Letter 35: J. Alfred Prufrock to Severus Snape, 15th September 2000

A/N: For simplicity's sake, titles of books, journals etc are underlined and emphases are italicised. In reviving the old tradition of epistolary novels, I understand the plot may be a little slow, laborious and difficult to follow. Some might consider it AU and a little OOC.

In order not to weary the reader's patience, a number of letters from the series of correspondences have been suppressed; those only have been given which appeared necessary to a complete understanding of the events in this group. For the same reason, some letters from the actors in the events of this drama have also been suppressed.

Proestigium or What the Seasons may Bring

Letter 35: J. Alfred Prufrock to Severus Snape, 15th September 2000

J. Alfred Prufrock

15 Windswept Terrace

Hetty's Fields

Leeds, West Yorkshire

United Kingdom

15th September 2000

Snape,

Do my eyes deceive me? Or have you started another debate with Hermione Granger in another journal that she decided to carry over into Ars Chemica? In case you haven't noticed, she reviewed Epistemological Alchemy by Arsenius Jigger and Severus Snape. What are you going to do about it? Don't tell me you will sit by and do nothing? Do you realise that others may uncover the secret too? She's addressing your work to your face, Snape; just WHAT are you going to do now?

Regards,

Prufrock.

In case you have not read it. Here's how the review reads:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ars Chemica, Vol. 1206, No. 9.

Review of Epistemological Alchemy by Arsenius Jigger and Severus Snape, Telos Press, Cambridge, 2000.

By Hermione J. Granger

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In Epistemological Alchemy, the authors' postulate the necessity of believing in the possibility of an alchemical utopia by treating philosophical potions ironically. Keeping this in mind, one realises that the title is a pun on the idea of necessity. Necessity, in this case, is something that fills a need, which, if left unmet, would diminish the quality of private or public life. Of course, this is all very well for the authors. What the authors have in mind is captured by Oscar Wilde's remark that "a map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth glancing at." What this means is simple – we have to consider whether utopia has been exhausted as a project and discredited as a body of thought. However, such a view is a sad commentary on the present situation. Obviously, this sentiment is shared by several other notable scholars in the field who contend that our social imagination in alchemy is abandoning us at the point where we most need it. Yet, faced with the dizzying of contingency in the history of alchemical theory vis-à-vis culture and society, the authors are convinced that everything can be or could have been other wise. Our alchemical culture is too dull to generate innovative solutions. Unwaveringly, it continues along this vein. Accordingly, for all the theoretical talk on epistemological alchemy, the field seems comatose in the sort of crisis that used to inspire it to visions of alternative futures. Radical but validly, they prove that most of us no longer live our lives in compliance with nature or tradition. Each chapter points out the fact that there is no longer any order in modern practical alchemy; as such, a change is needed. Susceptible to such views are modern students who only wish to concentrate on the palpable results of alchemy without due consideration of the theory and philosophy behind it. Evidently, they have proven that things that seemed self-evident – whether to have or how to feed and educate a child, how to relax and amuse ourselves, how to proceed with alchemical education, how and what to eat – have become colonised by reflexivity and are experienced as something to be learned and decided upon instead of just lived. Verily, we have become too knowing and critical, too proudly self-aware to tolerate the so-called 'idealism' of epistemological alchemy.

Ernst Hornby's theory that the first sense of necessity in philosophical alchemy is depended in the loss of impulses driving one's study of empirical potions brewing is discussed in this book. Regardless of the end and loss of radical philosophical alchemy posited by Hornby, the authors disagree with the well-ordered state of constant surveillance on the brew. Utopias in the field of alchemy are impossibilities and constant watching of a cauldron will do nothing to aid one's cause. Such utopian fantasies as pictured by Hornby and his proponents are criticised by the authors because they are characterised by mind-numbing routines. Sameness is not something the authors condone, for they acknowledge that no two potions, even those brewed by the same hand, are the same. Not withstanding the fact that collective rites are internalised in most potions students, the authors' go against their natural love for order and oppose these schemes as anti-utopias within the discipline. Apparently, the first sense of necessity celebrates the opening up of alternatives and possibilities; this second one suggests a closing down of political imagination and perhaps of politics itself. Pandora's myth, as laid down by Nietzsche, is called to mind in this case. Expectation in alchemical theory, he argues, was released last not because it would make other evils endurable. Noting that, the Jigger and Snape claim that it was released last because it was the worst evil of all for all true students of philosophical alchemy. Obviously, the reviewer agrees with this view for no sane person would be utopian. Moreover, necessity's third meaning is a variant of the second. Obviating the trappings in their language, it would be found that the sole concentration on alchemy without its philosophical base (which students think necessary) leads to the depletion of energy and ability. Potions philologists would argue that Jigger and Snape are unfairly erasing necessities in their anti-utopian view of epistemological alchemy. Rather than opposing these views, the authors' so-called detractors have fallen into the trap of underestimating Jigger and Snape. Epistemological alchemy is dependent liberation from necessity, the satisfaction of human needs, and the end to suffering, war, predatory hierarchies and private property. Therefore, powerful repository of utopian aspirations are kept alive in this book, not least because it has kept alive a vision of a universal way of brewing potions theoretically (and imperfectly) could be redeemed by the productive capacities of capitalism harnessed to the humane ends made possible by philosophical alchemy.

En soi, this redeems the student if the theory is consulted hand-in-glove with practical alchemy. Notice how the most ironic testament to the resiliency of utopianism is how quickly and completely utopian philosophical alchemy is when compared to the triumph of commercial potions. Snape, in his chapter, likens the esoteric reading of epistemological alchemy to adultery because philosophy in alchemy and potions is a placeholder for more sustained kinds of transformation. European tradition will, however, debunk his idea on grounds of impracticality. I beg to differ. Having impugned the philosophical nature of nature, we are unable to understand it. An effect of this failure is chaos in the classroom where students blow cauldrons due to the lack of understanding on the philosophical theory of the potion. Virtually every school has its share of such students and careful observation will prove the authors and myself correct in our surmises. Even Thomas More acknowledged this in his seminal work on esoteric potions in Utopia. Leaving aside the other political implications of the epistemological study of potions, the reader may be struck by the fact that the distance separating theory and practice in alchemy is the fallacy the book tries to address.

Owing to this, the book can be seen as a measure of the failure of modern students to consider philosophy in alchemy. Veering off the topic in chapter 10, the authors consider epistemology on its own. Elaborating on the opacity of most potions masters who are only concerned with increasing the number of students passing their subject than understanding it, the authors criticise the way in which potions masters are trained. "Exile would be too kind an option for those who do not expiate for such heinous teachings by concentrating on the theoretical aspects before actual brewing. Divinity, then, becomes a dimension of epistemological alchemy. Oracles and their divinely inspired riddling utterances are able to discern knowledge and meaning in alchemy. Naturally, the irony in this case lies in the recognition of meanings outside direct speech and of the subtexts of texts. Laird, in his review, dismisses this theory as utopian and ironic in itself. Yet, this is precisely the point the authors wish to make.

Once the reader dismisses the authors for their apparent inconsistencies, he has already underestimated them. Never do that! Every due consideration must be made to respect the authors. Mistaking the authors' genius is not an option. A certain way of looking at it is to realise that they already know of the inconsistencies in their work. Never entertain the possibility that you are more intelligent because you can spot their apparent contradictions. Instead, entertain the possibility that some of the apparent mistakes they make are deliberate. We will learn so much more if we take the debates they engender with good grace. In short, never think that you are smarter than the authors. Limitations in the human power of gauging things (especially something as volatile as potions) and the way we are used by the language even as we use it aids in our understanding of epistemological alchemy. Looking at this way, we will grow to have a new appreciation of theoretical potion brewing. Neo-modern philologists would dispute with me by saying that there is only way of looking at anything. On the contrary, it has to be acknowledged that there are these contradictions engender new debates. This makes the texts relevant in all situations across all time periods. Looking at it thus, it is easy to understand we still study Nietzschean potion theory and Platonic philosophical alchemy. Oddly enough, scholars in ancient Greek theoretical potions do not try to render their field to our changing times. Socratic potions brewing is heavily based on the logical sequences of nous and spirit; when these are incorporated into the potion, its effective is doubled. Evincing this further is the 5th chapter of the book which details the history and logic of Socrates' teaching. However, it is written in a manner that must be taken with a fair pinch of salt.

I have made my case for this book in this review. May it bring you as much intellectual stimulation as it did me. To all those who are put off by the theoretical nature of philosophical alchemy, I advise you to take it slowly so as to appreciate this art. What you learn here can be applicable to every field of life. In reading it, you will broaden your mind to the ongoing debate in the field. Consequently, you will arrive at a new understanding of muggle philosophy and the ways of our world. Every serious student of alchemy should acquire it.

Footnotes

Proestigium is Latin for illusion. Ironically, the English word Prestige derives from it.

There are three layers of meaning in the text of the review: (1) the response to the journal article mentioned above, (2) the hidden message within the text, and (3) the intellectual exchange of the review hides an indirect appeal to Jigger/Snape. This tripartite layer of meanings will continue to hold for the subsequent review articles.

If you extract the first letter of each of the review's sentences (notice that I stress sentences, not every capital alphabet), they read, "I KNOW WHO YOU ARE, SEVERUS SNAPE. NO MORE PRETENSE. I HAVE LOVED ONLY ONE MAN, I WILL NOT LOSE HIM TWICE.

Why did Hermione supposedly feel that she lost him twice? (1) When Jigger/Snape explicitly told her to concentrate on her education in Letter 32, (2) when Snape refused to meet at her Hogwarts to give her his 'Do's and Don'ts of Potions teachings'.