BIRTH OF TRAGEDY

Issue No. 4, November '86 - January '87

Special Anniversary Edition
The God Issue
Anton LaVey
INTERVIEW BY EUGENE ROBINSON
Anton LaVey is doing public relations for Satan. After 2000 years of possibly ju
stifiable bad press and recently in the form of LaVey and in the tradition of th
e sepia-toned tough guys, snap brim Fedoras, dangling cigarettes, and dead-end s
wagger, the self-professed head of the Church of Satan, author of The Satanic Bi
ble, and The Satanic Rituals, LaVey is in demand.
A one-time police crime photographer, concert pianist, and sideshow hand, LaVey
has weathered associations with the likes of Jayne Mansfield, Marilyn Monroe, Jo
hn Travolta, Hollywood Babylon author and film director Kenneth Anger, as well a
s appearances in Roman Polanski's Rosemary's Baby, technical advisor stints on s
everal other films, and the administration of the Church's brisk business activi
ties, to cruise into middle-age, a rich and satisfied man.
Corralled for the GOD Issue in the name of equal time, LaVey spoke at length on
God, Christianity, and the Church of Satan. Enter Here.
BOT: I noticed you used the term "Satanic" quite a bit in the Washington Post pi
ece. When I think of "Satanic," I think "of Satan," but I feel there is a differ
ent flavor to the way you use it.
ALV: I mean Satanic in the sense of a philosophical concept, a realm, or a state
of being that would best be described as a lifestyle, an outlook, an attitude,
as opposed to a Gothic stage set which is what most people consider when the wor
d "Satanic" is mentioned. Though certainly scholars have thought other of Gothic
stage sets because I've read the term "Satanic" used in the context of which we
're speaking.
BOT: Now you were speaking of the third stage?
ALV: The third stage, in the sense of a gyre, or the concepts that evolved as a
result of man's need or animal's need to develop beyond this instinctual stage,
as you described it, are almost...well, they necessitate as they always have, bu
t more now than ever before because we're going through this state of flux, a so
rt of separation. A separation in the sense that there is no bearing whatsoever
on past rules, regulations, or standards that have been set either by societies
or by individuals.
BOT: So that's where we are now?
ALV: That's where we are now.
BOT: The old laws don't mean anything.
ALV: They really don't. Unless, you could say, atavism would certainly surface a
nd there's a certain degree of subjective response, emotional response to things
even though we have exploded all of the rules and regulations...there's that ge
rm, that seed, that will probably never go away anymore than basically people be
ing sort of offshoots of different types of other creatures...there would be alm

ost, if you go back to certain animal types - there are leopard types, there are
dog types, there are bovine types of people.
BOT: That's what we see happening now. We get the sense that the old laws don't
mean anything because we see people with strong instinctual desires acting them
out, often in direct opposition to those of the civilized society. That's the at
avistic thing, going back...but now I see people striving. There seems to be thi
s kind of massive subconscious striving towards something.
ALV: I call it, almost, a return to a romantic attitude or an evolution if
ish. Probably more of an evolution because, unfortunately, the romantic of
ast was also a dunderhead. I mean most of them were pretty, let's face it,
d-in people and that's why they were romantics because they were living in
tain insular world of their own.

you w
the p
locke
a cer

And now there is a new breed or new class of people emerging...I could call them
the new romantics. They have burned the books and broken all the rules of the p
ast but want to take that which is gratifying and feel something that is not pro
grammed or that is not an option within a strict set of brackets.
BOT: This seems to be a striving that lots of different people have gone through
...Christianity seeks to deal with non-desire within society. To live in the wor
ld but not of the world. Buddhism speaks of non-desire outside of society...sequ
ester yourself inside a temple. Now, what is your approach to your idea about de
sire? How does that fit into the new romantic?
ALV: Well, as far as the concept of the anchorite or the monk or the monastic co
ncept...the best of both possible worlds, burning the candle at both ends, whate
ver you want to say, it would be total environments. It would be the sort of thi
ng...one would live in the way that would be most gratifying to himself or herse
lf while realizing that in the outside world, in the marketplace, there were cer
tain survival needs that had to be accounted for. Namely, being able to relate t
o other people, other situations, and primarily mask, I call, conformity or popu
larity. I feel that what is probably the greatest enemy of longevity is populari
ty. Quite literally. If only they could, like the vampire legends, remove themse
lves, just sort of say as Groucho used to say, "Whatever it is, I'm against it!"
If they could just take a little bit of that...not be real rebels or real alien
s, but just enough so that they could run from the contagion of popularity, then
they would have this breath of fresh air occasionally. That perhaps would rejuv
enate or energize them.
BOT: O.K. But these are people who believed in, to use my terminology, the 2nd s
tage. You're saying the new romantic needs to or desires to or should be able to
grasp this rebellion and use it as fuel, but still mesh?
ALV: Right! I think that if they can't do that then sooner or later they're goin
g to find that when they mesh they're going to be uncomfortable enough so that t
hey will be doing it less and less of the time and eventually what will evolve w
ill be a sort of stratification...it certainly will be a stratification, but the
new stratification, and this is of course what I said when I was a kid, 14 or 1
5 years old, should be based on no previous pedigrees of any kind but simply whe
ther or not a person can pass the sensitivity test of being one of the new elite
, one of the new class of super people. If this sounds of course fascistic, so b
e it. I've been accused of being everything from extreme left to extreme right.
I do believe that with a certain degree of stratification, people could be a lot
happier because water simply would seek its own level. As long as there were ha
rd, steadfast rules, if there were going to be any rules imposed, that there wou
ld be no ethnic, no past pedigree restrictions whatsoever. I think of course Hit
ler's greatest mistake was in, not his bringing together some of the things he t
ried to bring together, but by of course employing the racist concepts that he d

id, he lost everything. I mean, who knows but he would have won the war if he ke
pt the people around that he considered inferior or his adjutants considered inf
erior.
BOT: O.K., so what we're attempting to do then is forge a new law but now, pragm
atically, what does that have...
ALV: I know where you're going now. It's based on the premise that people beg, t
hey plead, they insist on being lead and there are only so many leaders and so m
any followers and those who are leaders are going to be leaders regardless of th
eir birth right, regardless of their schooling, regardless of their knowledge of
the world. There's just something about them that's going to be that sort of qu
ality.
BOT: When I said pragmatically, I was narrowing it down even further to "how do
I funnel my desire?" I mean I can't return to instinct and it's impossible for m
e to live as a civilized person...civilization is destroying us...we know that.
So, O.K., we've got this stratified new law society...What do I do with my desir
e? Before, in an instinctual world, I would act. If I was hungry, I would eat. I
f I was tired, I would sleep, etc. In a civilized world, my behavior was proscri
bed such that I ate at certain times and slept at certain times. Now the old law
s don't mean anything so we get rid of them. But in the new society, how do thes
e "new romantics" funnel desire in light of the new laws? This is important beca
use this is where the discontent with civilization arises, in its inability to r
elate to desire.
ALV: Right. That's absolutely right. They find people, places, outlets that are
conducive to these desires and certainly, there is enough for everyone who would
have these particular desires. There are these desires obviously on the part of
people, what you're getting to, who are purely atavistic and who would feel "No
w why can't I do this? If so and so does this? Just because he happens to have p
assed some sensitivity test or happens to be able to speak in certain tones, or
verbalize in a certain way. Why shouldn't I, who cannot, be able to do the same
thing?" I feel they should be able to do the same thing, but with people who wou
ld be, basically, not brought down by this. So there again we're dealing with st
ratification. It shouldn't be psychic vampirism...where the strong constantly pu
ll the weak up at the cost of their own strength. And if you have worked and str
uggled to place yourself in a position of supremacy in any given field then you
may feel, as a form of stimulation, that it's nice to give a helping hand to som
eone...it may give you a sense of gratification, a sense of well-being, but if i
t suddenly depletes or enervates you and you find that this intensifies to the p
oint where you're just sapped of all your strength at the expense of someone who
started out, perhaps as a form of gratification or stimulation...this is the es
sence of psychic vampirism.
BOT: The slave has become the master.
ALV: That's right. I coined the term "psychic vampire" and I see it all over the
place. I realize that it is a very real phenomenon that occurs especially in ou
r society because weakness, ineptitude, inadequacy is championed in many ways. T
he fine scholar is given, virtually, not nearly the opportunities that the retar
ded one is. (laughs) Of course this is necessary to balance things out eventuall
y.
BOT: At the expense of your strength you should not compromise yourself to engag
e in what would rob you of your strength. But back to Hitler, in a Jungian sense
, his ego and his self, who he was and who he thought he could be were the same.
In that sense he ingested everything into his reality and in that sense there i
s no compromise. "This is my world and these things are mine because I want them
to be." Again, desire...

ALV: That's right. Well, he didn't compromise himself nor did he really force an
yone, I would imagine...I didn't know the man so I'm not rash enough to presume
to speak for him...but I would imagine that his intimates were not forced into h
is presence at gun point.
So he said, in a sense, as I would say or anyone else in a semblance of power wo
uld say, "Welcome to my world! If you like it or you feel comfortable, if it's y
our bag, your thing too, then we'll enjoy ourselves." Otherwise the door swings
both ways and I'm not going to keep you around if you feel that it is abrasive.
BOT: Well, this kind of gets back to the question I had on the romantic thing. T
hat is, desire unchecked is the fountainhead of conflict. If you or I desire the
same object, then desire has lead me to be in conflict with you over something.
There seems to be a standard lurking there; asserting itself...
ALV: There is. The standard is, if it's appealing enough and if it encompasses o
r embraces enough...now we're talking about romanticism...of the ingredients, th
e stuff of which a person's fantasies, dreams, or inclinations happen to be made
then that would be the standard for entering their world. That would be qualifi
cation, that would be reason, that would be rationalization enough for entering
that world. Just simply because it met with one's sense of well-being to be clos
e to that source, that fountainhead. I know people who often share common intere
sts and make the mistake of solipsism. They become convinced that just because s
omeone out there likes whatever and I like the same thing, they feel "he's just
like me and I'm just like him. We really have something in common."
We all practice this to a great degree, so in the broader sense, I see where you
're coming from. There are going to be a lot of people that say "This looks grea
t" or "This sounds great, because I feel the same way. I like this therefore I b
elong in this grouping or that grouping," or whatever. They are not necessarily
eclectic people, they're just people that find...I deal with them all the time,
the "Oh, such fun!" types. I mean they want to have a flirtation with Satanism o
r a flirtation with one thing or another, but they want to keep their foot on th
e safety aisle and not put themselves on the line. That's, of course, fine, but
it is solipsism. I mean they think, "I'm interested because I dressed up on Hall
oween as a witch," something like that, "That makes me the same." (laughs)
"Satanism could become the major religion of the 21st century."

BOT: Entering your reality through the gates of The Satanic Bible I am to unders
tand that the lawlessness that will be necessary before entering the third stage
is something serious.
ALV: Sure.
BOT: It's therefore something to be resolved. Now, why within Satanism are there
any standards?
ALV: In other words, why not just nihilism or chaos?
BOT: No. Not chaos, because chaos implies no sense or nonsense but as an old mem
ber of the third stage, if I desire something, it's mine already.
ALV: In other words, why a need for a structure?
BOT: Right. Laws don't guide me.

ALV: Well, I don't feel that laws should be necessary for the basically honest m
an. I feel laws are, obviously, made to be broken because as soon as one is pass
ed, someone is going to find a way of circumventing it. And someone who is just,
intrinsically just, not moralistically or biblically or theologically just, but
I'm talking about the concept of how they would like it if such and such happen
ed to them, and using that as the only yardstick and finding if they're going to
find victims, suitable victims, because the world certainly abounds with them.
I mean there are a lot of people who wish to be taken advantage of or fettered a
nd this is the wondrously honest thing or refreshing thing about outspoken Satan
ism. It recognizes that the world is made up of people who do need rules, who do
need fetters, who do need direction and institutionalism and we cannot dismiss
that. But then that doesn't mean that these people will not be in this area or t
his capacity as opposed to the other capacity.
BOT: I remember from your book, you saying the things people do are from basical
ly selfish motives. I could kind of ameliorate that and say...
ALV: Yeah, they are basically selfish.
BOT: Well, I could interpret that to mean whatever a person does, they do for th
er own pleasure...that feeds into the idea of "why shouldn't I?" If everything t
hat everybody does is ultimately pleasurable to them, then everybody is responsi
ble and anything I should desire to do is basically with someone's else's agreem
ent, even if it doesn't appear that way. For example, robbing someone on the str
eet...obviously that individual wants to be robbed or he wouldn't be...
ALV: I see nothing wrong with robbing somebody on the street. I shouldn't probab
ly say this, if there is some indication given, tacitly given, that that person
is really setting himself up to be robbed. I mean this is really getting into th
e hardest core of the hunter and the hunted and we're getting into the strongest
elements of Satanic thought. That doesn't mean that I advocate robbery. It simp
ly that there should be, ideally, but there cannot be, a sort of arrangement...n
ot rules, not regulations, but an arrangement whereby the hunted know they're th
e hunted, the hunters know they're the hunters and that's it.
A little more self-awareness on the part of the human beings, the human animals
of this world would go a great deal toward affecting some advancement for mankin
d or some progress, I think. And that is what I deplore because man can understa
nd his scientific demands and send space shuttles up and do all kinds of things,
but he can't look into the mirror and say "Now look! I need to lose, I need to
fail. Why don't I exorcise it or exercise it some way, get it out of my system.
Maybe then I'll be able to function a little better with other creatures of my o
wn species."
"I feel that what is probably the greatest enemy of longevity is popularity, and
most people die of popularity."

BOT: Maybe he doesn't do that because he wants to lose, he wants to fail in that
regard also.
ALV: Well, if he wants to lose, why shouldn't there be enough understanding on t
he part of his fellow creatures and enough understanding on his part to recogniz
e these things? Possibly it is because we are so inculcated with guilt that we t
hink that weakness is a sin or that it is some crime against nature to be submis
sive or to be receptive in a way that would be submissive. I say there is nothin
g wrong with that.

BOT: Your pleasure is from your delusion, and if you're honest with yourself the
n you're not deluding yourself. So to stay happy, you have to delude yourself.
ALV: Yeah, but I think the superior person can step out of himself and say "It's
fun to fool myself." In fact this is what I go into in The Satanic Bible and Th
e Satanic Rituals. It's sort of like entering a decompression chamber. It's like
saying, "I know I'm deluding myself. I know this is fantasy. I know I'm not bei
ng honest with myself. But it's the best way for me to do it." It's like politic
s, sort of...if they don't want to say who they're going to vote for, at least t
hey get behind that curtain and they know themselves and who they're going to vo
te for. Basically this is what they would realize, that is, "I am this way." But
how many people can even recognize, much less admit it to themselves, for a fle
eting instant from time to time. And if there were not these societal pressures
and then again we're getting right back to the dying of popularity...societal, p
eer pressures inculcating essentially, "We shouldn't think these thoughts. They
are dangerous and unhealthy."
BOT: They're inimical to the second stage.
ALV: That's right. If we could get away from that sort of thing it would probabl
y be easier to step out of ourselves, see ourselves as we are and then enter the
ritualistic sensations of the innocent or the truly naive. It's entering a subj
ective state with an objective knowledge...that need to be subjective. And that'
s what would separate the third stage man and, of course, Yeats would agree. I'm
sure.
BOT: Because you don't want to suspend the critical mind because then you're mak
ing believe that something that is there is not there...
ALV: And then you expunge the critical mind, you destroy it, you annihilate it a
nd without the critical mind you certainly cannot continue to be free. Because f
reedom begins in the mind, freedom begins up here. (points to head) It doesn't b
egin anywhere else. If you can't be free up here...
BOT: But then you also mention "guilt" as a negative thing. I always thought gui
lt was a good thing. A sink of delusion will fill and guilt is the plug, the rec
koning.
ALV: I think guilt is great in that respect. I think what we're dealing with is
a semantic interpretation of guilt. In the sense that you're describing, guilt i
s akin to responsibility and I feel that that is absolutely necessary because if
a sense of guilt is akin to responsibility and if that's how one responds to or
handles a particular encounter or situation by these checks and these barricade
s that are called "guilt," then it's a very positive and productive thing. When
I say guilt, I mean unfounded guilt. I mean unreasonable guilt. I mean guilt tha
t is nonproductive guilt - nonproductive to oneself and is imposed as a sort of
collective thing.
It's sort of like being enslaved because you find a master who is worthy, a pers
onalized selection...who is respected, who is someone you feel you can enrich yo
ur life from as opposed to being enslaved by the system, being enslaved by an im
personal set of principles, being enslaved by a set of options that you don't da
re break out of. That's the worst kind of slavery, as far as I'm concerned, and
we haven't even come that far, because if anything we are enslaved more as human
beings now than at any time, probably, in man's history. But it is so sugarcoat
ed, it's so slick, it's so polished.
BOT: How do you move out of that guilt? I mean, if we are born into it, if it's
part and parcel of civilized living, it's insidious because it's always there. A

s with anything you can use it anyway you want to use it, but people currently u
se it to grind themselves down with what they should be doing, what they're doin
g, what they're not doing etc., etc.
ALV: The dilemma is how do you move away from it, from unwarranted guilt or the
nonproductive guilt. I would say through a form of non-religious exorcism that w
ould be ritualized. I've performed such exorcisms many, many times over, where o
nce this ritual or ritualizing was taking place and it has destroyed, it has has
shattered the fabric or the framework of these guilts that are nonproductive an
d the alternative is that it will invest these guilts with a conscious level of
enjoyment so they can be applied towards stimulating further ritualization.
"We are so inculcated with guilt that we think that weakness is a sin or that it
is some crime against nature to be submissive."

BOT: If the mind is the seat of freedom, the body of spiritual life, how does th
is doctrine of carnal exercise feed the process of freedom?
ALV: Now we're getting into Rasputin's concept that the best way to deal with te
mptation is to yield to it and that the highest form of spirituality is the carn
al and this is the seat of all spirituality. I believe that too. I believe that
in yoga, the kundalini concepts, the whole idea of the sensual or the carnal is
the closest to a foundation of what in an ephemeral or abstract state would be s
pirituality and if it can simply be defined as bedrock or a foundation in carnal
ity or through carnality, then it can surface in a much purer from. I'm not alon
e, obviously, in my beliefs but I feel this is one of the things that people hav
e spent centuries trying to get away from, trying to run away from.
So I'm not in a sense
pun intended, when it
planes. And you have
n touch with yourself
g is to do it through

putting down atavism because atavism is where it's at, no

comes to foundation of all so-called abstract or spiritual
to start again with first things first, if you can't get i
and satisfy yourself physically, then the second best thin
a mental or abstract thing.

BOT: But there is a distinction maintained...you are going from someplace to som
eplace and whether you've done an atavistic return to bedrock carnality and use
that as your springboard or whether your mind frees itself of itself...you're st
ill going somewhere. Where is that?
ALV: The journey?
BOT: Well, if we are exercising what is carnal within us in order to free our mi
nds, exercise our souls, how does the doctrine of carnal exercise achieve that e
nd? If you're shackled with things of the body, you use the body to lose the bod
y, but where are you then? In Buddhism it's a non-personal state.
ALV: That would depend on the boundaries, one's abilities, capabilities, that on
ly the individual can discover because after first things first then would come
the next stage in their development. It's sort of like the Schmenge Brothers ans
wer is pretty much it. I think they found after they got their rocks off carnall
y and they were looking for somewhere to go from there, maybe they found there w
as nowhere to go from there and that would be the sum total of their experience
or their journey into spirituality. (laughs)
BOT: Where have you found yourself?
ALV: I find myself able to do a Hell of a lot more as a result of it. I find mys
elf after my appetite is sated one way or another...saddened sometimes, energize
d other times, but certainly not the same. I find myself able to progress into s

ome sort of creative work or some sort of contemplative state or if nothing else
just a desire to go to sleep or a good meal or something like that.
BOT: So your journey brings you back?
ALV: Sure. It's like going to church for some people.
BOT: Nietzsche speaks of going from willing and desiring to pure contemplation,
unwilling ideation and then back again. The lyrical poet creates in that moment
of pain, of coming back from. Traditionally you engage in some mystical union.
ALV: Well, the entire concept is based on exteriorization. It's just exteriorize
all the way down the line from the first wellsprings of religious training to t
he highest plains of religious thought, it's exteriorization all the way. Even t
o the point where they claim, "I'm at peace with myself, I have found God within
my breast," and that sort of thing is a result of constant exteriorization as a
sort of training ground.
And I feel the main difference between that concept and the third stage concept
which you've described, or the Satanic concept, is that the total training probl
em from beginning to end, is based on finding more wonders within oneself or ret
rieving ones from past experiences that can be augmented into something much mor
e stimulating or more enlightening. And drawing from the wellsprings that start
out as one's unique experiential birthright and bearing in mind at all times tha
t this is drawn from many, many sources, centuries past. But it is still interna
lized rather than externalized. And then the sum total of all this internalizati
on and studying oneself is to be able to function as a more efficient machine in
an exterior way. In other words it's just the opposite. It's to be able to move
about in a more well-oiled, well functioning way.
BOT: There are extrinsic approaches to religion which have you exteriorizing, bu
t then there's the mystical path which says the ground of being is the soul, lik
e what Meister Eckhart talks about. If you're a virgin in the soul, if you have
nothing, then you've reached the ground of being.
ALV: Well, I'll go along with that for some people. Yeah, I would say that is an
other of the rarities of Satanism as a lifestyle and that is it takes into accou
nt different strokes for different folks. Incorporated into this concept that is
the eclecticism that is Satanism, would be the awareness of needs that would no
t be purely concrete but abstract or spiritual as well. It's just that the appro
ach should always be with an awareness of that this is "my way" of doing it, of
attaining or of reaching towards the goal of a more gratifying life and of cours
e returning full circle to what you addressed earlier and that is the concept of
Satanism being selfishness, rational self-interest. That says it all. Because w
hen you become irrational there's only one person who suffers for it and that's
yourself.
BOT: How do you define rational self-interest?
ALV: Being able to relate to
rder to maintain or continue
s that. In other words, when
irrational about it. That's
You are just cutoff from the

what has to be related to in order to survive, in o

what your self-interest would be...it's as simple a
the well starts to run dry then you've become a bit
the yardstick. You don't have to have a rule book.
parts, so to speak. You're not having fun anymore.

BOT: Do what you want, but don't get caught?

ALV: Do what you want as long as it's paying off for you. But once it's become a
liability, then something is wrong and you better find out what it is.

ON CHARLES MANSON
BOT: I noticed in the Washington Post article you said that Manson and Ramirez (
the Nightstalker) were insane and I've been under the opinion that they are not
insane at all. It's very convenient for us to think they are insane so we don't
have to take responsibility for understanding that they are like us. But did you
have a different flavor when you...
ALV: I probably may have said they are flaky or they're sky pilots or one thing
or another and they're not playing with a full deck. Obviously that doesn't mean
that they're not aware. I know they're aware of what they're doing because Susa
n Atkins (one of the Manson family) supposedly wrote a book in which I am blamed
for her whole dilemma in getting involved with Charlie and everything else beca
use of her previous association with me, which was a fluke in the first place be
cause she happened to be a topless dancer in a place that I was doing a witches'
review.
She was a junkie, she was strung out all the time. She'd come into work and said
she had a fever of 108 degrees and things like that. So she wasn't necessarily
insane, but she was certainly flaky and by the time she met Charlie Manson she w
as probably just made to order. But when she wrote the book, she obviously wante
d to get her parole in motion by saying she found God and had seen the light - a
nd blaming the devil for everything. That was obviously not insanity, that was p
ragmatism on her part. If the authorities are dumb enough to buy that type of th
ing, lord help all of us. All you'd have to do was say, "I believe" and you'd ge
t away with anything and there's been too damn much of that in the world already
. That's why Satanism expects people to take the consequences for their actions
and there again we're coming full circle to the thing about indulgence or the ra
tional self-interest...well, when the gravy train starts to run out...
BOT: I thought you had said Manson's pursuit of self-interest was insane because
it stopped paying off?
ALV: Yeah, well, I'm crazy, but I'm not stupid, hopefully. And I think we're all
a bit crazy if we do anything that's deviant. I've studied a great deal on devi
ance and aberrant behavior. Most of the interesting people I've ever met have be
en deviant in one form or another, or alienated and one of the transitional tool
s or explanatory means towards this third stage is the glorification of alienati
on. I believe this accounts, magically, for a great deal of renewed or increased
or new interest in such outlets as film noir and the whole noir concept of the
darkside or the anti-hero. All of these things are pure Luciferian philosophy or
personification and therefore the whole idea of the alienated being proud of th
eir alienation is something that will act as a vehicle toward this third stage b
ecause there will be more characters, more nutty people who are productively nut
ty. More and more crazy people who are Promethean-like crazy, hopefully, or at l
east stimulating or interesting and not socially disruptive or destructive.
BOT: The glorification of alienation and its other symptoms were signs that thin
gs were more wrong with our time than were wrong with us. A clarion was sounded
for the end of the 2nd stage, civilization...the anti-hero had become the hero.
ALV: And that's usually the way it works. The villain becomes the hero, eventual
ly, if you wait around long enough. I've seen this so much with people I've been
fortunate enough to meet or been inspired by...the alienation makes them much m
ore heroic. I remember going to see Paul Robeson in concert, years and years ago
, when this guy couldn't sing in the Opera House and people had to wait around t
he block of this little old church building to see, watch, and listen to him sin
g. I put him on the dedication page of The Satanic Bible because the guy was a N
ietzschean superman. He was so multitalented and so charismatic. Also, he was a
terribly dangerous, dangerous man because he could work within the system but wo

rk without the system as well, and the fact that his politics were such that he
was alienated, terribly alienated, was enough to eventually destroy him but did
not lessen his power or influence or magical influence on today's world. Chaplin
was another guy. He was absolutely alienated from this country although there w
ere still people who went to see his films, and then the tide turned and they sa
id, "We are sorry for the way we've treated you. You can come back now. We'll gi
ve you an honorary award." He was castigated - unfairly, alienated, and was, in
my eyes, a much greater man because of it. I can think of many people who have b
een alienated, who I've met in my time who subsequently, historically, have prov
en to be not only noteworthy and great, but household words.
BOT: We're steeped in that tradition.
ALV: Especially in America. We tend to create greatness or encourage greatness s
o it can be destroyed, and then rediscover it so it can be sold back.
BOT: Is it economics?
ALV: I have reason to believe that it's all economics aside from my own personal
theories. I feel there is a need to reduce or destroy or declass a person who h
as at one time been great, so that then they can feel that their own inadequacie
s are less. And America, being a rather fickle nation...fads, trends, popular co
nceits...America is more fast paced and has a higher mortality rate than anywher
e in the entire world. So it stands to reason, in a hermetic sense, that we woul
d create and destroy our heroes just as fast. It would also make something like
film noir a uniquely American phenomenon...just like the Western. This also mean
s that villains, too, could wind up being heroes much easier than they can in ot
her countries. That's at least a saving grace. (laughs) It's like the clock that
doesn't work, it's right at least twice a day.
ON THE CHURCH OF SATAN
BOT: What about the Church of Satan?
ALV: Well, one of the reasons I started the Church of Satan is that there was no
thing else around...like the Little Red Hen, I had to do it myself. I studied Cr
owley and met people who were involved in the OTO and other occultniks. These pe
ople are either parasitic in some ways philosophically of the Church of Satan or
else they want to dance but their feet won't let them. They want to be on the d
arkside but they have to do something that is going to make it O.K. They can't j
ust say, "Satan, you're my man." I think it's somewhat refreshing to be able to
say "I am a Satanist."
BOT: Well, you told the reporter from the Washington Post that you didn't believ
e in God or Satan.
ALV: Satanism is not an anthropomorphic thing. I don't have much truck with thos
e that want to learn the names of all the demons and stand within the pentagram,
etc., etc. All of these are credibility devices to give people a feeling that t
hey're doing something. Now, if they really want to do something why don't they
go out and write something about jazz or musical theatre in America or write abo
ut optics or structural rigidity. Play the violin or something. I mean this is s
o damn ephemeral, it's really like hanging out one's shingle saying, "I'm an exp
ert in the black arts. I'm an occultist." That doesn't really say anything and l
eaves a pretty wide open field for people who can't do anything else. If it soun
ds like I'm weary, I am, because I've had twenty years of it and before that, wh
en I was ghost-hunting and doing all of these things on my own with the Magical
Circle. I still listen to all this kind of thing and find, at best, that it is a
dubious achievement or calling to be able to say that you're an occult magician
.

"The best way to deal with temptation is to yield to it...the highest form of sp
irituality is the carnal."

BOT: So what does it mean when you say, "I am a Satanist"?

ALV: It means that I am able to be free up here (points to head) and say it and
not worry that the lightning bolt is going to strike me. I think that that's the
first step. We're coming back to the roots of our conversation now...What are t
he steps? What's the way from the second stage to the third stage? That's one of
the ways of getting to the awareness of oneself, one's own motivations, is bein
g able to be free in the head. That seems to me to be the easiest thing in the w
orld to do...but it obviously isn't for a lot of people because it's such atavis
tic horror.
BOT: O.K. So you freed yourself from one thing but you've stepped
else. The only religious scholar that I'm familiar with that has
himself from what he freed himself to , has been Meister Eckart.
point in his Commentary on John where he says you've got to loose
d...you have to have nothing.

into something
actually freed
These comes a
God to gain Go

ALV: Well, that's like EST or certain elements of Scientology or some of these b
asic self-help things where the individual is reduced to the level of a cipher,
starting from point zero and building himself up again. I don't feel the need to
do that, but for some people the options are there, within Satanism. Pretentiou
sness is the cardinal sin of Satanism. I can't stand it in any form unless it's
fun, unless it's laughable, then it's different. But pretentiousness in the sens
e of humorless pretension is abysmal to me. I don't feel the need to get down on
the floor before I can bear to to get up and sit in a chair because I've never
sat on any sort of ornately carved throne. I've never presented myself as having
spoken directly to Satan or God or anyone else or being in touch with any sort
of divinity or having any kind of special mandate or power or influence, even. I
just feel that what I'm doing is something that I do because I must, because it
's part of my nature and, critics, analysts, whatever, can interpret it as they
see fit. I also feel that the man who sleeps on the floor never has to worry abo
ut falling out of bed. I slept on the floor most of my life anyway. I don't have
any pretensions about my life being some sort of sacred or holy vein or message
or oracular kind of meaning. If things happen as a result of my magic then so m
uch the better. You can't fault someone for trying.
"There should be, ideally, but there cannot be, a sort of arrangement...whereby
the hunted know they're the hunted..."

BOT: So when you say, "I am a Satanist," is that the same as saying "I'm free"?
ALV: Yeah. I'm free of the first repression. At least the first theological or t
he first societal repression or the first civilized repression, that is nonprodu
ctive civilized behavior. The ancients did not look upon their devils as necessa
rily evil, as you know, having studied theology. Before Christianity these divin
ities or tutelary symbols or forces were looked upon with a great deal of awe be
cause they represented something. But they were not necessarily, intrinsically e
vil. The whole concept of Satanism is that it might be unpopular but it's not ne
cessarily evil. Everyone at one time or another in this country was considered d
iabolical. The Indian was the red devil, the Chinese, the Irish - and they were

the ones who in a lot of cases were the biggest bigots.

BOT: Does evil exist?
ALV: I'll go along with the Nietzschean concept that the superior man must go be
yond good and evil. And evil does exist for me, it really does. And if you want
my definition of evil, I'll give it to you: what doesn't feel so good, what pain
s you, what hurts you, what you find abrasive, what you find unpleasant. Good is
what feels good and don't think anyone can get beyond that kind of subjective a
ttitude of good and evil if they really look within themselves. They can go by y
ardsticks or guide books about what is supposed to be evil but at best these thi
ngs are arbitrary on the part of a vested interest who wrote the books. We're ge
tting back to economic reasons. Que bono? Who gains? What's in it for whom? Befo
re I approach any given situation or evaluate anyone's assumedly altruistic gest
ures, I can't help but to cynically bring to bear that phrase, Que bono?
BOT: Backtracking, for you to say, "I am a Satanist!" is the first in a series o
f freedoms?
ALV: Yeah. Not for me personally, but I find it to be almost universally so for
the people I've encountered, a liberating attitude.
BOT: Why is it different for you?
ALV: Because I never felt a particular freeing when I said it. I never felt the
particular repression that needed to say it because of my own religious upbringi
ng or lack of same - my own iconoclastic nature as a child. I found it very easy
to say, not realizing what horrors I was invoking for others to have to subject
themselves to, and then when I see the liberating process taking place because
of this "Hail Satan!" - this admitting to Satanic affiliation, then I realized h
ow stifling it must really be...and to be released with a semantic term like tha
t. And that reinforces in my own mind how powerful the science of semantics is.
I've been interested in that my whole life.
That answers the question, "Why the Church of Satan?" Because I know the power o
f certain words and the implications that they have in people's everyday lives a
nd when something loses its impact, it becomes ineffectual. So again, alienation
is often very powerful if you use it to your best advantage.
BOT: Would you consider yourself a symbolist? A semiotician? A metaphysician? Ju
st a guy?
ALV: Symbolism is certainly the big part, the symbology of Satanism. I see mysel
f as a guy just trying to live the way I want to live. As I said earlier, if som
ebody wants to come into my world, welcome. There's plenty of room. It's not goi
ng to get overcrowded, but if it does, knowing the propensities of Western cultu
re, it could become the major religion of the 21st century. And if that's the ca
se, I will still have my alienated shadow world that I will pridefully feel is a
vant, that is removed or apart from the herd. It's like in this state of flux, o
f alienated flux as a prime mover for what's out there.
BOT: Or to keep from getting absorbed...
ALV: Right. Avoiding the contagion and maintaining, if not an immortality, a lit
tle more unique level of stimulation during my lifetime.
BOT: There was a tone of resignation at the end of the Washington Post article.
ALV: Yeah, well there was...the sorrows of Satan, as Baudelaire called them...th
e weary dismay of the Satanic characterizations have rubbed off on me. I don't t

ry to deny it, I do lapse into states of melancholia, but it's not because I'm a
n unhappy person, it's because I'm a very happy person in a compulsively unhappy
world. People make problems. They encourage, they augment problems for themselv
es. I am dismayed by this because I feel that this rich earth that we have here.
..why do people insist on making life rough on themselves? Why buy into mass cri
sis or or public dilemmas that are really not part of them, despite what John Do
nne would say, "No man's an island." I don't buy that. I think that no man proba
bly is an island, but some are a little more able to close the door behind them
on popular fancies and popular worries and woes. So the third stage man will not
be woefully inadequate. He might be inadequate, but not woefully inadequate. He
will probably be jubilantly inadequate and there's a big difference.
BOT: I thought you were going to say he wouldn't be inadequate at all.
ALV: No. The stoops will still be stoops.
BOT: If saying, "I am a Satanist," can be liberating, what about saying, "I am a
Christian!"?
ALV: That takes a lot of balls to say that. I feel like saying, "Yeah? You and w
ho else? How many other million people?" It's so easy to be in the majority...th
ese crusaders against evil...what are they going to find, one guy who is a littl
e bit different? They are real brave, aren't they? It takes guts to be a rebel,
to be alienated and functionally alienated.
BOT: Do you think the great majority is Christian?
ALV: I think the great majority would like to be different, but they don't dare
because they're afraid of the consequences. I think most people want to be led i
n one way or another and will follow anybody with a new concept. That's why a bl
ack-draped Satanic chamber with just a couple of black candles and a couple of S
atanic symbols is so damned dramatic and people will run to photograph it, where
they can walk down the street and photograph all the gold and trappings and ico
nography on a Christian church and not ever pay much attention to it. There are
certain symbolic acts that are hard to follow and we pretty much have the market
cornered on that. BOT