h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A586190

Well, here it is at last. Talk about giving birth. This entry is not an attempt at de-mystifying the art of alchemy (god forbid!) but rather an appreciation of its subtle operations and processes, its paradoxical nature and its reading of the world as metaphor. By tracing its origins and illustrating its relevance as a psychological discipline, I hope to make the subject more accessible to those who are interested.
Since there are presently no known guide entries on the subject, it should prove a useful contribution. As the words on the little bottle say - "DRINK ME" - and see what happens.

*phew*

Great entry.

Having read loads of stuff on alchemy before, I expected a lot less from this entry. I expected it to be incomplete and feared I would be disappointed by not finding anything new, I was already mentally formulating a nice way to tell the author to do some more research... Read the entry first!!!

What a surprise! Not only is this entry very complete, but very well written too (perhaps a bit dry). I specially like the philosophical approach to alchemy, and not the commonly found greedy-scientist in the search for gold and eternal life. (There were many of those too, of course, but that's not the Art of Alchemy)

One minor thing: In one paragraph the author states "Alchemy, viewed as witchcraft and heresy by the Church Fathers, threatened the vision of Christian universal harmony, and was denounced as a superstitious heathen pursuit." True: Alchemy was viewed as something that was not conform with religious laws. BUT: The church was also involved in alchemy - so the condemnation of alchemy was more 'pro forma' to keep common people away from it - but not monks! A lot of alchemy (and also occultism) was being performed in monasteries and convents.

Anyways: Great Entry.

HELL

Magnificent.

I don't know anything about the subject so I am not in a position to comment on the content.

I think the writing style is wonderful and I found it a thoroughly informative piece.

Just one quick comment.......

At the end you seem to imply that anthropomorphism and humanism mean the same thing; I'm not sure that's correct.

Still, this was a great read, thanks so much for putting it up here

Cestus

I think I already tried to get you to put this up for Peer Review, so I think you know my opinion.



Orcus

Thanks HELL for reading the entry and for your astute observations. I agree there were exceptions and it is well documented that some of the religious denominations (Lutherians, Jesuits, Theosophical Rosicrucians) were deeply involved in alchemy and mysticism (the *hermetic arts* as they were referred to). Indeed alchemy attracted all sorts - from artists, physicians (notably, Paracelsus) to priests as you rightly point out. The most talented had rich benefactors and worked in royal courts. Also established (esoteric?) scientists like Isaac Newton were not averse to dabbling.
Of course, the history of alchemy (spanning greek, egyptian, oriental, arabic alchemy to Freemasonry) would be a good companion to this entry.
I'll attempt to couch the problematic section in less definitive terms.
Zaphod

Hi Zaphod

An interesting piece and not at all as I had imagined it.

I don't know anything much about alchemy, but I suspect that the alchemy you are describing is what it developed into in Medieval times from the ancient searching for the elixir of life etc.

The following is a quote from a very brief article on alchemy from a chemistry web-site, but if true, suggests to me that the original "alchemy" was indeed the search for a physical "philosopher's stone" and so forth and that the form you describe was a relatively short-lived development of this. I just wonder what you think.

Ugi

Quote (from the ChemSoc web site)

The word is derived from the Arabian phrase "al-kimia," which refers to the preparation of the Stone or Elixir by the Egyptians. The Arabic root "kimia" comes from the Coptic "khem" that alluded to the fertile black soil of the Nile delta. Esoterically and hieroglyphically, the word refers to the dark mystery of the primordial or First Matter (the Khem).

Unquote

Thanks for your comments, Ugi. Firstly, in response to your posting please read post 5 re. the need for *a history of alchemy* entry. The origins of alchemy have been lost in the mists of time, being almost as old as civilisation itself. The alchemists of the Middle Ages learnt their art from the Arabs in Spain and Italy, who in turn had adopted it from the ancient Greeks, who had developed it from the ancient Egyptians, and so on. There are even biblical references to alchemy. It wasn't until the 12th and 13th centuries that alchemy filtered into western Europe via Sicily and Spain. This was therefore my starting point in the Middle Ages.
I could also have mentioned that alchemy's transmutation of metals as development of Aristotle's idea about the prima materia linking with the four qualities of coldness, dryness, moisture and heat develping to form the four elements. By manipulating these qualities, he thought it was possible to change the elemental combinations of matertrails, thereby bringing about transmutation. Also, with it being such a huge subject, I left out metals and planetary influences (Jupiter-Tin, Mars-Iron, etc.), the stages of alchemy (nigredo, albedo, citrinitas, and rubedo), etc.
The divine *mercurial water* = the elixir of life. Some alchemists did seek a universal medicine or panacea, which became the fountain of youth, or the elixir of life and the key to immortality. It is said that only after the production of the philosopher's stone can the elixir be found. It is all very metaphorical, but is basically about renewal as indicated in my entry.
As for the derivation of the word alchemy, I am now the wiser.
So long
Z

I had read post 5 & was not suggesting that you include an entire history of alchemy, I just wondered if you wanted to make a passing reference to where it all came from. It's a great entry & I now know a great deal more about it than I did.

Ugi

Hi again, Ugi. I only thought a potted history of alchemy would make an ideal companion, but inclusion here would only add to an already over-burdened piece. Thinking about it, and by way of reference, would you mind if I included *your* derivation of alchemy as a footnote? This would be quite useful in highlighting its ancient origins. Was there a reference to this on the ChemSoc website?
Thanks
Z

Sorry to bug you on this one Ugi, but have you arrived at a decision re. inclusion of footnote (see post 9). By the way, forgot to mention that I really enjoyed reading your entry on performing magic tricks. I tried a few and they actually do work.
Regards, Z

Sorry Cestus for not getting back sooner. Just to say thanks for your comments and you were quite right about anthropomorphism and humanism, they are diffrences, and have duly placed an *and* between them.

Z

Is the jury out on this entry or what? If there are any interested Scouts out there *PLEASE* *PLEASE* *PLEASE* (beg, grovel, etc.) let me know what you think. If the temperature goes down on this one it'll spoil the work.
Z

Zaphod, the lack of comment on an article here can sometimes mean that is has gained perfection as it were Ie. no more changes may be necessary. I believe this to be the case with this article.
Please be patient - us scouts only get three picks once a month and we are now obliged to not pick articles that have been here less than one week. Take a look around Peer review - you will see articles that have been around for many months. I personally like to pick articles that have been around a while.
I think this article is ready for inclusion in the guide and is definitely of the right quality so you've got no worries there
You just need to wait for a scout to pick it now I believe.

But the wait is agonising...... I know the feeling well.

All the best,

Cestus

Some of us Souts write article too - we know about the waiting too

HI Zaphod,

Sorry, I lost this thread for a few days - it got pushed off the bottom of my page & I didn't realise you were replying to me.

Re derivation. It is not mine, it was copied verbatum from a web site. I will put a link to it in my personal space so you can check it out. I don't see why you should not use it though, because it is factual, rather than someone's creation. Certainly I have no objection.

Re tricks - that was only 1% mine & 99% other contributors, but I agree the final item was quite fun.

Re general - it would seem that there are several hundered items in Peer Review, waiting for possible recommendation and with only 5 featured each day, it may be a long wait to get even a very high quality entry into the guide. The best we can do is make it as complete and impressive as possible and wait for a Scout to decide it's one of their favourites. Pestering them is likely to be counter productive, since they have so much choice.

As I say, sorry for not getting back to you sooner.

Ugi

Hi Ugi (and Orcus too if you're reading this). I got the chemsoc link ta very much. It was really useful and have added it to my list of favourites. Pity I didn't read this first. Such is life.
Anyhow, thanks for explaining the whole situation viz-a-viz the scouting of entries. It puts my mind at rest to know that it hasn't been forgotten, and sorry if you felt hassled. I guess I was just a little impatient on this occasion (mid-flight jitters!!).

Zaphod

Oh no that wasn't hassly I was just letting you know it hadn't been forgotten about.
Hassly is when people post to your personal space saying "Hey, pick this" I almost certainly won't when people do that.

Oh and I know you drew my attention to this article on my homepage - that's OK, I don;t mind that - it's when people tell you what to pick that it gets irritating

Damn, how do you delete postings again?