Reluctant to ask this but do you or anyone you respect, not like The Rose of Paracelsus. I have only listened to the readings via The psychedelic salon and to be honest it is leaving me flat and I am surprised by the warmth of its reception. Partly the pace and reading is bothering me but I can usually get past that and am reluctant to purchase something that I am so disenchanted with. The essence of my non-enthusiasm is the scattershot absence of plot connecting characters and I really don't give a fuck about how clever and pretty these aimless harvard undergrads are which is all he seems to be saying . In fiction, action engages and description without momentum easily grows tedious. Maybe it begins to move and cohere and engage but how long does this take?
I listened to a Podcast recently who's guest, Michael Scott Alexander, wrote a book called "Making Peace with the Universe: Personal Crisis and Spiritual Healing". To sum up his thesis, respectfully, it could be called "the illuminated midlife crisis". He connects the post-30-year-old personal terror, followed by major spiritual and psychic awakenings of significant religious, philosophical, and artistic figures (William James, Buddha, Hamid Al-Ghazali, Mary Lou Williams....).
The connection he lands on apparently is one between the major spiritual traditions and the contemporary therapeutic process. Haven't read his book, but listening to his interview I thought about High Weirdness, which I did read, and how you make a personal crisis connection betwixt your three subjects. I plan on re-reading High Weirdness to see if maybe you actually mentioned the midlife-crisis-iness of it all, but it struck me that it's a thread that perhaps opens Exegesis, Cosmic Trigger and Archaic Revival to an even wider comparison. Does a clever mind that hit 40 and also traveled through chapel perilous end up writing Cosmic Trigger, while a materialism-addled simpleton finds a gray hair and buys a sports car, but both are expressions of something similarly archetypal?
There's so much contextual uniqueness to the Wilson/Dick/McKenna experiences that maybe the fear of mortality creep is cast in shadow. Or maybe I zoned out the part where you frame that in High Weirdness already.
Also, I noticed how much I've related to your weaving a narrative of transition struggle and reconciling the past in to, first, the final episodes of Expanding Mind, and now the Burning Shore. I'm in midlife, so I appreciate hearing that sentiment from your voice amongst the far out subjects I've been grokking from you since before my gut started expanding.
What follows is not a question, but thoughts about an idea that Terrance McKenna fielded. I hope someone may enjoy or even respond to it.
Terence McKenna once said:
"The main thing to understand is that we are imprisoned in some kind of work of art"
Rather a harsh view of the possibilities of art as a lens for understanding anything.... or everything one might come to understand, whatever "understand" means. One wonders what lies outside the prison and what of that free space can be known. Is there a big door out of this art museum prison with it's weird mix of war porn, tar roads going to the casinos, banks and restaurants, and the whole glorious array of plant leaves swaying and shimmering in the changing wind and light and rain all mixed with the insistent me me me storyboard. Is the exit behind door number 1, door number 2....?
Did Terrence and Buddha and Hildegard and Plato and Jesus and Sophia all describe the same heavenly freedom? There are some lovely parallels in their Ideas of how to make one's way out of the prison ( to my thinking the greatest visionaries all pointed toward peaceable means as essential to getting anywhere worth going). They also refer to a state of mind that is no longer experienced as a private persona, no longer embodied in any separate form or soul. But people disgree and even kill over the different versions of freedom. And so even if they all were describing a similar experience, anything they communicate is prone to distortion through communication( art), power structures, human limits .
And how do you know when it is no longer art, because won't any observer and any observation be a kind of artful camera? And maybe knowing that, knowing that our take on reality is always limited is enough to allow us to escape cultural biases that limit our connection to a deeper evolutionary state of mind. What is becoming obvious through the breakdown of the fossil fuel/monocrop agriculture/war/capitalism based empire is that we need a wisdom that harmonizes with nature and expands our consciousness into a greater and more inclusive spectrum of consciousness than our current techno-manipulative and bio-unfriendly models have provided.
So, while I guess it is getting obvious that I still wonder what Terence meant, It made me think and I feel it is a good try to redefine the nature a prison whose walls are actually quite flimsy and even largely a result of surrendering our imagination to something that is mostly propaganda, that the empire we face cannot rule over those who refuse its authority.
The essence of the gnostic model is that claims of divinity are inherently produced by a false God, an incomplete version of reality. That actual divinity is only ever incompletely and imperfectly perceived by a mortal being. The dangerous part comes where gnostics claim a more direct connection to divinity/reaity. They claim to “know” better than others. Gnosis means Knowledge. Can some actually know more clearly and perfectly than others?
Hi Erik. This isn’t a question, more of a comment for discussion. First I’m really enjoying Death is just around the corner. I even signed up to unlock all the Pynchon episodes. It triggered thoughts that I’ve had for awhile. That is the intersection of the assassination of JFK and the 60’s counterculture and the reaction of the power structure. I was 13 when JKF was killed. In a way he was a father figure to me and I’m sure I’m not alone. I view the 60’s counterculture as an emotional acting out from the trauma of that event, which was never resolved. The politicians-power structure were freaked out by the chaos and determined to shut it own. Michael Judge calls it the American Reconquista in his pod cast. We’ve heard about the drug wars as a reaction to criminalize dissenters. I was in Madison WI late 60’s early 70’s and the power structure there blamed it on outside agitators from New York so they tripled the out of state tuition. But the emotional power to undue the shattering of consciousness was never addressed. And few have ever discussed it and some still bury it. Chapo Traphouse did a review of the Chicago 7. They pretty much trashed it along with the 60’s in general Although none of them were even alive at the time. The only thing recently that addresses it is Dylan’s “Murder Most Foul” which is why it is so brilliant. Just some thoughts I needed to express. Comment if you wish. Peace
Reluctant to ask this but do you or anyone you respect, not like The Rose of Paracelsus. I have only listened to the readings via The psychedelic salon and to be honest it is leaving me flat and I am surprised by the warmth of its reception. Partly the pace and reading is bothering me but I can usually get past that and am reluctant to purchase something that I am so disenchanted with. The essence of my non-enthusiasm is the scattershot absence of plot connecting characters and I really don't give a fuck about how clever and pretty these aimless harvard undergrads are which is all he seems to be saying . In fiction, action engages and description without momentum easily grows tedious. Maybe it begins to move and cohere and engage but how long does this take?
Dear Dr. D,
I listened to a Podcast recently who's guest, Michael Scott Alexander, wrote a book called "Making Peace with the Universe: Personal Crisis and Spiritual Healing". To sum up his thesis, respectfully, it could be called "the illuminated midlife crisis". He connects the post-30-year-old personal terror, followed by major spiritual and psychic awakenings of significant religious, philosophical, and artistic figures (William James, Buddha, Hamid Al-Ghazali, Mary Lou Williams....).
The connection he lands on apparently is one between the major spiritual traditions and the contemporary therapeutic process. Haven't read his book, but listening to his interview I thought about High Weirdness, which I did read, and how you make a personal crisis connection betwixt your three subjects. I plan on re-reading High Weirdness to see if maybe you actually mentioned the midlife-crisis-iness of it all, but it struck me that it's a thread that perhaps opens Exegesis, Cosmic Trigger and Archaic Revival to an even wider comparison. Does a clever mind that hit 40 and also traveled through chapel perilous end up writing Cosmic Trigger, while a materialism-addled simpleton finds a gray hair and buys a sports car, but both are expressions of something similarly archetypal?
There's so much contextual uniqueness to the Wilson/Dick/McKenna experiences that maybe the fear of mortality creep is cast in shadow. Or maybe I zoned out the part where you frame that in High Weirdness already.
Also, I noticed how much I've related to your weaving a narrative of transition struggle and reconciling the past in to, first, the final episodes of Expanding Mind, and now the Burning Shore. I'm in midlife, so I appreciate hearing that sentiment from your voice amongst the far out subjects I've been grokking from you since before my gut started expanding.
Thanks, and is there something to the above?
Sincerely,
Lower Back Pain in Los Angeles
What follows is not a question, but thoughts about an idea that Terrance McKenna fielded. I hope someone may enjoy or even respond to it.
Terence McKenna once said:
"The main thing to understand is that we are imprisoned in some kind of work of art"
Rather a harsh view of the possibilities of art as a lens for understanding anything.... or everything one might come to understand, whatever "understand" means. One wonders what lies outside the prison and what of that free space can be known. Is there a big door out of this art museum prison with it's weird mix of war porn, tar roads going to the casinos, banks and restaurants, and the whole glorious array of plant leaves swaying and shimmering in the changing wind and light and rain all mixed with the insistent me me me storyboard. Is the exit behind door number 1, door number 2....?
Did Terrence and Buddha and Hildegard and Plato and Jesus and Sophia all describe the same heavenly freedom? There are some lovely parallels in their Ideas of how to make one's way out of the prison ( to my thinking the greatest visionaries all pointed toward peaceable means as essential to getting anywhere worth going). They also refer to a state of mind that is no longer experienced as a private persona, no longer embodied in any separate form or soul. But people disgree and even kill over the different versions of freedom. And so even if they all were describing a similar experience, anything they communicate is prone to distortion through communication( art), power structures, human limits .
And how do you know when it is no longer art, because won't any observer and any observation be a kind of artful camera? And maybe knowing that, knowing that our take on reality is always limited is enough to allow us to escape cultural biases that limit our connection to a deeper evolutionary state of mind. What is becoming obvious through the breakdown of the fossil fuel/monocrop agriculture/war/capitalism based empire is that we need a wisdom that harmonizes with nature and expands our consciousness into a greater and more inclusive spectrum of consciousness than our current techno-manipulative and bio-unfriendly models have provided.
So, while I guess it is getting obvious that I still wonder what Terence meant, It made me think and I feel it is a good try to redefine the nature a prison whose walls are actually quite flimsy and even largely a result of surrendering our imagination to something that is mostly propaganda, that the empire we face cannot rule over those who refuse its authority.
The essence of the gnostic model is that claims of divinity are inherently produced by a false God, an incomplete version of reality. That actual divinity is only ever incompletely and imperfectly perceived by a mortal being. The dangerous part comes where gnostics claim a more direct connection to divinity/reaity. They claim to “know” better than others. Gnosis means Knowledge. Can some actually know more clearly and perfectly than others?
So is there a discussion begun about COL49? If so where does it start?
Hi Erik. This isn’t a question, more of a comment for discussion. First I’m really enjoying Death is just around the corner. I even signed up to unlock all the Pynchon episodes. It triggered thoughts that I’ve had for awhile. That is the intersection of the assassination of JFK and the 60’s counterculture and the reaction of the power structure. I was 13 when JKF was killed. In a way he was a father figure to me and I’m sure I’m not alone. I view the 60’s counterculture as an emotional acting out from the trauma of that event, which was never resolved. The politicians-power structure were freaked out by the chaos and determined to shut it own. Michael Judge calls it the American Reconquista in his pod cast. We’ve heard about the drug wars as a reaction to criminalize dissenters. I was in Madison WI late 60’s early 70’s and the power structure there blamed it on outside agitators from New York so they tripled the out of state tuition. But the emotional power to undue the shattering of consciousness was never addressed. And few have ever discussed it and some still bury it. Chapo Traphouse did a review of the Chicago 7. They pretty much trashed it along with the 60’s in general Although none of them were even alive at the time. The only thing recently that addresses it is Dylan’s “Murder Most Foul” which is why it is so brilliant. Just some thoughts I needed to express. Comment if you wish. Peace