Showing posts with label Trust. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trust. Show all posts

Wednesday 9 October 2019

The Inverted Fool



We might well interpret this as The Fool getting completely lost in his head, in hopes and imagination, in talk of what he's going to do, completely surrendering to the sky, with no way to actually walk toward anything, even disaster. 

This, we might say, is the Fool doomed to Foolishness that makes sense only to him. 

He is not in The Real World and whatever he proposes cannot be made Real.


" Introduction to Reversed Tarot Cards

" Let me start with this introduction, which is all my humble opinion.

A lot of books make it seem like you can just memorize upright AND reversed meanings at the same time. Certainly, you can, but I believe that reversals are difficult to interpret - often more so than upright. For this reason, I believe you should be familiar with the upright meanings first and save reversals for later.

Second, let me cover the oft-asked question: are reversals necessary?

The answer is no. Some readers believe that reversals allow for a wider range of meaning and possibilities. Some believe that all cards have positive and negative possibilities, and that the spread and question will inform the reader of what the card means with no need to have any of the cards upside-down. Other readers just find that reversed cards interrupt the flow of their reading, and so don't use them because they just don't like them.

In addition, some readers will use reversals with some decks and not others. And to make matters even more complex, there are some decks created with reversals in mind (the Revelations Deck, for example, which almost requires the reader to use reversals). Other decks will admonish the reader NOT to use reversals, and the backs of the cards will be such to help the reader keep the cards all going in the right direction.

In the end, whether you use reversals or not is entirely up to you. There is no right or wrong about using them.

Part II

A frequently asked question about reversals: are reversals always negative?

Answer: No. Reversals do not always mean that something horrible is going to happen or that the situation is awful and hopeless. A spread heavy on reversals may simply be a way for the cards to get a strong message across, or to inform the reader and querent that there is a pessimistic, negative or blocked outlook to the problem. In short, that a change of attitude, beliefs, ways of tackling the problem can restore the energy and get things moving again.

This brings us to the three most common ways to interpret reversed cards.

1) Opposite: the meaning of the card is the opposite of its upright meaning. Frankly, I think this is the weakest and sloppiest of possibilities when it comes to reversals - it's a little too simplistic and has one problem: if a "bad" card is reversed, does that now make it a "good" card? So, reverse the Ten of Swords, Five of Pentacles or Three of Swords and the message is now a good one? We'll get back to that...but the answer is, not necessarily.

2) Blockage: the energy of the card is blocked or diminished. Quoting myself, from an earlier spread on the subject: "One of the best discussions of reversals I recall was one where we theorized that reversals are like running aground or being caught in an eddy. Uprights move the energy forward, as on a river. Reversals indicate that this energy is not flowing."

This means that if the Three of Swords is reversed, then its energy is blocked. If that energy includes communication, however hurtful that communication, then it is being dammed up. The vocalizing of something important is being held back and the results, positive as well as negative, are being held back as well. Nothing can go forward.

3) Upside-down Image. This is where you re-interpret the image given that it is upside-down. So, upright cups are now spilled, and that man in the Ten of Swords - he's actually worse off than when he was upright. Upright, the swords are all in his back - the nightmare had ended, it is over and done with. Reversed, he's on top of them sinking down to their hilts - it's a lingering end, drawn out and torturous.

In the end, reversals are not happy things - but they are, perhaps, important life lessons which teach us far more than if we only got sunny uprights.

Go back to the list of Reversed Tarot Card Meanings.









Fool Reversed Tarot Card Meaning

Generally speaking, the upright meaning of the Fool is that of birth, new beginnings, fresh starts, journeys and exploration. It can also mean not looking where you're going, being naive or foolish, or a potential disaster if you don't stop staring at the stars and take a good look at what's directly ahead of you.

1) Opposites: If we were to go for a simple, opposite meaning, the card might mean an ending and/or wisdom.

2) Blocked: More apt is the blocked interpretation. If the energy of the Fool is all about starting something new, going somewhere new, then blocking that energy means that the querent is having difficulty starting anew, moving, seeing the world with fresh eyes.

There is also an implication of being stuck, uninspired. The Fool, if you will, is sitting at the side of the road with blisters on his feet and rocks in his shoes, unable to go on his way.

3) Upside-down: What if we turn the image upside-down? I'll use classic Rider-Waite here--but in reversing the image, interpretation, of course, will depend on the deck.

The cliff edge is hanging over the Fool and his feet have no real purchase. We might say that he's falling, dropping off from under the rock to free fall through the yellow sky. Everything, the sack, the dog, tumbles with him.

We might well interpret this as the Fool (in Rider represented by Air), getting completely lost in his head, in hopes and imagination, in talk of what he's going to do, completely surrendering to the sky, with no way to actually walk toward anything, even disaster. This, we might say, is the Fool doomed to Foolishness that makes sense only to him. He is not in the real world and whatever he proposes cannot be made real.






The Hermit Reversed Tarot Card Meaning

Upright, the Hermit is about a time of solitude and introspection, of investigation, learning, enlightenment and sometime teaching. Reversed....

1) Opposite: If we take "opposite" to mean the negatives of the card then we can view the reversed card as all the evil stereotypes of hermits. The mean old man, isolated, misanthropic, paranoid. In this instance, isolation does not bring insights and epiphanies, but rather turns the person sour and against the world. We might well get reversed Hermit for men like the Unabomber, using their isolation to formulate crimes and destruction.

Other opposite of the Hermit is the Fool. Such as a teacher who uses his position to do foolish or childish things rather than to impart wisdom and insights. Either way, this is not a trustworthy teacher or sage.

2) Blocked: The power of the Hermit - his energy - is in his lantern. The Hermit has keen insight, and an ability to see what is hidden to others, to look beneath the surface. If this is blocked, then we might well say that the Hermit's lantern has been shuttered. It offers no light and the Hermit is left in darkness.

Thus, if reading this card as blocked, a reader might say to a querent that they are having trouble shedding light on a problem, or that they're alone in the dark in this situation. To get out, they must find a way to rekindle their lantern. The lantern is emblematic of their keen mind, sharp eye, and analytical abilities. Though currently in darkness, the hermit has the means to shed light on things if he'll just rekindle his lantern.

3) Upside-down: the most telling thing about the Hermit upside-down is that he loses his lantern. This is similar to the blocked interpretation, only worse. In the blocked interpretation the lantern can be re-illuminated. But upside-down, the lantern is gone. The Hermit is totally in the dark...and all alone. He has lost all ability to find his way and is going to have to stumble on home if he can.

I would see this extreme example in the case of people having some mental problems - they can't concentrate, they can't think, they can't remember or see things clearly anymore. An elder who is foolishly giving away his money, for example, might well be a Hermit reversed. A once wise and canny old fellow who seems to have completely lost his lantern, his ability to make intelligent decisions.

http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/card-meanings/reversed/introduction.shtml



Tuesday 24 September 2019

1955


The Hidden Unity is Obi-Wan Kenobi





In 1955, when our planet was bombarded by cycle 19 solar magnetic waves, young people in the West responded like needles in a groove with rock ’n’ roll’s tight jeans, short hair, biker JD aggression, short, fast songs, and widespread use of stimulant drugs like speed and coffee.

Silver Age comic-book punk was embodied by crew-cut Barry Allen in his speed suit. “Chemicals and Lighting” could have been a song or a band. 

The tight suits, establishment men, and emphasis on science and rationality are all typical, as are Stan Lee’s realistic superheroes such as the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man.







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 a minister 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, like Knights 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.




James Stark :
Suppose you had to do something.
You had to go someplace and do this thing that was...
You know, it was very dangerous.
But it was Matter of Honour.
And you had to prove it.
What would you do?


Well, is there some kind of trick answer?

James Stark :
No, what would you do?


Pinnie :
Well, I wouldn't make a hasty decision.
Tell you what, Jimbo.
Let's get a little light on the subject.
Blood.
Jim, what happened?
What kind of trouble are you in?

James Stark :
The kind I was telling you about.
Now can you answer me?


Pinnie :
Nobody can make a snap decision.
It's one of those things that you...

James Stark :
You can't.
That's all there is to it.
It's something that you... 

Pinnie :
You just don't.
We've got to consider all the pros and cons.

James Stark :
I don't have time.


Pinnie :
We'll make time.
I'll get paper and we'll make a list.
And then if we're still stuck... we'll get some advice.

James Stark :
What can you do when you have to be a Man?

Pinnie :
Well...

James Stark :
No, you give me a Direct Answer!
Are you going to keep me from going?


Pinnie :
Did I ever stop you from anything?
You're at a wonderful age.
In ten years, you'll look back on this and wish...

James Stark :
Ten years?
I want an answer now. I need one.


Pinnie :
Listen, Jimbo, I'm just trying to show you how foolish you are.
When you're older, you'll look back at this.... 
and you'll laugh at yourself for thinking that this is so important.
It's not as if you were alone.
This has happened to every boy.
It happened to me when I was your age, maybe a year older.


Ratbag :
What's all the excitement?
I've been working hard getting this house in order...

Pinnie : 
Jim had blood on him.
He just ran out.


Ratbag :
And you didn't stop him?











That's The Edge.
That's The End.

Jim Stark :
Certainly is.

You know something?
I like you.
You know that?

Why do we do this?

You got to do something...
...now, don't you?



JAMES STARK :
Listen... I know a Place. 
Plato told me before. 

It's an old, deserted mansion...up by the planetarium. 
Want to go up there with me? 

You can Trust me, Judy. 


NATALIE WOULD :
Okay. 





•Unbelievable• that Old Biff could've chosen that particular date!

It could mean that that point in time contains some cosmic significance... Almost as though it were the temporal junction point for the ENTIRE space-time continuum...!

....on The Other Hand it could just be an INCREDIBLE coincidence.”


IT’S NEITHER

Old Biff from The Future is from 2015 in a stolen Time Machine he cannot operate, without instructions, or a manual —  he just pressed CTRL + Z on the keypad 3 times until he found somewhere he wanted to go — November 12th 1955.



As a shorthand toward understanding the two maximum states we flip between, Spence suggests we can regard one pole as having a “punk” character, while its opposite may be thought of as “hippie.”

In Spence’s lexicon, at least as I understand it (his own website will set you straight if.   wrong), punk maxima can be identified in a fashion vogue for short hair, tight clothes, short, punchy popular music, aggression, speedy drugs, and materialism. 

He focused on youth culture trends on the basis that young nervous systems registered the magnetic reversals most profoundly and reflected them back in the lineaments of the art and music they made or consumed. So far, so good.

In 1955, when our planet was bombarded by cycle 19 solar magnetic waves, young people in the West responded like needles in a groove with rock ’n’ roll’s tight jeans, short hair, biker JD aggression, short, fast songs, and widespread use of stimulant drugs like speed and coffee.

Silver Age comic-book punk was embodied by crew-cut Barry Allen in his speed suit. “Chemicals and Lighting” could have been a song or a band. 

The tight suits, establishment men, and emphasis on science and rationality are all typical, as are Stan Lee’s realistic superheroes such as the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man.


Wednesday 18 September 2019

Stormer Youth : Defection from Xavier’s



Junior Battle is like Solar Eclipse —
We Rarely See Him, 
But When We Do, 
It’s Always Special.





“Spence didn’t get as far as 1999 in his Towards 2012 essay, but he imagined the rise of a “Stormer” generation of what he called “imperial youth.” As it happened, his predictions were more or less accurate. In 1999, we had nu-metal, The Matrix, tight clothes, short hair, No Logo anticorporate demos, the emergence of bondage styles, and the Goth underground moving into the mainstream, a revival of popularity for cocaine, and, more significantly, perhaps, the jittery rise of Red Bull, Starbucks and coffee society. Comics gave us proactive world-changing superheroes and villains in Authority, Marvel Boy, and Wanted.


When last I was at Exeter,
The Mayor in courtesy show'd me The Castle,
And call'd it ‘Rougemont’ : at which name I started,
Because a Bard of Ireland told me once

I should not live long after I saw Richmond.


Junior Fury :
It's one of your contracts, sir.

I've amended that contract.

You require your players to maintain a 2.3 grade point average.
I’ve committed to maintaining a 3.5.

You require ten hours of community service, and l've committed to 50.

Any unexcused absences, any other disciplinary issues at school, you can nullify this agreement and send me to any school you want.

Papa Fury :
And how many days do I have
to consider this offer?

Junior Fury :
None.
The second page is a letter you need to sign that confirms my withdrawal from St. Francis [Xavier’s]
They know l'm leaving.

Papa Fury :
What?
You withdrew from St. Francis?

Junior Fury :
l called Richmond.
They expect me there in the morning.

Papa Fury :
You called Richmond?
You should have spoken to me
about this.

Junior Fury :
lt was a personal choice for me.

Papa Fury :
Well, I can fix all that in the morning.

Junior Fury :
Sir, please listen :

All l wanna do is play for you.
If I'm one of the top students at Richmond, I mean one of the top in the whole school, and I have great SATs, I can go to any college in the country.
l'm asking you to Trust Me.

Papa Fury :
You really wanna do this, huh?
Okay.
Part of growing up is making your own decisions and LIVING with The Consequences.

And you will EARN every minute of playing time.


Tuesday 17 September 2019

Ladies and Gentlemen of The Class of 1999




At the prom. Everyone is standing, watching the stage. Xander is miming anticipation. 

Announcer: 
And the award for Sunnydale High's Class Clown for 1999 goes to — Jack Mayhew. 

  The winner puts on a balloon hat and acts silly. 

Xander: 
Please! Anybody can be a prop class clown. 
You know, none of the people who vote for these things are even funny. 

  Buffy is at the punch bowl, ignoring the ruckus. 
The announcer urges Jonathan to the microphone. 

Jonathan: 
We have one more award to give out. 
Is Buffy Summers here tonight? 
Did she, um... 

  The crowd turns and finds her. 
She looks nervous at the attention. 

Jonathan: 
This is actually a new category. 
First time ever. 
I guess there were a lot of write-in ballots, and, um, 
the prom committee asked me to read this. 

"We're not good friends. 
Most of us never found the time to get to know you, 
but that doesn't mean we haven't noticed you. 
We don't talk about it much, but it's no secret that Sunnydale High isn't really like other high schools. 
A lot of weird stuff happens here."

The Chorus :
Zombies! 
Hyena-People! 
Snyder! (laughter

"But, whenever there was a problem or something creepy happened, 
you seemed to show up and stop it. 

Most of the people here have been Saved by you, 
or helped by you at one time or another. 
We're proud to say that the Class of '99 has the lowest mortality rate of any graduating class in Sunnydale history. 

(applause from the crowd) 

And we know at least part of that is because of you.  
So the senior class, offers its thanks, and gives you, uh, this —

  Jonathan produces a multicolored, glittering, miniature umbrella with a small metal plaque attached to the shaft. 

It's from all of us, and it has written here : -

' Buffy Summers —
Class Protector ' 

  The crowd breaks into sustained applause and cheering. 
Buffy walks to the stage and takes her award. 
 
  Cut to Buffy, watching the dancers. 
Giles comes up behind her. 

Giles: 
You did Good Work tonight, Buffy. 

Buffy: 
And I got a little toy surprise. 

Giles: 
I had no idea that children en masse could be gracious. 

Buffy: 
Every now and then, people surprise you. 

Giles: (looking past her) 
Every now and then. 




“Iain Spence published Sekhmet Hypothesis: The Signals of the Beginning of a New Identity as a book in 1995, but it wasn’t until two years later that I came across his ideas in an article he’d written for the magazine Towards 2012. As an illuminating way of reconsidering the familiar, I’m particularly fond of the Sekhmet Hypothesis, which never fails to get people talking at parties. As usual, please remember that this is just a framework; a way of ordering information into meaningful patterns in the service of creative lateral thinking, if you like. You may be able to find all kinds of examples to refute this data, but first bear in mind that I’ve used this predictive model to great effect and no small financial reward, and trust me when I say I’m passing it on as a tip, not as a belief system. If this book has made any point clear, I hope it’s that things don’t have to be real to be true. Or vice versa.

Soon you’ll notice how many advertisers and trend makers are aware of this theory and have been applying it to product placement, design, and the seasonal shifts of the rag trade since Spence published it. The more people know about it and react against it, or try to preempt it, the more the effect is likely to dissipate or find different ways to express itself. That may already be happening in the windblown halls of popular culture, although as I write, in 2010, Spence’s broad predictions are accurate still.

Sunspot activity follows a twenty-two-year cyclical pattern, building to a period of furious activity known as the solar maximum, then calming down for the solar minimum. Every eleven years, the solar magnetic field also undergoes a polarity reversal. It’s a little like a huge switch that toggles on or off, or the volume slider on a mixing desk, with loud at one end and silent at the other, and each period is given an identifying number. Cycle 23, for instance, had its maximum in 1999.

Spence suggests that these regular rewirings of the solar magnetic field naturally have an effect on the human nervous system, which leaves its traces most clearly in our cultural record—like a desert wind carving the shape of its passage into the dunes of fashion, art, and music. As a shorthand toward understanding the two maximum states we flip between, Spence suggests we can regard one pole as having a “punk” character, while its opposite may be thought of as “hippie.”

In Spence’s lexicon, at least as I understand it (his own website will set you straight if.   wrong), punk maxima can be identified in a fashion vogue for short hair, tight clothes, short, punchy popular music, aggression, speedy drugs, and materialism. Hippie, as I’m sure you’ll have guessed, is associated with signifiers from the converse end of the spectrum, like long hair, loose or baggy clothes, longer-form popular music, psychedelic or mind-expanding drugs, peace, and a renewed interest in the spiritual or transcendental. He focused on youth culture trends on the basis that young nervous systems registered the magnetic reversals most profoundly and reflected them back in the lineaments of the art and music they made or consumed. So far, so good.

In 1955, when our planet was bombarded by cycle 19 solar magnetic waves, young people in the West responded like needles in a groove with rock ’n’ roll’s tight jeans, short hair, biker JD aggression, short, fast songs, and widespread use of stimulant drugs like speed and coffee.

Silver Age comic-book punk was embodied by crew-cut Barry Allen in his speed suit. “Chemicals and Lighting” could have been a song or a band. 

The tight suits, establishment men, and emphasis on science and rationality are all “wrong), punk maxima can be identified in a fashion vogue for short hair, tight clothes, short, punchy popular music, aggression, speedy drugs, and materialism. Hippie, as I’m sure you’ll have guessed, is associated with signifiers from the converse end of the spectrum, like long hair, loose or baggy clothes, longer-form popular music, psychedelic or mind-expanding drugs, peace, and a renewed interest in the spiritual or transcendental. He focused on youth culture trends on the basis that young nervous systems registered the magnetic reversals most profoundly and reflected them back in the lineaments of the art and music they made or consumed. So far, so good.

In 1955, when our planet was bombarded by cycle 19 solar magnetic waves, young people in the West responded like needles in a groove with rock ’n’ roll’s tight jeans, short hair, biker JD aggression, short, fast songs, and widespread use of stimulant drugs like speed and coffee.
Silver Age comic-book punk was embodied by crew-cut Barry Allen in his speed suit. “Chemicals and Lighting” could have been a song or a band. The tight suits, establishment men, and emphasis on science and rationality are all typical, as are Stan Lee’s realistic superheroes such as the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man.

Eleven years later, cycle 20 reversed the polarity. By 1966, hair had become longer, clothes were looser and more flamboyant, music became more involved and sophisticated, and the drugs were mind expanders like LSD.


In 1966 the cosmic wave entered the comics, to bring with it the gods of Thor, villains like the Anti-Matter Man, and John Broome’s psychedelic Flash stories. The new heroes were antiestablishment “freaks” and mutants.

Nineteen seventy-seven brought a shift back to punk, as expressed in Malcolm McLaren and Vivienne Westwood’s fifties-influenced clothes and music, bondage and restriction, amphetamine sulfate use, and angry, confrontational politics.

The comics boom of that cycle gave us Judge Dredd, Frank Miller’s gritty noir, Alan Moore’s harsh logical realism.

Nineteen eighty-eight saw ecstasy, or MDMA, as the favored drug, accompanying long-form trance, ambient and dance music, Manchester “baggy” fitness wear as street wear, grunge beards, and a return to long hair. In comic books, this was the time of Deadline, Doom Patrol, Shade, and Sandman.

Spence didn’t get as far as 1999 in his Towards 2012 essay, but he imagined the rise of a “Stormer” generation of what he called “imperial youth.” As it happened, his predictions were more or less accurate. In 1999, we had nu-metal, The Matrix, tight clothes, short hair, No Logo anticorporate demos, the emergence of bondage styles, and the Goth underground moving into the mainstream, a revival of popularity for cocaine, and, more significantly, perhaps, the jittery rise of Red Bull, Starbucks and coffee society. Comics gave us proactive world-changing superheroes and villains in Authority, Marvel Boy, and Wanted.

This book will be published in 2011, when the fruits of the next wave will be hard to avoid. As I write, the word psychedelic is being used so often on TV and in magazines that it’s barely funny. Avatar’s hippy eco-vision of an interconnected natural world and the massive success of Alice in Wonderland (always popular during hippie periods) exemplify this current, as do the vampire heroes who have occupied the imaginative place once taken by sixties Pre-Raphaelite and Edwardian dandies. In comics, the “realism” boom has been quietly left behind like an unfashionable pair of trousers. The new superhero books are becoming more fantastic, colorful, and self-consciously “mythic.”

Spence’s article does not, nor will I, attempt to track the alleged effects of these undeniably real solar magnetic events on non-Western cultures. 
Neither does he extend his argument backward to consider the ways in which the popular arts scene of 1944 could be described in “hippie” terms (LSD, however, was synthesized in 1945), or that of 1933 as “punk” (although perhaps Weimar decadence and the art of George Grosz could build a case there). And so on. I leave that contemplation to skeptics who choose to debunk the idea or to zealots who want to believe it.

Unless Terence McKenna’s “Timewave Zero” theories are correct, and we collapse into an atemporal singularity on December 21, 2012, 2021 will bring the cycle back around to “punk,” and if this seesaw sounds horribly predictable and repetitive, be assured that it will all seem fresh to the young people who take their own inspiration from the solar trade winds.

As for me, I intended to bring my run on JLA to an end along with the century. The Invisibles, too, was scheduled to wrap in 2000, and I planned to re-create myself again to complement the change in the weather. I was almost forty, had never felt better, and wanted to be ready for the harsher spirit I’d decided was on its way in the wake of the Labour election win, the death of the former Princess Diana, and the commencement of cycle 23.
I’d also just met my future wife, Kristan, a stunning, brainy blonde who dressed like Barbarella to go to the pub, worked as a corporate insurance broker, and read Philip K. Dick. It would be another three years before our paths crossed again and we were able to get together, but that die was already cast.

On a trip to Venice, Italy, I bought my first real suit—Donna Karan—and was encouraged to go corporate. Smart tailoring and the jargon of advertising, motivational speaking, instead of fractal-patterned shirts and druggy psychedelia, seemed the way to go in cycle 23. At heart, I’d always been an uptight Presbyterian anyway. I’d never been “able to get back to the radiant world I’d reached in Kathmandu, and I’d begun to “suspect it was because in some way I was already there. I had very little doubt that I’d “wake up” in that place at the moment of death, like a game player looking up from the screen where his avatar lies bleeding, only to realize he’s home and safe and always was.

“The drugs don’t work, they just make you worse,” sang the Verve, and after eight years of experimentation, ruthless self-examination, ego inflation, and ego loss, I had to admit they were probably onto something. The shallow hedonistic spirit of the nineties was too fragile to endure the cold of the vast twin shadows cast backward by an onrushing age of terror. Darker times were on their way, demanding a new clarity and rigor of thought.

I tried to articulate the outlines of the next trend by introducing to the pages of JLA a military-funded superteam called the Ultramarines, whipped up by Uncle Sam to keep the Justice League in check should their internationalist stance ever compromise US military security. By the end of the story, the Ultramarines had split from their paymasters and joined with a group of like-minded DC heroes in a hovering city-sized headquarters named Superbia, there to announce a bold new manifesto for change :

SUPERBIA HEREBY DECLARES INDEPENDENCE FROM ALL NATIONS AND OPENS ITS GATES TO SUPER-CHAMPIONS FROM THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. WE INTEND TO SERVE AS A FIRST-STRIKE GLOBAL PEACEKEEPING FORCE. WE WILL KILL IF WE HAVE TO. IF WE HAVE TO, WE’LL LET YOU KNOW. TERRORISTS, DESPOTS, CORRUPT BUSINESSMEN … THE INTERNATIONAL ULTRAMARINE CORPS IS HERE. THERE’S NOWHERE TO HIDE.

As it happened, I’d almost exactly described what the next big development of the superhero concept would look like.

Meanwhile, I prepared myself for the oncoming zeitgeist by listening to Chris Morris’s bleak, brilliant, bad-trippy Blue Jam on Radio 1 every Thursday after John Peel. Oddly enough, I was beginning to find humor in all the things that had once frightened me. The prying eye of Big Brother, the aging process, loneliness, failure, and death were all just punch lines to the joke. I loved to listen over and over again to HAL 9000’s death scene from the soundtrack to 2001 : A Space Odyssey, and when Jarvis Cocker and Pulp released their masterpiece comedown album, This Is Hardcore, its unflinching evocation of middle age, stale waterbeds, and tinny bachelor pad music made me rethink my own lifestyle.

I was about as alien as I’d ever wanted to be, but I’d grown tired of one-night stands, drink, drugs, and the dating game.

It was time to get serious.”


Papa Roach


End of Days
Gabriel Byrne - Rod Steiger - Kevin Pollock
Miriam Margolyes



Nhu8



The Duel of The Fates

Fight Club

Clubbed to Death


Earshot

The Columbine Clues

EgyptAir 990

Friday 13 September 2019

Writings








Abhinava tells us that the process of creative contemplation or holistic meditative inquiry (bhāvanā-krama) that leads to experiential knowing of reality is based on these three supports: 


❖ Sound and Careful Reflection on Your Experience (sat-tarka



❖ The Guidance of a Great Teacher (sad-guru) who is skilled in meditative enquiry and has attained its fruit 


❖ The Wisdom of The Scriptures (sad-āgama




“The Sacred Jedi TEXTS...!”

“Oh? Read Them, Have You....?”

•He hesitates and protests - No, he has not.•

“In this Galaxy, you gotta get The Missing Ancient Scrolls.


Then when you get The Missing Ancient Scrolls, you get The Power. 


Then, when you get The Power, then you get The Criminal Empire of Followers.


And you can do anything you want. That’s Why You Gotta Make Your Own Moves.”


— Snoke


 "Curious. I have brought The Sith to their ultimate victory. Through study, I will soon learn how to defeat death. While I may choose apprentices, I will never choose a successor."


 — Darth Sidious, 

Marginalia in The Book of The Sith, 

in the section titled 

"Selecting an Apprentice"



EPISTEMOLOGY 


One of the central concerns of philosophy is to investigate how we know what we know, if there is such a thing as certain knowledge, and, if so, how it is attained. This is a topic of concern to the Tantra as well, and it is explored in depth by the scholar-sages Utpala Deva and Abhinava Gupta. The difficult and abstruse nature of these discussions invite us to focus on a simpler formulation offered by the second author in his Essence of the Tantras. 


There Abhinava tells us that the process of creative contemplation or holistic meditative inquiry (bhāvanā-krama) that leads to experiential knowing of reality is based on these three supports: 


❖ sound and careful reflection on your experience (sat-tarka) 

❖ the guidance of a great teacher (sad-guru) who is skilled in meditative enquiry and has attained its fruit 


❖ the wisdom of the scriptures (sad-āgama) 


When these three come together in agreement, Abhinava suggests, we know we have arrived at truth. One or two of them is insufficient for certainty. In fact, allowing ourselves to abide in uncertainty about anything not supported by all three keeps us open and in a process of learning that closes down if we prematurely decide that we know. Usually in Indian philosophy, the first two valid means of knowledge that are argued for are direct perception and valid inference; here they are combined into sat-tarka, which means the process of drawing sound conclusions based on one’s experience. In logic (both Western and Indian), a conclusion is “sound” when the premises are true and the structure of thought leading to the conclusion is valid. To give a slightly modified version of the standard Indian example of a logical argument: Premise 1: Where there is smoke, there is fire (axiom based on the aggregate of one’s experiences). Premise 2: There is smoke on the mountain over there (direct observation). Conclusion: Therefore, there is fire on the mountain. The argument is called valid structurally because if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. But it is only sound (= correct) if the premises are in fact true. And this particular argument is an example of inference because there is no way to be one hundred per cent sure that there is always fire whenever and wherever there is smoke. The standard argument in the Indian system of logic is not deduction, which seeks to establish irrefutable certainty, but inference. Unlike in Western philosophy, in the Indian system you never decide that you know for sure, and so you never completely close yourself to unguessed possibilities. Thus the sense of wonder and openness that is the foundation of all philosophy is maintained. The problem of direct experience as a means of knowledge is that people often draw conclusions based on their experience that are logically invalid. They don’t realize they are doing so because their assumptions and the process by which they draw their conclusions usually go unexamined. Even more basically, they are often unable to separate their experience from their interpretation. People can get ruffled when their interpretation of their experience is questioned, saying, “But that’s my experience!” In fact, anything you can say in words about your experience is an interpretation, not the experience itself. On the path of inquiry into truth, we never devalue or dispense with reflection on our personal experience (note that Abhinava mentions it first), yet since we cannot be one hundred per cent certain about the conclusions we draw or how universally applicable they are, we soften our iron grip on our apparently safe and comfortable sense of certainty and seek to corroborate it with trusted authorities: the teacher and sacred scripture. To some Westerners, having the spiritual teacher and scripture as the other two legs of the tripod seems redundant. But this system of checks and balances is well worked out. Scripture exists as a representative document of a whole community; because even if a given scripture was written by just one person, it is transmitted (copied and recopied) for centuries if and only if some of its contents are effective for a wider group of people. As a document of collective wisdom perpetuated by community, scripture protects you from an aberrant teacher who preaches his own idiosyncratic experience as if it were universal, thereby potentially leading you astray. Of course, for this setup to work, you must read a scripture with your own judgment, not solely on the basis of the teacher’s interpretation of it. On the other hand, though scriptures are presumed to have been written by an awakened master, a healthy skepticism is maintained by requiring their wisdom to be corroborated by the other two sources of knowledge. Further, the requirement of the living teacher means that you are protected from an off-the-wall interpretation of scripture you arrived at in your own head. Such an interpretation might make sense to you, might even feel good, but is seen by the teacher with clear long-term view to be one that will eventually take you off track. Such a teacher will rarely say, “You’re wrong,” but will more likely challenge you to contemplate deeper, beyond your conditioned mind. This system of double corroboration for valid knowledge allows us to come up with seeds of wisdom that we can count on and build a spiritual life on. But the process is not completed until these seeds come to life as living, vibrating wisdom within us. That is, in the Tantra, we seek not just to know wisdom but to fully embody it. The evidence that you have done so is that you no longer need the external form of the teaching (the words or concepts); it has simply blossomed into living experience, unsupported by any reminders. When this happens, then no matter how beautiful the words of the teaching are, they seem to be flat or pale or inadequate in comparison with the actual experience.

Tuesday 10 September 2019

The Morrison Manifesto






The Morrison Manifesto

Having just read through every X-MEN trade paperback available to humanity, I think I have a pretty clear idea of what works in this book and what doesn't. Here's what I think would be the most effective strategy for keeping old readers and, more importantly, for attracting a new contemporary audience.

1. In my opinion, and probably everyone else's too, the best work done on the book, the work which transformed the New X-MEN into Marvel's primary franchise was done by Chris Claremont and John Byrne between '77 and '80. Long after I'd ditched my comic book collection and started a punk rock band THIS was the one book I still followed because it was COOL. It's been fashionable to knock both creators in the intervening years and often with some justification but I defy anyone to read this run of X-MEN and not be impressed by the bravado and invention. Not only were both creators so far ahead of their game they were defining the rules of a whole NEW game (early Alan Moore is PURE Claremont and the reverberations of 'Days of Future Past' - with its depictions of the twilight days of the superheroes - are still echoing in too many books to mention) they had the freedom to create new material, reconceptualise the old stuff which still worked and ignoring the outmoded elements which had sapped the original X-MEN series of its vitality.

2. In the last decade or so, the tendency at Marvel has been intensely conservative; comics like the X-MEN have gone from freewheeling, overdriven pop to cautious, dodgy retro. What was dynamic becomes static - dead characters always return, nothing that happens really matters ultimately. The stage is never cleared for new creations to develop and grow. The comic has turned inwards and gone septic like a toenail. The only people reading are fan boys who don't count. The X-MEN, for all it was still Marvel's bestseller, had become a watchword for undiluted geekery before the movie gave us another electroshock jolt. And in the last decade, sales fell from millions to hundreds of thousands.

3. In the way that Claremont and Byrne did in the 80s and Jim Lee in the 90s we need to make the book COOL again. The movie has already done most of the work for us and there are MILLIONS of new potential readers out there for the taking: including the women who slavered over Hugh Jackman and who should be able to pick up THIS book and get the same sexy thrills from the comic book character (so no more blue and yellow spandex and Batman helmet. Why does Wolverine wear a helmet in the the same shape as his hair anyway? It just looks safdsff stupid now) We have to stop talking to the shrinking fan audience and re-engage the attention of the mainstream. Longtime fans will read the book and safdsff about it NO MATTER WHAT. We don't need to attract them, we need to make the book accessible to the real world audience. We need to get X-MEN and Marvel Comics in the news again, in the cool magazines and on TV. We need to recapture the college and the hipster audience because that audience is bigger than ever thanks to the movies and games, and thanks to things like 'Buffy' and 'The Matrix', the entire mainstream is pumped and primed to consume super-hero stories.

To make the X-MEN feel fresh once more, we need to take a closer, harsher look at what's not working in this book and the comics field in general. The recent X-MEN stuff has been written in an old-fashioned, overdense style for one, and we need to update, streamline and demystify the storytelling techniques considerably to appeal to modern sensibilities.

4. I think everyone agrees that we can no longer afford to be bogged down by 40 years of the most convoluted continuity in comics. This isn't the Ultimate line, however, and we have to find a way be faithful to the sprawling X-MEN mythos without being shackled by events in stories written thirty years ago, for a different world and a very different audience. My intention is to use the rich history of the X-MEN more as background window dressing and as a treasure trove of material we can recut for a new eager audience (in the same way Claremont and Byrne sifted out the best stuff from the original series and combined it with new material). Elements like the Savage Land or the Shi'Ar Empire will be reappraised, re-introduced and woven into the larger scale science fiction universe of the X-MEN in such a way that it will seem as though we're seeing these concepts for the first time). The movie wisely went sci-fi instead of trying to appease the superhero crowd and I think we must do the same. The X-MEN is not a story about superheroes but a story about the ongoing evolutionary struggle between good/new and bad/old. The X-MEN are every rebel teenager wanting to change the world and make it better. Humanity is every adult, clinging to the past, trying to destroy the future even as he places all his hopes there. The superhero aspect should be seen as only a small element in the vast potential of this franchise.

These stories will be accessible, punchy and modern. Each story arc should be like a movie or a TV miniseries depending on the focus - beginning middle and end, character development and resolution. Every time we start a new arc, every time we start a new issue in fact, we start fresh as if someone is picking up the book for the first time. The movie has made the characters familiar which helps us immensely. From here on in we shall strive to limit the cast to a handful of easily-recognisable figures.

5. If there are any really major outstanding questions left unanswered about our characters, let me know and I'll figure out a way to resolve them in future stories but for now, let's start with a fresh storyline, a completely different feel and allow people a chance to get to know the cast on the run again. That's how we play 'continuity' as we gently lay it to rest and replace it with er... 'superconsistency'. Everything you need to know will be explained in ANY given issue but long-time fans will be rewarded with extended character development and soap opera backstories. Think of the modular, accessible nature of storylines from the Buffy mythos which also have extended developmental arcs for longterm fans to follow. Same goes for the X-Files etc. The longer storylines in XMEN would play out over a year at most. No more decades-long unrevealed secrets. And no more need be said about Logan's origins.

6. We have to get back the kick-ass anything can happen feeling that made the Claremont/Byrne issues so monumental. This is a POP book, as essential as the new Eminem release or the latest Keanu movie. We can rejoin the culture here and the only way to do it is to drop '80s and '90s notions of who our audience should be. The only way to get back in there is to deliver the stuff the movies and the games CAN'T. And what the mainstream audience wants from us (and I've asked a lot of 'em) is raw imagination, ready-made characters, outrageous spectacle, storming angst and emotional drama. Beautiful people with incredible powers doing startling, diverting things!

7. GET RID OF THE COSTUMES. Let's ditch the spandex for the new century and get our heroes into something that wouldn't make you look like a safdsff if you wore it in the street. The movie had it almost right: I think we should go for hardcore bike style exo-rubber uniforms, maybe military pants and wrestling style boots. Whatever. A UNIFORM again. Youth culture looks are going uniform anyway. The look's brutalist and military and I think the X-MEN should reflect that to stay on the cutting edge of cool. Long leather coats with a big X on the back as our heroes get smarter, prouder and louder. Cyclops wearing ruby quartz contacts. I'd like to see some yellow in panelling or detailing on the costumes - if only to avoid the dull black leather look of every film superhero - but it should be pop art dayglo yellow, the kind cyclists and bikers wear to be seen. Let's discuss a new look. X-MEN is a soap opera about super-people in the same way that Dallas was a soap about oil people. The oil only provided window-dressing and an excuse to look great.

8. Let's aim for the big audiences. Let's push books we can be proud of on every level. Books that kids will dig for their sheer gee-whizz, kinetic strut, which college kids will buy for the rebel irony and adults will love for the distraction, just like the movies and the TV shows - just like when Stan was doin' it!!! I believe we have a rare opportunity to bust some self-imposed barriers and run screaming through the streets if we just cut loose a little and do work aimed at the mainstream, media-literate audience of kids, teenagers and adults with disposable income. Trust me. It’ll feel like nothing ever seen before but I intend to deliver the best, most faithful-to-the-concept X-MEN you could hope to imagine ….

9. And, a propos of nothing – I just read that the most enthusiastic supporters of Darwin’s evolutionary theory were a group of English scientists of the 1800’s who called themselves …. The X Club




Saturday 7 September 2019

Snoke is a Joke : The Tool of The Fates














In this Galaxy, you gotta get The Ancient Scrolls.

Then when you get The Ancient Scrolls, you get The Power. 

Then, when you get The Power, then you get The Criminal Empire of Followers.


And you can do anything you want.








EPISTEMOLOGY 
“One of the central concerns of philosophy is to investigate how we know what we know, if there is such a thing as certain knowledge, and, if so, how it is attained.

This is a topic of concern to the Tantra as well, and it is explored in depth by the scholar-sages Utpala Deva and Abhinava Gupta. The difficult and abstruse nature of these discussions invite us to focus on a simpler formulation offered by the second author in his Essence of the Tantras. 

There Abhinava tells us that the process of creative contemplation or holistic meditative inquiry (bhāvanā-krama) that leads to experiential knowing of reality is based on these three supports: 

sound and careful reflection on your experience (sat-tarka) 

❖ the guidance of a great teacher (sad-guru) who is skilled in meditative enquiry and has attained its fruit 

❖ the wisdom of the scriptures (sad-āgama

When these three come together in agreement, Abhinava suggests, we know we have arrived at truth. 

One or two of them is insufficient for certainty. In fact, allowing ourselves to abide in uncertainty about anything not supported by all three keeps us open and in a process of learning that closes down if we prematurely decide that we know. Usually in Indian philosophy, the first two valid means of knowledge that are argued for are direct perception and valid inference; here they are combined into sat-tarka, which means the process of drawing sound conclusions based on one’s experience. 

In logic (both Western and Indian), a conclusion is “sound” when the premises are true and the structure of thought leading to the conclusion is valid. 

To give a slightly modified version of the standard Indian example of a logical argument: 

Premise 1: Where there is smoke, there is fire (axiom based on the aggregate of one’s experiences). 

Premise 2: There is smoke on the mountain over there (direct observation). 

Conclusion: Therefore, there is fire on the mountain. 

He’s No Jedi.



The argument is called valid structurally because if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. 

But it is only sound (= correct) if the premises are in fact true. And this particular argument is an example of inference because there is no way to be one hundred per cent sure that there is always fire whenever and wherever there is smoke. 





The standard argument in the Indian system of logic is not deduction, which seeks to establish irrefutable certainty, but inference. Unlike in Western philosophy, in the Indian system you never decide that you know for sure, and so you never completely close yourself to unguessed possibilities. 





Thus the sense of wonder and openness that is the foundation of all philosophy is maintained. The problem of direct experience as a means of knowledge is that people often draw conclusions based on their experience that are logically invalid. They don’t realize they are doing so because their assumptions and the process by which they draw their conclusions usually go unexamined. 

Even more basically, they are often unable to separate their experience from their interpretation. 

People can get ruffled when their interpretation of their experience is questioned, saying, “But that’s my experience!” 

In fact, anything you can say in words about your experience is an interpretation, not the experience itself. On the path of inquiry into truth, we never devalue or dispense with reflection on our personal experience (note that Abhinava mentions it first), yet since we cannot be one hundred per cent certain about the conclusions we draw or how universally applicable they are, we soften our iron grip on our apparently safe and comfortable sense of certainty and seek to corroborate it with trusted authorities: the teacher and sacred scripture. 

To some Westerners, having the spiritual teacher and scripture as the other two legs of the tripod seems redundant. But this system of checks and balances is well worked out. 



Scripture exists as a representative document of a whole community; because even if a given scripture was written by just one person, it is transmitted (copied and recopied) for centuries if and only if some of its contents are effective for a wider group of people. As a document of collective wisdom perpetuated by community, scripture protects you from an aberrant teacher who preaches his own idiosyncratic experience as if it were universal, thereby potentially leading you astray. Of course, for this setup to work, you must read a scripture with your own judgment, not solely on the basis of the teacher’s interpretation of it. 

On the other hand, though scriptures are presumed to have been written by an awakened master, a healthy skepticism is maintained by requiring their wisdom to be corroborated by the other two sources of knowledge. 

Further, the requirement of the living teacher means that you are protected from an off-the-wall interpretation of scripture you arrived at in your own head. Such an interpretation might make sense to you, might even feel good, but is seen by the teacher with clear long-term view to be one that will eventually take you off track. 

Such a teacher will rarely say, “You’re wrong,” but will more likely challenge you to contemplate deeper, beyond your conditioned mind. 

This system of double corroboration for valid knowledge allows us to come up with seeds of wisdom that we can count on and build a spiritual life on. But the process is not completed until these seeds come to life as living, vibrating wisdom within us. 

That is, in the Tantra, we seek not just to know wisdom but to fully embody it. The evidence that you have done so is that you no longer need the external form of the teaching (the words or concepts); it has simply blossomed into living experience, unsupported by any reminders. 

When this happens, then no matter how beautiful the words of the teaching are, they seem to be flat or pale or inadequate in comparison with the actual experience. 
Hate is just Love with it’s directional polarity inverted.

The Unified Force of Emotion is called Care — TRUE CARE

Whenever you hate someone, you are caring about them, intensely.










“I Don’t Want to Fight You.”

“I Don’t Care.”

LIAR — You Do Nothing Else — ALL YOU DO is Care















< A door opens and Vincent enters>

MICHAEL 
(rises and walks over to Vincent)
You look pale. Bad news. 
Tell me right away

VINCENT
It's not just a bad banking deal. 
These guys are butchers.

MICHAEL
What guys?

VINCENT
Lucchesi. 
He controls all of them -- 
Altobello, the Archbishop, other people higher up, P2* maybe, secret unknown. 
They're running things. 

[*Propaganda Due. This is a reference to a (real-life) Masonic lodge, based in Rome, and alleged(known?) to be comprised of only the highest echelon of elite power players including Italy's major political and corporate figures, high-ranking Vatican clergy, and of course Mafiosi. There are a number of conspiracy theories connected with this group. (Thanks to "Don Rico" for this info).]

MICHAEL
I'm in their way?

VINCENT
He's hired a professional assassin to kill you. 
He's Sicilian. I don't know his name. 
They say he never fails.

MICHAEL
Then no one is safe. 
Even the Pope is in danger.

VINCENT
No. We still have time. 
We can prevent this.

MICHAEL
I tried Vincent. I tried, to keep everything from coming to this. 

But it's not possible. 
Not in This World.


VINCENT
Give me the order.




MICHAEL
You won't be able to go back. You'll be like me.

VINCENT
Good.

MICHAEL
All my life I wanted out. 
I wanted The Family, out.



VINCENT
Well I don't want out. 

I want the power to preserve The Family.

(then)

I'm asking for The Order.

<Michael doesn’t say anything, but it’s apparent he’s given The Order. The door opens and Connie enters.>

VINCENT (to Connie)
It's done.

MICHAEL

Because I can't do it any more.

CONNIE

It doesn't matter. Vincent knows what to do. 
Come on outside. Take a rest and -- and don't think about it.

MICHAEL

All I do is think about it.

VINCENT

I am your son. 
Command me on all things.




MICHAEL
Give up my daughter. 
That's the price you pay, for the life you choose.

<Vincent nods. Michael goes to the door and motions for Calo, Al Neri and Armand to come in.>

MICHAEL (to Vincent)
Nephew, from this moment on, call yourself Vincent Corleone.

<Vincent kisses Michael's hand. Michael motions for him to sit down as Calo, Al Neri and Armand acknowledge their new Don.>

CALO (kissing Vincent's hand)
Vincenzo.

VINCENT
Grazie, Calo.

AL NERI (kissing Vincent's hand)
Don Corleone.

ARMAND (kissing Vincent's hand)
Don Vincenzo Corleone.

<Michael, watching, turns away and leaves with Connie, the door closes.>