Obsession with the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky split
The online text/selections from In Search of P. D. Ouspensky opens with the now frequent obsession of many books (cf. Patterson’s Struggle of the Magicians), and takes a refreshingly skeptical view of the split between Gurdjieff and Ouspensky. This has already been discussed here, the issue of Gurdjieff’s near rape of one of his female students being, in the claim of Orage, the reason for the final split. This resulted in Ouspensky trying to separate the teacher and the teaching.
The problem with that is that subsequent teachers, if that, have simply abandoned the whole framework of Ouspensky (and Gurdjieff) as a kind of dead end. Thus the efforts of the two proved efficacious only in the sense of creating a static movement on the treadmill of repetitious preoccupation with the outer surface materials.
But in the final analysis why shouldn’t Ouspensky have simply gone his own way. The self-destructive character of Gurdjieff’s own behavior almost made that inevitable.