ZuZu: How did you begin with the subject of Satanism as a book?
Gavin:
Satanism has preoccupied me for as long as I can remember. As a child, I was
fascinated by monsters. On a more pragmatic level, it's an obvious gap in
the market. There should be a book out which deals with Satanism in modern
popular culture, and a lot of people, when I mentioned the project, initially
said 'Isn't there a book on that already?' and of course, there hasn't been
since Lyons' Satan Wants You which never got UK distribution.
I was actually initially commissioned to write this by a contact and colleague,
who is now a friend, for a true crime publishing imprint he had. He wanted
something, initially, on straight Satanic rock. Of course, the problem with
this is the question people always ask is, 'Are these people for real? Is
this authentic?' So I said there's no point in a book like this unless you
deal with the background to get something to measure against. And so, we agreed,
let's do a book about Satanism and rock music. This was all around
seven years ago, something like that. A series of, I don't think it would
be an understatement to say, catastrophes overtook the publishing company
that initially took it. I can detail those if you're interested. There's a
certain level to which you could talk about a 'Lucifer Rising Curse', and
while I'm reluctant to launch such a rumour, I confess I'm somewhat tempted.
However, we can talk about that a little later. Suffice it to say, I then
took it to various other publishers who were unwilling to take something which
was dealing with Satanism from which was, to say the least, a sympathetic
viewpoint. Several years on, the original publisher is now an editor, was
working freelance for another publishing company. He approached me and said,
'We're looking for something unpleasant, and I believe you may still have
something in the drawer in your bedroom,' as it were, and I said I did, and
the rest, as they say, is history.
ZuZu: So, tell me more about the so-called curse of Lucifer Rising.
Gavin: Errr. I'm a little reluctant with this. Apart from anything else, I think I'd rather my book was associated with a blessing of some description, but I suppose it wouldn't really fit with the gothic milleu. (laughs) As far as it goes, the original publisher... I think it's around a month prior to publication... he discovered his wife was pregnant with triplets, he also discovered that his reps were allegedly ripping him off, and at the same time, his younger brother was kidnapped by drug dealers, all of which, I suppose, may be day to day in the world of publishing, but not to my experience. There were also a series of other interesting coincidences associated with the book. Everything from the original cover design going walkabout through to, I think it would be fair to say, a level of panic running through the publishers which verged upon the paranoiac. On balance, however, I think it's fair to say that Lucifer Rising has largely been characterized by a worryingly positive response. If you write something like this, there's part of you that wants somebody to come knocking at your door with a lynch mob of villagers and some torches, and I'm still waiting. If anyone has any lynch mobs or villages spare, then feel free to pop 'round.
ZuZu: You mentioned that this was a subject that was near and dear to you, but during the actual creation of the book, did you discover any new directions that you hadn't anticipated?
Gavin: There's always more material. It's fair to say that almost every chapter in this book could form a fact volume on itself. This is largely virgin territory. The history chapter in particular, which is of particular interest to me. I'm very interested in history, and unfortunately, publishers aren't. That, I'd like to expand at some point in the future. But in general, everything in there. There's just so much space. To an extent, to define Satanism, you're talking about looking at a shadow side of our culture. To the extent that we're a Judeo-Christian culture, then Satanism is the definitive counter-culture.
ZuZu: Do you have any plans to publish any of what was cut? (Update: We're working on a zine that will include some of this material.)
Gavin: It's always a possibility. There were a lot of reasons why material was removed. Part of it was because my publisher had a, shall we say, a scrupulous libel reading which veered towards the perodic at points, whereby things were removed for those kinds of reasons. Others were removed for reasons of space. Other parts were removed simply because, in order to explain the material, it would have required a level of complexity which I wanted to avoid in the book. There are certainly possibilities. I mean, I have a lot of friends involved with the internet at the moment who want to set up internet sites and that's been one of the suggestions, that that is the kind of material that people will want to see. Really, I guess it's a case of... if people get in touch with me and say, 'I want to hear more about so and so or I want to hear more about this story or that story', then sure, sure, that's the way I'll go.
ZuZu: In between the commissioning of the book and the final publication, how difficult was it for you to find someone who wanted to put it out?
Gavin: I think the word I'd look for there is impossible. I have a reasonable track record within the world of freelance journalism. That doesn't count for much in the world of book publishing. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, they're inherently conservative. They want books about aerobics, they want books about the Queen Mother, they want the same kind of thing they saw last year. If they want controversy, they want the same controversy they had last year. I was lucky, really. I say I was lucky, I mean, it's a case, also of making sure that you put the pieces in place. It wasn't easy. That's a good thing in a way. I mean, if it's easy, you have to wonder why someone hasn't done it before.
ZuZu: What sorts of things were people saying to you in their rejection letters? Did they come out and say they didn't want a book about Satanism or were they more veiled?
Gavin: Reading between the lines, I was just getting that they hadn't read it. No, I mean the reaction to the book is the same as, to a certain extent, the reaction that you get to Satanism as a whole. That being, for some people, there's a kind of melodramatic horror that you've been doing something unpleasant to children. To other people, it's a way of trying to demonstrate how cosmopolitan they are because they have no interest in such things as devils and such mediaeval bogeymen. I think it's just a reflection of the conservatism in publishing, really. I'd love to think that the Vatican had personally vetoed it, but I have a feeling that I'd be somewhat over-paranoiac on that level. I don't see how I can expect my book to get published. I think there's a level to which you can shout and rail against the injustice of the world as long as you like, or you can sod off and write something else, which is the other thing I did. In many ways, the Sun newspaper reflects many of the things which I think are evil, if you want to use that word about the human animal. But it just makes life easier. It's like baseball caps. I'm probably going to offend half the universe here, but baseball caps allow you to identify arseholes at a longer range. It's always complicated because there's a level to which exclusivity is appealing. I tried, with Lucifer Rising, to create something which people could access with a reasonable intelligence who hadn't had the benefit of education, and whatever. On the other hand, I didn't want to create something that dumbed it down to the level whereby a Sun reader could understand it. I like the idea that the Sun might like to launch a crusade against me. I wouldn't like the actuality, I'm sure, but the fact that these people have contempt for me is an indication that I'm moving in the right direction. I think there's a great deal more kudos in the contempt of idiots than there is in friends. I don't connect the two. I think if people want mass produced crap, people will get it.
ZuZu: Well said. Have you had any experience with other subject matter that got the same treatment as this book, or is it pretty much centered around this sort of Satanic paranoia?
Gavin:
I think the Satanic paranoia has died down a lot. The last really powerful
instance was a very half-arsed attempt to launch that off of Columbine, and
that really fell flat. The major one that you can still push the button and
people will stand up and start shouting is child abuse, though they haven't
found any new monsters to point that one at. And, of course, fascism, which
is another classic which nobody can define. I mean, I have trouble definitively
defining it, if I can torture the English language in that fashion, but it's
something that everybody knows they're against. I wouldn't call myself a fascist.
I think I'm an Imperialist now. It's interesting, I often think, the way in
which offensiveness is implied to be something someone does to somebody else.
I think in many cases, when somebody says that somebody else is offensive,
they're actually, if you like, being offensive towards them. It's portrayed
as if we're attacking them if we want to speak our minds, whereas in fact,
it's a conscious, active effort on their parts to censor and attack our freedom
to express ourselves. Political correctness is a term that's become so hackneyed,
I really don't want to use it, but it's very interesting the way in which,
during the 80s - particularly in the States, feminists and fundamentalist
Christians got into bed together, not literally, I hope, for aesthetic sense,
got into bed together on a series of legislation. You have to ask, what do
they have in common? The curious answer is, an awful lot. Fundamentalist Christians
are pleasure-hating, woman haters, and the fundamentalist feminists are male-hating,
pleasure haters. The entire drive of their philosophy is about avoiding offensiveness.
What's offensive to them, what's offensive to the other people. I find it
difficult on a personal level undestanding why people are offended by things.
I find it difficult to understand why certain words, why the use of a series
of syllables is so profoundly effective to people that they feel the need
to stop everybody doing it, but maybe that's something peculiar about me.
ZuZu: What do you think your treatment of the subject did that others may not have?
Gavin: Well, the first thing I'd like to say is, I'd like to give a tip of the hat to Arthur Lyons whose book Satan Wants You is now woefully out of date, I think, and misjudged on some of the areas of popular culture, but is still a very useful resource for me, and a wonderful book. On the broader sense, it's surprising how little good material there is in this area. Gothic culture, for example, almost everything is either this kind of appalling fan works by various characters who shall remain unnamed, and on the other hand, you have these appallingly anal, academic studies which dip their feet into Freud and feminism and generally miss the point. I'd like to think with Lucifer Rising, I mean, I don't know whether I succeeded or not, I'm far too close for obvious reasons, that I delivered something which was both engaged and impartial. As impartial as somebody can be on a subject as emotive as Satanism. I also hope I demonstrated to people who were into Satanism on a very facile level that there is more depth to it than that, and also demonstrated, perhaps, to those academics with an interest in the more historical, cultural levels of it that there is a vibrant and lively version that exists today and is moving into the future.
ZuZu: It seems to me that you avoided a lot of opining on what you were writing about. Did you find it difficult not to interject a lot of judgement calls, or was it easier to do it the way that you did?
Gavin: I'm flattered and pleased that you thought that. I tried to do that. I don't think it's possible to write a book with a specialist subject like this where you do avoid making various value judgements. There are reviews which accuse me of labelling everyone who's not a member of the Church of Satan as a wannabe, which, to be frank, I think is horseshit. Apart from anything else, the sheer quantity of material meant that there wasn't much space for this kind of pontificating, and the fact that like most wise asses, I'd rather make a joke... so, no, not really. I hope I succeeded.
ZuZu: It seems like with the breadth of material that you covered you could literally create an encylopaediea of Satanic rock. Given that there's no such animal as yet, where did you turn for research?
Gavin: You pick and choose from a hundred different areas. In many cases, you'd find that somebody would have labelled it something else. The 's' word is one that a lot of people are very uncomfortable with, especially if they find it's something they enjoy but don't want to be associated with. There are now a number of fairly good general reference on rock music and heavy metal, none of which I particularly recommend, except for the ones I contributed to. *grin* Aside from that, no. Part of the joy of this was that it was largely breaking new territory. It's interesting that academia is finally coming to terms with rock culture, metal culture, and to a lesser extent, affiliated areas like gothic culture. I'm sure many goths would be mortified at that suggestion. Though you'd have thought goths would enjoy being mortified. Anyway, the irony, perhaps, is that I rather suspect that the minute that heavy metal culture becomes interesting to these people and they do start dissecting it, is the point at which it starts to die. There's a level to which heavy metal is what's described under the counter culture. It's not approved counter culture. It just survives because people like it. The arbiters of cool, whoever they may be, find it as repellent as the mainstream does, which is one of the reasons I've always had a curious respect and affection for it.
ZuZu: What did you definitely NOT want the book to be?
Gavin: The obvious things. I didn't want it to be a true crime expose', I didn't want it to be something which pretended to be authoritative. I wanted it to be something to stimulate debate. I couldn't stimulate debate as far as I wanted to just because the groundwork wasn't there. I didn't want it to be something that was a rock 'n' roll book anymore than I wanted it to be something that was an occult book. There are a lot of pitfalls surrounding writing this book, and I suppose I stumbled very close to several of them, but it looks like I've gotten away with them. I didn't want to alienate people who were interested in Satanic culture but couldn't abide electric guitar music anymore than people who were interested in some of the bands I covered but perhaps weren't interested in the philosophical implications. Hopefully, I could drag them both in from different directions.
ZuZu: So you're creating a primer for two different camps as well as giving something to the people that may know a lot about these bands?
Gavin:
Hopefully, at least two different camps. As I tried to stress earlier, what
we're really dealing with here is the shadow side of our culture. I was only
able to touch on dozens of areas which would pay off research a hundred fold
for someone to be commissioned to write a book on. Everything from the role
of blasphemy in Renaissance art to the idea that... I mean, I like the way
that the book finished. I deliberately finished the book on what was a bizarre
anti-climax. You expect it to finish apocalyptically, and that was the obvious
thing to do. I deliberately finished with a quote from the artist Coop
whereby he said that he actually thinks that the world was getting better,
rather than the kind of apocalyptic blood and thunder finish you might expect.
And Coop's reasoning is that he thinks women's butts are getting bigger,
which he thinks is a good thing. I finished with that for a number of reasons.
One of them is that this is an example, or at least I think it's an example
of an authentic heresy. I think it's something that quite a few people think,
although I'm not sure in quite the explicit terms that Coop may have
put it, but it's something that is never said. It's an illustration of what
LaVey described as the modern religion, the modern Christianity of
corporate culture, of media zombies, basically. I think it's important, with
a book like Lucifer Rising, that it has a few surprises in there, but
also, it expresses a series of different ideas and makes people think. Heresy
is the last thing you'd expect, but Satanism, to a certain extent, is, if
not a religion of heresy, certainly a think tank that encourages heretical
thought. Coop also represents something else that I wanted the book
to show, which was the idea that Satanism is very much about fun, that it's
something which people should enjoy. If you don't enjoy doing it, then you're
doing something wrong. You really missed the point. Obviously, everyone's
life is not giggles and laughs all the time, but the worst thing an enemy
can possibly sense in their prey is the fact that you're giggling at them.
I think Coop encapsulates that very powerfully.
ZuZu: There is often a void of humour in a lot modern Satanists that I've met, although there are many that have the idea pretty well. That's another thing I wanted to ask you. Did you find that people were largely devoid of humour or were they mostly a bit of fun?
Gavin: It's reasonable to say that the more comfortable with the whole area, the philosophy, the aesthetic, whatever you want to call it, the more ready they were with a sense of humour. So at one level, you have the Norwegians who consider the very idea of laughing as a heresy to their adolescent fantasies, to the other level, whereby you have people like LaVey, who had a very impish side to him, which, it's important to note, didn't detract from his forcefulness or his potency. It's important to remember that the devil, as a figure encapsulated within peasant culture within the Middle Ages and Renaissance was actually regarded by his adherents, if they existed - it's a very muddy historical area with a lot of controversy - but as far as we can determine, he was largely a figure of mischief and fun. Sometimes he was mocked, but equally, he was regarded as an entity or a god or creature who could lighten the lives of the peasants by mocking their Christian feudal overlords. Also remember that a large element of the Black Masss which outsiders can't understand, is the Black Mass is a parody of a Mass. It's essentially, and quite literally, a piss take. The devil is always grinning, the villain always gets the best laughs, and that's essential. I think there's a level of adolescent need to frighten, an adolescent machismo, before you appreciate that actually, if you're able to laugh, to grin about the philosophy and the situation that you're in, or whatever, that shows a certain level of... not only confidence, but power. I don't think it's something you can teach people, or something you can lecture about. It's either there or it isn't. The people that glower or gloom about it will disappear in the long run anyway.