The Unauthorized Biography

[hunter s.durden]

I was raised Presbyterian, Catholic, and some sort of Pentecostal type thing (I think it was called Church of God, which confused me... aren't all churches of God?).  Basically I got a little taste of every sect.

[Iron Sulfide]

nice. we should work on some apostate stuff sometime.

well, here it is. my chapter, in interview form.

i wrote it on my lunch break yesterday; took me 'til now to post it...
federal holidays make people crazier than shit-gollems.

sans adieu:

Gallows Humor: An Interview with R.A. Wilson On His Death Bed

   I entered what used to be a hospital room until he moved into it. Now it looks like the Mickey Mouse Mausoleum. He,Äôs covered all the gadgets and do-hickies with fan art, newspaper clippings, old drug paraphernalia, old drugs,Ķthe Mickey Mouse Mausoleum isn,Äôt far off from the Manson Family House. He even scribbled lines from ,ÄúHelter Skelter,Äù on the walls. He makes a crack about Helen Keller as I sit down.

[RAW] ,Äú,Ķyou know, she gives the best hand-jobs ever. Maybe I,Äôm just setting her on a ,ÄúPedo,Äù stool,Ķ,Äù

   I look up from my planner long enough to stare blankly at him and lose track of time.

[Me] ,ÄúSo how much longer are you going to be here? Days? Months?

[RAW] ,ÄúShit; I,Äôm already gone. I was born that way. What,Äôcha readin,Äô?,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúYou know, fro a writer, you certainly slaughter the spoken word. This is just my day planner; I use it to figure out what I,Äôm going to do, take notes, jot down ideas, the usual.,Äù

[RAW: grabs my planner] ,ÄúLooks like a lot of chicken scratch to me. You know the saying, ,Äòyou can only write as good as you talk?,Äô,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúNo, and it,Äôs ,Äòwell,Äô.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúWell, it ain,Äôt true. See, the words we utilize in order to convey a thought- abstract or concrete- are only as effective as the situation allows for. If you speak out of context, you ain,Äôt talkin,Äô right.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúNeat, can I have it back now?,Äù

[RAW: hands me my planner] ,ÄúYou know the problem with today,Äôs kids?,Äù

[Me] I don,Äôt care, that,Äôs not why I,Äôm here.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúThen why are you here? Why are you ,Äònow,Äô for that matter?,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúHwy, if I want to hear inane shit, I,Äôll watch a G.W. speech, or rent a ,Äòhot pick,Äô flick.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúHow astute! That,Äôs exactly what,Äôs wrong with this new generation. And that,Äôs why I,Äôve spent so much time writing. I,Äôll pause while you write that down.,Äô

[Me] ,ÄúHow courteous,Ķ,Äù [I fake-write what he said, actually sketching a dead baby] ,ÄúI,Äôd appreciate it if you stopped imitating the way I talk; the readers will think I wrote this on my own.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúI,Äôd appreciate it if YOU stopped imitating the way I talk; people might think you,Äôre one of my fans.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúTouch?©. So what exactly is it that,Äôs wrong with people today? Generally?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúThe world is caught in a whirlwind of fever dreams, as it mumbles incoherently through restless sleep. Day in, day out; another tally on the cell wall, scrawled with a piece of bone that used to be the thumb on your off hand. Everything,Äôs been jumbled since we entered the dream. How else can you explain preferential handedness? Sure, the dream started out nice; it even gave an Enlightenment to Logic and Reason. Now, however, it has become the dumbest thing I,Äôve ever heard. Doesn,Äôt that make it a mute point? What,Äôs the dumbest thing you,Äôve ever heard?,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúThe dumbest thing I,Äôve heard is ,Äòmaybe,Äô as a logical premise.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúFair enough. It may be.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúNow that we,Äôve established that you are dreaming, why don,Äôt you demonstrate some lucid dream powers? You can do that, right?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúWell, actually,Ķno. the thing about fever dreams is that, no matter how outlandish they are, you never question if it,Äôs a dream. And pretty soon, all the whiney kids at Starbucks steal the chairs around you that were intended for people you don,Äôt know, but could haven possibly met. That,Äôs how fever dreams work.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúSo the chairs are the dream? Or the whiney kids are?,Äù


[RAW] ,ÄúNo, the kids are dreamers. The chairs are only part of the dream. You,Äôre the rest; the left-overs that they didn,Äôt want.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúOuch,Ķnice rebuttal. So what are some strange dreams you,Äôve had, then?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúOne time, I had this dream that I was a grandfather paradox. I went back in time, I think it was the 17-1800s, and met the most beautiful woman. Nature took care of the rest, and I screwed my own great grandma,Äô. Other stuff that happened in the dream gave me ideas for the Bavarian illuminati in my book,Ķ[pause]

[Me] ,Äú,ĶIlluminatus!?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúYes! I only paused so you would have to write a question mark after an exclamation mark. Did you know that both of those are derived from Egyptian hieroglyphs? They represent a cat,Äôs tail and ass-hole. Make sure you hyphenate ,Äòass-hole.,Äô I hate it when the syntax implies a separation between the two.,Äù

[Me} ,ÄúEgyptian hieroglyphs? Sure,Ķ,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúNo, really. The question mark is a cat in a curious state; the exclamation is when he,Äôs on edge. Take a hit and look again.,Äù [He offers a bong load of already burnt weed, sitting by his heart monitor.]

[Me] ,ÄúThat,Äôs alright, I,Äôll pass and take you word on this one. What other dreams have you had? I want something good; none more of that joke-dream crap.,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúOkay, but that dream wasn,Äôt a joke. Let,Äôs see,Ķ I could tell you about,ĶI,Äôm trying to think of a good one, the we,Äôll move on- I have far more interesting things to talk about. Besides: all dreams are weird, without regard to how mundane they are.
   ,ÄúThere,Äôs this one recurring dream I have, even more so  now, close to the end. It always starts differently: I,Äôm mowing the lawn, shopping for groceries, at a coffee shop, working some obscure, manual-labor job- whatever. And then, at the height of the tedium, I notice everything in the distance is two-dimensional; a backdrop for a play, or T.V. shows in some warehouse. Then the backdrop starts moving, and I spin around to find everyone I,Äôve ever known in life, laughing and pointing at me. Confused, I ask what the deal is. Then they say, ,ÄúGotcha!,Äù and I wake up. No joke.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúThat,Äôs like this dream I,Äôve had a few times. Always starts differently; then I realize I,Äôm dreaming and try to wake up; then I wake up into another dream, ad infinitum until I finally wake up,Ķ,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúSounds like you,Äôre on the verge of waking up from this dream.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúI wish this were a dream.,Äù

[RAW]  ,ÄúWhat if I told you it IS?,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúWhat did I tell you about inanities? Moving on: are you afraid of death? Especially now that it,Äôs so near?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúNot at all.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúWhat do you think happens after you die?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúNothing. Everything. Okay, I have no idea, but it,Äôs probably something. It has been so far,Ķ,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúAnd what were you diagnosed with?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúGiggles and the Herp.,Äù
[Me] ,ÄúNo, really,Ķ,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúREALLY? I,Äôm so stoned right now I can,Äôt even care, let alone remember.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúFine. What about Discordia? The Church of the SubGenius? Did you create them?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúHa, ha,Ķ[sighs],Ķperhaps the lamest joke I,Äôve ever told. I had nothing to do with those, either of ,Äòem. I think at one point I may have claimed that I did. Not sure, what with all the drugs I,Äôve done. Even Thornley and Hill didn,Äôt start it. My guess? Failed attempts by the illuminati to confuse the masses. They only ended up amusing the messes.,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúAre you incapable of refraining from puns and lame jokes? Is everything set-up for a one-liner with you?,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúOf course,Ķ,Äù

[Me] ,ÄúSTOP IT!,Äù

[RAW] ,ÄúCan,Äôt, it,Äôs part of the dream. Besides, if it,Äôs all nonsense anyway, what,Äôs the worst I can do to it by making it absurd as well?,Äù

[The interview abruptly ended when he turned into a platypus, and I awoke in a cold sweat, holding onto my phallus for dear life.]

[Daruko]

Really enjoying the work so far.  I am surprised that more Discordians wouldn't be fond of Robert Anton Wilson's work, but I surprise easily.  I love his books though.  For those of you who haven't read, you might consider Cosmic Trigger.  It's well worth a read for anyone, and not just for kicks.   It's a very useful field manual for reimprinting.

[LMNO]

Some of us have read it and liked it.
Some of us have read it and did not like it.
Some of us haven't read it, but want to.
Some of us haven't read it strictly out of principle.

[Daruko]

Understood, and I certainly wouldn't be impressed if you let me persuade you... However, the "strictly out of principle" is goofy sometimes. 

It's like music.  The music I like is often obscure and created from independent smaller labels.  I can't stand mainstream pre-digested trendy poppy american idol britney spears bullshit music.  HOWEVER, I will give anything a listen.  Just BECAUSE something is popular and endorsed by mainstream trendy imbeciles, does not NECESSARILY mean it isn't worth listening to.

Same with, let's say, Star Wars.  There are people who refuse to even watch it, because of it's popularity and surrounding fanaticism.  But that's ridiculous.  You may as well start going to Star Wars conventions.  You're doing the same thing.

To be disenchanted from something due to it's hype is the same thing as being attracted to it because of it's hype. 

I hate language right now, because I'm not getting at what I'm trying to say.  I'll just tell you how it SEEMS to me.  It seems like a lot of Discordians are disinteresting in reading Wilson just because a lot of Discordians ARE.  Either way, it's subjective, and people will make up their own damn minds, as well as they should. 

Not reading ANYTHING out of "principle" sounds dangerously dogmatic.  Many Christians fear reading anything that contradicts their own views.  I am a strong proponent for self-programming, but I also strongly endorse BREAKING programming, even self-programming.  Not reading the Satanic Bible because of principle would be ridiculous.  Not reading the Satanic Bible because you know something about how ignorantly narcissistic Anton Lavey was, and because you've possibly fallen asleep and/or gotten sick reading his imbecilic rants before is quite reasonable. 

Anyway, enough about Wilson.  What I'm REALLY discouraging here is rampant indulgence in absorbing only information that fits into a certain box. 

I don't know.  Am I possibly the one missing something here?

I'm trying to imagine saying this myself, "I refuse to read _________ out of principle."   Doesn't seem like anything makes sense in that blank. 

Now this:  "I refuse to read __________ because I have plenty of other stuff I'm more eager to consume," makes more sense, but that's a different thing entirely than this PRINCIPLE we've been discussing.

[LMNO]

I don't know.  Am I possibly the one missing something here?

There is also the possibility they're saying they won't read it on principle as a troll.


For the record, I've read just about everything RAW has written, and have found a handful of good ideas, which is more than I can say about some writers.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I've never seen the movie Titanic, and I plan not to. Ever. By your logic I am the world's biggest Titanic fan.

I have a friend who's constantly trying to get me to read Borges.

Every once in a while someone tries to convince me that I would love Lou Reed.

People make illogical connections all the time. They assume that because they like both A and B, therefore if you like A you will also like B.

When it all comes down to dust, though, who cares what other people enjoy, or why, as long as it doesn't infringe on your ability to enjoy what you do?

[LMNO]

Actually, you probably would like Borges.

[Cramulus]

well said, Daruko. I think you'll get along pretty well around here.

[Daruko]

I've never seen the movie Titanic, and I plan not to. Ever. By your logic I am the world's biggest Titanic fan.

I don't think you understood.  I was talking about not wanting to check something out PURELY because of the hype.  In the case of the Titanic, it seems more like this situation:

Not reading the Satanic Bible because you know something about how ignorantly narcissistic Anton Lavey was, and because you've possibly fallen asleep and/or gotten sick reading his imbecilic rants before is quite reasonable. 

Damn it!  How do I say who the quote is from? 

Anyway, as far as infringing on your ability to enjoy what you do... I thought I made my feelings about that clear by saying:

Either way, it's subjective, and people will make up their own damn minds, as well as they should.

Besides, we're talking apples and oranges here.  RAW is by no means a comparison with Titanic.  I hated that movie.  Again, subjective, but that's exactly what my opinions are, so....   I'll just state my opinion as crude truth:  If you like Discordianism and hate everything by RAW, you're missing something.

well said, Daruko. I think you'll get along pretty well around here.

Too kind, but thank you.

[LMNO]

That's where the "principle" comes in.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I've never seen the movie Titanic, and I plan not to. Ever. By your logic I am the world's biggest Titanic fan.

I don't think you understood.  I was talking about not wanting to check something out PURELY because of the hype.  In the case of the Titanic, it seems more like this situation:

Not reading the Satanic Bible because you know something about how ignorantly narcissistic Anton Lavey was, and because you've possibly fallen asleep and/or gotten sick reading his imbecilic rants before is quite reasonable. 

No, basically I didn't see it when it came out because all the hype irritated me, as did being told that I "had" to see it by friends who loved it. So that seems to sort of fall into the category of "principle". Now I am not seeing it because it's not that interesting and also I have a long-standing tradition of not having see it, which I would hate to break.

Really, it's a stupid and pointless reason. At the same time, no one really needs a GOOD reason to not watch/read anything. All reasons are somewhat arbitrary on some level.

If you like Discordianism and hate everything by RAW, you're missing something.

How do you come to that conclusion? Are you sure that you're not missing something if you don't see what another Discordian dislikes about RAW? Or maybe you're missing something AND they're missing something, because everybody is always missing something all the time.

[Daruko]

I think not watching/reading something because it has hype will simply expose you to a narrower field of experience for no good reason, yes, as you say.  You are correct that reasons are arbitrary, but that doesn't mean that they're not useful.  Logic isn't necessary, but often doing things logically is a more effective method than mood for obtaining more pleasurable experiences. 

Futhermore, I feel that if I allow the hype or popularity of something to determine my level of interest, that I am behaving robotically.  If one becomes a christian to fit in with christian family/friends it is often because one has been programmed thus, and it is a condition of the same program to revolt against the christian.  I prefer to see as many things as possible without being affected by the rules of that program.

As far as Wilson and Discordianism goes, I'm not sure I want to defend the statement I made there.  It seems to entail a lot of work.... Let me think....

Hmm.... 

Typing  Hmm as I was reading over your post again.  heh   Oh I see.  Yes, you are quite right Nigel.  I am possibly missing something.  However, I personally will most likely continue to connect the dots between RAW explanations of profound ideas and Discordian ones.  I group things in my personal group right up there with the many others who have touched the same truths that are beyond ideology and language.  Alan Watts was great with words.   The Map is not the Territory, Maybe Logic, and so on... That stuff isn't about our definitions.  There are thousands of ways to try and talk about it.    The Tao te Ching is full of this crap.  Discordianism is (holy shit what am i getting into) about seeing past the beliefs, the language, the definitions, and I think that was what RAW was all about.   Keep many models.  Keep thinking.  Stop knowing.  simultaneous interacting processing. 

Does that makes sense?

Adding here:  I mean, seriously... What makes this a Discordian forum?  If RAW was alive and had an account here and posted stuff he wrote in his books, I'd be willing to bet it'd blend better than his books really do.  Because his name is ROBERT ANTON WILSON.   Now before anyone gets up in arms, lol, I will explain that the reason I would bet that is because Wilson HAS hype, not because I don't give due credit to this forum, of which I have a very limited imprint so far.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Hmmm. Your position seems to be hinging on the idea that basing your discrimination on popularity or lack thereof is not a useful screening tool.

I have to disagree. No matter what, everyone has to limit their scope of education, and if you have observed that you typically get less out of things that are popular, then that is a reasonable place to set a parameter. It means you will probably miss out on things you would have found enjoyable/enlightening, but you will miss out on some things no matter where you set your parameters. I don't have cable because I have observed that television doesn't generally interest me. Am I missing out on some good shows which I would have enjoyed and possibly might have made me think about the world in a different way? Probably. Every choice, every parameter excludes an alternative. Choosing to read the Illuminatus! trilogy means that there are other books out there that I will not read.

There is also the possibility that choosing popularity as a parameter is based on the idea that the popular territory is already being explored rather thoroughly, and a desire to find territory that is not already being combed over.

[Daruko]

Actually I think we're pretty similar here.  I DO recognize the useful screening tool.   Every situation has it's own inherent variables, and this obviously isn't a matter of the RIGHT perspective.  I think Wilson hype is a bit different than Britney Spears hype. 

Let me use someone I'm not into that also has a lot of Discordian hype as an example.  Ivan Stang.  I don't really like his stuff.  I don't think he's all that funny, and his writing are generally very uninteresting to me.  But chances are that I MAY like something of his.  Chances are it's a hell of a lot more interesting than Bob Hope.  His reputation/image/hype tells me something about his associations, just like Britney Spears.  I will not actively pursue Britney Spears' little sisters debut album tour premiering on FOX Tonight, because of her association.  So the hype affects me.  HOWEVER, IF I am exposed to it inadvertently I WILL TRY to listen to it open-mindedly.   But Wilson can't possibly make people gag like Spears does.  lol

Lot of variables here though.  When we talk about Wilson hype in a Discordian forum it's a LOT different than Titanic hype.  Wilson was a Discordian.  Titanic is not.    I mean, I don't want to argue this point anymore, because I'm getting confused right now.  I'm tired.  lol

It really is totally your business what the hell you absorb.  I always get hung up somewhere between the language of taste and what's fucking stupid.  Taste is taste, but I still contend that the Flaming Lips are a hell of a lot more interesting than prefabricated pop idol bullshit.  Ask me to give you a philosophical explanation, and I get lost or tired or both.

BTW, I also disconnected the cable cord over 4 years ago, and haven't regretted it a bit.  Congratulations on your freedom from TV!  Isn't it grand?
I still watch movies and play games on my 57"  HD.  A lot of games.  Good ones.   

I guess if I have anything more to say on the matter, it'd be that popularity is often misleading and when used as the sole determining factor of whether to TUNE IN or NOT TO TUNE IN, you may be missing more than you think.  But hey, it's your station.   I totally respect that.

Cosmic Trigger is REALLLY good though   

Addition:  I hope some coherent form of consistency emerges here in my last two posts.  I think when read literally I'm contradicting myself all over the place, perhaps.  But jesus christ, if you take me literally, it won't matter what I say will it?   

Addition #2:  I think there's also something to be said for checking out shit you hate sometimes, with an open mind, even when you know you shouldn't.  Wilson talks about this.  Read some right wing fascist nazi propaganda sometime like you really believe it.  Then take notes.  Try it.  I've gotten good results from listening to Rush Limbaugh lately.