Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00153)

Paul Johnson writes:

PJ> ...Santucci and Hejka-Ekins had offered to make editorial
corrections and recommendations when it was being considered that
In Search of the Masters might be published by Theosophical
History Foundation (at my expense).  When that fell through due
to time constraints I still asked them for critiques, but never
got them.

Speaking for myself, I don't recall you asking for a critique,
but I don't doubt that you did.  What strikes me as odd however
is the circumstances that you are referring to.  Shortly after I
received a copy of the mss for ~In Search of the Masters~ in
1990, you told me over the phone that TH was either going to
publish the book as it was, or you were going to self publish.
You said that you were "tired of the mss" and wanted it out.  In
light of your ultimatum, I saw little sense in my continuing to
make "editorial corrections" that were not going to be used.
Under these same circumstances, I also don't see how it would
have made any sense for me to critique the mss for you either.

Regarding your "lake theosophy" post, I never fail to be
surprised by your oft make statements of being "distressed" by
other people's comments about your books.  Without even going
beyond the covers, it seems to me that you are "baiting the bear"
as they say.  The title of the first book suggests that the true
identity of the Masters are hidden "behind the occult myth." The
word "myth" suggests that the "occultism" which so many believe
in is false.  The revised title is a little more focused,
suggesting that the "great white lodge" is a myth i.e.  untrue.
It seems to me that the very choice of your titles is asking for
a negative response from a lot of people who don't like you
messing with their sacred cows.  If I were to publish a book
called "Christianity revealed, the truth behind the Jesus Myth,"
I think I would be a bit on the naive side to think that the
fundamentalist Christian community would run to embrace it with
smiles and blessings.  As for Dan's post, it appears that he has
gone beyond the covers of the book and is questioning the
methodology and the thoroughness of your research.  It seems to
me that such scrutiny is part of the game.  If you publish an
academic book through an academic press, and you will get members
of the academic community dissecting the hell out of it.  That is
what they do for a living.  Peer criticism is an important and
necessary activity used to keep the quality of research at a high
standard.  Whatever is in that book, it was published under your
name, therefore I would think that you want all of the feedback
you can get in order to do a better job on your next endeavor.
After all, your book bears your name, and you are ultimately
responsible for every word in it.  If you find this distressing,
perhaps you might find more satisfaction in other ways of making
theosophical contributions.

I hope that you understand that my comments are not intended to
throw flames.  As I have said before, I think your book should be
read and discussed.  But if you find that discussion
"distressing," then we have a problem.

Peace
Jerry Hejka-Ekins
JHE@KOKO.CSUSTAN.EDU