The shamanic void

I will write a bit later about the shamanic void and how that affects people --- because I think really, really truthful writing is in a way helpless writing, showing how little of reality we actually control. Of course most people try to defensively stage manage their lives....which is an attempt to ward off the shamanic void.

Thursday Link Encyclopedia and Self-Promotion | Clarissa's Blog

Thursday Link Encyclopedia and Self-Promotion | Clarissa's Blog



With regard to the woman producing a film on her father, I would say that not everything is necessarily an electra complex, although in some cases it might be.  In my case, however, my father moved very much into my own psychological space and kept conducting raids on it.  Consequently, he was very much in my space through much of my early adult life and in terms of the legacy he left even later.   So I wrote about it.   Clearly, he had not received enough nurturing from his mother in his early years for him to maintain a separate identity of his own when under stress.  So I felt incredibly emotionally blackmailed to be his mother, and tried to deal with that as best I could.  I would think it rather sad if people labeled my own state as pathological, just because I was dealing with extremely difficult circumstances at the time.  Traditional wisdom is that if someone thinks they are drowning and grabs onto you, you should slap them hard to restore them to their senses, otherwise both of you will drown toegether.   That can be very difficult to do.

The shamanic wound


The meaning of the shamanic wound -- or what Bataille terms "impalement" -- is that it forces a break with the biological as the principle of structuring reality.  Shamans don't care for progeneration, as a rule.

But looked at from the other direction, allowing one's life to be driven by organic, biological principles feeds into a determinism not unlike that which afflicts dead matter.  After all, the human life cycle is predictable and, in a deadening and deadly sense, rather normative.

To break with the structure of biological determinism releases energy.  The deterministic flow of life may stop but the individual him- or herself becomes vitalized.

That is why I think the current trend toward biologism (seeing everything in the light of the inevitability of progeneration) is negative.  So long as one's energies are travelling along these normative, predetermined pathways, one cannot even understand the meanings that shamanic types are trying to impart.





Modalities of sacrifice

Subjectivity

To me, subjectivity has always much to do with the development of one's sense of beauty, line, harmony.   I do not see it as the same as having an opinion.   No doubt about it, I have always been late in having opinions anyway, because they seemed rather ugly, crude excrescences, without any explicable rhyme or reason.  They were simply there.  And they mostly belonged to other people.  And I had to deal with them.   But mostly they got in the way of my attempt to see the underlying connections between things.   There were structural connections and there were causal connections and there were connections that either maintained or disrupted harmony -- or reorganised it.   These took a while to see, but they were worth the work, because everything became richer when one understood these semi-hidden factors.

So it was that I developed my subjectivity.

But then, much later I learned that I had taken an unusual path.  When most people spoke of subjectivity, what they meant was their crude, untrained opinion.  For instance, I might instantly take a dislike to someone because of some feature on their face, or the way they disappointed my ideals, or because they don't look like they belong here.

To be able to be arbitary and rampant in the face of fate and to feel that anything one feels and wants to express is automatically justified -- this is what most people understand by "subjectivity".

And there are others who view the term almost entirely pejoratively, as they consider themselves to be objectivists, only interested in the facts.   But, if they're only interested in the facts, then they have no option but to measure, ascertain and give all credence to others basic opinions, since these are obvious facts.  That is to say, in the contemporary world, everybody has an opinion.

The most objective types are those who bow down to the force of others' untrained, undirected and unthought-through opinions.  For instance, hammering down on asylum seekers trying to enter Australia is the pattern of those who recognise that a strong train of opinion must certainly be catered to.   Anyone who succeeds in politics these days must submit to this measure of objectivity.
 
Ultimately, then, objectivity and extreme but untrained opinionatedness are one and the same in that they lead in the same direction -- Only, one is on a micro level and the other then appears as a broader political fact.

"Blood debt"

Don't fight yourself

Predictions | Clarissa's Blog

Predictions | Clarissa's Blog





This would be a movement toward more narcissism, or what in Western culture we have come to understand as the project of constantly building and shoring up "self-esteem".  



I actually anticipate a movement away from this tendency, although probably also a schisming  , as people realize that they can survive materially and even socially on less than they had imagined they would have needed.



So on one side of society, you would have these overwrought childish types, who become more apolitical as they conflate their own feelings and sensations with politics.  On the other, you will have those who are almost completely self-reliant and have learned to make do with as little input from "society" as possible.



Meanwhile there will be some massive winners and tyrants who suck up all the power and try to create fiefdoms.

The extremities of experience (out of Africa)

The shamanic type's absorption of EVIL

"Master Morality" (NOT a walk in the park!)

SHAMANISM AS A METAPHOR

To the new left

I have linked psychological states with political outcomes.  But most have been resistant to what I've had to say, because it affects their self-esteem.

Of course it does!  All stages of learning involve having to manage our self-esteem as we realize how little it is we know and how much more we have to develop.  But not listening -- whilst is may preserve your illusions -- leads to succumbing to exactly that which I had warned you about.  Your psychological naivete leads directly to your being politically dominated by all sorts of unscupulous fellows.

Don't think I didn't warn you about this.  But do realize that you put priority on maintaining your self esteem, rather than looking more deeply into the nature of your illusions.

You have commanded that I spend many years looking very deeply indeed into the nature of my own political, moral and historical illusions -- and I have done so.   I've also learned a great deal about the link between psychological states and power structures in the process.   But now that I know all this, it's much easier to see that the majority of people remain stuck at the level of being concerned only with the sensations they have about themselves.  The whole of new left politics is predicated around the need that certain downpressed people feel, to elevate their self esteem.

But I cannot do that!  You must do it on your own.  And after that, when you feel strong enough, it is imperative to make the link between your acceptance of political domination and the nature of your psychological states.   That is work you must do on your own -- or else, succumb to the politics of resentment by voting out left-leaning encumbents because you are not totally satisfied with a less than completely submissive, morally-motherly figure.

You vote in order to enhance your self-esteem, but your actions are an endless well of negativity.  You can't achieve a political outcome that way.   Politics is one thing and self-esteem is another, but you insist on confounding the two, to the extent that a government of the extreme right seems preferable to you than one who fractionally transgresses your pristine morality.

I'm no longer going to promote your right to self-deception, not even when you crave it, like mother's milk, because I will not be your vehicle for self-delusion and political captivation.  You need to work it out for yourselves.

If you are lowly and feel lowly, well, I can see why.  It's because of what you continually insist on doing to yourselves, which is to punish others on your side for not being perfect enough for you.  Well, that is why you are in the mess you are in.

But you have nobody to blame for this but yourselves.  And stop blaming others.  Get over yourselves.




The Pain of Transformation | Clarissa's Blog

The Pain of Transformation | Clarissa's Blog

Bataille's suggestion is that everybody ought to experiment with themselves by going to the limits of their being.  Because, one only knows what one's morality is when one is on the retreat from the scary possibilities of a completely open-ended reality.  One defines oneself when one says, "No", and succumbs to one's limits.  But that a really important experiment to do and very necessary for self-knowledge, otherwise one may be under all sorts of illusions about oneself.

http://musteryou.wordpress.com/2014/04/23/ruinous-desire/