The stock market has sure been twitchy lately, hasn’t it? But that’s not all. What with the economic turmoil in Europe, the perennial threat of our own government being shut down by further gridlock in Congress, relentlessly radical statements and completely insane “plans” coming from various presidential candidates, it’s easy to see why people are just scared shitless. I know I am.

But enough of that negativity. If we’re going to move forward and heal, we need a potential future to focus on, something besides imagining ourselves running screaming into the night. Let’s see what the art of Tarot has to offer in the way of guidance. Here is my latest reading.

1 Present: The Moon
Things may not be as they seem, and we all know they probably aren’t. But that doesn’t stop us from howling at the moon about it.

2 Crossing: 6 of Swords
A long journey — not a fun one. We’re stuck on this trip until it’s over, friend.

3 Goal: 5 of Swords
We want to totally kick the ass of this recession. Hopefully it works like that. Apparently, that is how we’re approaching this problem.

4 Distant past: King of Wands
Oh remember when we all thought we could just elect the right guy president and we’d have a perfect future? Wealth, productivity, and an honest, hardworking government working for our best interest? This card does.

5 Recent past: 7 of Cups
Dude, we’ve been living a fantasy. We thought we’d get all our wildest dreams just like *poosh* but it didn’t happen, did it?

6 Future influence: 6 of Cups
Yeah, we’re pretty much stuck on our childhood fantasies about the American dream — and that’s what’s going to have the biggest influence on this year’s election.

7 Questioner: 4 of Pentacles
We want our damn money. If we already have any, we’re holding on to it for dear life. If we’re looking for money, watch out, because we think we’re pretty hardcore.

8 Environment: 7 of Wands
People are freaking out, you guys. People are ready to kick some ass and start some shit. It’s like that.

9 Hopes: The Star
What do we want? Apparently we want, more than anything, hope. We want an answer to our prayers. A light to shine in the darkness. And that’s a big deal.

10 Outcome: The Tower
What’s to come of all this? Well it’s not going to be sunshine and roses right away. Shit’s going to get real. But the only possible solution is a do-over — destroy what we know, and create anew. Not at all a small thing.

Aries (March 21-April 20)
You know what they say: There’s no time like the present. Better get going with that big taxidermy project now, before you completely lose your nerve.

Taurus (April 21-May 20)
That Manhattan you’ve been thinking about all day might be just the thing. But you should try it with Canadian whiskey this time. You’re welcome.

Gemini (May 21-June 20)
Time to lay low for a bit. Remember how you used to like playing ‘fort’ with the couch cushions? Yeah. It’s fort time.

Cancer (June 21-July 21)
If you keep picking at it, you’re only going to make it worse. I’m just saying. No really, stop it.

Leo (July 22-Aug. 21)
Well congratulations! Everyone pretty much thinks you’re as awesome as you suspected. But next time you should pick up the tab.

Virgo (Aug. 22-Sept. 21)
Give it some more time. I know you’re really impatient, but a watched pot doesn’t grow legs and develop sentience overnight. Also you have to leave some really funky stuff in it.

Libra (Sept. 22-Oct. 21)
You should probably just not leave your bathroom for about a month. We both know why.

Scorpio (Oct. 22-Nov. 21)
We get it, you’re really intense and ‘different’ — the rest of us still appreciate a heads up before you creatively destroy our everyday lives for your art.

Sagittarius (Nov. 22-Dec. 21)
That dog you saw last Tuesday has the soul of your great uncle, and he was trying to tell you something. Learn to understand his beautiful new language.

Capricorn (Dec. 22-Jan. 20)
Hang in there, champ. Everything is falling into place. Soon they’ll be eating out of your hand. Just don’t freak out if you still don’t get exact change.

Aquarius (Jan. 21-Feb. 19)
You have some mighty grand ideas, some of which aren’t even crazy. Figure out which ones those are and totally go for it.

Pisces (Feb. 20-March 20)
Whoa, calm down. Don’t do anything rash. You’ll feel much better after you re-read the Harry Potter series.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dHUfy_YBps

We’re playing those mind games together
Pushing the barriers, planting seeds
Playing the mind guerrilla
Chanting the mantra, peace on earth
We all been playing those mind games forever
Some kinda druid dudes lifting the veil
Doing the mind guerrilla
Some call it magic, the search for the grail

Love is the answer and you know that for sure
Love is a flower, you got to let it, you got to let it grow

So keep on playing those mind games together
Faith in the future, outta the now
You just can’t beat on those mind guerrillas
Absolute elsewhere in the stones of your mind
Yeah we’re playing those mind games forever
Projecting our images in space and in time

Yes is the answer and you know that for sure
Yes is surrender, you got to let it, you got to let it go

So keep on playing those mind games together
Doing the ritual dance in the sun
Millions of mind guerrillas
Putting their soul power to the karmic wheel
Keep on playing those mind games forever
Raising the spirit of peace and love

Love…
(I want you to make love, not war, I know you’ve heard it before)

Gary Lachman

We at The Contrarian are huge fans of Gary, as are many of our readers. Which is why we’re so delighted that he took time from his ridiculously busy schedule to answer a few questions about his new book and its perennially enigmatic subject.

——————————————

The Contrarian: There’s not a shortage of books about Carl Jung, with each subsequent entry purporting to be the definitive biography. What about your book stands out in this crowded field?

Gary Lachman: Rather than avoid talking about Jung’s “mystical” or “occult” inclinations, as some books on him do, or use them as a stick to beat him with, or applaud them uncritically, or explain them away, I take them seriously, and try to place Jung in the context of other “mystical” teachers, like Rudolf Steiner and Gurdjieff. I also ask why Jung seemed to have had a profound ambivalence about them, why publicly he insisted repeatedly that he was a scientist and not a mystic, yet among his close circle presented a different attitude.

TC: Individuation is Jung’s term for an alchemical-style process in which the components of one’s “spirit” and psyche are melded in a more holistic comprehension of self. How much of a believer are you in this transformation?

GL: If you’re asking if I believe in self-transformation, the answer is yes. I think you can understand individuation as broadly alchemical, in the sense that it involves bringing together opposites and creating something new out of the encounter. I don’t think you need to use alchemical language or concepts in order to do this, though. Individuation is about “becoming who you are” — it’s the same as Abraham Maslow‘s notion of self-actualization. It means becoming “you” and not merely a copy of the people around you.

TC: Jung is also known for his theory of the collective unconsciousness, or “world psyche,” in which the contents of our individual minds correlate at a deeper level through communal archetypes. Is there a dissonance between the idea of a shared spirit-map and the subjective experience of individuation, in which transformation is different for different people? Did you find any evidence in your studies of Jung attempting to reconcile these potentially contrasting ideas?

GL: I don’t see them as conflicting. It is precisely the collective unconscious that one individuates from, as it were. You individuate by becoming aware of the influence of the collective unconscious, the deeper forces at work in the psyche. By becoming aware of them and incorporating them consciously, one becomes an individual.You are not then pushed around by them without a clue, as most of us are most of the time.

TC: Jung seems to have spent a great deal of energy trying to dodge the mystic tag he was so often flagged with. How do you think he’d have dealt with the Aquarian-age co-opting of his concepts? If he were around today, would he be Grand Poo-Bah of Burning Man or an embittered shut-in?

GL: I think Jung would have been pleased that his ideas have become so fundamental to modern spirituality, but he would have shaken his head at raves and such. Individuation is hard work and it means confronting yourself, society, and the cosmos on your own. He enjoyed a good party but like anything of value, individuating is something one does on one’s own. I’m sure Burning Man and so on are great fun, but I don’t know how useful mass events are in “becoming who you are.” Jung, remember, spent a great deal of time in solitude in his famous tower at Bollingen.

TC: To me, Jung is the preeminent cartographer of the human mind. In fact, I’m always puzzled that he has so many critics who are quick to dismiss his work while swooning for far nuttier stuff. Why do you think he’s had such difficulty being accepted by either the scientific or spiritual mainstream?

GL: I don’t know that he hasn’t been accepted by the “spiritual mainstream,” whoever that means. He opposed the reductionist, materialist “scientistic” view, so it’s no surprise many scientists consider him a flake. I think Jung is a rare character, someone who applied scientific rigour to spiritual concerns. Sadly many “spiritual” people are disinclined to think, so they may adopt Jungian ideas like synchronicity without really thinking about them, or about anything else for that matter.

TC: Leading neuroscientists have embraced the idea of brain plasticity as a means of dealing with the “reformatting” of troublesome mental “programs,” i.e., neuroses. Plasticity is not a new concept; Buddhists have for centuries advocated for practices that allow thought to be neutrally observed and new mental habits established. In light of meditation, mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy, are Jung’s self-initiated breakdowns perhaps unnecessarily messy?

GL: Jung didn’t offer his “method” as one appropriate for everyone, and he often said that most neuroses were probably better treated by other means, even Freudian ones. But if you want to discover your unconscious and have some idea what’s going on in it and how you can develop a vital, creative, and surprising relation to it, he believed you needed to meet it face to face, as it were. He certainly wouldn’t have wanted active imagination to be seen as a “technique.” Becoming who you are isn’t something you can do when necessary. You either become who you are or you don’t.

TC: Speaking of self-initiation, Jung was also big on highly personal information, whether it be drawings, sculptures, mandalas or secret linguistics. Does sharing the semantic code with others somehow lessen its alchemical potency?

GL: I think some symbols discovered in dreams etc can have a collective meaning, but many are metaphors about your own life and are surprisingly specific, as if the intelligence responsible for them is speaking directly to ‘you’. At least in my own case I have always been stunned by the aptness of imagery in dreams and how they use jokes, plays on words, visual gags, to make a point. I am repeatedly reminded that what I call “my unconscious” is an independent, living intelligence that more times than not knows more than I do. Jung also believed it was important to have a ‘secret’, something of deep significance that you kept to yourself. This creates a kind of inner pressure that fuels individuation. It’s something he shares with most esoteric teaching. We all know the devaluing effect of telling a particularly important dream to someone else, how it often loses its “charge.” Pearls before swine, and all that.

TC: What do you think of the Red Book? I have it, but feel like I need to take a vacation in order to properly experience its contents.

GL: I think it is a remarkable record of one remarkable person’s encounter with a formidably remarkable living intelligence that just happened to have resided in his head.

TC: When it comes to transformations, you’re certainly no slouch. Going from punk rock star to distinguished esoteric historian is hardly a typical career arc. Could you offer a word of advice or encouragement to others on a less-than conventional path?

GL: Well, in the first case I never was a “star.” I made a not inconsiderable contribution to pop music, but was never a celebrity. But my basic advice is to listen to your “self” and do your best to become who you are. Don’t be afraid of taking risks or of disappointing other people, especially your friends. My interest in music and performing is part of the same impulse that later led me to write. It’s a need for self-expression combined with an appetite for ideas. I was always interested in the kind of thing I write about now, but I needed to mature in order to do it. I have nothing against pop music, but there’s only so much you can say in a song. Now I have 80,000 – 100,000 words. You may not be able to dance to it, but it is very satisfying to collect all your thoughts on, say, Jung and organize them into a book that, with any luck, others will get something out of.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI

Hi! Hi! It’s me!

• Warning: prostitutes crossing
• El Chupacabra?
• Association pushing for the rights of the living dead (no, really).
• This group is trying to get “Confederate Southern American” declared as a recognized race on the U.S. census form.

• Don’t list people in your phone using words that describe your murderous intentions.
• Fetish of the day!
• What better way to honor the resurrection of Christ than a mad, violent riot scene of greed featuring terrified children?
• Why don’t my neighbors ever do interesting things like this?
• Register and book your plane tickets now for your chance to talk to Harry Houdini or Jack the Ripper!

• Meet the patron saint of chubbies.
• “Top Ten Oddball Jesus Sightings“
• I think this is a very sensible and economical alternative to all those crazy expensive “scientific” conception methods.
• Do you know anyone whose middle name is Wayne?
• Are you looking to produce the next Battlefield Earth?
• That whole lime thing is apparently a myth. You should really find something else to throw over the bodies in your crawl space.

That’s all I’ve got. Bye bye for now, lovebugs!

I love you. Please be good to each other.

Molly

The Council On Spiritual Practices offers information on psychoactive sacramentals in their Enthogen Project.

While the New York Times reports on emerging studies with psychoactives.

This is much along the lines of Aldous Huxley‘s beautiful deathbed experience.

Troublesome Creek could be the name of your next band/novel/screenplay. Maybe this is where the term “blue blood” originated, though I don’t think they had a clan of Kentucky hillbillies in mind.

In the lives of modern American families, this is pop culture gone adorably wild. As Rebecca Mack aptly describes, this video demonstrates the “dangers of rigid gender roles.”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb9eL3ejXmE

And if you thought it just couldn’t get any cuter, please observe this orangutan and hound, who are clearly soul mates. WARNING. This may be too cute to handle. Please beware before following the link.

But sometimes, you just need a friend. Again, this is bromance.

This article includes a photo of some roadies, speaking of bros. I may plagiarize parts for my resume.

Though this blend of talent and ambition with the irony of their theme will likely dominate more of my time. To quote Animal: “DRUMS!”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl82N69B7qw

Okay, obviously some of these photos were taken in Manhattan, but it is interesting to see how many pictures one can take on a single theme, and within four blocks. I love New York.

Anyways, I would like to tell you about my inspiration here. In college, I had a wonderful 20th Century Art History professor, Stephen Myers, who really turned me on to some previously under-appreciated movements in modern art. While I always found De Stjl to be aesthetically pleasant, before Professor Myers’ fine tutelage, I hardly grasped the sociological commentary, much less it’s spiritual underpinnings:

Proponents of De Stijl sought to express a new utopian ideal of spiritual harmony and order. They advocated pure abstraction and universality by a reduction to the essentials of form and colour; they simplified visual compositions to the vertical and horizontal directions, and used only primary colors along with black and white.

According to Professor Myers, Mondrian was the first artist to request that gallery walls be painted white while exhibiting his work. The idea was that the viewer would be able to imagine the parallel and perpendicular lines of his paintings extending into infinity, creating a meditative atmosphere which preceded the works of Kandinsky, Klee, Rothko, etc.

(Side note: I was recently asked to participate in an informal personality test, in which I described my feelings of being in a white room. I said I would find it peaceful yet dull. The white room, apparently, represents death.)

While Cubism aimed to represent three dimensions simultaneously on a two-dimensional plane, De Stjl was shooting for the fourth dimension and beyond. At the same time, further east, in what was soon to become the Soviet Republic, a movement called Suprematism was evolving. Founded by Kazimir Malevich and his peers, Suprematism sought to replace the lush Russian Orthodox icons found in most households with simplified shapes such as perfect squares and circles, painted as carefully as a Tibetan sand painting, an illuminated manuscript or a rich traditional needlepoint.

While Malevich participated closely in the cultural movement surrounding the Russian Revolution, creating propaganda and populist design for everyday use, he soon found himself alienated from the new regime:

This development in artistic expression came about when Russia was in a revolutionary state, ideas were in ferment, and the old order was being swept away. As the new order became established, and Stalinism took hold from 1924 on, the state began limiting the freedom of artists. From the late 1920s the Russian avant-garde experienced direct and harsh criticism from the authorities and in 1934 the doctrine of Socialist Realism became official policy, and prohibited abstraction and divergence of artistic expression.

While Suprematism directly influenced the Bauhaus and other user-friendly schools of high design, Malevich himself did not fare so well. Persecuted by his government, yet unwilling to leave his beloved homeland, Malevich spent the rest of his days designing his own tomb. Although he may be less well-known than those he influenced (and remarkably more subtle in his execution of his ideas), his presence is certainly felt to this day. His clean design aesthetic has become a part of our everyday lives, the new icon lovingly stored in the corner of the kitchen.

I began to think of Malevich and Mondrian upon reading the following passage from Wilhelm‘s translation of the I Ching (Hexagram 2, The Receptive), so I will leave you with that:

Six in the second place means:
Straight, square, great.
WIthout purpose,
Yet nothing remains unfurthered.

The symbol of heaven is the circle, and that of earth is the square. Thus squareness is a primary quality of the earth. On the other hand, movement in a straight line, as well as magnitude, is a primary quality of the Creative. But all square things have their origin in a straight line and in turn from solid bodies. In mathematics, when we discriminate between lines, planes and solids, we find that rectangular planes result from straight lines, and cubic magnitudes from rectangular planes. The Receptive accommodates itself to the qualities of the Creative and makes them its own. Thus a square develops out of a straight line and a cube out of a square. this is compliance with the laws of the Creative; nothing is taken away, nothing added. Therefore the Receptive has no need of a special purpose of its own, nor of any effort; yet everything turns out as it should.

I think those skeletons are Petite Petes! I like it even better thinking that they are both male. This picture gives me an idea for what to do with the hideous chandelier in the dining room here. I’ll make it into a tiny skeletal Cirque du Soleil vignette! Like if a bunch of calaveras decided to become acrobats and aerialists.

• Giant flying condom!

• “Auto” erotica. Get it? I don’t know what that guy’s deal was, but there is an identified car fetish: mechaniphilia.
• Who wants a man rub?
• You are invited to the penis puppet party. No, not those penis puppets.
• This sucks. (Get it?) Growing up in rural Vermont I’d often hear rumors about men using the milking machines for sexual gratification.
• Better machines than this.
• More music industry conspiracy creativity.
• Caution: do not fall into the cauldron. P.S. Good Christians don’t hunt ghosts.
• “Bananas-for-sex cult leader on the run“
• Strange ailments: latah and Alice in Wonderland Syndrome
• WTF? Is there a sideshow crime spree going on in Wisconsin? (I didn’t find that on a novelty page, it was a serendipitous find during a non-Picayune related forensics search.)
• Roosten? Henock?
• How many Facebook pages does a dead serial killer/cannibal really need?

That’s all I got, kiddles.

I love you. Please be good to each other.

Molly