BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Magical spaces and cultural signifiers

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
21:56 / 21.01.06
In Money Shot's thread, Haus suggsted that:
there is a chance that we have to accept that people in magickal spaces are also operating in privileged spaces - that is that they can write things that would normally be criticised. Personally, I don't think that works, not least because it's hard to work out what constitutes a magical space from the outside.

I thought that it'd be worth separating this out for a thread of its own, as it's something that seems to come up every so often.

I'm also very interested in this given the discussions in the Conversation thread about the Temple.

Are encounters with other cultures through magical experience different to those enjoyed through other means? Should/are the rules for relaying those encounters different, here in the Temple, in the wider world?

And can I think of a synonym for encounter?
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
09:51 / 23.01.06
[subeditor] Direct contact, interaction, exposure to, experience of, confrontation with, vision of [/subeditor]

Not sure where to start with this one. Complicated. I think that any unexamined responses to race that you might happen to have will be amplified massively when you are confronted with an entity of that race who is also the embodiment of something like sexuality, death, passion, or war.

For instance, as Mordant observes in Money$hot's 'old dog, new tricks' thread, it's difficult not to veer towards the use clichéd language when describing contact with something that so embodies a distinct principle to which we have an instinctive emotional response. If you were describing a confrontation with Thor, you could very easily find yourself guilty of relying on stereotypes of Scandinavian peoples and at some level objectifying the racial attributes of a certain culture. You probably wouldn't use such language normally, say, when talking about a Norwegian guy who works in your office - but when you are confronted with a raging, thunderous, primal gestalt of the Nordic temperament, and struggle to put that abstract visionary experience into words that adequately convey the larger-than-human majesty of what you encountered, the clichéd language is more likely to come to the fore.

It gets more problematic when you have instances of a Caucasian person describing contact of this nature with, say, an African Love Goddess or a Haitian deity who comes on like the gangster badman out of your worst nightmares. In my experience of deities, they do seem to play on your primal emotional responses to certain things, and they will show faces of themselves that get that sort of response out of you. They are not human, and different criteria for describing them may well apply in some cases. For example, if someone posted in the conversation forum about getting beaten up by a black man and described him as a being like a "primal jungle god" - that would be a clear cut example of racist language. However, if someone was posting in the Temple about their experiences of meeting Ogun, and they described Him as being like a "primal jungle God" a different criteria of judgement might have to apply because Ogun is a primal jungle God. Ogun lives in the wild forest, carries a machete, wears a lion skin, is bloodthirsty, animistic, terrifying. (Although He also might show you another face where He comes on like St George, the noble chivalrous knight in shining armour. Or He might appear to you like an 18th century Haitian freedom fighter, or a military general, or a Saracen Knight. These are all faces of Ogun. He is not just one thing).

So I would speculate that, to a large extent, the rules for relaying this sort of encounter are a bit different because you are not talking about a physical encounter with a human being, but a visionary encounter with a multi-faceted personification of a principle that communicates by triggering instinctive, emotional responses to archetypal (as opposed to stereotypal) imagery in the person receiving the vision. It isn't a human being. It's a deity. A deity can come on like a bloodthirsty jungle God if it wants to scare the shit out of you. A deity can appear like your fantasy "Queen of the Harem", if She wants to show you that side of Her mysteries.

But it's complicated, because when you are attempting to communicate what is often a complex, non-verbal experience using woefully inadequate language - or worse, text on a screen - your attempt to accurately relay the emotional content of the experience can veer into what would be cliché and stereotype if you were talking about another human being. Thoughts?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
11:39 / 23.01.06
I guess you could argue for a resolution by non-resolution: that the spirit-worker has the right to use any and all language ze feels is appropriate in describing hir experiences, and that hir interlocuters have a corresponding duty to interrogate that language if it seems to veer into ugly territory. That's of limited help, though; I think there's a real need to find modes of expression that avoid such marshy areas, but I don't know how one does that...
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
11:43 / 23.01.06
There's also the matter of describing interactions that, were they to occur between two humans, would be ethically indefensible or politically unsound. How do you describe an interaction in which being punched in the face by a God of War was a good thing without seeming to justify analogous violence back in meatspace?
 
 
trouser the trouserian
12:19 / 23.01.06
Are encounters with other cultures through magical experience different to those enjoyed through other means?

Interesting question - I can see resonances with the previous debates on cultural appropriation here, and a relationship to the wider debate over the politics of representation.

I think in general, I would agree with Haus. Although occultism is often perceived (both from outside and within) as a kind of 'hermetic' (in the sense of being sealed) space distinct from the wider culture, I would argue that it isn't, and that contemporary magical discourse is as influenced by hegemony as any other form of knowledge. Although this might not be readily apparent, particularly as hegemonic, or ideological power is often the most insiduous, as it precludes individudals and groups from even thinking of questioning a given situation where disproportionate power relationships exist.

Perhaps one of the most visible examples of occult knowledge reflecting and reinforcing ideological dominants is when so-called "occult truths" can be identified as representative of hegemony - something that was discussed at some length in the Gender-specific magick thread.

Whilst I can empathise with what Gypsy is saying in respect to attempting to describe contacts with deities, I still believe that it is important to recognise how we frame those encounters - the personal/cultural (and hence hegemonic) "baggage" which we bring to them. Take Kali for example - frequently depicted in terms of being dark, dangerous, destructive, lustful, etc., - the popular image depicted by Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - yet this is also an image that emerged out of European orientalist/colonial representations from the eighteenth century onwards. It's a representation which, emerging out of a particular ideology, has become 'factual' (googling for Kali+Crone for example, threw up over 26k of hits). It might be worth reviewing some of the comments made in this thread apropos of deities & cultural contexts.

...the spirit-worker has the right to use any and all language ze feels is appropriate in describing hir experiences, and that hir interlocuters have a corresponding duty to interrogate that language if it seems to veer into ugly territory.

But Mordant, that interrogation, has to come from yourself primarily. All too often, speech acts which reflect hegemonic discourse don't get challenged because people don't see them as as indicative of a problem. A friend of mine did a talk last year on queer paganism for the Pagan Federation Conference in Scotland (noting how many people who identify as queer have felt themselves to be excluded from mainstream paganisms), and she later said (rather dispiritedly) that she was overwhelmingly responded to in a kind of "we don't understand why you're making a fuss about this" way.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
12:35 / 23.01.06
here's an article which I think is relevant to this discussion:

"In order that the varying emanations of ideas around history, gender, 'race', identity and ethnicity and other issues do not slip the net, I will be seeking to identify the nodes each presently occupies on the web of pagan culture and to name the points at which this web is becoming entangled with that of the more dominant social structures in which pagans also participate. This piece will argue that current pagan praxis has the power to transform both, and to point the way towards a pagan ethics which would support this mutual transformation; but this first requires acknowledging the links between the two identities and meanings being allotted and ascribed to an ongoing construction of current pagan identity that may make that identity appear more fragile and contingent."
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
13:27 / 23.01.06
But Mordant, that interrogation, has to come from yourself primarily. All too often, speech acts which reflect hegemonic discourse don't get challenged because people don't see them as as indicative of a problem.

Well, this is where it all falls down, of course. If the person using the language doesn't see it as problematic, then anyone attmepting to challenge that language is going to face an uphill battle.

There was that incident here which Haus referred to in the other thread, where a poster known as The Fetch brought out the cocking Protocols of the Elders of Zion as supporting literature for whatever case he was making at the time. When he was duly pulled up on this and later banned, a lot of posters at the time were up in arms because they were fans of The Fetch's numerological analyses and didn't think a little anti-semitism should have been allowed to spoil their fun.

I was really just throwing the concept out there as a possible starting point. I think might be possible to have the kind of interaction I was mulling over, but only in certain special circumstances: if you set up a space within which more a rigourous approach to what's okay and what's not is taken, which may be very much at odds with what is generally seen as okay in wider society. Not sure you could achieve that on Barbelith.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
14:41 / 23.01.06
Well, this is where it all falls down, of course. If the person using the language doesn't see it as problematic, then anyone attmepting to challenge that language is going to face an uphill battle.

Yeah, but its still worth making the challenge, IMO. I recall years ago reading one of my feminist friends a goddess poem I'd written - which I was quite proud of, and her just sighing and giving me a lengthy breakdown about how she felt this articulated my attitudes to women and the cultural signifiers underlying the text. I was shocked, really, as it contrasted quite significantly with how I saw myself in relation to women. When I became interested in the whole cultural appropiation debate in the late '90's, it was largely due to some pretty intense conversations with various friends.

From the article posted earlier:

"If we believe in a web of life; one in which everything is interconnected, then we must believe in the reverberating effects of a conscious disentanglement, a conscious awareness of privilege and oppression, and the outflowing change the ownership of that awareness can bring to wider contexts than ours."
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
14:44 / 24.01.06
Lovely quote, trouser.

And a very interesting article, which I'm still chewing over. But on a first read, I really like the slant that suggests that it's a responsibility of the practioner to examine themself, and the culture they inhabit, in terms of negative impact.

Another quote from that article:

(That) the acknowledgement of our own oppressions carry the responsibility of acknowledging both our own privileges and the oppressions of others. Fighting for our own rights need not mean that we privilege our community's needs by ignoring or trivializing the day to day prejudice that other oppressed groups experience
 
 
trouser the trouserian
15:53 / 24.01.06
GGM - PDF article here from Jenny Blain (it's about 3mb) examining an article in Shaman's Drum in which an American shamanic teacher constructs an 'authentic Celtic Shamanic practice' (after a visit to Scotland) and the ramifications thereof. Writing of modern neoshamans, she says:

Practitioners, attempting to create identity, draw on popular categories, simplify processes, collapse millennia, and in doing so utilise the narratives of individualism-within-sameness that permeate the popular media interpretations of culture and inheritance. Present-day Western, Europeanised ‘urban shamanism’ is a product of Western, urban-orientated society, and it cannot be surprising that many present-day Western ‘urban shamans’, therefore, reflect their specific, geographical and temporal, contingent ideologies.

It's an interesting look at the cultural signifiers underlying what, on the surface, appears to be an unmediated, personal magical experience (I haven't read the original article she's critiquing, tho').
 
 
grant
20:11 / 24.01.06
from the Gallagher article: Perhaps getting our history and occasionally our geography wrong is part of constructing a pagan identity. But what might the consequences of such myth-building be? Might not the construction of our ideas about, for example, Celticity actually be 'culture-u-like' with knotwork, and undermine those voices struggling to be heard below the surface of that lumpenmasse identity; fighting for land-rights in Scotland, against racism and poverty in Wales, against war in Ireland, absentee landlords in Cornwall and against the demise of the Manx language in Vannin?

That bit terrifies me, in a way. Myth-building as necessity? I can buy that, but yikes!

Uninteded consequences... 'specially the parallels with dreamcatcher-style Real! Indian! Spiritual! Magick!. Starting to get that prickly formication feeling.
 
 
illmatic
20:51 / 24.01.06
That is a great article. I also liked her comments on paganism and universality (dealing with personal responsibility) :

There is a tendency, which expresses itself in a variety of ways, to place responsibility for the conditions of one's life at the feet of the individual. This is often taken up and applied uncritically and regardless of the specific context of the individual's life and the extent to which they may control events governing their situation.

... which I think you can see in magical discourse across the board. And reminds me of a lot of conversations I've had - though sadly few books I've read - about how the understanding of context is so important to magical practice. Understanding how you fit into a situation, rather, than trying to change it from outside while remaining unchanged, in control and "safe" yourself. (This is not exactly what Gallagher is arguing against, but is I related attitude, I feel).

I've been struggling to find something to say on the main topic itself, and still haven't quite articulated my feelings. No wonder, bearing in mind the complexity of the topic. We have questions of cultural appropriation meeting the ontological reality of deity, alongside the knotty poltics of representation. Hats off to Barbelith for even attempting it.

One thing that occured to me was that a lot of indigneous practices have - in their own cultural contexts (again) - distinct ways of addressing power imbalances. These means of engagement even provide fuel to the disciplines themselves. A lot of the dialogue in tantra, for instance, has evolved in response to a repressive caste system.

I'm sure you can find similar concerns in Voudoun. In the reading I've done, there seems to be a keen awareness of the exchanges of power between people of differing means and social status. I'm thinking of an extract where a financial exchange between Lourdes (Brown's subject) and her poor Haitian relatives is maked by the return of gifts in the form of massage and hospitality, which serves as a way of saving face and avoding embarassment for all concerned).

Not sure of the point I'm making here, if any. I just wanted to foreground the fact that the practices a lot of us are interested in have a keen awareness of power imbalances in their own societies and have evolved ways to address it.
 
 
trouser the trouserian
09:54 / 27.01.06
I'm sure you can find similar concerns in Voudoun. In the reading I've done, there seems to be a keen awareness of the exchanges of power between people of differing means and social status.

Yes, but perhaps we need to be a bit careful here. I do feel there's a tendency to valorise magical practices (wherever they hail from) and to not always closely examine how those practice articulate (or more often than not don't articulate) power imbalances. So you can have a 'belief system' which, whilst apparently challenging some aspects of cultural normatives (particularly when they're things we might see as 'repressive') and yet remain deeply ambivalent and conflicted about other areas. I'm thinking of the emergence of Buddhism here - 'radical' in it's challenge to "caste relationships" yet deeply ambivalent when it comes to the matter of women's equality with men (admittedly, tho' this is a huge area of debate).

here's an interesting article which examines fairly fundamental differences in morality between Christianity & Vodou, and in particular, how power is conceptualised in Haitian culture, i.e:

In the Vodou tradition, a victim is by definition in the wrong. The lwa have shown their preference for the victimizer by giving that person more power than the victim. A victimized individual is an object of derision, feels shame, and supplicates the lwa in order to obtain power to wreak vengean=ce on the aggressor. Misfortune of any kind is always the fault, at least in part, of the person upon whom it falls, because that person failed to adequately protect himself.

It's a rather challenging perspective, to say the least.
 
 
illmatic
08:44 / 29.01.06
Does anyone think it might be worth moving this thread to Headshop to get some non-Temple posters chipping in?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
09:24 / 29.01.06
I guess it might, but I really like having this thread here in the Temple. These are important considerations and it's good to see them addressed.
 
 
Seth
12:27 / 29.01.06
I’d prefer to see it stay in the Temple. What an excellent topic.

I apologise in advance if I offend anyone with this post, as I’m attempting to delineate a distinction that’s quite slippery but has emerged from my personal experience, that in many ways bears similarities to Money $hot’s (but in other ways definitely doesn’t). Now it’s possible that the distinction is actually non-existent and for that I’ll rely on my own after-the-fact thinking plus your thoughts to correct myself. If I fumble the ball here please err on the side of forgiving, as some of this is pretty personal.

Enough embarrassing safety net building…

For several years through my late teenage years and early twenties (but probably having its roots much earlier) I had recurring dreams in which figured sexual relationships with females of Asian ethnicity, specifically Chinese (although later in this account I’ll fudge even that specificity by giving an example that blurs over into a culture I know practically nothing about). Already I’m on shaky ground and in what Mordant might describe as Asian Babes territory, the “white fetishisation of nonwhite women.” This tended to crop up time and time again, and if I’m to be honest I chose to reinforce it in waking life with choices of porn and Chinese movies. More problematic still were the ways in which I was representing this to myself in my journals, which were pretty similar again to the ways in which Money $hot describes his experiences only without the potentially saving grace of describing a love Goddess. In waking life I’d have extreme reactions around women who I perceived as being *of this type* (the type being essentially of my own making, which was a predominantly unconscious process). And if I were to track all this potential misogyny back to a particular starting point then I reckon it probably began when I was dumped back in my teenage years by a girl who – to me – exemplified these characteristics, after which I rebelled into religious chastity as an escape from the pain (funny, as my early teenage growing pains surrounding my first sexual experiences were a rebellion away from my religious upbringing… I guess I wanted safe, non-sexual territory). These reactions to people I knew in the flesh were frequently very physical, shaking and getting tongue tied, etc. And once my limited brainpower had cottoned on to the fact that there was a pattern in all this, when I attempted to describe every instance of women who fit the pattern I would use words like “exotic” and “sensual.” Being honest about my journaling, there would also be accounts of them being “creative,” “forces of nature,” “tempestuous,” “highly emotional” and even “promiscuous.”

Reading that back, it’s classic Barbelith male growing up stuff: getting ditched and freaking out whenever you see someone who reminds you of the person, with all the attendant terror of women hidden beneath the surface. Hopefully this has the benefit of being honest, and possibly even good for a laugh.

Now the first step in dealing with all of this stuff was to take responsibility for it, to realise that it was all about me, really. Now here comes the crucial distinction that I mentioned in my first paragraph, the distinction that I suspect actually exists but am open to being proved wrong about: as is quite common in young blokes, a lot of these sexualised representations were accompanied by a lot of fear, shame, guilt and a basic denial of parts of myself. Essentially, I came to the realisation that the sheer number of times these women were cropping up in my dreams was my unconscious giving me a very pointed message concerning parts of myself that had become somehow dislocated, qualities in myself that my unconscious had labelled “female” in order to better put the message across. In short, it was a pretty classic example of what Jung would call *anima,* a term that I’m not necessarily sure I wholly believe in but use here because it fits my experience nicely.

The distinction is this: I knew there was something wrong here, something wrong about me. But if I’d have acted in a manner that denied these phenomena because their manifestation was extremely problematic it would have had the secondary effect of pushing that complex that my unconscious was trying to flag up further out of reach, in that telling myself it was wrong to feel this way I would have reinforced the fear, guilt and shame. If I had dismissed this message as Seth having an icky, pervy sexual predilection for Asian Babes sites it would have buried some important self realisation, and I’d have run further from Self-Awaria, not closer to it.

The first step was accepting that I felt that way and allowing myself to feel it. Then came the process of owning it all, of realising that I was that of which I dreamed. I was the one who was creative, sensual, flirtatious, promiscuous, tempestuous, exotic and highly emotional (not that you’d necessarily think “sensual” if you were to look at a chubby, bald-headed and extremely hairy bloke nearing his thirties). These are all qualities of Seth that I couldn’t recognise about myself because I’d chosen to do a complete about-face from my painful teenage rebellious years into a kind of utterly unreal religious sexual purity, denying my sex drive, being a committed Christian and entering into a sexless marriage with a – surprise surprise – Chinese girl (I’d like to add that this isn’t a commentary on my marriage in its entirety. I had a seven year relationship with a woman I loved very much, and any mention of her here will not do justice to her in the slightest, or the complexities of our relationship). I’d effectively ignored particular parts of myself and they were clamouring to be heard, choosing their own form until I was wise enough to capable enough to deal.

When I was doing my NLP course I deliberately used these internal representations in order to restore these qualities back into myself using an exercise called Change Personal History. This is extremely important, not only because as a result of the exercise I’ve never had those recurring problems again, but also because of the principle it demonstrates: in changework, utilise ANYTHING. It was always only the stuff of me, and as such it is my right to use it effectively in healing myself. To not allow it to come good in this way would have been to disrespect myself. If I had dismissed the messages I’d been flagging to myself as the product of vile wrong-thinking I could never have seen that it was a part of myself that I had othered, and never have utilised the principle that the cure is often contained within the symptom. Now I can allow myself to create, to be emotional, to fuck when I want to (should the opportunity present itself) and flirt when I want to (if the other person is up for it). I see those characteristics as a part of me, not belonging to someone or something else. Crucially the integration happened because I accepted my thoughts and feelings at an earlier, more unpalatable stage and didn’t judge too quickly or too harshly.

As a brief aside on technique, the exercise involved a trans-derivational search to find the earliest instance of a recurring problem, and then to introduce resources back into those memories and experience how your conceptions of your own life and your pain changes as a result. At the time I was working at the bank with someone onto whom I was projecting all of this, my unconscious had seemingly flagged her as the exemplar of everything about Seth that Seth couldn’t deal with at that time. I hope to God she wasn’t aware of any of this, it’s really embarrassing. To add fuel to the fire of all of this being totally theoretically unsound and potentially lying in areas questionable and icky, she was Vietnamese. The extent of my knowledge of Vietnam is from movies and what she chose to tell me, in effect all of my projections seemed utterly independent of who she was at any level. I’m not proud of any of this, and I’m not trying to make out that it’s all OK because it had a happy ending, but at least I can roll my eyes at myself. When I was doing the exercise and trying to decide what resource to bring to the problem, I felt her name instantly bubble up within myself, and I knew enough to trust the instinct. Sure enough it proved bang on the money and all of this stuff is historical past now. I don’t have those reactions any more. I integrated it all. It’s all a part of me again, and while I can’t explain it all I know I was responsible for my own healing as well as the life choices that led to the fragmentation in the first place.

Now that’s a gross over-simplification of everything, as usual. Every event has infinite causes and there’s far too much going on to adequately do it justice. I guess what I’m trying to say is that I’m taking total responsibility for this, for what goes on in my unconscious, even if I recognise that a lot more goes on in there than I’m capable of categorising or controlling. It’s my unconscious. It’s part of me, it’s one of the most important parts of me. It’s mine and I own it and I love it. I didn’t choose the gender and race representations that my unconscious flagged up to me, but I set the life circumstances – the parameters – that led to their creation, by fleeing from my healing process into a kind of religious emotional and sexual hiatus. And I don’t even regret that, as a lot of the best learning I ever did was at that stage of my life. But crucially, while I take responsibility for my life and my actions I also think that it took me years to unpick the tangle of pain and hurt and that I can’t judge myself too harshly for how I thought and felt.

So what exactly is the distinction here? I’m struggling to put it into words. I firmly believe that, as Trouser has been so eloquently writing upthread, these considerations should be taken into account. That they should be challenged. But this has to be balanced against an understanding of the type of changework that we’re engaged in when we claim to do magic or therapy or whatever you want to call it. How and when should a person be challenged? Are we always necessarily the one fit to challenge them? Many of us have a series of extremely well-rehearsed reactions that we go into when we feel we are being judged, and to couple that with deeply personal situations that are experienced in visionary or dream states that have a sexual element should be sufficient to flag to anyone getting involved that you have to tread extremely carefully and with an extraordinary amount of wisdom. This is not an easy area to deal with in the slightest, and it may concern relating to people at their most intimate levels, at the very basis of who they are.

I have no idea how anyone might respond to any of the above. I think it’s all safely past experience for me now, done and dealt with and healed up. I see it as a major success story in my life. Whether you see it that way is entirely up to you, and I’ll happily answer questions on it to the best of my ability. Again, sorry if that’s too much information, or if I’ve offended anyone.
 
 
Seth
16:18 / 29.01.06
I guess the distinction could be boiled down to: not everything you see in dreams is as it seems, and you'd be wrong to judge it too quickly. I was only ever dreaming about myself in terms of the qualities of myself that I was not comfortable with at the time, and that these were displayed to me in dreams as a female person of an ethnicity different to that of my own gave me enough of a representation of what was going on in order to eventually deal with it. That the entire experience was sexualised may make it more problematic for many readers, but I'm pretty sure this has more to do with the deep seated need to unite with this other half of myself, to become one... I guess you could look at concepts of the alchemical union being innately sexual, and that this manifestation was a desire towards personal wholeness rather than creating a fetish object.

I'm actually fairly terrified about how people might respond to these posts. It's about as honest as I've ever been here and I'm shitting myself about it!
 
 
Spaniel
17:39 / 29.01.06
Well you shouldn't, you've been spectacularly honest and, frankly, I'd be very suspicious of anyone who takes a holier than thou attitude. At least you've processed your shit.

Well done.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:13 / 29.01.06
A-fucking-men.
 
 
Seth
19:03 / 29.01.06
Thank you. I feel a lot better now.

Thing is, at that time of my life those qualities were only made intelligible for me as something *other* enough for me to get the message that they were part of *me* because they were condensed in a representation that was formed by my preconceived ideas about sex, gender and race. I’m thinking that in order to draw my own attention to my gaping personality holes I involuntarily and unconsciously conceptualised a body type and a psychology as different from how I consciously saw mine as I could conceive, informed by the general cultural prejudices towards East and West that are so manifest in our culture (tellingly, I probably unconsciously picked a physiology that originates from the location at which my religion is most notably absent of anywhere in the world). By a psychology different from my own I mean creative where I felt thwarted, promiscuous where I was repressed, emotionally tempestuous where I existed on some kind of numb equilibrium. I created a second self as my counterpart. And then conceptualised being in a love relationship with my lost self in dreams and saw myself everywhere I looked upon waking.

What’s fascinating me more and more as I examine this through the act of writing it here is that those preconceived notions disappeared as a result of embracing them and internalising what they said about me rather than trying to root them out and burn them as fetishized descriptor of the way I saw the world outside me… to the extent at which I wonder whether the reverse of the equation may also have been true, in which these prejudices did not exist until the schism that rent my personality (and I'm still not sure I understand that event, although I’m not convinced understanding one’s personal history consciously is as key to healing as many people think it is. I think I understand enough to avoid it happening again). I certainly don’t remember them earlier than the age of about sixteen, seventeen.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
19:32 / 29.01.06
(I just want to say thankyou for being so honest, and fucking brave, in writing this. *Manly pat on the back for Seth*)
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
00:39 / 30.01.06
Seth, that is a very beautiful exposition on a very complex subject , and I thank you for your honesty and willingness to share. Awesome.

Your identification of this as *anima* is exactly, spot on, ahem, the Money. Your post summed up many angles of what I would like to say about this.

I don't think it needs pointing out, but your post, and my thread which lead to this thread, are extremely personal. In fact, I now am of the opinion, after that marathon, that these things should remain discrete and private. They are a specific communication for a specific point of consciousness, and not really public property. I examined my motives long and hard before choosing to record them here, prehaps not long enough or hard enough. Regardless, there it is. But it's important for me to point out that it represents the equivalent of 'therapy', and can be viewed most fairly in that light.

And thaks to everyone in this thread, and the other, for your teachings. I appreciate this critical analysis of extremely hard to analyze matters so much. :-)
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
00:54 / 30.01.06
Wow. Just re-read it, and its even better second time round. Viva Seth!
 
 
Seth
03:56 / 30.01.06
Thank you Money $hot.

I have to admit, being praised here for honesty is making me nearly as uncomfortable as being frightened of how people might respond, and I don’t want to derail the thread from its objective of discussing this matter just by dropping an anecdote bomb. I’d like to try and get what can be learned from my experience worked through into the thinking of the rest of the thread, because I strongly suspect that I’m not alone in having these types of experiences.

I guess one thing that might be drawn from the above is that accounts that are given from dreams, hallucinations, invocations, journeys and visions are all coming from places within us that are not necessarily fully worked through… that if magic is – in part – the art of working these things through then it’s going to get pretty messy when it comes to our accounts of these experiences. Being honest about what was experienced, as well as offering your best critique of it in the light of how you think about the subject, is maybe the best we can manage.

If I were to talk about dream journaling for a moment, how might that change the emphasis here? I could put under the microscope a dreams that I’ve actually had, dreams that would make the above account seem slight and easy to deal with by comparison (and to some might be extraordinarily offensive, even borderline insane) but I suspect that we’ve all had these types of dreams somewhere along the line. The skills I learned from journaling immediately after I woke up are the way in which I’d write up any visionary experience: write honestly, in the present tense, exactly what you feel does justice to the dream, without any impingement by the values you might hold in your normal waking consciousness, in that language that you feel best describes what you actually experienced, without a view to sanitising it.

Then keep a separate journal for analysis, in a different book, so that the unexamined account is left there, warts and all, in the best way you knew how to transcribe it at the time. None of this stuff has to be made public; this is you delving into the guts of yourself and doesn’t have to be seen as your magnum opus. Interpret using the emotions felt within the dream as the key to finding their meaning, regardless of the way in which your waking critical faculties operate. It’s possible to dream of things that would likely be seen as atrocities if they were to crop up in a movie, but for them to have another meaning entirely within your personal internal logic. The emotion felt within the dream rather than your waking value judgement is the key to getting an interpretation that will do you some good in the long run, nowhere more so than in the case of nightmares, which in extreme cases do not offer any seemingly problematic content but are accompanied by a sense of absolute terror nonetheless.

Having captured the account in the manner that does it best justice, you can then start to discuss the implications of that interpretation in the light of what you believe about the world with your conscious, waking values. They may be quite different to the values that you don’t realise that you have. There are a variety of change techniques discussed the in the rest of the Temple Forum that could give a basis for negotiating these changes within yourself. Having such glaring differences of opinion within yourself can be alarming and extremely hard to deal with, and if you need years to work it through then you have my admiration and respect because I know how that feels. This is work, after all.

Anyone who is thinking about getting involved in these kind of areas is opening themselves up for what is potentially a lot of examination, as the above journaling process will probably indicate. It’ll likely be some of the most important personal work you’ll ever do. But there’s a real difference here between what is useful for you and what you might allow to be read by others, and certainly a difference between what you might use to instruct others or include in a book… or on a public webspace. Different practitioners have differing levels of awareness about what should go public, and different skills levels when it comes to the interpretive process, as well as differing standards of diligence and honesty when it comes to self-examination.

When we choose to give our opinions on someone else’ account, we take a measure of responsibility for becoming involved in their lives at that point. What we say, and the way in which we say it, can be of crucial importance and we may never be able to go back and make it right. When one of my friends heard that I interpret dreams and came to me because she was really concerned about the dreams she was having in which she was having sex with her father, if I’d made a joke or asked a loaded question or imposed my value system onto her she would have been crushed, and I would have been responsible for that, at least in part. She was scared there was something wrong with her. The great thing about the experience was that after about an hour of gentle questioning and trying to inhabit what I learned about her world, trying to see her dream as she saw it, I had the privilege of giving her an interpretation that put a smile on her face, that made her realise there was nothing majorly wrong with her, that she wasn’t into incest like she was scared she was, and she went away with a list of things to think about and work on.

Hope that helps to bring things back on track.
 
 
illmatic
08:13 / 30.01.06
Absolutely first class posts, Seth. Brillant stuff. Commedations on your honesty. My only problem with it is I don't see how anyone can follow it!

I think you've done a really good job in articulating some of the tensions and difficulties people experience in exploring these areas. Perhaps this is something that non-practiconers aren't as vividly aware of as - that when you start to "dig deep" you do come up against a lot of uncomfortable material. I certainly have - I wouldn't say I've worked through it all either, but an awareness that it's there is quite revealing in itself.

Well done again. Will try and think of something more intelligent to say now!
 
 
Olulabelle
09:06 / 30.01.06
More hats off to Seth from me and to GGM for starting this thread. Pre-seth I had an urge to write about the relevance of Ecoshamanism in this discussion and then I read Seth's posts. They are indeed hard to follow so I think I will go back to what I was going to say and let someone else 'follow' Seth.

I'm currently reading a book called Ecoshamanism which is about living a spiritual and sustainable life (the two being entertwined) in the modern day world of consumerism and technology. It's interesting to me because it involves thinking about modern magical practice and living this way of life directly in relation to the society I am part of. This is in direct contrast to following many magical systems which are focussed on the past; ancient stories, God's of other ages etc.

In Britian particularly we have lost many of our Pagan traditions and our intimate knowledge of our natural surroundings, partly because of our religious history. So we seem to be turning to other spiritual frameworks. Maybe the problems we have with discussing culture, race and sexuality within these frameworks has to do with the fact that we are attempting to use our modern day language and experience to describe ancient practices, Gods and systems?

It applies in our actions too. For instance I'm sure that in the past the ability to whip up a bit of berserka rage was very useful when being faced by a band of marauding warriors but these days it's not something one tends to come across much.

I think what I'm trying to say is that if you have spent all your life interacting with a particular system and these beliefs and behaviours have been passed down from generation to generation it's much easier to find the correct language for discussing it, because it comes from within you and is inherent in you.

It seems to me that part of our problem is that we are forming new relationships with these things. It's a bit like the ease an old married couple have with each other compared to a couple who have just met. The old couple have a shared language and an inate understanding of each other. The couple who have just met have yet to write theirs.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
11:57 / 30.01.06
in the past the ability to whip up a bit of berserka rage was very useful when being faced by a band of marauding warriors but these days it's not something one tends to come across much.

You don't drive, then?
 
 
Alex's Grandma
13:12 / 30.01.06
Seth;

If it's any consolation, I think that you are a genuinely evil man.
 
 
grant
19:44 / 30.01.06
Actually, I'm wondering -- and feel free to ignore this if it's too light or pointed a question for something that deep and personal -- but I'm wondering, Seth, if you hadn't consciously sorted through this psychic imagery in the context of doing changework... if it had remained a wound... would you have been more prone to bigotry? It seems like a lot of racism/sexism operates in a kind of twilight realm of not-quite-awareness which may or may not be the same realm that dream images come from.
 
 
Seth
18:24 / 31.01.06
I’ve thought about your question all day, grant. I have absolutely no idea how to go about answering it, because I have no frame of reference besides how I felt before the dreams/physical symptoms stopped… so in quite a dull way I suspect it would have been more of the same. Although who can say with *what if* scenarios? What’s interesting is I have a complete block when it comes to imagining what life could have been like, and I think it’s because I have some deeply rooted and immovable belief that there’s no such thing as a world in which I wouldn’t have worked through my own healing. I have a stubborn and unreasonable belief that I will live my life happy and whole, and I find it almost impossible to believe otherwise despite the fact I can remember I time when it wasn’t so.

It’s also worth noting that while in many ways I had bigoted attitudes towards certain women who I perceived fit my unconsciously constructed and arbitrary criteria (in that I wasn’t prepared to accept that they might be different from my preconceived ideas regardless of the actuality), these issues probably would never have been discernable to anyone outside me because they typically manifested as fear, fascination and awe, all of which I could usually cover for pretty well. In fact, the only person I can currently think of who realised anything close to what my perceptions of women were like was the person who dumped me in my teenage years, who called me on it ten years later!

Most of the time it manifested in a kind of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind type way, by which I mean the goofy but still totally wrong-headed way in which Joel thought Clementine was going to be the one that saved him, without him ever realising how that meant he was only having a relationship with his fantasy version of her and thus turning her into an ideal rather than a person. He de-humanised her because he was afraid of women and only ever wanted what was in his head… that’s pretty accurate to what I was experiencing. And in a way I was right: once I realised that this fantasy woman was only ever me in disguise I could unite with her fully, and that union did indeed save me.

The reality of the situation is that I was generally described by my female friends as pretty empathic and often quite feminine in outlook and the way I treated people (whatever they meant by that). In fact I had a lot of close female friends. Go figure!
 
 
Dead Megatron
19:43 / 31.01.06
First, let me congratulate Seth on his honesty and courage. I would never explose my evil thougths in such details like this, for fear of judgement (although I can say my evil thoughts have never been gender and/or ethnic-specific. In my bad moments I can despise and de-humanize pretty mch everybody, myself first and foremost)

But what I want is to make Seth a question: does your changework stuck easily, or did you have to insist on it again and again? Do you see yourself falling back to old ways, like it was an addiction, or your new mindframe became a natural and relaxed state for you?

I'm asking because I`m struggling in controling my evilside for quite some time now, but at any bump in the road I find myself going back to the start much faster than I was getting away from it (it's like going a diet, sort of). I've developed a method in which I summ all my worse traits in a character with a name (which I'll never tell anyone) that I picture in a leech and locked up in a cage. When I want to be mean to someone, I just let this personal devil of mine out, and he does most of the work-and it is nasty stuff, I'll tell you. I don't let it out much these days, because, thank God, I'm left with very few enemies and grudges now. But, even when he's in the cage, he won't stop roaring ans snarling and trying to claw his way out back into dominance. How do you cope with such pressure, or is there no pressure to you at all (in which case I envy you man!)?

"Hate the Sin, Love the Sinner, this is how Good prevails!" (a wise man once told me)
 
 
Seth
22:40 / 31.01.06
The changework stuck. From that point on the recurring female dream character, and the weird physical reactions went. They’ve never returned, and I’ve never had those predispositions or those specific thoughts since.

As for ongoing self-examination and self-regulation, I’ve never found that more challenging than I have at this point in my life, largely because of my job. I find I constantly have to be aware of my preconceived notions and prejudice and it makes some days extremely hard because I don’t always like what I see in myself, and I have a good deal of people relying on me to do a good job. Most days I have to deal with at least one caller who makes comments or behaves in ways that show their beliefs about class, race, gender, sexuality, age, notions of parenting, religions, occupations. I have to try and understand them, the wider situation and how my preconceptions as the observer effect the way I’m likely to understand. It can be very hard work.

Today’s examples: “How would you describe your ethnic origin?” “White… very white.” Overheard conversations at lunch between colleagues commenting on the situation in Iraq (general consensus: get the troops out immediately and leave them to it). My Muslim colleague constantly being subjected to ham-fisted attempts at understanding her, in this case another team-mate assuming she wouldn’t get a sexual innuendo and being surprised when she did. A lengthy conversation with a caller in which I was frankly appalled by the preconceived notions concerning internet paedophilia and parental choices I found reprehensible. Not an exhaustive list by any definition. Thankfully there were none of my own prejudices to report today, and usually I notice them before I act on them.

My unexamined assumptions and prejudices will probably cause me to make countless mistakes throughout my life. Some I’ll notice, some I won’t. I’ll always try to do my best, but being honest, I’ll probably hurt a quite a lot of people, many of them in ways I’ll never know about. I can’t quite believe I have to state this explicitly, but no one has the option of being perfect. Good luck, Dead Megatron. Pay attention to yourself and do your best. As far as more specific help with your personal devil: start a thread and I’m sure people will join you there.

As for my *evil thoughts*… I’m sorry, I can’t help you. I’ve never had any.
 
 
grant
01:06 / 01.02.06
Would you like some? I've got plenty....
 
 
Seth
10:26 / 01.02.06
That's fair enough, grant. What's important here is how Dead Megatron defines evil in the context of this personal devil. I doubt any thoughts I have on the subject of evil really apply to hir situation at the moment, to the point at which I wonder whether I'm fit to offer the assistance ze seeks. I'm happy to help if I can.
 
 
illmatic
10:36 / 01.02.06
Can I just say if anyone does want to debate the subject of Evil, it might be best done in another thread. Possibly even in another forum (Headshop).
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply