

Cornell’s art ultimately aimed at creating “palaces” free of the limitations of the matter and the mortal mind, where the mental state fully governed the physical. Perhaps, this was the true aim of all Christian Science artists. Although no “Christian science art” as a unified artistic language exists, a common theme in all artists who were either members of, or influence by, Christian Science may perhaps be identified. It is the idea that a different world exists, the world of Divine Mind (not to be confused with the fallible human mind), and that artists are in a unique position for co-operating with Eddy’s grand project by portraying in their works, although with the obvious limitations of the material tools they use, at least something alluding to this higher world.

IMAGES**
** All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1: The Mother Church, Boston.

Image #2: James Franklin Gilman, illustration for Christ and Christmas with changes approved by Mary Baker Eddy. Courtesy of The Mary Baker Eddy Library, Boston.

Image #3: Violet Oakley, Mary Baker Eddy, cover design for The Christian Science Journal. Courtesy of The Mary Baker Eddy Library, Boston.

Image #4: Winifred Nicholson, Consciousness (1980).

Image #5: Maurice Chabas, Vers l’au-delà Marche à deux, date unknown.

Image #6: Lawren Harris, The Christian Scientist (1920).

Image #7: Joseph Cornell, Penny Arcade (1962).

REFERENCES

Andreae, Christopher. 2002. Winifred Nicholson. Farnham, United Kingdom and Burlington, VT: Lund Humphries.

Blair, Lindsay. 1999. Joseph Cornell’s Vision of Spiritual Order. London: Reaktion Books.

Carter, Alice A. 2002. The Red Rose Girls: An Uncommon Story of Art and Love. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

Caws, Mary Ann, ed. 2000. Joseph Cornell’s Theatre of the Mind: Selected Diaries, Letters, and Files. New York: Thames & Hudson.

Chandley, Paul F.S. 1994. “Cyril Meir Scott and Theosophical Symbolism: A Biographical and Philosophical Study.” Musical Arts Dissertation. Kansas City, MO: University of Missouri – Kansas City.

Clarke, Gill. 2006. Evelyn Dunbar: War and Country. Bristol: Sansom and Company.

Curtis, Penelope – Christ Stephens, eds. 2015. Barbara Hepworth: Sculpture for a Modern World. London: Tate Publishing.

Doss, Erika. 2007. “Joseph Cornell and Christian Science.” Pp. 113-35 in Joseph Cornell: Opening the Box, edited by Jason Edwards and Stephanie L. Taylor. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.

Eddy, Mary Baker. 1934. Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Boston: The Christian Science Publishing Society.

Eddy, Mary Baker. 1924. Miscellaneous Writings 1883-1896. Boston: The Christian Science Publishing Society.

Gilman, James F. 1935. Recollections of Mary Baker Eddy, Discoverer and Founder of Christian Science, as Preserved in the Diary Records of James F. Gilman Written during the Making of the Illustrations for Mrs. Eddy’s Poem, Christ and Christmas, in 1893. Reprint. Freehold, NJ: Rare Book.

Gottschalk, Stephen. 1973. The Emergence of Christian Science in American Religious Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Introvigne, Massimo. 2016. “Lawren Harris and the Theosophical Appropriation of the National Tradition in Canada.” Pp. 355-86 in Theosophical Appropriations: Kabbalah, Western Esotericism and the Transformation of Tradition, edited by Boaz Huss and Julie Chajes. Be’er Sheva, Israel: Ben Gurion University Press.

Introvigne, Massimo. 2014. “From Mondrian to Charmion von Wiegand: Neoplasticism, Theosophy and Buddhism.” Pp. 47-59 in Black Mirror 0: Territory, edited by Judith Noble, Dominic Shepherd and Robert Ansell. London, England: Fulgur Esoterica.

Ivey, Paul Eli. 1999. Prayers in Stone: Christian Science Architecture in the United States 1894-1930. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Kent, Lucy. 2015. “ Immortal Mind: Christian Science and Ben Nicholson’s Work of the 1930s.” The Burlington Magazine 1348/157:474-81.

Mason, Roger Burford. A Grand Eye for Glory: A Life of Franz Johnston. Toronto, Canada: Dundurn Press.

Painting a Poem: Mary Baker Eddy and James F. Gilman Illustrate Christ and Christmas. 1998. Boston: The Christian Science Publication Society.

Mills, Sally. 1984. Violet Oakley: The Decoration of the Alumnae House Living Room. Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College Art Gallery.

Nicholson, Winifred. 1954. “I Like to Have A Picture In My Room.” The Christian Science Monitor, November 9.

Pinkham, Margaret M. 2009. A Miracle in Stone: The History of the Building of the Original Mother Church, The First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston, Massachusetts, 1894. 2 volumes. Santa Barbara, CA: Nebbadoon Press.

Reiss-de Palma, Myriam. 2004. “Maurice Chabas (1862-1947): Du Symbolisme à l’Abstraction. Essai et catalogue raisonné. ” Ph.D. Dissertation. Paris, France: Université of Paris IV – Sorbonne.

Solomon, Deborah. 1997. Utopia Parkway: The Life and Work of Joseph Cornell. Boston: MFA Publications.

Starr, Sandra Leonard. 1982. Joseph Cornell: Art and Metaphysics. New York: Castelli, Feigen, Corcoran.

The Pennsylvania Capitol Preservation Committee. 2002. A Sacred Challenge: Violet Oakley and the Pennsylvania Capitol Murals. Harrisburg, PA: The Pennsylvania Capitol Preservation Committee.

Thomas, Allison. 1999. The Art of Hilda Carline: Mrs Stanley Spencer. Farnham, England: Lund Humphries.

Post Date:
18 December 2016

Share

Gurumayi (Swami Chidvilasananda)

GURUMAYI TIMELINE

1955 (June 24):  Gurumayi was born as Malti Shetty in Bombay (Mumbai), India.

1982 (April 26):  She was formally initiated by the then-guru of Siddha Yoga, Swami Muktananda, as an ascetic in the tradition and renamed Swami Chidvilasananda (the Sanskrit title translates to “the religious teacher [swami] who is the bliss of the play of consciousness”); Gurumayi, “immersed in the guru,” is an honorific that is used less formally.

1982 (May 3):  She was co-consecrated with her brother Swami Nityananada by Swami Muktananda to be his successors as gurus of Siddha Yoga.

1982 (October 2):  Swami Muktananda died and Swami Chidvilasananda and her brother became the gurus of Siddha Yoga

1985 (November 10):  Swami Chidvilasananda was installed as the sole guru of Siddha Yoga; she has held this status continuously to the present day.

BIOGRAPHY

Malti Shetty, born June 24, 1955, was the oldest child of a Bombay restaurateur and his wife. The very next year, Swami Muktananda (1908–1982), whose Sanskrit name means “the bliss of liberation,” in the culmination of decades of spiritual practice (sadhana), received permission to establish an ashram at Ganeshpuri, near Bombay (Mumbai) and to teach from his guru, Bhagavan Nityananda (“the venerable one who is eternally joyful”). The charismatic Swami Muktananda named his teaching “Siddha Yoga” and instituted weekend programs for the transmission of spiritual energy from guru to disciple, shaktipat or shaktipat-diksha (shaktipat initiation), a format that was distinctive from the classical full-time residence model of guru-disciple and that allowed for the participation of diverse devotees in ashram events. Shetty’s parents became disciples, and by 1960 they were bringing her, her sister and two brothers to the ashram on weekends.

The guru bestowed formal shaktipat initiation on Malti in 1969, when she was fourteen years old (Durgananda 1997:64), and she began to reside at the ashram by the time she was eighteen. Swami Muktananda “concerned himself with every detail of Malti’s diet and schedule, making sure that she ate food that fostered meditation” (Durgananda 1997:65). Malti was both like and unlike other devotees: Along with other devotees, she furthered her spiritual progress by her own devotional commitment to the guru as well as her engagement in intensive spiritual practices (sadhana) such as meditation. Yet to Swami Muktananda she stood out as special, as in his 1969 prediction that one day she would serve as a global beacon: “‘You know,’ he said, ‘that girl Malti is a blazing fire. One day she will light up the entire world’” (Durgananda 1997:65).

Swami Muktananda instituted world tours to spread the teachings of Siddha Yoga in what he envisioned to be a worldwide “meditation revolution.” In 1975, he appointed Malti as his translator during his second world tour in Oakland, California. During the years 1974–1975, Muktananda established many of the features of Siddha Yoga practice that were to remain core elements of the path for the next quarter century, including the guru personally bestowing shaktipat on devotees at weekend Intensive programs, establishing ashrams globally, and creating guidelines for teaching courses on aspects of Siddha Yoga practice and theology. Grooming Malti as a leader was part of these developments. In 1980, Muktananda decreed that Malti would deliver the public talks at the ashram on Sunday nights, and in 1981 she was made executive vice-president of SYDA Foundation, the non-profit organizational structure supporting the teaching program (Pechilis 2004b:224–29).

In April 1982, at the age of twenty-six, Malti was formally initiated into the ascetic lifestyle (sannyasa) by her guru and given the formal name of Swami Chidvilasananda (“the bliss of the play of consciousness”). Ten years later, she wrote of her transformative experience of identity with the universal divinity (expressed as He and as Brahman in the passage) during that ceremony:

At one point during the pattābhisheka, the ceremony during which Baba Muktananda passed on to me the power of his lineage, he whispered So’ham [I am He] and aham Brahmāsmi [I am of Brahman] in my ear. I experienced the mantra as an immensely powerful force which rocketed at lightning speed throughout my bloodstream and created an upheaval in my entire system. I instantly transcended body-consciousness and became aware that all distinctions such as inner and outer were false and artificial. Everything was the same; what was within me was also without. My mind became completely blank. There was only the pulsating awareness “I am That,” accompanied by great bliss and light.

When my mind again began to function, all I could think was, “What is Baba? Who is this being who looks so ordinary, yet has the capacity to transmit such an experience at will?”

I knew beyond a doubt that the mantra was God. I had never experienced a force so mighty, yet at the same time so soothing (Swami Chidvilasananda 1992:xxiii).

Two weeks later, Swami Muktananda consecrated as his successors both Swami Chidvilasananda and her brother Swami Nityananda (b. 1962). Formerly Subash Shetty, Nityananda had been resident at the ashram and initiated into sannyasa in 1980. This consecration of the two siblings surprised people because of their youthfulness, their familiarity to devotees since they had grown up at the ashram, and the fact that Siddha Yoga taught that one should devote oneself to a single guru (Williamson 2010:119). Five months later, the two actually became the gurus of Siddha Yoga, at Muktananda’s samadhi (“immersion in enlightened consciousness,” often used as in this case to indicate the death of a spiritual leader) on October 2, 1982.

Swami Chidvilasananda, who is more commonly referred to as Gurumayi (“immersed in the guru”), which expresses her continuing dedication to Muktananda, became the sole guru of Siddha Yoga on November 10, 1985. Gurumayi led the Siddha Yoga movement through a number of scandals, including that of her brother Nityananda leaving and then wanting to reassume the co-guruship ( “Former SYDA Co-guru Explains” 1986; Thursby 1991; Harris 1994:93–94, 101–04; Durgananda 1997:126–34; Healy 2010; Williamson 2010:118–21); and through allegations which emerged shortly after the guru’s death and have intensified over the years that Muktananda had sexually abused female devotees (Rodarmor 1983; Caldwell 2001; Radha 2002; Shah 2010; Salon Staff 2010; Williamson 2010:114–17).

Gurumayi persevered in her leadership of Siddha Yoga through her close following of traditions and practices that her guru Muktananda had put in place (ashrams, shaktipat, weekend Intensive programs, also known as Intensives), as well as her own star power, with disciples eager to catch a glimpse of her at the ashram and vying for seats close to her at official programs or Intensives (Williamson 2010:124). Gurumayi also established innovative programs, for instance a talk on New Year’s Eve that revealed the Yearly Message for contemplation throughout the coming year; such annual messages consist of short phrases that emphasize purity of mind, belief in love, and knowledge of the truth (“Gurumayi’s Messages and Message Artwork” 1991–2017). During the late 1980s, the ashram in South Fallsburg, New York more than tripled in size, and this period into the early 1990s has been called the Golden Era of the Siddha Yoga Movement (Williamson 2010:121). (For more about Siddha Yoga ashrams see below.) In 1997, Gurumayi established the Muktabodha Indological Research Institute (“About Muktabodha” 2017) in New Delhi, India, for the study and preservation of classical scriptures of India. There are many publications by the gurus, swamis, and scholars of Siddha Yoga on spiritual teachings and theology.

TEACHINGS/DOCTRINES

 The teachings that Swami Muktananda designated as Siddha Yoga are understood by the organization to have deep roots in Hindu theology. The term “siddha” has been used for many centuries in Indian religions to refer to a “perfected being,” and it is often associated with secret teachings. South Indian Tamil tradition recognizes a remote lineage of siddhas (siddhars) who are distinguished by their achievement of powers of immortality and healing (Weiss 2009). The first guru in the Siddha Yoga lineage, Bhagavan Nityananda (1900–1961), is remembered as a great yogi who possessed miraculous powers of healing, and who had no need of ceremonial events because he could transmit shaktipat to a worthy disciple through the light of his gaze (Durgananda 1997:11–22, esp. 19). Drawing in part on formulations in the classical Hindu philosophical treatises, the Upanishads, Swami Muktananda’s understanding of the term “siddha” emphasized the power of meditation to effect the realization of the identity between the human spirit and the divine.

The true Siddha has realized his own true nature through meditation and knowledge and has obliterated his ego and become one with the Universal Spirit. He unites with Shiva and becomes Shiva Himself. He is a true Siddha, a genuine Siddha. Such a Siddha was Ramakrishna, such a one was Sai Baba of Shirdi, and such a Siddha was Nityananda Baba [Bhagavan Nityananda]; they all became one with Shiva and became Shiva (Muktananda 1974:173, cited in Muller-Ortega 1997:169).

In Siddha Yoga, there is a lineage of three gurus: Bhagavan Nityananda, Swami Muktananda, and Swami Chidvilasananda, and each are understood to be perfectly self-realized beings.

Inherent to the definition of “guru” is that she or he transmits the power of true self-realization to the disciple. This transmission is effected in multilayered ways, including: the transmission of shaktipat from guru to disciple, which is an expression of the guru’s intention (sankalpa) that often serves as an initial awakening; the guru’s bestowal of a mantra or sacred oral formula; the guru’s grace; the guru’s oral and written teachings; and the guru’s visual presence as beheld (darshan) by the disciple (Mahoney 1997). Through these practices, the disciple comes to recognize through the example of the guru that the divine is actually within him or herself.

The guru serves as a funnel for the disciple to encounter and understand teachings from the voluminous Hindu scriptures that point to the divine within—from revealed texts such as the Vedas (of which the Upanishads are part) to remembered texts such as the Bhagavad Gita, to treatises from the philosophical schools of Advaita Vedanta and Kashmiri Shaivism, to songs and oral teachings (Brooks 1997). In their publications and talks, Swami Muktananda and Gurumayi freely draw from this vast spiritual heritage: “Since the Siddha Yoga gurus are not proponents of any one form of doctrinal worship (siddhānta), they are not committed to traditionalist ‘schools’ of thought or particular philosophical identities” (Brooks 1997:291). Siddha Yoga devotees access the texts in several ways, including talks by the guru, study at retreats, and the Siddha Yoga Home Study Course.

One text in particular, the Guru Gita (“Song of the Guru”), features centrally since it is the text that Siddha Yoga practitioners recite daily. As described by Muktananda:

If anyone were to ask me which is the one indispensable text, I would answer, “The Guru Gītā.” This is so supremely holy that it makes the ignorant learned, the destitute wealthy and the scholarly fully realized. The Guru Gītā is a supreme song of Shiva, of salvation. It is a veritable ocean of bliss in this world. It encompasses the science of the absolute, the yoga of the Self. It gives vitality to life. It is a harmonious composition; its 182 stanzas in varied verse patterns beautifully describe the importance of devotion to the Guru, his role, his nature and his distinguishing characteristics. If a person who is devoted to the Guru sings this song, he easily attains all powers, realizations and knowledge, fulfilling the aim of yoga (Muktananda 1983:xiv).

The Guru Gita text as printed in The Nectar of Chanting may be eclectic itself; the origin of its 182 verses is to date unknown: “Said to be within either the Skanda Purāṇa, or, more rarely, the Padma Purāṇa. . .certain verses appear also in the Kulārṇava Tantra and other Tantric sources. . . .This status is similarly not unusual for sources belonging to traditions of mystical yoga. . .” (Brooks 1997:291). This key text that is the basis of daily practice in Siddha Yoga may have been compiled in this form by Muktananda himself.

Swami Muktananda influentially fashioned lasting features of the Siddha Yoga path. Motivated by a global vision, he established institutions and instructional procedures to effect the processes of transmission from guru to disciple in a “radical” making of shaktipat initiation accessible to a global audience (Jain 2014:199); his successor, Gurumayi, has maintained and enhanced these institutions and methods of spiritual instruction. The most prominent Siddha Yoga ashrams are large physical campuses founded by Swami Muktananda, including the first Siddha Yoga ashram, Gurudev Siddha Peeth, near the town of Ganeshpuri in the state of Maharashtra, India (est. 1956); the Siddha Yoga Ashram in Oakland, California (est. April 28, 1975); and the Shree Muktananda Ashram in South Fallsburg, New York (est. 1978–1979). He also created the weekend Intensive program, in which devotees gather in residence at an ashram to perform collective chanting, listen to teachings by the guru or credentialed Siddha Yoga teachers, hear testimonials by other devotees, engage in service (seva), and participate in workshops on the teachings; depending on the participant, these activities may inspire an experience of shaktipat. Although clearly rooted in Hindu tradition and actively deploying Hindu sources (for example, the Guru Gita is chanted in Sanskrit) Muktananda envisioned Siddha Yoga to be a universal path and Gurumayi has continued that approach. The Siddha Yoga vision statement describes the path as:

For everyone, everywhere,
to realize the presence of divinity
in themselves and creation,
the cessation of all miseries and suffering,
and the attainment of supreme bliss
(“Siddha Yoga Vision Statement” 2016).

In Siddha Yoga, the universality of accessibility frames the specificity of tradition: “Hindu-inspired” is thus a more apt characterization of the Siddha Yoga path than “Hinduism.”

Gurumayi has maintained the teachings and practices of Muktananda, including the centerpiece that is now known as the Shaktipat Intensive (“Questions and Answers” 2016). However, she has brought her own emphases and personal style to the established framework. Scholarly observers have suggested several ways to characterize her teachings; for example, service through unselfish action: “If one overall ethical teaching could be said to characterize her ministry, it is the teaching of unselfish action. The years since 1982 have seen an increasingly conscious attempt to mold the Siddha Yoga movement into a fusion of individuals and institutions that embody that message.” Gurumayi herself has said, “My message is ‘do it!’” (Durgananda 1997:136, 138). She has put increased emphasis on disciples performing practices (sadhana) on a daily basis on their own as guided by the teachings, as well as outreach services (“PRASAD Project” 2016; “The Prison Project” 2016).

Gurumayi’s focus can be contrasted with that of her guru Muktananda, drawing on a distinction made by Richard Gombrich: Muktananda was “soteriological” in focus while Gurumayi is “communal”:

Soteriological religions emphasize the practices and beliefs that are necessary for attaining salvation—and attaining it quickly. Communal religions emphasize practices and beliefs that ensure the continuity of social life. . . . Much of [Gurumayi’s] teaching is directed toward practical, everyday matters of living in the world. . . . Although the Hindu-based practices of chanting Sanskrit texts and performing worship (puja) still occur in Siddha Yoga, Gurumayi’s emphasis is discovering one’s own inner wisdom through contemplating ordinary daily experiences within the context of scriptural texts or Gurumayi’s or Muktananda’s words (Williamson 2005:154, 155, 156).

The practical, “communal” nature of the Siddha Yoga path today brings together spiritual knowledge and personal experience in the world, grounding the former and enhancing the meaning of the latter. One aspect of this emphasis on applying the teachings to practical, everyday living in the world is the Siddha Yoga Home Study Course program, which is “four courses designed to invigorate and support your sadhana” to “engage in active study and application of Siddha Yoga teachings” (“SIDDHA YOGA® Home Study Course” 2017).

What makes the Home Study Course possible is Gurumayi’s expansive use of technology (Pechilis 2004b: 233–36). Today it is a given that gurus have a website through which to explain and promote their teachings, but Gurumayi was a pioneer in the use of technology as a global medium, beginning in 1989, “when the first ‘satellite’ Intensives were broadcast around the world, [and] the term ‘global shaktipat’ began to take on literal meaning” (Durgananda 1997:150). As Swami Durgananda explains:

In 1994, an Intensive was broadcast by audio hookup to the tiny Siddha Yoga center in St. Petersburg, Russia. The next year, a French student took a trip to Russia and, toward the end of his trip, spent some time in a Russian Orthodox monastery there. The abbot there noticed the student’s photograph of Gurumayi. “Oh, you’re with Gurumayi,” the abbott said. Surprised, the student asked, “How do you know Gurumayi?” “Everyone knows Gurumayi,” replied the abbot, explaining that her name and photograph were widely circulated in the Russian spiritual community—no doubt by students who had taken that Intensive (Durgananda 1997:150–51).

By 2002, a visually-based global satellite broadcast was used for Intensives, the unveiling of the Siddha Yoga Yearly Message and the “first ever year-long global curriculum focused on the Siddha Yoga Message,” the Siddha Yoga Message Course. These were described as opportunities to “participate together as a global sangham [community]” (Pechilis 2004b:236). Through the satellite, the guru can be both in one place and in many places at the same time. It was and is a postmodern enactment of the simultaneity of the universal and the particular that pervades Siddha Yoga: The path as both Hindu and universally accessible; the guru as both personal and universal consciousness; the guru as both present and absent. The context is the very large role that images of the guru play in Siddha Yoga’s representation of access to the guru. “At South Fallsburg [ashram], photographs of the guru—with her thousand-watt smile, wide eyes, and elegantly chiselled cheekbones—adorn nearly every wall, cash register, shop counter, and shelf, as well as her devotees’ private meditation altars and many of their car dashboards” (Harris 1994:92). They saturate the ashram walls, they are for sale in the ashram’s physical and online bookshops, and they are tightly controlled as vehicles of contact with the guru. Live images of the guru during an Intensive or the unveiling of the Yearly Message, as situated in this larger context of the importance of the guru’s image, constitute an assertion of technological connection as intimacy (Pechilis 2004b). That images are increasingly tightly controlled is demonstrated by the discontinuation in 2013 of public access online to Gurumayi’s Yearly Message with accompanying artwork (“Gurumayi’s Messages and Message Artwork” 1991–2017). Now a devotee must log in to be able to view (“to have darshan ”) of Gurumayi’s Message Artwork (“Darshan of Gurumayi’s Message Artwork for 2016” 2016).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Currently, Siddha Yoga recognizes six ashrams and a host of meditation and chanting groups worldwide (“Siddha Yoga Ashrams” 2016). The ashrams have a special status, since they are a powerful “body” of the guru (Gold 1995), and they are expansive, often architecturally specific spaces for practice of the path; some of the ashrams have been constructed according to the norms of Hindu science of architecture (vastu shastra or vāstu śāstra). The six ashrams are in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia; Ganeshpuri, India; Oakland, California; Boston, Massachusetts; and South Fallsburg, New York. Meditation centers are designated organizational spaces, often in major cities. Chanting and meditation groups are held within a Siddha Yoga student’s home.

Online information from the Siddha Yoga website about the ashrams reveals several different models of ongoing practice apart from holidays. The Australian ashrams in Sydney and Melbourne routinely have community gatherings (satsang, enlightened company) and recitation of the Guru Gita on Saturdays and Sundays, seemingly an accommodation to the devotees’ work week. Also prioritizing weekends, the schedule at the Oakland, California ashram has a more elaborate ongoing program of chanting, welcome orientations for people new to the Siddha Yoga path, meditation and study gatherings. The Ganeshpuri ashram and the South Fallsburg ashram are both accessible only to committed members of Siddha Yoga, by application, for long-term daily service activities; and the Boston ashram is a retreat center. Long-term seva (devotional service) practitioners who reside at the ashrams would typically follow a daily schedule such as: Early morning meditation and chanting session at 3:00 in the morning, followed by another session at 4:30 in the morning, in which the Guru Gita is chanted; then breakfast; followed by a morning session of seva, during which one might help clean the ashram or perform outdoor work; noontime chanting; afternoon seva; and finally dinner, evening chanting, and lights out by 10:00 in the evening. Vegetarian meals are taken by sevites, and there is segregation between male and female staff in terms of accommodation and seating for chanting and meditation.

Such long-term residents are joined by residential participants in the Siddha Yoga Intensive, during which the guru bestows shakti (spiritual power or energy) on the devotees. Baba Muktananda held many one- or two-day Intensives during a given calendar year, and until 2005, Gurumayi did so as well. In 2006, she declared that there would be one Global Siddha Yoga Shaktipat Intensive per year, in October, to coincide with Baba Muktananda’s mahasamadhi or act of consciously and intentionally leaving his body (resulting in death). As explained by Siddha Yoga: “After mahasamadhi, the shakti of an enlightened being continues to be ever-present and all-pervasive, uplifting the world illuminating the lives of devotees. . . . [A] sacred occasion enhances the power of one’s practices” (“Questions and Answers” 2016).

The yearly calendar of holidays, when members of the community are expected to gather in large numbers, is constituted by such days of “sacred occasion,” the majority focused on the Siddha Yoga gurus, which provide an enhanced context for practice. The dates in 2017 were:

January 1: New Year’s Day (when Gurumayi releases her Yearly Message).

February 24: Mahashivaratri (the Great Night of Shiva, occurring in February/March).

May 10 :Baba Muktananda’s Lunar Birthday.

June 24: Gurumayi Chidvilasananda’s Birthday.

July 8 :Gurupurnima (the full moon day in the month of Ashadha (July-August); day to honor one’s guru).

August 8: Bhagavan Nityananda’s Solar Punyatithi (death anniversary).

August 15: Baba Muktananda’s Divya Diksha (the day Baba received divine initiation from his Guru, Bhagavan Nityananda).

October 5: Baba Muktananda’s Lunar Mahasamadhi (act of consciously and intentionally leaving one’s body).

“In addition to these holidays, Pitru Paksha is a Siddha Yoga observance. This sacred time from the Indian tradition is devoted to remembrance of one’s ancestors. In 2017, Pitru Paksha is September 6–19” (“Siddha Yoga Holidays and Celebrations 2017” 2017).

LEADERSHIP

Discussion of whether female gurus today, and specifically Gurumayi, may be considered feminist has yielded different assessments for and against (Wessinger 1993; Sered 1994; Puttick 1997; Pechilis 2011). Much recent scholarship has illuminated the specific ways in which female Hindu or Hindu-inspired leaders change the historically male-defined categories of guru and sannyasin (ascetic), which may provide more concrete information for such assessments. A major issue is the ways in which the guru is set apart from ordinary social life. Traditionally, a significant element in women’s rise to religious authority has been their renunciation of marriage. Renunciation of marriage was a factor in the construction of male spiritual authority, which was based on renunciation of ordinary social occupations and concerns; however, male gurus were often married and a male renouncer could live with his wife in the forest, although the category of sannyasin was defined as an unmarried male wandering ascetic. For women, in particular, the expectation of marriage and child-bearing has been pronounced in the Indian context. As Meena Khandelwal explains, for a variety of cultural reasons the pressures on women are greater:

Given the importance of heterosexual marriage and procreation in South Asian cultures generally, a man’s decision to renounce householder life is likely to be met by opposition from family and society; this is especially true if he is either young and unmarried or married with dependents at home. Even so, there are scriptural, historical, and contemporary precedents for male renunciation at any age, and so it is considered a legitimate path for men even if discouraged by kin. Marriage is even more compulsory for women, and for this reason most research on South Asian women has focused on their domestic lives. While most women in South Asia aspire to obtain a good husband, kind in-laws, and healthy children, those who do not are likely to face intense pressure to conform” (Khandelwal 2009:1005).

What Sondra Hausner and Meena Khandelwal say about female ascetics applies to female gurus as well: “All have wondered whether to marry, remarry, or stay married, and have struggled with how to negotiate the unquestioned South Asian social value of having a husband and being a wife” (Hausner and Khandelwal 2006:3). Medieval stories of female gurus in Hindu tradition situate them as wives; in modern times, female gurus exhibit a range of stances on the issue (Pechilis 2004a:7, 15, 28–29, 34), including being married, being separated from a husband, or rejecting demands that they marry. For some, including Gurumayi, the issue of marriage does not come up in biographical accounts.

An emphasis on personal experience is another hallmark of female gurus in history and today (Pechilis 2011; Pechilis 2012), and can be seen in Gurumayi’s emphasis on sadhana (spiritual practice). Although it is clear that her guru Baba Muktananda saw something special in her, what Gurumayi emphasizes in her own accounts of the years before she became guru is that her intensive practice gradually attuned her mind to her guru’s (Pechilis 2004b:226–27). In terms of devotees’ sadhana, in the late 1990s Gurumayi effected an important shift away from her guru Swami Muktananda’s and her own practice of personally interacting with devotees, especially at weekend Intensive programs. The Intensives had been famous for always having the guru in residence, and devotees could approach the guru and receive a graceful touch with a peacock feather wand on their bowed heads. Instead, the guru began to be absent from Intensives; if she appeared, it was by satellite video transmission. Discussion of the change in Siddha Yoga publications encouraged the view that by her absence, the guru sought to encourage devotees to focus on their practice of the teachings rather than on her presence (Pechilis 2004b:229–33).

Gurumayi’s shifting presence and absence suggests an interesting dynamic between intimacy and distance in the paths of female gurus (Pechilis 2015). In terms of interaction with the guru, one model is an “event intimacy” cultivated through defined moments of the guru’s presence at scheduled gatherings, which often deploy technology to widen the reach; however, much of the spiritual work of the disciples is done away from the guru’s embodied presence, in contrast to the traditional gurukula system in which the students live with the guru. This event intimacy characterizes Gurumayi’s leadership. A different model is that many female guru-ascetics operate on a more local level, where they have personal experience with their followers on a daily basis; they offer opportunities for “everyday intimacy.” For example, a contemporary guru-ascetic in north India holds frequent small-gathering meetings with her devotees in which she narrates stories of everyday encounters that illustrate themes of duty, destiny, and devotion, which create a gendered “rhetoric of renunciation” that has at its center a concept of engaged, devotional asceticism (DeNapoli 2014). Of course, the number of devotees and organizational structure are factors here: Siddha Yoga is a global movement that has become a highly systematized, vertical organization constructed of hierarchies to manage various aspects of the institution, including spiritual instruction, finance, and research. It has made recent efforts to focus more directly on those who commit to the path, and to exclude others; for example, closing the Shree Muktananda Ashram in South Fallsburg to all but long-term students; enhancing the status of regional centers by holding more, including “global,” activities at them; promoting the home-study course; holding retreats for up to twenty-five students; and making some information on the Siddha Yoga website accessible only by sign in.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

The most prominent issue in understanding the nature of the guru in a Western context is the deep-seated cultural suspicion of the category, based on the lack of a concept of a “perfected being” in Western tradition. Traditions that originated in South Asia have long histories of thinking about and asserting the reality of a perfected being, with the historical Buddha probably the most well-known example across the globe. Adoration of a living person can read as a “cult” in the Western contextalthough the culture of celebrity so prominent in the West displays many similarities. Traditionally in South Asia, surrender and loyalty are due to the guru, which amplifies the vulnerability of the devotee within a relationship that is in many ways comparable to a relatively common power differential (parent-child, teacher-student, employer-worker). Many female gurus offset this vulnerability of the devotee by embodying the nurturing persona of mother, evident in their titles (ma, amma) and behavior (such as Ammachi ‘s hugging), as well as by the public dimension they cultivate, such as visibility, accessibility, service, and teachings on their websites. Controversial aspects of the paths of the male gurus popular in the West in the 1960s, such as a closed and secretive residential campus, are outmoded. Still, to what extent a specific guru operates in an authoritarian mode and a specific devotee’s response to a guru renders the guru authoritarian for her or for him does need to be assessed, since there remains the potential for the devotee to be overwhelmed by the relationship (Cornille 1991:23–30; Kramer and Alstad 1993; Storr 1997). Even a cursory internet search reveals that there are vocal groups of ex-Siddha Yoga devotees who feel betrayed by Siddha Yoga gurus.

Significantly, there has been a healthy skepticism of the guru in Indian tradition, especially on the issues of the acquisition of money and sexual exploitation (Narayan 1989; Kang 2016). Also, it is worth remembering that, in the traditional model, study with the guru prepared a man to move into a healthy, socially meaningful life of work and marriage; it was not generally speaking an end in itself. These nuances, coupled with female gurus’ emphasis on life experiences, are now beginning to inform Western reflections on experiences of the guru path. What we see emerging are personal critical reflections that more calmly and less polemically reflect on areas of disappointment in or perceived limitations of the guru, written by former devotees who reflect on their experiences with the guru in the context of a longer view of their own evolving life experiences; I have called these a “discourse of constructive disappointment” (Pechilis 2012:127). Such reflections have emerged mainly around female gurus, including Gurumayi of Siddha Yoga (Caldwell 2001; Szabo 2009). It remains to be seen if the guru-disciple relationship, even in its breakdown, can lead to generative modern discussion of interdependence and human spiritual growth.

REFERENCES

Brooks, Douglas Renfrew. 1997. “The Canons of Siddha Yoga: The Body of Scripture and the Form of the Guru.” Pp. 277-346 in Meditation Revolution: A History and Theology of the Siddha Yoga Lineage, edited by Douglas Renfrew Brooks, Swami Durgananda, Paul E. Muller-Ortega, William K. Mahoney, Constantina Rhodes Bailly, S. P. Sabharathnam. South Fallsburg, NY: Agama Press.

Caldwell, Sarah. 2001. “The Heart of the Secret: A Personal and Scholarly Encounter with Shakta Tantrism in Siddha Yoga.” Nova Religio 5:1–51.

Chidvilasananda, Swami. 1992. “Preface.” Pp. xix–xxiv in I Am That: The Science of Hamsa from the Vijnana Bhairava, by Swami Muktananda. South Fallsburg NY: SYDA Foundation.

Cornille, Catherine. 1991. The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of Inculturation? Leuven: Peeters.

“Darshan of Gurumayi’s Message Artwork for 2016.” 2016. Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA Path.® January 1. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/teachings/gurumayis-message-artwork-2016/invitation on 5 March 2017.

DeNapoli, Antoinette. 2014. Real Sadhus Sing to God: Gender, Asceticism, and Vernacular Religion in Rajasthan. New York: Oxford University Press.

Durgananda, Swami. 1992. “To See the World Full of Saints: The History of Siddha Yoga as a Contemporary Movement.” Pp. 3-161 in Meditation Revolution: A History and Theology of the Siddha Yoga Lineage, edited by Douglas Renfrew Brooks, Swami Durgananda, Paul E. Muller-Ortega, William K. Mahoney, Constantina Rhodes Bailly, S. P. Sabharathnam. South Fallsburg NY: Agama Press.

Gold, Daniel. 1995. “Guru’s Body, Guru’s Abode.” Pp. 230-50 in Religious Reflections on the Human Body, edited by Jane Marie Law. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

“Gurumayi’s Messages and Message Artwork.” 1991–2017. Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/a-sweet-surprise/messages on 5 March 2017.

Harris, Lis. 1994. “Oh Guru, Guru, Guru.” The New Yorker 70: 92–109.

Hausner, Sondra L., and Meena Khandelwal. 2006. “Introduction: Women on their Own.” Pp. 1-36 in Women’s Renunciation in South Asia: Nuns, Yoginis, Saints and Singers, edited by Meena Khandelwal, Sondra L. Hausner, and Ann Grodzins Gold. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

Healy, John Paul. 2010. “Schisms of Swami Muktananda’s Siddha Yoga.” Marburg Journal of Religion 15:1–15. Accessed from https://www.uni-marburg.de/fb03/ivk/mjr/pdfs/2010/articles/healy_2010.pdf on 5 March 2017.

“Former SYDA Co-guru Explains.” 1986. Hinduism Today, January. Magazine web edition. Accessed from http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=358 on 5 March 2017.

“SIDDHA YOGA ® Home Study Course.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/homestudy on 28 February 2017.

Jain, Andrea R. 2013. “Muktananda: Entrepreneurial Godman, Tantric Hero.” Pp. 190-209 in Gurus of Modern Yoga, edited by Mark Singleton and Ellen Goldberg. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kang, Bhavdeep. 2016. Gurus: Stories of India’s Leading Babas. New Delhi: Westland Ltd.

Khandelwal, Meena. 2009. “Research on Women’s Renunciation Today: State of the Field.” Religion Compass 3:1003–14.

Kramer, Joel, and Diana Alstad. 1993. The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power. Berkeley: Frog Books.

Mahoney, William K. 1997. “The Guru-Disciple Relationship: The Context for Transformation.” Pp. 223-76 in Meditation Revolution: A History and Theology of the Siddha Yoga Lineage, edited by Douglas Renfrew Brooks, Swami Durgananda, Paul E. Muller-Ortega, William K. Mahoney, Constantina Rhodes Bailly, S. P. Sabharathnam. South Fallsburg, NY: Agama Press.

Muktananda, Swami. 1983 [1972]. “Introduction.” Pp. x–xvii in The Nectar of Chanting. South Fallsburg: SYDA Foundation.

Muller-Ortega, Paul E. 1997. “The Siddha: Paradoxical Exemplar of Indian Spirituality.” Pp. 165-211 in Meditation Revolution: A History and Theology of the Siddha Yoga Lineage, edited by Douglas Renfrew Brooks, Swami Durgananda, Paul E. Muller-Ortega, William K. Mahoney, Constantina Rhodes Bailly, S. P. Sabharathnam. South Fallsburg NY: Agama Press.

“About Muktabodha.” Muktabodha Indological Research Institute. Accessed from http://www.muktabodha.org/about.htm on 28 February 2017.

Muktananda, Swami. 1974. Satsang with Baba, Volume 1. Oakland, CA: SYDA Foundation.

Narayan, Kirin. 1989. Saints, Storytellers and Scoundrels: Folk Narrative in Hindu Religious Teaching. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Pechilis, Karen. 2015. “Women Gurus in Hinduism.” Prabuddha Bharata 120:401-09. Accessed from http://advaitaashrama.org/Content/pb/2015/062015.pdf on 5 March 2017.

Pechilis, Karen. 2012. “The Female Guru: Guru, Gender and the Path of Personal Experience.” Pp. 113-32 in The Guru in South Asia: New Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Jacob Copeman and Aya Ikegame. London: Routledge.

Pechilis, Karen. 2011. “Spreading Śakti.” Pp. 97-120 in Woman and Goddess in Hinduism: Reinterpretations and Re-envisionings, edited by Tracy Pintchman and Rita D. Sherma. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Pechilis, Karen. 2004a. “Introduction: Hindu Female Gurus in Historical and Philosophical Context.” Pp. 1-49 in The Graceful Guru: Hindu Female Gurus in India and the United States, edited by Karen Pechilis. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pechilis, Karen. 2004b. “Gurumayi, the Play of Shakti and Guru.” Pp. 219-43 in The Graceful Guru: Hindu Female Gurus in India and the United States, edited by Karen Pechilis. New York: Oxford University Press.

“PRASAD Project.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Acceseed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/prasad on 28 February 2017.

“The Prison Project.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/syda-foundation/prison-project on 28 February 2017.

Puttick, Elizabeth. 1997. Women in New Religions: In Search of Community, Sexuality and Spiritual Power. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

“Questions and Answers with Swami Shantananda about the Siddha Yoga Shaktipat Intensive.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/shaktipat-intensive/what-is-shaktipat on 28 February 2017.

Radha. 2002. “My Story,” September 30. Leaving Siddha Yoga. Accessed from http://leavingsiddhayoga.net/Radha_story.htm on 5 March 2017.

Rodarmor, William. 1983. “The Secret Life of Swami Muktananda.” Originally published in CoEvolution Quarterly. Accessed from http://www.leavingsiddhayoga.net/secret.htm on 5 March 2017.

Salon Staff. 2010. “Siddha Yoga Responds to Salon Story.” Salon, August 16. Accessed from http://www.salon.com/2010/08/16/sya_response_to_eat_pray_love_story/ on 5 March 2017.

Sered, Susan. 1994. Priestess, Daughter, Sacred Sister: Religions Dominated by Women. New York: Oxford University Press.

Shah, Riddhi. 2010. “The ‘Eat, Pray, Love’ Guru’s Troubling Past.” Salon, August 14. Accessed from http://www.salon.com/2010/08/14/eat_pray_love_guru_sex_scandals/ on 5 March 2017.

“Siddha Yoga Ashrams, Meditation Centers, and Chanting and Meditation Groups.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/centerslist on 28 February 2017.

“Siddha Yoga Holidays and Celebrations 2017.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/holidays on 28 February 2017.

“The SIDDHA YOGA® Vision Statement.” Welcome to the SIDDHA YOGA ® Path. Accessed from http://www.siddhayoga.org/vision-and-mission-statements on 28 February 2017.

Storr, Anthony. 1997. Feet of Clay: Saints, Sinners, and Madmen: A Study of Gurus. New York: Free Press.

Szabo, Marta. 2009. The Guru Looked Good. Woodstock: Tinker Street Press.

Thursby, Gene. 1991. “Siddha Yoga: Swami Muktananda and the Seat of Power.” Pp. 165-81 in When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religions, edited by Timothy Miller. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Weiss, Richard S. 2009. Recipes for Immortality: Medicine, Religion, and Community in South India. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wessinger, Catherine. 1993. “Woman Guru, Woman Roshi: The Legitimation of Female Religious Leadership in Hindu and Buddhist Groups in America.” Pp 125-46 in Women’s Leadership in Marginal Religions: Explorations Outside the Mainstream, edited by Catherine Wessinger. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Williamson, Lola. 2005. “The Perfectibility of Perfection: Siddha Yoga as a Global Movement.” Pp. 147-67 in Gurus in America, edited by Thomas A. Forsthoefel and Cynthia Ann Humes. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Williamson, Lola. 2010. Transcendent in America: Hindu-inspired Meditation Movements as New Religion. New York: New York University Press.

Post Date:
7 March 2017

Share

Zbigniew Makowski

ZBIGNIEW MAKOWSKI TIMELINE 

1930 (January 31):  Zbigniew Makowski was born in Warsaw, Poland.

1950:  Makowski was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in Warsaw.

1956:  Makowski obtained his diploma after working in the workshop of K. Tomorowicz in Warsaw.

1957:  The first individual exhibition of the artist took place in the student club Hybrids in Warsaw.

1958/1959:  Makowski created his first illuminated book, which opened a series of over two hundred works of this kind. In order to produce it, he worked on a book by Theosophist Annie Besant, writing and painting on a copy of it.

1962:  Makowski travelled to Paris, where he met André Breton and became involved with the artistic movement Phases.

1965/1966:  Makowski worked as a lecturer in the National Higher School of Fine Arts (from 1996 called University of Fine Arts) in Poznań, Poland.

1973:  Makowski received the prestigious Polish Art Critique’s Prize.

1982–1988:  Makowski took a break from artistic exhibitions.

1991:  The artist’s painting Mirabilitas secundum diversos modos exire potest a rebus (painted between 1973–1980) was presented by the Polish Government to the Office of the United Nations in Geneva.

1992:  Makowski received the prestigious Polish Jan Cybis Award for lifetime achievement.

1995:  The so called “Blue Exhibition” of the painter, organized for the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, took place in the Zachęta Gallery in Warsaw.

2010:  Makowski received the Special Prize of the Polish Ministry of Culture and National Heritage.

2010-2019:  Makowski continued to live and work in Warsaw

2019 (August 19):  Zbigniew Makowski died.

BIOGRAPHY

Zbigniew Makowski is one of the most important Polish contemporary artists. His art includes both paintings and illuminated books. Art critics called his work “metaphorical painting” or “romantic geometry,” because of the forms he uses in his paintings, consisting of geometric figures and fantastic backgrounds with surrealistic elements, which create mysterious, dreamy visions. Makowski’s works are also often called treatises rather than paintings, because the author fills them with words or lines of small letters in many different shapes, reminiscent of graphics in alchemical treatises. His art includes continuous references to the whole tradition of Western esotericism. There is a certain emphasis on Theosophy, but Makowski is influenced by a large multiplicity of esoteric sources.

Zbigniew Makowski was born in 1930 in Warsaw, Poland. From 1950Makowski1to 1956, he studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Warsaw. He obtained a diploma by studying in the workshop of Kazimierz Tomorowicz (1897–1961), a landscape painter and a representative of Polish Formism, an avant-garde artistic current emphasizing form over content. Makowski debuted as an artist in the mid-1950s. The political situation in Poland after World War II and the emerging communist regime had an impact on the development of his art. Makowski did not follow the trends officially imposed by the regime, and from the very beginning of his career started looking for non-conventional forms of expression.

He became a member of an international movement known as Phases, which was born in the early 1950s in France. Phases was established by the French poet and critic Édouard Jaguer (1924–2006), not as a group but as an informal collaborative enterprise of artists engaged in different projects. Phases never published a manifesto, but the common denominator of his artists was the importance it attributed to imagination (Dąbkowska-Zydroń 1994:9–15, 118–20). Makowski was involved with this movement from 1962 on. He first encountered Phases during a trip to Paris, and later he repeatedly exhibited his works together with other artists involved with the movement. In Paris, Makowski also met the father of Surrealism, André Breton (1896–1966), whose artistic explorations became an important source of inspiration for him (Szafkowska 2015:11-16).

In the initial period of his artistic work (1965–1960), Makowski was strongly influenced by expressionism and existentialism. At that time, he was mostly creating realistic works: still lives, landscapes, and portraits. However, he quickly started to move towards Surrealism and Informalism. In the early 1960s, his art could be characterized as structural abstraction, with the use of simple, and often geometric, shapes in shades of black, white, and grey. In the first half of the 1960s his works were filled with lines (horizontal, vertical, sometimes circular  Makowski or parabolic), painted across signs and symbols, letters, or whole sentences (Sowińska 1980:2–5). [Image at right] At this time, the artist was mostly known for his calligraphic compositions, which he himself called “letters written to unknown addressees” (Makowski 1965:8).

In the mid-1960s, signs and symbols, becoming over time more and more numerous and varied, were placed in landscape backgrounds divided into the two spheres of earth and air. In this scenery, Makowski placed his favorite keys, ladders, stairs, geometrical forms, letters, ciphers, citations, and labyrinths. These elements were realistically painted but did not serve a descriptive function, Rather, they became symbols with a secret meanings, within the framework of a specific artistic and esoteric language that Makowski used but did not explain to his audiences. It is this language that critics nicknamed “romantic geometry.” In the second part of the 1960s and at the beginning of the 1970s, the painter abandoned this style, but came back to it in the 1980s (Sowińska 1980:2–5).

Makowski was awarded many prestigious Polish prizes, among others the Cyprian Kamil Norwid Prize of Art Critique in 1973, the Jan Cybis Award in 1992, and the Special Prize of the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage in 2010 (Szafkowska 2015:11–16). One of Makowski’s paintings, Mirabilitas secundum diversos modos exire potest a rebus, (painted between 1973 and 1980) was presented as a gift from the Polish Government to the Office of the United Nations in Geneva. Works of Makowski are present in the most important museums in Poland, with a large collection is in the National Museum in Wroclaw, and around the world, including in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York. Throughout his long career, the artist took part in over two hundred collective exhibitions and around one hundred personal ones (Szafkowska 2015:11–16).

Makowski is an erudite painter, inspired not only by the history of art, but also by literature, philosophy, and the traditions of cultures and religions around the world. Using those inspirations, he created an original mythology based on his own experiences, feelings, and thoughts. He tried to affect not only the aesthetic sense of his audience, but also their emotions, their mind, and their subconscious, converting his works of art into multidimensional spiritual experiences (Nastulanka 1978:6). The surfaces of his paintings are reminiscent of multicolored carpets or richly ornated collages, with a baroque sense of horror vacui (Szafkowska 2015:11–16).

Makowski is also known for creating artistic works that can be called “illuminated books” in the tradition of William Blake (1757-1827). Makowski created over two hundred works of this kind (Szafkowska 2015:11), experimenting with the very form and function of books. The illuminated books are a key to understanding his paintings, and often serve as the basis for future compositions. The books themselves are recreated many times: the artist includes paintings and drawings in them with pencil, ink, gouache, or watercolor, cuts or stitches them, adds his notes, citations, and poetry. They become a kind of magical grimoires, written with an encrypted language, whose multiplicity of meaning cannot be easily discovered by the uninitiated (Bartnik 2008:7–16). The basis for the first “illuminated book” was one of the works of Annie Besant (1847–1933), the second president of the Theosophical Society. The painter started from a printed book and wrote and painted on it. However, Makowski sometimes created his own books from the beginning, using handmade paper and illustrating every single page (Szafkowska 2015:15).

Makowski combines writing and drawing, multiplying the meanings of Makowski3his works and making them somewhat hermetic and hard toread. The presence of writing constitutes the original character of Makowski’s paintings. [Image at right] The artist often uses not only his own notes, but also sentences in various languages, among others ancient Greek and Latin, citations from classics of literature, poetry, and so on. There is a characteristic motif of a spiral inscription that appears in several of his works and resembles a mandala. Sometimes, Makowski encrypts his notes; some of them can be read only in a mirror, others are deliberately partly erased (Bartnik 2008:8). One of the inspirations for this “Lettrism” were the works of Abraham ben Samuel Abulafia (1240–91), one of the leading Kabbalists of the Middle Ages, as well as those of an Italian priest, mystic and cartographer of the fourteenth century, Opicinus de Canistris (1296–c.1353), also known as the Anonymous Ticinensis, the creator of the so called anthropomorphic maps (Baranowa 2011:72–79).

Beyond these references, however, we find in Makowski’s work a great variety of symbols, coming from both Western and Eastern esoteric traditions. [Image at right] His favorite motifs are keys, black birds,labyrinths, stairs, ladders, bevels, gates and portals, spirals, cups, swords, Platonic solids, Tarot cards placed on an oneiric Makowski4.pngbackground. [Image at right] A motif he often uses is a female portrait (a contemporary woman but also a goddess, a Renaissance lady, or a medieval Madonna), appearing where we would not expect it. Nothing is what it seems at first sight to be. Ostensibly realistic elements become archetypical forms, creating “mystical rebuses” (Szafkowska 2015:11–16).

Multiple Western esoteric traditions are present in many of Makowski’s paintings and illuminated books. The esoteric reference is not only apparent in the works themselves, but is also explicitly mentioned in the painter’s notes and memoirs. For instance, Makowski mentions his return to Warsaw in 1945, a city in ruin right after the war. He was fifteen, and along with his colored reproductions of paintings by Joseph M.W. Turner (1775–1851) and the Pre-Raphaelites, and his own drawings, he brought with him books by Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925), the founder of Anthroposophy, and by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831–1891), the co-founder of the Theosophical Society. In his Autobiography, Makowski mentions his interest in the Austrian esoteric novelist, Gustav Meyrink (1868–1932), and in Polish messianic philosophers. He took a special interest in the ideas of one of the latter, Józef Maria Hoene-Wroński (1776–1853), although he was not fully convinced by them. He also read the Polish Hegelian philosopher, August Cieszkowski (1814–1894), and delighted in the works of one of the most important Polish Romantic poets, Juliusz Słowacki (1809–1849), himself not foreign to esotericism. Among his acknowledged inspirations, he mentions also Theosophical books such as The Great Initiates, by French Theosophist Édouard Schuré (1841–1929), and The Book of the Living God, by German writer and painter Joseph Anton Schneiderfranken, known as Bô Yin Râ (18761–943) (Makowski 1978:79–90).

Other sources important for Makowski were the classic authors of Western esotericism: Paracelsus (1493–1541), Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499), Éliphas Lévi (1810–1875) (Bartnik 2008:7–11), and William Blake (Szafkowska 2015:11). Like other artists interested in esotericism, Makowski was also influenced by the psychology of Carl Gustav Jung (1875–1961) (Makowski 2007:66). In addition to Hermeticism, and ancient mysteries, the artist is also a devoted student of Kabbalah, particularly as interpreted by Christian philosophers such as Ramon Llull (ca. 1232–ca. 1315) and Giordano Bruno (1548–1600). Of Bruno, who was burned at stake in Rome in 1600 by the Catholic Church for his unorthodox, esoteric ideas, Makowski wrote: “I owe it to him that I live, and that I have the courage to think” (Makowski 1978:60).

Makowski repeatedly quoted Llull’s treatise Ars Magna (ca. 1305), a part of his philosophical work Ars generalis ultima, and also mentioned the Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1467), an enigmatic fifteenth century Italian esoteric work probably written by Francesco Colonna (c.1433–1527). Ultimately, however, it would be impossible to list all of Makowski’s esoteric inspirations, just as it would be impossible to ascribe him to any specific esoteric movement or current (Janicka 1973:226). Makowski continued to lead his artistic workshop in Warsaw until his death in 2019. His work remains a testimony to the widespread influence of Western esotericism on twentieth and twenty-first century art.

IMAGES**
**All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1:  Zbigniew Makowski, photo by Mirosław R. Makowski, c. 1974 (in the background: a self-portrait based on a photograph from the artist’s childhood).
Image #2:  Zbigniew Makowski, Które były krajobrazy ostateczne [Those that were final landscapes] (1963). Courtesy of Agra-Art Auction House, Warsaw, Poland.
Image #3:  Zbigniew Makowski, Labyrinth (1963–1972). Courtesy of Agra-Art Auction House, Warsaw, Poland.
Image #4:  Zbigniew Makowski, Mirabilita (1995). Courtesy of Agra-Art Auction House, Warsaw, Poland.

REFERENCES

Baranowa, Anna. 2012. “Zbigniew Makowski.” Pp. 28–34 in Arttak – Sztuki Piekne, no. 3

Baranowa, Anna. 2011.“Ars Magna.” Pp. 73–79 in Dekada Literacka, no. 516.

Bartnik, Krystyna. 2008. Zbigniew Makowski. Wrocław: Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocławiu.

Dąbkowska-Zydroń, Jolanta. 1994. Surrealizm po surrealizmie. Międzynarodowy Ruch „PHASES.” Warszawa: Instytut Kultury.

Hermansdorfer, Mariusz. 1995. “Sztuka Zbigniewa Makowskiego.” Pp. 4–7 in the catalogue Błękitna Wystawa. Warszawa: Galeria Sztuki Współczesnej Zachęta.

Janicka, Krystyna. 1973. Surrealizm. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Filmowe i Artystyczne.

Kuczyńska, Agnieszka and Krzysztof Cichoń. 2008. Wąski Dunaj No 5. Ze Zbigniewem Makowskim rozmawiają Agnieszka Kuczyńska i Krzysztof Cichoń. Łódź: Atlas Sztuki.

Makowski, Zbigniew. 1978. “Autobiografia (fragmenty).” Pp. 79–90 in Zbigniew Makowski (Katalog wystawy). Wrocław: Muzeum Narodowe, and Łódź: Biuro Wystaw Artystycznych.

Makowski, Zbigniew. 1965. “Artysta o sobie.” P. 8 in Współczesność, no. 9.

Makowski, Zbigniew. n.d. “Korespondencja z Jackiem Waltosiem na temat ‘Wesela’ Stanisława Wyspiańskiego.” Pp. 66–68 in Zeszyty naukowo-artystyczne Wydziału Malarstwa Akademii Sztuk Pieknych w Krakowie, no. 8.

Nastulanka, Krystyna. 1978. “Gdzie czekają niespodzianki. Rozmowa ze Zbigniewem Makowskim.” Pp. 8 in Polityka, no. 51.

Sowińska, Teresa. 1980. “Wyobraźnia bez granic.” Pp. 2–5 in Zbigniew Makowski. Zeichnungen, Gouchen und Aquarelle. Berlin: Ośrodek Informacji i Kultury Polskiej Leipzig.

Szafkowska, Magdalena. 2015. “Księgi artystyczne Zbigniewa Makowskiego.” Pp. 11–16 in Polia 10.VI.1946, edited by M. Szafkowska. Wrocław: Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocławiu.

Zbigniew Makowski’s works in NYC Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). Accessed from https://www.moma.org/artists/3706?locale=en&page=1&direction = on 20 February 2017.

Post Date:
20 February 2017

Share

Kazimierz Stabrowski

KAZIMIERZ STABROWSKI TIMELINE

1869 (November 29):  Kazimierz Stabrowski was born in Kruplany (Russian Empire, formerly Poland, present-day Belarus).

1887:  Stabrowski was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in St. Petersburg.

1892:  While preparing for his diploma in painting, Stabrowski travelled for a few months to Greece and the Middle East.

1894:  Stabrowski travelled to Germany. He completed the painting Mohammed in the Desert, also known as Escape from Mecca, for which he was awarded the Great Gold Medal by the St. Petersburg Academy of Fine Arts. He started studying under I.J. Riepin.

1897:  Stabrowski went to Paris, where he studied painting in the Académie Julian under J.-J. Benjamin-Constant and J.-P. Laurens.

1890:  Stabrowski returned to St. Petersburg.

c. 1900:  Stabrowski wrote his short story, Legend.

1902 (September 15):  Stabrowski married Julia Janiszewska. They moved to Warsaw, where the painter joined the Polish Artists’ Society “Art” [Sztuka] and started preparing for establishing a School of Fine Arts.

1904 (March 17):  The Warsaw School of Fine Arts was established. Stabrowski became its director and one of its professors. In the same year, Lithuanian painter Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis joined the Academy. The show Lilla Weneda, with Stabrowski’s scenography, debuted at The City Theater in Kraków.

1905:  Stabrowski became a member of the Theosophical circle in Warsaw that later evolved into the “Alba” lodge, of which he became the Secretary.

1908:  “The Young Art” ball took place (organized annually since then) and became a source of inspiration for a series of esoterically inspired paintings by Stabrowski, including In Front of Stained Glass – A Peacock , The Princess of the Magic Crystal, and The Story of the Waves.

1909:  Stabrowski was involved in a conflict with one of the School committee members, because both of financial problems of the institution and his involvement in the occult. As a consequence, he resigned from his position as director. Roughly at the same time, he became one of the founding members of the Warsaw Theosophical Society. Around this time, he also painted Vision I–III (Sketches for Annunciation).

1912:  The Warsaw Theosophical Society, of which Stabrowski was the head, was registered in April.

1913:  Stabrowski took part in the European Theosophical Conference in Stockholm, where he also exhibited his paintings. After the Conference, he went to Berlin and left his works in care of the family of Rudolph Steiner, so that the founder of the Anthroposophical Society and German artists could see them.

1915:  During World War I, Stabrowski moved to St. Petersburg. He organized a large exhibition of his works there.

1916:  Stabrowski collaborated in several artistic events held in Moscow.

1918:  Stabrowski and his wife moved back again to Warsaw, due to the political situation in Russia. He established the artistic association “Sursum Corda” and organized an important exhibition in Warsaw.

1920:  Stabrowski took part in organizing the Polish Theosophical Society. In this year, he painted The Consoler of Monsters and Angel and Monsters.

1924:  Stabrowski became a member of a Polish Anthroposophical group that started to form in this time (the Polish Anthroposophical Society would be established officially only in the year the painter died). He painted Fantastic Composition.

1927:  Stabrowski celebrated a jubilee for his 40 years of artistic work. Four exhibitions celebrated the event.

1929 (June 8):  Stabrowski died in Garwolin, near Warsaw, Poland.

BIOGRAPHY 

Kazimierz Stabrowski was a celebrated Polish painter, and the founder and first Stabrowski1director of the Academy of Fine Arts in Warsaw. [Image at right] He was also a very important figure in the Polish esoteric milieu: he was the first secretary of a registered Theosophical group in Poland, a founding member of the Polish Theosophical Society, and later a co-founder of the Anthroposophical Society in Poland in the 1920s. His esoteric interests reflect in some of his paintings. He is well-known as an artist for his dreamy landscapes, but even more for his symbolic, fantastic, and mystical compositions.

Stabrowski was born on November 29, 1869 in Kruplany, a village near Nowogródek that was then in the Russian Empire, although it was earlier part of Poland and is located in present-day Belarus. Stabrowski’s parents Antoni and Zofia (née Pilecka) belonged to a family of Polish landed gentry. Stabrowski’s early education took place in the Real School in Białystok, which he attended from 1880 to 1886. In 1887, he was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in St. Petersburg (Skalska-Miecik 2002:275).

During his studies in the Academy, he travelled to several countries to improve his working skills. In 1892, he went via Odessa, Constantinople, Athens, Rhodes, Smyrna, Beirut, and Jaffa to Palestine (Jerusalem), where he took part in a Catholic retreat and received his confirmation, before traveling further to Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo. Two years later, he went to Germany and spent a few months there. He was regarded as a very talented student, who won several prizes in St. Petersburg for his painting: a Small and a Great Silver Medals in 1892, another Great Silver Medal in 1893, and a Great Golden Medal in 1894, when he received his diploma. He obtained a Master’s Degree with a painting entitled Mohammed in the Desert (known also as Escape from Mecca). In this work his religious and metaphysical interests, which would shape his later career, were already present.

His life-long passion for travels supplied him with inspiration and fueled his interest in the mystic East. From the time of his early art studies, he was also interested in Theosophy, that he had encountered in the esoteric milieus of St. Petersburg. After getting his diploma, Stabrowski studied one year in the workshop of renowned Russian realist painter Ilja Repin (1844–1930), under whose influence he remained for a long time.

In 1897, Stabrowski went to Paris to continue his studies in painting at the famous Académie Julian. His main teachers there were Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant (1845-1903), a French painter well-known for his Orientalist taste, and the academic painter and sculptor Jean-Paul Laurens (1838-1921). After one year, he came back to St. Petersburg. In this time, besides painting, Stabrowski started to make a name for himself as an art critic and writer. He published several art-related notes and essays in Russian newspapers, and also wrote (but did not publish) a short story, Legend (Stabrowski c.1895-1905).

Some Polish art historians (e.g. Skalska 2002:275) claimed that, after Stabrowski left Riepin’s workshop and went to Paris, he spent a year in Munich where he studied under the Greek painter Nikolaos Gyzis (1842-1901). If confirmed, the detail would be relevant, as Gyzis was himself deeply interested in mysticism and esotericism. However, based on our own research, documents at the Academy of the Fine Arts in Munich show that, at that time, a Polish student named Stabrowski did study under Gyzis, but his first name was Edmond, not Kazimierz, he was born in Warsaw and was twenty, while our Stabrowski was born in Kruplany and was twenty-six.

In 1902, Stabrowski married Julia Janiszewska (1869-1941), herself an artist, who had completed her studies in sculpture at the Academy of Fine Arts in St. Petersburg. After the marriage, they moved to Warsaw, where the painter became a member of the Polish Artists’ Society “Sztuka” (Art). He started to organize an artistic academy thanks to the support of his Russian connections, including the Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (1857–1905). With the permission of the Governor General, the Warsaw School of Fine Arts was officially opened on March 17, 1904. It is the ancestor of present-day Academy of Fine Arts in Warsaw. Stabrowski became its first director, and one of the first teachers, along with such well-known Polish artists as Xavery Dunikowski (1875–1964), Ferdynand Ruszczyc (1870–1936), Konrad Krzyżanowski (1872–1922), and Karol Tichy (1871–1939).

In this time, Stabrowski’s esoteric interests also flourished. He became a member of the first Polish Theosophical circle. Later, this informal circle became the Alba Lodge, placed under the jurisdiction of the Russian Theosophical Society and named after the leading Russian Theosophist, Anna “Alba” Kamenskaya (1867–1952 ). Stabrowski became its Secretary. We do not know exactly at what date Stabrowski first joined the Theosophical Society. We do know, however, that he was officially a member of the Theosophical Society in England in the first years of the twentieth century and that, after the Russian branch of the Theosophical Society was officially established in 1908 (incorporated on September 30 and registered on November 17), he was transferred to the Russian Section on December 18, 1908.

In 1904, Stabrowski’s Warsaw School of Fine Arts enrolled as a student Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis (1875–1911), a Lithuanian composer, who later also gained international fame as a painter. Čiurlionis was twenty-nine at this time, which made him one of the School’s oldest students, and he befriended some of his teachers (Žukienė 2015:12). At the time of his studies and friendship with Stabrowski, the Lithuanian artist also developed his interests in Theosophy (Hess and Dulska 2017). Although Čiurlionis died young (at age thirty-six), and never joined the Theosophical Society, a number of allusions to Theosophy are recognizable in his works (Introvigne 2013).

Stabrowski was active in the esoteric milieu in Warsaw, which included well-known writers, painters, and other members of the cultural elite of the time. He organized the so called “wild strawberry tea” meetings, where occult phenomena as well as Theosophical and Kabbalistic ideas were debated (Mažrimienė 2015:45-46). Spiritualist séances were also held there. They were attended by such prominent figures as the Polish poet and playwright Tadeusz Miciński (1873–1918) and the above mentioned Čiurlionis, who sometimes also played the role of a medium (Hass 1984:90), Zenon Przesmycki (1861–1944), the editor of the journal Chimera, Artur Górski (1870–1959), whose series of articles titled “Young Poland” gave the name to an important current in Polish visual arts, Bolesław Leśmian (1877–1937), a renowned poet, and others (Siedlecka 1996:63). Stabrowski was also a regular guest at similar meetings that were held in the home of poet Edward Słoński (1872–1926) and featured the famous Polish Spiritualist medium, Jan Guzik (1875-1928).

Polish artists interested in Theosophy also cooperated in various ventures. Stabrowski prepared Theosophically-inspired covers and illustrations for books written by other Polish members of the Theosophical Society, such as Tadeusz Miciński’s Nietota: The Book of Tatra Mystery and the works of Hanna Krzemieniecka (pen name of Janina Furs-Żyrkiewicz, 1866-1930), Fate and And when He Leaves into the Eternal Abyss… A Romance beyond the Grave. The Theosophical circle of Stabrowski in the first decade of the twentieth century seems to have been strongly influenced by Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), the leader of the German branch of the Theosophical Society who later founded Anthroposophy. Like Steiner, Stabrowski and his friends emphasized both Theosophical Eastern ideas and the esoteric dimensions of Christianity.

In 1908, the Warsaw Philharmonic hosted a memorable “Young Art” ball,Stabrowski2organized by the Warsaw School of Fine Arts (Sieradzka 1980:187). The Academy held numerous artistic events, but the balls became an annual tradition of the school for many years, as documented by Stabrowski’s portraits of several participants in these events. These paintings, however, are not just portraits, but fantastic and symbolic interpretations of female beauty, inspired by Theosophical thought. Among them were In Front of Stained Glass – A Peacock, [Image at right] The Princess of the Magic Crystal, and The Story of the Waves.

The career of Stabrowski as director of the Warsaw School of Fine Arts came to an end in 1909, when he resigned after having been involved in a conflict with one of the school committee members. He was accused of poor management (because of financial problems of the Academy), but also criticized for his involvement in the occult and for having invited students to Spiritualist séances. Stabrowski wrote a response to the accusations, but resigned anyway.

The Polish members of the Theosophical Society were very keen on having their own branch, one that would not be directly connected to the Russian Theosophical Society. It was a political statement, implicitly criticizing Russian occupation of Poland. A letter survives, which Stabrowski sent in 1910 to the Theosophical Society’s headquarters in Adyar seeking an independent status for the Polish branch (Stabrowski 1910), but his efforts were initially unsuccessful. Only in April 1912, the Alba lodge was reconstituted as separated from the Russian section, and registered as the Warsaw Theosophical Society, with its statutes ratified by the Governor General (Bocheński n.d.; Karas 1958).

In 1913, Stabrowski took part in the European Conference of the National Sections of the Theosophical Society held in Stockholm, where he also exhibited his paintings. After the conference, he went to Berlin and left most of his works exhibited in Stockholm in care of the family of Rudolph Steiner (Skalska-Miecik 2002:276). Kalinowski claims that Stabrowski was on his way to Italy via Berlin when he met Steiner, and was asked by him to leave the paintings in Germany so that, after the Theosophists in Stockholm, artists in Berlin might see them too. Unfortunately, after Steiner’s death, those paintings were lost (Kalinowski 1927:7). Some other works, which revealed Stabrowski’s esoteric interests, but of which only the titles remain, were: Radiant [Promienisty], Larvae [Larwy], On the edge of the invisible [Na granicy niewidzialnego], In the Astral [W astralu], and others (Makowska 1986:332). Alojzy Gleic claimed that Stabrowski later also became interested in Rosicrucianism, astrology, and Kabbalah (Glejc 1936:75).

During World War I, in 1915, Stabrowski and his wife moved to St. Petersburg.Stabrowski3He organized a large exhibition of his works there and travelled to several countries. He also took part in the Russian cultural life, not only in St. Petersburg but also in Moscow. After three years, the Stabrowskis moved back to Warsaw, due to the political situation prevailing in Russia. At this time, many of his paintings were damaged or lost. When in Poland, his interest in mysticism led Stabrowski to establish an ephemeral group, “Sursum Corda,” in 1922 (Morawińska 1997:210)

In 1920, now in independent Poland, Stabrowski took part in the forming of the Polish Theosophical Society (Skalska-Miecik 2002:276). The organization was registered legally in the country in 1921, and became an official national section of the Theosophical Society, Adyar in 1923, with Wanda Dynowska (1888–1971) as its Secretary General (Hess 2015:65-66). In this period, Stabrowski painted The Consoler of Monsters, [Image at right] Angel and Monsters, and Fantastic Composition. Those paintings are also considered as inspired by Theosophy (Hess and Dulska 2017).

Since Stabrowski had always been an admirer of Rudolph Steiner, both during the latter’s career in the Theosophical Society and thereafter, it is not surprising that in 1924 the painter became a member of a Polish Anthroposophical group that started to form in this time. However, the Polish Anthroposophical Society was established officially only in the year of Stabrowski’s death.

In his last years, Stabrowski was recognized as one of Poland’s leading Stabrowski4painters, and continued his travels to a number of countries. In 1927, he celebrated his jubilee for forty years of artistic work. On the occasion, four exhibitions were organized: in Poznań, Łódź, Bydgoszcz, and Warsaw. [Image at right] Stabrowski died in Garwolin near Warsaw, on June 8, 1929, at age sixty. According to his family, his death occurred in somewhat mysterious circumstances (Skalska-Miecik 2002:277). He is regarded as a leading exponent of Polish symbolism, although the category of symbolism in general is now increasingly controversial and has been deconstructed by some critics. The important influence of Theosophy and, later, Anthroposophy in his work is increasingly recognized by historians, and Stabrowski also played a crucial role in introducing other artists and poets to Theosophical ideas.

IMAGES**
**All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1: Portrait of Kazimier Strabrowski.
Image #2: Stabrowski painting: In Front of Stained Glass.
Image #3: Stabrowski painting: The Consoler of Monsters.
Image #4: Strabrowsk in 1927 at the exhibition in Poznan.

REFERENCES

Bocheński, Władysław. n.d. Moje wspomnienia z okresu należenia do Polskiego Towarzystwa Teozoficznego w latach 1922–1939 . Archival document from Archiwum Nauki PAN i PAU w Krakowie. Kazimierz Tokarski 1930–2007, KIII-180: 16 and 20.

Glejc, Alojzy Krzysztof. 1939. Glossariusz okultyzmu. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Wawelskie.

Hass, Ludwik. 1984. Ambicje, rachuby, rzeczywistość. Wolnomularstwo w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej 1905-1928. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Hess, Karolina Maria. 2015. “The Beginnings of Theosophy in Poland: From Early Visions to the Polish Theosophical Society.” Pp. 53–71 in The Polish Journal of the Arts and Culture, no. 13.

Hess, Karolina Maria and Małgorzata Alicja Dulska. 2017. “Kazimierz Stabrowski’s Esoteric Dimensions: Theosophy, Art, and the Vision of Femininity.” La Rosa di Paracelso, issue The Eternal Esoteric Feminine [forthcoming].

Introvigne, Massimo. 2013. Čiurlionis’ Theosophy: Myth or Reality? Paper presented at the conference Enchanted Modernities: Theosophy and the Arts in the Modern World, Amsterdam, September 26, 2013.

Kalinowski, Kazimierz . 1927. K. Stabrowski. Sylwetka malarza-poety. Poznań: Wielkopolski Związek Artystów Plastyków.

Karas, Evelyn. 1958. The Theosophical Society and Theosophy in Poland . A talk given at the School of Wisdom, Aydar, March 1958. Archival document from Archiwum Nauki PAN i PAU w Krakowie, Kazimierz Tokarski 1930–2007, KIII-180: 20.

Lilla Weneda. 1904. Poster, 23 May 1904. Kraków: Dyrekcja Teatru Miejskiego.

Makowska, Urszula. 1986. “Wiedza tajemna Wschodu. Tendencje okultystyczne w kulturze polskiej na przełomie XIX i XX wieku.” Pp 323–38 in Orient i orientalizm w sztuce . Materiały Sesji Stowarzyszenia Historyków Sztuki, Kraków, grudzień 1983. Warsaw: Polskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Morawińska, Agnieszka. 1997. Symbolizm w malarstwie polskim 1890-1914. Warsaw: Arkady.

Piwocki, Ksawery. 1965. Historia Akademii Sztuk Pięknych w Warszawie 1904-1964. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.

Siedlecka, Jadwiga. 1996. Mikołaj Konstatnty Ciurlionis 1875-1911. Preludium warszawskie. Warsaw: AgArt.

Sieradzka, Anna. 1980. “’Bal Młodej Sztuki’ w 1908 roku i jego reminiscencje plastyczne i literackie.” Pp. 187–98 in Biuletyn Historii Sztuki , no. 42.

Skalska, Lija. 1975. “Kazimierz Stabrowski – lata studiów i początki działalności twórczej.” Pp. 575–657 in Rocznik Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie, vol.. 19.

Skalska-Miecik, Lija. 1984. “Echa sztuki rosyjsiej w twórczości warszawskich modernistów.” Pp. 125–72 in Rocznik Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie, no. 28.

Skalska-Miecik, Lija. 2002. “Kazimierz Stabrowski.” Pp. 275–78 in Polski Słownik Biograficzny, vol. 41.

Stabrowski, Kazimierz. 1910. Letter. Archival material in Archiwum Nauki PAN i PAU w Krakowie, Kazimierz Tokarski 1930-2007, KIII-180:19.

Stabrowski Kazimierz. c.1895-1905. Legenda [unpublished]. Manuscript in the Biblioteka Narodowa. Warsaw.

Žukienė, Rasa. 2015. “Shades of Lithuania in the work of Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis.” Pp. 8–35 in M. K. Čiurlionis. Litewska opowieść. Krakow: International Cultural Centre, and Kaunas: M.K. Čiurlionis National Museum of Art.

Post Date:
9 February 2017

 

Share

Pieter Cornelis “Piet” Mondrian

PIETER MONDRIAN TIMELINE

1872 (March 7):  Pieter Cornelis Mondriaan (he would change his last name into “Mondrian” in 1911 ) was born in Amersfoort, The Netherlands.

1892:  Mondrian was admitted to the Amsterdam Academy of Fine Arts.

1894:  Mondrian’s fellow student at the Academy and friend, architect Karel de Bazel, joined the Theosophical Society.

1900:  Mondrian went through a religious crisis and abandoned the Calvinist faith of his family. He also read The Great Initiates by French Theosophist Éd ouard Schuré.

1901:  Mondrian painted The Passion Flower, a work in which some critics see religious influences.

1908:  Mondrian painted Devotion, a work he explicitly connected to Theosophy in his notebooks.

1909 (May 14):  Mondrian formally joined the Theosophical Society.

1911:  Mondrian completed his triptych Evolution, a powerful statement of Theosophical doctrine.

1912:  Mondrian moved to Paris, where he first stayed in a guest room provided by the Theosophical Society.

1914:  The journal of the Dutch Theosophical Society, Theosophia, rejected a long article by Mondrian on Theosophy and art.

1915:  Mondrian came under the influence of independent Dutch Theosophist, and founder of Christosophy, Mathieu Hubertus Josephus Schoenmaekers.

1918:  Mondrian rejected Schoenmaekers and returned to an orthodox “Blavatskyan” approach to Theosophy.

1921:  Mondrian wrote to Rudolf Steiner, founder and leader of Anthroposophy, but received no answer.

(ca.) 1930:  Mondrian started considering Neo-Plasticism as a new world spirituality superseding a ll religions and spiritual paths, including Theosophy.

1932:  Mondrian’s application to join Freemasonry was rejected.

1938:  Mondrian moved to London and asked his membership in the Theosophical Society to be transferred to the British branch.

1940:  Mondrian moved to New York, where he stopped being active in the Theosophical Society.

1941 (April 12):  Mondrian met in New York Charmion von Wiegand, with whom he would start a spiritual, personal, and artistic relationship.

1942:  With the help of von Wiegand, Mondrian started working at Victory Boogie Woogie, his last masterpiece and a summary of his mature ideas.

1944 (February 1):  Mondrian died in New York.

BIOGRAPHY

Piet Mondrian (1872-1944) [Image at right] was one of the founders of abstract art, and a Mondrian1painter of immense influence on the whole twentieth century modernistic art movement. He was a member of the Theosophical Society for most of his adult life, although in later years he came to regard his own brand of art, Neo-Plasticism, as a new global spirituality superseding all religions and spiritual schools, including Theosophy.

Dutch historian Carel Blotkamp argued that Mondrian is best understood as a man of the Belle Époque. In 1919, he wrote to a Dutch friend from Paris sharing his enthusiasm for the book Comment on devient fée (How to Become a Fairy) by French Rosicrucian novelist Joséphin Péladan (1858-1918). “You will find much of me in this work, Mondrian wrote; he takes inspiration from the same ancient sources (occult)” (Blotkamp 1984:14). It would be difficult to find a book more representative of late nineteenth century occultism, which by 1919 was largely perceived as outdated, but not by Mondrian.

Mondrian was born in Amersfoort, The Netherlands, on March 7, 1972 in a family of art teachers who subscribed to a strict variety of Calvinism. The painter’s first contacts with occultism and Theosophy occurred when he was a student at the Amsterdam’s Academy of Fine Arts between 1892 and 1897. Among Mondrian’s fellow pupils was Karel de Bazel (1864-1932), who went on to become a leading Dutch architect. De Bazel joined the Theosophical Society in 1894. In 1896, he became a founding member of its Vahana Lodge in Amsterdam, together with fellow architects Johannes Ludovicus Mathieu Lauweriks (1864-1932) and Hermanus Johannes Maria Walenkamp (1871-1933). Another prominent Dutch architect, Michiel Brinkman (1873-1925), became the chairperson of the Rotterdam Lodge in 1903 (Lambla 1999:8-9).

According to Mondrian’s friend Albert van den Briel (1881-1971), the painter experienced aroundMondarin2 the year 1900 a religious crisis that led him to abandon the Calvinist Protestantism of his parents. He studied with great interest the doctrines of Theosophy and of the book The Great Initiates written by French Theosophist Édouard Schuré (1841-1929), to which he continued to refer throughout his life (Seuphor 1956:53-54). Under the influence of a fellow painter, Cornelis Spoor (1867-1928), Mondrian in 1909 both manifested “a sudden interest in yoga” (Bax 1995:292) and finally decided to become a member of the Theosophical Society. He formally joined it on May 14, 1909 (Bax 2006:547).

Mondrian referred in his correspondence and notebooks to several of his paintings as related to Theosophy. They included theearly Devotion (1908), which depicts a girl’s spiritual awakening, and the 1911 triptych Evolution. Mondrian scholar Robert P. Welsh (1932-2000) found religious influences already at work in an early painting, Passion Flower, [Image at right] commonly dated 1908 but in fact, according to Welsh, painted in or around 1901. Although similar in style to Evolution, Passion Flower does not yet allude to Theosophy but to a Christian mysticism and symbolism. Welsh finds in Passion Flower a “still basically ethical or Christian content,” perhaps with a moralistic element, as the painter had heard thathis model had been “infected with venereal disease” (Welsh 1987:167).

Welsh also suggested that the triptych Evolution [Image at right] should be read in a sequence Mondarin3going from left to right and then to the centre, depicting the three stages of the Theosophical enlightenment (Welsh 1971:47-49).

In 1912, when Mondrian arrived in Paris, where he would read Cubism through Theosophical lenses, before moving to his own studio he decided to stay in a guest room at the headquarters of the French Theosophical Society (Blotkamp 1994:59). When he returned to the Netherlands, Mondrian kept a portrait of Madame Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891), co-founder of the Theosophical Society, hung on the wall of his studio in Laren (Seuphor 1956:57).

Mondrian’s theoretical writings are impossible to understand without considering their roots in Theosophy. The earliest effort to present his ideas on abstract art was a long article on Theosophy and art written in 1913-1914 and intended for the Dutch Theosophical journal Theosophia. The text was rejected as too complicated and has unfortunately been lost, but we know something of its content from two sketchbooks compiled in Paris in the same years. Here, we see that for Mondrian Theosophy could help reduce art to “great generalities,” colors and lines, capturing the essential beyond any representation or symbolism (Welsh and Joosten 1969).

Mondrian’s ideas were already grounded in Theosophy before he met, in 1914 or 1915, the controversial Dutch esoteric author Mathieu Hubertus Josephus Schoenmaekers (1875-1944), a former Catholic priest and Theosophist who had developed his own esoteric system known as Christosophy. Hans Ludwig Cohn Jaffé (1915-1984) insisted on Schoenmaekers’s crucial influence on the development of Mondrian’s mature worldview and art, and on the foundation in 1917 of the movement and journal De Stijl. The very term “Nieuwe Beelding’” translated into English as “Neo-Plasticism’” was coined in 1916 by Schoenmaekers (Jaffé 1956). In 1916, van Doesburg described Mondrian as “obsessed by the theories of Dr. Schoenmaekers” (Blotkamp 1994:111), but the obsession was short-lived. By 1918, the artist came to refer to Schoenmaekers as an “awful man” and to conclude that, if the former priest wrote anything valuable, he derived it from Blavatsky (Blotkamp 1994:111). She taught, Mondrian argued, that cosmic harmony, truth, and beauty were one. They might be reduced to two simple elements, one male, vertical, represented by the line, and one female, horizontal, represented by color and background (Bax 2006:234-39).

Theosophy was one among different elements that lead to Mondrian’s move from symbolism to abstract art, to his theorization of Neo-Plasticism, and to his co-operation and later break, in 1924-1925, with van Doesburg. This break is normally attributed to van Doesburg’s insistence in using diagonal lines, rather than simply horizontal and vertical, as Mondrian recommended. In fact, there was more. Although sympathetic to Theosophy, van Doesburg was not a member of the Theosophical Society. In the 1920s, he gradually came to criticize Mondrian’s “rigid” Theosophy (Blotkamp 1994:192) and what he saw as his friend’s increasing transformation of Neo-Plasticism from an artistic movement into a religion.

Michel Seuphor (1901-1999) argued that Mondrian’s religion went from Calvinism to TheosophyCatalogue no. SCH-1957-0071 0333329     Piet Mondriaan     Title: Composition with Large Red Plane, Yellow, Black, Gray and Blue Painting scan van neg juni2006and from Theosophy to Neo-Plasticism, which “absorbed” Theosophy and became a global spiritual worldview (Seuphor 1956:58). In fact, Mondrian saw Neo-Plasticism, particularly after his debates with the Dutch philosopher Louis Hoyack (1893-1967) in the 1930s, as a millenarian project for transforming the whole of society. He believed that, just as the Neo-Plastic way of painting had disposed of the old art and created an entirely new one, so Neo-Plasticism would end up destroying the old forms of state, Church, and family and creating new, simpler and better ones. Correctly read, his paintings were a manifesto for this brave new world. “The rectangular plane of varying dimensions and colors, Mondrian wrote, visibly demonstrates that internationalism does not mean chaos ruled by monotony, but an ordered and clearly divided unity” (Mondrian 1986:268). [Image at right]

Most Theosophists rejected these utopian ideas and did not fully understand Mondrian’s art. He came to the conclusion that the powers that be in the Theosophical Society were “always against my work.” His utopian vision of global reform had something in common with certain trends in Freemasonry. Yet, in 1932 he wrote to Hoyack that his request to become a Freemason had not even been considered (Blotkamp 1994:16).

Painful as they were, these rejections did not lead Mondrian to a break with Theosophy. When he moved to London in 1938, he duly asked the Theosophical Society to transfer his name to the local branch (Blotkamp 1994:16). It is also significant that in London his best friend was the painter Winifred Nicholson (1893-1981), a Christian Scientist. Although obviously different from Theosophy, the metaphysical Christianity of Christian Science did interest many Theosophists.

According to American painter Charmion von Wiegand (1896-1983), after he moved to New York in 1940 Mondrian was no longer active in the Theosophical Society. In fact, he “had gone beyond organizations or groups […]. To him, they represented limitations, a division in the total unity he sought to achieve.” Yet, von Wiegand maintained, he had not denied Theosophy but had made it “implicit to his life” (Rowell 1971:77).

Charmion von Wiegand is a very reliable source on Mondrian’s American years. Although her personal papers remain so far unavailable to scholars, those who knew her reported that she was more than a friend to the Dutch painter. Von Wiegand first met him on April 12, 1941 in New York (Hersh 1998:228) and started a close personal and artistic relationship that lasted until Mondrian’s death on February 1, 1944. Von Wiegand came from a family of Theosophists, and later became a pupil of George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1866-1949), although she described herself at the same time as a Marxist. After Mondrian’s death, she became an important figure in New York’s Tibetan Buddhist scene (Introvigne 2014).

Mondrian also believed himself to be an “old soul,” i.e. in Theosophical jargon to have been “ reincarnated many times” (Rowell 1971:,80-81). Theosophy teaches that old souls are often misunderstood by their contemporaries. Mondrian’s Neo-Plasticism was not appreciated by these Theosophists who believed that a Theosophical art should explicitly include Theosophical symbols or rely on “thought-forms,” i.e. shapes and colors of thoughts and feelings perceived by clairvoyant Theosophists and described by Theosophical leaders Annie Besant (1847-1933) and Charles Webster Leadbeater (1854-1934: Besant and Leadbeater 1905). For many Theosophists, this was Theosophical art. For Mondrian, it was not (Blotkamp 1986:98): pure Theosophical art was indeed Neo-Plasticism.

Early interpreters insisted that Theosophy did not play a significant role for Mondrian. As late as 1990, Yve-Alain Bois wrote that happily “the theosophical nonsense with which the artist’s mind was momentarily encumbered” disappeared quite rapidly from his art (Bois 1990:247-48). This was not, however, Mondrian’s own position. In 1918, he wrote to Theo van Doesburg (1883-1931): “I got everything from The Secret Doctrine ” (Blotkamp 1994:13), referring to a book written by Blavatsky. In 1921, in a letter to the founder of the Anthroposophical Society, Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), Mondrian argued that his own brand of art, Neo-Plasticism, was “the art of the foreseeable future for all true Anthroposophists and Theosophists.” Disappointed at not having heard back from Steiner, Mondrian insisted in another letter to van Doesburg, in 1922, that “it is Neo-Plasticism that exemplifies Theosophical art (in the true sense of the world)” (Blotkamp 1994:182).

As mentioned earlier, this opinion was not shared by the leadership of the Theosophical Society in theMondarin5Netherlands, which led Mondrian to the persuasion that Neo-Plasticism went in fact beyond Theosophy and was capable of offering to the world a new religion. There is no reason, however, not to take Mondrian seriously when he repeatedly stated that Theosophy inspired him in his quest for a reduction of the universe to its primary components, horizontal and vertical straight lines and colors. [Image at right] Accordingly, it is also fair to state that, through Mondrian, the Theosophical Society greatly contributed to the birth of modern abstract art.

IMAGES**
All images are clickable links to enlarged representations.

Image #1 : Piet Mondrian.
Image #2: Piet Mondrian, The Passion Flower (1901)
Image #3 : Piet Mondrian, Evolution (1911).
Image #4: Piet Mondrian, Composition in Red, Yellow, Blue, and Black (1921).
Image #5: Piet Mondrian, Victory Boogie Woogie (unfinished, 1942-1944).

REFERENCES

Bax, Marti. 2006. Het Web der Schlepping. Theosofie en Kunst in Nederland van Lauweriks tot Mondriaan. Amsterdam: Sun.

Bax, Marti. 1995. “Theosophie und Kunst in den Niederlanden 1880-1915.” Pp. 282-320 in Okkultismus und Avantgarde: von Munch bis Mondrian 1900-1915. Ostfildern: Tertium.

Besant, Annie and Charles Webster Leadbeater. 1905. Thought-Forms. London: The Theosophical Publishing House.

Blotkamp, Carel. 1994. Mondrian: The Art of Destruction. London: Reaktion Books.

Blotkamp, Carel. 1986. “Annunciation of the New Mysticism: Dutch Symbolism and Early Abstraction.” Pp. 89-111 in The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985, edited by Maurice Tuchman. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

Bois, Yve-Alain. 1990. Painting as Model. Cambridge, MA and London: The MIT Press.

Hersh, Jennifer Newton. 1998. “Abstraction, Spiritualism, and Social Justice: The Art and Writing of Charmion von Wiegand.” Ph.D. Dissertation. New York: City University of New York.

Introvigne, Massimo. 2014. “From Mondrian to Charmion von Wiegand: Neoplasticism, Theosophy and Buddhism.” Pp. 49-61 in Black Mirror 0: Territory, edited by Judith Noble, Dominic Shepherd and Robert Ansell. London: Fulgur Esoterica.

Jaffé, Hans Ludwig Cohn. 1956. De Stijl 1917-1931: The Dutch Contribution to Modern Art. London: Alec Tiranti.

Lambla, Kenneth. 1999. “Abstraction and Theosophy: Social Housing in Rotterdam, The Netherlands.” Architronic 8:1. Accessed from http://architronic.saed.kent.edu/v8n1/v8n104.pdf on 24 December 2016.

Mondrian, Piet. 1986. The New Art – The New Life: The Collected Writings of Piet Mondrian. Edited by Harry Holtzman and Martin S. James. Boston: G.K. Hall.

Rowell, Margit. 1971. “Interview with Charmion von Wiegand.” Pp. 77-86 in Piet Mondrian 1872-1944: Centennial Exhibition. New York: The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.

Seuphor, Michel. 1956. Piet Mondrian: Life and Work. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

Welsh, Robert P. 1987. “Mondrian and Theosophy.” Pp. 163-84 in The Spiritual Image in Modern Art, edited by Kathleen J. Regier. Wheaton, IL: The Theosophical Publishing House.

Welsh, Robert P. 1971. “Mondrian and Theosophy.” Pp. 35-51 in Piet Mondrian 1872-1944: Centennial Exhibition. New York: The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.

Welsh, Robert P. and J.M. Joosten, 1969. Two Mondrian Sketchbooks, 1912-1914. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff International.

Post Date:
26 December 2016

Share