Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00220)

Both Paul and Brigitte have recently labelled
Cranston's biography of Blavatsky as "propaganda". 

In turn, some theosophists have labelled Paul's works
and Brigitte's postings as "propaganda." 

I remember many years ago when some theosophists
called Tillett's work on Leadbeater "propaganda". No
doubt other examples could be given in the
theosophical field.

It is quite easy to label something as "propaganda". 
The word has a negative emotional connotation and the
word is often thrown around in an attempt to silence
the opposition or at least to tar the opposition with
an unsavory appearance. 

One's person's "truth" is viewed by someone else as
mere "propaganda". And vice versa.

It seems to me that a far better approach would be to
try to determine exactly what is "propaganda". Could
we come up with a definite list of characteristics or
features that define a work as propaganda? Then in
the light of those criteria, we could try to apply in
an even handed manner those criteria to a particualar
work: for example, Cranston's bio or Paul's books,
etc. Or we could compare and contrast these two works
in light of those general features.

And as one is grappling with the word "propaganda" one
might also compare and contrast it with the word
"scholarly". This latter word is also easily thrown
around and used as a label either to praise or condemn
a book.

But the above approach has its limits and I think it
is far better to focus on the subject matter, i.e.,
the historical events themselves and use all books
(especially secondary works) with caution. It is
through comparing and contrasting how different
authors and writers view an event or controversy that
one can gain a better understanding. And one should
prefer to go to the actual primary sources rather than
to depend on what is written in a secondary work.

In the material Brigitte quoted on reincarnation in
ISIS UNVEILED from Deveney's book, one finds a one
sided presentation. Ryan's chapter on ISIS that I
partially quoted contains another perspective on the
subject which is not complete either. The serious
student whether a theosophist or scholar should try to
study ALL the relevant primary source material on this
issue. I find that neither Deveney or Ryan adequately
deal with all the points that are necessary to come to
an appreciative understanding of this particular
issue.


=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
info@blavatskyarchives.com
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com
You can always access BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES 
by simply typing into the URL address bar 
the following 6 characters: hpb.cc

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/