Finishing Wicker's book, we see her trying to, or really pretending to, get something out of her experiences with the magic people, those millions in America who have no religion but know something is afoot. I know she is pretending because I, too, write books and one is always tempted to follow the classic narrative of foreign travel: to leave home and journey to a strange land and return with deep knowledge. It is the Quest myth, and I was tempted to use it in my autobiography/travelogue "Dream Weaver." I resisted, however, and instead told the truth - that after all that travel, I still did not know my butt from my elbow, but had come up with some very interesting lifestyles and theories. I was blasted for it by some critics who demanded that I reach a synthesis of sorts. Since I did not, I could only be shallow. But the fake synthesis would have been easier - as it was to Wicker - whereas the truth is hard. Most of us, like myself, do not know our butt from our elbow when it comes to the Big Picture.
And so the trouble with the New Age, with new religion and with magical thinking in general. We demand that there must be an answer in the void, a place in that great eternity where we can work the outer and inner worlds like a lathe if only we reach the proper level of understanding, just as I did when learning to read the floor in archaeology. And in truth, at least my truth, you can; shamans, for instance, can work magic, but in general they do not work as well as penicillin. Prayer works, too, but it is a touchy on/off affair. Praying for a job usually only helps if you also LOOK for a job. And the cosmos will always lead you to your destiny, but you will probably not see it until it is well in hindsight, on your death bed or beyond, and then it might well be different than you thought. The real and open truth is that we don't know what's out there. We are tuned to a world that we can physically manipulate, and as we get better at manipulating it, the more we become attuned to it, to the exclusion of everything else. But still - even those from different times and cultures could not (by in large) clearly see into the void.
Or at least not far into it, and that is the problem. Let's take an example: if you were extremely nearsighted and tried to shoot a target at 5 feet away, you could probably do it. At 20 it's getting pretty iffy, and at 100 it's really a shot in the dark. You know something is out there, but what are your chances of hitting it when you can't see it? So it seems to me is magic and, on a broader scale, religion. For the latter, we are taking a broad overall view, but that view is a second hand one of things that we have never seen. It is described as best as can be done by the prophet or mystic or shaman who has gone out far, but his references are limited and so, too, his own understanding. As for magic, that works on a practical scale and must be more exact. For that reason, it seldom sees the forest for the trees and so cannot relate a particular action to the whole. There is danger in that - let's say, the magician is shooting for a target that he knows is somewhere out there, so he blasts away. Unfortunately, there is a school playground beyond the target that he cannot see, and suddenly someone is in very big trouble.
The metaphor is not a great one, but I hope the point is made. The depth of reality is limitless, but most of us are using only very limited tools. We can experiment and extend our tools - to keep the metaphor, get a pair of glasses - but still, we can only go so far. We can not know, or few of us can anyway, the whole. We can grasp limited concepts that expand our vision of reality, but still they are limited. We can play around with forces that are not part of our norm - but we don't really understand them. We are still shooting in the dark, with all that that implies.
I have written essays on synchronicity, on real ones that have come into my life. These Jung defines as "meaningful coincidences" but more often than not we cannot grasp the meaning. Every now and then one smacks us upside the head - like a sign that we barely notice that says "last gas for 100 miles" before we run out of gas 50 miles later. That is to say, there are real signs, and there is a greater truth or truths. But which is the true sign? Which is the greater and which is the more limited vision, one that we might see so hazily that we get it all wrong? For magic, it must work, or work the wrong way, or not at all. We can end our delusions on that if we are honest about it. But for religions: aren't we called to faith without proof? It is often the only way to greater truths, but at some point, mustn't we be honest with ourselves and ask: has it worked in my life, or worked well?
What I called the New Revolution has started with a lack of results from the old religions, or so it has seemed to many. What we have now with our new magic, if our author Wicker were honest, is mostly a bunch of wishful thinking masquerading as wisdom. It is not good enough. There is a world more magical than magic out there, but our vision must be clear and we, honest with ourselves before we take in the new. For the greater vision, the old religions have lasted for thousands of years, and for that someone must have had clear vision at least once for each to have happened. If we are to walk to someplace new, we, too, must have at least someone who can see the path clearly. FK
And so the trouble with the New Age, with new religion and with magical thinking in general. We demand that there must be an answer in the void, a place in that great eternity where we can work the outer and inner worlds like a lathe if only we reach the proper level of understanding, just as I did when learning to read the floor in archaeology. And in truth, at least my truth, you can; shamans, for instance, can work magic, but in general they do not work as well as penicillin. Prayer works, too, but it is a touchy on/off affair. Praying for a job usually only helps if you also LOOK for a job. And the cosmos will always lead you to your destiny, but you will probably not see it until it is well in hindsight, on your death bed or beyond, and then it might well be different than you thought. The real and open truth is that we don't know what's out there. We are tuned to a world that we can physically manipulate, and as we get better at manipulating it, the more we become attuned to it, to the exclusion of everything else. But still - even those from different times and cultures could not (by in large) clearly see into the void.
Or at least not far into it, and that is the problem. Let's take an example: if you were extremely nearsighted and tried to shoot a target at 5 feet away, you could probably do it. At 20 it's getting pretty iffy, and at 100 it's really a shot in the dark. You know something is out there, but what are your chances of hitting it when you can't see it? So it seems to me is magic and, on a broader scale, religion. For the latter, we are taking a broad overall view, but that view is a second hand one of things that we have never seen. It is described as best as can be done by the prophet or mystic or shaman who has gone out far, but his references are limited and so, too, his own understanding. As for magic, that works on a practical scale and must be more exact. For that reason, it seldom sees the forest for the trees and so cannot relate a particular action to the whole. There is danger in that - let's say, the magician is shooting for a target that he knows is somewhere out there, so he blasts away. Unfortunately, there is a school playground beyond the target that he cannot see, and suddenly someone is in very big trouble.
The metaphor is not a great one, but I hope the point is made. The depth of reality is limitless, but most of us are using only very limited tools. We can experiment and extend our tools - to keep the metaphor, get a pair of glasses - but still, we can only go so far. We can not know, or few of us can anyway, the whole. We can grasp limited concepts that expand our vision of reality, but still they are limited. We can play around with forces that are not part of our norm - but we don't really understand them. We are still shooting in the dark, with all that that implies.
I have written essays on synchronicity, on real ones that have come into my life. These Jung defines as "meaningful coincidences" but more often than not we cannot grasp the meaning. Every now and then one smacks us upside the head - like a sign that we barely notice that says "last gas for 100 miles" before we run out of gas 50 miles later. That is to say, there are real signs, and there is a greater truth or truths. But which is the true sign? Which is the greater and which is the more limited vision, one that we might see so hazily that we get it all wrong? For magic, it must work, or work the wrong way, or not at all. We can end our delusions on that if we are honest about it. But for religions: aren't we called to faith without proof? It is often the only way to greater truths, but at some point, mustn't we be honest with ourselves and ask: has it worked in my life, or worked well?
What I called the New Revolution has started with a lack of results from the old religions, or so it has seemed to many. What we have now with our new magic, if our author Wicker were honest, is mostly a bunch of wishful thinking masquerading as wisdom. It is not good enough. There is a world more magical than magic out there, but our vision must be clear and we, honest with ourselves before we take in the new. For the greater vision, the old religions have lasted for thousands of years, and for that someone must have had clear vision at least once for each to have happened. If we are to walk to someplace new, we, too, must have at least someone who can see the path clearly. FK
RSS Feed