Wednesday 7 November 2018

Michael, The Knight


Archangel Michael
Defend Us in 
BATTLE.


Our Greatest Fear is Not That We Are Inadequate — 
Our Greatest Fear is That We are Power-Full BEYOND MEASURE.








It is our Light, not our Darkness, 
that most frightens us. 

Your playing 'Small' 
does not serve The World. 

There is nothing enlightened about shrinking 
so that Other People won't feel insecure around you. 

We are all meant to SHINE 
as children do. 

It's not just in some of Us; 
it is in EVERYONE. 

And as We let Our Own Lights shine, 
We unconsciously give Other People 
permission to do the same. 

As we are liberated from Our Own Fear,
Our presence automatically liberates Others.

When The Angels Turn Their Back On You



Donna
Do you think that if you were falling in space... 
That you would slow down after a while, 
or go faster and faster? 

Laura
Faster and Faster. 
And for a long time you wouldn't 
feel anything. 

And then you'd burst into Fire. 
Forever... 

And The Angels wouldn't help you. 

Because They've All Gone Away...




Alan Moore’s Lost Stan Lee Essay

"Blinded By The Hype: 
An Affectionate Character Assassination". 

by The Alan Moore of 1983

 

I doubt that any of you sitting out there reading this are totally unfamiliar with the name Stan Lee…unless, of course, you happen to be one of those unfortunates who have spent their childhoods in a laundry hamper. Should this be the case, then please allow me to fill you in on the necessary details.

Stan Lee is the name of the flawed genius responsible for the Marvel Comics empire in its entirety. Without Stan Lee, you would not be reading this. Without Stan Lee there would have been no Fantastic Four, no X Men, no Hulk, no Thor, no nothing. Without Stan Lee there quite probably would have been no Conan movie and it is almost certain the comic book industry as a whole would be vastly different, assuming that it existed at all.

On the other hand, without Stan Lee you wouldn’t have to sit through such marrow-chilling dreck as the Spider-Man television show. I suppose it’s a case of having to take the rough with the smooth.

My long-distance acquaintance with this gentleman goes back some twenty years to the fateful day when, laid up with one of those loathsome childhood, I had sent my mother out to buy me my weekly comics ration. The particular comic I had been after was an issue of DC’s Blackhawk.

Knowing, however, that my maternal parent would be unlikely to remember anything as demanding as a two-syllable word like Blackhawk, I played it safe and told her that the comic I wanted featured a bunch fo people who all wore blue uniforms.

What turned up was Fantastic Four number three. Imagine my surprise.

My mother, of course, apologised profusely. For this reason I let her off with a mild cuffing and didn’t loose the dobermans upon her, as was my usual practice. Some two hours later, after I’d finished reading FF no.3 for something like the eighth time, I realised that she had in fact done me a tremendous service. This comic was utterly stark raving foaming-at-the-mouth stupendous!

Now, I was not the sort of child who regularly went in for lavish displays of gratitude but I recall that evening I threw mother an extra lump of raw meat and agreed to consider putting a couple of extra links in her chain…

At this point I should perhaps explain exactly what it was that devastated me about the third issue of the Fantastic Four. After all, when the issue first appeared, most of you readers were just a bunch of random genes and chromosomes wandering around looking for somebody to happen to. On top of that, you have grown up in a world where you have something in the region of forty different super-hero titles to chose from each month.

I doubt you can imagine the sheer impact that single comic possessed back there in the comic-starved wastelands of 1961 or whenever it was. Especially to someone whose only exposure to the super hero had been the clear-cut and clean-living square-jawed heroes featured in DC comics at the time. The most immediately noticeable thing was the sheer strangeness of Jack Kirby’s art. It had a craggy, textured quality that looked almost unpleasant to eyes that had become used to the graceful figures of Carmine Infantino or the smooth inking of Murphy Anderson. That said, it was a taste which quickly grew upon me.

Only a few short months later I couldn’t really look at Infantino or Kane or Swan or any of the other DC artists of that period without feeling that there was something missing… a lack of grittiness or something. Like I say, the art was very, very strange. Those of you whose only exposure to Kirby’s artwork has been something like ‘The Eternals’ can’t begin to imagine how strange.

The writing, however, was stranger. It wasn’t the plot that was so exceptional… as I recall the plot featured a second rate villain called the Miracle man who had the power to create illusions. He attacked the Fantastic Four, beat them, they regrouped, beat him, end of story. Nothing special.

What was special was the characterization…the way the characters talked, thought and behaved. I mean, think about it for a moment…there was a standard noble scientist type called Reed Richards who was given to making long-winded and pretentious proclamations on everything from Epsilon radiation to Universal Love.

There was his wimpy and fainthearted girlfriend, Susan Storm, who always looked as if she’d be much happier curled up in an armchair with a bottle of valium and the latest issue of Vogue rather than being captured by the Mole Man or someone of that ilk.

There was her skinny, teenaged brother Johnny who was brash, loudmouthed and not a little obnoxious, the sort of person who looked like he’d have less trouble picking up an articulated lorry than he would have picking up a steady girlfriend.

And last, but certainly not least, there was Ben Grimm, the Thing.

In those early days, the Thing was nothing at all like your cuddly, likeable ‘Orange Teddy-bear’ of later years. In those days he was portrayed as being something like a manic-depressive Hulk with a constant migraine headache, forever sprouting dialogue along the liens of “Bah! Out of my way, puny mortal!” and smashing up cars and buildings with a gusto that would leave the average soccer hooligan gaping with admiration.

On more than one occasion he came dangerously close to actually murdering the Human Torch while in a bad mood and in general you had the impression that he was always on the verge of turning into a fully fledged villain and quitting the Fantastic Four for good.

To someone who had cut his teeth upon the sanitised niceness of the Justice League of America, this was heady stuff indeed. I mean, in DC comics, if Superman ever said anything remotely nasty to Batman or Wonder Woman you knew that he was either suffering from the unpredictable effects of Red Kryptonite or was having his mind controlled by Lex Luther’s latest ‘Brain-Ray’.

With Ben Grimm, you knew that he was quite likely to pull someone’s arms and legs off one at a time for no better reason than that his corn-flakes had gone all soggy before he got round to eating them that morning.

There was a memorable scene in that selfsame issue three which featured the Invisible Girl proudly presenting her team-mates with some new costumes which she had designed (Up until that point, the Fantastic Four had dressed in ordinary street clothes.)

The Thing’s Costume was a skintight blue affair complete with black boots and a blue helmet which did it’s best to conceal his hideous, lumpy orange face. By the end of the issue he had ripped it to pieces in a fit of temper and stamped off wearing only the black bootees and the modified Y-Fronts which we know and love today.

In the same time, the Human Torch threw a screaming temper tantrum that would have looked better on a five-year old and decided to leave the Fantastic Four forever. With all this going on, you can see why I was less than interested by the Miracle Man and his horde of illusory monsters.

It was my first taste of Stan Lee’s writing and I was hooked.

Subsequent issues were no let down. In issue four the Sub Mariner made his first appearance since the 1950’s, turning up in the guise of a down and out amnesiac tramp who was quietly rotting away in a Bowery flophouse until said establishment was visited by the Human Torch who was still on the run from his three teammates.

In what, to me, remains one of the most electrifying comic scenes ever, an awestruck Johnny Storm ignites one finger using his flame-power and begins to shave away the tramp’s shaggy mane of hair and tangled beard to reveal the unearthly triangular face and elegant curving eyebrows of Prince Namor, the legendary Sub Mariner.

And on and on it went. And not only within the pages of the Fantastic Four: during this period Lee was expanding the whole Marvel line-up, revamping the flagging mystery titles to include a constantly increasing menagerie super-humans, and, most remarkably, writing them all himself. Thor, Ant Man, Daredevil, Iron Man, The Hulk, The Avengers… bearing in mind that the majority of these titles were monthlies, perhaps you’d like to sit down with a pencil and paper and work out just how many pages of script Stan the Man was having to turn out in any given month in addition to being the managing editor of a rapidly snowballing comic-book empire.

I mean, I myself have been known to pen a page or two in my time, but the thought of a workload like the that makes me tremble uncontrollably and give voice to funny squeaking noises. The man must have had eight pints of black coffee where most of us have blood.

Naturally, not all the scripts were that good, although if anyone had suggested that to me at the time I would have ripped their spine out and fed it to them an inch at a time.

Like most readers of that period I had become totally brainwashed by the sheer bellowing overkill of the Marvel publicity machine. If a cover-blurb in formed me that Millie the Model meets The Rawhide Kid was “The Greatest Action Epic of All Time” then by God, so it was and never mind about War and Peace, The Bible, King Solomon’s Mines and Moby Dick. As far as I was concerned, if it wasn’t written by Stan Lee it wasn’t in the running.

Probably the most remarkable thing that Stan Lee achieved was the way in which he managed to hold on to his audience long after they had grown beyond the age range usually associated with comic book readers of that period. He did this by constant application of change, modification and development.

No comic book was allowed to remain static for long. Iron Man traded in his gunmetal-grey juggernaut of a costume for the sleek red and gold affair that was gradually turned into the costume we know today. The Hulk left the Avengers, never to return. A Howling Commando got killed from time to time. You can say what you like about the early Marvel universe, but it sure as hell wasn’t boring.

As the sixties wore on, Lee’s writing began to mirror the changes that were taking place in the society about him. The gritty, streetwise realism slowly gave way to a sense of adventure and wonder on a grand and cosmic scale, just as thousands of middle class American kids were donning kaftans, growing their hair and setting out for San Francisco in search of cosmic adventures of their own.

To many, this ‘visionary’ period of Lee’s writing stands as his finest work. Personally, although it knocked me for a loop at the time, I can see with hindsight that in many ways it spelled the beginning of the end. That said, while it lasted it was probably the most fun you could have without risking imprisonment.

The Fantastic Four encountered, in swift succession, the stunning planet-eater known as Galactus, the soulful and simonized Silver Surfer, the Black Panther’s technological utopia set in the heart of the African jungles, the Inhumans, the Watcher and a vast plethora of equally brain-numbing individuals.

Thor encountered the Rigellian colonizers and more memorably, Ego the Living Planet. I’ll never forget turning the last page of that particular issue of Journey into Mystery to be confronted by the full-page spectacle of a massive organic planet with the grafted-on face of a malign octogenarian.

Believe me, when people my age wax lyrical about the sense of wonder to be found in those old comics, that’s the sort of thing they’re talking about. It was the sort of once-in-a-lifetime utterly mind-roasting concept that made you wonder just how long Lee and his Bullpen buddies could keep up that sort of pace and style.

The answer was, sadly, not long.”

As Marvel began to grow into a bigger and bigger concern, Lee seemed to find most of his time taken up in the day to day editorial decisions implicit in such a large enterprise, and less and less time available for the actual writing.

Other writers began to appear. Some of them, like Roy Thomas, were very very competent indeed. Others were less so. The one thing that all of these newer writers had in common was that they had by and large cut their teeth upon the writing o f Stan Lee.

This was good in as much as it lent a pleasing continuity to the books. Roy Thomas following Stan Lee with a style very much like Lee’s own… but bad in that what we were getting was a kind of Stan-Lee-Once-Removed situation. It was a sort of watering down process.

Eventually, writers began to appear who had cut their teeth upon Roy Thomas and the original idea was diluted still further. Writers who had less idea about plotting and characterization than a common earthworm came to believe that all one needed to write a good solid Stan Lee type story was to have Dr Doom or Galactus turn up and the heroes to spend a couple of obligatory frames arguing amongst themselves.

But, through Lee’s genius for publicity, the Marvel Machine had gathered a certain momentum. Each successive cover boasted that this issue was destined to be “The Greatest Super Heroic Slugfest in the Mighty Marvel Age of Comics!” And, like the ninnies we were, believed it. After all, when had Stan ever lied to us?

No matter that the issue in question featured the same old mindless fight scenes that we’d been through a hundred times before. No matter that the characters had degenerated into shallow parodies of their former selves. We sent for our MMMS membership kits and erected fiery crosses in the gardens of people suspected of reading DC comics or Brand Ecch as our fearless leader suggested we to refer to his distinguished competition.

We were wild-eyed fanatics to rival the loopiest thugee cultist or member of the Manson family. We were True Believers.

The worst thing was that everything had ground to a halt. The books had stopped developing. If you take a look at a current Spider-Man comic, you’ll find that he’s maybe twenty years old, he worries a lot about whats right and what’s wrong, and he has a lot of trouble with his girlfriends.

Do you know what Spider-Man was doing fifteen years ago? Well, he was about nineteen years old, he worried a lot about what was right and what was wrong and he had a lot of trouble with his girlfriends.
On the benign side, nearly everyone working in the medium today, especially those of us who are writers, owe Stan Lee a very great debt. I’d be the first to admit that any flair which my own writing might possess probably originates back on that Thursday afternoon when I was eight years old, sitting and boggling at the strange-looking comic that was far removed from Blackhawk as Mother Theresa is from Hugh Hefner. That’s a debt that I don’t take lightly, and if I wore a hat it would certainly be doffed to Mr. Lee for providing me with the inspiration that is currently helping to pay my rent.

Also, as I said in the opening paragraphs of this article, without the revitalising spark that Lee brought to the industry way back then, comics today would be vastly different and might not even exist at all.

A number of today’s most clearly Lee-influenced writers… Chris Claremont, Marv Wolfman, Jim Shooter… would almost certainly not be with us. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing depends upon your opinion of their individual talents. Stan Lee has done a hell of a lot for the industry and there’s no getting away from it.

But it’s a thing that cuts both ways. I’ve often noticed that the most sparkling examples of the industry at the peak of it’s form seem to have an ultimately deleterious effect upon the medium as a whole. As a for instance, the original E.C. Mad comic, undeniably brilliant in it’s own right, has doomed us to a situation where any new humour magazine that appears is almost forced by law to have a title associated with mental illness (Cracked, Sick, Crazy, Frantic, panic, Madhouse, etc. etc.) and features a pale imitation of Mad’s stock in trade genre parodies without reflecting any of the wonderful drive and imagination of the original. The same is true for Stan Lee.

Stan Lee became a name that was synonymous with comic-book success. His competitors had either to copy what he was doing or go out of business. The largest of these competitors, DC comics, opted for the former course of action and today have a product which is largely interchangeable with that of their Marvel counterparts.

You see, somewhere along the line, one of the newer breed of Marvel editors… maybe it was Marv Wolfman, maybe it was someone else, had come up with one of those incredibly snappy sounding and utterly stupid little pieces of folk-wisdom that some editors seem to like pulling out of the hat from time to time.

This particular little gem went something as follows; “Readers don’t want change. Readers only want the illusion of change.” Like I said, it sounds perceptive and well-reasoned on first listening. It is also, in my opinion, one of the most specious and retarded theories that it has ever been my misfortune to come across.

Who says readers don’t want change? Did they do a survey or something? Why wasn’t I consulted?

If readers are that averse to change then how come Marvel ever got to be so popular in the first place, back when constant change and innovation was the order of the day? Frankly, it beats it beats the hell out of me.

Perhaps I could have a little more sympathy for pronouncements like this if there was some solid commercial reasoning behind them. If, for example, Marvel’s books suddenly started selling significantly more during the period when this “Let’s-Not-Rock-The-Boat” policy was introduced, then I might have reluctantly been forced to agree with it.

This is not the case. Marvel’s best selling title today is the X Men, or it was when I saw any figures. It sells something like 300,000 copies, and it is regarded as a staggering success.

Listen, in a country the size of America, 300,00 copies is absolutely pathetic. Back in the early fifties it was not unknown for even a comparatively minor-league publication like Lev Gleason’s original Daredevil (no relation) to clear six million copies every month. Even in the early days of the Marvel empire, any comic that was selling only 300,000 copies would have probably been cause for grave concern amongst those in charge of it’s production, and indeed it would have most likely been cancelled. These days, it’s the best we’ve got.

Now, I don’t want to cause too much alarm and despondency by talking about Marvel’s imminent downfall. Some of the recent developments over there in the home of the hamburger look very promising indeed and it looks as if it might just be possible to save the day at the last minute, the way it always happens in the comics. But, and it’s a big but, it’s been left awfully late. Maybe too late. We’ll have to wait and see.

As for Stan Lee, to read the man’s increasingly infrequent pronouncements you would assume that everything was brighter and better than it had ever been before. Gradually, however, it became clear that Stan Lee was no longer even marginally associated with the line of comics that had made him a very rich man. Oh sure, you get “Stan Lee presents…” at the top of every splash page and the odd guest-spot of embarrassing geriatric gibberings from the man himself turning up in the Bullpen Bulletin pages from time to time, but I have my doubts as to whether Mr. Lee has actually bothered to read a Marvel comic since sometime during the early seventies. As far as I know he occupies some sort of executive position out on the sunny west coast of America and is thoroughly immersed in a world of gold ingots and grey chest-hairs. In short, he’s out of the picture.

So, finally getting around the initial purpose of this article, what sort of legacy has he left behind? In comic book history, is he a Hero or a Villain?

Well, to borrow a concept that Mr. Lee himself made popular during the early sixties, he’s a Hero/Villain, just like Submariner or Hawkeye. He has had an influence upon the medium which is as benign as it is poisonous.

In the Justice League, Green Arrow, and Hawkman argue together in a pale echo of the original Thing/Torch dust-ups of yesteryear. Firestorm is about twenty years old, has lots of teenage problems and trouble with his girlfriends. In effect we have two big companies who are both Marvel comics to all intents and purposes but merely have different names.

All the other companies of the mid sixties… Charlton, ACG, Tower and so on… opted not to follow Marvel’s lead and subsequently went bust, leaving the comic field populated solely by pale ghosts of Lee’s former glories.

Even the independent publishers that have recently sprung up seem largely unable to do anything more radical than tinker feebly with Lee’s basic formulas. Captain Victory is little more than The Eternals playing at the wrong speed and Ditko’s Missing Man would not have looked out of place as a sub-plot in Dr. Strange.

Oddly enough, it is imitating the superficial stylistics of Mr. Lee’s ‘Marvel Renaissance’, most of these imitators seem unable to recognize the single most important quality that he brought to the comic medium.

Stan Lee, in his heyday, did something wildly and radically different.

And as far as I’m concerned, his vacant throne will remain empty until we come up with someone who has the guts and imagination to do the same.

Any offers? " 

- Alan Moore








Before The Law, 
There Stands a Guard.
A Man comes from the country, 
begging admittance to The Law.

But The Guard cannot admit him.

May he hope to enter at a later time?

"That is possible", 
said The Guard.

The Man tries to peer 
through the entrance.

He'd been taught that The Law 
was to be accessible to every Man.

"Do not attempt to enter without my permission", 
 says The Guard.

“I am very powerful. 
Yet I am the least of all The Guards.

From Hall to Hall,
 Door after Door, 
each Guard is more powerful 
than The Last." 

By The Guard's permission, 
The Man sits by the side of The Door, 
and there He waits.

For years, He waits.

Everything He has, he gives away 
in the hope of bribing The Guard, 
who never fails to say to him :

"I take what You give me only so that You will not feel that You left something undone."

Keeping His Watch during the long years, 
The Man has come to know even the fleas on The Guard's fur collar.

Growing childish in old age, 
He begs the fleas to persuade The Guard 
to change His mind and allow Him to enter.

His sight has dimmed, 
but in The Darkness
He perceives a radiance streaming immortally from 
The Door of The Law.

And now, before He dies, 
all He's experienced condenses into one Question, 
a Question He's never asked.

He beckons The Guard.

Says The Guard, 
"You are insatiable! 
What is it now?"
Says The Man, 
"Every Man strives to attain The Law.

How is it then that in all these years, 
no one else has ever come here, 
seeking admittance?"


His hearing has failed, 
so the Guard yells into his ear.

"Nobody else but You could ever have obtained admittance.

No one else could enter this door!

This door was intended only for you!

And now, I'm going to close it."

This tale is told during the story called 
"The Trial".
It's been said that the logic of this story is 
The Logic of a Dream...

Or a Nightmare.

Tuesday 6 November 2018

The Great Celestial Ship of The North



“ Production came to an end on Buffy, Season 3 [1999], and over my Summer vacation, I was reading The Killer Angels, about the survivors of Gettysburg, and it immediately made me think of the Millennium Falcon.

You know, as most things do. “

— Joss Wheedon



Getting down and dirty with a procyon lotor
Got no people skills but he's good with motors
That weird thing by his side's an infantilized sequoia
The two of them walk by, people say "oh boy-a"
They ask me why I'm bringin'
A baby into battle
That's really irresponsible
And getting them rattled
I say "Give me a break
Get off of my back damn, it"
I didn't learn no parenting
MUH DADDY WUZ A PLANET
Zardu Hasselfrau, Zardu Hasselfrau, hey
Zardu Hasselfrau, Zardu Hasselfrau, hey
In these times of hardship
Just remember : 

We
Are
Groot

The Most Important Thing in a Person’s Life is to Feel Useful



The Most Important Thing in a Person’s Life is to Feel Useful














The Land is Dying and The Cities are Dead


Monday 5 November 2018

Jars





The Gane is a Foot and The Door is a Jar.

Q : Why Would You Put a Jar on a Car...?

A: To Ride Out The Storm.

GUNN
Taking out Angel's soul. Putting it in a jar. I hope we know what we're doing.

Cut to:

6     INT.     OFFICE AT HOTEL / ANGEL INVESTIGATIONS
Cordelia walks into the office where Lorne, Fred, and Gunn are staring at the safe. 

FRED
Angel's soul. It's gone.

Pan over to show the empty safe.




She heads out the door to go take her exam. Willow picks up the bundle 
of sage and sniffs it some more.

 Willow:  Mm, sage. I love that smell. (reaches into a jar) And marnox 
root. You know, a smidge of this mixed with a virgin's saliva... (gets a 
look from Giles) Does something I know nothing about. 
Giles:  These forces are not something that one plays around with, 
Willow. What have you been conjuring?
 Willow:  Nothing... much. Well, you know, I tried this spell to cure 
Angel, and I guess that was a bust. But since then, you know, small 
stuff: floating feather, fire out of ice, which next time I won't do on 
the bedspread. (Giles looks down) Are you mad at me? 
Giles:  (looks up) No, of course not, no. If I were, I would be making a 
strange clucking sound with my tongue. 
 Willow is embarrassed and smiles cutely up at him



.Cut to:

46     INT.     LOBBY AT HOTEL / ANGEL INVESTIGATIONS
Wesley and Willow are preparing a spell. There's a bubbling jar in front of Willow.

WILLOW
Look, it's working. 

WESLEY
I thought Delothrian's Arrow was used to protect good magicks.

WILLOW
It is.

WESLEY
So, how can you use it to break the jar? The Muo-Ping is a sacred object. It's holy.

WILLOW
It's glass, therefore crunchable. The sacred's what's inside. "All life a container..."

WESLEY
"...For the heart of all life." You've studied the Daharim.

WILLOW
It had to be something specific. There's lots of jars in the world—can't shatter them all. 

I mean, you could, but good things come in jars. Peanut butter, jelly, those two-headed fetal pigs at the natural history museum. (Wes doesn't respond) 

Come on, everybody loves fetal pigs.

WESLEY
(leans forward) Sorry. I think my sense of humor's trapped in a jar somewhere.

WILLOW
Does seem like you've given in to the grumpy side of the force.

WESLEY
A lot's happened. Not just Angelus. 

I've been—I've changed. 

I've seen a Darkness in myself. 

I'm not sure you'd even begin to understand—

WILLOW
I flayed a guy alive and tried to Destroy The World.

WESLEY
Oh. So... 

(stands, doesn't make eye-contact

WILLOW
Darkness. 

Been There.

WESLEY
Yeah. Well, I never flayed... (seems sickened)  

I had a woman chained in a closet.

WILLOW
Hey.

WESLEY
That doesn't compare.

WILLOW
No, Dark. 

That's Dark. 

You've been to a place.

WESLEY
You seem exactly the same as when I left. No other major changes I'm not up on?

WILLOW
(shrugs) Just little things. So, uh, Fred. What's her story?

Barely Tolerated





TRAVERS (V.O.)
Congratulations. You pass.
 
INT. LIBRARY - NIGHT
Buffy sits at the table, holding a wet cloth to her head. Travers stands before her, Giles stands nearby. Nobody looks wildly happy.


TRAVERS 
You exhibited extraordinary courage and clearheadedness in battle.
 
The Council is very pleased.

 
BUFFYDo I get a gold star?


TRAVERSI understand that you're upset -

 
BUFFY
You understand nothing. 
You set that monster loose and he came after my
mother.

 
TRAVERS
You think the test was unfair?

 
BUFFY
I think you better get out of town
before I get my strength back.

 
TRAVERS
We're not in the business of 'fair', Miss Summers. 
We're fighting a war.

                  

GILES
You're waging a war. 
She's fighting it. 
There is a difference.

 
TRAVERS
Mr. Giles, if you don't mind -

 
GILES
The Test is done. We're finished.

 
TRAVERS
Not quite. She passed. You didn't.
 
Neither Giles nor Buffy knows what to say.


TRAVERS
The Slayer isn't the only one who must perform in this situation. 
I have recommended to the council, and they
have agreed, that you be relieved of
your duties as Watcher effective
immediately. 
 
 
You're Fired.

 
GILESOn what grounds?

 
TRAVERS
Your affection for your charge has rendered you incapable of clear and impartial judgment.
 
You have a Father's Love for the child and that is useless to the cause.
 
A moment, as Buffy registers the truth in this. Giles does not even look at her.

 
TRAVERS
It would be best for you not to havefurther contact with The Slayer -

 
GILES
I'm not going anywhere.

 
TRAVERS
No, well, I didn't expect you to adhere to that. 
However, if you interfere with the new Watcher or try to countermand  his authority in any way you will be dealt  with. 
 
Are we clear.

 
GILES
We're very clear.

 
TRAVERS
(to Buffy)

Congratulations again.

 
BUFFY
Bite me.
 

TRAVERS
(turning to go)

Yes. Well. 
Colorful girl.
 
He throws a look at Giles and walks out. Neither Giles nor Buffy says anything for a while. She puts the rag to her head and winces-


BUFFY
Ow!
 
--with pain. Giles moves to her, instinctively.


GILES
Let me see...
 
She looks up at him. A moment of silence, and she slowly hands him the rag. He dips it in water and squats down, inspecting the wound, dabbing it with the rag.


She says nothing. Lets him tend to her.



WILLOW
I just can't believe Giles was fired!
How could Giles get fired?

 
OZ
So how did you manage to kill Kralik?

 
JOYCE
Oh, she was very clever.
(off Buffy's look)
You go ahead and tell it, dear. 
You tell
it better.

 
WILLOW
But when you say fired, you mean fired?

 
XANDER
You're not cruising past that concept anytime soon, are you?
 

WLLOW
It's just-he's been fired! 
He's unemployed! 
He's between jobs!

 
BUFFY
Giles isn't going anywhere, Will.
He's still librarian.

 
WILLOW
Okay, but I'm writing an angry letter.


Sunday 4 November 2018

Thinking, Teaching and Reading — No More, No Less.




" I should mention that the mode of our discussion here is not straight philosophy but what is called philosophical theology because it includes the Divine as an axiom, or at least a variable, in the mix. 

Furthermore, some of these questions—which are all central to Western philosophy—are not addressed in a systematic manner in the Tantrik literature but through a variety of sometimes cryptic statements that I have wrestled with over the years. 

So, I am particularly grateful to one of my teachers, Ādyashānti, for clarifications of several of these issues, explanations that deeply connected to both my contemplated experience and my scriptural study. 



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 (bat-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. We discuss this final, subtle criterion for true wisdom elsewhere.”

Saturday 3 November 2018

HUGE Mane, Out Ta Here.




HUGE Mane, Out Ta Here.

He’s Lyin’ There, 
Under a Tree —

It’s The Middler The Day.

Middler Africa.

He’s So BIG —
It’s So HAHT —

HE DOESN’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING








It is NOT Safe to SPEAK — But it is Even LESS Safe, NOT To Speak






On September 15, veteran radio DJ Paul Gambaccini released his memoir of the year he spent under investigation by the Met Police's Operation Yewtree, before he was exonerated of the allegations.

Mr Gambaccini said he was attacked in the press, unable to work, and forced to pay tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees during a year in which he had no income.

"It is a tactic of the police to call out and ask if people would like to make accusations...

Under this mutation of the British Justice system, 
which has occurred from the centuries old internationally respected, 
objective evidence based system, 
into 
the subjective rumour and accusation based system, 

THERE CAN BE NO EVIDENCE

Only people who agree."














';

The Path of  
The Righteous Man 
is beset on all sides by 
The Iniquities of The Selfish
and by  
The Tyranny of Evil Men.

Blessed is He
Who In The Name of 
Charity + Goodwill 
Shepherds The Weak  
through The Valley of Darkness
for He is 
Truly His Brother’s Keeper,
and 
The Finder of Lost Children.


And I Will Strike Down Upon Thee 
w. Great Vengence
and 
Furious Anger — 
Those, Who Attempt to  
POISON + DESTROY
My Brothers...


And You Will 
KNOW 
His Name is
Paul Gambuccini -

When I Lay
My Vengence
Upon Thee...

My Name is  
MIKE.

His Name.....
Is BOB.....