 |
The androgyne Rebis from Splendor Solis, Solomon Trismosin,
painted copy from the British Library, London. |
The history of the Golden Dawn at the turn of the twentieth century was a colourful helter-skelter of crisis, both internal and external, which led to various schisms and, eventually, multiple successors, including MacGregor Mathers's Alpha et Omega, A. E. Waite's Fellowship of the Rosy Cross, and the Stella Matutina under R. W. Felkin.
Georgie Hyde Lees joined the Stella Matutina, sponsored by W. B Yeats, and taking the magical name of 'Nemo Sciat' ('Let no-one know'). A few years later, in 1919, Violet Firth joined Alpha and Omega taking her family's motto—'Deo Non Fortuna' ('By God, not by Fortune')—as her magical name and she went on to write under a streamlined version of it, 'Dion Fortune'. In due course, she also went on to found her own magical order, The Fraternity of Inner Light, and had a significant influence through her prolific writings, both fiction and books esoteric topics, including
The Mystical Qabalah (1935).
One of her earliest works is entitled
The Esoteric Philosophy of Love and Marriage. It was written in 1924, and if readers can get past some of the imperialist, Anglocentric, and homophobic elements of the presentation, it is a valuable insight into ideas of sex and gender at the period in the groups related to the Golden Dawn. Indeed Moina Mathers accused Fortune of 'betraying the inner teaching of the Order'—a charge she was able to rebut (the relevant teachings belonged to a level that she had not yet reached; see Nevill Drury,
Stealing Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Modern Western Magic, 129).
Ideas of Gender
The Esoteric Philosophy of Love and Marriage is a short book and much of it focuses on occult polarity, gender, and sex. Fortune writes of
the spiritual human as having two aspects:
a timeless self or "individuality", which progresses through incarnations (cf. Yeats's
Principles), and part of this is manifested in a particular incarnation as
a temporary self or "personality" (cf. Yeats's
Faculties).
Esoteric science... conceives [the spiritual human] not to be sexless, but on the contrary, bi-sexual, and therefore complete in himself. The individuality is two-sided positive and negative, has a kinetic aspect and a static aspect, and is therefore male-female or female-male, according to the relation of "force" to "form" in its make-up. The personality, however, is one-sided, and therefore has a defined sex. The individuality may be thought of as a magnet, having a positive and a negative pole, one of which is at a time is inserted in dense matter, and the nature of the pole inserted determines the sex of the body that is built up around it.
(The Esoteric Philosophy of Love and Marriage, 31)
The timeless self therefore embraces both male and female in a form of alchemical union, where the two elements remain distinct though joined.
The bisexual or androgyne as envisaged in alchemy is almost never a sexless fusion of female and male, but a union of female and male as the androgyne (Greek:
andros-man and
guné-woman), or less commonly hermaphrodite (Greek gods, Hermes and Aphrodite). It is often referred to as the 'rebis',
re (thing),
bis (twice), indicating its explicitly double nature, and the alchemists usually show their
rebis with two heads (female and male) and often with both female and male genitals.
 |
Michael Maier, Atalanta Fugiens, Emblem XXXIII,
engraving by Matthäus Merian, the Elder. |
Fortune envisages the complete spiritual human as being like a bar magnet, one end of which is plunged in matter, manifesting as male or female, while the rest of the magnet remains free and the opposite sex, complementing and balancing the incarnate half.
Hermetic Principles
What Fortune calls 'esoteric science', taking on the language of the modern age, is more traditionally referred to as 'Hermetic wisdom' and traced back to the
Corpus Hermeticum and the teachings attributed to Hermes Trismegistos.
Anna Kingsford, founder of the
Hermetic Society in the 1880s, had similarly seen a fundamental sexual balance, as expressed in the Hermetic principles underlying the universe: 'The Hermetic system [is superior to
pseudo-mystical systems] in its equal recognition of the sexes'. This included both duality and gender as fundamental forces. Her introduction to the Hermetic dialogue
The Virgin of the World, entitled
'The Hermetic System and the Significance of its Present Revival',
offers a summary of some of the fundamental principles of Hermetic thought. She notes the fundamental unity of all things in Spirit, but that this is not incompatible with 'an original Dualism, consisting of principles inherently antagonistic'. Hermes Trismegistos tells Asclepios in
The Virgin of the World
that 'this law of generation is contained in Nature, in intellect, in
the universe, and preserves all that is brought forth. The two sexes are
full of procreation, and their union, or rather their incomprehensible
at-one-ment, may be known as Eros, or as Aphrodite, or by both names at
once', seems to lie behind Yeats's 'Supernatural Songs', such as 'Ribh
Denounces Patrick' and 'Ribh in Ecstasy'.
Mary Greer has drawn attention to how Kingsford's formulations foreshadow the later and now better-known axioms of the
Kybalion (1912). There is no evidence that Yeats knew
The Kybalion, but he certainly knew both the Hermetic Corpus and the contemporary interpretations of it, such as Kingsford's. And, despite the importance of Cabala and Rosicrucianism to the teachings of the Golden Dawn, it was called a
Hermetic Order and at least one of its cover names was the 'Hermetic Students', as recorded in Yeats's autobiographies and on the
invitation to his initiation.
Human and Daimon
Anna Kingsford posited
that 'Every human spirit-soul has attached to him a genius, variously called, by Socrates, a dæmon; by Jesus, an angel; by the apostles, a
ministering spirit'. She explains that, ‘The genius is linked to his client by a bond of soul-substance’ and ‘is the moon to the planet man, reflecting to him the sun, or God, within him....
the complement of the man; and his "sex" is always
the converse of the planet's' (The Perfect Way, or the
Finding of Christ [1882], 89–90).
The Yeatses'
Daimon, as outlined in the automatic script and in
A Vision A, similarly complements its human counterpart, "(the
Daimon being of the opposite sex to that of man)" (
AVA 27,
CW13 25).
The
Daimon is not just a companion moon to the human planet, but closer in fact to the bar magnet imagined by Dion Fortune.
Within physical life and normal contexts, the
Daimon manifests through
the people and habits of life—sexual relations, love for the other, all
the complex knot of relationships and desires. Yeats imagines the
Daimon or Guardian Angel conspiring with sweetheart and also jealous of her (
AVB 240,
CW14 175), referring to the western horizon or 'the seventh house of the horoscope where one finds friend and enemy' (
AVB 213,
CW14 157). Yet the
Daimon also represents both the individual's destiny and the highest possibility of free will.
In many respects, Yeats increasingly came to see the
Daimon as the complete archetype from which the localized human is a fragment immersed into space and time to become manifest and experience phenomenal reality.
Trying to formulate the relationship between human and
Daimon in one draft, Yeats wrote:
Though it enters into memory & reflects in the human mind, it is not contained within that mind nor can that mind see the whole object as it is present before the daimon. though sometimes, it knows of it, through its own increasing excitement. & sometimes it shows some perception of the daimon in such a way, that the perception seems miraculous by seeing it separated from the general framework of its thought, as in prevision, & clairvoyance & those affinities of personality which are so swift that different personalities seem to coexist within our mind. Though for the purposes of exposition we shall separate daimon & man & give to man a different symbol, they are one continuous <consciousness> perception, seeing we perceive all that the daimon does & only remember &
therefore only know what is in part a recurrance of our past.
(NLI MS 30,359, probably written in Cannes, December 1927/January 1928)
As Plotinus says of his 'guiding spirit', it appears that Yeats's Daimon 'is not entirely outside of ourselves; is not bound up with our
nature; is not the agent in our action; it belongs to us as belonging to
our Soul....' (Enneads III.4.5). We can be aware of it through excitement or a sense of miraculous perception, or in the case of Socrates, a sneeze. We are a continuous perception with the Daimon, and perception became increasingly important to Yeats as fundamental to identity (probably through the influence of Berkeley and through his attempts to understand the Principles), as is seen clearly in the formulations of the Seven Propositions which are posited on perception.
Much of the early automatic script is concerned with the nature and sources of different kinds of genius, a term that can refer to creative abilities as much as to a separate spirit, but often hovers between both in Yeats's thinking. Giving Yeats forms of contact with the genius was possibly the main reason for George Yeats's continued involvement with the automatic script, in terms of poetic material and of confident access to springs of creative energy. She probably saw the system as something of a personal support for her husband's creativity rather than something to be proclaimed to the world, and this was turned into the instructors' comment 'we have come to give you metaphors for poetry" (AVB 8, CW14 7). (This is not to say that she ventriloquized the whole automatic script, but in occult matters she evidently kept to the dictum she had taken as her motto—'Let no-one know'.)
Certainly connection to the
Daimonic aspect
of perception or inspiration was something to be sought, particularly
by those assigned to Phase 17, Yeats's own phase, the
Daimonic person. One of the ways that he could do this was through seeking a female voice, approaching towards the opposite half of the bar-magnet-self.
'a great mind must be androgynous'
In
one of the earliest drafts of the system Michael Robartes expounds some
of the system, and Owen Aherne makes a comment about remembering a '
passage in the Table talk [of Coleridge], he said that all great minds were
androgynous' (‘The Discoveries of Michael Robartes’, typescript,
YVP4 43). Aherne goes on to make a conjecture about the system of
A Vision that is incorrect, but Virginia Woolf also seized upon this comment of Coleridge's, and explored it perhaps more richly and aptly:
Coleridge perhaps meant this when he said that a great mind is androgynous. It is when this fusion takes place that the mind is fully fertilized and uses all its faculties. Perhaps a mind that is purely masculine cannot create, any more than a mind that is purely feminine, I thought.... Coleridge certainly did not mean... that it is a mind that has any special sympathy with women; a mind that takes up their cause or devotes itself to their interpretation.... He meant, perhaps, that the androgynous mind is resonant and porous; that it transmits emotion without impediment; that it is naturally creative, incandescent and undivided. In fact one goes back to Shakespeare’s mind as the type of the androgynous, of the man-womanly mind.... (A Room of One's Own, Ch. VI)
Key elements that echo Yeats's own ideas are those of fusion and a mind that uses all its faculties—one of the elements of Unity of Being, where on one
Faculty brings the others into play automatically. When writing of Unity of Being Yeats uses the image of sympathetic vibration, Woolf here of resonance, but the porousness that allows the undivided mind to express itself and more of itself than is normal is part of the symbolic androgyne. Within
A Vision and elsewhere in Yeats's writings, the term Unity of Being changes meaning and application as Yeats's ideas developed, but it was always something that the person should aim for, an ideal of the mind.
The conjecture that Aherne makes is that 'If we understand the Primary nature as masculine the saying would apply
very well to those phases as you have described them' (
YVP4 43), which is wrong because in the Yeatses' system the
primary is feminine and the
antithetical masculine, but the vital thing is that all minds are an equal mixture of both
tinctures. Whichever side of the Wheel
Will and
Creative Mind are on,
Mask and
Body of Fate balance them equally in the opposite
tincture.
Only perhaps those who achieve Unity of Being are able to fully realize
this equal oppostion in a form of dynamic equilibrium, Coleridge's
androgynous great minds, but the fundamental elements are there in all
humanity.
Every person is a balance of the
primary and
antithetical halves, and potentially of the male and female. In the first version of
A Vision, Yeats goes one stage further, identifying
Will and
Creative Mind with the 'light' of the human mind (regardless of whether they are light or dark according to the coding for
antithetical and
primary) and
Mask and
Body of Fate with the
Daimon's mind, which is dark to us.
The Will and the Creative Mind are in the light, but the Body of Fate working through accident, in dark,
while Mask, or Image, is a form selected instinctively for those emotional associations which
come out of the dark, and this form is itself set before us by accident, or
swims up from the dark portion of the mind. But there is another mind, or
another part of our mind in this darkness, that is yet to its own perceptions
in the light; and we in our turn are dark to that mind. These two minds (one always light
and one always dark, when considered by one mind alone), make up man and Daimon, the Will of the man being the Mask of the Daimon, the Creative Mind of the man being the Body of Fate of the Daimon and so on. The Wheel is in this way reversed,
as St. Peter at his crucifixion reversed by the position of his body the
position of the crucified Christ : “Demon est Deus
Inversus”. Man’s Daimon has therefore her energy and bias,
in man’s Mask, and her constructive power in man’s fate, and man and Daimon face each other in a perpetual
conflict or embrace. This relation (the Daimon being of the opposite sex to that
of man) may create a passion like that of sexual love. The relation of man and woman, in
so far as it is passionate, reproduces the relation of man and Daimon, and becomes an element where man
and Daimon sport, pursue one another, and do one another good or evil. (AVA 26–27, CW13 24–25)
Too many critics, perhaps, take this comment as license to identify the
Daimon with any and all of the women in W. B. Yeats's life (and little else), but there is definitely an element of truth in the idea that the
Daimon and its influence are discerned in these women, not least George Yeats.
In
A Vision, the system's myth of itself is that it is the product of the
Daimons of W. B. and George Yeats—that is WBY's female
Daimon and GY's male
Daimon (— with possible contributions from the
Daimons
of the children, Anne and Michael). Indeed, though the supposed instructors worked through a
hierarchy of communicating spirits, one of the voices, Ameritus, was said to be
George's
Daimon (
YVP2 300).
There is thus a complex interchange
of man and woman sitting and writing questions and answers, or the man
questioning the sleeping woman, yet it is the
Daimons of the two
who supposedly originate, and they influence their own charge directly
but also work through the spouse. Male and female are fused and yet distinct, androgynous.
 |
Michael Maier, Atalanta Fugiens, Emblem XXXVIII, engraving by Matthäus Merian, the Elder. |
The
following post will look at Yeats's use of female voices in poetry to express a potentially
Daimonic view of reality, and subsequent ones will consider the
Daimon with Plotinus and the Golden Dawn, and concepts of Unity of Being.