Recently, we’ve had some lively debates here on the issue of the Simon Necronomicon, with some excellent questions being asked. One item that has been raised is why John and I didn’t interview those who used the Simon Necronomicon in our book, The Necronomicon Files. As Warlock puts it,
While Dan Harms seems to convince his followers that he is conducting some sort of sincere research in his examination of the Simon Necronomicon, much like an adolescent with a video camera attending the set of a porn movie, Harms has never interviewed any Practitioner of the Simon Necronomicon.
That analogy sounds like a really compelling reason not to conduct those interviews, no matter which way you read it. Still, I’ll try to answer.
To be brief: when John and I were researching our book, it was in the early days of the Internet. Now, serious Necronomicon practitioners are still pretty scarce online; I can name perhaps three off the top of my head. Back then, there were considerably fewer people online, and most of those who practiced the Necronomicon in our area were either non-existent or didn’t advertise. Simply put, we didn’t run into anyone who seemed sincere or credible enough to interview.
That didn’t mean that we didn’t include views from Necronomicon practitioners in our book. Even at that time a few books on working with the Necronomicon, written by someone other than Simon, had been written, and we spent considerable time and a little expense to get and review them. None of them proved very persuasive. You can read more in the book itself.
It’s likely that, if the Files were written today, we’d get more perspectives from Gatewalkers, or even Simon himself (we’d try, anyway). Nonetheless, at the time, we had to do the best we could.
Next post, my take on the Simon Necronomicon as a spiritual system.
Papers Falling from an Attic Window 
The analogy was a metaphor, somewhat comical, meaning that the uninitiated (adolescent) trying to explore the Greater Mysteries. Anyway, if you read my entire comment I do give the possibility that the scarcity of GateWalkers at the time was probably the case. I am sure that in your upcoming article, about the Simon Necronomicon as a spiritual system, you will feature an interview.
Because after all, your sole purpose in life should be to fulfill Warlock’s ever-shifting demands.
It’s not about fulfilling my demands. I try to answer Harms observations and he does the same. I am hopeful that our debates have shed some light on the thesis presented on both sides of the coin, which should help our readers obtain a wider view of the subject contained therein. I have a great deal of respect for Harms and his work. Debate has played a big part in the history of the Greater Mysteries and Religion. When such a practice is abandoned ignorance soon follows. Although I disagree with Harms about his observations on the Simon Necronomicon he has still made a priceless contribution to the Necronomicon Tradition. The Necronomicon Files does provide information that is not readily available but valuable for the GateWalker-such as a definition of certain herbs and other valuable information that can aid both perspectives. The research that goes into presenting a debate is an act of love for the reader and everyone involved. A game of chest can take a long time to finish. The winner only gains what everyone has observed
I think it’s a very honest point Warlock Asylum is making. You have to try the system before you can say anything about it. Unless of course you subscribe to the idea “it will work if you believe it works”. In which case, you subscribe to what I believe is a faulty idea that worshipping and praying towards anything is as good as anything else, and faith in itself is the beginning and end achievement of all enlightenment. This discounts all spiritual growth completely and in that case any sort of phenomena related is because you put your mind too it. In which case Rhonda Byrne’s “The Secret” is your bible. But in the defence of Daniel Harms and John Wisdom Gonce III it is very true, you are an incredibly rare breed, Warlock. I myself have been researching the Necronomicon for several months now and have only really found your work and this very blog in search engines. I believe you have taken the Necronomicon research to a new level. The book was released in 2003 and your blog’s earliest entry is 2008. Perhaps a revised version could appear with practitioner accounts, even then I’m sure few practitioners would be up for sharing such personal experiences. I admire your passion Warlock and can see why you would be upset when you have done so much for the authentication of the tradition but I don’t believe harm was meant by Mr.Harms and Mr. Gonce’s research. They simply arrived at their own conclusions based on the resources at hand. For example In my personal experiences, I never would have given the system a second glance if I hadn’t met someone who used it, and had clearly achieved success in magick. I too would have let my scepticism get the best of me.