BARBELITH underground
 

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


Underground > Temple >

Sheeple and scum and humatons, oh my!

  
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
 
Jack Fear
18:05 / 24.03.06
I found this odd and hurtful, to be frank.

Thank god you've got your self-awareness to give you solace, then.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
18:57 / 24.03.06
A bit late now, but-

Must everyone who holds an opinion different from yours be perforce either stupid or evil?

Well, no, but I thought we were talking about people like Quimper666 and the Daily Mail?
 
 
BlueMeanie
19:31 / 24.03.06
Thank god you've got your self-awareness to give you solace, then.

What on earth are you on about?
 
 
illmatic
20:39 / 24.03.06
The burden of proof is not on me, son. That's not how it works.

No? Not even in light of the statement from Doc A which seems to have slipped your radar? I feel that this broadens things out a lot more than my own "purely subjective definitions, which are by definition, bullshit". I can provide more context if you wish. Presuming you're actually interested in having some sort of discussion about what we're actually talking about, rather than scoring points, because someone has offended your sensibilites in some way.

Thank god you've got your self-awareness to give you solace, then.

I've been trying to fence the whole discussion around with caveats that indicate what we're talking about is not something that makes us better, more enlightened, superior than TEH SHEEPLE etc. Why the continued objections?
 
 
Mirror
22:01 / 24.03.06
Christ, Jack, what crawled up your ass and died?

I seem to be completely failing to get what's so offensive about the statement that most (probably all) people go through their lives without being fully self-aware 100% of the time. Also, I don't see Dr. A. or Illmatic claiming that they're in any way superior to anybody else.

How aware are you of the potential hurtful impact of your words upon others?
 
 
Ender
22:47 / 24.03.06
Being 'awake' is a lot of responsibility. You can't just say, 'tada! I am now awake'.

This whole thing is a constant process. We are always fighting against the things that rub against the grain of who we are.

I have had moments of complete ignorance, and during those moments I would swear to you that I was fully cognizant of the things going on all around me. Old posters cringe and remember my bush loving days. Even then, I thought that I was not only right but had a duty to 'heal' the world (and at the time I thought 'healing' the world meant persuading anyone who didnt share my thoughts to join my brainwave).

I do think that everyone should 'wake up' but I have realized that there are so many people who are just barely hanging on to what they have, and for some people it is an everyday battle not to blow their fucking brains out. Would you tell me that Joe Blow can handle 'waking up' right now, today?

It is okay for some people to be sheeple. I did take issue with them until I realized that they too have families, and things that make them tick, and pieces of humanity that burn brightly within them (you just have to look). And if you are truly 'awake' it gives you (or me atleast) the ability to be a bit more aware of what those people are thinking and feeling, and in many ways increases my ability to have love for them, however loneliness is often a side-affect of consciousness. Also I think that it is that loneliness that drives many of us to be callused (elite was the term used for the symptom earlier in this thread).

You have to be strong to be awake, otherwise you will become a fucking wolf feeding off of the sheeple, or a powermongral using sheeple as cannon fodder and building blocks, or you might try to go back to sleep and wind up an insomniac madman mother fucker.

I dont have any answers for anyone. More than anything I am just writing here as a sounding board trying to make sense of a million things rushing by, shooting out my hands trying to grasp time by the coat tails as it hops down the hole hanging ironically at the end of a gold chain in a white paw. Thanks for listening.
 
 
BlueMeanie
23:29 / 24.03.06
Also, I don't see Dr. A. or Illmatic claiming that they're in any way superior to anybody else.

Too fucking right that I've never claimed that.
 
 
Mirror
01:55 / 25.03.06
You have to be strong to be awake, otherwise you will become a fucking wolf feeding off of the sheeple, or a powermongral using sheeple as cannon fodder and building blocks, or you might try to go back to sleep and wind up an insomniac madman mother fucker.

Who's to say that the "wolves" are any more awake? That's the point. Everyone has moments of self-awareness and long periods of mindlessness. What were you thinking of this morning while brushing your teeth? For me, at least, the vast majority of moments slip away unremembered and with me generally unaware.

I think that the capacity to exploit the inattention of others is basically unrelated to self-awareness. I'd think that anyone who was actually "awake" in the sense we're talking about would be capable of figuring out much better things to do with their time.
 
 
ORA ORA ORA ORAAAA!!
05:44 / 25.03.06
For me, at least, the vast majority of moments slip away unremembered and with me generally unaware.

This raises what seems like a related point to me, but probably isn't:

Is being aware related to/the same as remembering?

It is certainly the case that there are some points in my life I remember better than others, and most of the most vivid memories are of times when I was more engaged in what I was doing and the world around me than I usually am.

But I know there are times when I have been far, far more engaged in the world than I can possibly remember at the moment, and those moments blur and shift as I try to remember them. Maybe I'm not present enough to even remember really being present.

There's also times I don't remember at all (blackouts) when I was, according to others, acting oddly, but in a way that suggests I was not only aware of my environment, but more aware of many aspects of it than they, and my 'normal' self would have been - though I have no direct experience of these times, obviously.

So, anyway, is remembering what you've been doing the same as being aware of it at the time?
 
 
illmatic
06:44 / 25.03.06
Christ, Jack, what crawled up your ass and died?

The "grapes of wrath" perhaps?

Ender: While I don't want in any way to play down your political conversion (I think it's great), using the term "awake" to refer to your own political beliefs (with your opponents as "asleep") is precisely what I've been arguing against in this thread. What me and Dr A are trying to talk about is the specific results of meditation practices - a seperate realm from politcal allegiance (thus my substitution of the less loaded word "presence").

An analogy, which might help: What we're talking about is a specific skill, or set of skills, and their implications - much like juggling. I don't think it's an elitist statement to say that "most people don't juggle". Juggling is a nice parallel actually for me personally: I can only juggle three balls, and that badly. I usually manage 4 or 5 rotations before I drop them and the balls go over the place. Very much like my efforts with self-remembering/remaining "present".

Red Frog: Interesting points about memory. I don't know is the only answer I can give with this mornings hangover... more later maybe.
 
 
BlueMeanie
07:00 / 25.03.06
So, anyway, is remembering what you've been doing the same as being aware of it at the time?

I think so. Ouspensky talked about 'self-remembering' - being aware of doing something when you're doing it as opposed to having the mind wander about. Like I said earlier, just thinking about being aware or asking someone if they're aware of the present seems to bring about self-remembering/paying attention to the present experience. It's interesting to test how long you can do this for.

I think it was in an Ouspensky book where he gives the demonstration of this by asking the reader to look at their watch and keep their attention fully on it for as long as possible.

Memories seem to be a collection of all the times that there was this self-rememberance/attention. The rest seems to be oddly blank for me, although filled in to some degree later (much to the consternation of people such as police officers trying to get accurate witness statements).
 
 
Sam T.
07:26 / 25.03.06
Just stumbled upon this thread.

Don't have much to add to what has been said, agree with most of it.

While we're talking about exercises, I'd like to share this with you, it's from 'Exploring the world of Lucid dreaming', by Stephen LaBerge:

"The following experiential exercise will guide you through a tour of your everyday waking state of consciousness. Spend about one minute on each of the steps.

EXERCISE: YOUR PRESENT STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS

1. Look
Become aware of what you see: notice the richly varied and vivid impressions—shapes, colors, movement, dimensionality, the entire visible world.

2. Listen
Become aware of what you hear: register the various sounds taken in by your ears—a diverse range of intensities, pitches, and tonal qualities, perhaps including the commonplace miracle of speech or the wonder of music.

3. Feel
Become aware of what you touch: texture (smooth, rough, dry, sticky, or wet), weight (heavy, light, solid, or empty), pleasure, pain, heat and cold, and the rest. Also note how your body feels right now and compare that to the many other ways it feels at other times, tired or energetic, stiff or limber, painful or pleasant, and so on.

4. Taste
Become aware of what it is like to taste: taste a number of different foods and substances, or remember and vividly imagine their tastes.

5. Smell
Become aware of what you smell: the odor of warm bodies, earth, incense, smoke, perfume, coffee, onions, alcohol, and the sea. Remember and imagine as many of them as you can.

6. Breathing
Attend to your breathing. A moment ago you probably were not consciously aware of your breathing even though you have inhaled and exhaled fifty times while doing this exercise. Hold your breath for a few seconds. Let it out. Now take a deep breath. Notice that being conscious of your breathing allows you to alter it deliberately.

7. Emotions
Become aware of your feelings. Remember the difference between anger and joy, serenity and excitement, and as many other emotions as you care to feel. How real do emotions feel?

8. Thoughts
Become aware of your thoughts. What have you been thinking while doing this exercise? What are you thinking right now? How real do thoughts seem?

9. “I”
Become aware of the fact that your world always includes you.

As William James noted, it is I see, I hear, I feel, I think that is the basic fact of experience. You are not what you see, hear, think, or feel; you have these experiences. Perhaps most essentially, you are who is aware.

You are always at the center of your multidimensional universe of experience, but you are not always consciously aware of yourself.

Briefly repeat the exercise with the following difference: At the same time you attend to each of the various aspects of your experience, be aware that it is you who is noticing these things (“I see the light...”).

10. Awareness of awareness
Finally, become aware of your awareness. Normally, awareness focuses on objects outside ourselves, but it can itself be an object of awareness. In the light of ordinary experience, we seem to be distinct and limited centers of awareness, each alone in our inner worlds. In the light of eternity, mystics tell us, we are ultimately all one—the unlimited awareness that is the source of being. Here, experience cannot be adequately expressed by language."
 
 
*
17:45 / 27.03.06
Is being aware related to/the same as remembering?

Intimately.

Because of the infinitesimal delay between when something happens and when we sense it, between when we sense it and when that sensation is processed by the brain, essentially, all awareness is an act of memory. Being aware of a sensation can be described as being aware of a neurological event being recorded to sensory memory. The more you attend to it, the more likely it is that it will be recorded to short-term or long-term memory. This is a simplistic explanation, but it's the one I'm operating on until someone offers me a better one.

Have you ever experienced something belatedly? You hear something to which you're not attending. A moment or two later, as the perception is being (maybe?) overwritten in sensory memory, you realize that it demands your attention— "I'm sorry, what did you just say?" "Was that a knock at the door just now?" And interestingly, even though you weren't attending consciously, had no awareness in the moment that your mate was speaking, for instance, often you can recover a few actual words from sensory memory, maybe enough to get the sense of what you missed.

I'm going back to my stance on prioritizing here. People who appear to be "in the moment" are experts at prioritizing their sensory input and sorting it into the right kinds of memory. If you were attentive to every input and prioritized it all the same, you wouldn't be very functional. I'd be interested to know how this woman seems to be an exception.

(Now I feel like since this is a Temple thread now I need to relate this back to Temply stuff in some way. Insert mention of how awareness exercises involve memory and prioritization as well, and how some awareness exercises demand that the practitioner try to avoid prioritizing, what's all that about then etc.)
 
 
Sam T.
07:03 / 28.03.06
All awareness is an act of memory.

That's wholeheartedly the position of the Bates Method. It's a very controversial method of natural vision improvement. Dr Bates stated that: "When the sight is perfect, the memory is also perfect"

In short, he found experimentally that good vision and memory were intimately linked, and that if the memory was good, the sight was also good. In his experience there were no exception to this.

So, one of his way to cure people of defective vision was to coax them into remembering perfectly (without effort) a familiar object. Vision followed accordingly, allowing people to read further lines down on the eyechart.

Dr Bates writing are pretty hard to read, because it is 1910 english, and because what he try to say is very hard to convey by words, especially if you happen to have defective vision. A good introduction/ressource is iblindness.org

In my own experience, memory, vision, awareness, clarity of thought and strain are all intimately linked on a very physiological level.

As for the Bates method in itself, my wife and I can vouch for its effectiveness, for what it's worth.
 
 
illmatic
07:37 / 28.03.06
Could you start a thread about it? Maybe in Convo? I'll add my own experiences.
 
 
Bruno
09:31 / 28.03.06
Maybe this is slightly off-tangent, but:
Illmatic said Funny, some of this reminds me of those Marxist arguments about "false consciousness"...

Well, especially if you contrast it to 'historical consciousness'*, which is very similar to Gurdjieff/Ouspensky's self-remembering, or what Crowley wrote about the Magical Memory (Liber Thisarb; a little bit in Magick Without Tears).

The main difference is that while the magic-mystic people look at remembering/consciousness as being an individual process, communists see it as a group process (classically this takes place within the proletariat, more recently there has been a lot of debate about the validity of the term proletariat in this stage of capitalism). Marx concentrated his analysis on the production of life (both material and immaterial). He theorised that by becoming conscious of 1. the history of production, and therefore 2. the potential of production to be liberated from exploitation and alienation, we (the proletariat) will change the way production works and have a lot more free time and mental health. This is of course based on humanist ideals of solidarity and equality, or if you like, Love and compassion.

As I wrote in the Magick and Marxism thread a while ago there are a lot of similarities between the two approaches. The most obvious crossover is Wilhelm Reich. Although unfortunately I do not have my copy of Mass Psychology of Fascism with me I seem to remember that in the introduction to my edition Reich talks about his old terminology (which is hardcore 1930s marxist) and his new one (possibly around the time he had become an anti-communist), and if I remember correctly where he had previously used 'class consciousness'* he now used 'dynamic character structure'.

I think this sheds a lot of light on the subject, because it's unlikely you can have one without the other. If I feel compassion for other people I would like them to stop being exploited economically (the beginnings of class consciousness); if I don't feel compassion for other people then my character structure is probably quite rigid.

("All awareness is an act of memory" is also Crowley's position in one of the early chapters of Magick Without Tears when he talks about point-events.)
I read Huxley's "The Art of Seeing" on the Bates method and I think it's a helpful book. I am very interested in whatever crossover there is between the sort of eye-strain Huxley/Bates describe and what Reich/Bioenergetics people have to say about ocular armoring.

Also of interest is Alistair Livingston's criticism of my lack of historical consciousness on barbelith last year (june 5th), and the link between self-re-membering and general historical consciousness:
The Spectacle as Ground Hog day. The personal as political.

My youngest son is 14. He is also blind and physically (spastic quadriplegia) disabled. He can chat away 19 to the dozen, but gets a bit stuck from time to time. His current obsession is time. He has decided that it will stay March 2005 forever and ever. He has 'cancelled' all other months and all the years up to about 2020. He has written (with my help) numerous letters to his school explaining the situation, but has difficulty getting his message across.

Re-reading Guy Debord's The Society of the Spectacle for the below, I found it echoed my son's problem with time. The way I read him, Guy is saying that 'history' is stuck at the point where modern bourgeoisie culture won its 'revolution'. The Spectacle is the so far successful attempt to keep us locked in an endless Ground Hog day so the next revolution, the proletarian one, can never happen. The record of history is stuck. The record of history is stuck. The record of history is stuck. The Record of History is Stuck. ad infinitum.

Yet we the proletariat ( I worked in a factory for 7 years) keep making history. We keep trying and succeeding in changing our everyday lives. But such changes happen at the individual level, they are personal and subjective changes, personal and subjective his stories and hers stories. Occasionally the potential for collective change happens, but then shit comes down and we get beaten back in line. (Or beat ourselves back in line...)

One way forward, one way to make history happen again, is to re-member our individual life stories and share them so they become part of a collective consciousness. So they provoke and spark others to say "I remember that.". Which is what my blog is trying to do. I am putting my memories, my history 'out there' in the hope that it will help other people to re-member their lives. Equally, I keep looking ( via the internet) for other people's memories of their lives which help me to re-member my life.


-carl-

*using the terms 'historical consciousness' and 'class consciousness' interchangably is not very accurate but to stay (relatively) on-topic I will say that one necessarily entails the other and that 'false consciousness' means the lack of both.
 
 
illmatic
09:46 / 28.03.06
I probably should have added I didn't think propogating the "false consciousness" idea wasn't something I was favour of.
 
 
illmatic
09:48 / 28.03.06
... as it propogates elitism, mcuh as the "sheeple" thing does, if that wasn't clear.
 
 
illmatic
09:59 / 28.03.06
Actually, Bruno, maybe I gave you a bum steer, with the bit you've quoted from me above, but you're conflating two completely different processes - I don't think "false consciousness" and "self-remebering" are the same at all. They take place in completely different realms and refer to completely differnt things.

I hate being the Temple naysayer, but there you go.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:46 / 28.03.06
Well, the biggest problem with false consciousness is that a lot of the people who trot out the idea, either by name or not, don't bother to apply it to themselves with any rigour. So it becomes a way to, for example, be rude about other's people's taste in, to pick a really random example totally at random, music, but coated with a sickly-sweet veneer of disingenuous compassion: "You like bad music, but I'm not saying you have bad taste - it's just that you've been brainwashed and conditioned into thinking that you like it!" This plays into the hands of a strawman that right-wing commentators love to envoke: the left-wing intellectual who scorns popular culture and the populace as a whole, and doesn't trust them to make their own minds up.

On a completely unrelated note, as I've said elsewhere I'd love to see Jack Fear explain (probably in another thread) what the intelligent, non-"evil" arguments are for arresting all "justice for Palestine protestors"...
 
 
Bruno
10:36 / 01.04.06
Interesting points made by Illmatic and Flyboy. Sorry for the late reply.
BTW I really liked Withiel's first post, I think it captures the dilemma quite well. Why didn't you follow it up Withiel?

Illmatic said [false consciousness] 'it propogates elitism mcuh as the "sheeple" thing does, if that wasn't clear'
Sorry but I dont think it necessarily does. 'Consciousness/non-consciousness' is pretty much similar to the 'awake/asleep' or 'present/absent' metaphors and does not imply that those who are 'not conscious' are permanently in some herd-animal state of inferority. Use of the term isnt necessarily elitist. It’s a very subjective term though, it can mean a lot of things.

Flyboy: "Well, the biggest problem with false consciousness is that a lot of the people who trot out the idea, either by name or not, don't bother to apply it to themselves with any rigour."
I dont disagree with this statement but you can use the same argument for many ideas (e.g. “Well the biggest problem with anti-sexism is that a lot of people who talk about it dont try to apply it to their own lives in any depth”… proves nothing about anti-sexism itself, right?). Speaking for myself, I use the concepts of consciousness and its absence as a tool for self-analysis and I have no problem with admitting that sometimes I am not awake or present or conscious. Which is why some of my posts are good and some have been fucking stupid (-: I am always in a learning process. And learning requires remembering.

I can see the point both of you are making. But I think we all believe in some form of false consciousness.
Let me give an example.
I went to the barber the other day and the man in front of me was a prison guard. He chatted with the barber and said ‘we have 3 illegal immigrants with no papers, they cant be deported back to their countries because we dont know where to send them, so theyre staying in prison here.’
The barber replies 'Why should I pay taxes to feed them?'.
The prison guard says 'well what can we do?'
and the barber replies 'give them injections let them die in their sleep'.
This is a true story.
This is not to say the barber is like this all the time - but at that moment in time, at least - (and it’s probably not just at that moment) I think that his statement was symptomatic of the psychological state of not being 'awake' or 'conscious' or ‘mentally healthy’ or ‘self-aware’. I would estimate that his opinion on executing people from 3rd world countries because they do not have offical-looking pieces of paper stemmed from some fucked up hateful aggression he was projecting onto the demonized prisoners; racism; a complete lack of empathy or idenitification on any human level; greed about the money he ‘pays to feed them’. This is I think a fairly objective example of “false consciousness”. Do we disagree?

And Flyboy said the left-wing intellectual who scorns popular culture and the populace as a whole, and doesn't trust them to make their own minds up.
The sort of elitism you describe exists and is often aristocrat-style bigotry (e.g. Adorno’s writings on jazz). But on the other hand we are not conscious of many things. We are often not critical of opinions and asimilate them without question. Certain behaviors are reinforced, others are not. Not everyone is equipped with a good system of filtering things out. Questioning the dominant hegemony is healthy, but many people never do. Do you disagree?
And on ‘doesn't trust them to make their own minds up’: I dont trust most people, do you? That is different from believing that I or anyone else has the right to make decisions for them.

Flyboy, shifting from popular culture to politics, how do you explain that, after the towers were destroyed, ninety something percent of united-statians (according to polls anyway) believed strongly that their government should bomb and invade Afghanistan.
Are we in agreement that it was a completely illogical and inhuman course of action?
I mean how do you explain these things if not with some analysis of a widespread lack of consciousness?

And Illmatic: I don't think "false consciousness" and "self-remebering" are the same at all. They take place in completely different realms and refer to completely differnt things.
Yes they are different. (is that a typo?) 'False consciousness' is (approximately!) like 'forgetting' while 'self-remembering' is (approximately!) like 'historical consciousness'. Thats what I suggested.


And I checked the Reich quotes, they are:
(from the Preface to the Third Edition)
p xxiii 'The concepts 'communist' 'socialist' 'class consciousness' etc were replaced by more specific sociologic and psychologic terms such as 'revolutionary' and scientific'. What they import is a 'radical revolutionizing', 'rational activity' 'getting to the root of things'.
p xxiv The concept 'class consciousness' is not only too narrow, it does not at all tally with the structure of the class of manual workers. For this reason 'industrial work' & 'proletariat' were replaced by the terms 'vital work' and 'the working man' These two terms include all those who perform work that is vital to the existence of society…The Marxist word 'consciousness' was replaced by 'dynamic structure'

The idea of (historical) consciousness being linked to dynamic character structure made me think that rigid character structure is linked to repressed memories…?

Also made me think of Barbelith in the comic. 'Try to Remember'.

-carl-
 
 
illmatic
08:06 / 02.04.06
'False consciousness' is (approximately!) like 'forgetting' while 'self-remembering' is (approximately!) like 'historical consciousness'. Thats what I suggested.

Actually, “approximately” means something like “imprecise, but close to correct” – which, in this instance, isn’t true. A better descriptor would be simply “imprecise”. If you really want to understand anything about these states they should be experienced on their own terms i.e. if you want to understand self-remembering a) read Gurdjieff (or his commentators) and then b) actually practice some of the disciplines he suggests. Drawing these sort of (loose, and arguably non-existent) parallel with Marxism doesn’t aid anyone’s understanding. What’s the point, beyond the fun of pattern recognition? It’s the same with magick, meditation, whatever – actually DO IT and then you will be able to converse from an informed position.

I could, say, take up Kundalini Yoga and say “the movement of energy up my spine represents the surging forth of the revolutionary proletarian vanguard – it is coloured RED the colour of revolution ” – but, I don’t – because I don’t see the usefulness. And, as in your example above, I think it would actively obscures the process.
 
 
illmatic
09:58 / 02.04.06
I'd argue the same with the Reichian stuff - try and get some practical experience of what Reich was actually talking about. I think you'd find this illuminating, more so than this:

the idea of (historical) consciousness being linked to dynamic character structure made me think that rigid character structure is linked to repressed memories…?

If you did some of the work, you could actually find out the truth or otherwise of this statement for yourself.
 
 
Bruno
13:16 / 02.04.06
Your condensending attitude does not become you! Where are you basing your assumption that I have never practiced any of the techniques?

the idea of (historical) consciousness being linked to dynamic character structure made me think that rigid character structure is linked to repressed memories…?
If you did some of the work, you could actually find out the truth or otherwise of this statement for yourself.
Yes, focusing on tenseness in different regions of my body and trying different techniques (such as relaxing and directing the breath there, both seated and lying; working muscles till exhaustion; yoga asanas and stretching; dancing; a strong massage) has brought memories back although not always at the same time as the technique. It tends to happen when the mind drifts off and stops thinking, then the memory just appears. It also happens when I DJ and when I smoke weed sometimes.

re Gurdjieff I read Maurice Nicol's first volume of commentaries and I thought it was good.

Since your Kundalini/proletarian-redness comparison seemed like a silly caricature to me, can I flip your question around, and ask you what Marxist texts are you familiar with?
 
 
illmatic
13:57 / 02.04.06
Where are you basing your assumption that I have never practiced any of the techniques?

Well, mostly your writing here. You have, if I'm not mistaken, never mentioned practical work in any of your posts (apart from shouting in tube stations as ... some sort of something). Your posts are rooted in your reading of Marxist theory, and you've never shown an interest in the practical side of things. I find it a common mistake when writing about magickal/deconditioning exercise to assume that an intellectual grasp of some sort of theory can compensate for a lack of experience.

Yes, focusing on tenseness in different regions of my body and trying different techniques (such as relaxing and directing the breath there, both seated and lying; working muscles till exhaustion; yoga asanas and stretching; dancing; a strong massage) has brought memories back although not always at the same time as the technique

I'm glad to see I'm wrong to a degree, though it doesn't sound to me like a systematic or thorough investigation of one's character armour in a Reichan sense. (I'd say much te the same re. your comments on Gurdjieff). Personally, I'm much more interested in this sort of thing and it's impact on my life/emotions/body than I am in making very loose and arbitary theoretical connections.

My post above may well be a caricture, but I presented it as I still don't see the point of what you're trying to do. All I can see is that you're drawing loose parallels between two areas that excite you. Why? What do you hope to achieve?

hat Marxist texts are you familiar with?

Not many! Why does it matter?
 
 
illmatic
14:04 / 02.04.06
though it doesn't sound to me like a systematic or thorough investigation of one's character armour in a Reichan sense

That isn't meant to sound as snobby as it does. I'm glad you've done something, though I'm tempted to ask if aren't tempted to take it further?
 
 
illmatic
15:18 / 02.04.06
What Marxist texts are you familiar with?

Actually, I'll answer this exactly if you can show me exactly why it's relevant to the discussion and isn't just a poor rhetorical strategy aimed at shifting the focus off your ideas.
 
 
Bruno
12:38 / 08.04.06
Once again, sorry for the late reply.

I said What Marxist texts are you familiar with?
Illmatic said Actually, I'll answer this exactly if you can show me exactly why it's relevant to the discussion and isn't just a poor rhetorical strategy aimed at shifting the focus off your ideas

Because you called the connection between individual self-remembering and collective historical consciousness 'loose and arbitrary theoretical connections' and 'arguably non-existent parallels'.
To me the connections seem fairly concrete. In order to discuss the relationship between the two, you need, at the very least, a basic understanding of both concepts. So can I ask where are you basing your understanding of the concepts 'false consciousness' and 'historical consciousness'?


You have, if I'm not mistaken, never mentioned practical work in any of your posts (apart from shouting in tube stations as ... some sort of something). Your posts are rooted in your reading of Marxist theory, and you've never shown an interest in the practical side of things. I find it a common mistake when writing about magickal/deconditioning exercise to assume that an intellectual grasp of some sort of theory can compensate for a lack of experience.
I am reserved about talking about personal experience for various reasons,
(1) the most 'impressive' experiences I have had are things that I would rather keep to myself. Their meaning becomes diluted when you talk about them. Hence the traditional magickal vow of silence.
(2) I think they often prove very little (I could be bullshitting you)
(3) they can be a bit boring (e.g. "today at 15:00 I lay on my back to practice motionlessness and body awareness. Brief itch in my scalp. Then I gradually became aware of unecessary tightness in my abdomen. Focused on relaxing it, my left thigh twitched 3 or 4 times." Etc etc).
(4) they can be a bit personal, you know, the kind of memories people tend to repress, well that's not what I would like to share.

(threadrot - Re talking loudly, chanting and shouting in public, I found it very effective for banishing stress, depression, despair, alienation and feelings of disempowerment. It teaches social courage and is good practice for reducing performance anxiety. It activated fight-or-flight response and gave a huge adrenalin rush. I remember one time very clearly, walking down Edgeware Road all the way from Marble Arch to Kentish Town Road, engaged in a loud and angry conversation with myself, at the beginning I was in a state of suicidal despair (I was very ill at the time) and by the end I was full of creative energy, it was like I had split my mind into two and the one half healed the other, and then they reunited. I miss living in London for just that reason, that you can do shit like that without social repurcussions because it is unlikely you will bump into anyone you know. Although that did happen to me twice in London (-: )
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
12:48 / 08.04.06
Yeah, that must have been grebt for all the people around you who had to suck up a dose of your bile, whether they liked it or not. I mean, maybe that old granny did trip over her walker trying to get across the road and away from you, but fuck her, she's just a sheep, right?
 
 
Bruno
13:16 / 08.04.06
(threadrot

Hahaha what a cheap shot *Mr* Carnival (can I call you that?)! Poor old granny tripping over her walker terrorized by the young hooligan, she was run over by a bus while trying to escape, her head squashed in front of crowds of little young children, they were traumatized for life, all because Bruno wasn't within the appointed parameters of volume and tone of voice. And the bus driver later committed suicide, his whole family homeless, his children addicted to heroin, the economy in ruins.


I doubt what I did was particularly harmful to anyone else. A lot less harmful than the fucking billboards that visually pollute that whole street. I didnt focus 'bile' at anyone, but lots of people do it in the street and the tube all the time, most of the time just with their eyes.

)
 
 
Bruno
13:25 / 08.04.06
(Mr Carnival's hypothetical granny might have crossed the street in terror if I was a punk. Do you think punks should start dressing and acting more normal so they won't offend people? Do you think middle eastern men with beards should be prohibited from entering public spaces because some people might find them scary?)
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
13:59 / 08.04.06
Hit a nerve? I feel very strongly that people have a responsibility to think about how their behavior might affect the people around them. If I saw some stranger bearing down on me shouting random abuse, I think I might feel a bit unnerved, yeah. If I were physically a lot weaker than that person, I'd feel even worse. I used to have a schizophrenic mate who I've now lost touch with who'd have been scared to death by something like that, maybe even refusing to leave the house for days afterwards. Back when I used to sport a big purple mowie, or later when I had no hair at all, I took into consideration the way my chosen appearance might affect people, especially people from a different generation or culture and people who were physically frailer than me. Even now I look less extreme, I still steps to reduce the potential for fear and anxiety, like stepping to one side, maybe smiling a little, acting courteously. If I feel the need to act like a maniac, and I frequently do, I go off somewhere I'm not going to cause undue distress. I don't believe that the world owes me an audience for my inner demons.
 
 
Quantum
14:41 / 08.04.06
Hear hear. A man came in the pub the other day with MILLWALL tattooed on his knuckles who looked like he could kill you with his thumb, ordered a pint in a polite plummy voice and was generally nice as pie to everyone around him. I prefer that to 'normal' people striding down the road swearing and spraying aggression everywhere, there's enough of that already thanks. 'Be mindful of your effect on others' is surely sound advice?
No wonder London is such a nice, relaxing place.
 
 
Digital Hermes
16:50 / 08.04.06
I just sort of skirted through the thread, not reading everything, so if what I'm saying has already been said, or is just in general useless, feel free to heap the hosts of your flame attacks upon my humble post. Anyway...

The danger of the 'sheeple' apellation is the us/them implication, and the better/worse that goes with it. Nine times out of ten, trying to explain to a 'sheeple' why they are 'asleep' and whatnot, ends up that the biography of that person up that point has led them to sometimes, a choice of lesser evils, and that the archtype of the disconnected drone, purely consuming what they are handed, is just that an archtype. With no literal basis, since very few are that far along the spectrum.

The other element is that it smells of 'magic as therapy' in the sense that the us/them dichotomy is also empowering, at least for those considering themselves 'free.'

Let people be as they want to; no-one has any right (or even the proper information) to judge the lives they've lived. That said, they have every right to share their own lives, and what they've learned. As a writer, a poet, and a theatre director, I very specifically think part of my job is to show the transcendance that is possible in the 'mundane' world, but how will my readers or audience listen to me, if I'm calling them sheep?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
16:58 / 08.04.06
Their meaning becomes diluted when you talk about them. Hence the traditional magickal vow of silence.

Their meaning to you? So, the things and ideas that help you in some way become less good for you when you share them?

I can see there's a certain power in secret knowledge et al, in fact I even remember quite clearly copying occult symbols on to school exercisebooks and the like when I was 12 in a childish attempt to "get one over" on various people by scaring/upsetting them- the point was that "I knew" what the symbols meant, and "no-one else did". As I say, childish, but at one stage I was happily doing this pretty much every day.

In truth, I find discussing "cool thing x" with people can actually be far more beneficial because it shows up the problems with "cool thing x" and shows you where it might have been going wrong. Thus making it better and purer when you get rid of those negatives.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
  
Add Your Reply