Showing posts with label Batman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Batman. Show all posts

Friday, 4 January 2019

A Cover is Not The Book




A Cover is Not The Book.

The Map is Not The Territory.

Big Data is Not Reality.


ADRIC: 
No! I don't want to play. 

HINDLE: 
Why not? 

ADRIC: 
Because I don't want to. 
It's childish. 


HINDLE: 
Oh, go on. 
It isn't a game, it's real
With measuring and everything!































Uncle Goodenberg was a bookworm
And he lived on Charring Cross
The memory of his volumes brings a smile
He would read me lots of stories
When he wasn't on the sauce

Now I'd like to share the wisdom
Of my favourite bibliophile
He said a
Cover is not the book
So open it up and take a look
'Cause under the cover one discovers
That the king maybe a crook
Chapter titles are like signs
And if you read between the lines
You'll find your first impression was mistook
For a cover is nice
But a cover is not the book

"Mary Poppins, could you give us an example?"

"Certainly"

Nelly Rebitta was made of wood
But what could not be seen was though
A trunk up top was barren
While her roots were lush and green
So in Spring when Mr. Hickery saw her blossoms blooming there
He took fruit despite her bark
And now there's seedlings everywhere
Which proves that
A cover is not the book
So open it up and take a look
'Cause under the cover one discovers
That the king maybe a crook

Chapter titles are like signs
And if you read between the lines
You'll find your first impression was mistook
For a cover is nice
But a cover is not the book

"Should we do the one about the wealthy widow?"

"Ooh, by all means"

"Always loved that one"

"Well, go on then"

Lady Highest of Macaw
Brought all her treasures to a reef
Where she only wore a smile
Plus two feathers, and a leaf
So no one tried to rob her
'Cause she barely wore a stitch
For when you're in your birthday suit
There ain't much there to show you're rich
Oh, a cover is not the book
So open it up and take a look
'Cause under the cover one discovers
That the king maybe a crook
Tarulalee, tarurala, tarulalee, tara-ta-ta
You'll find your first impression was mistook (ya-da-da-da)
For a cover is nice
But a cover is not the book

"Oh give us the one about that dirty rascal, why don't ya"
"Isn't that one a bit long?"
"Well the quicker you're into it, the quicker you're out of it"

Once upon a time
In a nursery rhyme
There was a castle with a king
Hiding in a wing
'Cause he never went to school to learn a single thing
He had scepters and swords
And a parliament of lords
But on the inside he was sad
Egad!
Because he never had a wisdom for numbers
A wisdom for words
Though his crown was quite immense
His brain was smaller that a bird's
So the queen of the nation
Made a royal proclamation
"To the Missus and the Messers
The more or lessers
Bring me all the land's professors"
Then she went to the hair dressers
And they came from the east
And they came from the south
From each college they poured knowledge
From their brains into his mouth
But the king couldn't learn
So each professor met their fate
For the queen had their heads removed
And placed upon the gate
And on that date
I state their wives all got a note
Their mate was now the late great
But then suddenly one day
A stranger started in to sing
He said "I'm the dirty rascal
And I'm here to teach the king"
And the queen clutched her jewels
For she hated royal fools
But this fool had some rules
They really ought to teach in schools
Like you'll be a happy king
If you enjoy the things you've got
You should never try to be
The kind of person that you're not
So they sang and they laughed
For the king had found a friend
And they ran onto a rainbow for
The story's perfect end
So the moral is you mustn't let
The outside be the guide
For it's not so cut and dried
Well unless it's Dr. Jekyll
Then you better hide
Petrified
No, the truth can't be denied
As I now have testified
All that really counts and matters
Is the special stuff inside
"He did it!"
Oh, a cover is not the book
So open it up and take a look
Cause under the cover one discovers
That the king maybe a crook
So please listen to what we've said
And open up a book tonight in bed
So one more time before we get the hook (sing it out strong!)
A cover is nice (Please take our advice)
A cover is nice (Or you'll pay the price)
A cover is nice
But a cover is not the book















Tuesday, 25 December 2018

Pseudologia Fantastica













JOSEPH SMITH AS PHYLLIS GREENACRE’S “IMPOSTOR"


Fawn Brodie, in her biography of the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith, suggests that one important tool for understanding the psychology and the demagogic appeal of the founder of the Latter-day Saints can be found in the psychological disorder of pseudologia fantastica, whose victims or practitioners are often referred to as impostors.

Brodie preferred the notion of impostor to literary historian Bernard DeVoto’s classification of Joseph Smith as a “paranoid,” or Kimball Young’s labeling of the Prophet as a “parapath,” that is to say as someone unable to separate fantasy and reality.

MULTIPLE PERSONALITY ORDER


In the experience of the present author, the notions of the imposter and of pseudologia fantastica might well be expanded to include greater emphasis on the question of multiple personalities and multiple personality disorder. This insight derives from my own observation over a number of years of a charismatic political leader with strong tendencies toward the creation of a personality cult, somewhat on the model of Joseph Smith.

The individual in question is Lyndon H. LaRouche.

In the 1960s and 1970s, LaRouche was remarkable for his intelligence overview and programmatic orientation, which tended more and more to be overshadowed by a crude demand for adulation and unquestioning obedience, precisely along the lines of a personality cult. Over time, one got the impression that LaRouche had several distinct personalities –one perceptive and insightful, one raging, narcissistic, and vindictive, and yet another whimsical and nostalgic.


Needless to say, it was the insistent and vindictive personality which employed the other selves to recruit a following and then impose on them the yoke of his personality cult. In this process, he exhibited moments of charismatic rhetorical appeal, and other moments of the most primitive infantilism.


He also neglected the most elementary precautions
. On the one hand, he launched campaigns of exposure and denunciation against Henry Kissinger, Jimmy Carter, Nelson Rockefeller, and other public figures of some power, while at the same time he refused to submit yearly federal income tax returns. 


It was this latter failing which helped to put him in jail for five years.

On at least one known occasion, LaRouche reportedly boasted of his multiple personalities, while claiming that he had the ability to shift at will from one personality to another, according to his own psychological needs. LaRouche called this his “multiple personality order.” The parallels of this syndrome to the case of Joseph Smith are evident.

In her discussion of the impostor, Phyllis Greenacre also cites the case of Titus Oates (1649-1705), who was the great protagonist of the fictitious “Popish Plot” during the reign of Charles II Stuart of England.

This plot was supposedly aiming at a Catholic takeover of England with the help of the Stuarts. Fictitious though this report turned out to be, its political effects were most welcome to the pro-Venetian Whig party of the English aristocracy.


Without intelligence networks interested in promoting Titus Oates’ story, he might have been relegated to total obscurity. 

Oates was a mythomaniac, recounting wild inventions he knew his listeners wanted to hear, all in a desperate bid to attract attention. But there were powerful political forces who found his hallucinations advantageous.

This reminds us once again, as in the case of Joseph Smith, to always look for the interaction between the individual impostor and the organized networks which constitute and assemble the audience which the impostor so urgently desires.

Some key excerpts from Greenacre:



“An impostor is not only a liar, but a very special type of liar who imposes on others fabrications of his attainments, position, or worldly possessions. This he may do through misrepresentations of his official (statistical) identity, by presenting himself with a fictitious name, history, and other items of personal identity, either borrowed from some other actual person or fabricated according to some imaginative conception of himself.

There are similar falsifications on that part of his identity belonging to his accomplishments, a plagiarizing on a grand scale, or making claims which are grossly implausible. Imposture appears to contain the hope of getting something material, or some other worldly advantage. 








DATA: 
Captain, why should a King wish to pass as a commoner? 
If he is The Leader, should he not be leading?

PICARD: 
Listen to what Shakespeare is telling you about The MAN, Data.

A King who had True feelings for his soldiers would wish to share their fears with them on the eve of battle. 





While the reverse certainly exists among the distinguished, wealthy, and competent persons who lose themselves in cloaks of obscurity and assumed mediocrity, these come less frequently into sharp focus in the public eye. 

One suspects, however, that some “hysterical” amnesia is, and dual or multiple personalities are conditions related to imposturous characters. The contrast between the original and the assumed identities may sometimes be not so great in the matter of worldly position, and consequently does not lend itself so readily to the superficial explanation that it has been achieved for direct and material gain. The investigation of even a few instances of imposture –if one has not become emotionally involved in the deception –is sufficient to show how crude though clever many impostors are, how very faulty any scheming is, and how often, in fact, the element of shrewdness is lacking. Rather a quality of showmanship is involved, with its reliance all on the response of an audience to illusions.

“In some of the most celebrated instances of imposture, it indeed appears that the fraud was successful only because many others as well as the perpetrator had a hunger to believe in the fraud, and that any success of such fraudulence depended in fact on strong social as well as individual factors and especial receptivity to the trickery.

To this extent those on whom the fraudulence is imposed are not only victims but unconscious conspirators. Its success too is partly a matter of timing. Such combinations of imposturous talent and a peculiar susceptibility of the times to believe in the swindler, who presents the deceptive means of salvation, may account for the great impostures of history. There are, however, instances of the repeated perpetration of frauds under circumstances which give evidence of a precise content that may seem independent of social factors….

“It is the extraordinary and continued pressure in the impostor to live out his fantasy that demands explanation, a living out which has the force of a delusion, (and in the psychotic may actually appear in that form), but it is ordinarily associated with the ‘formal’ awareness that the claims are false. The sense of reality is characterized by a peculiarly sharp, quick perceptiveness, extraordinarily immediate keenness and responsiveness, especially in the area of the imposture. The over-all utility of the sense of reality is, however, impaired. What is striking in many impostors is that, although they are quick to pick up details and nuances in the lives and activities of those whom they simulate and can sometimes utilize these with great adroitness, they are frequently so utterly obtuse to many ordinary considerations of fact that they give the impression of mere brazenness or stupidity in many aspects of their life peripheral to their impostures….

“The impostor has, then, a specially sharpened sensitivity within the area of his fraud, and identity toward the assumption of which he has a powerful unconscious pressure, beside which his conscious wish, although recognizable, is relatively slight. The unconscious drive heightens his perceptions in a focused area and permits him to ignore or deny other elements of reality which would ordinarily be considered matters of common sense. It is this discrepancy in abilities which makes some impostors such puzzling individuals. Skill and persuasiveness are combined with utter foolishness and stupidity.

“In well-structured impostures this may be described as a struggle between two dominant identities in the individual: the temporarily focused and strongly assertive imposturous one, and the frequently amazingly crude and poorly knit one from which the impostor has emerged. In some instances, however, it is also probable that the imposture cannot be sustained unless there is emotional support from someone who especially believes in and nourishes it. The need for self-betrayal may then he one part of the tendency to revert to a less demanding, more easily sustainable personality, particularly if support is withdrawn.


“The impostor seems to flourish on the success of his exhibitionism. Enjoyment of the limelight and inner triumph of ‘putting something over’ seems inherent, and bespeak the closeness of imposture to voyeurism. Both aspects are represented: pleasure in watching while the voyeur himself is invisible; exultation in being admired and observed as a spectacle. It seems as if the impostor becomes temporarily convinced of the rightness of his assumed character in proportion to the amount of attention he is able to gain from it.

“In the lives of impostors there are circumscribed areas of reaction which approach the delusional. These are clung to when the other elements of the imposture have been relinquished….

“Once an imposturous goal has been glimpsed, the individual seems to behave without need for consistency, but to strive rather for the supremacy of the gains from what can be acted out with sufficient immediate gratification to convince others. For the typical impostor, an audience is absolutely essential. It is from the confirming reaction of his audience that the impostor gets a ‘realistic’ sense of self, a value greater than anything he can otherwise achieve. It is the demand for an audience in which the (false) self is reflected that causes impostures often to become of social significance. Both reality and identity seem to the impostor to be strengthened rather than diminished by the success of the fraudulence of his claims….

“The impostor seems to be repeatedly seeking confirmation of his assumed identity to overcome his sense of helplessness or incompleteness. It is my impression that this is the secret of his appeal to others, and that often especially conscientious people are ‘taken in’ and other impostors as well attracted because of the longing to return to that happy state of omnipotence which adults have had to relinquish….

Sunday, 21 October 2018

The Secondary Fathers : The Batman



“Son, you are in for a Show tonight..!!!”

Textbook Joseph Campbell.

The way Campbell explained it, 
Young Men need a Secondary Father to finish raising them.

Beyond their Biological Father, they need a surrogate, traditionally aminister or a coach or a military officer.

The floatsam and jetsam of a generation washed up on the beach of last resort.

That's why street gangs are so appealing. 
They send you men out, likeKnights on Quests to hone their skills and improve themselves.

And all the TRADITIONAL Mentors -- forget it.

Men are presumptive predators. They're leaving Teaching in droves.

Religious Leaders are pariahs.

Sports Coaches are stigmatized as odds-on pedophiles.

Even The Military is sketchy with sexual goings-on.

A Generation of Apprentices 
Without Masters.