(Yes, from the title you have probably guessed I am getting my Nietzsche on)
OK, so you wanna know why I don't like RAW? Why I have a tendency to stomp n00bs who mention his name, why I make fun of Illuminatus! And generally act like a jerk towards people who ape his ideas?
Alright then. I'll go with the aesthetics then go a bit deeper with the other stuff. But first, I really don't like his writing style. When I read something, I don't particularly want to be playing mental mind games with the text, or having to flip over three pages of pretentious imitation Joyce style writings about taking acid. There's being complex due to the subject matter and then there is just being a pain in the ass, which RAW's fiction tends towards.
But the reason I really dislike RAW is he took something that was meant to be, to a degree, indefinable and went and created a whole damn subculture based around it. If you read some of the other stuff by Hill and Thornley, you'll notice they were quite into their Zen. One point that really stuck with Thornley in Zen thought is that naming something essentially destroys it. Once you have a name, you can caricature it, you can define and exclude and you can eventually subvert it. Once something has a definable set of ideas and symbols linked with it, it'll be in Hot Topic next week. And once the Con has its hands on a movement, it ceases to be relevant or dangerous to the prevailing orthodoxy.
Now Illuminatus! did contain a lot of things that were only mentioned in passing by Thornley and Hill, yet were definitely in the Principia Discordia. The Illuminati, the fate of Ambrose Bierce and Yog-Sothoth come to mind.
But now, every aspiring Discordian seems to think they have to be into these sort of things! If you can't jabber on for hours about the mystic import of the number 23 (none), or the majesty of the works of H. P. Lovecraft (relatively mediocre), talk like you've been dropping acid non-stop since your third birthday or act like you're stuck in the 1960s then you aren't doing it right.
RAW, in essence, has created his own counter-orthodoxy within a group that shouldn't stand for any of it. Now because every basement dwelling sockfucker once played Call of Cthulhu, he thinks that makes him a Discordian. He created a set of interests every Discordian should have and can be identified by, because he created a common reality in Illuminatus! that is probably the single most harmful thing anyone has done to Discordianism since its creation. Drawing people into a common reality stifles the creative processes and growth of group, because everyone comes to the table with their ideas pre-defined for them. Thats one of the many reasons I am glad I discovered Discordianism in general and PrincipiaDiscordia.com in particular long before I read any RAW.
There is also the matter of his status. I remember a ,ÄúDiscordian,Äù coming onto this here board asking for ,Äúwords of wisdom,Äù from one of the Discordian founders. Create your own damn words of wisdom! Shit, didn't any of that book actually sink into your skulls? You are your own spiritual authority. You can steal as many ideas as you can get away with, but for the love of sweet Baby Jeebus stop looking to others for your own development, you fucking Cabbages! Thats what created this mess in the first place, people constantly looking to others for orders instead of doing their own thing. How aneristic. And RAW is one of the people most of this sort of Cabbage look to for leadership.
Now, I don't hold this against RAW personally. Going by his personality, he is probably just as tired of people sucking up to him as I am. I'm sure he didn't intend to be become the cult figure he did, which is what makes it all the more tragic. I'm almost certain he didn't intend for the book to be as popular as it was. Personally, he seems a nice guy who has done a lot of interesting things, written some interesting books (Prometheus Rising is fascinating, its hard to deny, as well as his non-fictional work on conspiracies) and is much smarter in a lot more fields than I could be.
But seriously, the only word for some of you people is Bobbies. You're trying to turn this irreligion which has some pretty interesting and insightful ways of looking into the world into a Bob Anton Wilson fan club. Didn't you fuckers learn anything from the example of Jesus? Shit.
Can I have that on a teeshirt please? It'd save on so many stupid conversations.
QuoteDidn't you fuckers learn anything from the example of Jesus? Shit.
Quote of the year! 8-)
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2006, 03:18:47 PM
or the majesty of the works of H. P. Lovecraft
speaking from a pretty big fan of lovecraft i really dont think lovecraft as an individual would appreachiate being even linked to discordianism
he was in all matter of fact a very conservative, semi-religious, racist nutbar
though he did calm down quite a bit later in life during his second run at writing, after the first world war, where he wrote his later lesser known, may i dare say far better, works
I think lovecraft is one of those writers, due to the almost dream-like style of his writing, where it is like old men looking into to a fire
you could project what you want into it
but in all purposes Lovecraft as a person would probably be pretty horrified that his writings are used in a discordian text, just as much as lets say as most of us would be if the writings here would be used by one of these writers
http://www.inscribe.org/MemberLinks.htm
I would agree. I'm not a great fan, I think he had good ideas about the development of horror (taking the "things man ought not know" theme to a higher level), but he lacked the literary ability to actualize it.
well its all about where your tastes lay
with lovecraft he had an amazing sense of setting and atmosphere
but he lacked a sense of character and direction
reading his stuff is like reading somebodies dream journal
like a lot of american authors at the time he was writing in a style that had been passe in europe for about a generation
try his later works like dagon, mountains of madness, and the tomb
they arent as well known as his early works and harder to find
probably cause, with the exception of maybe dagon, he was slowly going away from his former ideas of subraces and alien interference.
It was actually at this time too that he came out and officially said the necronomicon was a load of crap, and by then people already had some invested intrest in it
but he was actually became more focused as a writer
Wait... "At The Mountains of Madness" is not about alien infrastructure or the Necornomicon mythos?
Funny, it seemed to me like it was giving an alien explaination for the Old Ones...
sorry didnt noticed i used it as an example
:lol:
More like you didn't think anyone else had read it...
actually its more like its 2 oclock in the afternoon
and i just woke up about 30 minutes ago
:evil:
dont even have my pants on yet
You forgot to mention that RAW didn't have the creativity to end any of his books properly, the wanker.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on October 27, 2006, 07:53:17 PM
actually its more like its 2 oclock in the afternoon
and i just woke up about 30 minutes ago
:evil:
dont even have my pants on yet
How did you manage to get a subtitle under your avi? That's some l33t ninja shit that is!
go to profile
options there
Quote from: Rabid Badger of God on October 27, 2006, 08:14:13 PM
You forgot to mention that RAW didn't have the creativity to end any of his books properly, the wanker.
Yes, but since I havent finished writing the City stuff yet, I thought best not to draw any attention to that...
Hey, I'll freely admit that I can't finish anything I write and I still criticize him for the same thing. The difference is he somehow managed to get published by some miracle or other. Maybe he impregnated the pages of his manuscript with LSD. Like in Name of the Rose except with less death and God.
Quote from: SillyCybin on October 27, 2006, 03:36:31 PM
Can I have that on a teeshirt please? It'd save on so many stupid conversations.
http://www.spreadshirt.net/shop.php?sid=155587&product_id=772122&affiliate=321975
Quote from: Rabid Badger of God on October 27, 2006, 09:11:14 PM
Like in Name of the Rose except with less death and God.
Holy shit you just summed up my entire life! :-o
Really good stuff.
11/9.
Robert Anton Wilson isn't the problem, it's the people that take him seriosuly or think he's a figure head in this thing of ours(which he is, but that's cuz people made him that way.) I first came across Prinicipia Discordia after reading the Illuminatus, and I really can't say it's completely changed my life(either books) but I'm still growing and expirienceing things with an added discordian perspective, so I have to thank RAW. As far as I can tell, RAW was only trying to get a point across in Illuminatus, but he did it in a very confusing, entertaining, and downright ridiculous way(which I love, but not everyone does.) When I read the part where George first discovers the "truth" of the robot when he was being illuminated by Hagbard, I took it to heart. There's SO many authors, philosophers, socioligist, etc. that talk about conformity and all the limitations and problems it could bestow on a person or group, but reading Hagbard talk about the robot presented it in totally original and oddily understandable fashion.
Second, if your pissed about RAW giving a definintion to Discordianism, then create one that's completely opposite. When it comes to Discordianism, there is no Dogma or law except for the ones people impose on it. Keep the people guessing. When asking someone what Discordianism is, they may say...
"There a religion that believes Humor is the key to salvation"
"They believe that all religions, miricles, and phenomina can be explianed through quantum physics"
"I think they believe aliens run the planet and will return in like 400 years or something"
"They have these really weird sex rituals which consist of massive orgies and artificial straw berries"
"Oh, they beileve farting alot will guarentee them safe passage to the next world."
"There just crazy"
And the best...
"I have no fucking clue."
You see, all these answers are true, but technically none of them are true. HA, isn't that beautiful.
Isn't somthing with no name, the same as somthing with many names that are all valid AND invalid.
BTW, wtf does it matter what thornley and hill believed or practiced. They created this monster with the intent of letting in run loose, they're in the same boat as the rest of us now.
In summation, RAW didn't do anything. As a matter of fact he did the only thing a discordian could do and came up with his own theory of how people work and/or should work, but not once, did he ever claim his theory was right or absolute. The fault lies with the dogmatic student, not the sage.
EDIT: Nothing I just wrote is true, but all of it is. Dig?
I never read past page 10 myself. No offense or anything, but it looked like bullshit to me.
You just totally glossed over one of my main points, didn't you? The problem is that Illumaintus! came out long before any other Discordian works and is still the only Discordian fiction in print. If there had been six or seven people with different ideas on Discordianism at the time who had released books, that would have been much better.
You gotta factor in the time line here. Now if any books are released, they are going to be seen as opposing RAW, trying to undermine or oppose RAW....basically bringing it back to RAW instead of Discordianism.
Illuminatus! is too well defined, too indepth and precise in its thoughts and what it says. Which is very bad. It limits creativity. The good thing about the Principia Discordia is that it is vague and short. It also purports only to be the holy book of the Joshua Norton Cabal and not a book for all Discordians. Illuminatus! doesn't do that and because it came out when there was nothing else, it defined Discordianism in a way thats going to take a long time to fade.
True, but this isn't RAW's fault. He got lucky when his book hit it big in the seventies. You can't blaim him for that. I admit that referances to RAW's work are very common in Discordian discussion boards, including this one. But like I said before, the fault lies with Discordians that still have dogmatic tendancies, whether they know it or not. Even if Illuminatus was a very stuctured, orderd "Bible to Discordianism," any smart discordian would know that such a thing does not exisist, and if someone did religiously "follow" whatever was in any book, then they aren't discordian. RAW presented his perception of Discordianism, it is a shame when people claim it as THE book to read on the subject, but the whole thing is a joke anyway(although, like the bible, it does contain some shreds of wisdom, in my eyes that is).
And as for it being the only discordian work of fiction in print, don't worry about that, in five years I'll have a novel out that completely blows the Illuminatus out of the water, but until then, someone should start a magzine that punblishes articles about all the different crazies that make up Discordianism. That would be a pretty efficent and definetly entertaining way to let people see all the formless froms of discordianism.
Also, Davedim, of course it's bullshit.
Whether or not you like RAW (I kinda like him but not quite as much as I used to, he does tend to go on and on...) you still have to acknowledge that, without him (and Shea, I suppose) odds are that none of us would ever have heard about Discordianism in the first place... Illuminatus! is accessible in a way that PD never was. Maybe that's part of the problem, but what would be the point of a movement if it had no members?
Or wait, maybe that's the ultimate movement?
if somebody forced me to read a book, i would read Wilson before most other authors
i agree tho: the lack of fine-tuning and polish in Wilson's literary efforts are a bad example for discordians
sloppiness and disorder is not the same thing
Wilson could have benefitted from the school of half-short-twice-strong
Quote from: LHX on October 29, 2006, 07:22:53 PM
if somebody forced me to read a book, i would read Wilson before most other authors
i agree tho: the lack of fine-tuning and polish in Wilson's literary efforts are a bad example for discordians
sloppiness and disorder is not the same thing
Wilson could have benefitted from the school of half-short-twice-strong
lol, even though I love his work, I have to admit that it took me three tries to read the full illuminatus trilogy.
ba-BUMP
Cain, as long as you're wearing your Pagan Pariah mask, maybe this should go on the blog too? There was a lot of Illuminatus humping in #discord the other day, and I needed to read this to remind myself why nothing in Discordia should be taken as a Sacred Text.
I've read Illuminatus countless times. I own two copies, my own copy and a "lender" copy. I can think of few works of fiction that were more mind-expanding than the first time I read Illuminatus. But I do find it disturbing that many Discordians I've met are interested in the same ten things, and yes, most of that really does boil down to that most of us have read RAW, and many of us treat him like an Authority - or at least let him suggest cool things to get into. Now we've got a shadow of homogeneity in our weird little Discordant subculture.
"If you meet Bob on the road, kill him."
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on March 18, 2008, 03:12:15 PM
"If you meet Bob on the road, kill him."
I've always thought that this was a strong reason behind the RAW-bashing on this site.
I always figured if someone is cool then they're cool.
If some asshole decides to take their word as gospel then they're some asshole.
Doesn't detract from the cool only from the asshole.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on March 18, 2008, 03:12:15 PM
ba-BUMP
Cain, as long as you're wearing your Pagan Pariah mask, maybe this should go on the blog too? There was a lot of Illuminatus humping in #discord the other day, and I needed to read this to remind myself why nothing in Discordia should be taken as a Sacred Text.
I knew I shouldn't have gone to bed early. I could have mocked RAW fanbois.
I'll put it up on the blog in a bit.
in the vein of making blog articles more visually attractive, I suggest the attached image as a header.
also, (and slightly off-topic) doesn't this look like the cover of a Choose Your Own Adventure book?
(http://bp3.blogger.com/_O9lM-JozQlY/Rm8N96FTFiI/AAAAAAAAAFk/f57qMadEevs/s400/illuminatus4.jpg)
[attachment deleted by admin]
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on March 18, 2008, 03:58:13 PM
in the vein of making blog articles more visually attractive, I suggest the attached image as a header.
also, (and slightly off-topic) doesn't this look like the cover of a Choose Your Own Adventure book?
(http://bp3.blogger.com/_O9lM-JozQlY/Rm8N96FTFiI/AAAAAAAAAFk/f57qMadEevs/s400/illuminatus4.jpg)
It does, and that idea has potential for goodness.
I personally like RAW and will play the other side for a minute, don't get mad...
OK, so you wanna know why I don't like RAW? Why I have a tendency to stomp n00bs who mention his name, why I make fun of Illuminatus! And generally act like a jerk towards people who ape his ideas?
Because you imprinted heavily on the "I'm OK, You're Not OK" quadrant? :fnord:
Alright then. I'll go with the aesthetics then go a bit deeper with the other stuff. But first, I really don't like his writing style. When I read something, I don't particularly want to be playing mental mind games with the text, or having to flip over three pages of pretentious imitation Joyce style writings about taking acid. There's being complex due to the subject matter and then there is just being a pain in the ass, which RAW's fiction tends towards.
Illuminatus tends toward that... Schrodinger's Cat does a little (though since it's specifically exploring the idea of a multiverse there's a plausible excuse)... However, Masks of The Illuminati is written like a 'normal' book. The Historical Illuminatus Trilogy also appears as a "normal" example of writing (as does Reality Is What You Can Get Away With). The majority of Bob's writings, though are not fiction and don't have a Joycean feel to them (Cosmic Trigger series, Quantum Psychology, Prometheus Rising, Coincidance, The New Inquisition etc etc etc.) Your characterization of his writing style may be true for one (maybe two) of his books, but I don't think it applies to the 30+ other books he's written.
But the reason I really dislike RAW is he took something that was meant to be, to a degree, indefinable and went and created a whole damn subculture based around it.
Well, no... he wrote a silly work of fiction, designed to make fun of conspiracy theories and utilized a series of prank letters that Omar, Mal and some others were sending around which involved the Illuminati and Discordians fighting over all sorts of zany things. The subculture came later and wasn't intentional. Further, I'd argue that Discordianism in that book is still indefinable... if people stop thinking halfway through the book and conclude they KNOW what's going on, that's their own damn fault.
If you read some of the other stuff by Hill and Thornley, you'll notice they were quite into their Zen. One point that really stuck with Thornley in Zen thought is that naming something essentially destroys it. Once you have a name, you can caricature it, you can define and exclude and you can eventually subvert it. Once something has a definable set of ideas and symbols linked with it, it'll be in Hot Topic next week. And once the Con has its hands on a movement, it ceases to be relevant or dangerous to the prevailing orthodoxy.
So you're saying we should follow Thornley's ideas rather than Bob's? It seems to me that Thornley took the zen ideas into Zenarchy, and Bob went in a different direction. Different directions aren't necessarily wrong... especially in Discordianism.
Now Illuminatus! did contain a lot of things that were only mentioned in passing by Thornley and Hill, yet were definitely in the Principia Discordia. The Illuminati, the fate of Ambrose Bierce and Yog-Sothoth come to mind.
You mean Bob took some Discordian memes and used them, mixing in some new Discordian memes along the way?!?!?!
But now, every aspiring Discordian seems to think they have to be into these sort of things! If you can't jabber on for hours about the mystic import of the number 23 (none), or the majesty of the works of H. P. Lovecraft (relatively mediocre), talk like you've been dropping acid non-stop since your third birthday or act like you're stuck in the 1960s then you aren't doing it right.
As much as I hear this complaint, I find it doesn't really seem true. I mean, sure its true in some sense... some Discordians, particularly new Discordians think that 23 IS magical and that Cthulhu IS Discordian etc. However, mosbunal Discordians I know aren't at all like that... they may occasionally go on a rant about 23 or 5 or Hastur... but they have separate and independent ideas as well. Is there anything wrong with sharing an in-joke among a subculture? What group exists that doesn't have at least some common set of memes?
I wonder if Discordians always spout 23, or if some Discordians are pattern matching in their observations?
RAW, in essence, has created his own counter-orthodoxy within a group that shouldn't stand for any of it.
Well, RAW promoted memes. Some people turned those memes into a counter-orthodoxy. If you are of the opinion that Bob, in real life (or even in most of his work) acts like a OMGZ23PINEALFNORD, then I fear you may have missed most of his life's work. Sure, there are oft repeated memes (his favorite was making Popes)... but in most of his writings there aren't Discordian lamememes, if anything, some of his best Discordian memes have been well hidden from the mainstream (like "Keep the Lasagna Flying").
Now because every basement dwelling sockfucker once played Call of Cthulhu, he thinks that makes him a Discordian.
Well, he was already a Discordian... his only flaw is that he thinks it had something to do with CoC, rather than by virtue of being born a human.
He created a set of interests every Discordian should have and can be identified by, because he created a common reality in Illuminatus! that is probably the single most harmful thing anyone has done to Discordianism since its creation.
He used a bunch of memes, related them to Discordianism and WHAT DO YOU KNOW?!?!?! the memes did exactly what memes do, they stuck in people's minds. If it hadn't been for Illuminatus, the likelihood that the PD 4th, 5th or SJG versions would have been published is near 0. Without those, how many people would be here discussing these concepts... or arguing about the book?
As for the rest... any fool who would have asked Bob for Words of Wisdom, and idiot that called him Wise, or Guru, or acted in any way like a disciple... well I think Bob's favorite term for his response was a "Zen Hotfoot". When you tell some wide eyed follower "You know, a disciple is just an asshole looking for some human to attach itself to", you can't really be blamed for idiots that still clamor for your words of wisdom afterward.
The thing is, in any set of ideas, particularly ones that fill a 'religious' or philosophical sort of slot, there will be idiots. There will be followers. There will be unthinking robots, able to do nothing more than repeat whatever they read, heard or otherwise found wandering around inside their heads. There are Christians that make statements which embarrass other Christians, because the person obviously doesn't "Think for themselves" (or they confuse the accepted orthodoxy). There are philosophers, scientists, and religious people of all creeds that behave just as the Bobbites do. Pagans call them "fluffy", Jehovah's Wittnesses say that they only have the "milk" and have never progressed to the "meat". The thing is, some people are sheep. Anything that would have popularized Discordianism, in any way, would have defined Discordianism for those sheep. In fact, I would argue that there are some people who have defined their Discordianism by this very forum, by its memes, its attitudes and its particular metaphors. That's just how reality works.
Some people don't need to follow, they can chart their own path and for them, The Illuminatus Trilogy may become a starting point for some new ideas. Some people, on the other hand, for some reason... don't think for themselves and for them, what other people have written is all they have in their head. That has nothing to do with the author or the book, it has everything to do with the mind of the individual. I think that some people confuse the symptom and the cause of RAWITES. RAWites were never encouraged or tolerated by RAW, if you couldn't think for yourself, he didn't want much to do with you. Hell, if you didn't argue with him, he'd try to goad you into arguing with him.
No, I can't agree that Bob was bad for Discordianism, I think you've got your wires crossed. Bob wrote about Discordianism, just like we all do. The difference is that his memes were catchy enough that a bunch of people liked and thus use them. It wasn't as though he defined what Discordianism IS, nowhere in any of his work does he even try (with perhaps, the exception of "Think for Yourself, Schmuck!")
In fact, by comparison, I think that I could argue he had (and espoused) far less of an idea about what Discordianism IS than some people on this forum.
But seriously, the only word for some of you people is Bobbies. You're trying to turn this irreligion which has some pretty interesting and insightful ways of looking into the world into a Bob Anton Wilson fan club. Didn't you fuckers learn anything from the example of Jesus? Shit.
Now that statement seems like TROOF to me!
many :mittens: to you, dear sir
However, Masks of The Illuminati is written like a 'normal' book.
Sir, I point you to the third act, where Crowley doses Babcock, as well as all the dreams of Maria and Babcock.
Quote from: LMNO on March 18, 2008, 07:08:34 PM
However, Masks of The Illuminati is written like a 'normal' book.
Sir, I point you to the third act, where Crowley doses Babcock, as well as all the dreams of Maria and Babcock.
Maria's not in Masks of the Illuminati, otherwise I agree. His cut-upping (is that a term) gets tiring. He understands how Finnegan's Wake sounds, but his "joyce" has nothing inside of it.
That drawing of Robert Anton Wilson is by my friend Antony, by the way: www.siteway.com (http://www.siteway.com)
Quote from: LMNO on March 18, 2008, 07:08:34 PM
However, Masks of The Illuminati is written like a 'normal' book.
Sir, I point you to the third act, where Crowley doses Babcock, as well as all the dreams of Maria and Babcock.
So the drug induced scene is written in a bizarre manner... that seems acceptable to me. (and as Hoops said... Maria isn't in Masks).
I find his cut-up stuff a bit overboard occasionally, but it really isn't a mainstay in Masks... its exists in that scene (which I had forgotten) and maybe one or two others, but for the most part, I thought it was a well written book.
Maria's the one with the kid... Am I thinking of the Earth Will Shake?
Quote from: LMNO on March 18, 2008, 07:27:14 PM
Maria's the one with the kid... Am I thinking of the Earth Will Shake?
Yep, she's Sigismundo's wife
No... she's Siggie's True Love.
She married Babccock, AFAIR. He was feeling guilty for being attracted to young boys, and gets drunk on Guinness.
True. And its in The Widow's Son.
A quite excellent book, I might add.
Ther first two really were pretty good.
Then I spent 8 years looking for the third, and as it turns out, it's utter crap.
Ah yes, thats right... Sigi ended up running around with the Indians... its been a few years since I read that series :mullet:
Anyway, my point was that the "Illuminatus" style is not the only style used by RAW, it does make appearances in THIC, but overall that series is written like a series.
I also wish the third book would have been better though and I am sad that he died before finishing the fourth book. I think though that he had gotten a lotof the ideas he wanted to explore covered in the first two and just had way too much of a twisted plot that kept getting in the way of ending the book. :lulz: I know three people that were told the contents of the fourth book, sadly, I wasn't one of them... even though I tried bribing with magic brownies :(
I may be (more or less) a n00b here, but I still feel like offering an opinion in a thread over a year old.
It was RAW that first exposed me to Discordianism. I do think that the PD is superior, but without the Illuminatus! Trilogy I would have never known of it. I think his trilogy does do a good job of exposing Discordian ideas to other people, but since it is about the only mainstream work about Discordianism there will be people who miss the point of Discordianism. I do agree that Lovecraft was a mediocre writer (his stuff bores the shit out of me), the number 23 is minor at best, and that drug use isn't required to be Discordian. And, I do dislike that there are people who basically replace one form of dogma with RAW's ideas. But, that's fanboys (and fangirls) for you, there will always be people who feel the need to conform. I can't blame RAW that some people don't get it. And, it is regrettable that his work has overshadowed the PD and there is no competing Discordian work.
Can I be the first to say that I'm much gladder if people take RAW's views as dogma than if they take almost any other world-view as dogma?
I think either a person goes for dogma or they don't. The subject matter is not to blame. When a person is starving for Truth, they can bite almost anything (even Color-Theory Situationalism (http://www.cwyohba.org/noexit//tccverb24pmk.jpg) :P) and hang on to it like their life depends on it. And most people could do much, much worse than RAWism.
That said, when people Think For Themselves it's even better. But you can't blame a guy for writing something just because there are automatons in the world looking for dogma.
:mittens:
So, if they're going to be sheep, they might as well be Black Sheep?
Quote from: LMNO on March 19, 2008, 02:46:15 PM
So, if they're going to be sheep, they might as well be Black Sheep?
More like, if they're going to be sheep, it's not really the shepherds fault.
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 19, 2008, 04:18:50 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 19, 2008, 02:46:15 PM
So, if they're going to be sheep, they might as well be Black Sheep?
More like, if they're going to be sheep, it's not really the shepherds fault.
:mittens:
MEME BOMB!
Also, :potd:
So if the shepherd is trying to help people stop being sheep, and ends up only creating sheep with edgier catchphrases and better camoflage, then he or she is blameless?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
"You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves?"
"Seems to be a major human activity, yes."
I too can quote tangenitally related sentences.
However, I like to do my own thinking.
Heh.
I done been Zanged.
Well I've decided since no-one else actually wants to engage my points but instead respond to what they wish I wrote, I will ignore them and instead be a snarky fuckwit until the point someone raises a point I bought up or this thread dies.
Well, as far as I know, RAW himself continually said that he didn't want to be a guru. What more could he have done?
Hell, Crowley did his best to be reviled so no one would hold him up as a guru*, and still people created a cult around him.
*I'm guessing he also did it because he thought it was funny.
That was incidental to my whole point.
Dweeb.
Well, I do have to agree with most of what you say, Cain. New Discordians do focus on RAW more then they should--I know I did--and seem to make him the only thing they know about Discordia. I don't know if this is because they read up on him and his works, then never think to expand their thoughts (which is something I think RAW would disapprove of), or, they think because there is a lot more of him published. Meaning, of course, they think because he's published, he's the one who knows the most. If only they'd look at the homemade stuff, like the Book of Eris and Apocrypha Discordia, they'd start thinking.
The only thing I disagree with you, Cain, is that I enjoy RAW's writing style. 'Tis all.
First, I do like his writing style. Schrodinger's Cat is the first work by him I read, and fell in love. It was like Vonnegut but even snarkier, and mysterious.
Second, if you don't want to have to think when reading fiction that's fine, and there are many books out there which will fulfill that desire. Illuminatus is hard to read, but I don't think its because it was intentionally supposed to be difficult. The first 30 pages or so are all over the place, but it gets a rhythm going after that, and keeps up with it. And, despite popular opinion there isn't really any Joycean text in Illuminatus.
Third, RAW and Shea wrote a lot about Yog Sothoth in Illuminatus, but very little about Cthulhu, which seems to be most written about by Discordians.
Fourth, RAW didn't write the book by himself.
Fifth, there are going to be sheep and idiots in any movement, no matter what the point of the movement is, why should Discordianism be any different?
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 06:08:33 PM
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Incidental to my main point.
Dude: that's fuckin rude.
I'm done with this conversation.
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:02:08 PM
despite popular opinion there isn't really any Joycean text in Illuminatus.
NO— because I'd be a fool to think miracles can occur in this world before somebody pays the rent and the taxes and shows that their papers are in order and the people who are running it can always tell you your papers are not in order No because there are no magicians and even Hagbard is mostly a fraud and a con man even if he means well No because I'm not Pope Joan if there ever was a Pope Joan No because like the song says I'm not a queen I'm a woman and the wrong color woman to boot No because there will be rivers of blood and the earth will be shaken before we can overturn Boss Charlie because it isn't a simple one-night symbolic Armageddon like Hagbard fooled them all into thinking No because Hagbard is some kind of magician and put us all on his own trip for a while but the real world isn't a trip it's a bummer No because the lovers don't live happily ever after what happens is that they get married and get into debt and live in slavery ever after and I've got to find something better than that No because none of us are driving the car it's the car that's driving us No because it's like that old joke "Balls" said the queen "if I had them I'd be king" and "Nuts" said the prince "I've got them and I'm not king" and "Crap" said the king and thirty thousand royal subjects squatted and strained for in those days the king's word was law Hagbard would call it anality and sexism and ageism but it just comes down to the women and children getting all the crap right in the face and a few males owning everything the truth is all in the old jokes especially the bad jokes I'm still tripping but this is true they can always say your papers are not in order No because sometimes you've got to be a hermit and then come back later when you're together No because the wheel keeps spinning and doesn't give a fuck if there's going to be any change it's got to be that some human being somewhere does give a fuck No because I've never found a way to shut Simon's mouth and make him listen No because Jesus Christ was a black man and they've even lied about that he was another black man they killed and they won't admit it No because death is the currency in every empire Roman or American or any other all empires are the same Death is always the argument they use No because the whole world can go to the Devil and I'm taking care of Mary Lou No because look at that professor they killed at the UN building and none of them arrested yet No because there's a perpetual motion machine inside me and I'm learning to let it run No because I'll put a curse on all of them I'll burn them I'll condemn them I'll have the world No because look what happened to Daddy and Mommy.
CF:
"...I was a Flower of the mountain yes when I put the rose in my hair like the Andalusian girls used or shall I wear a red yes and how he kissed me under the Moorish wall and I thought well as well him as another and then I asked him with my eyes to ask again yes and then he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes. "
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PM
Dude: that's fuckin rude.
I'm done with this conversation.
Yeah? We'll I'll remember that next time you complain someone is ignoring the point you are making entirely and then the next person goes on to do the exact same thing.
Fucktard. I dont have to put up with that sort of shit from you, or anyone else. Go run off, because I refuse to play the game the way you want me to.
Is this your main point?
QuoteBut the reason I really dislike RAW is he took something that was meant to be, to a degree, indefinable and went and created a whole damn subculture based around it.
If I have to tell you, whats the point? I may as well never fucking bother writing if I have to spell every single goddamn thing out, and then take a ton of shit anyway from people who either had a knee jerk reaction to their idol being attacked or otherwise are incapable of reading and thinking at the same time.
I didn't really want to post a response if you were gonna do the "incidental" thing again.
Oh well.
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 06:25:59 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PM
Dude: that's fuckin rude.
I'm done with this conversation.
Yeah? We'll I'll remember that next time you complain someone is ignoring the point you are making entirely and then the next person goes on to do the exact same thing.
Fucktard. I dont have to put up with that sort of shit from you, or anyone else. Go run off, because I refuse to play the game the way you want me to.
Personally, I was just agreeing with you. It would of have been a kind of silly post for me to just have said, "Oh, yeah."
Quote from: K-Scar on March 19, 2008, 06:50:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 06:25:59 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PM
Dude: that's fuckin rude.
I'm done with this conversation.
Yeah? We'll I'll remember that next time you complain someone is ignoring the point you are making entirely and then the next person goes on to do the exact same thing.
Fucktard. I dont have to put up with that sort of shit from you, or anyone else. Go run off, because I refuse to play the game the way you want me to.
Personally, I was just agreeing with you. It would of have been a kind of silly post for me to just have said, "Oh, yeah."
Apologies, I meant "the one after the next".
No, my mistake. I tend to take things personally. But let's not turn this into an apology thread.
I will now leave this conversation, so that other's may continue to annoy you.
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2006, 03:18:47 PM
(Yes, from the title you have probably guessed I am getting my Nietzsche on)
OK, so you wanna know why I don't like RAW? Why I have a tendency to stomp n00bs who mention his name, why I make fun of Illuminatus! And generally act like a jerk towards people who ape his ideas?
Alright then. I'll go with the aesthetics then go a bit deeper with the other stuff. But first, I really don't like his writing style. When I read something, I don't particularly want to be playing mental mind games with the text, or having to flip over three pages of pretentious imitation Joyce style writings about taking acid. There's being complex due to the subject matter and then there is just being a pain in the ass, which RAW's fiction tends towards.
But the reason I really dislike RAW is he took something that was meant to be, to a degree, indefinable and went and created a whole damn subculture based around it. If you read some of the other stuff by Hill and Thornley, you'll notice they were quite into their Zen. One point that really stuck with Thornley in Zen thought is that naming something essentially destroys it. Once you have a name, you can caricature it, you can define and exclude and you can eventually subvert it. Once something has a definable set of ideas and symbols linked with it, it'll be in Hot Topic next week. And once the Con has its hands on a movement, it ceases to be relevant or dangerous to the prevailing orthodoxy.
Now Illuminatus! did contain a lot of things that were only mentioned in passing by Thornley and Hill, yet were definitely in the Principia Discordia. The Illuminati, the fate of Ambrose Bierce and Yog-Sothoth come to mind.
But now, every aspiring Discordian seems to think they have to be into these sort of things! If you can't jabber on for hours about the mystic import of the number 23 (none), or the majesty of the works of H. P. Lovecraft (relatively mediocre), talk like you've been dropping acid non-stop since your third birthday or act like you're stuck in the 1960s then you aren't doing it right.
RAW, in essence, has created his own counter-orthodoxy within a group that shouldn't stand for any of it. Now because every basement dwelling sockfucker once played Call of Cthulhu, he thinks that makes him a Discordian. He created a set of interests every Discordian should have and can be identified by, because he created a common reality in Illuminatus! that is probably the single most harmful thing anyone has done to Discordianism since its creation. Drawing people into a common reality stifles the creative processes and growth of group, because everyone comes to the table with their ideas pre-defined for them. Thats one of the many reasons I am glad I discovered Discordianism in general and PrincipiaDiscordia.com in particular long before I read any RAW.
There is also the matter of his status. I remember a ,ÄúDiscordian,Äù coming onto this here board asking for ,Äúwords of wisdom,Äù from one of the Discordian founders. Create your own damn words of wisdom! Shit, didn't any of that book actually sink into your skulls? You are your own spiritual authority. You can steal as many ideas as you can get away with, but for the love of sweet Baby Jeebus stop looking to others for your own development, you fucking Cabbages! Thats what created this mess in the first place, people constantly looking to others for orders instead of doing their own thing. How aneristic. And RAW is one of the people most of this sort of Cabbage look to for leadership.
Now, I don't hold this against RAW personally. Going by his personality, he is probably just as tired of people sucking up to him as I am. I'm sure he didn't intend to be become the cult figure he did, which is what makes it all the more tragic. I'm almost certain he didn't intend for the book to be as popular as it was. Personally, he seems a nice guy who has done a lot of interesting things, written some interesting books (Prometheus Rising is fascinating, its hard to deny, as well as his non-fictional work on conspiracies) and is much smarter in a lot more fields than I could be.
But seriously, the only word for some of you people is Bobbies. You're trying to turn this irreligion which has some pretty interesting and insightful ways of looking into the world into a Bob Anton Wilson fan club. Didn't you fuckers learn anything from the example of Jesus? Shit.
After reading this again I've come to the conclusion that there is no response that you would have given reasonable arguments toward, clearly you are blowing out of a megaphone in this rant, not inviting discussion.
It also seems you are in the middle of one of your quarterly nutcase sessions when you fly off the handle with anyone who dares to disagree with you, or not understand your oh-so-well-thought-out point. How can anyone have the temerity to disagree with YUO?? You're Cain, FFS!
Fuck off and die.
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 07:02:45 PM
After reading this again I've come to the conclusion that there is no response that you would have given reasonable arguments toward, clearly you are blowing out of a megaphone in this rant, not inviting discussion.
It also seems you are in the middle of one of your quarterly nutcase sessions when you fly off the handle with anyone who dares to disagree with you, or not understand your oh-so-well-thought-out point. How can anyone have the temerity to disagree with YUO?? You're Cain, FFS!
Fuck off and die.
:lulz:
Thanks for proving my point Hoopla.
Now go die in a fire or something. I'd hate for you to get even more upset at your inability to see a point dangled right in front of your face, or more criticism of your hero, so ending it now might be the best way for this to go.
And thank you also for proving MY point. :lulz:
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 07:22:37 PM
And thank you also for proving MY point. :lulz:
Yes, of course. Me getting annoyed that you decide to answer what you want instead of the main point of the debate, and then you going ad hominem when called on it proves your point
entirely.
Why are you so blatantly dishonest, Hoopla?
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PMI'm done with this conversation.
Why are you so blatantly dishonest, Hoopla?
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 07:25:28 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 07:22:37 PM
Yes, of course. Me getting annoyed that you decide to answer what you want instead of the main point of the debate, and then you going ad hominem when called on it proves your point entirely.
You have no point, which was MY point. :lulz:
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PMI'm done with this conversation.
Why are you so blatantly dishonest, Hoopla?
I should have been more clear, and stated explicitly that I was finished trying to discuss your points with you like a civilized person.
On the other hand, I'll still poke you with a stick until the cows come home.
Oh, so you're a mindreader now too, Hoopla? Did you use mahadqickque to tell what I was thinking, or do you have another method? Strange, that you can apparently read my mind, yet not pick out the point behind my post.
You're so deliciously dishonest, I'm glad you're illustrating this for everyone to see.
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 07:40:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2008, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on March 19, 2008, 06:09:58 PMI'm done with this conversation.
Why are you so blatantly dishonest, Hoopla?
I should have been more clear, and stated explicitly that I was finished trying to discuss your points with you like a civilized person.
On the other hand, I'll still poke you with a stick until the cows come home.
Yes, you're sure poking me Hoopla. You're liek some sort of sooper-troll or something.
And we get another illustration of your revisionism and dishonesty into the bargain.
I can see those of you lurking, by the way. Including the usual "lets have a go at Cain when someone else does" crowd.
Don't disappoint me now.
I was under the impression I was responding to your points, since you made several in your post, but clearly none of those points were the REAL point, so I'm obviously too stupid to discuss it with you Cain.
I was also under the impression that you and I were friends, which -to me- means that if I fail to understand your point (because I'm too stupid, recall) I might warrant the patience to help me realize it, but cleary (hope I'm not trying to use my mahaghjiqual mind-reading powers here) I am on approximately the same level as the average TCC poster, which is nice to know, even if it is after the fact.
I actually find it frightening that you become this ballistic this fast, over nothing really, I mean its a fucking discussion on a message board . . . I discuss things with people on here for enjoyment, not to be bashed over the head for "NOT GETTING IT". Sorry.
But hey, what do you care? Right?
I first read this thread after it was bumped. Yesterday or today, whatever. I just skimmed it to see if I had missed something the first time around.
I'm not sure what your "Real Point" is. I'm even less sure why you started ranting about how we don't understand you. Frankly, it seems a little infantile.
Having read the opening post twice, I still don't see how the discussion of the last three pages has failed to be relevant. Please, please clarify which point you wanted us to debate. At least for those, like myself, too stupid to figure this out on our own.
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2006, 03:18:47 PM
But the reason I really dislike RAW is he took something that was meant to be, to a degree, indefinable and went and created a whole damn subculture based around it. If you read some of the other stuff by Hill and Thornley, you'll notice they were quite into their Zen. One point that really stuck with Thornley in Zen thought is that naming something essentially destroys it. Once you have a name, you can caricature it, you can define and exclude and you can eventually subvert it. Once something has a definable set of ideas and symbols linked with it, it'll be in Hot Topic next week. And once the Con has its hands on a movement, it ceases to be relevant or dangerous to the prevailing orthodoxy.
Is this TEH POINT that us fuckwits keep missing? Or did you use your super-secret literati powers to disguise TEH POINT in multiple layers of meaning behind what is, essentially, a statement of opinion?
Nice. I get attacked and misrepresented, so I'm "infantile". No-one else mind, not least the people who went out of their to attack and misrepresent me. You misinterpret my rant, treat me like an idiot and then expect me to play nice...and then when I don't, I get slapped down for it. Real smooth, classy even.
I didn't say you're infantile. I said your behavior in this thread seemed infantile.
I was expecting there to be some plan behind it, or some personal reasons involved (or other reasons I am not privy to).
At any rate, I didn't mean to attack you. I respect you tremendously.
I guess what I don't understand is who this post was referring to exactly? I don't see a lot of RAW worship on this board.
I like RAW, I admit that, but I don't think I'm a Bobbie. I take what I like from RAW, and ignore a hell of a lot of it too, as I would with anyone else I like. I do consider myself my own spiritual authority, and I don't think I really parrot a lot of shit from the PD; yes, some of it, but again, I use what I like and discard what I don't like.
Jesus, maybe I should throw away the copy of the Illuminati trilogy I just bought and remain in blissful ignorance and unable to participate in discussions like this one. I don't understand anything Cain said, which is apparently a good thing.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
I have no idea how this thread imploded, but I'm claiming victory.
Quote from: Nigel on March 19, 2008, 11:26:51 PM
Jesus, maybe I should throw away the copy of the Illuminati trilogy I just bought and remain in blissful ignorance and unable to participate in discussions like this one. I don't understand anything Cain said, which is apparently a good thing.
Ha ha. I haven't read it either.
SOLIDARITY IN IGNORANCE!
:banana:
Quote from: Nigel on March 19, 2008, 11:26:51 PM
Jesus, maybe I should throw away the copy of the Illuminati trilogy I just bought and remain in blissful ignorance and unable to participate in discussions like this one. I don't understand anything Cain said, which is apparently a good thing.
A lot of what is said in the illuminatus is excellent. Its the sensationalist shit that people latch onto thats the problem.
It is however a really good read with some cool ideas, and a great yarn of what discordianism was to the two bobs.
Not to put words in cains mouth but I think: Its giving out about meme essentially.... Rightly so.
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m284/jsreynoldz/drama.jpg)
:|
In almost-related news, the bassist for the empties expressed surprise I never heard of, and started babbling on about, the Illuminatus! card game. I immediately thought of this thread.
Then, I thought: Wait a second. RAW wrote the I3!, and may have had a hand in PD but the rest of his stuff doesn't always name-check Discordia. It's more of the "Guerilla Ontology" shite he's always on about.
The person who grabbed Discordia, packaged it, and pushed it into the mainstream is STEVE JACKSON. He's the one who decided to make a buck off it, he's the one who keeps publishing crap copies of the PD, and the one who comes up with new ways to exploit the memes.
Anyway, I doubt that addresses the point of the OP, so I apologize. Just wanted to get that off my chest.
Cain, I thought you were going to keep responding idiocy until someone discovered your "point", or the thread died?
Why are you so blatantly dishonest?
:deadhorse:
Quote from: Hoopla on March 20, 2008, 12:56:53 PM
Cain, I thought you were going to keep responding idiocy until someone discovered your "point", or the thread died?
Why are you so blatantly dishonest?
I never said
when I was going to do it. I have paper to read, people to see and shopping to do.
Why do you feel the need to compulsively lie?
What was my lie this time, oh brilliant one?
I'm still confused. What did we miss? Why are Cain and Hoopla beating on each other.
You two are being...
OUTLANDISH!!!
Srsly. It's just the internet afterall.
I had a dream last night that someone published a pocket-sized Principia Discordia New Testament, and it was all rewritten in the style of bible verses, with no pictures or anything. It made absolutely no sense.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 20, 2008, 05:19:15 PM
I'm still confused. What did we miss? Why are Cain and Hoopla beating on each other.
You two are being...
OUTLANDISH!!!
apparently their is some hidden message to cains post, and hoopla doesn't like it.
I simply didn't like being treated in what I perceived to be a unnecessarily rude manner by someone I consider a friend, simply because I didn't understand what something meant. I couldn't care less if someone else likes or dislikes RAW, I was arguing the points in the OP because that's what we do here, not out of true defense of RAW, or an attempt to "attack" Cain.
Now, THIS post is officially the last time I am posting in this thread, and that's a promise.
you are both adults, you are right to argue it. please dont let this become a tiff.
You know, I understand (I think) Cain's frustration with some Discordians and I can see how he might link that activity to RAW. I personally, disagree that anyone's actions should be blamed on anyone but themselves (be they '23' throwers or puppy throwers)... but that doesn't mean that Cain doesn't have several good points in his contra.
There are fans of Robert Anton Wilson that hold him as a Guru, a Hero, a Prophet and The Discordian. Some of those fans, think that quoting Bob is thinking for oneself, or that Bob's favorite maxims are The Rules of Discordia (like "If you can't be kind, at least be courteous"). Sure, some people are unwilling to admit that TIT has some iffy writing and some weird styles... personally, I love the book and thoroughly enjoyed being forced to learn a new pattern of reading. I mean, in the end, that, more than being Joycean or cut-up, was the Bob's reason for writing in the manner they did. They hoped to follow a non-standard pattern, to see if people's brains would adopt the new pattern. TIT is a beautiful, literal, mindfuck, in my opinion. However, that doesn't make it a must read for Discordians, it doesn't mean that every Discordian should love it or that we should all eternally spout memes culled from Bob's Best Known Tome. Hell, Bob didn't even continue to spout those memes alone, his writing remained progressive and he didn't stick with OMGZ23PINEALFNORD... in fact, in some of his last works, there's not much inane Discordian silliness at all. Tales of the Tribe (Email To The Universe) covers some fantastic ground, Coincidance also displays some extremely thoughtful essays which don't simply repeat old Illuminatus memes.
I think that there may be several issues at play. First and foremost, as Bob always hated and feared, some Discordians hold him up as God. This is not only bad, its stupid and a direct opposite of everything Bob tried to encourage in people's brains. I have seen him rip into people that treated him like a prophet or teacher or whatever. I don't blame him for the faults of other hairless monkeys (but I can understand if some people do). The second issue is that as Discordians, we often work very hard to throw down any icon we find... and Bob, Fnord, Pineal, 23 and TIT are all icons in some sense... of course, throwing down all icons may be no better than worshiping all icons... I dunno. Finally, I think that some people may only have some small exposure to RAW, through TIT and RAWITES and base their opinion off of that alone.
I don't know Cain's particular reasons for holding the opinion that he does, but I understand why some Discordians share (at least) his sentiment, if not the reasons. I think this would be a great topic for debate and discussion... hell if the old man were alive, he'd think it was a great topic for discussion as well :gheyforum: .
Cain, I don't know why you've taken offense or become defensive or whatever... but I think either your post didn't clearly state your argument, or somehow we've all misread what you intended to say. Perhaps you could explain a little more so that we could correct this misunderstanding, rather than you and Hoops beating each other with pickled herring, which although amusing for all of us... isn't nearly as interesting as a dissection of the useful and not useful contributions of older Discordians.
Can we call a truce and get back to the topic please?
Intellectually speaking it seems ever so stupid to blame an author for the idiocy of that person's self proclaimed followers. But that has never led anybody to wash their hands off praise received for the greatness they have inspired in others. See what I mean?
Of course, the consequence of that view is regarding everybody as responsible for every result of all of their actions. That sounds a little Kantian in its rigidity but we would not want personal rejection of a philosopher stand in our way, would we? Ahem. What I meant was that accepting responsibility only when it suits you kind of fucks the concept.
I got about halfway through the Illuminatus! trilogy in the yurt.
I'm amused. I had no idea how many memes on this board came from that book... so I can sort of see the reasons for some of Cain's dislike of that. I mean, we're Discordians, so we should be coming up with our own shtick, right? On the other hand, it gives new people something comforting to latch onto until they acclimate.
As has been pointed out to me in the past, I'm not sure pairing Discordian with "should" is safe ground to tread.
I've never read the trilogy myself, and I have no interest in it, but I wouldn't begrudge someone else who does. It's not an either/or proposition here. One can look to the past and the future simultaneously. Sharing stories of old is important to any culture, and I think that can pertain to internet cultures as well. I mean, there has to be some kind of bedrock and foundation that loosely unites us, right? Cause generally, in just about every other way, we all seem to be very, very different people.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 26, 2008, 01:20:52 PM
As has been pointed out to me in the past, I'm not sure pairing Discordian with "should" is safe ground to tread.
Meh. "Should be coming up with our own ideas, right?"
Interpret as you wish.
:argh!:
Damn now I'm going to have to go buy the fucking thing to have an opinion....
fuckfuckfuckshitfuckfuckfuckdamnfuckfuckfuck
Quote from: Khara on March 26, 2008, 09:00:08 PM
:argh!:
fuckfuckfuckshitfuckfuckfuckdamnfuckfuckfuck
Actually, that was quite accurate.
I just finished reading I!3 and started on Prometheus Rising, and I'm noticing a very peculiar thing: something in my mind has learned to outright refuse to believe anything this man writes. On the one hand it's cool because I find myself actually considering every thing he mentions and considering the possibility that the sources he mentions don't exists... On the other hand it's annoying because I can't take anything seriously.
But I think that some experiment in Illuminatus really worked for me.
the one exercise in prometheus rising where you pretend to be a nazi (among other things) for three minutes can be fun--until mom grounds ya for invading her liquor cabinets.
Quote from: burnstoupee on April 01, 2008, 10:04:02 PM
the one exercise in prometheus rising where you pretend to be a nazi (among other things) for three minutes can be fun--until mom grounds ya for invading her liquor cabinets.
And killing all the gypsies camping in the backyard.
hitler read prometheus rising and look what happened!
Quote from: st.verbatim on April 01, 2008, 09:58:55 PM
I just finished reading I!3 and started on Prometheus Rising, and I'm noticing a very peculiar thing: something in my mind has learned to outright refuse to believe anything this man writes. On the one hand it's cool because I find myself actually considering every thing he mentions and considering the possibility that the sources he mentions don't exists... On the other hand it's annoying because I can't take anything seriously.
But I think that some experiment in Illuminatus really worked for me.
I think RAW would
love the fact you don't trust him-- but do the experiments anyway.
Quote from: st.verbatim on April 01, 2008, 09:58:55 PM
I just finished reading I!3 and started on Prometheus Rising, and I'm noticing a very peculiar thing: something in my mind has learned to outright refuse to believe anything this man writes. On the one hand it's cool because I find myself actually considering every thing he mentions and considering the possibility that the sources he mentions don't exists... On the other hand it's annoying because I can't take anything seriously.
But I think that some experiment in Illuminatus really worked for me.
The fact that you don't believe him is a good start. You should question his sources.
That's the point, you should feel the same way about every other author.Illuminatus is intentionally absurd. Prometheus Rising, Cosmic Trigger etc are less so, but RAW's intent is to force you to question him... and everything else.
Don't Believe... Think For Yourself, Schmuck! ;-)
I know I'm a little late but.....
Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2006, 03:18:47 PM
or the majesty of the works of H. P. Lovecraft (relatively mediocre)
....................JIHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!!!!!!!!!!
:argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!:
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 02, 2008, 05:07:41 PM
Quote from: st.verbatim on April 01, 2008, 09:58:55 PM
I just finished reading I!3 and started on Prometheus Rising, and I'm noticing a very peculiar thing: something in my mind has learned to outright refuse to believe anything this man writes. On the one hand it's cool because I find myself actually considering every thing he mentions and considering the possibility that the sources he mentions don't exists... On the other hand it's annoying because I can't take anything seriously.
But I think that some experiment in Illuminatus really worked for me.
The fact that you don't believe him is a good start. You should question his sources. That's the point, you should feel the same way about every other author.
Illuminatus is intentionally absurd. Prometheus Rising, Cosmic Trigger etc are less so, but RAW's intent is to force you to question him... and everything else.
Don't Believe... Think For Yourself, Schmuck! ;-)
Quick question, are the books Prometheus Rising and Cosmic Trigger worthwhile to read? I ask because I already have a list of books I want/have to read and I would rather not add more to it for no good reason.
I'm reading Prometheus Rising right now and it's excellent, definitely recommended. Very interesting model of the mind, with practical exercizes and comparisons to other psychological models.
it's also a heap of steaming shit in some places. but i still recommend it, it's got one of the most clear explanations of the 8-circuit model of consciousness i've read so far.
Quote from: Vene on April 09, 2008, 05:03:47 AM
Quick question, are the books Prometheus Rising and Cosmic Trigger worthwhile to read? I ask because I already have a list of books I want/have to read and I would rather not add more to it for no good reason.
Yes, and yes.
:argh!: Damn you! Now I've added them to my mental list.
Quote from: Vene on April 09, 2008, 05:03:47 AMQuick question, are the books Prometheus Rising and Cosmic Trigger worthwhile to read? I ask because I already have a list of books I want/have to read and I would rather not add more to it for no good reason.
If you want to know how Mr. Spock connects with the Illuminati, or be able to find quarters on the street, yes.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 10, 2008, 04:16:21 PM
Mr. Spock connects with the Illuminati
AND Peyote!
Yeah, but thats obvious.
Learning how to find quarters was useful. Especially when modified into learning how to find 5€ bills.
the day i tried it, i lost 50ct in a battle with a cigarette machine. i have found some money in the mean time, but as far as i've been keeping count i'm still 5cts short.
Strangely, all I've ever found was homeless people.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 11, 2008, 12:27:29 PM
Strangely, all I've ever found was homeless people.
You need to hold them up by the feet and shake vigorously.
There's quarters I tell you!
I'm in the middle of the quarter exercise, and I'm thinking it might boost my chances if I widen the scope to include nickels and dimes.
Cainad,
Impatient
Quote from: Cainad on April 11, 2008, 06:15:01 PM
I'm in the middle of the quarter exercise, and I'm thinking it might boost my chances if I widen the scope to include nickels and dimes.
Cainad,
Impatient
In my experience it decreased the effectiveness. I've come to consider the Quarter exercise as a 'pattern matching' exercise... that is, if we concentrate on pattern X regularly, our brains seem more likely pick up on that pattern when its noticed. Adding lots of patterns, in my case at least, seemed to dilute the experience.
Quote from: Cainad on April 11, 2008, 06:15:01 PM
I'm in the middle of the quarter exercise, and I'm thinking it might boost my chances if I widen the scope to include nickels and dimes.
Cainad,
Impatient
Change it to the number 23 then... you'll find them.
Meh, I tried that. Had some fun, then got bored.
Looking for 23's does not get me moneys.
Quote from: Cainad on April 11, 2008, 06:52:31 PM
Meh, I tried that. Had some fun, then got bored.
Looking for 23's does not get me moneys.
I wouldn't rely on the quarter experiment for teh monies. I got lucky because I was on OSU campus a lot and apparently students have holes in their pockets. If you're not in an area where people drop quarters... I will be very surprised and somewhat excited if you find lots ;-)
by the way, I read Prometheus Rising about a year ago
and last week, for the first time since I've read it - found a quarter on the ground.
BOUT FUCKING TIME, RAW!
i had to modify it to a 20 eurocent coin, because we dont have quarters anymore.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 11, 2008, 07:02:23 PM
by the way, I read Prometheus Rising about a year ago
and last week, for the first time since I've read it - found a quarter on the ground.
BOUT FUCKING TIME, RAW!
I had a lot of good luck about 5 years ago and less luck the times I've tried it since them.
I wonder if quarters are being used less than before and thus making them less likely to show up on the ground?
NO ITS BECUZ MADGJEEK IZ LEAVING TEH WORLDZ!
Sign of the Dimes.
Ohhhh RHWN coining a new phrase...
It's mint!
Quote from: LMNO on April 11, 2008, 08:50:24 PM
NO ITS BECUZ MADGJEEK IZ LEAVING TEH WORLDZ!
that made me spew a gorgeous display of lailaise. :lulz:
How a book affects somebody or something is anybody's fault but the author's. I am entirely capable of reading something and disagreeing with it; even if only part of it. I mostly like Mr. Wilson because he stated many things I already agreed with before I read it. If you read something and its all new, and you believe it, then you're just gullable. Really, peoples reactions to something (whether its genuine or crap) is more or less a schmuck filter. Cause and effect. The cause is never bad, only the effect. Don't shift the blame.
.. and reading things that merely confirm your beliefs makes you .. a what? :)
The cause is never bad, only the effect?
That sounds eerily close to "the ends justify the means".
Also, what 000 said. You've got to expose yourself to new ideas, check them against your own, and compensate for any disagreements. The cool thing about books is that one person's words can influence as many people who read it, and as many people who they talk to, by extension. There can't be an ideosphere worth noticing without books and the role they play in our thoughts.
My point is that just because you disagree with books, doesn't mean reality does.
everyone is a fanboy, everyone has an ego (bob did)
though if he werent to make the lovecraft , and yog sogoth and such reference then what would he write?
subcultures happen
i've never done the discordian things or w/v except the stuff i did before i knew about this
i think illuminatis! is a great great story, one of the coolest. i dont think it has much to do with discordian other than being an example. i dont even know what discordianism is, i dont give a shit
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 11, 2008, 08:48:47 PM
I had a lot of good luck about 5 years ago and less luck the times I've tried it since them.
I wonder if quarters are being used less than before and thus making them less likely to show up on the ground?
Maybe more people have read Prometheus Rising and are looking for quarters, making it less likely to find them. :sad:
Quote from: Xooxe on May 06, 2008, 03:26:50 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 11, 2008, 08:48:47 PM
I had a lot of good luck about 5 years ago and less luck the times I've tried it since them.
I wonder if quarters are being used less than before and thus making them less likely to show up on the ground?
Maybe more people have read Prometheus Rising and are looking for quarters, making it less likely to find them. :sad:
:lol: