Talk:Helena Blavatsky/Archive 1

message: In Sylvia Cranston's huge book on HPB she lists in her notes a work "Helena Andreevna Hahn" by Bobritsky.  No author named Bobritsky however appears in her subsequent bibliography, and I cannot find a book by this name or an author named this who work a book on her mother either.  Very frustrating!  If anyone recognizes this work, can you give a full citation? Thanks. Wjhonson 01:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources on mother 

message: In her book "Priestess of the Occult", Gertrude Marvin Williams does a very fine and very well researched (in my opinion) biography of Helena's early years.  Although the book is antagonistic to Helena's alledged powers, there is no reason in my mind why Gertrude would mis-state her ancestry.  In this book, Gertrude, states the name of the grandmother was "Pricess Helene Dolgoruki" and the grandfather "Andrez Mikhailovich Fadeev, Privy Councillor of the Caucasus".  I'm assuming from this, that the grandmother retained her family name, in spite of being married.
   
If someone has a SOURCE which states overwise, please put it here so we can review it. Wjhonson 17:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Due to grammar of the Russian language, Russian female names in most cases have different endings, thus the name of the grandmother should be Helena Andreyevna Fadeyeva. The exception made for Helena Blavatskaya is probably determined by the fact she became famous abroad. Anyway to be sure check a guide on how to write Russian names. 7even 09:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I stated she is not called the Pricess Fadeyeva but rather the Princess Dolgoruki.  Do you have any source for giving her the other surname? Wjhonson 15:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  grandmother's name 

message: Quote:
:In 1874, Helena met Henry Steel Olcott; he was a lawyer, agricultural expert, and journalist who covered the Spiritualist phenomena.
Was it really spiritualism and not spiritism he covered? Nixdorf 22:23, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
Gertrude Marvin Williams, in her book "Priestess of the Occult" uses the word spiritualism.  If you check the page of spiritism it mentions the Fox sisters but not the Eddy brothers.  That is confusing to me.  I'm not at all sure the two pages themselves are not confused as to who is what and which is where. Wjhonson 17:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spiritualism or spiritism?

message: Under "Works", "Books about her", regarding the book "Madame Blavatsky's Baboon".  I have changed the description of the link from "Review" to "Rebuttal/Review".  The article is hardly unbiased, certainly not just a review, and the description of the article on that page even describes it as "not so much a book review as a remedial essay."
Before removing the link to Amazon please post your reference for "we don't link to bookstores".  This is the first time I've seen this statment and I challenge it's validity.  In my experience, wiki links to anywhere it feels like linking. Thanks.Wjhonson 18:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Works / Books about her / "Madame Blavatsky's Baboon" 

message: I noticed Madagascar shifted a couple of times in the southern ocean, so its a perfect example of isolated nature. It has at least 5 water marks on the Antarctic floor from its origin in the Indian Lemuria. It broke off from Lemuria when it was a part of the Pacific Ocean dwipa, then settled in the Atlantic. It helped form the southern tip of Africa. Then it went to its position it is now in. This continent seems to have moved quit a bit. A valid cause for the human species or third race maybe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asfd777 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemurian subcontinent Madasgar? Was Darwin Right?

message: Dear Editors,
I would like to get it to your notice the observation that why does this article carry so much of controversies as against the rest of the biography and the article? Wikipedia cannot be a page of fight between Illuminati and the Christian or between Christian Dogmas and Pagan Beliefs. It has to be edited with due respect to the person and the life. If Blavatsky's life was worth of only controversies why should the article, at first place, be written as a wikipedia biographical article? We can as well remove it. The reason for Blavatsky getting such a high fame and attention is because of her contribution to theosophy. We respect Blavatsky for her contribution and revival of Eastern Esoteric wisdom. She was a historian, contemporary philosopher and miracle worker. It is a shame that people are using Wikipedia to make their whims and fancies shadow the biographical notes. Please do ponder on these thoughts without any bias.Thank you. Sailpra (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this former statement. The general tone of the article is purely negative and the reader gets no inkling about why theosophy was so important in spiritual research. It looks like an article about the Vatican that would dedicate half of its content to the problem of pedophilia among the Catholic clergy. It ascribes more importance to the reception of Blavatsky work than to her work properly. --Alexandre Rongellion (talk) 13:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think your analogy with the Vatican is a valid one. Less than 1 percent of catholic priests are pedophile, while Blavatsky is a single person and many reliable sources describe many of her works and claims as fraudulent. WP:DUE weight must be given to those sources inside the article. GreyWinterOwl (talk) 14:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversies vs. the rest of her life

message: Someone inline with her idea's and beliefs wrote this article, and they defending it from having any type of NPOV. This isn't a Biography, it's cheer-leading pamphlet, an after the fact rationalization of history, a debate swayed towards the views of the supporters, and a total mockery of what Wikipedia is supposed to stand for. The Talk page, and ton of other research show tons of criticism, debunking, disproving, case of out right bigotry, fraud, and racism in the concepts this woman wrote about. But all of that goes unmentioned, deleted, or debate and withheld in this article. Believers in her concepts and philosophy are using that article to rewrite and misguide History. The Neutrality of the dominate contributing editors of this Article is in Question. 98.203.36.3 (talk) 10:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. It needs severe pruning and the addition of more skeptical material, from sources such as . William Avery (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I believe that unattributed content with unreferenced citation numbers was  by Deodarvostok; and, I see that those unreferenced citation numbers were . --BoBoMisiu (talk) 02:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright violation

message: I'll add the following important fact to the end of the paragraph "Ariosophy" when no one wish to oppose:
--Teutobald (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ariosophy

message: Paul Fusco the voice and chief puppeteer of ALF had a character on the animated series on NBC named Madame Pokipsi, a fairly blatant parody of Blavatsky, should we include him in the influenced category as well? Also many cultural references to the gypsy fortuneteller are allusions to Blavatsky, especially in speaking, since she would most likely have spoken with a fairly noticeable Slavic accent. Sochwa 2007-01-06T18:36:26 
:You need to source this. See Wikipedia:Attribution, SqueakBox 22:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Madame Pokipsi (character)

message: In the article about New Age it is written that "The New Age movement is a Western spiritual movement that developed in the second half of the 20th century". Blavatsky passed away much earlier - in 1891, so it is not precise to categorize her in "New Age spiritual leaders". I suggest to move her into a new category - "New Age precursors" or "New Age predecessors", where Swedenborg, Vivekananda and others can also be placed. --174.3.242.51 (talk) 19:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Other predecessors also included. --Hrisantius (talk) 00:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: New Age spiritual leader?

message: Is the movie The Illusionist based off of Blavatsky? Pg. 16 - 19 of The Esoteric World of Helena Blavatsky, is a witness account of her 'weighing a coffee table down,' much like the sword scene. Also, Blavatsky's brother is named Leonid (whom was there during this alleged incident, and a devout skeptic until then), and the antagonist of the movie is Leopold. Huffstuff (talk) 02:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:The Illusionist (2006 film)#historical relevance.3F for other discussion about this. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: ''The Illusionist'' (2006 film)

message: Blavatsky also appears as a character in Mark Frost's The List of Seven wherein her work is influential to his main character - Arthur Conan Doyle - creating a work of fiction that leads to a Sherlockian supernatural adventure. Doyle's manuscript in a novel supposedly lifts much "straight out of Blavatsky." In Chapter 7 of the novel, Blavatsky and Doyle meet and discuss her work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.54.93.244 (talk) 20:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Some quotes from the occult murder mystery include "he borrowed not only the title of his book but his villains' motives from the woolliest works of Madame Blavatsky. Who would have thought his petty larceny would come so hideously to roost?" "he'd more or less cribbed 'The Dark Brotherhood' from Blavatsky. Which begged the question, if they were after him because of his book, how close to the truth of what they were up to had the lunatic Russian wandered?" I looked through the eBook () which didn't include print page numbers, so no page numbers are cited. I'm not going to look for a print copy or finish reading the ebook because I don't like reading murder mysteries. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: ''The List of Seven''

message: Robert Plant has rarely, if ever, expressed any particular spiritual stance; the best you might say is that he's influenced by Norse mythology. Page, on the other hand, has stated publicly many times (and it's otherwise well-documented) that he has been inspired by Aleister Crowley; I'm not aware of him ever mentioning Blavatsky as an influence. So, I removed them both from the "Influences" section. If anything, you might consider adding Jon Anderson and Yes (band) (read the lyrics of Close to the Edge and Tales from Topographic Oceans in particular). But then, that would be OR, too, I reckon. Eaglizard 04:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NB:Dang, I thought for sure there'd be some disagreement with this. I guess I've just been editing Alice Bailey for too long, I see edit-wars everywhere I go now. lol Eaglizard 22:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm quite familiar with Close to the Edge and Tales from Topographic Oceans, and you are blowing smoke, talking out the back of your neck and talking through your hat. I prefer to listen to the LPs and commune with my Tokemaster. Blavatsky also had a well-known fondness for some good 'shish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.238 (talk) 08:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rm'vd Plant and Page from "Influences"

message: Whoever removed the Influences section is clearly trying to cover-up the important discussion about the influence of Blavatsky.
It is a well known fact that the Nazi's modeled much of the Nazi culture and government after the Hindu caste system.
The question as to whether Blavatsky influenced the Nazi's is an important debate, to claim otherwise, is just insane bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.181.62 (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's a  then you'll presumably have no difficulty in providing reliable sources to verify it. As you have been asked to do repeatedly. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Un-did Removal of Influences Section

message: The fact that Adolf Hitler may have read the works of Blavatsky, or may in some way have been influenced by her, is not a reflection on Blavatsky. Hitler also listed to Bach and studied the paintings of the Renaissance Masters. They are not, for that reason, responsible for the Third Reich. Blavatsky must be understood in her own terms. --66.81.100.246 (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: The influenced are not a reflection of the influencer

message: A book review on a blog questioned the scholarship of books which repeated a legend, that evolved from speculation that Albert Einstein had read a Blavatsky book into speculation that Einstein had kept a Blavatsky book on his desk, to Einstein's non-existant niece. More so, that objectivity is bad or, in the words of the book reviewer, Jason Colavito, an "argument that science and scholarship are bad because they don't assume the reality of a spiritual dimension of gods and monsters" is a premise that some writers about Blavatsky exploit. Colavito, cited the sources of this legend and questioned the authenticity and intentions of the authors. The citation was  by XercesBlue1991. Colavito identified what he called "a psychic post office in Blavatsky's lacquered cabinet, materializing letters to her from the ether on demand" and her other "parlor tricks" and concluded that, this "implies nothing about the correctness of her spiritual beliefs" so "to rehabilitate Blavatsky as a spiritual guide would involve proving the validity of her claims in Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, a tall order given their reliance on assumptions that cannot be  and outdated sources long since proved false." Identifying logical fallacies, as Colavito seems to have done (that a person's ability to perform stage magician tricks does not cause that same person's written beliefs to be true) is a valid argument, and, in my opinion, should be integrated into the section on Blavatskian Theosophy.
Colavito points out the fact that "Western interest in Eastern faiths did not originate with Blavatsky and had been a popular subject of study in the West for a century before her." He identifies Pope Pius IX's 1864 Syllabus of Errors as "good evidence for the widespread nature of the beliefs" such as pantheism and indifferentism ("that reason guides each individual to God through any number of equally valid religious paths"). Colavito believes that the Syllabus of Errors "is strong evidence that Blavatsky was a result not an originator of the religious and spiritual changes of the nineteenth century" as some books about her presume. Colavito cites The Greeks and the Irrational by E. R. Dodds as an example of works which examine ancient esoteric ideas.
A , Colavito's blog, reveals that it contains several skeptical posts about her.
--BoBoMisiu (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Book review on a blog