17.12.08
Posted in Uncategorized
at 6:48 pm
by nemo
James said,
5:30 pm ·
“This guru was one of the most subtly destructive in my experience, often, I suspect, for people who had nothing to do with him (he had to treat his in house disciples differently), such as myself.”
What is your connection to this guy and the whole Gurdjieff stream?
These are good questions, hard to answer without getting into hopeless difficulties with conventional forms of explanation, from occult witchcraft to reincarnation.
So I will simply describe the basic narrative, which isn’t complex.
I had a thriving New Age sequence of experiences, all successful, all very brief, until I encountered the Gurdjieff, then Gold people.
I had been working overseas, came home (early seventies), got a job in a hospital (mental ward) which was a strange experience in which I experienced a strange illumination/madness, an almost eerie/funny situation for a hospital orderly supposed to maintain outer sanity (which I did, and learned a lot about psychology/psychiatry by osmosis). I left the job finally (praised for outstanding work) in a strange state of ‘normal madness’ which soon turned into depression.
Someone who saw the depression (family relative) suggested a swimming course in scuba diving: brilliant idea. The practice (in a swimming pool) was an experience in ‘natural pranayama’ and revived me almost completely (I didn’t finish the course) and got a job as a taxi driver (all this is New York early to mid seventies).
I bought a book on yoga postures and relaxion, after the scuba course, and did that for two or three weeks, experiencing a deep relaxion. After that I left yoga, but saw an ad about Transcendental Meditation, and so went down to their hq, plunked down my money, and got a mantra, cash on the barrel.
TM is nonsense, but in my case, the use of the mantra generated the first of three mini-samadhi experiences, starting with the first minute of the first session of the TM mantra game.
The effect wore off after a few days, and I stopped doing the meditation, and never had anything more to do with TM.
The next experience was reading a well-known (at that time) book on Kabbalah, and the same samadhi started, lasting for a few days. The experience wrecked the study of Kabbalah which I have never studied since.
The third experience was reading J. G. Bennett’s The Dramatic Universe. I was in a strange state as i devoured his books.
Again the experience lasted only a short time, and after all that I realized that ‘what I was doing’ had nothing to do with what I was experiencing, i.e. the books were irrelevant, so I set them aside. (Althugh lately I am rereading Bennett for some reason).
In short I had a viable and vigorous ‘path’ that was producing results, but then in this period the study of Ouspensky triggered a regressive obsession with all the obscurities of those destructive works. The Gurdjieff people were not so bad, ignorant remnants, but others, such as E.J. Gold were less benign.
I interacted briefly with his people, and to make a long story short lost everything I had started with and was stuck with seemingly endless voodoo attacks from him and people in his outfit. I can hardly go into it, but to state the facts, I had little to do with those people and suffered greatly at a distance.
It can be a misfortune to come to the attention of someone like Gold in isolation, after you have no further contacts with his outer game or organization. As I warned SK, the bad part comes outside of the premises of such people.
From there I passed very briefly through a lot of situations, Da Free John, Lee Lozowick, always mostly on the fringes, with at most interactions of several hours, after periods of studying the relevant books.
I then had the same fringe experience with the Rajneesh people, and that was intermittent through the eighties.
But to conclude the tale for the nonce, my ‘path’ existed before meeting the ‘teachers’ and ceased to exist after intersecting with them.
A source of great frustration and regret.
Never buy into the idea that these gurus teach! Gold and Da Free John especially are vampires sucking away all potential. Dreadful monsters.
There is more to say here, but perhaps some other time. I can’t really speak for anyone but myself, but I think that my experience of the G people, Gold’s people, and the various sufis in the background was uniquely dreadful: cannibals, black magicians, thieves of baraka, peddlers of the sufi secret, etc, ad nauseam. I was told by a sufi nutcase a strange fact: that I had been connected with Gurdjieff in a previous life, and that the rumor had passed among sufi sharks who descended on me for any remnant baraka. That’s what other people thought, not I (and I deny the whole nonsense), but what can you do if black magicians are the victims of false rumors.
Skip town, that’s what, and look over your shoulder thereafter.
At least I did find out the sufi secret, but it’s a waste of time, so don’t bother with it.
After all that Rajneesh seemed some help but, sure enough, he nosedived very swiftly, and in any case, one again, my readings and actual contacts (minimal) diverged. As Rajneesh crashed and turned out to be an enlightened jerkoff, my disillusion was complete.
I was done with all of it. That was the early/mid eighties, I forget.
I got some money from relatives to take a course in C programming. I refocussed my life and brain for thirteen plus hours a day of C programming, for a year and a half, a unique form of therapy (for me) that rewired my brain beyond the New Age movement. I was done with all that and passed beyond.
Andrew Cohen briefly tried his number on me, but I was ready and sent him packing. Asshole.
Iin a way Rajneesh was the last straw.
so what do you do if an enlightened man is an asshole? The experience is disorienting. One needs a new new age after that.
Who needs any of it.
Enough.
Hope that helps.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 4:49 pm
by nemo
This guru was one of the most subtly destructive in my experience, often, I suspect, for people who had nothing to do with him (he had to treat his in house disciples differently), such as myself.
People need to be warned to never ‘guruize’ from a distance with a book.
If you thought Cohen or Da Free John were bad, consider e j gold.
As to Cohen’s ‘monopoly’,he has none, and he won’t/didn’t last long: the specialist in monopoly here is e j gold. Beside destroying the spiritual paths of anyone he can, he attacks other gurus and tries to destroy their reputation.
He is truly a strange menace, hurting those who never suspect, and never showing mercy.
Recall, sillykitty and his charges of spiritual rape
He is worse by far
Permalink
16.12.08
Posted in Uncategorized
at 5:24 pm
by nemo
Two comments from James:
James said,
16.12.08 at 4:18 pm ·
By the way, Adi Da is dead:
http://www.fijitimes.com/story.aspx?id=107501
James said,
16.12.08 at 4:19 pm ·
Cohen has the monopoly now.
Here’s the article:
Spiritual leader passes on
Friday, November 28, 2008
Update: 4:30PM Adi Da Samraj, leader of a spiritual community based at Naitauba in Lau, passed away at his home on the island on Thursday.
Adi Da Samraj, 69, established Naitauba as his principal teaching retreat in 1983 and became a Fiji citizen in 1993.
Spokesperson for the Naitauba Trust, owner of the island, Matt Wilson said Adi Da Samrajs followers from many countries around the world would continue to maintain Naitauba as a centre for quiet study and contemplation for those who come there year round.
Courses at the Naitauba retreat programs focus on Samraj Adi Das teachings of spiritual self-realisation, tolerance, respect, the unity of humanity, world peace and cooperation.
He said Adi Da Samraj wrote many books about his beliefs.
He also encouraged his students to study the worlds great religious traditions.
Adi Da Samraj was a legal renunciate, who owned no personal possessions.
Mr Wilson said Naitauba is a significant contributor to the economy of the Lau Group.
“It provides employment and contributes to many social and educational causes including scholarships for students in the Lau and Cakaudrove provinces.”
Permalink
15.12.08
Posted in Uncategorized
at 7:19 pm
by nemo
Very Basic Intro to Jean Gebser
It seems Wilbur is misled by his enthusiasm for Gebser, with the result that he is confusing psychological, developmental, and evolutionary stages.
It is undoubtedly true that a kind of ‘mental’ emphasis is visible in the Greeks, and then in modern times, but the remedy is not going to be a ‘new age of the integral’.
I can hardly begrudge the Greeks their ‘mental’ phases if those critical can’t explain their own position.
This is a misunderstanding of history. The downward center of gravity toward the ‘mental’, is characteristic of all stages of man.
There is a confusion of veritical and horizontal factors here.
If I seem a bit stuck on Bennett it is because his spiritual psychology extricated from Gurdjieff and resonant of Samkhya remains much clearer and still usable.
Jean Gebser (1905-1973) tried to understand the unfoldment of human consciousness. He developed a model examining the structures of consciousness: the Archaic, Magical, Mythical, Mental, and Integral structures.
The Archaic structure can best be described as a zero-dimensional, non-perspectival world which could be compared to a state of deep sleep. It was characterized by non-differentiation and the total absence of any sense of separation from the environment. This was a world of identity between self and surroundings; not a world in which we could speak of consciousness in any terms that would be meaningful to our modern understanding of the term.
By contrast, the Magical structure was characterized by a certain separateness, but not a total separation by any means. Dimensionally this could be described as one-dimensional; a pre-perspectival state of timelessness and spacelessness. It’s like a state of sleep. Magic man was much a part of his environment, to be sure, and felt secure only within his group, his tribe or clan. It was the transition from the Archaic to Magic structure of consciousness that has probably been mythologically captured in the story of the “Fall of Man.”
The clothing of knowledge in myth is what characterized the transition to the Mythical structure of consciousness, the two-dimensional, unperspectival state of consciousness that can best be compared to a dream. Imagination and attunement with natural rhythms became important factors in man’s life. The separation begun in the Magic structure reaches a tensional climax in the Mythical.
This structure is superseded by the Mental structure, whose appearance coincides with the rise of Greek civilization. In this regard, it can be seen that modern thought disregards a good deal of mankind’s history, for it is to the Greeks that we most often trace our intellectual roots. By comparison, the Mental structure of consciousness is a three-dimensional, perspectival world that we describe with the term wakefulness. The polar tensions of mythology are replaced by the analytical separation of duality and opposition. Thinking is primary, and in its latter phase rational thinking is primary.
But this structure, too, is yielding to a final mutation which Gebser identifies as the Integral structure of consciousness. This is described as a four-dimensional, aperspectival world of transparency. This is a time-free, space-free, subject- and object-free world of verition.
From a methodological point of view, three fundamental notions are involved: systasis, synairesis, and eteology.
The first term, systasis, goes beyond mere synthesis, which is a mental-rational concept, to achieve a total integration of all parts simultaneously.
Synairesis is the means of achieving the end just described. It emphasizes the how of such total grasping, namely by the mind or spirit. It is synairesis that enables us to achieve the transparency that is indicative of the Integral structure of consciousness.
Finally, eteology replaces philosophy as the way of knowing and acquiring knowledge. Eteology becomes the statement of truth in lieu of the philosophical statement about truth.
This approach goes beyond the limitations of space- and time-perception, to a complete and liberating understanding of the whole. It should be noted that this transition is still in process; it is not yet a completed act.
Condensed from a text by Ed Mahood, Jr.: Homepage
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 7:02 pm
by nemo
Wilbur critique, previously cited
Perhaps this citation will confuse the issue: Wilbur is closer to something critical than this critic who doesn’t grasp Wilbur indirect reference to a Kantian critique of metaphysics, something most New Age philosophers could use.
I don’t mean to sound derogatory, but the implication of the above passage is that Wilber doesn’t know what the “metaphysics” is. Although in popular conversation, the word “metaphysics” is used in a very vague sense to mean anything otherworldly or “beyond the physical”. But in fact metaphysics (meta-physics) means “after” (not “beyond” or “above”) “physics”, and refers to the arrangement of Aristotle’s collected writings (those volumes that came after the books on Physics) . Apparently (whether this is historical fact or legend is difficult to say) Aristotle’s books in the Great Library of Alexandria were arranged so that there were a number of works collectively called the Physics, and after them was another set of books concerned with basic areas of philosophical inquiry, which Aristotle himself called “First Philosophy”. Because they came after the other books, early Aristotelian scholars called those books ta meta ta physika biblia, – “the books that come after the (books about) physics”.[33]
Wilber’s lack of understanding of what “metaphysics” is further brought out by his association elsewhere (in the context of a much longer discussion on what he calls “integral mathematics”) of metaphysics with Plotinus, Shankara, Asanga, Padmasambhava, Gurdjieff, Hegel, Rudolf Steiner, Carl Jung, William James, and Sri Aurobindo.[34] Since one can hardly call Padmasambhava, Gurdjieff (is he confusing him with his disciple Ouspensky perhaps?), Steiner, Jung, or James in any way metaphysical, one might assume that by “metaphysics” Wilber means those concepts or realities that do not fit with secular understanding; e.g. The Atman-Brahman of Shankara, the siddhis (occult powers) of Padmasambhava, the Collective Unconscious of Jung, the study of higher states of consciousness by James. And as Steiner is an occultist (or esotericist), one wouldn’t call him a metaphysician except in the common slang of “supra-physical”.
Wilber is at pains to point out he is not denying the experiences of these individuals, only the conceptual framework (which he interprets as “metaphysics”) they used to explain those experiences. Which of course brings us back to the discomfort much of the physicalist-based modern world feels not just with yogic or esotericist explanations (which is understandable), but even with phenomenological studies of non-mundane states of consciousness (e..g William James).
The second thing that is strange about the afore-cited paragraph, assuming I am reading Wilber right (and perhaps I am not; Wilber is famous for complaining that all his critics universally get it wrong so whatever they are criticising has nothing to do with what he wrote!) , what Wilber is saying here is that either there is no such thing as supra-physical reality, or if there is, none of the great sages and teachers of the past ever experienced it. Instead, they were mistaking what was happening in their own heads (neurotransmitters and so on), the intra-physical, for an “external” metaphysical reality such as the Subtle or Causal realms, or even the Absolute or Nirguna Brahman. And while not even the most other-worldly esotericist will deny that neurochemical activity has a central determining influence on our consciousness, it is quite another thing to identify these processes as literally one aspect (the upper right quadrant in this case) of these Realities, even of the Absolute Reality.[35]
In short, what Wilber is offering, with his postmodernist synthesis, is a subtle (or not so subtle) form of reductionism, just “flatland” or “descender philosophy” under a different name. Because by rejecting supra-physical realities, Wilber has no choice but to support the physicalist position of modernity (all that exists is physical reality). Ironically he thus falls into the same trap he accuses the Marxists, eco-philosophers, eco-feminists, and the rest of doing.[36] In doing so, he becomes part of the tradition of Buddhist and Vedantic empiricism and materialism that has developed in the West over the last century, a result of an apologetic attempt by westernised Easterners to justify their spiritual teaching in terms of western empirical method and scientific validity.[37]
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 6:36 pm
by nemo
The Wilberian paradigm
a fourfold critique
This, from the Aurobindo perspective, may be as problematical as Wilbur, but what the heck, interesting….
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 6:27 pm
by nemo
These questions get tricky. The ICR (fundamentalist christians) has some interesting quotes. Dobzhansky sounds close to stating the basic issue, but his commitment to Darwinism threw him off track.
Evolution and the New Age
Although New Agers have a form of religion, their “god” is Evolution, not the true God of creation. Many of them regard the controversial priest, Teilhard de Chardin, as their spiritual father. His famous statement of faith was as follows:
“(Evolution) is a general postulate to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must henceforward bow and which they must satisfy in order to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, a trajectory which all lines of thought must follow.” 1
The ethnic religions of the east (Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, etc.), which in large measure continue the polytheistic pantheism of the ancient pagan religions, have long espoused evolutionary views of the universe and its living things, and so merge naturally and easily into the evolutionary framework of the New Age philosophy. It is surprising, however, to find that Julian Huxley and Theodosius Dobzhansky, the two most prominent of the western scientific neo-Darwinians, were really early proponents of this modern evolutionary religion. In a eulogy following Dobzhansky’s death, geneticist Francisco Ayala said:
“Dobzhansky was a religious man, although he apparently rejected fundamental beliefs of traditional religion, such as the existence of a personal God. . . . Dobzhansky held that in man, biological evolution has transcended itself into the realm of self-awareness and culture. He believed that mankind would eventually evolve into higher levels of harmony and creativity. He was a metaphysical optimist.” 2
Dobzhansky himself penned the following typical New Age sentiment:
“In giving rise to man, the evolutionary process has, apparently for the first and only time in the history of the Cosmos, become conscious of itself.” 3
More recently, the socialist Jeremy Rifkin, expressed this concept in picturesque language, as follows:
“Evolution is no longer viewed as a mindless affair, quite the opposite. It is mind enlarging its domain up the chain of species.” 4
“In this way one eventually ends up with the idea of the universe as a mind that oversees, orchestrates, and gives order and structure to all things.” 5
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 6:19 pm
by nemo
Here’s another example: Spiritual Evolution
The planet is currently changing rapidly. A wide-scale awakening and acceleration of consciousness seems to be taking place. That is however also bringing unresolved issues to the surface and increasing polarization. That will necessarily lead to integration in the long run, and the evolvement into a higher state of consciousness.
Man’s capacity for ‘higher states of consciousness’, that is, his actual already ‘evolved’ self-consciousness, must have evolved long ago. The realization of that potential is not really evolution, since that potential appeared long ago.
New agers are unable to define what they mean by evolution.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 6:16 pm
by nemo
Here the confusion over evolution reaches its nadir:http://newageevolution.tripod.com/
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 5:52 pm
by nemo
It can be useful to consider issues of evolution in the context of critical study of gurus. Here’s a post at Darwiniana.
http://darwiniana.com/2008/12/15/macroevolution-impossible-to-study/
These gurus consider that they have the whole key to the universe, but in fact have misinterpreted history itself. The combined factor of individual action and the ‘macro’ factor of evolutionary action is missed by many in the New Age movement who confuse the two.
Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilbur are two examples.
Gurdjieff and Blavatsky are two others.
People fall for this. But it is not ‘evolution’ in the real sense.
Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
at 4:48 pm
by nemo
There was some discussion of Nietzsche at darwiniana, with some objections from one commenter. It is easy to be unfair to Nietzsche, it is even easier to be too fair
http://darwiniana.com/2008/12/12/prophet-of-nazism/
Stephen Smith recommends:
Here is an interesting read:
Nietzsche, Prophet of Nazism: The Cult of the Superman–Unveiling the Nazi Secret Doctrine (Paperback)
by ABIR TAHA (Author)
See:
http://www.amazon.com/Nietzsche-Prophet-Nazism-Superman-Unveiling-Doctrine/dp/1420841211/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229060125&sr=1-4
From Note on Ascheim and his book on Nietzsche/Nazism, 2008/12/12 at 12:36 AM
This book certainly looks interesting, despite the howls of protest certain to arise from the Nietzsche defender/commenter of the last few days/week.
I accept that fellow’s dialectic, but after having been too fair to Nietzsche I have learned to consider renewed suspicions of the whole game that materialized in the generation of Blavatsky, young Gurdjieff, and a host of other figures. Something we can’t quite see, and which was very dreadful took root, and it is echoed in Nietzsche, one speculates. In part it is the general tide of the right rising to meet the surging left. ‘Echoed’ of course does not mean that Nietzsche was consciously aware of what was going on, even as he became a mysterious, but contradictory, mouthpiece. It seems that Nietzsche ‘came to’, somehow, and pulled up short, as he sensed the monumental bullshit over the era of the Bismarck Reich, emerging antisemitism, Wagnerian coteries of proto-fascists, etc… The result was the mixed and confusing legacy of Nietzsche in relation to both the first world war and the coming of Nazism. This issue requires careful study of such meticulous authors as Steven Ascheim (which can lead to other subsequent studies), which even at its most favorable must demonstrate the clear and obvious uses of Nietzsche by these later thugs, whether or not or to what degree Nietzsche would have repudiated them (and in fact did so before the fact).
The problem is Nietzsche’s loudmouth tendencies to say shockingly quotable things, unaware that dangerous idiots would take them literally.
So, I can’t vouch for this book til read, and even as the issue of ‘estoricism’ is brought in, it is inevitable that authors claiming to resolve this aspect of the question, invariably get it wrong.
Product Description, Amazon
The “Cult of the Superman” has haunted humanity throughout history, yet it was only clearly expressed in the philosophy of its modern prophet, Friedrich Nietzsche, and culminated in its fiercest supporter, the National Socialist ideology, a political religion whose main ideal and objective were the creation of a superhuman species.
By showing the link between the Nietzschean and Nazi worldviews – and more specifically the Nazi Secret Doctrine which the author calls “esoteric Nazism”- the author’s aim is to demonstrate that the Nazis were pure Nietzscheans, thus repudiating the views of some scholars who deny or undermine any link between the Nietzschean and Nazi doctrines. She endeavours to prove that the Nazi esoteric ideology was primarily an endeavour to actualise and institutionalise Nietzsche’s cult of the Superman, applying it to a political system that would breed a Herrenvolk or “Master Race” in body and spirit, destined to rule the earth. Nazism was in fact greatly influenced by Nietzsche’s philosophy, especially his concept of the Superman, giving it a political dimension in order to “put Nietzsche into motion” and turn the philosopher’s cult from an abstract notion into a concrete reality. The S.S. (Schutzstaffeln, or “Security Squads”), Nazi Germany’s racial and political elite, was indeed a self-proclaimed Nietzschean institution of Übermenschen or “Supermen” claiming to embody the creed of the Godlike man.
Thus did both Nietzsche and the Nazis call for a revival of Aryan paganism, namely the ancient Aryan esoteric tradition from India to Greece, rejecting the Jewish religion of Christianity, which they believed was a gross distortion of Christ’s original teachings. Both doctrines acknowledged the Will to Power as the motor of history; both praised the qualities and values of the Superman, glorifying war, and advocating a radically aristocratic view of the world. Both Nietzsche and Nazism despised Western Judaeo-Christian Civilisation and its two products, Liberalism and Socialism, introducing a “third option” – aristocratic radicalism – between “corrupt egalitarian democracy” and the “materialist socialism of the mob”. In addition, both advocated the rule of an Aryan universal “Master Race” transcending the boundaries of states and nations; and finally, both Nietzsche and the Nazis dismissed the “decadent” Jew from civilisation, considering him alien to the natural order, an incarnation of the slave morality.
About the Author
Abir Taha, currently a diplomat and a “doctorante” in philosophy at the Sorbonne University, is an expert in Nietzschean thought. For yearsshe has extensively read, studied, and analysed Nietzsche’s philosophy. She has written several studies and dissertations on philosophy and political theory, particularly Nietzschean thought. Whereas most Nietzsche scholars ignore the spiritual dimension of Nietzsche’s philosophy, the author contends that there lies the essence of the great German philosopher’s work. She thus put special focus on Nietzsche’s spirituality, which is deeply influenced by Greek and Indian philosophy. Having deep knowledge of Western and Eastern esoteric thought and the influence of esoteric schools on current political ideologies, the author underwent extensive research on Nazism and its occult roots, paying special attention to Nietzsche’s influence on what she calls “Esoteric Nazism”, thus unveiling the Nazi Secret Doctrine and establishing a clear link between Nietzsche’s philosophy and Nazism as a spiritual Weltanschauung. The author is currently publishing a book in French entitled “Nietzsche’s Coming God, or the Redemption of the Divine”.
Permalink
10.12.08
Posted in Uncategorized
at 1:31 pm
by nemo
mybrainisafleamarket said,
Deborah Hayden assembles a formidable array of sources to support a posthumous diagnosis of syphilis for Nietszche.
His suffering from this condition does NOT invalidate the importance or impact of his work.
It is clear from N’s own writings and the course of his medical history, that he was gravely diasbled for much of his adult working life, suffering from ghastly headaches, stomach upsets, and crippling eye disease. In one year, from his own letters, N records that he was ill for one third of that year.
He had ample personal reasons to try to make sense of suffering.
And after he was hospitalized, he was presented in a clinic to medical students as a typical case of syphilitic paresis.
Hayden wrote Pox trying to make sense of how artists and writers sense of themselves was affected by knowledge of having a shameful, crippling and painful disease which ended, typically with sudden cardiovascular accident or insanity. She wanted to understand what this did to a persons sense of themselves and how it affected their work.
And in Hitlers case, his condition may well have affected the trajectory of his hatreds…and the course of history itself.
The entire book is compellling. It totally changed my understanding of what life was like in the pre-penicillin era.
My father was crippled by fears of VD and he was old enough to have grown up when syphillis was still an incurable and utterly terrifying scourage.
Now I understand all this far better. It is a mindset that is almost beyond imagination unless one has information and curiosity.
———————
mybrainisafleamarket said,
I want to make it clear that knowing of N’s terrible sufferings due to syphillis does not require us to agree with his arguments or deny how dangerous his material can be when in the wrong hands.
But it can help us comprehend why his ideas may have taken on such drastic form.
He was working and writing against time, and terrified of what he sensed was able to happen to him.
Sigmund Freud discussed N’s case, and commented that it was typical in cases of syphilitic madness for tremendous energy and productivity to precede the final breakdown into madness, and that even when a person began to be insane, he or she might express wild ideas but still do so preserving discipline and form.
If the person was trained well as a musician or writer, the result might be a final and stunning burst of creativity before the persons mind came unravelled. One could disagree with the worth of the persons creation, but still note how the disease seemed to unleash that final burst of energy that would be forced through pre-existing catagories of thought and interest.
Dont rest content with my comments. Read the book and decide for yourselves.
Permalink