Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00110)

--- In theos-talk@y..., Steve Stubbs <stevestubbs@y...> wrote:

> That is a problem I have with Cranston's book. From
> what has been posted on these lists, Cranston
> evidently was a cover upper of the truth in her own
> right, and repeatedly argued for positions that were
> palpably false. 

I wouldn't judge any book based on what people on this list say about 
it, but there are indeed serious problems with Cranston's approach. 
The thing that astounded me most was that she simply omits all 
mention of the child Yuri, who died in the 1860s after having been 
reared by HPB. She claimed it was not her child; her enemies claimed 
it was. This is a subject addressed by *every* book about HPB that I 
know of, yet Cranston simply avoids it.

> Why would anyone want to do that? 

Well, I corresponded with "Sylvia" before and after the book came 
out, and mentioned my concern at Yuri's omission. She said that she 
had hoped to include him, but that some evidence she had sought had 
not come through, so she was unable to address the subject. Allowing 
for some failure of my memory, I think it still safe to say that she 
didn't want to *address the subject at all* unless it could be 
addressed from the standpoint of "refuting HPB's enemies."

> Does that honor HPB or anyone else?
> 
Adopting the persona of one of our elder listmembers, I would retort,
"Does discussing an illegitimate child honor THE THEOSOPHICAL 
PHILOSOPHY, and if it does not, is there any excuse whatsoever for 
doing so?"

PJ