Scan barcode
nunasreads's review against another edition
2.0
As much as I was excited for this book, I have to admit that the more I read the more dissapointed I was. This is due to the fact that the subject was covered only superficially, there were mentions of numerous bands and how their music was connected to the occult, but none of the chapters actually went in depth and only presented the connection between music and occult at surface level. I think the problem with it is that 'the occult in rock and roll' is a too vast of a subject to be encapsulated in only 229 pages. (let's be real only the David Bowie albums would have taken at least several volumes to describe properly).
All in all it was an interesting read, it opened up my apetite for the subject. But for those looking for more details I'd recommend choosing another book. ~
All in all it was an interesting read, it opened up my apetite for the subject. But for those looking for more details I'd recommend choosing another book. ~
scheu's review against another edition
3.0
Not a bad book by any measure; I just wanted more out of it. Less of a survey, more detail. I was very comfortable with the author's knowledge of the occult, but less comfortable with his overenthusiasm and cute little quips when he wrote about things he was the most fond of (or so it seemed to me).
tittypete's review against another edition
2.0
Meh.
In this book occult is a vague word. It means magic, Golden Dawn philosophy, theosophy, spacemen, satanism, acid trips, prog-rock and having a pyramid on your album cover. It seems anything can be occult as long as it's not a song about love. And even then that could be construed as some magical otherness that is now certifiably counter-culture and occult. My main complaint I guess is that every topic broached in this book is super duperficial, a passing mention with tenuous ties at best to some cloudy definition of occultness then on to the next barely connected example. Academic it is not. The whole thing seems to be a comment made in passing. I could have used an in depth primer on the history of occult thought and it's non-musical impact before reading that "Yes albums were occult, period."
On the potentially positive side, I am now listening to Yes and Hawkwind.
In this book occult is a vague word. It means magic, Golden Dawn philosophy, theosophy, spacemen, satanism, acid trips, prog-rock and having a pyramid on your album cover. It seems anything can be occult as long as it's not a song about love. And even then that could be construed as some magical otherness that is now certifiably counter-culture and occult. My main complaint I guess is that every topic broached in this book is super duperficial, a passing mention with tenuous ties at best to some cloudy definition of occultness then on to the next barely connected example. Academic it is not. The whole thing seems to be a comment made in passing. I could have used an in depth primer on the history of occult thought and it's non-musical impact before reading that "Yes albums were occult, period."
On the potentially positive side, I am now listening to Yes and Hawkwind.
jeriklein's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
3.0
Despite the amazing title (and cover art) Seasons of the Witch: How the Occult Saved Rock and Roll is not actually about the occult. In fact the author isn’t even a believer in the occult, doesn’t truly understand the occult + is not a practitioner of the occult.
His bio on Amazon says he studied religion and writes about fringe topics, but none of that comes through in this book. He also assumes the reader already knows the artists/bands/songs referenced throughout the book, which I did not, so the joy you get from doing a deep dive into topics you already know was lost on me.
If you have a solid musical education on rock from the 60s - late 80s, and do not care if the occult is accurately represented, you may enjoy this book (clearly I’m not the demographic)
a_monkey's review against another edition
3.0
I really wanted to love this book. Bebergal is a lively interviewee with a clear passion for both strands of this story. But much of the narrative felt very introductory and there was a lot of padding-material rhapsody regarding the righteous riffage of rawk that I can only hope might have seemed less perfunctory to younger audiences less steeped in these sorts of cliche.
One chapter will skim through occult theory or musical ephemera so lightly as to make the book itself seem bored with the subject matter; then the next will meander deep down interesting side-roads without managing to bring things back to the matter at hand. It felt underedited — again, Mitch Horowitz, the book’s editor, is a big name in his field with a fascinating command of the subject matter — and unsure of its own remit. And it’s a hard story to fuck up, and hard to imagine any reader coming away without at least a couple of new things to think about or listen to.
But like, we know David Bowie is good. Surely a history like this can do better than that!
The top review on Goodreads points out that this is a real sausage fest, and light on the sort of arcana that anyone picking up this book should safely be assumed to gravitate toward. I’d definitely agree with those assessments. If anyone reading this can recommend any more insightful or indepth excursions into the same sort of wheelhouse, I would be all ears.
One chapter will skim through occult theory or musical ephemera so lightly as to make the book itself seem bored with the subject matter; then the next will meander deep down interesting side-roads without managing to bring things back to the matter at hand. It felt underedited — again, Mitch Horowitz, the book’s editor, is a big name in his field with a fascinating command of the subject matter — and unsure of its own remit. And it’s a hard story to fuck up, and hard to imagine any reader coming away without at least a couple of new things to think about or listen to.
But like, we know David Bowie is good. Surely a history like this can do better than that!
The top review on Goodreads points out that this is a real sausage fest, and light on the sort of arcana that anyone picking up this book should safely be assumed to gravitate toward. I’d definitely agree with those assessments. If anyone reading this can recommend any more insightful or indepth excursions into the same sort of wheelhouse, I would be all ears.
kellyofcali's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
2.0
While very informative, I found it quite boring - it read kind of like reading someone's thesis, which you'd only be interested if you really loved the subject...which I don't. But hey, if you're into rock history and the occult, this is the one for you!
Content Warnings
Graphic: Drug abuse and Drug use
Moderate: Addiction
Minor: Blood
caitlintremblay's review against another edition
1.0
Imagine writing this book and not mentioning a singular woman.