Last night you spent time online boning up on the unconscious, Freud and Jung.
I had forgotten some points. I tend to agree with Jung more than Freud, but then, perhaps I have good reason for that. I lean towards an inherited ‘collective unconsciousness’ along with everyone growing and living within this world/universe – combinations of earth, air, fire and water.
Late afternoon. Linda and Bill stopped by after his monthly visit to the Vet Hospital nearby. As a Marine he was wounded and contracted further physical problems when in Vietnam. You four had lunch at Dave’s – onion rings and chicken Philly sandwiches. Then you and Bill swam for an hour, he and Linda went home, and you and Carol swam for another hour. The luggage is mostly packed and you plan to be out of Chris and Larry Meiber’s condo by nine-thirty in the morning. You are sitting at McD’s by their boat docks enjoying the scenery. Tomorrow, to Linda and Bill’s for Christmas and you and Carol will be heading home early Monday morning.
No complaints. We have had a great couple weeks with family. I took one more sunset tonight, our last in Madeira Beach until sometime next fall the way the schedule goes. Kim and Paul are due at the end of February, thus we will be spending our spring between Mason and University Heights on the near east side of Cleveland. We have had a good year for travel. Arizona, New Mexico, California, Florida, Tennessee for Jean’s wedding, Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, Maine, and Florida once more.
Later, dude. Time for the news. – Amorella
After supper (scrambled eggs and ham) and the national news we are placing our ‘luggage’ in the hallway as we fill them up. The more I read about the unconscious mind the less the experts agree. Mostly it appears to come down to definition and function at least in Wikipedia and like sources. Without an agreement on definition it is confusing to me the more I read beyond the usual material. I have my doubts that my unconscious could pick up something my conscious mind did not unless, according to modern research, it was extremely fast; too fast for consciousness to become aware of the event. This is possible however as neurological studies have shown.
Here’s my problem, what could I have seen that would lend itself to an image of an Angel of G---D? Wings? Eyes? These are earthly features not supernatural. The closest image I (cannot conjure) that would lend itself to the supernatural would be an image that has not straight or curved features – even a dot, a period appears as circular. Therefore, if I witnessed such an event, how could I relate it to anything? Surely it would have unconsciously struck one or more of my five senses (or even a reasonable sixth sense – intuition) in order to ‘pick it up on human radar’ so to speak. I think that whatever the event was, was an intuitive error at best, on my part. I have made lots of errors in my life because I am human. I will no doubt make many more.
I say we let this go as far as the blog is concerned. I can see nothing coming from this one way or another, and frankly I should have realized as such. I didn’t think ahead far enough when I came up with the question. And, I can’t for the life of me guess why you mentioned Diplomat Burroughs. How can an imaginary character have such a like experience? There is nothing mentioned about this in the books. In an episode she travels within an Angel across the Place of the Dead. – I skimmed the first part of book three and the first place where there is a hint that Diplomat “knows” something is taken down a notch or two by the Soki (really Amorella). Here is the selection in Pouch Text – 4, book 3, Merlyn’s Mind:
***
-- This is the Soki. The walls Diplomat thinks she sees, the building blocks of the original universe wherever that universe is or was, are just that. Blocks. For human minds I’ll call them blocks, like children’s blocks, the old wooden ones with letters on them. Some old timers might remember, the blocks had slits in them so you could slide one block on top of another so they wouldn’t fall down so easily when you built a tall stack of blocks.
When you put the children’s blocks together you could spell words in the process. Thus you could have three blocks stacked one on top of the other, and one side of the top block would have a ‘B’ on it, for example, and a middle one could have an ‘A’, and the bottom block could have a ‘D’ on it. The blocks were just blocks but with the spelling, at least on one side of each, it would spell BAD. And, as such the three blocks take on a meaning they did not have before. Beyond that if you look at the blocks from the other three sides the letters there may mean nothing or some other word more by accident than anything else. This is child’s play of course, but it has a point as to a philosophy on how the original universe came about. In one way the origin of the universe looks like an accident, another view gives it an ordered look, that is the sense of it. Same building blocks from different sides.
When Blake is trying to describe the folds and runny ink, he thinks Diplomat can ‘see’ into the slits that hold the blocks together, these are the ‘walls’ that he thinks she can manipulate so that the block that sits on the top of another can be moved and another block slid into its place so that the three blocks that at one time spelled BAD now spell BED instead. This is a tremendous change in meaning even though the middle ‘A’ Block may not have even been moved out of place at all, but just turned in place, to the right or the left, and another letter, ‘E’ in this case, takes the place of the ‘A’. Diplomat knows how to manipulate the blocks so the letters mean something better than they did before. Now, Blake’s problem is that he thinks it is something deeper, but that is all there is to it.
This is what happens when you forget to think like a typical seven year old might. When a child thinks of folding something it means to make it tighter, to press it so you can stuff it someplace that you couldn’t before, like folding your favorite blanket in a suitcase so you can take it with you on a trip, because most any seven year old girl would not think to just jam a favorite of anything into a suitcase. It takes care and finesse to fold neatly, to pack neatly, to place neatly. Look at a typical little girl’s room compared to a little boy’s room of the same age. Some might call this a sexist comment. And, you see, in here that is just what it is. --
Blake sat on the side of the bed looking toward the door. “Are we going to play some slots?” he said, “if so, let’s get going before dinner.” He heard the hair dryer in the bathroom. ‘This is going to take forever,’ he though. ‘We could almost have driven here by now. Women. No wonder I never got married.’ He thought that first, and then, ‘well, no one would have me at the time I was interesting.
From: Merlyn's Mind, Chapter Four, Pouch Text
***
You see this as an example of ‘nothing much’ but in context with our present discussion I read ‘you’ through Diplomat, rationalizing an event that took you to the beginning of the universe.
Of course you can do this, Amorella, but you are the one who did the writing, not me.
I could only write from what I ‘saw’ within your mind, boy. – Amorella
Well, I disagree. I’m sure these books can be taken apart as a psychological study of me. Why not? They are from my head whether you or I wrote them doesn’t make a bit of difference in this sense, I understand, but why would anyone want to go to the trouble. I mean, I wouldn’t go to the trouble – it is too much work and it would end in a debate, no doubt – just like there is a debate on unconsciousness.
There is evidence to what you saw, or thought you saw in your unconsciousness within the first three books, boy. I set it up that way. – Amorella.
I don’t believe you, Amorella. You make up stories for me and this is another one. I’m embarrassed to put this in the blog.
You are arrogant and you are lying, boy. – Amorella
I don’t believe you ever said I was lying before.
I will not allow you to lie to yourself in here, to deceive yourself without your realizing it. – Amorella
Okay. How am I lying?
You are ‘embarrassed’ because you suddenly thought of an alternative purpose – to get people to read the books. This was your thought, not mine. – Amorella
Oh. Now I am embarrassed. I am sounding like a huckster, a charlatan.
Do you think I do not play the part of an angel as far as you are concerned. You ‘looked me in the eye’ and said, “I am embarrassed to put this in the blog.” What you really meant was that you are embarrassed you were suddenly thinking like a charlatan.
I understand. Thank you, Amorella. I am sorry.
You are arrogant. How can you be sorry for a thought that popped into your head? – Amorella
I am suddenly feeling unwell, uncomfortable, and naked. I am going to back up now, respectfully, and attempt to restore myself.
It is your soul that is shaken, boy. It does not know who I am and is beginning to realize it. All for tonight. Post. - Amorella
No comments:
Post a Comment