"I am and, for as long as I can remember, I have always been a poor visualizer. Words, even the pregnant words of poets, do not evoke pictures in my mind."
I cannot put my finger on this Aldous Huxley. I have had arguments with friends over Brave New World, and whether it should be a deemed classic fiction. Um... I find this work by him much more relieving. It seems that his writing in non-fiction, although a bit preachy at times, is his stronger medium.
This is the first book we've read that actually follows someone's journey through a drug experiment. Having had some prior knowledge on the subject (from other assigned readings) I found it interesting that his taking mescalin was to see. He had no other reason for taking it. I think for the most part he and his friend were just looking to have a good time. There was no experiment except for, "I'm going to take this drug, and then we'll see what happens."
Is-ness
He even says that the changes the drug makes are not revolutionary. He never mentions Shamanism is his book. I like this because he touches upon some of its principles without even realizing he's done so. For instance, he talks about the pulsing life in a vase of flowers.
Huxley's great change was what had happened to his world of "objective fact." The drug also made him some what reclusive. He mentions not making eye contact with his friend and his wife because he was not interested in their world at that moment. They belonged to "the world of selves, of time, of moral judgements, utilitarian considerations, the world of self-assertion, of cocksureness, of over valued words and idolatrousy worshiped notions." I think this idea is explored in Crack in the Cosmic Egg when Peirce talks about children and autistic thinking.
Heaven and Hell caught me off guard. I took the title literally at first, and thought how is this going to relate to what we're learning at the moment? I was pleasantly surprised. The two books go hand in hand. Huxley mentions his heightened sense of seeing color after taking the pill. He calls the ability of humans to see color a luxury.
I had seen a Felini (sp?) film in a class a few years ago in which he recreated dreams. All of the dreams were in black and white, and I was a bit confused when my professor said that most people dream in black and white. I don't believe this. For so many years we've been having dreams, but nobody I've ever spoken to has said anything about black and white dreams. I never said anything. I never thought I had them, and I'm still convinced I don't. But this is the second time I've been told this fact, and now I don't know what I think about it.
I really enjoyed Huxley's human island analogy. I gather he was a bit of a curmudgeon, but his cynical approach to human interaction was interesting. "By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude." What I find so interesting about it is I don't think a lot of people realize the truth in this statement. Some people spend all their time committing themselves to people, and remain unhappy and insecure. Bukowski wrote something about this as well. The line was something like, "Beware of the person who constantly needs a crowd. When they're alone, they are nothing." Someone put a band-aid on that aching truth. Again, this thought has traces of Shamanism to it. The self.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Blog number six
The Doors of Perception & Heaven and Hell:
Immediately reading this book I found that the last paragraph on page 12 to be very insightful. “We live together, we act on, and react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves… By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude. Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies –all these are private and, except through symbols at second hand, incommunicable.”
I really liked that because I often acknowledge the fact that a lot of times I am by myself and experience much on my own, to think about it deeper than that as Huxley puts it, down to yes, our thoughts feelings and insights are incommunicable for the most part, and sometimes when we try to reveal the things in our head to others, meanings or ideas get lost in the translation from one mind to another.
The concept of Mind at Large…
I definitely think it’s possible. Huxley quotes Cambridge Philosopher, Dr. C. D. Broad, “The suggestion is that the function of the brain and nervous system and sense organs is the main eliminative and not productive. Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has ever happened to him and of perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment, and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be practically useful.”
Huxley makes a good point in connecting this to survival, “Mind at Large has to be funneled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet.”
I find this interesting because we know that we don’t use all of our brain. This provides a realistic explanation as to what happens. Plus, we definitely do disassociate ourselves with certain things of the past for survival. I think this kind of explains it.
Through mescalin Huxley had an inkling of what it is to be mad. Mescalin = Schizophrenia.
After a semester of hard core upper level undergraduate Psychology courses, I had my fare share of studying schizophrenia. The fact that this drug induces the “heavenly part of schizophrenia” seems intimidating to a degree. For starters that means, it’s not always a good experience for everyone, and two, schizophrenia includes: hallucinations- often auditory, delusions, disorganized speech, disorganized or catatonic behavior, and “Negative” symptoms (e.g., flat affect, alogia, avolition, anhedonia). So really, it’s really a use at your own risk kind of thing.
I really liked how Huxley stated, “Humanity at large will ever be able to dispense with Artificial Paradises seems very unlikely. Most men and women lead lives at the worst so painful, at the best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves if only for a few moments, is and has always been one of the principal appetites of the soul.”
Mescalin apparently may interfere with the enzyme system that regulates cerebral functioning. The theory is that by doing so, it lowers the efficiency of the brain as an instrument for focusing the mind on the problems of life on the surface of the planet. It also resembles the state of schizophrenia, which after hearing about in Psych class, sounds crappy.
The concept of antipodes was interesting… regions of the mind that can be reached with certain meditation, drugs, etc. It was the first time I heard the term.
I also never really noticed that my dreams are in black and white and that 2/3 of all dreams are in black and white. Few people ever dream in color and few never experience color in their dreams. It’s also concluded that color in dreams doesn’t say anything about the personality of the dreamer.
Immediately reading this book I found that the last paragraph on page 12 to be very insightful. “We live together, we act on, and react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves… By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude. Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies –all these are private and, except through symbols at second hand, incommunicable.”
I really liked that because I often acknowledge the fact that a lot of times I am by myself and experience much on my own, to think about it deeper than that as Huxley puts it, down to yes, our thoughts feelings and insights are incommunicable for the most part, and sometimes when we try to reveal the things in our head to others, meanings or ideas get lost in the translation from one mind to another.
The concept of Mind at Large…
I definitely think it’s possible. Huxley quotes Cambridge Philosopher, Dr. C. D. Broad, “The suggestion is that the function of the brain and nervous system and sense organs is the main eliminative and not productive. Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has ever happened to him and of perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment, and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be practically useful.”
Huxley makes a good point in connecting this to survival, “Mind at Large has to be funneled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet.”
I find this interesting because we know that we don’t use all of our brain. This provides a realistic explanation as to what happens. Plus, we definitely do disassociate ourselves with certain things of the past for survival. I think this kind of explains it.
Through mescalin Huxley had an inkling of what it is to be mad. Mescalin = Schizophrenia.
After a semester of hard core upper level undergraduate Psychology courses, I had my fare share of studying schizophrenia. The fact that this drug induces the “heavenly part of schizophrenia” seems intimidating to a degree. For starters that means, it’s not always a good experience for everyone, and two, schizophrenia includes: hallucinations- often auditory, delusions, disorganized speech, disorganized or catatonic behavior, and “Negative” symptoms (e.g., flat affect, alogia, avolition, anhedonia). So really, it’s really a use at your own risk kind of thing.
I really liked how Huxley stated, “Humanity at large will ever be able to dispense with Artificial Paradises seems very unlikely. Most men and women lead lives at the worst so painful, at the best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves if only for a few moments, is and has always been one of the principal appetites of the soul.”
Mescalin apparently may interfere with the enzyme system that regulates cerebral functioning. The theory is that by doing so, it lowers the efficiency of the brain as an instrument for focusing the mind on the problems of life on the surface of the planet. It also resembles the state of schizophrenia, which after hearing about in Psych class, sounds crappy.
The concept of antipodes was interesting… regions of the mind that can be reached with certain meditation, drugs, etc. It was the first time I heard the term.
I also never really noticed that my dreams are in black and white and that 2/3 of all dreams are in black and white. Few people ever dream in color and few never experience color in their dreams. It’s also concluded that color in dreams doesn’t say anything about the personality of the dreamer.
Huxley
I dont see how a person can take a drug, record his expieences, write a book on it and get an award for it. I do find it intersting that he could "discover" another world and look in on reality. What i dont understand is he stares a t a bamboo chair for 5 pages because hes high, not because hes making these great insights and people love him for it. It seems the world that Huxley is in is so peaceful and sureal compared to our busy and hectic world of reality. It seems Huxley is saying the other world is where humans should be and that its our job to get into that other world where everythung is calm. As a class we were speaking about living in the present, I say its impossible to live in the present but when Huxley is on Mecaline he says time is no factor and the whole expierence of the drug is to live in the present.Huxley states, "we live in our own created world and thoughts, and society tells us there is no exit. We try to create exits with drugs, alcohol and orgasms". There is only one problem with that statement, there is no exit theres not supossed to be one. Humans are designed to take alot of stress and pressure, why would anyone want to leave this life? I say Humans have pretty good lives i dont know about anyone else but i love the stress and pressure of life its what makes a person stronger. I found a critique on doors of perception, "Even his extatic description of the Other World cannot do justice to what he has witnessed since it is impossible to put an experience into writing. He is crystal clear in describing the absurdity, arrogance and craziness of our world. He has mixed up the notions "I" and "Self" several times. But, where he really goes astray is in the elaboration of his insights. The book contains a fair bit of contradictions and prejudices, but inbetween it contains beauties of clarity and insight". I think this quote sums my argument up very nicely.
Huxley
Huxley's prose, knowledge of history and personal experience with mescalin made his book more interesting to read than any other thus far in the course. It was interesting how he became unconcerned with people in his immediate surroundings after taking mescalin. This sort of drug induced antisocial behavior he describes seems to coincide with the fact that people who take hallucinogens like to surround themselves with other people who are also under the influence of hallucinogens. Maybe if he had another person tripping with him, his book would have turned out a little bit differently. Anyhow, how do we know that mescalin, mushrooms or LSD produce an experience with numinous qualities and possess any actual intellectual value? The only way to know for certain would be to experiment with the said drugs and see what happens. Until then, we would be solely taking Huxley's word for it, and in doing so, exemplifying the same indoctrinated approach to learning information that is discussed and frowned upon in Pearce's text. As we've already discussed, there are numerous ways to experience an altered state of mind, and not all of them entail taking drugs. Nor do such experiences all result in a person arriving at the same conclusions about the nature of reality. At any rate, ingesting a hallucinogen does seem like the most direct, timely and dramatic way to endure a cognitive journey to an altered frame of mind; however, not everyone will be able to empathize with Huxley's interpretation of the world and human behavior due to their abstention from drug use.
Huxley
It was interesting because Huxley seemed very concerened with the experiences of other individuals, even when he was having his own experience. It is interesting that this mescalin could cause so much color and beauty and even awareness of what is happening in the universe. It seemed like his hallucinations got stronger after the cerebral sugar shortage was wearing off and that he was still having pretty intense visions. I did think he did a good job at relaying his experience to the reader. I thought it was kind of neat.
Later on I thought it was interesting that he said that, "We now spend a good deal more on drink and smoke than we spend on education. This of course, is not surprising. The urge to escape from selfhood and the environment is in almost everyone almost all the time."(63) I thought that was interesting, because I don't think that society spends more time on drink and smoke then on education. Perhaps parts of society do, but that is a pretty large claim to make. Also, I don't have the urge to escape myself almost all the time. Honestly, I never thought that much about it until I had this class. I just felt like he is making a lot of statements and he is not backing them up. He also says, "What is needed is a new drug which will relieve and console our suffering species without doing more harm in the long run than it does good in the short."(65) I guess it is better to have a drug like this opposed to cigarettes and alcohol, but I don't feel that drugs are that crucial. Even when Huxley explains what is gained by a drug, I still cannot understand it. I really don't believe one can understand until they experience it, and I think the only reason people do drugs is because of curiosity.
I feel like even people who have experienced drugs and hypnosis still don't understand it. Huxley even mentions that nobody knows how and why hypnosis effects people. What is the point in going to another state of consciousness if we won't understand it. I'm a very curious person. Therefore, I would not be satisfied in having an experience in which I don't understand. Overall, I feel like altered states of consciousness won't be fascinating for long, because people will just look at them from a scientific approach. They will apply so much meaning and so many terms that the mystery will be erased. Eventually, altered states of consciousness will become just as dull as normal states of consciousness.
Also, I found this quote by Huxley interesting. "Unconsciously to myself, I looked at a film of sand I had picked up on my hand, when I suddenly saw the exquisite beauty of every little grain of it; instead of being dull, I saw that each particle was made up on a perfect geometrical pattern..." (94) This quote in general reminded me of Walt Whitman because he sees beauty in everything. Maybe he was on some kind of drug. I don't know.
Later on I thought it was interesting that he said that, "We now spend a good deal more on drink and smoke than we spend on education. This of course, is not surprising. The urge to escape from selfhood and the environment is in almost everyone almost all the time."(63) I thought that was interesting, because I don't think that society spends more time on drink and smoke then on education. Perhaps parts of society do, but that is a pretty large claim to make. Also, I don't have the urge to escape myself almost all the time. Honestly, I never thought that much about it until I had this class. I just felt like he is making a lot of statements and he is not backing them up. He also says, "What is needed is a new drug which will relieve and console our suffering species without doing more harm in the long run than it does good in the short."(65) I guess it is better to have a drug like this opposed to cigarettes and alcohol, but I don't feel that drugs are that crucial. Even when Huxley explains what is gained by a drug, I still cannot understand it. I really don't believe one can understand until they experience it, and I think the only reason people do drugs is because of curiosity.
I feel like even people who have experienced drugs and hypnosis still don't understand it. Huxley even mentions that nobody knows how and why hypnosis effects people. What is the point in going to another state of consciousness if we won't understand it. I'm a very curious person. Therefore, I would not be satisfied in having an experience in which I don't understand. Overall, I feel like altered states of consciousness won't be fascinating for long, because people will just look at them from a scientific approach. They will apply so much meaning and so many terms that the mystery will be erased. Eventually, altered states of consciousness will become just as dull as normal states of consciousness.
Also, I found this quote by Huxley interesting. "Unconsciously to myself, I looked at a film of sand I had picked up on my hand, when I suddenly saw the exquisite beauty of every little grain of it; instead of being dull, I saw that each particle was made up on a perfect geometrical pattern..." (94) This quote in general reminded me of Walt Whitman because he sees beauty in everything. Maybe he was on some kind of drug. I don't know.
Huxley's world in High-Def...
So I get Huxley's intention, he wanted to be able to perceive this inner world, or inner light through the use of mescalin. Through his various references to the flowers in the vase, the chair, the blue car, the reader can really get an appreciation of hoe deeply his perception went. He mentions that such factors as time and space were no longer contenders in the fight to occupy his thoughts. Under the spell of the drug, Huxley's focus lie on the "intensity of experience, profundity of significance, and relationships with pattern". Huxley was now aware of a deeper meaning to such trivial, mundane things - things we recognize as our reality, however our reality, perhaps is only "surface deep". Being in this drug-induced state allows the mind to contemplate the meaning of such novelty-everyday things, and appreciate their "just being". I think this is what Huxley was describing when he said this ASC he experienced was like regaining perceptual innocence of childhood. I can recall from my own two sons, the wonder and amazement in their eyes as they explored different toys, books, and everyday items as infants.
I think Huxley made a good point about society's excessive use of symbols as a means of expression and clarification. In reality, these symbols stand for nothing at all unless the item being 'symbolized' can be experienced. His analogy of the "elegantly composed recipe in lieu of dinner" made me chuckle. Not only are symbols ultimately portraying just 'Suchness', but they permit us to go on with this lifestyle of condensing our values, time, space, etc. just so we can cram more things into our day. How many times do we as a society do such things , not necessarily making dinner, but any event or activity that can be shortened or abbreviated as to save us time in our hurried lives...are we really getting the 'meaning and being' of everyday life with all our short cuts?
I really liked Huxley's comment about an ASC's perception vs. that of an artist's; "What the rest of us see only under the influence of mescalin, the artist is congenitally equipped to see all the time". This made me think a lot about our creativity discussions - perhaps artists (and certainly I'm not limiting the term to those exclusively of the fine arts) have an uncanny ability to tap into the creative process much easier than others.
It was interesting that he noted while under the influence, he could not look at his wife or friend who was with him during the experience, and he made great effort not to do so. Would obliging in eye contact with those not induced cause him to feel guilty for his newly acquired perception, or perhaps present him with a buzzkill due to their confined thinking? I also thought it was interesting that his enlightened inner world consisted of no work or monotony...it provided for yet another chuckle as I remembered our extensive class discussion regarding work in our everyday reality.
I do have to disagree with Huxley's assumption that we as 'hungry sheep' look to be fed and when we do not obtain what we are searching for we "turn to the bottle". Say it isn't so! He had me until that point - certainly we go to services, take part in rituals, anything that can provide us with some kind of nourishment for the soul. But I think his assumption is a little extreme, people may turn away from such soul-searching tasks in disappointment, but I disagree that we are turning into the nearest State store for a fifth!
Lastly, I was surprised about the mention that 2/3 of our dreams are black and white...who knew? I've been attributing our discussions on ASC to dream-like states, but Huxley's ASC under mescalin was a plethora of high-def colors - some so intense that the name alone implied nothing. Huxley describes colors viewed with this inner light as having so many divisions and meanings. This parallels Hughes' comment on synthesesia. Apparently, a dreamlike state comes nothing close to the mescalin-induced state as far as "colors' being".
I think Huxley made a good point about society's excessive use of symbols as a means of expression and clarification. In reality, these symbols stand for nothing at all unless the item being 'symbolized' can be experienced. His analogy of the "elegantly composed recipe in lieu of dinner" made me chuckle. Not only are symbols ultimately portraying just 'Suchness', but they permit us to go on with this lifestyle of condensing our values, time, space, etc. just so we can cram more things into our day. How many times do we as a society do such things , not necessarily making dinner, but any event or activity that can be shortened or abbreviated as to save us time in our hurried lives...are we really getting the 'meaning and being' of everyday life with all our short cuts?
I really liked Huxley's comment about an ASC's perception vs. that of an artist's; "What the rest of us see only under the influence of mescalin, the artist is congenitally equipped to see all the time". This made me think a lot about our creativity discussions - perhaps artists (and certainly I'm not limiting the term to those exclusively of the fine arts) have an uncanny ability to tap into the creative process much easier than others.
It was interesting that he noted while under the influence, he could not look at his wife or friend who was with him during the experience, and he made great effort not to do so. Would obliging in eye contact with those not induced cause him to feel guilty for his newly acquired perception, or perhaps present him with a buzzkill due to their confined thinking? I also thought it was interesting that his enlightened inner world consisted of no work or monotony...it provided for yet another chuckle as I remembered our extensive class discussion regarding work in our everyday reality.
I do have to disagree with Huxley's assumption that we as 'hungry sheep' look to be fed and when we do not obtain what we are searching for we "turn to the bottle". Say it isn't so! He had me until that point - certainly we go to services, take part in rituals, anything that can provide us with some kind of nourishment for the soul. But I think his assumption is a little extreme, people may turn away from such soul-searching tasks in disappointment, but I disagree that we are turning into the nearest State store for a fifth!
Lastly, I was surprised about the mention that 2/3 of our dreams are black and white...who knew? I've been attributing our discussions on ASC to dream-like states, but Huxley's ASC under mescalin was a plethora of high-def colors - some so intense that the name alone implied nothing. Huxley describes colors viewed with this inner light as having so many divisions and meanings. This parallels Hughes' comment on synthesesia. Apparently, a dreamlike state comes nothing close to the mescalin-induced state as far as "colors' being".
Ah, mescalin
I thought Huxley's descriptions of what it was like to be under the influence of mescalin were absolutely fascinating. Though I have never taken the drug itself, there was a lingering familiarity to similar experiences I have had. It has just dawned on me that while drugs or meditation or sleep deprivation or whatever may be a way to get to an altered state of consciousness, that does not necessarily mean that the destination is so different once we get there; that is to say, we may travel by plane or train or automobile, but Disney World will still be there at the end of the journey. And just as Disney World will be there, every person who visits will take something different from the visit.
The crude analogy to a theme park aside, Huxley's thoughts got me thinking. While reading about the flowers or the material of his slacks, I was reminded of fleeting thoughts and memories that had flitted through my own mind, perhaps when I was in an altered state of consciousness, or close to it. We've already discussed that sleep deprivation can lead to an altered state, even unintentionally; have you ever had a day when you were so incredibly exhausted you can barely keep your eyes open and your head upright? Still, you take a shower (trying not to drown yourself in the process), put on make-up (because the worse you feel, the more you have to look like you're fabulous), and somehow manage to make it to school or work in one piece, though when you get there you're not exactly sure how you didn't hit anything (a typical example of drifting consciousness).
You're so sure that you can fool everyone, that if you look the part and if you are physically present, no one will ever guess that you were up so late because your girlfriend never left your house or you had to cram for an exam or because you couldn't put down the controller because you were playing MegaMan until the sun came up. Yet somehow, at some point throughout the day, you look down at your knee, and you're suddenly and as if for the first time aware of the knee of your jeans, of the curious diagonal pattern (what would have been wrong with horizontal or vertical threads?), of the ridges from one thread to the other, how the jean is not all the same color but faded in some spots, darker in others. Though some small part of your conscience may be trying to tell you that you should be listening to the professor, that voice slowly fades into nothingness, and you're absorbed with the pattern on the jeans.
You don't care whence the jeans came or how many cotton plants it took to weave those patterns or how long the jeans will last or even what you leg looks like beneath it. Though on any other day they would just be a pair of pants that happen to look good with any shirt you own, in those moments they are your entire world, because you are suddenly aware that they are. While you don't give any thought to the leg itself, you can feel the brush of the material against your thigh when you move; you can feel where it's stiff from being hung to dry and soft from being worn so many times. Every aspect of those jeans fills your mind and your senses -- you can even smell the Tide laundry detergent you used to wash them, but that does not exist in your mind as Tide; it is the scent of those jeans.
Perhaps it is a form of meditating that when we become so focused on one object that it expands to fill one's entire mind; perhaps it is a combination of meditation and sleep deprivation and hypnosis? From everything we've been reading about what happens to the mind when it is influenced by drugs, it seems that these drugs offer the user the opportunity to shut out everything else, to focus on one thing that is so important -- an idea for a painting, a vision for a book, pitching a no-hitter. In these altered states, we are no longer a slave to the busyness and the white noise that surrounds us and fills our everyday lives with meaningless chatter. Life is a package that has arrived and is filled with Styrofoam packing peanuts -- they're everywhere, of no particular use and in fact dangerous, but we have to cut through them to reach what is really important in the center of that box.
It's all shadows and dust.
The crude analogy to a theme park aside, Huxley's thoughts got me thinking. While reading about the flowers or the material of his slacks, I was reminded of fleeting thoughts and memories that had flitted through my own mind, perhaps when I was in an altered state of consciousness, or close to it. We've already discussed that sleep deprivation can lead to an altered state, even unintentionally; have you ever had a day when you were so incredibly exhausted you can barely keep your eyes open and your head upright? Still, you take a shower (trying not to drown yourself in the process), put on make-up (because the worse you feel, the more you have to look like you're fabulous), and somehow manage to make it to school or work in one piece, though when you get there you're not exactly sure how you didn't hit anything (a typical example of drifting consciousness).
You're so sure that you can fool everyone, that if you look the part and if you are physically present, no one will ever guess that you were up so late because your girlfriend never left your house or you had to cram for an exam or because you couldn't put down the controller because you were playing MegaMan until the sun came up. Yet somehow, at some point throughout the day, you look down at your knee, and you're suddenly and as if for the first time aware of the knee of your jeans, of the curious diagonal pattern (what would have been wrong with horizontal or vertical threads?), of the ridges from one thread to the other, how the jean is not all the same color but faded in some spots, darker in others. Though some small part of your conscience may be trying to tell you that you should be listening to the professor, that voice slowly fades into nothingness, and you're absorbed with the pattern on the jeans.
You don't care whence the jeans came or how many cotton plants it took to weave those patterns or how long the jeans will last or even what you leg looks like beneath it. Though on any other day they would just be a pair of pants that happen to look good with any shirt you own, in those moments they are your entire world, because you are suddenly aware that they are. While you don't give any thought to the leg itself, you can feel the brush of the material against your thigh when you move; you can feel where it's stiff from being hung to dry and soft from being worn so many times. Every aspect of those jeans fills your mind and your senses -- you can even smell the Tide laundry detergent you used to wash them, but that does not exist in your mind as Tide; it is the scent of those jeans.
Perhaps it is a form of meditating that when we become so focused on one object that it expands to fill one's entire mind; perhaps it is a combination of meditation and sleep deprivation and hypnosis? From everything we've been reading about what happens to the mind when it is influenced by drugs, it seems that these drugs offer the user the opportunity to shut out everything else, to focus on one thing that is so important -- an idea for a painting, a vision for a book, pitching a no-hitter. In these altered states, we are no longer a slave to the busyness and the white noise that surrounds us and fills our everyday lives with meaningless chatter. Life is a package that has arrived and is filled with Styrofoam packing peanuts -- they're everywhere, of no particular use and in fact dangerous, but we have to cut through them to reach what is really important in the center of that box.
It's all shadows and dust.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Does peyote rhyme with coyote? Just wondering.....
A couple of times during the readings, I had to kind of shake my head, as if to dislodge water from my ears. I know this reading was a little easier than the other texts, but it was still a little tedious to me. I think that accompanying Huxley on his experience was a little weird, but at the same time a little interesting. I think I would rather read about one's experience than to see it, like with did with the video in class. It's one of those things that I think loses something with the visual to accompany it............kind of like what Huxley says about landscapes. For years, no one painted them, but they spoke/wrote of them. Now that that they are painted, we could care less about them. A flower is a flower. A rock is a rock. A babbling brook............well, it doesn't babble.
I thought it was interesting when he touched on the mind as an elimintative. Some of the other authors we've studied have talked about this, but I like how Huxley put it. "What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet." (p. 23) The idea makes sense. Our brain filters through everything it takes in and merely highlights to us what we need to know to keep us alive. The information it receives that won't benefit us is discarded...........it's considered chaff, in a sense. It is that "stuff" though, that may increase our day-to-day experience. I would expect that as our society moved into more industrialized times, with more "free" time, that our mind would filter less, and that we would experience more. But I don't think we allow ourselves to do that. I made a comment to the Professor the other day and she advised me to relax (I'm paraphrasing). I told her that wasn't how I was wired. She thought that was funny, but I had to reflect on that. I know that I am wound tighter than a tick (where do these phrases even come from????). BUT WHY???? I am not daily fighting for my survival............far from it. Yet we all act this way. We are constantly in a go-go-go state of mind. We think that everything we do is soooooo important. And while some things might have some sort of significance, I think we may need a lesson from Huxley. We need to stop and smell the proverbial roses, or as he did, look at a chair. He found so much in a chair. Granted, he was taking a drug, so he wasn't in the "right" state of mind, but maybe he's on the right track. There are times when I realize that I have been so focused on going somewhere, that I don't realize what I have experienced while getting there. I have learned to look around when I'm running, not just to avoid stepping in roadkill (though that is terribly important), but to make sure I SEE. A lot of what Huxley talked about was simple. He mostly talked about taking in our surroundings, and studying them. I'm removing the altered state from this, sure, but I think that's the underlying message, especially in The Door of Perception...........at least that's what I came away with.
I spent most of this blog referencing The Doors of Perception, though I enjoyed Heaven and Hell more. One of my favorite passages was on page 138: the nature of the mind is such that the sinner who repents and makes an act of faith in a higher power is more likely to have a blissful visionary experience than is the self-satisfied pillar of society.......Hence the enormous importance attached, in all the great religious traditions, to the state of mind at the moment of death." God sees through the things we say and do that are solely for appearances. He knows the state of our heart, of our true mind. He knows when we are simply spouting out crap that we think we ought to say, because someone told us it was so when we were young. When we make the true commitment to Him, regardless of how late in life, He recognizes it, and welcomes it. A death-bed conversion is a conversion, even though it came at the last possible minute. Such a person will receive the same lot in Heaven as someone who was converted much earlier in life. That's the beauty of God!!!
I think I have sufficiently digressed in my ramblings about both articles, so I will consider this entry completed.
I thought it was interesting when he touched on the mind as an elimintative. Some of the other authors we've studied have talked about this, but I like how Huxley put it. "What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet." (p. 23) The idea makes sense. Our brain filters through everything it takes in and merely highlights to us what we need to know to keep us alive. The information it receives that won't benefit us is discarded...........it's considered chaff, in a sense. It is that "stuff" though, that may increase our day-to-day experience. I would expect that as our society moved into more industrialized times, with more "free" time, that our mind would filter less, and that we would experience more. But I don't think we allow ourselves to do that. I made a comment to the Professor the other day and she advised me to relax (I'm paraphrasing). I told her that wasn't how I was wired. She thought that was funny, but I had to reflect on that. I know that I am wound tighter than a tick (where do these phrases even come from????). BUT WHY???? I am not daily fighting for my survival............far from it. Yet we all act this way. We are constantly in a go-go-go state of mind. We think that everything we do is soooooo important. And while some things might have some sort of significance, I think we may need a lesson from Huxley. We need to stop and smell the proverbial roses, or as he did, look at a chair. He found so much in a chair. Granted, he was taking a drug, so he wasn't in the "right" state of mind, but maybe he's on the right track. There are times when I realize that I have been so focused on going somewhere, that I don't realize what I have experienced while getting there. I have learned to look around when I'm running, not just to avoid stepping in roadkill (though that is terribly important), but to make sure I SEE. A lot of what Huxley talked about was simple. He mostly talked about taking in our surroundings, and studying them. I'm removing the altered state from this, sure, but I think that's the underlying message, especially in The Door of Perception...........at least that's what I came away with.
I spent most of this blog referencing The Doors of Perception, though I enjoyed Heaven and Hell more. One of my favorite passages was on page 138: the nature of the mind is such that the sinner who repents and makes an act of faith in a higher power is more likely to have a blissful visionary experience than is the self-satisfied pillar of society.......Hence the enormous importance attached, in all the great religious traditions, to the state of mind at the moment of death." God sees through the things we say and do that are solely for appearances. He knows the state of our heart, of our true mind. He knows when we are simply spouting out crap that we think we ought to say, because someone told us it was so when we were young. When we make the true commitment to Him, regardless of how late in life, He recognizes it, and welcomes it. A death-bed conversion is a conversion, even though it came at the last possible minute. Such a person will receive the same lot in Heaven as someone who was converted much earlier in life. That's the beauty of God!!!
I think I have sufficiently digressed in my ramblings about both articles, so I will consider this entry completed.
Drugs, Again
Aldous Huxley made it interesting to say that when you take a drug, the normal side effects are not always the same. That is a very important fact to take to heart. This includes any drug you take, whether prescription, over the counter, or even illegal, if you’re a person who does that. I found it interesting when he went on to explain about the side effects he experienced. While taking the drug Mescalin, he experienced a huge increase in awareness. There was an infallible intensity of existence, perception of significance, relationships, the loss of predominance in space, the mind loosing interest in measures and specific locations, a major focusing on being and meaning, an indifference in time, and a still life recognition to relative objectivity in the world. His primary focus mostly became triggered on the concern of forms and their relationships with one another. “Place and distance cease to be of much interest.” (The Doors of Perception & Heaven and Hell, Page 20) What is said to happen to most people who take Mescalin, is a reduction in the normal ability to remember, or to think normally, visual impressions are intensified, loss of interest in space, a great loss in time, and loss of will or the motivation to do anything in particular. It is believed by the author that “most visualizers are transformed by mescalin into visionaries.”(The Doors of Perception & Heaven and Hell, Page 45) I do not agree on this. Once again, I feel anyone who has to use drugs to see visions, hallucinations, foreshadows, or whatever the case may be weakens a person. These people are not visionaries, they are just high. Only people who are weak take themselves out of the normal realm of reality, instead of facing it head on. That is my belief. The weak look for a crutch to fall on while the strong stay sober, drug free, and face there problems, issues, concerns, fears, and pain.
Huxley
Perception-
I enjoyed reading Huxleys experiment with mescalin. During his experience with the drug it was neat to find that he seen more beyond what a typical rose, carnation, and iris actually are observed by the human eye. This actually made me think that if you stare at a flower for a short period of time you may not understand the compound of it, but if you think about it you can see what its all about. The way Huxley described the investigator shifting Huxleys vision from the book shelf to the furniture and making him see what added space is and how it can be full was interesting, because what really makes up the extra space we see? I believe what Huxley stated about the five and dime ship and how it correlates to us and how we are perceived as others is a good example of self confidence. Because, when you act in a proper fashion or act approate you are given more respect and appointed different positions, and you should give back to your environment with some talents you have. In the last paragraph of the perception, Huxley states that " The man who comes back through the Door in the Wall will never be quite the same as the man who went out." That's true but my ? is can you really be changed after coming back into the light?
Heaven an Hell-
I enjoyed reading Huxleys over all expierence with mesculin and how it affect him. I thought that his expiernce was good that way he can describe it to us how it feels. It was neat to see that he used an instructor or guide on his trip. The guide followed him through seeing the meaning behind the apperence of flowers and showed him the negative space that fills the air. Also I enjoyed how Huxley decribed his trip to the beach with his friend and how he zoned out and managed to see the sparkle in the sand that caught his eye and how he realized how special this piece of sand was and in transition how to special life really is. That happens to me sometimes when Im driving and Im listing to a cd in the car and its something that strikes my over all perception of what Im doing and helps me focus on the good things in life.
Appendices-
I enjoyed learning about different stages of mescalin and how it affects the body, mind and soul.
I enjoyed reading Huxleys experiment with mescalin. During his experience with the drug it was neat to find that he seen more beyond what a typical rose, carnation, and iris actually are observed by the human eye. This actually made me think that if you stare at a flower for a short period of time you may not understand the compound of it, but if you think about it you can see what its all about. The way Huxley described the investigator shifting Huxleys vision from the book shelf to the furniture and making him see what added space is and how it can be full was interesting, because what really makes up the extra space we see? I believe what Huxley stated about the five and dime ship and how it correlates to us and how we are perceived as others is a good example of self confidence. Because, when you act in a proper fashion or act approate you are given more respect and appointed different positions, and you should give back to your environment with some talents you have. In the last paragraph of the perception, Huxley states that " The man who comes back through the Door in the Wall will never be quite the same as the man who went out." That's true but my ? is can you really be changed after coming back into the light?
Heaven an Hell-
I enjoyed reading Huxleys over all expierence with mesculin and how it affect him. I thought that his expiernce was good that way he can describe it to us how it feels. It was neat to see that he used an instructor or guide on his trip. The guide followed him through seeing the meaning behind the apperence of flowers and showed him the negative space that fills the air. Also I enjoyed how Huxley decribed his trip to the beach with his friend and how he zoned out and managed to see the sparkle in the sand that caught his eye and how he realized how special this piece of sand was and in transition how to special life really is. That happens to me sometimes when Im driving and Im listing to a cd in the car and its something that strikes my over all perception of what Im doing and helps me focus on the good things in life.
Appendices-
I enjoyed learning about different stages of mescalin and how it affects the body, mind and soul.
The doors or perception..Heaven & Hell
I thought i was interesting that taking mescalin in small does changes the quality of consciousness in a profound way, and it is NOT as toxic as most drugs. It has an affect on the central nervous system and affects the relationship between the brain and consciousness.
I LOVED the quote, "the martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse thier insulated ecstasies into a single self-transcendence; in vain" this gives me such a sad feeling. Huxley uses it in describing how we are overall actually all by ourselves, even though we feel like we are with others. It makes me think about my own perception of reality. He continues on about how communication between 'universes' is pretty much nonexsistent. The minds of the insane and gifted are so unique compared to normal men and women. He poses the question, "How can the sane get to know what it feels like to be mad?"
I needed to know what some words meant:
mesomorphy means of, relating to, or existing in a state of matter intermediate between liquid and crystal.
somatotonia: is defined as the temperamental trait associated with a mesomorphic somatotype, characterized by an active, aggressive, and risk-taking approach to life.
These both relate by means of there is an inside to expierence as well as an outside.
I liked the authors description of his mescalin expierence. He thought he was going to have a crazy episode and see all sorts of things. He actually only saw more vivid colors and speace ceased to matter to him. It is interesting that to humans, we percieve things in terms of intensity of exsistence, significance, and patterns. Suddenyl, space meant little to Huxley. He was concerned simply with being and meaning.
The author states on page 23 that "every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the lingusitic tradition into which he has been born" this brings me to think about the whole "nature versus nurture" argument.
The use of mescalin causes: the ability to remember is mostly reduced, visual impressions are intensified, intrest in space is diminished, the intellect is intact, but perception is improved, the will diminishes, and 'better things' may be expierenced 'out there' and 'in there'.
"the elegantly composed recipe in lieu of actual dinner", a great analogy for the way someone thinks while on mescalin.
I like how Huley says our minds still have the darkest Africa's, unmapped Borneo's and amazonian basins. We still have much to learn about the human mind. The zoologist analogy is creative.
A visionary is not seeing anything that reminds him of his past. He is looking for new things to be a creation. I think this is hard for some people to do this, because we are emotional and tend to relate things to our expierences.
I LOVED the quote, "the martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse thier insulated ecstasies into a single self-transcendence; in vain" this gives me such a sad feeling. Huxley uses it in describing how we are overall actually all by ourselves, even though we feel like we are with others. It makes me think about my own perception of reality. He continues on about how communication between 'universes' is pretty much nonexsistent. The minds of the insane and gifted are so unique compared to normal men and women. He poses the question, "How can the sane get to know what it feels like to be mad?"
I needed to know what some words meant:
mesomorphy means of, relating to, or existing in a state of matter intermediate between liquid and crystal.
somatotonia: is defined as the temperamental trait associated with a mesomorphic somatotype, characterized by an active, aggressive, and risk-taking approach to life.
These both relate by means of there is an inside to expierence as well as an outside.
I liked the authors description of his mescalin expierence. He thought he was going to have a crazy episode and see all sorts of things. He actually only saw more vivid colors and speace ceased to matter to him. It is interesting that to humans, we percieve things in terms of intensity of exsistence, significance, and patterns. Suddenyl, space meant little to Huxley. He was concerned simply with being and meaning.
The author states on page 23 that "every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the lingusitic tradition into which he has been born" this brings me to think about the whole "nature versus nurture" argument.
The use of mescalin causes: the ability to remember is mostly reduced, visual impressions are intensified, intrest in space is diminished, the intellect is intact, but perception is improved, the will diminishes, and 'better things' may be expierenced 'out there' and 'in there'.
"the elegantly composed recipe in lieu of actual dinner", a great analogy for the way someone thinks while on mescalin.
I like how Huley says our minds still have the darkest Africa's, unmapped Borneo's and amazonian basins. We still have much to learn about the human mind. The zoologist analogy is creative.
A visionary is not seeing anything that reminds him of his past. He is looking for new things to be a creation. I think this is hard for some people to do this, because we are emotional and tend to relate things to our expierences.
Carbon dioxide and the stroboscopic lamp, causes the user to have certain physical and psycholoical changes. Some see swirls of colors, vivid recollection of past expierences.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Week Six Blogs - I Know, Drugs, drugs and more drugs
We didn't really focus on the Hughes reading on Tuesday because I wanted to explain in more detail how and why the Fly Agaric mushroom has been interpreted. Santa is a fun way of introducing the symbolic and hidden practices of shamans, and as many of you mentioned, is quite entertaining. Your blogs, however, raise questions concerning the use of drugs in Western cultures -- a culture which both Blake, Wilbert and Josh S. remind us is monophasic as opposed to ployphasic. Their discussion also raises the question of who decides which drugs are good or bad, legal or illegal, and why these decisions are made. An interesting perspective from all of you, and one we'll return to after the Huxley reading.
Allison, Suset and Lance all discuss the idea that artists are artists first (i.e. they need artistic talent), and seem to turn to drug use later in their career. Mobius, the artist in the movie we watched is one example, and after trying the mushroom only once, has spent the rest of his life attempting to communicate this experience (a notion which both Ken and Ashley describe).
Hughe's "positive" approach to drug use is mentioned by Ben, yet Tyler indicates that Hughes has also peppered his chapter with warnings against their use. Ben also brings up the question of whether cultures have been, or are being, passified by drugs in order to prevent an uprising. Good question -- people obsessed and addicted to drugs are pretty passive. Yet Tobe suggests the opposite -- that perhaps drugs represent an "untapped potential for artistic and intellectual creativity ... that some people don't want us to discover." I wonder if these disparate views have anything to do with the difference between additive drugs and entheogens ( non-addictive drugs used for spiritual awakening by polyphasic cultures and shamans).
Allison, Suset and Lance all discuss the idea that artists are artists first (i.e. they need artistic talent), and seem to turn to drug use later in their career. Mobius, the artist in the movie we watched is one example, and after trying the mushroom only once, has spent the rest of his life attempting to communicate this experience (a notion which both Ken and Ashley describe).
Hughe's "positive" approach to drug use is mentioned by Ben, yet Tyler indicates that Hughes has also peppered his chapter with warnings against their use. Ben also brings up the question of whether cultures have been, or are being, passified by drugs in order to prevent an uprising. Good question -- people obsessed and addicted to drugs are pretty passive. Yet Tobe suggests the opposite -- that perhaps drugs represent an "untapped potential for artistic and intellectual creativity ... that some people don't want us to discover." I wonder if these disparate views have anything to do with the difference between additive drugs and entheogens ( non-addictive drugs used for spiritual awakening by polyphasic cultures and shamans).
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Let’s take drugs and listen to Death from Above...
The thing I took from these readings was the implication and understanding that there is nothing creative about drugs. Drugs, as they should be understood, are simply a “looking glass.” I think the point many “artists” try to make is that there are very few “looking glasses” at our disposal and therefore drugs allow them to expand their perspective, if not adjust it in some way. What drugs will not do, however, is give you a perspective. As Pearce stated in his book, only true creative thought can be achieved from relentless study based on logic and reason. As a creative entity, you must be willing to put forth extreme amounts of preparation and devotion to sculpting your mind by realities standards in order to take whatever experience you have on drugs and interpret it for others and yourself. If you look into the backgrounds of most creative people, they have studied books, practiced music, or educated themselves in such a way that taking drugs only allowed them to tap into a new perspective, not a new state of consciousness, completely segmented from themselves. Hughes writes “Many of the artist associated with drug use were artists before they became heavy users, spending years developing their styles and mediums. Such people are inextricably linked to their creative process. Involvement with drugs will alter their creative process, for better or worse, but will not necessarily determine it.” I think people fear talking about drugs so openly because they see it as rationalizing or condoning actions which (are not rationalized or condoned) by our society. I think there is even more fear in the “I guess these aren’t so bad, maybe I should try one” point of view that someone could (but most likely won’t) garner. I think what people need to realize is that talking about drugs is not going to make you want to take them, and if it did, you should realize they are not going to do anything more (for your abilities) than what you can already do on your own. Many “spontaneous” (aka lazy) people don’t feel the need to put in the effort and think a quick fix, i.e. drugs, will allow them to develop an altered state of creativity. This is not the case. More than likely, drugs will become these peoples identity, and they will be trapped in the very thing they hoped would set them free.
As far is good old Santa is concerned, I think much of the first few pages felt like a stretch. I can see “A Partridge in a Pear Tree,” relating to “The Partridge Family” relating to “Family Matters” and suddenly Urkel is the anti-christ. But all that being said I did like how he talked about some of the shamanistic qualities and I do see how Santa could be a direct descendant of shamanism; maybe even St. Nicholas was influenced my shamanistic traditions? I do think many of the “traditions” we hold dear to us definitely have origins in other cultures and we have just molded them to feel unique to us. I also liked the idea that things like Santa and Coca-Cola fill voids, or substitute for things we need to identify or connect with. There can be no money made on just “love” or “compassion” so we must relate these principles to products in order to confuse the public and generate consumer dollars. When we start to relate “stuff” to happiness, we lose our inherent ability to (you fill in the blank).
As far is good old Santa is concerned, I think much of the first few pages felt like a stretch. I can see “A Partridge in a Pear Tree,” relating to “The Partridge Family” relating to “Family Matters” and suddenly Urkel is the anti-christ. But all that being said I did like how he talked about some of the shamanistic qualities and I do see how Santa could be a direct descendant of shamanism; maybe even St. Nicholas was influenced my shamanistic traditions? I do think many of the “traditions” we hold dear to us definitely have origins in other cultures and we have just molded them to feel unique to us. I also liked the idea that things like Santa and Coca-Cola fill voids, or substitute for things we need to identify or connect with. There can be no money made on just “love” or “compassion” so we must relate these principles to products in order to confuse the public and generate consumer dollars. When we start to relate “stuff” to happiness, we lose our inherent ability to (you fill in the blank).
Walsh, Hughes, and Santa Claus
It's been a rather interesting week for myself in the fact that these readings touched on a subject that I am not entirely familiar with. I've heard the speil before...I think all students have at a young age: "Stay away from drugs, they are evil!" As a result, we haven't had the time to learn about them. Hughes explains that drugs are not necessarily a byproduct of evil, but are rather a misunderstood substance.
As for Walsh, I take the stance that these 20 pages entailed a sense of spite within them. Essentially, it was a bit of a rant in that society has defamed Shamanism and the drugs associated with Altered States of Conciousness. Well, the Western world, anyway. It kind of puts things into perspective for the reader in that it's viewed as a political issue. I remember discussing a ways back, in another class, why alcohol is legal and marijuana is not, and it was brought up that those in power prefer alcohol to marijuana, and thusly, make the former legal and the latter not. If only others of this country...no, this hemisphere...have read this book to look at issues from another angle.
As for the Santa Claus article, I was amazed. I can't believe the number of similarities between a fungus and the jolly elf. Particularly interesting were the reindeer, portraying not only the various attributes of such a drug, but also the aspects of the psyche affected. Not only that, but other connections were made with Shamanic practices, such as transformation into a power animal, which struck me as an intriguing coincidence at first, yet as a stunning correlation later.
Perhaps other long-forgotten facts of other aspects of life might be revealed if we only take a closer look...
As for Walsh, I take the stance that these 20 pages entailed a sense of spite within them. Essentially, it was a bit of a rant in that society has defamed Shamanism and the drugs associated with Altered States of Conciousness. Well, the Western world, anyway. It kind of puts things into perspective for the reader in that it's viewed as a political issue. I remember discussing a ways back, in another class, why alcohol is legal and marijuana is not, and it was brought up that those in power prefer alcohol to marijuana, and thusly, make the former legal and the latter not. If only others of this country...no, this hemisphere...have read this book to look at issues from another angle.
As for the Santa Claus article, I was amazed. I can't believe the number of similarities between a fungus and the jolly elf. Particularly interesting were the reindeer, portraying not only the various attributes of such a drug, but also the aspects of the psyche affected. Not only that, but other connections were made with Shamanic practices, such as transformation into a power animal, which struck me as an intriguing coincidence at first, yet as a stunning correlation later.
Perhaps other long-forgotten facts of other aspects of life might be revealed if we only take a closer look...
Walsh (Part 6, 179-199) Hughes (Chapter 12), Amanita Muscaria and Santa
In the beginning of Part 6, Walsh writes about monophasic and polyphasic societies. According to Walsh, Western society is monophasic, meaning that they derive their view of reality almost exclusively on the waking state.
There IS a huge difference between Western societies and the rest of the world. It's even evident in our class discussions—many are completely close minded. Walsh goes on to write that not only are Westerners close minded, but they denigrate those who explore alternate states.
Maybe that’s why I ORGINALLY chose martial arts as my taste of eastern culture. Very few (including me) can denigrate or refute the power of my craft. When a martial artist breaks a cement block or kicks over someone’s head, monophasic onlookers say, "Oh wow, this stuff has merit."
The majority of Westerners are so hooked to empirical evidence. I think it is really frustrating. Why should I (or anyone for that matter) bother explaining any of my polyphasic experiences to people who are totally ignorant and unwilling to know? You could spend/waste a whole life trying to do so...
Furthermore, it seems to me that most of these books are only good for people who are willing to open their mind... and these kinds of people are rare in our society. I mean, I guess it’s good that these close minded individuals are learning that there are other views. Oh, I don’t know.
I hate to admit it... but... if it weren’t for drugs, I'm sure our society would be even more close minded.
Talking about the whole idea of drugs actually helping our society... In Altered States, Hughes writes, "Within the opium-induced cocoon of perfect invulnerability, the individual's strangest unconsciousness feels safe to venture out." (Hughes, pg. 163)
Finally, I think it is pretty wild that Cocteau used opium to get in touch with the real world and world of imagination. "Everything one does in life, even love, occurs in an express train reaching toward death. To smoke opium is to get out of the train while it is still moving. It is to concern oneself with something other than death." Jean Cocteau
As for the connection between Santa and Amanita Muscaria, I can say that I was very entertained. Yes, Santa and fly agaric mushrooms are portly, and they both are adorned with black red and white but… Santa, as I remember, is nothing more than an old legend… the ghost of Saint Nicholas.
There IS a huge difference between Western societies and the rest of the world. It's even evident in our class discussions—many are completely close minded. Walsh goes on to write that not only are Westerners close minded, but they denigrate those who explore alternate states.
Maybe that’s why I ORGINALLY chose martial arts as my taste of eastern culture. Very few (including me) can denigrate or refute the power of my craft. When a martial artist breaks a cement block or kicks over someone’s head, monophasic onlookers say, "Oh wow, this stuff has merit."
The majority of Westerners are so hooked to empirical evidence. I think it is really frustrating. Why should I (or anyone for that matter) bother explaining any of my polyphasic experiences to people who are totally ignorant and unwilling to know? You could spend/waste a whole life trying to do so...
Furthermore, it seems to me that most of these books are only good for people who are willing to open their mind... and these kinds of people are rare in our society. I mean, I guess it’s good that these close minded individuals are learning that there are other views. Oh, I don’t know.
I hate to admit it... but... if it weren’t for drugs, I'm sure our society would be even more close minded.
Talking about the whole idea of drugs actually helping our society... In Altered States, Hughes writes, "Within the opium-induced cocoon of perfect invulnerability, the individual's strangest unconsciousness feels safe to venture out." (Hughes, pg. 163)
Finally, I think it is pretty wild that Cocteau used opium to get in touch with the real world and world of imagination. "Everything one does in life, even love, occurs in an express train reaching toward death. To smoke opium is to get out of the train while it is still moving. It is to concern oneself with something other than death." Jean Cocteau
As for the connection between Santa and Amanita Muscaria, I can say that I was very entertained. Yes, Santa and fly agaric mushrooms are portly, and they both are adorned with black red and white but… Santa, as I remember, is nothing more than an old legend… the ghost of Saint Nicholas.
"Higher Ceilings of Human Nature" (Maslow)
Wow...All the readings were so interesting and eye opening I guess i can being with creativity and chemistry. Hughes make clear that many artists linked with drugs were artists before they became heavy users and they had spend many years developing their particular style or medium. This involvement of drugs will only enhance their creative process but not better or worsen the piece of art they are trying to convey. "For many crative artists, however, art is a passion that cannot be replaced by drugs, although it can be extinguished by addiction." (Hughes 161)
Opium was imported and used as a house-hold drug for children and raw opium was sold in forms of pills and penny sticks. Opium acts like natural painkiller, first producing a feeling of pleasure and euphoria. After continued use the body will want more to achieve the same or greater feeling.
Author, Arthur Conan Doyle, super-detective creator of "Sherlock Holmes", was a frequent user of cocaine and another known user was American animator Walt Disney. I know it may sound silly but I wouldn't ever known that unless I researched about it...what are the chances.
Also, the amphetamines such as Benzedrine was very popular by college students who wanted to cram for test and wanted to stay up and have this great extra energy. I remember in n episode on "Saved by the Bell" (TV show in the late 90s) one of the girl characters who was studying for her big test and juggling between aerobics and school, she took this drug to her be more awake and be able to do it all. At the time I didn't eve have a clue of what this was!
Opium was imported and used as a house-hold drug for children and raw opium was sold in forms of pills and penny sticks. Opium acts like natural painkiller, first producing a feeling of pleasure and euphoria. After continued use the body will want more to achieve the same or greater feeling.
Author, Arthur Conan Doyle, super-detective creator of "Sherlock Holmes", was a frequent user of cocaine and another known user was American animator Walt Disney. I know it may sound silly but I wouldn't ever known that unless I researched about it...what are the chances.
Also, the amphetamines such as Benzedrine was very popular by college students who wanted to cram for test and wanted to stay up and have this great extra energy. I remember in n episode on "Saved by the Bell" (TV show in the late 90s) one of the girl characters who was studying for her big test and juggling between aerobics and school, she took this drug to her be more awake and be able to do it all. At the time I didn't eve have a clue of what this was!
blog
Hughes mentions “’After some ten experiments we renounced once and for all this intoxicating drug,’ Gautier wrote, ‘not only because it made us physically ill, but also because the true litterateur has need only of natural dreams, and does not wish his thoughts to be influenced by any outside agency.’” This is the opposite of what Shaman believe. They use drugs as a means to enter the altered state in order to be influenced by any outside agency.
Some of the best-known writers, musicians, and artists have done the majority of their work under the influence of opium, hashish, and cannabis. Hughes says that some experts might say that the majority of their work was better when they were not under the influence of drugs. One of the bad things about taking drugs as a celebrity is that it is very easy to overdose like Janice Joplin and Jimi Hendrix, but then again this makes them legends. These people are closely related to Shaman because they have out of body experiences.
Santa Claus is a mushroom? Clement Clarke Moore cemented the look of Santa as closely as he could to the fly agaric. Since the description was created long before Moore wrote ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas and the mushrooms that he resembles were used by Shamans, it makes sense that Santa was invented a couple thousand years before Moore’s poem. I knew that Santa has been around for a long time but I did not realize exactly how long until I read this article.
The reindeer liked the fly agaric too?? Santa’s reindeer are named after effects that the mushroom have on people? Dasher, Dancer, and Prancer aren’t just cute names that people made up because of their athletic displays? This is making Christmas one giant drug experience that the Shaman saw. It makes the myth more interesting for the people who no longer believe in Santa. Little kids who do believe in him would not be able to understand what this means so they are safe.
Some of the best-known writers, musicians, and artists have done the majority of their work under the influence of opium, hashish, and cannabis. Hughes says that some experts might say that the majority of their work was better when they were not under the influence of drugs. One of the bad things about taking drugs as a celebrity is that it is very easy to overdose like Janice Joplin and Jimi Hendrix, but then again this makes them legends. These people are closely related to Shaman because they have out of body experiences.
Santa Claus is a mushroom? Clement Clarke Moore cemented the look of Santa as closely as he could to the fly agaric. Since the description was created long before Moore wrote ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas and the mushrooms that he resembles were used by Shamans, it makes sense that Santa was invented a couple thousand years before Moore’s poem. I knew that Santa has been around for a long time but I did not realize exactly how long until I read this article.
The reindeer liked the fly agaric too?? Santa’s reindeer are named after effects that the mushroom have on people? Dasher, Dancer, and Prancer aren’t just cute names that people made up because of their athletic displays? This is making Christmas one giant drug experience that the Shaman saw. It makes the myth more interesting for the people who no longer believe in Santa. Little kids who do believe in him would not be able to understand what this means so they are safe.
Bursenos *sigh*
Wow. I've heard some conspiracy theories before, but this puppy takes the cake. To his credit, the author definitely has a unique theory and looked high and low to search for evidence to back it up, but too often i feel as if Bursenos is reaching. I agree that there is likely more to the Santa Claus figure than is readily apparent, but the character and historical figures origins are in Russia, in the Eastern Orthodox tradition of Christianity, and while i don't doubt the importance of magical mushrooms to shamanism and even early modern medicine, i feel the santa claus legend has more in common with early marxism than with amanita muscaria.
The area of the text that really taxed my ability to suspend my disbelief was the section where the author did his best to link thier names with the effect of the fungus in question. While i felt that the basic link with the raindeer and thier use/ingestion of the mushroom was interesting (as well as being a strong piece of evidence in the authors favor), however these detail felt like desprite reaching, as did the bit about the beserkers/vikings/and bears. While the German people did readily embrace the Santa Claus story and would likely leave their linguistic mark on the tale, the vikings had nothing even remotely approaching St. Nick in their mythology.
Another area of interest which i took issue with was the way he reached to fit a bear into the argument so he could use lycothopy as evidence to back his argument. While this was important to shamanism, this phenominon had very little (squeezing down the chimney...maybe?) to do with the Santa legend. I applaud his attempt to explain the symettry between the appearance of the devil, the mushroom and santa, but there is a chronological failing here. The devils appearance as we know it was not "finalized" until the late 18th century some 60 years before "the night before Chirstmas" was even written. Both examples are far too recent to be used as a "code" representing the muscaria mushroom, especially since the authors main arguement is that this fugus and it's effects have been forgotten by the western world since the the 5th century when Pope Gregory banned pagan ritual.
The area of the text that really taxed my ability to suspend my disbelief was the section where the author did his best to link thier names with the effect of the fungus in question. While i felt that the basic link with the raindeer and thier use/ingestion of the mushroom was interesting (as well as being a strong piece of evidence in the authors favor), however these detail felt like desprite reaching, as did the bit about the beserkers/vikings/and bears. While the German people did readily embrace the Santa Claus story and would likely leave their linguistic mark on the tale, the vikings had nothing even remotely approaching St. Nick in their mythology.
Another area of interest which i took issue with was the way he reached to fit a bear into the argument so he could use lycothopy as evidence to back his argument. While this was important to shamanism, this phenominon had very little (squeezing down the chimney...maybe?) to do with the Santa legend. I applaud his attempt to explain the symettry between the appearance of the devil, the mushroom and santa, but there is a chronological failing here. The devils appearance as we know it was not "finalized" until the late 18th century some 60 years before "the night before Chirstmas" was even written. Both examples are far too recent to be used as a "code" representing the muscaria mushroom, especially since the authors main arguement is that this fugus and it's effects have been forgotten by the western world since the the 5th century when Pope Gregory banned pagan ritual.
Blog number 5
Hughes Chapter 12
This chapter reallt interested me in the fact it talks about every kind of mainstream drug and what the drug's classificaton is. The first part that interested me was when Hughes talks about opium and how highly addictive it is, the surprise from that section was apparently alot of people in the 1950's used this drug as an everyday relaxation method. I did understand the fact when Hughes says it takes more and more opium for the person to get a high so every so often the person must up the dosage. I know in my life when i first was injured playing baseball i was on 1-2 vicodin a day for pain, now im popping 5-6 a day to keep the pain under control. The next section was about hash i want to say just a few words on it because most of us know enough about it for me not to state the obvious. The one interesting fact i did want to mention is I had no idea alot of singers used it to get more inspiration for writing songs. When i think of hash i think artists and poets, yet im not sure why i just know i would never touch it. Heroin was another interstng topic in this chapter for the mere fact i had no idea it was the strongest pain killer even more so than straight morphine. Although you have to inject Heroin that just turns my stomach i cant see people injecting themselves with a needle just to get a high.
Now i want to move to the last topic Cocaine and amphetamines, when i was in high school we had a very important baseball game and we had to win to get into districts. Before the game some of the guys were popping speed so i took two and i tell you what i was more focused on that game than any other game i had ever played. When your on speed its like you invincible and nothing will get in your way of getting whatever it is you want. It reminds me of how people on steriods act.
Santa and Mushrooms
I tried to have an open mind when reding this paper but this was redicilious, First of all the idea of Santa Clause was an idea from Germany not from a mushroom. That being said i believe the author did a ver nice job in comming up with similarities to make the reader believe that Santa was derived from this mushroom. The main point i wanted to draw from this reading was the color techniques that the author used to support his thesis. Color shemes have been used for years in commercials to seel products all the author is doinf her is trying to sell his idea with bogus color schemes. look at car companies making knock offs of other cars which will then start rivalries, its all about money im not sure if this author even believes what he is writing. This man is trying to sell his idea for example Ford Explorer vs. Chevy Blazer. Bottom line is the author is a whack job just out there trying to make some money so all in al i respect the man but do not believe him.
This chapter reallt interested me in the fact it talks about every kind of mainstream drug and what the drug's classificaton is. The first part that interested me was when Hughes talks about opium and how highly addictive it is, the surprise from that section was apparently alot of people in the 1950's used this drug as an everyday relaxation method. I did understand the fact when Hughes says it takes more and more opium for the person to get a high so every so often the person must up the dosage. I know in my life when i first was injured playing baseball i was on 1-2 vicodin a day for pain, now im popping 5-6 a day to keep the pain under control. The next section was about hash i want to say just a few words on it because most of us know enough about it for me not to state the obvious. The one interesting fact i did want to mention is I had no idea alot of singers used it to get more inspiration for writing songs. When i think of hash i think artists and poets, yet im not sure why i just know i would never touch it. Heroin was another interstng topic in this chapter for the mere fact i had no idea it was the strongest pain killer even more so than straight morphine. Although you have to inject Heroin that just turns my stomach i cant see people injecting themselves with a needle just to get a high.
Now i want to move to the last topic Cocaine and amphetamines, when i was in high school we had a very important baseball game and we had to win to get into districts. Before the game some of the guys were popping speed so i took two and i tell you what i was more focused on that game than any other game i had ever played. When your on speed its like you invincible and nothing will get in your way of getting whatever it is you want. It reminds me of how people on steriods act.
Santa and Mushrooms
I tried to have an open mind when reding this paper but this was redicilious, First of all the idea of Santa Clause was an idea from Germany not from a mushroom. That being said i believe the author did a ver nice job in comming up with similarities to make the reader believe that Santa was derived from this mushroom. The main point i wanted to draw from this reading was the color techniques that the author used to support his thesis. Color shemes have been used for years in commercials to seel products all the author is doinf her is trying to sell his idea with bogus color schemes. look at car companies making knock offs of other cars which will then start rivalries, its all about money im not sure if this author even believes what he is writing. This man is trying to sell his idea for example Ford Explorer vs. Chevy Blazer. Bottom line is the author is a whack job just out there trying to make some money so all in al i respect the man but do not believe him.
"Is Everybody In? The Ceremony Is About To Begin..."
Aside from the one Walsh chapter about the politics of consciousness, these readings were pretty much there to help us get in tune with what one may encounter while attempting to reach an ASC. Forget about meditation, yoga, or hypnosis - we are going right to the field with a hand full of magic mushrooms and a sheet of LSD. Hughes did an amazing job of keeping himself out of trouble by mentioning several times that drugs aren't everything. There has to be something there in a persons makeup, whether physically, mentally or emotionally, to allow a person to reach within using these tools to gain a higher perspective on what they are already pursuing. I loved the picture of Hendrix in all of his psychedelic glory - they even used the term "demi-God" to describe him (I totally agree maybe even more). The fact is that drugs CAN and WILL change your life whether it is trivial or long-term. The LSD experience is one that a person will never forget and will talk about with friends and relatives for their entire lives. The insight that was given into the magic mushroom was incredible. Comparing mushroom tripping to santa clause? It only made me think that this person was tripping while he wrote it HAHA. If any of you have not seen the movie "Detroit Rock City", I suggest checking out the scene where a couple of some kid's friends break him out of a Catholic boarding school by giving the priest some magic mushrooms on his pizza. He then begins to compare Santa and Satan claiming "It's the same guy!" Rhythm. It is always there. Your stride, your fingers typing this blog, your mind drifting off to your favorite new song during class - music is a huge part of our lives and I guarantee you that you wouldn't look at it the same way after you spent the last 12 hours tripping on a psychedelic whether it be the outrageous visions of LSD, the "at-home" feeling of a mushroom trip, or the "connections" made on ecstasy. Whether you are against drugs or not, they are helping you day to day. I recommend each of you head to Youtube and search for "Bill Hicks - Drugs". He is an amazing comedian from the 80's that told it like it was meant to be told. Whether we are drinking coffee and energy drinks, taking aspirin and Tylenol, smoking ganja and opium, eating LSD and ecstasy, we are altering our consciousness - some are going farther and some aren't. The people that go farther will be the ones who benefit more and learn more.
Santa, Hughes, and Walsh
Santa:
This Santa stuff is interesting. It's not entirely for me, but it's interesting. For instance, the whole idea of an "upper" world and a "lower" world---upper being heaven and lower being hell. The author writes, "the lower world is underground and commonly accessed by a tunnel or a hole in the earth" --and--"the upper world is associated in the sky and is accessed by such means as a sacred tree, or ladder that reaches into heaven" (3). Why do we always associate heaven with being above us? This isn't the first time that I've heard a reference to a ladder or rope to go UP to heaven. I don't get it. When I was a younger I used to always think that if you flew far enough out into the sky that you could reach heaven. Also, that if you dug far enough into the ground you could reach hell. And, as a child might do, I attempted to dig to hell. Not because that was my preferred choice, but rather, because my dad owned a shovel but not an airplane. It didn't take me long until I gave up when I realized how much time and work it would take---I did, in case you are interested, put a pit from a peach in the small hole I managed to dig in an attempt to grow a peach tree. No success. The author also points out that "sugar, caffeine, alcohol and tobacco have been culturally supported whereas the sacramental use of entheogenic mushrooms are still demonized and outlawed" (6). I liked this quote because it reminds me of a comment I made in an earlier blog about wanting to reach an ASOC through yoga but not drug use because I have been taught that drug use is a bad thing. I'll get back to this point later.
Hughes:
It must be later because here goes.....Hughes writes, "the most popular drugs range from coffee and tea to tobacco and alcohol, with marijuana a recent addition" (161). He goes on to talk about "psychedelic" drugs too labeling them as "problematic in social terms". I drink coffee and I drink alcohol---and sometimes when I'm drinking alcohol I might smoke a few cigarettes because they go so well together ( I know, I know). I also don't like taking any medicine when I'm sick and have recently started eating some organic food. I had to set that up to give you the proper perspective for what I'm about to say (summary: coffee, alcohol, some cigs, organic food)---what I don't do is any drug considered "illegal". But here's the catch, we have had a prohibition before. So I strikes me as odd to consider certain drugs illegal and not others when the ideas/feeling/emotions/thoughts about these drugs change over time. People used to use opium openly---now it's illegal. People used to drink alcohol---then it became illegal----now it's legal again. Who is in control of this whole thing any way? Why do certain people get to classify drugs as either "good" or "bad"---legal or illegal. They're all drugs, right? Even the word "drugs" had different connotations to it. For instance, when I say that I don't use drugs people generally understand what that means. You can name the ones that you know would be included on that list. But, at the end of the day---I would be lying because every morning I drink coffee and occasionally I'll have a few drinks on the weekend. People automatically make a distinction between "illegal" and "legal". Oh, you don't do drugs? Ok, well how about that soda you're drinking?---I love the hypocrisy. Hughes also talks about absinthe which I've seen in a movie before (can't remember which movie but I do remember the drink was green). The movie portrayed it as the greatest thing ever---which just makes me want to try it. This is strange because it happens to be a liqueur, whereas if it were a mushroom or something like that then I wouldn't be interested. I just love what I've taken in from my culture. Speaking of cultures...
Walsh:
He writes that most of the world's cultures are polyphasic whereas the Western world is monophasic. In discussing ASC's: polyphasic cultures "value and cultivate these states, honor those who master them..." -----while monophasic cultures "give little credence to alternate states and may denigrate those who explore them" (179). This just goes back to my point about how our culture teaches us, and has taught me, that drugs (here, I mean illegal drugs) are bad and that people who use them are bad too. I was happy to read how popular other spiritual practices are becoming in the West, such as yoga and meditation. I'm going to end this week's blog with a quote (surprise, surprise) "cognicentrism- is the counterpart of ethnocentrism between cultures, but in this case it is not the narrowness of someone's cultural experience that is the fundamental issue but the narrowness of someone's conscious experience" (182).
This Santa stuff is interesting. It's not entirely for me, but it's interesting. For instance, the whole idea of an "upper" world and a "lower" world---upper being heaven and lower being hell. The author writes, "the lower world is underground and commonly accessed by a tunnel or a hole in the earth" --and--"the upper world is associated in the sky and is accessed by such means as a sacred tree, or ladder that reaches into heaven" (3). Why do we always associate heaven with being above us? This isn't the first time that I've heard a reference to a ladder or rope to go UP to heaven. I don't get it. When I was a younger I used to always think that if you flew far enough out into the sky that you could reach heaven. Also, that if you dug far enough into the ground you could reach hell. And, as a child might do, I attempted to dig to hell. Not because that was my preferred choice, but rather, because my dad owned a shovel but not an airplane. It didn't take me long until I gave up when I realized how much time and work it would take---I did, in case you are interested, put a pit from a peach in the small hole I managed to dig in an attempt to grow a peach tree. No success. The author also points out that "sugar, caffeine, alcohol and tobacco have been culturally supported whereas the sacramental use of entheogenic mushrooms are still demonized and outlawed" (6). I liked this quote because it reminds me of a comment I made in an earlier blog about wanting to reach an ASOC through yoga but not drug use because I have been taught that drug use is a bad thing. I'll get back to this point later.
Hughes:
It must be later because here goes.....Hughes writes, "the most popular drugs range from coffee and tea to tobacco and alcohol, with marijuana a recent addition" (161). He goes on to talk about "psychedelic" drugs too labeling them as "problematic in social terms". I drink coffee and I drink alcohol---and sometimes when I'm drinking alcohol I might smoke a few cigarettes because they go so well together ( I know, I know). I also don't like taking any medicine when I'm sick and have recently started eating some organic food. I had to set that up to give you the proper perspective for what I'm about to say (summary: coffee, alcohol, some cigs, organic food)---what I don't do is any drug considered "illegal". But here's the catch, we have had a prohibition before. So I strikes me as odd to consider certain drugs illegal and not others when the ideas/feeling/emotions/thoughts about these drugs change over time. People used to use opium openly---now it's illegal. People used to drink alcohol---then it became illegal----now it's legal again. Who is in control of this whole thing any way? Why do certain people get to classify drugs as either "good" or "bad"---legal or illegal. They're all drugs, right? Even the word "drugs" had different connotations to it. For instance, when I say that I don't use drugs people generally understand what that means. You can name the ones that you know would be included on that list. But, at the end of the day---I would be lying because every morning I drink coffee and occasionally I'll have a few drinks on the weekend. People automatically make a distinction between "illegal" and "legal". Oh, you don't do drugs? Ok, well how about that soda you're drinking?---I love the hypocrisy. Hughes also talks about absinthe which I've seen in a movie before (can't remember which movie but I do remember the drink was green). The movie portrayed it as the greatest thing ever---which just makes me want to try it. This is strange because it happens to be a liqueur, whereas if it were a mushroom or something like that then I wouldn't be interested. I just love what I've taken in from my culture. Speaking of cultures...
Walsh:
He writes that most of the world's cultures are polyphasic whereas the Western world is monophasic. In discussing ASC's: polyphasic cultures "value and cultivate these states, honor those who master them..." -----while monophasic cultures "give little credence to alternate states and may denigrate those who explore them" (179). This just goes back to my point about how our culture teaches us, and has taught me, that drugs (here, I mean illegal drugs) are bad and that people who use them are bad too. I was happy to read how popular other spiritual practices are becoming in the West, such as yoga and meditation. I'm going to end this week's blog with a quote (surprise, surprise) "cognicentrism- is the counterpart of ethnocentrism between cultures, but in this case it is not the narrowness of someone's cultural experience that is the fundamental issue but the narrowness of someone's conscious experience" (182).
Another interesting week of philosophical thinking
Hughes:
You know this reading reminds me of a simple theory that I brought up in class last thursday in class about whose reality we are really living. What is reality and whose consciousness are we really living. What is reality and who sets the standards of what we percieve as reality. The chapter outlines different kinds of mind altering stimulants that people use to induce creativity. They tell you not to use drugs because its bad for you without telling you the real concrete reasoning for it. It might seem as if I am advocating for the junkies but I don't even use drugs but it just draws my attention as to why it is illegal to use some of these stimulants when they can be inducive to a creative and artistic work environment. Is there a potential level of thinking that can be reached that the status quo don't want the average man to reach. I don't know but seeing that some of our greatest artist and thinkers indulged in drug usage to gain a better perspective on another form of consciousnes it makes me suspicious that in theory these hallucinogens might have something to them.
Amanita Muscaria and Santa Clause
This article is a litlle out there for me. The whole Santa Clause and agaric mushrooms is a bit made up to me. Now I don't know what the ties of mushrooms is to santa it might have some truth to it. Maybe someone was high on shrooms when they thought about connecting Sanata and Christmas together. When you come to think about it Christmas and Santa are pawns for capitalism From September to december.
Walsh:
It seems that the shamans were up to something with the whole drug induced consciousness. Could it be that under the influence we have an untapped potential for artistic and intellectual creativity that as I mentioned on the other article that some people don't want us to discover. The shamans see the world from another point of view that is just to some of us ludicrous but its about opening your mind to new and potential ideas.They seemed to just love drugs so much.
You know this reading reminds me of a simple theory that I brought up in class last thursday in class about whose reality we are really living. What is reality and whose consciousness are we really living. What is reality and who sets the standards of what we percieve as reality. The chapter outlines different kinds of mind altering stimulants that people use to induce creativity. They tell you not to use drugs because its bad for you without telling you the real concrete reasoning for it. It might seem as if I am advocating for the junkies but I don't even use drugs but it just draws my attention as to why it is illegal to use some of these stimulants when they can be inducive to a creative and artistic work environment. Is there a potential level of thinking that can be reached that the status quo don't want the average man to reach. I don't know but seeing that some of our greatest artist and thinkers indulged in drug usage to gain a better perspective on another form of consciousnes it makes me suspicious that in theory these hallucinogens might have something to them.
Amanita Muscaria and Santa Clause
This article is a litlle out there for me. The whole Santa Clause and agaric mushrooms is a bit made up to me. Now I don't know what the ties of mushrooms is to santa it might have some truth to it. Maybe someone was high on shrooms when they thought about connecting Sanata and Christmas together. When you come to think about it Christmas and Santa are pawns for capitalism From September to december.
Walsh:
It seems that the shamans were up to something with the whole drug induced consciousness. Could it be that under the influence we have an untapped potential for artistic and intellectual creativity that as I mentioned on the other article that some people don't want us to discover. The shamans see the world from another point of view that is just to some of us ludicrous but its about opening your mind to new and potential ideas.They seemed to just love drugs so much.
Santa vs. Mushrooms
The article Amanita muscaria and Santa Claus, excerpts from James Bursenos, was very far-out and strange. How do you get a connection between Santa Claus and a magic mushroom? Well in Bursenos mind, you can. Apparently, hence the word apparently, because of the colors they share, they have a connection, along with the Coca-Cola company eventually. Once again, a writer has given his view on personal connections, without support. He thinks that since they share the colors red, white, and black, there is a connection. He also feels Santa’s “current form is twisted and grotesque…” This article really caused me to loose interest and laugh about how ridiculous this topic is. What am I going to do with this information I read? It has no significance. All I have to say is that there are a lot of color schemes shared amongst companies, countries, teams, products, and everything else. For instance like Penn State and BMW, both share the colors blue and white, Nike and Under Armor, both share black and white, the American flag and Red bull, both share red, white, and blue. This does not mean there is a connection, and I feel shamanism brings weird symbolizations and no significance to life.
Hughes once again, went on about drugs. I guess all these authors think that all people of the world should just get stoned so they find themselves, is that what they are trying to say? It’s hard to say. Hughes made an interesting observation about the connection between people and artists who are famous and do drugs. I believe it is a coincidence that they have made it to their level of status, not by drug addiction, but due to addiction and craving for their dream. Other means then drugs can reach creativity. Like Hughes said, “…art is a passion that cannot be replaced by drugs, although it can be extinguished by addiction.” How I interpret this quote is by how I achieve creativity. I find it simply by focus and determination. If you are not fully focused on a dream or goal, addiction of other distractions blocks your way to achieve. I will never be a great student if I don’t but the work in. This is the same with artists. You’re not going to become Picasso just by taking drugs.
Walsh brought an interesting story to attention about a man getting his leg chopped off. I think it is impossible for a person to go through surgery, without the help of anesthesia, without being in a strong state of mind. The only people I could see doing that are people who go through some of the toughest, competitions, battles, and challenges, most people never would have the chance to face. I believe it takes a person with strong psychological will and control to put themselves in a fixed state in which they can totally block out reality. A conscious person could never do it. I don’t a single person who wouldn’t be screaming for dear life, go into shock, or pass out after a surgery has began, and in no way do I think a person is capable of staying awake to see it through. A person has to be in a certain state to deal with the fear and torturous pain endured during surgeries.
Hughes once again, went on about drugs. I guess all these authors think that all people of the world should just get stoned so they find themselves, is that what they are trying to say? It’s hard to say. Hughes made an interesting observation about the connection between people and artists who are famous and do drugs. I believe it is a coincidence that they have made it to their level of status, not by drug addiction, but due to addiction and craving for their dream. Other means then drugs can reach creativity. Like Hughes said, “…art is a passion that cannot be replaced by drugs, although it can be extinguished by addiction.” How I interpret this quote is by how I achieve creativity. I find it simply by focus and determination. If you are not fully focused on a dream or goal, addiction of other distractions blocks your way to achieve. I will never be a great student if I don’t but the work in. This is the same with artists. You’re not going to become Picasso just by taking drugs.
Walsh brought an interesting story to attention about a man getting his leg chopped off. I think it is impossible for a person to go through surgery, without the help of anesthesia, without being in a strong state of mind. The only people I could see doing that are people who go through some of the toughest, competitions, battles, and challenges, most people never would have the chance to face. I believe it takes a person with strong psychological will and control to put themselves in a fixed state in which they can totally block out reality. A conscious person could never do it. I don’t a single person who wouldn’t be screaming for dear life, go into shock, or pass out after a surgery has began, and in no way do I think a person is capable of staying awake to see it through. A person has to be in a certain state to deal with the fear and torturous pain endured during surgeries.
Blog number five
Walsh, Part IV 179-199
I’m a skeptic in hypnosis. When I read about the man who was hypnotized and had his gangrenous leg amputated under hypnosis sitting there calmly smiling, I didn’t really know how to react. It seems unfathomable for that to have happened, seriously. Maybe because I’m programmed to believe hypnosis is a sham (cultural programming), or maybe I’d rather be ignorant to the truth. I don’t know.
In terms of modifying the consciousness, it appears we’re biologically programmed to seek out ASC’s.
It is an “innate normal drive analogous to hunger or the sexual drive.” I believe it. It’s the need to take break from reality. A break from what is real to us.
Is the induction of an altered state of consciousness as simple as Figure 13. on page 187? It’s a bunch of circles that are together, spread apart, moved around, and then move back together. Um, OK… Is that what an ASC looks like? I think an ASC would look more complex than that.
OK, here’s where I agree 100 percent, “Overdosed America points out that we are bombarded by drug advertisements and each year gulp down billions of dollars worth of tranquilizers, sacrifice about 500,000 people to tobacco consumption, and lose another 100,000 to alcohol. Yet we subsidize tobacco growers while imprisoning marijuana grows and make no distinction between socially destructive and sacred drug use.” Yup, that is so incredibly on point.
When it comes to the shamans and drugs, they’re definitely respectful of the ways in which they use them. I just think if people approached the matter with maturity and an open mind, the drug debate in the aspect of ASC’s would be better understood.
Hughes, Chapter 12
Drugs influencing artist’s creativity is inevitable. Maybe it’s just part of the lifestyle to a degree. I think a good synopsis of the way drugs are incorporated to art is decently explained on page 161, “Artists create from things that they experience and see and hear-if they use drugs, then drugs form part of that experience.“
I like how it’s stated in the West that popular drugs range from coffee and tea, to tobacco and alcohol, with marijuana which is a recent addition. It’s very true, and as basic and minute as coffee and tea is, those beverages are still “drugs.” Just like, even if you speed, you’re still breaking the law.
The section about opium reminded me about Johnny Depp who played Inspector Fred Abberline in From Hell. His character was dependent on opium and it killed him in the end (spoiler… oops).
The days of opium must have been crazyyyyy.
And the medicinal properties of cannabis sativa have been known since prehistoric times. Hmmm… It also looks like one of my favorite jazz musicians Louis Armstrong was a regular pot smoker, he was even arrested. The breakdown of all the different drugs was definitely pretty on point and informative. I was definitely entertained at the same time.
Amanita muscaria and Santa Claus
The idea of Santa Claus is related to mushrooms, hmm. That’s interesting, and I’m going to allow it. Why not? It makes a bit of sense. There also seems to be enough evidence backing the idea that Santa is related to a psychedelic mushroom. Down to his looks, his reindeer, his location, the elves, etc… I'm more prone to let people believe what they want. Why not? Though, I get the sense that the author is desperately trying to get us to believe him.
At the same time, I don’t really celebrate Christmas. Nor do I get excited about it, so my enthusiasm on this article was lacking. After I grew up and moved out, I became apathetic to the holiday. It works for me, because I don’t have to put up or take down decorations, and I also save a lot of money. Maybe because the idea of Santa is probably derived from this mushroom, Christmas might make its way back in the DeNoyelles household.
I’m a skeptic in hypnosis. When I read about the man who was hypnotized and had his gangrenous leg amputated under hypnosis sitting there calmly smiling, I didn’t really know how to react. It seems unfathomable for that to have happened, seriously. Maybe because I’m programmed to believe hypnosis is a sham (cultural programming), or maybe I’d rather be ignorant to the truth. I don’t know.
In terms of modifying the consciousness, it appears we’re biologically programmed to seek out ASC’s.
It is an “innate normal drive analogous to hunger or the sexual drive.” I believe it. It’s the need to take break from reality. A break from what is real to us.
Is the induction of an altered state of consciousness as simple as Figure 13. on page 187? It’s a bunch of circles that are together, spread apart, moved around, and then move back together. Um, OK… Is that what an ASC looks like? I think an ASC would look more complex than that.
OK, here’s where I agree 100 percent, “Overdosed America points out that we are bombarded by drug advertisements and each year gulp down billions of dollars worth of tranquilizers, sacrifice about 500,000 people to tobacco consumption, and lose another 100,000 to alcohol. Yet we subsidize tobacco growers while imprisoning marijuana grows and make no distinction between socially destructive and sacred drug use.” Yup, that is so incredibly on point.
When it comes to the shamans and drugs, they’re definitely respectful of the ways in which they use them. I just think if people approached the matter with maturity and an open mind, the drug debate in the aspect of ASC’s would be better understood.
Hughes, Chapter 12
Drugs influencing artist’s creativity is inevitable. Maybe it’s just part of the lifestyle to a degree. I think a good synopsis of the way drugs are incorporated to art is decently explained on page 161, “Artists create from things that they experience and see and hear-if they use drugs, then drugs form part of that experience.“
I like how it’s stated in the West that popular drugs range from coffee and tea, to tobacco and alcohol, with marijuana which is a recent addition. It’s very true, and as basic and minute as coffee and tea is, those beverages are still “drugs.” Just like, even if you speed, you’re still breaking the law.
The section about opium reminded me about Johnny Depp who played Inspector Fred Abberline in From Hell. His character was dependent on opium and it killed him in the end (spoiler… oops).
The days of opium must have been crazyyyyy.
And the medicinal properties of cannabis sativa have been known since prehistoric times. Hmmm… It also looks like one of my favorite jazz musicians Louis Armstrong was a regular pot smoker, he was even arrested. The breakdown of all the different drugs was definitely pretty on point and informative. I was definitely entertained at the same time.
Amanita muscaria and Santa Claus
The idea of Santa Claus is related to mushrooms, hmm. That’s interesting, and I’m going to allow it. Why not? It makes a bit of sense. There also seems to be enough evidence backing the idea that Santa is related to a psychedelic mushroom. Down to his looks, his reindeer, his location, the elves, etc… I'm more prone to let people believe what they want. Why not? Though, I get the sense that the author is desperately trying to get us to believe him.
At the same time, I don’t really celebrate Christmas. Nor do I get excited about it, so my enthusiasm on this article was lacking. After I grew up and moved out, I became apathetic to the holiday. It works for me, because I don’t have to put up or take down decorations, and I also save a lot of money. Maybe because the idea of Santa is probably derived from this mushroom, Christmas might make its way back in the DeNoyelles household.
"Up on the housetop, reindeer pause..." (to munch on some Amanita muscaria for their 'journey')!
This article, entertaining the similarities between the fly agaric and our Santa legend, I found to be both enlightening and yet ridiculous. I appreciate the author's efforts to assimilate the two; sure- they are both red and white, they both provide for an adventurous journey, reindeer love the man and mushroom, and both include the "Christmas tree" in their identity. These examples, I feel the author backs up nicely, and if I were under the mushroom spell, would totally be on board with this theory. However, I feel that the reindeer names symbolizing shamanic experience was a bit of a stretch. What would Rudolph's name signify? If he has the "red" nose that guides the rest of the team, is he representative of the shroom itself? How about the bear reference...again a little far-fetched for me to accept. I'm not sure why the author suggests they are an animal that is often "included in images of Christmastime" except to only be able to incorporate this into his theory. I don't remember seeing bear decorations, ornaments and what-have-you during the holiday except for maybe in an inflatable yard decoration?! The anagram example portrayed is what I consider to be simply coincidental. In this case, one could also debate that God and dog are also alter egos - sure, man's creator and man's best friend! I don't think so. Finally, in discussing the importance of the three colors: red, white, and black, I found the quote offered on the last page interesting. "The fairy tale hero or heroine...who chances to see a drop of red blood fall from a black raven into the white snow, sinks immediately into a yogic trance. That suggests the vast power red, black, and white have or have had over human consciousness." I hope the next time I'm shopping at Target, watching a Campbell's soup commercial, or playing checkers- the red, white, black trio doesn't spontaneouosly send me into an ASC. Sorry for all the sarcasm, and although I don't agree with all of the author's correlations, it was entertaining and at least got you to think about the material.
Walsh's chapter took me back to the basics. I felt this chapter was a great "recap" of what we discused in the beginning of the semester. There are three stages of induction; the first requiring some sort of destabilizer (this reminded me of the first article we read). In the next stage it is determined how long the ASC will last by "patterning forces". Any disruption during this phase will jeopardize the final stage- almost what we used to refer to as "buzzkills". "Zen teachers...relate how they trailed students, crept up behind them, and suddenly yelled at the top of their voice." This example left me with an image of such a disruption or buzzkill. Of extreme interest to me was the mention of timing on pg 188. I always wondered why it seems that seances, "ghost hunts" (as depicted on tv), and even the ahauasca ceremonies we witnessed in the classroom movie are always held at night. If spirits (regarding the former two) and an ASC (the latter) are always obtainable or present, couldn't these take place during the day? I was always skeptical of such events becuase of this fact alone. However, I appreciate and understand now due to the explanations given in the text (the imagery of the house lights helped). Lastly on Walsh, regarding the arguments over drug-induced religious experiences on pg 195, I feel I should play devil's advocate with #3. Being a Christian, I support this notion - however, if God created herbs and plants and also created man and woman with the power of free will, to do as he/she chooses, couldn't this argue the argument itself? Sounds as if I need a drug-induced experience at this point!
Hughes, as always, was an enjoyable read. I thought the description on 163 about opium, "Within the opiate-induced coccoon of perfect invulnerability, the individual's strangest unconscious material feels safe to venture out". I thought this gave the reader a great understanding of what an opium-induced state entails and also another example of how one emits creativity (not that I propose it). The topic of synthesia was fascinating - the phenomenon to hear color and see sound. Mentioned alongside of this was Louis Armstrong and his renowned talent and use of cannabis. With the explanation of synthesia and Louis Armstrong, could there be more behind the lyrics to "What a Wonderful World"? Were the trees really green and what were the red roses saying? Just a funny twist on the two topics :)
Walsh's chapter took me back to the basics. I felt this chapter was a great "recap" of what we discused in the beginning of the semester. There are three stages of induction; the first requiring some sort of destabilizer (this reminded me of the first article we read). In the next stage it is determined how long the ASC will last by "patterning forces". Any disruption during this phase will jeopardize the final stage- almost what we used to refer to as "buzzkills". "Zen teachers...relate how they trailed students, crept up behind them, and suddenly yelled at the top of their voice." This example left me with an image of such a disruption or buzzkill. Of extreme interest to me was the mention of timing on pg 188. I always wondered why it seems that seances, "ghost hunts" (as depicted on tv), and even the ahauasca ceremonies we witnessed in the classroom movie are always held at night. If spirits (regarding the former two) and an ASC (the latter) are always obtainable or present, couldn't these take place during the day? I was always skeptical of such events becuase of this fact alone. However, I appreciate and understand now due to the explanations given in the text (the imagery of the house lights helped). Lastly on Walsh, regarding the arguments over drug-induced religious experiences on pg 195, I feel I should play devil's advocate with #3. Being a Christian, I support this notion - however, if God created herbs and plants and also created man and woman with the power of free will, to do as he/she chooses, couldn't this argue the argument itself? Sounds as if I need a drug-induced experience at this point!
Hughes, as always, was an enjoyable read. I thought the description on 163 about opium, "Within the opiate-induced coccoon of perfect invulnerability, the individual's strangest unconscious material feels safe to venture out". I thought this gave the reader a great understanding of what an opium-induced state entails and also another example of how one emits creativity (not that I propose it). The topic of synthesia was fascinating - the phenomenon to hear color and see sound. Mentioned alongside of this was Louis Armstrong and his renowned talent and use of cannabis. With the explanation of synthesia and Louis Armstrong, could there be more behind the lyrics to "What a Wonderful World"? Were the trees really green and what were the red roses saying? Just a funny twist on the two topics :)
SATAN = SANTA ?!?!
First, I found the Santa reading to be very interesting and enlightening. It is very factual about the agaric mushroom, but at times I found the links between Santa and the fly agaric a little forced and farfetched. For the most part, however, the Santa reading certainly gives me something to think about. Many of the points outlined in the Santa reading seem to make too much sense than to be mere coincidence.
What I came away with from the readings is very vague and perhaps oxymoronic. I got the impression that often drugs can help artists have more creative thoughts and ideas, but just as often drugs can hinder an artist's work. Basically drugs induce altered states, in which artists are often inspired. In the altered state however, most artists do not actually produce work. They only have a vision. Once sober, they use their skills and talents to express the creativity experienced in the altered state. Similarly, without artistic skills, creativity experienced in an altered state that cannot be expressed is lost to the world. Drugs have influenced many artists like Jimi Hendrix, John Lennon, and Edgar Allen Poe, but they have also restricted many artists as well. For example, Hughes states that for Jack Kerouac, "the effect of speed is more clearly harmful." And even though Poe was influenced by opium, alcohol, and severe mental illness, perhaps he would have been just as genius sans drugs. And without drugs, Poe may not have been found dying in the streets in clothes that weren't even his own and we could have more Poe short stories.
Another thought I had was that if in general, artists don't actually produce work in drug induced ASCs and must do so in a normal state, that's why marijuana, LSD, and other seemingly nonaddictive drugs consistenly produce art. I mean once you're addicted to heroin, all you're worried about is getting heroin, so expressing what you experienced on your last high probably takes a backseat to your next fix.
One last thought: Walt Disney was a major progressive in American culture and yes, he used drugs. I don't think it is a coincidence that Alice in Wonderland is pretty much an animated trip and fly agaric mushrooms show up in Snow White. How I'd love to see his diaries. I'm sure that every project Disney was personally behind had a social message.
Santa Claus, Hughes, Walsh
Santa Claus
I thought this was a crazy article, but I actually believe it. I think it is funny that the idea of Santa Claus, his reindeer, Christmas trees, etc., can all be traced back to the agaric mushroom. I think the writer of this article might have taken it a little too far by trying to trace everything to this mushroom, but I still thought it was interesting. I thought the funniest part was how the author made connections from the song 'Twas the night before Christmas.' The fact that Santa and the Amanita mushroom both shiver and shake like a bowl full of jelly is comical. I think the author should have stuck with the christmas connections, rather than going on to talk about William Blake's poem Songs of Innocence. I have read that poem before and I don't think it has anything to do with mushrooms. Again, with the Coca Cola I don't think that has anything to do with mushrooms. I do think that there is some truth that is being said in this article, but I definitely don't buy into all of it. Still, I think it is interesting that so much of our society can be traced to Shamanism and Amanita muscaria.
Hughes
Wow! I can't speak from experience, but I don't think that opium had that much of an effect on some of the greatest artists. I think Samuel Coleridge, Edgar Allan Poe, Wordsworth, etc. were great, whether they did opium or not. I admire their work and I think they could have come up with amazing poems and stories, whether they had opium or not. Even if opium enhanced their work, I don't think it enhanced it that much. It really kind of upsets me to think of all kinds of artists as druggies. I mean I want to see people as being great, without any kind of help. I know heroin is very addictive and powerful, but I just don't get it. I don't do drugs, so it is really difficult for me to wrap my head around all of this stuff. Everyone says drugs are bad, but look at all of these successful people who have been a result of drugs. I mean everyone seems to be associated with some form of drugs. Even Freud is associated to cocaine. I'm not saying altered states are bad, even thought that is what everyone is taught to believe. However, I do feel like everyone who uses drugs is cheating in order to be successful.
Walsh
Maybe I'm not a believer, but I'm not. I can't imagine a man a hypnotized man with a gangrenous leg smiling, while he got his leg amputated. Even if I saw it I don't know if I would believe it. To me, that is impossible. I just think it is difficult to understand something so different and unusual. Even when Tart explains the steps to get to an altered state of consciousness it sounds kind of easy, but I know that it is not. I mean it is just 4 steps, but why haven't more people been able to experience it? I know I'm bashing everything right now, but I really think a person has to experience it, in order to understand it. I would like to talk and see someone in an altered state. It is interesting and I do believe people go to altered states, I just can't imagine a place that I have never been.
I thought this was a crazy article, but I actually believe it. I think it is funny that the idea of Santa Claus, his reindeer, Christmas trees, etc., can all be traced back to the agaric mushroom. I think the writer of this article might have taken it a little too far by trying to trace everything to this mushroom, but I still thought it was interesting. I thought the funniest part was how the author made connections from the song 'Twas the night before Christmas.' The fact that Santa and the Amanita mushroom both shiver and shake like a bowl full of jelly is comical. I think the author should have stuck with the christmas connections, rather than going on to talk about William Blake's poem Songs of Innocence. I have read that poem before and I don't think it has anything to do with mushrooms. Again, with the Coca Cola I don't think that has anything to do with mushrooms. I do think that there is some truth that is being said in this article, but I definitely don't buy into all of it. Still, I think it is interesting that so much of our society can be traced to Shamanism and Amanita muscaria.
Hughes
Wow! I can't speak from experience, but I don't think that opium had that much of an effect on some of the greatest artists. I think Samuel Coleridge, Edgar Allan Poe, Wordsworth, etc. were great, whether they did opium or not. I admire their work and I think they could have come up with amazing poems and stories, whether they had opium or not. Even if opium enhanced their work, I don't think it enhanced it that much. It really kind of upsets me to think of all kinds of artists as druggies. I mean I want to see people as being great, without any kind of help. I know heroin is very addictive and powerful, but I just don't get it. I don't do drugs, so it is really difficult for me to wrap my head around all of this stuff. Everyone says drugs are bad, but look at all of these successful people who have been a result of drugs. I mean everyone seems to be associated with some form of drugs. Even Freud is associated to cocaine. I'm not saying altered states are bad, even thought that is what everyone is taught to believe. However, I do feel like everyone who uses drugs is cheating in order to be successful.
Walsh
Maybe I'm not a believer, but I'm not. I can't imagine a man a hypnotized man with a gangrenous leg smiling, while he got his leg amputated. Even if I saw it I don't know if I would believe it. To me, that is impossible. I just think it is difficult to understand something so different and unusual. Even when Tart explains the steps to get to an altered state of consciousness it sounds kind of easy, but I know that it is not. I mean it is just 4 steps, but why haven't more people been able to experience it? I know I'm bashing everything right now, but I really think a person has to experience it, in order to understand it. I would like to talk and see someone in an altered state. It is interesting and I do believe people go to altered states, I just can't imagine a place that I have never been.
Yes, Virgina, there is a magic mushroom
I've heard a lot of explanations for the existence of Santa Claus. Perhaps the most unbelievable is the notion that there is a jolly, overweight man who rides in a sleigh pulled by flying reindeer and somehow manages to slide down your chimney in the dead of the night without waking anybody. Though it be less tangible, one of the more logical explanations is the existence of Santa in our hearts, no necessarily as a physical being but as a constant reminder that there is good and generosity in our everyday lives. Part of my mind (perhaps that little corner where the child in me hides) finds it far-fetched that Santa was developed from a likeness to magic mushrooms; however, there are a string of coincidences mentioned in the Bursenos article that simply someone did not just come up with this theory out of nowhere.
The main question seems to be if the influence of drugs creates creativity or merely encourages it. When it comes to creativity, I think it involves more than just opening the mind. It is necessary to be able to translate thoughts and ideas into some sort of experience, whether music or art or dance (or any of a number of outlets). Under the influence of drugs, one's mine may become less inhibited, and in fact may open it to new ideas the person may had not previously considered, but creativity is not achieved until those ideas can be shared. That is to say, no artist is required to share his or her work, but unless there is something that can possibly be shared, then nothing has been created.
From the reading, it seems that the artist does not create anything until he or she comes out of this drug-induced state of consciousness. That being said, perhaps drugs do expand the mind and allow the user to see or hear or envision things that he or she might otherwise not have been likely to do; however, as it is mentioned in several places throughout the texts, if he or she does not have the discipline to then apply those visions or thoughts or ideas, in essence to create something from what he or she saw, then the experience within the influence of the drug may as well have been useless, or even non-existent.
Walt Disney did drugs? Seriously? These readings are slowly giving new meaning to my childhood.
The main question seems to be if the influence of drugs creates creativity or merely encourages it. When it comes to creativity, I think it involves more than just opening the mind. It is necessary to be able to translate thoughts and ideas into some sort of experience, whether music or art or dance (or any of a number of outlets). Under the influence of drugs, one's mine may become less inhibited, and in fact may open it to new ideas the person may had not previously considered, but creativity is not achieved until those ideas can be shared. That is to say, no artist is required to share his or her work, but unless there is something that can possibly be shared, then nothing has been created.
From the reading, it seems that the artist does not create anything until he or she comes out of this drug-induced state of consciousness. That being said, perhaps drugs do expand the mind and allow the user to see or hear or envision things that he or she might otherwise not have been likely to do; however, as it is mentioned in several places throughout the texts, if he or she does not have the discipline to then apply those visions or thoughts or ideas, in essence to create something from what he or she saw, then the experience within the influence of the drug may as well have been useless, or even non-existent.
Walt Disney did drugs? Seriously? These readings are slowly giving new meaning to my childhood.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Walsh, Hughes and Santa Claus
Walsh
"In the West there is currently a strong tendency to deny religious significance to any drug experience, and psychedelic use by shamans has led people to dismiss them (Walsh 194)." Yes, that would seem to be the case in most instances. However, not all Westerner's would dismiss the shamans religious experience solely because they ingest hallucinogenic drugs. Some Westerner's may refute the religious significance associated with shamanism not only because shamans consume drugs to attain altered states of consciousness; rather, some people may demur the notion or claim which asserts that a person has literally undergone a metaphysical passage, and then proceed to take issue with the religiosity of such an experience altogether. Suppose for a moment that a persons doubt of a spiritual or mystical shamanic experience stems not from any ethnocentric or cognicentric belief that they may harbor, but from a firm disbelief in any God or deity altogether. Consequently, this ideology negates any subsequent dialogue about other planes of existence, metaphysical travels, or any divine religious experience as wholly nonsense, whether it is an indigenous shamanic practice or an Abrahamic religion under discussion. Now, such a criticism neither rejects the notion that humans can reach altered states of consciousness nor renders all conversations about shamanism completely out of bounds. Once again, the contention here just simply takes issue with the religious experience conceptually, opposed to accepting or dismissing it based on the shaman's consumption of a psychedelic substance. Indeed, I think this observation is relevant to the matter at hand because a lot of the readings thus far (not just the Walsh readings) have discussed the shaman's transcendental experience by either inferring or outwardly claiming that such experiences literally have supernatural or spirtual characteristics.
Hughes
I actually enjoyed the Hughes reading for once. I had no idea that Louis Armstrong smoked weed. I had to laugh when I saw the picture on page 166; man, he looks so baked. But anyhow, Cannabis isn't conducive to producing creativity? Really? Perhaps the person that made this statement hasn't heard a pothead speak his/her mind. If they had, maybe they would know that whatever is churning about in that charcoal fried brain of theirs certainly has creative characteristics, and is probably capable of expressing creativity in some fashion. At any rate, I enjoyed the discussion concerning drug intake and creative musical expression. A lot of my favorite musicians are byproducts of experimenting with drugs, such as Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Jim Morrison, Jimmy Page, etc. Additionally, I liked the quote on page 172 by Timothy Leary. Leary notes that "We have to distinguish between the experience, a new experience,-and whether you can communicate the experience."
Santa Claus
The Santa Claus reading was a little out there. He made so many bizarre claims, I'm not particuarly sure what to specifically mention. Actually, I'm not really interested in entertaining this subject-matter or attempting to critically analzye it. I didn't enjoy this handout at all.
"In the West there is currently a strong tendency to deny religious significance to any drug experience, and psychedelic use by shamans has led people to dismiss them (Walsh 194)." Yes, that would seem to be the case in most instances. However, not all Westerner's would dismiss the shamans religious experience solely because they ingest hallucinogenic drugs. Some Westerner's may refute the religious significance associated with shamanism not only because shamans consume drugs to attain altered states of consciousness; rather, some people may demur the notion or claim which asserts that a person has literally undergone a metaphysical passage, and then proceed to take issue with the religiosity of such an experience altogether. Suppose for a moment that a persons doubt of a spiritual or mystical shamanic experience stems not from any ethnocentric or cognicentric belief that they may harbor, but from a firm disbelief in any God or deity altogether. Consequently, this ideology negates any subsequent dialogue about other planes of existence, metaphysical travels, or any divine religious experience as wholly nonsense, whether it is an indigenous shamanic practice or an Abrahamic religion under discussion. Now, such a criticism neither rejects the notion that humans can reach altered states of consciousness nor renders all conversations about shamanism completely out of bounds. Once again, the contention here just simply takes issue with the religious experience conceptually, opposed to accepting or dismissing it based on the shaman's consumption of a psychedelic substance. Indeed, I think this observation is relevant to the matter at hand because a lot of the readings thus far (not just the Walsh readings) have discussed the shaman's transcendental experience by either inferring or outwardly claiming that such experiences literally have supernatural or spirtual characteristics.
Hughes
I actually enjoyed the Hughes reading for once. I had no idea that Louis Armstrong smoked weed. I had to laugh when I saw the picture on page 166; man, he looks so baked. But anyhow, Cannabis isn't conducive to producing creativity? Really? Perhaps the person that made this statement hasn't heard a pothead speak his/her mind. If they had, maybe they would know that whatever is churning about in that charcoal fried brain of theirs certainly has creative characteristics, and is probably capable of expressing creativity in some fashion. At any rate, I enjoyed the discussion concerning drug intake and creative musical expression. A lot of my favorite musicians are byproducts of experimenting with drugs, such as Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Jim Morrison, Jimmy Page, etc. Additionally, I liked the quote on page 172 by Timothy Leary. Leary notes that "We have to distinguish between the experience, a new experience,-and whether you can communicate the experience."
Santa Claus
The Santa Claus reading was a little out there. He made so many bizarre claims, I'm not particuarly sure what to specifically mention. Actually, I'm not really interested in entertaining this subject-matter or attempting to critically analzye it. I didn't enjoy this handout at all.
Your Words Burn the Air Like the Names of Candy Bars
I'm not exactly sure what the title of this blog means. It's a quote from some band I used to listen to when I was in junior high. Their name was Soul Coughing and the lead singer, Mike Doughty, was addicted to heroin throughout the band's career. He also wrote a book of poetry that he used as a way to keep himself off of drugs while he was in rehab. When he was shooting heroin his lyrics were charged with all this imagery that as a listener, one had so much fun imagining. He later said that everything he wrote while in the band was influenced by heroin and most of it had no meaning. However, once he sobered up, and took a solo career his lyrics suffered tremendously. You can follow his lyrical downfall in audio.
I had always thought that maybe artists relied on drugs as a way to get over certain anxieties within themselves. Perhaps they were nervous that nobody would respond to things that they were creating, and as a defense mechanism used drugs as their back up plan. The whole, "Well, I was on drugs when I wrote this." I think Hughes said "cold" creativity comes from the artist without the use of drugs. I thought that maybe he was saying that the artist is quite capable of producing the same work while sober. I think it's an interesting area to research. He only mentioned in one sentence how artists practiced their craft for many years. It wasn't just magic when they put a pen, paint brush, or instrument in their hands.
Hughes mentioned Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters. Kesey wrote one phenomenal book before he started using LSD, and then he never did much after that. I think he wrote one other book to very little acclaim, but for the most part he spent the rest of his life running away to Mexico to avoid being arrested, or he was driving across the country on that bus while he and his friends colored themselves in Day-Glo. Artistically, his career was rather uneventful. That's one example.
Balzac and Dumas are two of my favorite authors. I was unaware of Balzac's involvement with the Club des Haschischins, but I started laughing about Dumas' name being mentioned. There are a few scenes in The Count of Monte Cristo where I think Dumas wasn't so concerned about the plot of his novel as much as he just wanted to describe how great marijuana is.
Walsh
There was a paragraph in Walsh's text that was borderline if not pointless.
"Electroencephalograms of subjects listening to drumming seemed to show auditory driving responses. Unfortunately, the studies are flawed and give us little reliable information." Okay.
I would much rather him say, "Hey, reader. Have you ever stood near a drum set while someone bangs away on it. You know that feeling in your chest. Your whole body feels like it's not on the ground. Yeah, that's what I'm talking about."
Roberte Hamayon rejects shamanism as if these cultures are putting on stunts like David Blain or that other weird guy from Las Vegas. Not Copperfield, that rock n' roll looking one. She says, "How can we determine whether practitioners are actually in altered states, let alone which state they are in." She makes it sound as if shamans have some alterior motive. For instance, are these South American tribes doing this for money and publicity? Please.
Throughout this portion of the book, Walsh mentions the ungoing debate of drug induced ASCs and contemplative ASCs. I have yet to read any evidence of the drug induced ASCs causing anyone harm.
And Santa... That article was a lot of fun, and well thought out. It's a bit hard to write an analysis on an analysis. I was really hoping Bursenos would delve into Christmas trees. I always thought of them as being a product of someone's ASC.
"There is still such a legacy of fear and misunderstanding about hallucinogenic mushrooms that many of us simply refuse to consider the role they have played in forming the human mind." An interesting quote. Along with Santa, there are all sorts of stories related to people using mushrooms while they wrote them. Most of the stories are for kids.
I had always thought that maybe artists relied on drugs as a way to get over certain anxieties within themselves. Perhaps they were nervous that nobody would respond to things that they were creating, and as a defense mechanism used drugs as their back up plan. The whole, "Well, I was on drugs when I wrote this." I think Hughes said "cold" creativity comes from the artist without the use of drugs. I thought that maybe he was saying that the artist is quite capable of producing the same work while sober. I think it's an interesting area to research. He only mentioned in one sentence how artists practiced their craft for many years. It wasn't just magic when they put a pen, paint brush, or instrument in their hands.
Hughes mentioned Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters. Kesey wrote one phenomenal book before he started using LSD, and then he never did much after that. I think he wrote one other book to very little acclaim, but for the most part he spent the rest of his life running away to Mexico to avoid being arrested, or he was driving across the country on that bus while he and his friends colored themselves in Day-Glo. Artistically, his career was rather uneventful. That's one example.
Balzac and Dumas are two of my favorite authors. I was unaware of Balzac's involvement with the Club des Haschischins, but I started laughing about Dumas' name being mentioned. There are a few scenes in The Count of Monte Cristo where I think Dumas wasn't so concerned about the plot of his novel as much as he just wanted to describe how great marijuana is.
Walsh
There was a paragraph in Walsh's text that was borderline if not pointless.
"Electroencephalograms of subjects listening to drumming seemed to show auditory driving responses. Unfortunately, the studies are flawed and give us little reliable information." Okay.
I would much rather him say, "Hey, reader. Have you ever stood near a drum set while someone bangs away on it. You know that feeling in your chest. Your whole body feels like it's not on the ground. Yeah, that's what I'm talking about."
Roberte Hamayon rejects shamanism as if these cultures are putting on stunts like David Blain or that other weird guy from Las Vegas. Not Copperfield, that rock n' roll looking one. She says, "How can we determine whether practitioners are actually in altered states, let alone which state they are in." She makes it sound as if shamans have some alterior motive. For instance, are these South American tribes doing this for money and publicity? Please.
Throughout this portion of the book, Walsh mentions the ungoing debate of drug induced ASCs and contemplative ASCs. I have yet to read any evidence of the drug induced ASCs causing anyone harm.
And Santa... That article was a lot of fun, and well thought out. It's a bit hard to write an analysis on an analysis. I was really hoping Bursenos would delve into Christmas trees. I always thought of them as being a product of someone's ASC.
"There is still such a legacy of fear and misunderstanding about hallucinogenic mushrooms that many of us simply refuse to consider the role they have played in forming the human mind." An interesting quote. Along with Santa, there are all sorts of stories related to people using mushrooms while they wrote them. Most of the stories are for kids.
Will there be 'shrooms in my stocking this year????
I'll admit that I didn't start these readings until early Monday evening. I had to laugh to myself when I opened each book, upon seeing that the topic of each reading was drugs. My husband and I spent our entire dinner hour last night discussing various drugs, their effects (those experienced by the user and those perceived by others around them), and the harm that they can do. I had no idea what was in store for me tonight!!
Having never done drugs (aside from taking perscription drugs under a doctor's explicit care), and having been drunk very few times, I don't really understand the concept of being high, stoned, or entering into whatever state a drug takes the user. I find it hard to believe that drugs can induce a truly "spiritual" state, as Walsh talks about. I obviously can only speculate about this, but I doubts that the experiences of one using drugs would be the same as those experiencing an altered states via a contemplative method. To me, it just seems as though the chemical changes experienced by the brain as a result of the drugs would result in something less.........less something........I just don't know what. I am now thinking about something I hadn't thought of earlier. I have a really hard time getting a good night's sleep. I, and my docs, have no idea why. I just suck at sleeping. Unfortunately, I am not one of these Dean Karnazes-types (a crazy ultra-marathoner, if you don't know the name) who can thrive on 4-5 hours of sleep. I'm lucky to survive on 7-8 hours. At times, I have to take a perscription sleep-aid to get to, and maintain, sleep. I hate doing so, but it is necessary if I want any chance of keeping my job or maintaining decent grades in school. If I compare a "normal" night's sleep (one without Lunesta) to a manufactured night's sleep, they are markedly different. I could totally tell if someone slipped me one of those pills. Even though I wake up feeling better, it doesn't feel natural - it just doesn't quite feel "right". If I could achieve the same level of sleep without medication, I think that I would feel better, on the whole. This is what I think about drugs and altered states. Yes, drugs and contemplative methods may both enable an individual to achieve an altered state of consciousness. And during both experiences, the individual may experience some level of creativity, or have a spiritual experience, but I have to believe that the drug-induced experience would not be as "real" as the contemplative one. (Since I truly typed that as I thought it, I hope it made sense to the reader!!!)
I found the reading on the links between Santa and the mushroom a little odd. I think the idea of Santa is ridiculous, and I am going to struggle with that whole notion when I have kids. I don't want to push that idea of a fat old white man living at the top of the world, who delivers toys to "all" (don't get me started on that part!) of the kids of the world in one night. It's total hog-wash............YET, I don't want my kids to be the ones everyone blames for ruining their kids' Christmas by saying Santa isn't real. Maybe I should just do some mushrooms so I believe in him???? JUST KIDDING!!!! While I think that idea of Santa is ridiculous, I have a hard time believing he had his origins in fungus. It just seems a little far-fetched to me. If the reindeer were 'shrooming, why are they the ones pulling the fat old man around in the sleigh?? It seems like they should be having more fun than that. It's all just a little bit out there to me. In spite of this, though, maybe we'll put some mushrooms on the hearth this year, just in case.
Having never done drugs (aside from taking perscription drugs under a doctor's explicit care), and having been drunk very few times, I don't really understand the concept of being high, stoned, or entering into whatever state a drug takes the user. I find it hard to believe that drugs can induce a truly "spiritual" state, as Walsh talks about. I obviously can only speculate about this, but I doubts that the experiences of one using drugs would be the same as those experiencing an altered states via a contemplative method. To me, it just seems as though the chemical changes experienced by the brain as a result of the drugs would result in something less.........less something........I just don't know what. I am now thinking about something I hadn't thought of earlier. I have a really hard time getting a good night's sleep. I, and my docs, have no idea why. I just suck at sleeping. Unfortunately, I am not one of these Dean Karnazes-types (a crazy ultra-marathoner, if you don't know the name) who can thrive on 4-5 hours of sleep. I'm lucky to survive on 7-8 hours. At times, I have to take a perscription sleep-aid to get to, and maintain, sleep. I hate doing so, but it is necessary if I want any chance of keeping my job or maintaining decent grades in school. If I compare a "normal" night's sleep (one without Lunesta) to a manufactured night's sleep, they are markedly different. I could totally tell if someone slipped me one of those pills. Even though I wake up feeling better, it doesn't feel natural - it just doesn't quite feel "right". If I could achieve the same level of sleep without medication, I think that I would feel better, on the whole. This is what I think about drugs and altered states. Yes, drugs and contemplative methods may both enable an individual to achieve an altered state of consciousness. And during both experiences, the individual may experience some level of creativity, or have a spiritual experience, but I have to believe that the drug-induced experience would not be as "real" as the contemplative one. (Since I truly typed that as I thought it, I hope it made sense to the reader!!!)
I found the reading on the links between Santa and the mushroom a little odd. I think the idea of Santa is ridiculous, and I am going to struggle with that whole notion when I have kids. I don't want to push that idea of a fat old white man living at the top of the world, who delivers toys to "all" (don't get me started on that part!) of the kids of the world in one night. It's total hog-wash............YET, I don't want my kids to be the ones everyone blames for ruining their kids' Christmas by saying Santa isn't real. Maybe I should just do some mushrooms so I believe in him???? JUST KIDDING!!!! While I think that idea of Santa is ridiculous, I have a hard time believing he had his origins in fungus. It just seems a little far-fetched to me. If the reindeer were 'shrooming, why are they the ones pulling the fat old man around in the sleigh?? It seems like they should be having more fun than that. It's all just a little bit out there to me. In spite of this, though, maybe we'll put some mushrooms on the hearth this year, just in case.
Ho, Ho, Ho – Who knew?
It feels as though the sleigh has been pulled out from beneath me! Santa Claus, Jolly Old Saint Nick, Father Christmas they are all mysteriously linked to Satan and Amanita muscaria a psychedelic mushroom? Please say it isn’t so… Next someone will tell me that the tooth fairy isn’t legitimate!!
Let me start by saying that I wasn’t making the connection between Santa’s benevolence and widespread religious and political oppression. . . Yes, I know we talked about Consensus Reality and Suspension of Disbelief during class on September 18, but the information in “Santa” article causes me to dig my heels deeper into the filed of logic!
I’m sorry, I think, but I cannot suspend my beliefs and even consider that “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross posited that Jesus was actually a metaphor for the flying agaric and the powers it bestowed upon the initiate.”
Albeit this article may have facts regarding mushrooms, Shamans connection to bears, and the semi-nomadic communities’ relationship with reindeer; I submit that the masses of society are not willing to accept the postulations of James Bursenos. I realize that he is looking at patterns and applying them to Christmas and the jolly- faced mushrooms he enjoys. However, society’s suspension of disbelief to think that “the true origin of Christmas and his flying reindeer” are connected to hallucinogenic mushrooms is off the wall! I will close this section by quoting my Pap “That’s hog wash!”
I get high with a little help from my friends. . .
(Hughes)
Hughes makes reference to various “famous” drug users who were seeking a new creative break though in their work. The mystical adventures described in the text may seem enchanting because of the names associated with drugs. I realize that the text does not cover, to any degree, addiction, but I think it is worth a mention. When you consider the thousands of individuals who are looking for something to release their mind from the normal constrains of life and end-up disillusioned.
Rat-ah-tat-tat on the drum…
(Walsh)
I don’t claim to recall every word I have read in this course, sorry Dr. Kearney… But to my recollection, very few of the texts explore how it is determined whether a practitioner is actually in an altered state, let alone which state they are in? (Hamayon) For an “altered state novice” like me, the concept of altering ones’ state is difficult to comprehend. Maybe I am getting off track because much of what we read is so unusual and out of my ‘normal’. . . The psychedelic experiences we have seen and heard are wild. I have no point of reference or understanding of people seeing gem colored alligators while smoking weed in a tent…
Each of us has a talent (S). Our talents are refined with practice. I wonder if individuals who force altered experiences upon themselves by the use of drugs or other mind altering substances are receiving a genuine mystical experience. This seemed a bit more logical to me when Walsh discussed independence. Independence implies that the Shaman may need less external stimulation fewer drugs to induce an altered state.
I really enjoyed Chapter 25 because it helped to have contemporary examples (pg 192). This chapter also, concluded with an idea that I have been pondering; the use of drugs can unequivocally produce mystical experiences – in some people, on some occasions.
Let me start by saying that I wasn’t making the connection between Santa’s benevolence and widespread religious and political oppression. . . Yes, I know we talked about Consensus Reality and Suspension of Disbelief during class on September 18, but the information in “Santa” article causes me to dig my heels deeper into the filed of logic!
I’m sorry, I think, but I cannot suspend my beliefs and even consider that “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross posited that Jesus was actually a metaphor for the flying agaric and the powers it bestowed upon the initiate.”
Albeit this article may have facts regarding mushrooms, Shamans connection to bears, and the semi-nomadic communities’ relationship with reindeer; I submit that the masses of society are not willing to accept the postulations of James Bursenos. I realize that he is looking at patterns and applying them to Christmas and the jolly- faced mushrooms he enjoys. However, society’s suspension of disbelief to think that “the true origin of Christmas and his flying reindeer” are connected to hallucinogenic mushrooms is off the wall! I will close this section by quoting my Pap “That’s hog wash!”
I get high with a little help from my friends. . .
(Hughes)
Hughes makes reference to various “famous” drug users who were seeking a new creative break though in their work. The mystical adventures described in the text may seem enchanting because of the names associated with drugs. I realize that the text does not cover, to any degree, addiction, but I think it is worth a mention. When you consider the thousands of individuals who are looking for something to release their mind from the normal constrains of life and end-up disillusioned.
Rat-ah-tat-tat on the drum…
(Walsh)
I don’t claim to recall every word I have read in this course, sorry Dr. Kearney… But to my recollection, very few of the texts explore how it is determined whether a practitioner is actually in an altered state, let alone which state they are in? (Hamayon) For an “altered state novice” like me, the concept of altering ones’ state is difficult to comprehend. Maybe I am getting off track because much of what we read is so unusual and out of my ‘normal’. . . The psychedelic experiences we have seen and heard are wild. I have no point of reference or understanding of people seeing gem colored alligators while smoking weed in a tent…
Each of us has a talent (S). Our talents are refined with practice. I wonder if individuals who force altered experiences upon themselves by the use of drugs or other mind altering substances are receiving a genuine mystical experience. This seemed a bit more logical to me when Walsh discussed independence. Independence implies that the Shaman may need less external stimulation fewer drugs to induce an altered state.
I really enjoyed Chapter 25 because it helped to have contemporary examples (pg 192). This chapter also, concluded with an idea that I have been pondering; the use of drugs can unequivocally produce mystical experiences – in some people, on some occasions.
It's hard to type when you slammed your hand in a door
Amanita muscaria ad Santa Claus
Very interesting...I had no idea you could find similiarities between jolly old St. Nick and a fungus. But yet, you can! Amazing! I found it interesting that the author admits to coming up with this theory during a "state of heightened awareness"(possibly the mushroom itself?) The connection between the appearence: portly, bright, and jolly looking. Also red and white with black (the soot or dirt). The naming of the reindeer was neat. Donder and Blitzen, thunder and lightening. The ancient belief that mushrooms appeared where lightening struck the earth. Dasher, Dancer, Prancer...names used to describe the feeling a Shaman has when in flight. Comet, a celestial body...taking flight, leaving ones body. Cupid, due to the fact that the mushroom awakens feelings of love. Vixen..fox lady...a witch...pretty cool stuff. The description by the Koryak shaman of use of the fly agaric is crazy.The agric tells him what to do. Sometimes it is pleasant, others it is not. I never saw bears involved with christmas...maybe i missed that.
Also, the closeness in names between Satan and Santa. The reading says their could be a an alter ego. Old nick being the dark side and Saint Nick, being the bright side.
Hughes, chap 12
Drugs, drugs, and more drugs. It was cool how each of the major drug category is defined and examples are given. I like the quote on page 161"For many creative artists, however, art is a passion that cannot be replaced by drugs, although it can be extinguished by addiction." OMG...so true! Have you seen any episodes of Intervention? We all know drugs, at one time, had thier positives. At first opium users feel invulnerabile and pleasure and euphoria...with extended use, you can have malnutrition, low blood pressure, and respitory complications. I think it's neat to show that most of the dead white guys we study in litterature and english class were on drugs at some time or another. Coleridge who we read about (Kubla Khan(he wrote while ON opium), and Rime of the Ancient Mariner(BEFORE opium)...I've read both and they're pretty intense.) These works show that Coleridge had a constant feeling of dread and maybe depression throughout his life. Edgar Allen Poe, another huge player was a user of opium. But it's safe to say this guy had issues beyond drugs. Picasso..again..a major part...could have even used opium. It's crazy to believe how many big names have touched this stuff.
Hashishins or assassins..this is an interesting connection. The idea that Hashish/Cannibis causes the user to hear colors and see sounds is unique. Louis Armstrong a forerunner in jazz was a regular user. However, with each drug, there is a downside. On page 167, Baudelaire gives a description of the drug "it is the willpower that is attacked..and that is the most precious organ. No man with a spoonful of conserve is able to procure instantly all the treasures of heaven and earth will bother to acquire the thousandth part of it by means of work. The primary task is to live and work." Hashish is an enemy of the will...an enemy of the artist.
Heroin seems to be the worst of all. Who would want to do this? If it reduces your anxiety, thats great, but not if it takes over your life. Eventually the addict doesn't know how to express thier feelings, so they keep festering up. This does not sound like fun to me...seriously.
LSD..for those who want to alter and intensify their perceptual expierence. Some have even called an acid trip a "peak expierence". Maslow, the psychologist said it is like recharging ones psychic battery. It was cool to know that the creator of LSD only got in in his system at first by accident(page 173).
Walsh, IV
I thought it was interesting that hypnosis was long considered a sham. To be honest...sometimes, i wonder if it could be. I guess it would be different if I tried it though. Part of me wants to think the guy who was under hypnosis during leg surgery...i mean anything is possible....but from a medical stand point...would'nt he have simply gone into shock?
The anthropologist Roberte Hamayon who criticizes Shamanism has some good points. but the book does a great job of counterarguing.
Very interesting...I had no idea you could find similiarities between jolly old St. Nick and a fungus. But yet, you can! Amazing! I found it interesting that the author admits to coming up with this theory during a "state of heightened awareness"(possibly the mushroom itself?) The connection between the appearence: portly, bright, and jolly looking. Also red and white with black (the soot or dirt). The naming of the reindeer was neat. Donder and Blitzen, thunder and lightening. The ancient belief that mushrooms appeared where lightening struck the earth. Dasher, Dancer, Prancer...names used to describe the feeling a Shaman has when in flight. Comet, a celestial body...taking flight, leaving ones body. Cupid, due to the fact that the mushroom awakens feelings of love. Vixen..fox lady...a witch...pretty cool stuff. The description by the Koryak shaman of use of the fly agaric is crazy.The agric tells him what to do. Sometimes it is pleasant, others it is not. I never saw bears involved with christmas...maybe i missed that.
Also, the closeness in names between Satan and Santa. The reading says their could be a an alter ego. Old nick being the dark side and Saint Nick, being the bright side.
Hughes, chap 12
Drugs, drugs, and more drugs. It was cool how each of the major drug category is defined and examples are given. I like the quote on page 161"For many creative artists, however, art is a passion that cannot be replaced by drugs, although it can be extinguished by addiction." OMG...so true! Have you seen any episodes of Intervention? We all know drugs, at one time, had thier positives. At first opium users feel invulnerabile and pleasure and euphoria...with extended use, you can have malnutrition, low blood pressure, and respitory complications. I think it's neat to show that most of the dead white guys we study in litterature and english class were on drugs at some time or another. Coleridge who we read about (Kubla Khan(he wrote while ON opium), and Rime of the Ancient Mariner(BEFORE opium)...I've read both and they're pretty intense.) These works show that Coleridge had a constant feeling of dread and maybe depression throughout his life. Edgar Allen Poe, another huge player was a user of opium. But it's safe to say this guy had issues beyond drugs. Picasso..again..a major part...could have even used opium. It's crazy to believe how many big names have touched this stuff.
Hashishins or assassins..this is an interesting connection. The idea that Hashish/Cannibis causes the user to hear colors and see sounds is unique. Louis Armstrong a forerunner in jazz was a regular user. However, with each drug, there is a downside. On page 167, Baudelaire gives a description of the drug "it is the willpower that is attacked..and that is the most precious organ. No man with a spoonful of conserve is able to procure instantly all the treasures of heaven and earth will bother to acquire the thousandth part of it by means of work. The primary task is to live and work." Hashish is an enemy of the will...an enemy of the artist.
Heroin seems to be the worst of all. Who would want to do this? If it reduces your anxiety, thats great, but not if it takes over your life. Eventually the addict doesn't know how to express thier feelings, so they keep festering up. This does not sound like fun to me...seriously.
LSD..for those who want to alter and intensify their perceptual expierence. Some have even called an acid trip a "peak expierence". Maslow, the psychologist said it is like recharging ones psychic battery. It was cool to know that the creator of LSD only got in in his system at first by accident(page 173).
Walsh, IV
I thought it was interesting that hypnosis was long considered a sham. To be honest...sometimes, i wonder if it could be. I guess it would be different if I tried it though. Part of me wants to think the guy who was under hypnosis during leg surgery...i mean anything is possible....but from a medical stand point...would'nt he have simply gone into shock?
The anthropologist Roberte Hamayon who criticizes Shamanism has some good points. but the book does a great job of counterarguing.
I like the statement on page 181, "Every method sets unavoidable limits on knowledge because every perspective both reveals and conceals." This applies to almost everything in education..not just shamanism.
So..besides drug use, I was wondering the other ways to induce consciousness. There are three stages to induction, according to Walsh: destabilization of the initial ordinary state, transition to a new state, and stabilization of the new state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
