Sigil thread

[AFK]

TGRR just took the sentiment right out of my brain.  I was going to say, why not just tie a string around your finger?

[LMNO]

If a sigil is a "reminder" when you see it, then by definition it didn't work, as you just said you're "not supposed to consciously remember" what it represented.


MAGICK FAIL.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

If a sigil is a "reminder" when you see it, then by definition it didn't work, as you just said you're "not supposed to consciously remember" what it represented.


MAGICK FAIL.

Huh?

Oh... I reread what I wrote, maybe it was unclear. During the ritual, when you're doing the "slight of mind" you don't want to consciously be thinking about the goal. After its embedded, it doesn't matter. The "don't remember it" is just part of the process to get it past the psychic censor (the bit of your brain that says "Hey, all of this is bullshit").

I usually just load a reminder message into my cell phone.

Well then you should do that, if it works for you.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

totally...hence the irritating commercials over and over and over again flashing their corporate identities over and over and over again.

This is a good example of why the whole "don't remember what it's about" thing in sigil magic is a suggestion rather than a rule. Corporations don't forget what their logos are supposed to do, and it's far from obscure to the people being bombarded with them.

Sigils have intent. The rationale (typically) is that you might fixate on the subject conciously -- imagine thinking "omg this damned sigil thing isn't working what am I doing wrong omg omg" in a loop for the whole time -- and so avoiding that is going to be helpful. If you can avoid that (Crowley called that "chronzon 333" -- Mr Mack called it "Bobby" I think -- either way it's annoying) then you are more likely to get shit done, rather than worry about whether or not the ritual you are doing to try to get it done is working.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Sigils have intent.

Sigils have stupid squiggly lines that don't mean anything.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Sigils have intent.

Sigils have stupid squiggly lines that don't mean anything.

Just like your mom.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Sigils have intent.

Sigils have stupid squiggly lines that don't mean anything.

Just like your mom.

Oh, burn

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Sigils have intent.

Sigils have stupid squiggly lines that don't mean anything.

Just like your mom.

Varicose veins?

[Bu🤠ns]

totally...hence the irritating commercials over and over and over again flashing their corporate identities over and over and over again.

This is a good example of why the whole "don't remember what it's about" thing in sigil magic is a suggestion rather than a rule. Corporations don't forget what their logos are supposed to do, and it's far from obscure to the people being bombarded with them.

Sigils have intent. The rationale (typically) is that you might fixate on the subject conciously -- imagine thinking "omg this damned sigil thing isn't working what am I doing wrong omg omg" in a loop for the whole time -- and so avoiding that is going to be helpful. If you can avoid that (Crowley called that "chronzon 333" -- Mr Mack called it "Bobby" I think -- either way it's annoying) then you are more likely to get shit done, rather than worry about whether or not the ritual you are doing to try to get it done is working.

I thought that the logo was to get the consumer familiar with the product so that when they see the image they'll associate it in terms of the emotion the commercial was trying to convey.  That's the subconscious message planted in a logo not the logo itself.  This way they choose the familiar product over the less familiar product. The logo is the vehicle not the message.

Insurance companies thrive off of fear, right, so that's the intent when you see allstate or progressive.  "THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT" etc etc,blah blah blah. The narrative is complete when you sign up.

Pepsi and Coke are interesting because their constant play off each other seems to have almost merged their corporate identities.  IOW If you see pepsi you see coke also. If you see coke you think pepsi also.  

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

I thought that the logo was to get the consumer familiar with the product so that when they see the image they'll associate it in terms of the emotion the commercial was trying to convey.  That's the subconscious message planted in a logo not the logo itself.  This way they choose the familiar product over the less familiar product. The logo is the vehicle not the message.

The 'subconscious' message in that case is not very subconcious -- it is the emotion and the content of the commercial, which are associated with the logo. Of course, months later when you see the logo, you won't remember the commercial...

[Bu🤠ns]

I thought that the logo was to get the consumer familiar with the product so that when they see the image they'll associate it in terms of the emotion the commercial was trying to convey.  That's the subconscious message planted in a logo not the logo itself.  This way they choose the familiar product over the less familiar product. The logo is the vehicle not the message.

The 'subconscious' message in that case is not very subconcious -- it is the emotion and the content of the commercial, which are associated with the logo. Of course, months later when you see the logo, you won't remember the commercial...

That's the repetition part.  the commercial reinforces the logo which reinforces the commercial and that's how you make a homunculus known as corporate identity. 

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Egregores are (ostensibly) a different matter. It is, however, a good example of when sigils can be effective without hiding or purging the intent.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Egregores are (ostensibly) a different matter.

No, it's just one more nugget on the bullshit heap.

[Bu🤠ns]

Egregores are (ostensibly) a different matter. It is, however, a good example of when sigils can be effective without hiding or purging the intent.

You're getting me wrong.  The intent isn't to buy the product.  That's a result of the intent.  The intent is to gain consumer loyalty and devotion to fulfill a narrative set forth by the commercial.  The logo is the smiling reinforcement of this intent.

The insurance company example...the intent is fear.  That's the hidden part.  If they can hook you on the intent you'll naturally go buy a product.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

I'd say the intent IS to make the product get bought. The 'narrative' of a commercial is a ritual performance designed to manipulate the emotions of the viewers so that the charging is optimal.

This is to fully mix metaphors, of course, and mangle terminology. I think it's an apt translation, but I am biased.