Comments from Mr. Panda on “Heaven Stormers,” in CAPS, sometimes preceded by quotes from “HS,” in italics, and followed by my responses, in bold.
IT’S WORTH CONSIDERING ALL THE GIFTED ARTISTS AND MUSICIANS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED SIMILAR LEVELS OF CHILDHOOD TRAUMA. THE BODY REDIRECTS ENERGY AND MATTER WHEN PHYSICALLY WOUNDED, PERHAPS THE SPIRITUAL/CREATIVE SELF DOES THE SAME WHEN EMOTIONALLY WOUNDED.
By spiritual self I read “energy body.” Is that a real polarity or are the two inextricably bound up, so that what is done to one is done to the other?
“Heaven Stormers: “A dancer, painter, or writer may be expressing eros or life force, while someone having sex with a shoe (and almost all pornography) does not.”
PORNOGRAPHY AS A WAY OF TRANSFORMING SEX INTO A MECHANISED FUNCTION, SOMETHING TO DEAL WITH IN THE SAME MANNER AS EATING AND DEFACATING.
Is that a bad thing? Is eating and even defecating purely mechanical or has it also been ‘debased” or reduced in this fashion? Can Eros express through food (or shit?) as well as sexual urges?
HS: De-eroticization, I ventured, would be perceivable not only in trends (such as the New Age movement) but also in individuals. If so, I wondered if it was possible that the sort of sexual trauma which someone like Strieber appears to have undergone might be a requirement to be deemed eligible for seeding the memes of a de-eroticized spirituality? In other words, were sexually traumatized individuals sought (or even created) as spokespeople for the propagation of a mind-based spirituality designed to serve socio-political agendas?
DOES SEXUAL DISTRESS CAUSE THE VICTIM TO YEARN FOR AN ASEXUAL REALM, TO WISH AWAY THE HUMAN SEX DRIVE AND THE TRAUMA IT CAN CAUSE? IF SO, A COMMON BOND WOULD EXIST BETWEEN HUMAN AND POST-HUMAN. A STEPPING STONE BETWEEN THE WORLDS OF THE SEXUAL HUMAN AND ASEXUAL ALIEN.
Is the Alien archetype inherently asexual? Seems as though these beings are very sexually active – with humans at least, if not each other.
Transhumanism would seem to be a more exact match with how sexual trauma creates an urge towards transcending sexuality and the body?
QUESTIONS: TO WHAT EXTENT DOES OUR CULTURE WELCOME NON-SEXUAL HUMANS? IS THERE A PLACE FOR THEM OUTSIDE OF MONASTRIES AND OTHER SUCH FORMS OF GHETTOISATION?
Depends partly what you mean by “non-sexual.” Capitalist culture would seem to depend on sublimating sexual drives and hijacking them, not in eradicating them altogether. Think of the way advertising works, to give the crudest example.
IS THE NON-SEXUAL OVERLY ASSOCIATED WITH VULCAN-LIKE EMOTIONAL STATES AND MENTAL CONDITIONS?
Yeah I think so. Sex and passion are often used interchangeably, and passion = the most intense emotional state of all. Ironically, or paradoxically, it also equates with the crucifiction, i.e., the image/event of spirit being ‘nailed’ to matter (ostensibly to free humanity from “sin” – i.e., sexual bondage).
IS THIS SEXUAL REPRESSION OF A DIFFERENT NATURE? PERHAPS A REPRESSION OF THE NON-SEXUAL DRIVE? TO WHAT EXTENT IS THIS HARMFUL?
Off the top of my head, I’d say to the extent that it requires force (will) and causes the bodily senses to shut down. Interesting to think of modern medication in this context, as the now almost universally embraced alternative to psychotherapy. Taking drugs to suppress anxiety, etc, is a way to ease the mind, and reduce emotions, by shutting the body down. One common side effect, or so I hear, is the loss of libido. But then of course they have meds for that, too.
TO SOME ASEXUALS, SOMETHING LIKE HIGH SCHOOL EXPOSURE TO THEIR CLASSMATES LIBIDINALLY CHARGED CONVERSATIONS (FEATURING VULGAR SLANG WORDS USED WITH PORNOGRAPHIC ABANDON) WOULD BE SOMETHING AKIN TO A MILD, NON-PHYSICAL BUT PROLONGED SEXUAL ASSAULT, ALL THE MORE DISTRESSING IN THAT IT WOULD NEVER BE CONSCIOUSLY ACKNOWLEDGED AS SUCH BY VICTIM OR PERPETRATOR ALIKE.
I’m not sure about the class of ‘asexual’. While I might fit in that category to some extent (being a very late starter), I view it not as some natural difference but as the result of trauma – the flip side of sexual addiction (which my father and brother exhibited). It’s posible there is a class of human that is naturally less highly-sexed (I believe this relates to neoteny), but if so, wouldn’t it be very hard to identify as separate from traumatized/dissociated humans?
HS: “Deny the divine access to our natural urges, and the devil will gladly take them over.”
A PROBLEMATIC SENTENCE. SOUNDS LIKE VINTAGE KEPHAS STYLISTICALLY. ON THE OTHER HAND IT SOUNDS LIKE MODIFIED CATHOLIC RHETORIC.
Sometimes it’s necessary to fight fire with fire?
ITS A PROBLEM LOGICALLY IN THE SENSE THAT MANY OF THESE PRACTITIONERS OF SEXUAL DEVILRY, PROBABLY BELIEVE THEIR URGES ARE CONNECTED
Connected to what?
HS: “both the scientific and spiritual quest to “dematerialize/spiritualize matter” (and so merge with it), while it couldn’t be reduced to it, would be concealing an infant drive to be reunited with the mother.”
INTERESTINGLY ITS NEVER A DESIRE FOR REUNION WITH THE FATHERS TESTICLES, FROM WHICH THE INNOCENT SPERM WAS SO CRUELLY EJECTED.
: D That may be too much of a leap for most people.
TESTICLES = THE GARDEN OF EDEN.
SPERM = ADAM & EVE, SIBLINGS WITHOUT SEXUAL CHARACTERISTICS LIVING IN HARMONY.
DESIRE = MEETING THE SERPENT.
EJACULATION = EXILE FROM HEAVEN.
Nice psycho-biological blueprint.
THE IDEA OF SUBLIMATION IS VERY INTERESTING. IF WORKING AWAY FRANTICALLY IS A SUBLIMATION OF THE MECHANICAL/REPETITIVE ASPECT OF THE SEX ACT, WHAT FORM WOULD THE SUBLIMATION OF THE ORGASM TAKE? REVOLUTION? ARMAGEDDON? RAPTURE?
That brings to mind my (sometimes) favorite movie, Taxi Driver, and how Pauline Kael described the blood bath which Travis causes at the end as “the only real orgasm he can have.”
Comments on “An Archetypal Traumatogenic Agency”:
AN ILLUMINATING AND DISTURBING QUOTE [Opening quote from Donald Kalsched]. DOESN’T THIS APPLY GENERALLY THOUGH, LIKE THE EX-GIRLFRIEND WHO, IN THE PROCESS OF IDEALISATION, BECOMES MORE DESIRABLE THAN THEY EVER WERE IN REAL LIFE. THE QUOTE SEEMS TO REFER TO AN INVERSED IDEALISATION.
Not sure if I quite follow the line of logic, but in general, any psychological strategies and subterfuges which the organism adapts in infancy to survive would naturally continue into adult life and become “generalized.”
ATA: “As I worked on this piece, I was reminded of a bunch of notes I’d thrown together, a couple of years previously, after reading Norman O. Brown’s Life Against Death. In it, Brown describes culture as the collective product of repression, negation, and sublimation, making it a kind of external matrix created and maintained by infantile agendas and drives to recover “the lost object”—that of the mother’s body.”
A VERY MALE-CENTRIC POINT OF VIEW. WHAT ABOUT THE MOTHERS DESIRE TO KEEP BABY SAFE AND WARM, FOR THEM TO BE NEEDED IN SUCH A VITAL WAY? WOULDN’T THE EXTERNAL MATRIX BE CREATED TO FULFILL THOSE DESIRES TOO? WOULDN’T THOSE “INFANTILE AGENDAS” BE PLAYING OUT AND ENCOURAGED BY A LARGER AGENDA? A CRITICISM OF CULTURE IN GENERAL WOULD BE ITS RELUCTANCE TO INTERFACE WITH THE CONCEPT OF MATERNAL DESIRE.
Yes, all good points. But the mother was also an infant once, and women can also be imprinted with similar patterns, albeit less severely because they have their own body-wombs to “possess” (tune into)?
JUST AN OBSERVATION, YOUR WRITING STYLE IS MARKEDLY DIFFERENT WHEN DESCRIBING YOUR DREAM. THE WHOLE SECTION SEEMS INCONGRUOUS WITH THE REST OF THE PIECE SO FAR, WITH A PRONOUNCED SHIFT IN FOCUS AND URGENCY. ITS USE OF BREATHLESS, EMOTIVE PHRASES HAS SIMILARITIES WITH STREIBERS WRITING. I CONCED THAT THIS MAY BE ON PURPOSE AS IT DOES BRING AN INTERESTING NEW VOICE INTO PLAY.
It’s mostly deliberate, but also unavoidable, since the dream was recounted twenty years ago and I didn’t want to rewrite the content, but rather cite it as evidence for my state of mind back then. Interesting if it evokes WS’s writing because that serves to underline the affinity I have felt for him, especially back in that time.
I did send him the dream account last year, in fact. He didn’t respond to it.