I can't comment yet...but if it continues as it is here, I can agree with it. I wonder however, whether the difference between a sorcerer and necromancer is in actuality that different - personally, it appears as if there are individuals that are both sorcerers and necromancers combined.

Thanks Craig ... well, wait, this essay is not finished yet ;) ... gravity problem will be dissected. Yes, it is not the only difference; but IMHO, the main difference between the escapist and Deleuze-Guattarian sorcerers and necromancers. Yes, there are many threads of sorcery which are combined (esp. in the left-hand path and Cainite branches of sorcery); i'll try to discuss them. But the main theme of this essay is the difference between necromancers (is it really about death or the dead? one of the crucial questions about necromancy) and those sorcerers who use lines of escape, in particular DGon escapist sorcerers. Since Sorcery is too diverse (with multiplicative lines), i could only select one thread of sorcery, the escapist sorcery which is very significant in the works of Deleuze and Guattari.

...magick represents diversing lines of intersections and explorations that resembles the diversing lines found in the continually explored musick of the dj (...read the linear notes to the early works of dj spooky and realise his splicing of deleuzian/ guattarian terrains into his musick and setting forth the seeds for the current dj nations and tribes that continue to intersect: diverse: and continued changed and changing...) -

as a black cherokee male with strong shamanic tendencies: i can tell you that within the shamanic community there exists diversing levels to enter as a shaman and there doesn't exist per se the hard cold 'facts' other than shamans are the navigators into spaces that intersect and diversifies into further ongoing expanding/compressing space and spaces.....

the essay here though i will add to my personal litany of study and studies......

Thanks Osa! This gives me more space to open the discussion. ... yes, i have read Paul D. Miller’s texts inspired by DG and De Landa.

Yes, as you know, and as i mentioned in my previous comment on Craig's note, the multiplicity of sorcery does not allow you track or focus on particular issues (and esp. on discursive or transcendental levels) so the only way to pseudo-analyze some issues is to ‘reduce’ or select a distinct thread or branch of sorcery. The one that I am examining here is the escapist sorcery or those sorcerers who interlock with DGon Line of Escape. This branch of sorcery is one of the most general trends in Shamanism / Sorcery. If DG also frequently discuss the line of escape and rigorous escapism, it is because one of the most common and general traits of sorcery and shamanism is ‘initiation’ (triggering or engineering a shamanistic (S) / sorcerous (C) function); From Crowley to Elide to Coyajee the phase of initiation (and initializing the S/C function) is usually connected to a process of levitation, both symbolic levitation as a very common tendency among Asian shamans / sorcerers, and non-symbolic lines of levitation. Levitation is, in fact, the function through which one becomes free (or levis: light) from certain restricting factors like the State, processes of Subjectification, etc. which work through their own forces of gravity and try to prevent / obstruct the process of initialization (or domesticate the initialization of S/C function); to this extent it is somehow a general phase for S/C lines. Levitation or ‘levis’ (becoming light / free) on the pattern of ‘gravitate’ (or gravitas as it will be discussed in the next parts) is also corresponding to ‘Flight’. Levitation as a particular line of flight (which DG adore passionately and also warn about its negative functions) is the function of the line of escape (cutting through the states of gravitas or evading them).

This notion of the 'Levis' I find fascinating in terms of the lightness it suggests, the sorcerer (in terms of the line of escape that you make your subject)...the sorcerer as escape artist, surface skimmer, pond skater on limited surface tension.

My own analysis of DG and sorcery takes a line of descent in that I find the atavistic drop rather than the levitational leap to be closer to the practical experimentations with sorcerous metaphysics I carry out. This is more Spare influenced however but also relates perhaps to something like the love of the abject (in a sort of inversion of Kristeva perhaps). Necromancy may be closer to this atavistic practice perhaps.

Interesting blog, will return to see more.

Thanks very much ... the next part (part III) elaborates ‘levis’ and the problem of ‘gravitas’ (How does the State, grund, etc. use the force of gravity to seize or even utilize the function of ‘levis’ and the line of escape?) ... but still a long way to the chapter about necromancy.

BTW, visited your site ... v. interesting ... I’ll definitely add it to our coming blogroll.

Very nice site!