This book was highly recommended to me by several people and by the authors of books I've read over the years. I'll have to remember that when deciding who to send birthday cards to and who not and what books to pay real money for. It's supposed to be a fantastic book on magic(k)al practice, for beginners but not for beginners. Now I know why that particular description fits. The thing I fail to see is how this book is supposed to be useful to anyone. If the reader is approaching the subject for the first time the author's attitude and the general approach would be daunting and tend to scare any beginner away from trying to do anything at all. The bar for the least magical practice is said to be so high that few could hope to ever even begin if the author is to be believed. But I get ahead of myself.

The book is filled with the most amazing statements. I can't resist quoting some of the best. It's like seeing the trailer for a movie that shows off the most amazing computer-generated effects. When you see the crashing helicopters and mile-long alien worms you know where the movie is going. When you read this sparkling prose, you'll have a good idea how the rest of the book is written and what the author's attitude toward his readers and the subject is. It's the Plan-9 from Outer Space of books on magic(k). Unfortunately there's no Tor Johnson, Bunny Breckinridge, or Vampira to add interest as they did in that movie. I've spoiler marked one of these because it's racist. If you don't want to see it I don't want to make you see it.

“Christian magicians who failed in their art now had the Devil, and the loss of their souls to Hell to fear, according to the theologians.”

Oddly enough, not so. Faust wasn't doomed until Marlowe, who himself was a member of the School of Night and widely suspected of being an Atheist. There's a hidden story behind this change. In earlier times it was believed, so far as I know, that even the most unreconstructed practitioner of magic, mayhem, and murder was redeemable if they repented of their sins at the last. That's not a part of the modern view of things or rather the popular modern view of the superstitious past, which the author obviously subscribes to. I tend not to assume people of the past, including the ancient past, were so ignorant. Which naturally leads to another lovely quote.

“Only superstition remains in the culture of the American Black.”

Thank you for informing me of that mister Mickaharic. He refers to 'the blacks' many times as well. The discussions of Afro-Caribbean religions and magical practices is completely disjointed with bits of reality sprinkled among the wildly varying descriptions. Which leads to his descriptions of working with spirits of the dead.

“Even the most skeptical dead will believe in an existence after death.”

What? I don't even. The author is discussing the common walnut that the dead are no more wise or powerful than they were in life. I'd be willing to buy that principle (more on that later) in general. This particular statement is just weird. It's like saying that fish generally believe in fish.

“Working with the dead, like all other modes of magic, can be a rather tricky business.”

Yes, of course. Nonetheless the author fails to explain exactly what the pitfalls of working with the dead are or even how to work with them in the first place. This is a constant one-note song in the book. Mentioning something amazing but giving no clue as to how is is supposed to be achieved. He also says that if you have a morbid bent of mind you might be suited to working with the dead. I suppose this is an obvious observation. It fits with the rest of the author's painfully obvious observations. Now onward to the development of basic magical abilities, which according to the author requires the preliminary exercise of astral travel around the house and moving large objects telekinetically.

“Eventually the best students will be able to move a weight of about fifty pounds, or up to about a third of their body weight, using their astral forms.”

Like so many other things in this book Micaharic never explains how this is accomplished. A few chapters later he explains how to develop telekinetic skills to the most amazing level by just relaxing and willing things to move. That's it, but according to the author it's much too difficult for you and you'll never develop any ability whatsoever without a teacher who probably won't accept you because you're so pitiful and most students drop out anyway. That's the only explanation given and this is similar to other things in this book stated from authority with no further expansion. I have yet to see anyone move fifty pounds of anything telekinetically. As they say, pics or it didn't happen. But these days it's amazingly easy to fake videos so it would be hard to confirm such things one way or another even if it actually occurred. Now to the discussion of elemental or natural magic. The author can't seem to decide which to call it and so switches forth and back between the two.

“One of the physiological indications indicating an ability to work with elemental magic is having pointed ears. These 'Dr. Spock' type ears are not very common, but they usually are an indication of people who are able to communicate deeply with nature.”

I know and have met many people with a deep connection with nature. None of them has pointed ears that aren't made of plastic. I suppose in the future I should seek out people with Williams Syndrome (aka. WS, WMS, or WBS) who match this description. According to him they must be talented in elemental magic in addition to having congenital intellectual and heart defects. Also, 'Doctor' Spock generally refers to Benjamin Spock, not the character in Star Trek. I don't think he meant the author of books on childrearing.

This is one of the author's attitudes that come up repeatedly in the book and seriously put me off. Authors generally refrain from generalizing about types of people in these ways unless they're speaking through the mouth of a bigoted character. I have to say that I don't much care for it. One or two generalizations are forgivable but the attitude is constant throughout the book and it really grates on me.

Another thing that's grating to me as a reader is the use of the word principal in place of principle. Shouldn't an editor have caught that? Maybe the editor is unaware of the usage of principle in an esoteric context but it should still be obvious that this is the wrong word.

The final chapter, “Not In Conclusion” actually contains some good advice. Much of it contradicts statements earlier in the book. The author sometimes contradicts himself within one paragraph so that's par for the course. The book isn't entirely devoid of usefulness but I would advise anyone starting out with magic(k) against reading this book or at least taking it seriously. ( )

It's an intro to magic that gives the reader first contact to several varieties of magical practice.
The author writes in old-school style, so those who may be interested in reading this book might be put off by Mickaharic's seemingly terse, conceited, and condescending tone. But it's not another book about Wicca, let alone traditional Wicca, nor is it a book on ceremonial magic, although it does mention it as one of the types of magical practice.
If you were to meet someone like Mickaharic who had even half the training in real magic, you would probably find that he or she would sound a lot like this....which would probably not sound so pleasant to American ears. But if you could tolerate it, you could at least appreciate the honesty.
Mickaharic covers several forms of magic which I could probably split off into an even smaller number of only two categories: One depends a lot on faith and the other depends heavily on natural ability. Not a lot of authors will admit anymore that for a person to practice real magic well you should start out with being a natural at it. Most will lead you astray by letting you assume that anyone can do magic. That's only partially true. This author will pretty much tell you like it is, that there's a major difference between someone only trained in magic and one who's a natural. It's the same way with an actor, counselor, politician, or soldier. Naturals are just far better at what they do, and you can totally see the difference. The reality is bitter to face, that you can train and study and practice and put your heart and soul into it, and then some noob comes along to blow you away with their abilities like it's beginner's luck...all the time. However, the same author will also tell you that a trained magician is still better than an untrained natural, even though a well-trained natural will still be better than a well-trained ordinary anyway. So you think you should give up and change lines of work now? Well, if you can get yourself to admit that you don't have what it takes to be an elemental-, plant-, or even ghost-whisperer, well, there's still always practicing magic by faith....
The author covers six modes of magical practice: Religious Ritual, Ritual and Ceremonial Magic, Deific Magic, Death Magic (or Communing with Spirits), Elemental Magic, and Natural Magic. Personally, I feel these groups can be reduced to about three because, for example, dividing Natural Magic in two by call the other group Elemental wasn't necessary. (Incidentally, Natural Magic is one of those kinds that you actually need natural intuitive abilities to be good at it. You can't just learn it and hope you can be this amazing animal-, plant-, stone-, or whatever-whisperer.) Neither do I totally agree with how he names his classifications. But it's cool.
What I do agree with is just how long it takes to learn this stuff, and that you're better off training under a teacher rather than to do it yourself New Age style. The practices he suggests you do on your own, until the teacher appears, may not be the only ones you ought to do, but they're satisfactory. Also, Yes, his stress on personal development I totally agree with. Any legitimate and respectable religious, magical, and psychological philosophy ought to be able to train its adherents in effective self-development before letting them even consider something like mystical or magical training. If you're not psychologically together, things can go anywhere from living nothing more than a personal delusional fantasy life to stuff going horribly wrong. So yeah, the not-so-fun, boring, frustrating work of self-development should come first. And no, I'm not thrilled to say that, but you got to start with the basic building blocks first.
Anyway, it may not be a fun read, and it may be a splash of ice water in the face for some, but even with what I consider its inaccuracies, I would still suggest it to beginners. Don't take every word in the book for gospel of course, but consider what this guy is basically saying overall. Magic is tough work. And no, it doesn't look at all like it does in the movies. No bells, no whistles, no special effects. Just results.
Rant over. :-) ( )