"I of my own knowledge…"

Papa, I can see that my work is being sabotaged by my own self-doubt. (Is it really Hemingway online? Will anybody believe it? If they do, will they care? If they would, can I put the material into an enjoyable, accessible format? Etc.)

How would you expect to avoid such doubts? That’s part of the territory. You know the writer’s three fears.

I do. I have nothing to say, I can’t say it, nobody would care anyway.

Well, if you know they are common fears, why give it to them when they visit you? Or dwell within you, if that’s the case?

It takes a monumental self-confidence, it seems to me, to be so sure that what you’re doing is worthwhile and can be done.

Yes, or courage to do it without being sure.

All right. Sort of like me working on the novel, not really knowing how I’m going to do it, not having any surer footing — at all — in what I am doing now.

So? That’s part of the admission ticket.

This month’s column in The Meta Arts magazine. (If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you read this here a while ago.) It’s always a question: Among the competing demands on our  time, how can we tell which are legitimate demands for us? Naturally, the guys upstairs had an opinion.

http://www.themetaarts.com/pages/frankdemarco.html

Last August, , in a talk with Whitley Strieber, I said the mind could travel in time but the body couldn’t. In response, his wife Anne sent me an e-mail link to his description of two instances in which he apparently time-slipped to another century, and was told if he did anything he’d wind up there permanently. I thought, I’d better ask the guys. So, on Wednesday, August 31, 2011, I did.

(more…)

Monday, October 31, 2011

5:45 AM. Papa, the fourth and fifth dimensions: Time, and then Beyond Time?

Close enough. Or you might say viewpoint over time, viewpoint beyond viewpoint, or overall viewpoint, or really view without the distortion of viewpoint. Now, you can see that to write in such a way as to hint at (for you cannot actually do it) going beyond viewpoint is very difficult, and requires not only skill and luck in the writer but, let’s say, skill and attention in the reader. Luck, too, perhaps, for the reader has to be in the right mental space to be able to comprehend it.

That’s what I was trying for in Across The River. I told the story seemingly from inside Colonel Cantwell’s head, but not precisely. Within his mind — the nonphysical mechanism we all live in, as you recognize — he moves across elements of his past, both what he has experienced and what he has experienced second-hand through reading or other instruction or from appreciating, as in a picture. I believe I achieved that fourth dimension, and it was disappointing to have it not recognized — because of Renata, of course.

Now here is something nobody sees. I achieved the fifth dimension with Santiago, who lay dreaming of the lions at the end. My achieving it was not at the end, though, but throughout, because in careful recounting of his moment by moment actions, and his moment by moment thought or memory, and his moment by moment emotion, I was so close to the moving present that we get beyond time to the timeless. Where else do you think that strange aura around the story comes from?

It is not told fromSantiago’s viewpoint, or from Manolin’s. It may be said to be narrated by God, or the guys upstairs, or the part ofSantiago that lives outside time and space. It is our life described neither from within it nor from without it.

Yes, there is the story itself — the old man striving, and winning, and losing, and remaining himself. There is the effect on the boy. But beyond all that is the strange penumbra that people feel but don’t quite understand, and this is because the story’s atmosphere talks to us of things beyond the story.

I could not have produced the story to order. And it came as a gift, and I passed on the gift. Those who think it’s simple or simpleminded are only one eyed; they cannot sense the presence of that extra dimension.

It is a curious paradox, isn’t it? To get beyond time, one way is to sit on the very edge of the moving line. There are other ways — Tolstoy did it on a mammoth scale — but this was mine.

My friend Karl Boyken send me this link, saying “Frank, I do believe you’re going to love this video.” Very true. Inspirational without being sappy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXDMoiEkyuQ&feature=share

About 10 minutes.

One night in the middle of the night I was looking through a beautiful book a friend sent me, The Blue Heron Book Of Love And Gratitude. And there, on page 39, was my spiritual autobiography, in these words from psychologist William James.

“The transition from tenseness, self-responsibility, and worry, to equanimity, receptivity, and peace, is the most wonderful of all those shiftings of inner equilibrium, those changes of the personal center of energy, which I have analyzed so often; and the chief wonder of it is that it so often comes about, not by doing, but by simply relaxing and throwing the burden down.”

That’s just how it (finally) happened. I relaxed and threw the burden down. Or, I didn’t even need to throw it down; I shrugged it off. But like so many of the things we learn, it can’t be passed on to others merely by telling them about it. We have to test for ourselves whether a thing is true or not.

(more…)

John Michael Greer is an interesting thinker, whose column The Archdruid Report appears Wednesdays at http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/ My friend Rich Spees sent me an email reminder that the weekly column had been posted, saying, “Oh, you’re going to like the latest druid.” I don’t always, but this time, he was so right. The spooky thing, as I told Rich, is that decades ago, writing in my journal, I made a conscious decision to always find a third choice, never to stay at two, because (something told me) any two would be incomplete and misleading. Where did that knowing come from?

(more…)

Haven’t been posting. Writing another novel. This popped up, though, and I thought I’d mention it. This passage is from Dion Fortune’s novel The Goat Foot God (p. 365-6)

“…one expects psychic phenomena to be reasonably tangible and to have something of the miraculous about them. We’ve had nothing of that…. We’ve had nothing that you can’t father onto the subconscious if you have a mind to. nothing you could call evidential if you’d got any notion of the nature of evidence. But all the same we’ve had — or at any rate I’ve had, some pretty drastic experiences. I couldn’t prove them to anybody else, and I’m not such a fool as to try to; but I’m quite satisfied about them in my own mind. Anyway, whatever they are, subconscious, super-conscious, hallucinations, telepathy, suggestion, auto-suggestion, cosmic experiences, bunk, spoof or hokum, I feel as if I had been born again….”

“How do you know it isn’t all your imagination, Hugh?” asked Jelkes, watching him.

“I don’t know, T.J., and don’t care. It probably is, for I’ve used my imagination diligently enough over the job. But via the imagination I’ve got extended consciousness, which I probably should never have been able to make a start on if I’d stuck to hard facts all along and rejected everything I couldn’t prove at the first go-off. It’s no use doing that. You’ve got to take the Unseen as a working hypothesis, and then things you can’t prove at the first go-off prove themselves later.”

A friend  sent  me to this website: http://www.noosphereforum.org/

It took a while for me to get beyond the artwork. Unfortunately their presentation is in reversed type (white over a background) so I took this text from this pagehttp://www.noosphereforum.org/drupal/?q=node/6 and reformatted it so I could read it. Now, I haven’t yet read the other pages, but this seems to me an important initiative. The analysis feels real. It ties in with what I have felt in my bones for most of my lifetime: We are in a once-in-a-species-lifetime transition and it’s a good and hopeful thing!

(more…)

Carl Jung died in 1961, half a century ago. The following quotation was contained in The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, which was copyrighted 1959. I don’t know when the specific paper “A Study in the Process of Individuation” was published, but the original paper from which it was developed goes back at least to 1933.

You think it’s possible he may have something to say to our time?????

(more…)