< Wep> 

Conversations With Robin, Page 3

Conversations between R.E. Prindle And Robin Mark

 

     Well, well, well.   Robert Goulet.  I should have known that filthy bastard would be mixed up in there somewhere.  What amazes me is that Guralnik could write two fat volumes on Elvis and never mention the Mob once.  I think we can begin to integrate Elvis’ Mob conflicts pretty clearly now, although research will have to establish the connections for sure.

     For starters, entertainment is a Mob industry both records and movies; that includes both Jews and Sicilians.  If you haven’t read Gus Russo’s Supermob yet, do so.  The Sidney Korshak role at MCA is crucial.

     Anent shooting out TVs remember that Sinatra had a plane he called Superwop or something to that effect so it is clear he bore a grudge against the Anglo world.   The plane was a small ‘Lear’ if I remember correctly.  Elvis went out and bought a 707.  Big plane, big penis; little plane little penis.  Not exactly true in Frank’s case, but you get the point.  So at least Goulet and Sinatra.  I can understand why Dean Martin tried to distance himself from those creeps.

     Parker must have had the business dealings with the Outfit.  As he ran into gambling problems the only commodity he had to barter was Presley.  Thus he would have had to ‘sell’ Presley to keep both his legs under him.  Elvis’ rapid deterioration could have been because of his realization that he was ‘caught in a trap.  I can’t get out.’  Devastating awareness.  One could only retreat into booze and/or drugs.

     Now, Leiber said that he and Stoller at one time worked for the Mafia.  This wouldn’t be unusual nor should it  be held against them because if you’re in entertainment you’re involved, like it or not.  The question is when were they involved, for how long, and for what purpose.

     We all know Fabian was a Mob creation.  Why not others?  If you haven’t seen and studied The Girl Can’t Help It, do so.  The movie is an alegory of the record business.  Everything you see in the movie is the Outfit in action.  In the fifties every Juke Box in America was stocked by the Outfit.  You didn’t get your record stocked unless you were Mobbed up somewhere along the line.  Someone recently told me that the girls on the Dick Clark Show were prostitutes and Bandstand was used to showcase them for Johns.  Don’t know that it’s true but I wouldn’t be surprised.

     Leiber and Stoller could have been co-opted to write songs for, say, The Coasters.  A Black act with interchangeable personnel.  Kind of an early Back Street Boys.  I don’t know but I’d like to hear Leiber talk about it.  Might prove enlightening.

     So, let us assume that the Colonel was drawn into the Mob scene from the beginning of Presley’s movie career.  That might explain some of his stupid decisions and those dumb movies.  Perhaps Parker didn’t have a free hand but was ‘wise’ enough to figure out that something is better than nothing.

     Then after Vegas Presley was increasingly drawn into orbit until he learned the horrifying truth.  Guralnik seems to have his head up his ass as far as I’m concerned.

     As Presley learned the truth looking forward to forty more years of slavery he found drugs more comfortable than reality.  Possible, it would make things make sense.

  

 

 

 

Conversations With Robin

Page Two.

Chatter Between

Robin Mark and R.E. Prindle

 

     Well, you know, the river just keeps right on a flowin’ and you have to stay afloat but the bozos in Washington just don’t seem to have a clue and they’re so cynically dishonest.  Eighty percent were against the bailout but they said we had to have it or the world would end yesterday.  Now the bailout has gone away.  first there was a bailout, then there was no bailout.

     I thought both Obama and McCain were genuninely crazy to want to step into Bush’s shoes and I hope Obama gets what he’s got coming.to him before I get mine.  The Commies have to be stopped this time; twice was enough of that bull roar.

     But to turn the radio back up.  Have you read any of Miss Pamela’s latest:  Let’s Spend The Night Together?  she interviews twenty-four groupies mining their minds for golden memories.

     As super Presley buff you’ll want to read the first chapter by someone called Tura Satana.  Taught Elvis nearly every thing he knew.  How to kiss, the whole works.  Came to her as a country bumpkin and left as The Sheik.  Funny I haven’t heard you vent on her before.

     And then a Catherine James invents the most improbable story about Dylan you’ve ever heard.

     Elvira makes her guest appearance with some more info on Elvis that sounds like it might be as true, at least, as a Hollywood movie.

     It’s kind of a kiss and invent book but Miss Pamela is her usual charming self.  Get’s a little gruesome after a while though, but, Hey, here it is 2008 and they’ve all survived.  Even Miss Mercy.  Carazy mama but she’s got a few more tidbits on Elvis.  Did he ever have an interest in a Memphis area club called Hernando’s Hideaway?

     Those girls did get around but the question is what can they actually remember?  It makes you wonder how Jimmy Page ever had a spare moment to practice guitar.

     Good luck with your school.  We’re a long way from the bottom yet.  It amazes me how few people understand how far its fallen and that it is absolutely impossible for it to bounce back.  For crying out loud the Faller has barely gotten ‘Timber’ out his mouth already.

     I pity those poor Liberals who’ve finally gotten their wish.  Now what are they going to do with General Motors.  There is no forgiveness in my heart for them.

 

Exhuming Bob 11:

Bob Dylan And Toby Thompson

A Review

Positively Main Street

Text:

Thompson, Toby: Positively Main Street, U Minnesota Press, 2008 reprint of the 1971 edition.

Forty Miles Of Bad Road Later

Forty Miles Of Bad Road Later

     Toby Thompson’s self identification with Bob Dylan is an interesting situation.  In a way he predated the Elvis impersonators; blazing a new trail.  That he recorded his infatuation on the spot and got it into print is even more fascinating.

     I suppose people have always identified with important people as the insane asylums full of Napoleon Bonapartes indicate, but when the movies came into existence things changed.  Movie actors were designed to appeal to certain character traits making identification with the actors more accessible.  That the actors came from social strata much like one’s own with no apparent effort or skills made identification easier.  (See the novel Merton Of The Movies by Harry Leon Wilson)  When sound was matched to image one could act like and even talk like these heroes.

     Older people being formed already were more immune than younger people so that the John Wayne imitators, Bogarts, Jimmie Stewarts or what have you began to surface in numbers beginning in the fifties.  Still there was a psychological distance between the people on the screen and oneself while a direct imitation brought ridicule on oneself.

     Then in the mid-fifties Presley burst on the scene.  Here was a guy who drove truck, we were told, one day and was a major recording star the next.  Then, as immediately as it seemed to all of us, more to some of us than others, he parlayed that into becoming a movie star.  That was just about every teenagers dream.  Now that was something we all could do and a great many of the most venturesome did get at least to the level of recording stars but they all wanted the movies.

     Presley was the first who created a legion of impersonators.  The movies formed a cadre of amateur impersonators but Presley spawned a full frontal impersonation for a profit; People who became Elvis Presley as a surrogate for themselves.  This began fairly early in the Presley career too.

     Then as the sixties hit young people were conditioned by phonograph records.  Records were the way the generation communicated with each other; They took the place of movies and literature.  One could still write books or rarely, like Presley, make it into the movies but anyone with enough ambition, little training during the sixties and none in the seventies, could make a record.

     This was no more evident than in the case of Bob Dylan.  Quite frankly my own first impression was that here is a talentless guy putting out records.  If Dylan could do it, if I wanted to, I could.  It then became easy to identify with Dylan.  Plus he was a nobody, had never even been to college.

     After I and many others had written his early records off he surfaced in a way to seize your attention, however his appeal was limited to a certain psychology.  But, now, in the twentieth century via records and radio if there were only a million of any certain type those million could make an artist very, very successful, viz. Janis Joplin.

      When Big Brother And The Holding Company with Janis Joplin released its first CBS disc the record went to the top of the charts on the strength of a small minority of the public.  The vast, and I mean vast, majority of the public had never heard of the band or Joplin.  I was in the record business at that time and was astounded that a relatively few hippies made a group and singer unkown to 9 1/2 out of ten, at the minimum, could send a record to the top.  Hippies were not known to take care of their possessions.  They trashed that record in a week or two playing it perhaps a hundred times or more then coming back to buy another one after another.  Each one of those sales contributed to the accumulation of a million so the entire course of American music was swayed by the success of a record purchased by a very small percentage of the population, and the lunatic fringe at that.

     So with Dylan.  Dylan provoked a violent split in society.  Just as Pat Boone was opposed to Elvis as a role model so Simon and Garfunkle were opposed to Bob Dylan.  In 1966-67 the S & G faction was much larger than Dylan’s.  Bob got more TV attention however.  His cult was as the misunderstood, oppressed genius, the Outsider who was shucking the world.  You can see where his fan base came from.  So, all of us who were in that category became devoted, almost obsessed, advocates of Bob Dylan.  I was one, I’m merely analyzing not being superior.  I never went as far as Toby Thompson in my obsession but then I didn’t think of what he did either and I was six years older.  I already had a life of my own, such as it was.

     The younger people took to the pop stars with ease.  We had Jim Morrisons, various Beatles and Stones or whatever as well as Dylans walking around campus, people completely immersed in the various identies.  I don’t even have to p[oint out the Deadheads and they were truly legion.

     So Thompson’s notion of reliving Bob’s youth in his own person while extreme was not completely imcomprehensible.  Still psychotic but borderline as he never completely lost contact with reality.  Really interesting because unlike Freud’s Schreiber he was able to write a book about it even as it happened.

     Thompson was born in 1944 being  three years younger than Bob thus being able to look up to him as a role model.  Being three years older than Bob I always looked down on him as a younger sibling who was somehow outshining me.  The identification was there nonetheless.

     Through 1966 Bob befogged us all.  Blonde On Blonde was such a towering effort both musically and lyrically that it was incomprehensible.  No one could understand it.  Some of it you couldn’t even listen to but you were convinced it was a work of genius.  The people who called it mere noise weren’t entirely wrong either.  Philistines nonetheless.

     I knew that Bob had peaked along those musical lines and there would have to be a model change.  But then the word came out that Bob was dead, close to it or paralyzed from the eyes down.  He disappeared from the stage for a while but as he wasn’t dead or paralyzed we all stood with out faces turned to Woodstock waiting for news from the East.  We all, being those of like psychology.

     Then Bob dressed like Billy the Kid or some other Western desperado released John Wesley Harding.  the psychology was changed.  What had drawn us in for ’64 to ’66 was the muse using Bob Dylan as an instrument and he now had been discarded.  I dropped him as did many others.

     A year later Toby Thompson conceived the idea of searching out Dylan’s roots in Minnesota.  He didn’t go as a mere reporter though.  He went as a Bob Dylan impersonator.  There was Toby Thompson standing in Bob Dylan’s shoes.

     The Thompson that emerges from his telling is a very disturbed young man of twenty-four.  His intake of alcohol and marijuana was prodigious.   Of course, he’s telling a story, but I can’t recall one day that he wasn’t stone drunk.  He keeps a pint in his glove compartment.  He gets so drunk he stands on his head in the middle of a dance floor and can’t remember it the next day.  The guy must have smelled like a brewery all the time.  I’m sure the fumes coming from him when he interviewed Dylan’s mother in the daytime gave her a very negative opinion of him.  Robert Shelton, Dylan’s biographer, future biographer at this time, had been out to Minnesota the year before.  He was a professional Journalistic persona older than Dylan’s friends.  Thompson was three years younger and appears to have been accepted on a personal rather than professional basis.  After all he had no journalistic history, he was only going to write.

     On that basis he formed an intimate relationship with Dylan’s high school sweetheart, Echo Helstrom.  I’m going to concentrate on that aspect of the book for this review.  Bear in mind that she is three years older than Thompson.

     Thompson’s visit to Hibbing must have had the locals’ heads spinning.  Thompson, in his book, doesn’t seem to be aware of the impression he was creating.  From his description it seems that he appeared among them as a Bob Dylan impersonator.  Bobby Zimmerman left Hibbing ten years earlier, became Bob Dylan, and now ten years later this guy shows up impersonating him.  Doing a good job of it too.

     One can only imagine what Hibbingites thought. 

The idea of this guy pictured below going forth to conquer the world  of popular music appears to be absurd.  We all have known kids who wanted to do the same.  We may even be one of those kids but the odd

Look Out Little Richard

       Look Out Little Richard

of succeeding were about a million and a half to one.  How could anyone even suspect that Bobby Zimmerman, the kid above, from the virtually uninhabited North Country would be the ONE.  Everyone in town must have been laughing up their sleeve, like the guy on the right above, when Bobby Zimmerman sallied forth to ‘join Little Richard’ and conquer the world.

     Now, this guy Thompson using his own name came posing as a journalist but impersonating Bob shows up.  Thompson seems surprised at the reaction of Maurice and Paul Zimmerman, Bob’s uncles, but can you imagine being interviewed by a guy talking and acting like your nephew Bob.  It’s kind of crazy.  Imagine what Beattie Zimmerman, Bob’s mother, thought sitting across from Toby doing Bob.  Maybe that’s what Bob meant when he said ‘This guy Toby Thompson has got some things to learn.’

     Nobody knew what was going on there, did they?

     When Bob and John Bucklen and Echo Helstrom were kids, like many another group of Musketeers, they swore that if one of them made it he or she would help the others along.  Well, Bob made it but he forgot John and Echo.  No big deal.  Teenage vows even spoken in earnest have no meaning after the fact but the promise lives on in the innocent hearts of those who aren’t pulled through by the successful one.  There is a sense of betrayal.  Added to that there was romantic ill will on Echo’s part because of Bob’s eleventh and twelfth grade betrayal.

     Bob is making it big while Echo just has a job.  A young woman trying to make her way has a tougher  row to hoe than a guy.  But, if she knows how to work it she does have a story that’s worth at least a couple three or four years worth of wages.  She doesn’t know how to market it though.  Robert Shelton came out to Minneapolis a year before Thompson and paid her a hundred dollars for an interview.  She held the hundred up to Toby as hint but he wasn’t thinking that way.  She was only going to get screwed by Toby, literally.

     If Toby hadn’t been in an alcholic haze he might have realized that the story Positively Main Street was only subsidiary to Absolutely Sweet Echo.  The money was with Echo.

Echo When She Knew Bob

Echo When She Knew Bob

          As they’re driving up Highway 61 Echo pulls out a hundred dollar bill and says ‘See what Robert Shelton gave me for an interview.’  The light still didn’t go off in Thompson’s head.  He reached into the glove compartment for his pint.

     I am astonished at the amount of alcohol Thompson consumed on these trips.  If he isn’t novelizing the guy was in a virtual stupor the whole time.  When he and Echo arrive in Hibbing they go to a bar where Toby becomes blotto on beer, no less.  He has no memory of the moment but Echo tells him that he stood on his head in the middle of the dance floor as coins and keys showered out of his pockets.

     Echo must have been one tolerant girl or else she was hoping for something to happen.  Perhaps a large part of the charm of Positively Main Street is the stunning unconciousness of Thompson.  The guy was twenty-four years old at the time, not a kid- exactly.  He had been telling Echo he was going to write a book.  When he gets the first trip written up he sends her sixty pages.  Echo writes back:  ‘Sixty pages isn’t enough for a book is it?’  She has reasons to be disappointed.  Heck, Toby is using her to attempt to make his fortune and he hasn’t even promised to cut Echo in for a dime.  Think about this.  The self centered naivete shines through with startling clarity.  For that reason it is one of the most interesting books in the the Dylan canon.

Echo When She Knew Toby

Echo When She Knew Toby

     Now, in these sixty pages Toby has misunderstood what Echo told him about the time Bob called her on the phone and played Bobby Freeman’s Do You Want To Dance claiming to be singing the song.

     In his sixty pages he projects a better story where Bob shows up on Echo’s front porch playing guitar and sings Do You Want To Dance then strutting all through the house singing and playing somewhat like Elvis in the dime store in King Creole.

     Echo points out this error.  Toby liked his version so much he left it in the way he first wrote it.  Then when Echo introduces this Bob Dylan impersonator into his parents home Toby whips out his quitar and reenacts his version of the incident strutting around the house as he plays and sings.  The guy was absolutely out of his mind in his alcohol haze.  He must have smelled like a brewery the whole time.

     One is astonished that he was so well tolerated.  Of course maybe everyone was thinking:  ‘This is amazing, but it won’t last long’ and let it pass.  Waved his car goodbe as he sped away.

     One wonders what Echo’s emotional rection to the Bob Dylan impersonator was.  Toby must have reactivated dormant affections for Bobby Zimmerman as he came on to her strongly in Bob’s persona.  Echo had ten year old memories of Bob and now here he was, his double, coming onto her again.  Frightening actually.

     Toby left again and never returned.  In the book he seems oblivious to the havoc he created in Echo’s life.  In the interview at the end of Main Street given many years later he doesn’t seem to be any more aware.  In fact he seems to be still posing as Dylan’s double.  He mentions that he still contacts Echo, who has moved to LA, occasionally as does Bob but Bob seems to have better success in finding her. 

     Hurt and mystified that Thompson had no more use for her she wrote a poem for him that she mailed to him in far off Washington D.C.

Hey! Toby!

Where can you be?

Somebody told me

That you went back to

Washing Machine D.C.

How can that be?

 

You came to town in your Volkswagen

And I’ll tell you we sure had fun!

And now you’re gone!

 

You played for me on your old guitar,

Took me for a ride in your little car,

Drove me near and drove me far,

We looked at the moon,

And stared at the stars,

You stood on your head in my hometown bar…

How could it be you’ve gone so far?

 

Hey Toby?  Where are you?

– Echo Helstrom

     Toby hadn’t gone anywhere.  Like Bob he’d just never been there.  His fantasy like Bob’s didn’t include anyone else, they were just bit players in his own movie.  Toby was no longer thinking of Echo.  He was married to the bottle.  He was touring bars across the country to get material for his next book.  Echo could just consider herself as one of those bars.  Once Toby had visited it there was no reason to return.

     The tragedy for Echo was that she was betrayed once by Bob in 1958 and then again by a Bob impersonator in 1968.  Perhaps a wound was created in her heart that could never heal.  One wonders what her later history was after she left Minneapolis and drifted West.

I wonder where you are tonight.

I wonder if you are alright.

I wonder if you think of me

In my lonely misery.

There stands the glass,

Fill it up to the brim,

Till it flows o’er the rim,

It’s my first one today.

-Webb Pierce.

     Here’s to old memories.  Bottoms up.

A Review

Lipstick Traces:

Greil Marcus

Part IX

Into The Abyss

It sounded like a lot of fun wrecking the world.

It felt like freedom.

Greil Marcus: Lipstick Traces

 

     It is probably time to look a little into Mr. Marcus’ antecedents.  He was born in the summer of 1945 between VE and VJ day as he tells us.  He was ten, then, in 1954-55 when Rock and Roll came into existence.  He doesn’t seem to imply that he was particularly interested in records in the next decade that would have made him twenty in 1964-65.  He would have been 15 to 20  from 1960-65 during which time he would have listened to the radio.  He also seems to have been in Philadelphia at some time during that period when he attended a Bob Dylan concert. I haven’t read yet where he mentioned that he had a record collection during that period.  He doesn’t seem to recall much from memory before 1965 with the possible exception of Bob Dylan.

     One is forced to conclude then that most if not all his record lore was acquired between his twentieth and thirtieth years from 1965 to 1974-75.  He began his career as a critic in 1966 when he went to work for Rolling Stone.  He left that post a year later to write for Creem Magazine. His first book Mystery Train was published in 1975 so he should have acquired his lore over maybe eight years.

     He should have been a sophomore in ’64 which means he should have graduated in’66 so his real record education would have been from ’66 to ’74.  Not much time  for someone posing as an expert in ’75. 

     He says he was born in San Francisco moving into Menlo Park in 1955 so that he went to Menlo Park-Atherton High.  The area is one of the ritziest in the Bay Area.  Atherton is top of the line for the Bay so his step-father must have been doing pretty well.  In other words Mr. Marcus is a rich kid.  I haven’t read exactly where he lived between 1948 when his mother remarried and 1955.

     At any rate he comes from a very well to do background.  After graduating from MPA he went over to Berkeley to attend UC.  He was there for the whole Free Speech brouhaha.  At some time after graduation from UC he returned to Berkeley to live which is his home base at the present time.

     At the time he wrote Mystery Train I would question the depth and breadth of his knowledge.

     He published Mystery Train at the last possible moment such a book could be published.  From ’66 to ’75 those of us concerned with records were convinced that something monumental and earth shaking was happening.  Wonderful theories of the music’s importance were spun of which Mystery Train is one.  I think it probable that Mr. Marcus saw a string of such books rolling off his pen.  A funny thing happened on the way to the forum however.  Disco and Punk blew up the Rock monolith about the same year destroying the grandiose notions we were all believing in.  All of a sudden as Mr. Marcus points out confidence was destroyed and survival became the issue.  Mr. Marcus and his plans were thrown for a loop.

     Not until 1989 did he find another tack to try to get back on track.  In that year he published Lipstick Traces.  Feeling that his first career had been blown out of the water by Punk he paid homage to it by concentrating on Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols.  Broadening out some he incorporated the history of what he considered various Dada movements.  His concern with Dada had found expression in Mystery Train so it was only necessary to relate Dada to Punk with which he had no trouble.

     Since ’89 he has published a continuous series of books, the most recent being The Shape Of Things To Come.

2.

     I hesitate to do this but I feel the reader should know something of my credentials to give some basis for judging my criticism and analysis.

     I’m about seven years older than Mr. Marcus having been born in 1938.  I was therefore sixteen in 1954 which is more or less the cut off date for the beginning of Rock and Roll.

     I grew up in Saginaw, Michigan.  We were apparently out of the mainstream of Rock development.  Even though we had a fairly large Black population there was no Rhythm And Blues or Black music on the local radio.  There were only traditional music shows on radio in 1954 when Top Forty was in embryo.  By ’55 and ’56 we had full fledged Top 40 and what a blast it was.

     With Top 40 came Black artists like Bill Doggett, Fats Domino and Little Richard but they were a Top 40 sound whether they called it Rhythm And Blues or not.  One could tune into Detroit for Black records but I didn’t know anyone who did.  I tuned in a couple times but Black music per se repelled me.

     I was in the class of ’56.  The class of ’55 knew nothing of Rock and Roll at the time and very little of Top 40 radio.  I was in a distinct minority in the class of ’56 who listened to Rock at all.  The class of ’57 was the first class attuned to the music.

     As to first R & R records, who knows?  The early and mid-fifties were a blend of musics so I heard a fair amount of Swing.  Anyone who traces Rock and Roll directly to Swing is dreaming.  I know Buddy Rich, Gene Krupa and the Swing drummers.  None of them had the R&R feel.  Swing rhythm sections were miniscule compared to Rock which to my mind is a singer, lead guitar and a two or three piece rhythm section.  Very faint resemblance to Swing.

     When it became financially impossible for Big Band to survive I suppose the instrumental quartet was the next logical step which led to the Big Beat.  Neither Elvis nor Sun had a Big Beat.  He had rhythm but no beat;  he was essentially a hillbilly singer doing fast songs which is how everyone thought of him.  That’s what I heard and none of the people I knew would listen to him because he was a hillbilly.  As far as I’m concerned the Big Beat was developed by Lonnie Donegan and that is where the English Beat groups come from.  Lonnie’s early stuff was as much Rock as anything else although he was primarily a terrific Folk and Blues singers.  Unparalleled.  He was as good as Elvis but somewhat more traditional sounding than Presley.  Elvis could really move you.

     Elvis was virtually unknown in Saginaw before Heartbreak Hotel.  I missed out on the Sun records by a day.  The record store had returned them the day before I got there so I have all RCAs.  I never knew anyone else who had heard of Elvis between the time I bought my 45s and Heartbreak Hotel.

     I never thought of Elvis as a Rock and Roller on those early records.  There really was no Rock and Roll except for Bill Haley And The Comets and that stuff was really leadfooted.  I didn’t really enjoy Rock Around The Clock and I never bought it. Elvis was just a hillbilly cat who could really sing a song.  I knew from reading the labels that Arthur Crudup wrote That’s All Right Mama but that meant nothing to me.  Who ever heard of Arthur Crudup? 

     I don’t understand why I don’t have Sun Presleys as I bought every Sun record as it came out.  I had to have them special ordered as nobody wanted them but I was very familiar with the Sun sound.  Not impossibly Sam Phillips had as much to do with Rock and Roll as anyone because all the records he produced had that forward leaning scudding way.  You could have substituted Elvis for Johnny Cash on Get Rhythm and there wouldn’t have been much difference.

     When Elvis left Sun his production values changed with the sound becoming flat footed and vertical rather than forward leaning.  Elvis was always Elvis for me but I never had the incentive to buy his RCA produced 45s.

     Some may say the music died with Buddy Holly’s plane crash but that is a gross exaggeration.  Holly’s career was virtually over by February ’59.  He was singing solo and fading fast.  The Big Bopper was a no one who had one trash talking record while Richie Valens was as close to a zero as you can get.

     Elvis was kept alive by RCA during his Army years but Little Richard was finished after Heebie Jeebies and Jerry Lee’s Rock career was stalled.  High School Confidential was so-so.  Jerry Lee’s marriage to his cousin may have put him in bad odor in some quarters but that was a fishing expedition to discredit him.  Might have hurt his personal appearances but not his record sales, they were already down.  To my mind Duane Eddy came out with Rebel Rouser on the heel of the plane crash and Rock and Roll bounced right along without missing a beat.  Apparently not too many people remember the effect of Eddy and Rebel Rouser but it was the second kick in the pants after Presley.  Kept us all going.

     The big problem for Rock and Roll was Organized Crime.  The Mafia and Chicago Outfit controlled Juke boxes.  Those idiots determined that only their acts got on the Juke boxes.  If you want a good representation of what the record industry was like check out the best Rock and Roll movie ever made- The Girl Can’t Help It.  If you watch closely and pay attention you are being told exactly how it was.

     An Outfit figure greatly resembling Al Capone, although the time period was long after Capone, controls the Juke boxes for the Outfit.  That means the Juke boxes at least West of the Appalachians to the Coast.  The Juke boxes in Saginaw were stocked by the Outfit that for all practical purposes controlled the town.  All towns.

     Girl Can’t Help It stars Jayne Mansfield and Tommy Ewell.  Mansfield is the Mafia figure’s moll.  He wants to make her a record star which he figures he can do because he controls the Juke boxes.  All of ’em.  But the Girl Can’t Sing.  The producers are at their wits ends because they have to do something with her.  They accidentally discover that she has this high pitched squeal.  So, a la Tequila in which periodically the instrumental music stops and someone announces ‘Tequila’, at certain points in the record the music stops and Mansfield squeals.  This is so captivating the record does become a hit.

     Now, the movie highlights several Mafia acts like Teddy Randazzo and the Gum Drops that would never draw anyone into the theatres.  Teddy didn’t even have an attractive high pitched squeal to go along with his great accordion playing.  But as is usual with non-record types the belief is that if you can expose non-talent acts to enough people they will sell.  So the Outfit did understand they needed some draws to get people in to expose the non-talent.  Who are you going to go to?  Well, Gene Vincent, Eddie Cochran, Little Richard for starters.  I went because of Gene Vincent.

     The movie was released in ’58 so not many of us had ever actually seen any of these guys.  The Mob had their draws but they wanted to showcase the Italian acts which they did.  Gene Vincent was shot through the window of a recording studio for about half of Be Bop A Lula; Eddie Cochran did his Twenty Flight Rock shot off a TV set and Little Richard was shot through a crowd in a club about fifty feet away.

     As I say if you pay attention you can get a very good idea of what was going on.  Mansfield and Ewell were great but they were at the terminal point of their careers.

     The early sixties were pretty duddy as far as I was concerned, but that doesn’t necessarily mean I was right,  so I went back to my true love, Country and Western.  As I noted in Part One I was drawn back into pop by my brother-in -law.  As I said I then graduated from college in ’66 going up to Oregon from the Bay Area.  It was there in ’67 that I opened a record store.  From ’67 to ’80 I was a decent sized player in the record business.  I thought I heard everything but I am always amazed at the records for which I have no recollection even seeing. 

     I was there when the first Rolling Stone came out.  I don’t know where the magazine sold but it wasn’t Oregon.  Pretty boring actually.  Got worse as time went on and then it got Political. 

     I quit listening to records in 1980 when I closed my record store.  Punk was too ridiculous to waste your time on although I do have two or three Disco records I value.  Well, Rock and Roll was great while it lasted but it really did die in ’75.  Not only Punk and Disco but the untalented Epigone came along.  The splitting out of Heavy Metal as a genre didn’t help either.  God!  I know how Marcus felt.  Everything just crashed to the ground.

3.

     Mr. Marcus’ themes and direction remain the same from Mystery Train to The Shape Of Things To Come.  His attitudes are controlled by his dual Israeli and American passports: his Semitism and anti-Semitism.  These two citizenships coincide in his psyche with his twin racial concerns.  The Israeli citizenship as Semitism and his American citizenship with anti-Semitism. Naturally his Israeli Semitism takes precedence in his loyalty over his American anti-Semitism.  Americans are Nazis in his mind.  As with Adam in the Garden of Paradise and God, the twin concepts exist side by side in his mind with Adam representing Semitism and God anti-Semitism.  Thus his Jewish/Adamic/Israeli identity represents his absolute purity in his mind while America/God represent his foul or Devil side.  He and his fellow Jews think that by trashing the Garden, Europe, Palestine, America or wherever they happen to reside that their ‘purity’ will triumph and they will be as they represent themselves: a Holy People suited to govern mankind, Judge-Penitents.  That is what the eighteenth century messiah, Jacob Frank, meant by saying that if the Jews commited all the evil in their minds then this ‘purity’ will shine to light the way for the peoples.  You don’t have to be Freud to know it ain’t going to work.  Thus Mr. Marcus’ subliminal message is all good comes from Jewish musicians and all evil from American musicians.  The Jewish Bob Dylan becomes his ultimate hero taking precedence over the American anti-hero, Elvis Presley.

     That’s why in Lipstick Traces he juxtaposes the anti-hero Presley and the Jewish hero Isidore Isou.

     Mr. Marcus scatters several clues throughout his work to hint at what he’s attempting.  He mentions John Ford’s movie The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence and one of its morals a couple times concentrating on the movie’s stated notion that once an event becomes legendary even though the received version may be untrue people prefer the myth to the fact.  There may be some truth to the notion although as Mr. Marcus explores the counter notion of detournement he gives us the means to strip such an ingrained notion from the story and turn it in any direction we want.  Thus in the twenties the Judaeo-Communists on the one hand debunked American heroes and myths while at the same time detourning them so that Jefferson and Lincoln become founding members of Communism as Communism in turn becomes Twentieth Century Americanism.  A neat trick that didn’t quite work.

     Actually the two practices denote the transition from one religion to another which also lays bare Mr. Marcus’ intent.  Thus in the first few centuries of the Piscean Age the Catholic Church detourned ancient Taurian and Arien religious sites by stripping them of their pagan connotations replacing the meaning with little balloons containing Christian messages.  Eventually they replaced Arien temples with Piscean churches.

      Jack Finney’s 1950’s novel The Invasion Of The Body Snatchers describes the same thing in which aliens while maintaining exact replicas of the bodies they take over inform the minds with entirely different content.  Finney understood detournement completely long before Guy Debord had it figured out.

     That is exactly what the Jews, who are attempting to replace Christianity are doing.  Mr. Marcus mentions Philip Roth’s The Plot To Destroy America approvingly.  Of course Mr. Marcus and Roth are both Jewish.  In Roth’s detournement of American history he portrays the Jewish rescue of the true America, which the Jews in their wisdom created, from the Weird Old Americans who are trying to twist the Promised Land into some Nazi hate filled paranoid perversion of what one is led to believe was the American paradise Jews had created.

      Roth chooses to recklessly defame Charles Lindhberg, a great and true American, but that is what detournement is all about.  Thus on the one hand Roth detournes ‘Weird Old American’ heroes into villains while at the same time creating the myth of the Jewish saviors a la Liberty Valence.

     The Jews then become the men who shot Liberty Valence thus destroying the Weird Old America while bringing into existence this Jewish paradise we enjoy today.  Shut your mouth, you anti-Semite.

     Why Liberty Valence?

     Well, Liberty is the opposite of collectivity or the Jewish Law.  He represents the sort of ‘rugged individualism’ that threatened Jewish collectivity or subordination to the Mosaic Law.  Valence means valour, courage or valiance.  That is, a man who has what it takes to stand out against the crowd or Mosaic Law.  I’m sure it was an unintended compliment.  No one of the collectivity has what it takes to stand up against him, not even the hero of the collectivity, John Wayne.

     The legend that is so hard to kill is that Jimmie Stewart shot Liberty Valance down in a fair and square man to man fight.  Actually Wayne is the agent of the collectivity who bushwhacked Liberty from a dark alley,  Wayne and his Negro servitor and alter ego who tossed his rifle to him.

     So this is the secret message of Lipstick Traces creating a legend and detourning existing beliefs that run counter to those of the collectivity.  For that reason the branch of academic history known as American Studies has been captured by Jews who stand up laughingly epatering the Americans, debunking and detourning as they go.  

     I see where Mr. Marcus and a yoyo by the name of Todd Gitlin are joining forces to epater the Americans together.  Ought to be funny if you’ve got the right sense of humor.

4.

     All the seeds of Mr. Marcus later work are apparent in his 1975 Mystery Train.  One should examine Mr. Marcus construction of Train carefully.

     He examines six recording stars.  Two of which he calls ancestors and four ‘Inheritors.’  The six are Harmonica Frank, Robert Johnson, Dylan/The Band, Sly Stone, Randy Newman and Elvis Presley.

     Out of the period of 1950-75 Mr. Marcus chooses a very personal list of bands.  One would call the list debateable but there’s not much to debate.  Whether they are supposed to be important or influential isn’t clear.  Apart from Presley none of them were overwhelming important  or influential.  Pink Floyd, Grateful Dead, the Doors?  No, they aren’t on board Mr. Marcus’ Mystery Train.  So, what do we have? 

     The list is bracketed by two White performers, Harmonica Frank and Elvis Presley.  Robert Johnson and Sly Stone are Black.  Dylan/The Band are Jewish and Canadian while Robbie Robertson is mentioned as having a Jewish father.  Thus Dylan/The Band and Randy Newman are two Jewish outfits.  Two Whites, two Blacks, two Jews.  Obviously we have an agenda here.

     The two ancestors are questionable.  I may have a vague memory of having heard the name Harmonica Frank but the man influenced absolutely no one.  Technically he is no ancestor.  His only connection with, say, Elvis, is that both were produced by Sam Phillips at Sun records.  In that sense Harmonica Frank may be representative of what Phillips as a producer was trying to do but that represents Phillips and not Harmonica Frank.

     Thus when Phillips decided to produce Presley he used the same musical tenets or ‘ear.’ Elvis was very fortunate to have Phillips to hear his talent and draw him out.  Without Phillips there would never have been an Elvis Presley other than this guy driving a truck.

     As far as ‘White’ ancestors go Phillips would have been more appropriate than Frank.  I suppose what I am saying is that I find Mr. Marcus either too shallow or too tendentious.

     Mr. Marcus doesn’t use a Jewish ancestor but as a Black ancestor he chooses Robert Johnson.  As he states there were no Robert Johnson recordings available for anyone to hear before the 1960 Columbia release.  Huddie ‘Leadbelly’ Ledbettor would have been a much more influential ancestor.  Not only had his recordings been continuously available but his songs formed a staple for Folk artists from the post-war years on.  His Good Night Irene and Midnight Special were ten times more influential than anything Robert Johnson ever wrote, a hundred times…heck, a thousand times, more.  Johnson’s songs began to appear by other artists only in late sixties.

     Mr. Marcus’ enthusiasm for Johnson’s lyrics is absolutely inexplicable.  He quotes the following as an example of Johnson’s genius:

 

Me and the devil, was walking side by side

Oooo, me and the devil was walking side by side.

I’m going to beat my woman until I get satisfied.

 

     Pretty choice stuff, huh?  I’m surprised the ladies haven’t boycotted both Johnson and Mr. Marcus’ Mystery Train.

     Nevertheless his choice of Johnson seems arbitrary at the best and tendentious at the worst.

     I presume he chose the Band because of their association with Bob Dylan.  Mr. Marcus definitely sets Dylan up as the greatest of the era replacing Presley.  This is patently ridiculous.

     His final paragraph detournes Elvis in favor of Dylan.  Bear in mind that in 1975 Elvis still had two years to live so Mr. Marcus may be understood to be addressing Presley indirectly:

     Quote:

     All in all there is one remaining moment I want to see;  One epiphany that would somehow bring his (Elvis’) story home.  Elvis would take the stage as he always has; the roar of the audience would surround him, as it always will.  After a time, he would begin a song by Bob Dylan, singing slowly.  Elvis would give it everything he has.  “I must have been mad,” he would cry,  “I didn’t know what I had- until I threw it all away.”

     And then with love in his heart, he would laugh.

     Unquote.

     That’s a pretty tale.  As a detournement the kingof rock n’ roll passes the scepter to Dylan.  While as a hypnotic suggestion to the living Elvis Mr. Marcus is attempting to bring his dream to come to pass.  We’ll never know if it would have worked but it was the traditional Judaeo-Freudian method.

     Thus the two sections on Harmonica Frank and Elvis are slurs on Mr. Marcus’ concept of The Weird Old America.  That title of another of his books is itself a detournement of America.

     For the last few years I have been wavering but after reading Mr. Marcus’ ideas on Dylan I have probably irrevocably turned against him.  To write of the Band is to write of Dylan.  Dylan would always have been Dylan but the Band would never have been anything without Dylan.  The Band probably stands to Dylan as Presley does to Sam Phillips.

     The first two Band LPs are the result of direct contact with Dylan in the sessions that resulted in the basement tapes.  With the separation from Dylan the effect wore off with the Band returning to their R & R roots.  At their peak they were no Doors or Led Zeppelin.  Like Dylan I find them unlistenable today.

     Mr. Marcus wrote a two or three hundred page essay on Dylan’s Like A Rolling Stone which he seems to consider the greatest song ever written.  He perversely refuses to accept the song for what it is- a hymn to ingratitude.  In the song Dylan clearly resents his dependence on Joan Baez for his early success.  He, in fact, used her but now in his pride of success he spurns her from him- with his foot so to speak.  A real ingrate as a matter of fact.

     Mr. Marcus reproduces the lyrics in their entirety as a preface to the book.  I’m not going to do the same here but Like A Rolling Stone is in a genre of Dylan songs that can be defined only as mocking or ‘hate songs.’  Along with Rolling Stone one can include Positively Fourth Street, Please, Crawl Out Your Window, Ballad Of A Thin Man, Desolation Row and any number of others.  Sooner Or Later, One Of Us Must Know.

     Again with Dylan the tone of his voice is more important than the words.  For me I responded to the pain and anger in his voice that seemed to reflect my own experiences and which I interpreted in my own way.  The same attitude would be reflected differently by the baby boomers born in the early fifties.  As noted they came along at the time of Mystery Train’s writing to shatter Mr. Marcus immediate dream of a Rock And Roll Czardom.

     One presumes that the song Mr. Marcus wanted Presley to sing in order to detourne himself in favor of Bob Dylan ‘with love in his heart and a laugh’ thus allowing one religious idol to replace another was ‘Like A Rolling Stone.’

     Unfortunately due to Mr. Marcus’ interpretation I now see ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ as an actual hymn of hate scorning and mocking Joan Baez.  Throughout Bob Dylan’s career he had the habit of purloining things of others…said the Joker to the Thief.  In Minneapolis and Colorado he actually stole records from other people.  His excuse was that he really needed them.  In New york he lifted the arrangement of a song of Dave Von Ronk’s and recorded it without permission.  He had a ‘good excuse’ for that too.  He needed it.

     Perhaps his greatest theft was of the career of Joan Baez.  Baez out of a generous heart used her influence and reputation to gain acceptance for the caterwauling Dylan.  He couldn’t admit this theft without exposing himself as an ingrate subject to the scorn of the Folk community of Greenwich Village.  This may possibly be the secret meaning of Positively Fourth Street in which he seems to heap scorn on the whole Folk community.

      Mr. Marcus is especially impressed with the disgustingly hateful lines:

Ain’t it hard

When you discover that

He really wasn’t

Where It’s at

After he took from you everything

He could steal?

 

How does it feel?

How does it feel to be on your own

No direction home

Like a complete unknown

Like a rolling stone.

     Dylan has identified the person he is speaking to as ‘Miss Lowly’ who went to a fine school and here he says that he has stolen everything from her that he can steal and then he taunts her as though he had reduced her to his condition when he first arrived in New York City.  ‘How does it feel to be on your own with no direction home like a complete unknown?’

     Yes.  It must have been terrifying for Dylan to arrive in New York City as a complete unknown with no understanding of how to get started, homeless and starving.  Dylan solved his problem by scrounging lodging and his next meal.  He just moved in on people, ate their food, read their books, listened to their records, picked their minds, stole from them everything he could steal and then turned his back on them.  Cut them cold.  Scorned them as in Positively Fourth St.  Well, all right. OK.  But I don’t find it as admirable as Mr. Marcus does.  As I say I never really thought of Like A Rolling Stone deeply before reading Bob Dylan At The Crossroads.  (Robert Johnson again.  Is Mr. Marcus suggesting that Dylan sold his soul to the Devil?) but now that I have I am appalled at the coarseness of actually composing a song about your perfidy and advertising it to the world.

     If Mr. Marcus had handed Presley the song saying this is going to be what you’ll sing next, Presley who had perfect musical sense would have said:  ‘Not on your life, Baby Blue.’

     No laugh and a shrug from the King.

     After Dylan/The Band Mr. Marcus moves on to Sly Stone.  Sly was not a major talent.  He had a couple fair R&B songs bordering on open racism.  Sinking rapidly beneath drugs Sly Stone rapidly sunk his career.

     Moving next to Randy Newman I must confess that Mr. Marcus has lost me.  Perhaps he is trying to help the career of a fellow Semite along.  Got me.  Newman’s songs were always repulsive to me and Mr. Marcus’ quotes merely make them more repellent.  Gee, I wonder why Elvis never sang ‘Short People?’

     And then of course we come to what Mr. Marcus intends as his piece de resistance of criticism, Elvis himself.  This piece is a regular tear down job.

     Mr. Marcus was a trifle too young during the late forties and first half of the fifties to understand the situation.  During those years the musical culture was in the hands of Jews and Italians.  New York’s Tin Pan Alley from the twenties on had controlled American popular music.  The clubs in which artists performed were all mobbed up as all the artists were mobbed up will they nil they.  Thus nobody got through who wasn’t thoroughly vetted.

     On the fringes one had areas of Black musicians who were outside the scope of popular music hence not worried about.  At the same time one had Hillbilly music that was so despised that proper Whites retched at the mere mention of it and that is no exaggeration.  Concomitant with Hillbilly although culturally acceptable was Folk music.  Postwar from 1946 to 1964 in my estimation Folk was the only listenable pop musical expression.  Unfortunately Folk music was in the hands of the Reds making it culturally suspect.

     During the twenties and thirties Tin Pan Alley songs were vital enough to satisfy the nation’s listening ear although there were those who complained about it.  Whatever had worked for Tin Pan Alley between the wars the ethic had worn too thin between ’46 and ’54.  The music was so godawful and stiff that few could listen to it especially the young.  Into the Jewish vacuum stepped the Black and Hillbilly songwriters and performers.  While Hank Williams may have slipped slightly over the line of pop his songs were welcomed with open arms by pop cover artists.  At that time there was no shame in covering a song made popular by another artist, even as the original version was still moving up the charts.

     A golden time was created for unvetted performers and songwriters to step into the vacuum.  While Eddie Fisher, Ezio Pinza and Mario Lanza  and a stable of Italian pop singers attempted to hold the Tin Pan Alley fort Black street singers were emerging as Doo Wop groups while in Memphis Sam Phillips was developing the distinctive Sun Sound of which Elvis was the cornerstone.  Elvis and his songs were completely unvetted by Tin Pan Alley and the Mob.  As far as I’m concerned Presley’s breakthrough was such a fortunate concatenation of circumstances as to be miraculous.  There are few times when things work out so perfectly for all concerned from Sam Phillips to Elvis to Colonel Parker and RCA.  While Elvis was the transcendant talent he was only a component in the Elvis Presley success story.  He had the good sense to stick to singing while he had the good fortune to be associated with managers of talent, circumspection, genius and above average integrity.  So rare as to be almost unbelievable.

      Phillips brought the talent to the surface that anyone else would have overlooked.  A shy retiring Elvis given the opportunity dug deep to release the inner singer to become a polished singer almost immediately- in fact immediately.  All of his Sun singles are absolutely stunning.  There was no reason not to be swept off your feet from the first note of That’s All Right Mama.

     Elvis’ genius was that he handled songs in a perfect blend of hillbilly and pop.  He may have used some songs written by Blacks but there was no Black singer that could possibly have made of those songs what Elvis did.

     Greil Marcus, Guralnick and others seem to be of the opinion that something went wrong with Elvis.  Nothing went wrong with Elvis; he had the perfect career from his first single to his death in 1977.  He was unable to withstand the pressures of his unparalled success.  Unable to move in public because of his fans he was virtually under house arrest.  For crying out loud, the guy couldn’t even go to McDonald’s.  On top of that he aroused the anger and enmity of the ‘greatest generation’, the Mob and if Mr. Marcus is any example, the Jews.  I’m sure he had difficulty just staying alive.

     His goal was the movies.  Thus his singing style changed to fit the venue.  As much as I loved the Sun Elvis there is no possible way he could have continued in the same vein and sustained popularity  for twenty some odd years.  The new Elvis of Heartbreak Hotel and the early RCA years lost me as a record buyer.  Still, as Dr. Hook sang:  Elvis, he’s a hero, he’s a superstar…. as a hero Elvis always retained my loyalty.

     While the Army seemed a disaster, his tour of duty may have been fortuitous for his career.  The Army allowed the excitement to abate even as anticipation increased but when he returned it was as a return with a different feel.  His style once again changed from the early RCA years.  Listening to those old Mario Lanza and Ezio Pinza records inspired him to sing operatic C&W.  Rather startling to my ear but with sure musical sensibility it worked for Elvis.

     And then his popularity was so immense that he was able to star in two to three movies a year with all of them being money makers.  The songs may have been less than memorable but he had to reach a mass audience for which popular music allowed of no vocal eccentricities.  His fan base was strong enough and his talent great enough to sustain his popularity through a couple dozen movies that were frequently scorned and mocked but as Mr. Marcus generously points out they offered something that set them apart. 

     As all things must his movie career passed its ethic and cannily realizing it Elvis moved on.  Thus in 1968 he produced a special that catapulted him back to the top of the musical scene.  Even Mr. Marcus was overwhelmed by the ’68 transition from movie star back to recording master.

     Nor did Elvis stop there but went on to a musical triumph that dwarfed anything that had gone before it including Frank Sinatra’s whole career- that was the satellite transmission form Hawaii to the whole world, the entire planet, simultaneously.  The whole world tuned in to Elvis at one time.  The equivalent of several hundred Woodstocks and something that has never been equaled by any other performer or groups of performers.

     So, what did go wrong?  Elvis had an unimaginably perfect career.  The tragedy is that the enormous pressures were too great for this amazingly centered performer.  It took a lot to beat him down.

     Now, Elvis had a popularity that Bob Dylan couldn’t even dream about.  Dylan could sing cranky little songs of hatred and viciousness such as Like A Rolling Stone to the ‘abused, confused, misused strung out ones and worse’ but Elvis couldn’t sing such viciousness to a worldwide audience.  Imagine Elvis Live from Hawaii singing to a mob of adoring women lines like this:

Aw, you’ve

Gone to the finest school alright Miss Lowly but you know you only used to get

Juiced in it.

Nobody’s ever taught you to live out on the street

And now you’re gonna

Have to get

Used to it.

You say you never

Compromise

With the mystery tramp but now you

Realize

He’s not selling any

Alibis

As you stare into the vacuum

Of his eyes

And say:

Do you want to

Make a deal?

How  does it feel?

How does it feel?

To be on your own

With no direction home

A complete unknown…

      Pardon me, I’m laughing so hard at the image I’m falling out of my chair.  Oops, there I go.

—–

     I’m back.  Didn’t hurt myself.

     So, anyway I consider Mr. Marcus’ whole critique so skewed as to be vitiated.  It would take a whole lot of love in Elvis heart to make such a musical gaffe, blowing his career in one misguided song and then say:  ‘I didn’t know what I had until I till I threw it all away.’  Sorry Greil, Bob Dylan is actually a minor talent.  Let us not forget that he once opened a show for the Rolling Stones.

5.

     There was a long hiatus of fourteen years between Mystery Train and the appearance of Lipstick Traces in 1989.  During that period one assumes that Mr. Marcus had ‘no direction home.’  How the elements that make up Lipstick Traces formed is open to conjecture.  He attributes his direction to one John Rockwell on the dedication page.  His style was also apparently heavily influenced by the Firesign Theatre hence the herky jerky, jumpy non-sequitur style.  The Firesign Theatre was one of the great recording acts of the late 60s and the 70s, still going too.  They have continued to release CDs on into their old age, such as it is, but, as I say, I stopped listening to anything after 1980.

     As the Firesign is essential to Mr. Marcus I suspect there is loads of humor in Traces that I’m not getting.  Hard enough to make those difficult jumps.  Juxtaposing Presley and Isou wasn’t even a jump, it was a gap.

      John Rockwell was some sort of music critic at the NYT so not exactly the sort of influence one would want.  As Mr. Marcus would have been already familiar with the Frankfurt School of which he is a continuator and mentions Dada in Mystery Train one imagines that critic Rockwell pushed him in the direction of the Presley lookalike Isidore Isou and incidents like the rather obscure Invasion of Notre Dame.  Mr. Marcus was five at the time of the Invasion; one doubts he remembers it.  Thus, perhaps Mr. Rockwell directed his eyes to the morgue of intriguing but all but forgotten news clippings with which he would have been familiar.  Thus Mr. Marcus found the Lettrist/Situationist International.

     The Paris disturbance following on the heels of the Free Speech brouhaha  would then have given him a focal point.  It appears that at some point Mr. Marcus met Debord becoming very well acquainted with the old drunk and pervert, as it were, a disciple.  When Debord shot himself through the heart in 1994 as with Drs. Mabuse and Baum Debord’s soul apparently entered Mr. Marcus’ body so that he appears to have assumed leadership of the SI.

     Traumatized by the Punkers who he gives credit for bringing down Rock he also became fascinated with Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols as well as several other Punk units.  Personally I have always thought Punk was absolutely useless hence I find Mr. Marcus’ fascination with this sub-marginal trash actually objectionable.  While his subjects knew that they were nothing and sought to be everything the means they chose to raise their chances of becoming something were ill advised.

     However as Mr. Marcus integrates them into the Dada/Lettrist/Situationist program it may be worth considering at least Johnny Rotten and the Sex Pistols who according to Mr. Marcus are an outgrowth of the SI.

     After the failure of the 1968 disturbance in Paris Debord’s SI seems to have become truly international what with Greil Marcus in the US and people like Malcom McLaren and Jamie Reid in England.  God only knows how many covert cells there were and what looneys they were allied with.

     McLaren and Reid were casting about for some way to epater the bourgeois when McLaren had an interview with the New York Dolls.  From them he conceived the notion  that no talent was needed at all to become a rock band.  One only needed the ability to make noise.  Fortunately for Reid and McLaren there were myriads of young losers who felt the same way.  One only had to pick and choose the most likely candidates on a cosmetic basis and give their repertoire a Situationist slant.  You know, create a situation.

     Mr. Marcus wonders from where the musical infuences for the Punkers came.  I have to say that their inspiration was largely Bob Dylan.  Johnny Rotten (ne Lydon) was born in 1956 so in 1975 he was twenty years old.  The Punks then would have been eighteen to twenty-five.  A primary influence on them would have been Bob Dylan.  Dylan’s first records give the impression of an untutored musician.  The stuff was just noisy.  He could neither sing nor play.

     The mean streak that Mr. Marcus finds so attractive in Like A Rolling Stone runs throughout the corpus.  As much as I hate to admit it that hateful mocking derisive attitude is the essence of Dylan’s style.  After having Mr. Marcus point this out to me so unmistakably I’m having to rearrange my memories of Bob to change their faces and give them all brand new names.  I’m having to become a revisionist of my own history.

     While Dylan is a real cultural name dropper so that he gives the impression of being learned, he isn’t.  Chronicles proved that.  His criticisms of society are merely emotional rants rather than informed or intellectual critiques.  That he could wing tripe like Masters of War past what must have been a fairly sophisticated Folk crowd is truly phenomenal.  Or, maybe I was wrong about them too.

     At any rate the Punkers were merely unhappy with their teenage angst.  I can assure you that I and my age cohort were too.  If the right social environment had been provided perhaps we would have responded in the same way.

     Johnny Rotten could not have had many of the thoughts Mr. Marcus attributes to him, the kid was only nineteen, so one must believe that McLaren and Reid filled in the blanks with Situationese and Rotten rearranged the words.  While McLaren and Reid may have turned a few dollars from the act it is difficult to see what else they accomplished.

     Society was developing rapidly without their help.  The band Devo released their significant LP Are We Not Men? A. We Are Devo that quite clearly reflected the direction in which society was headed.

     The amazing thing is that Mr. Marcus can discuss these insignificant nits at such length and with such seriousness.  His long discussion of Johnathon Richman’s ‘Roadrunner’ was entirely uncalled for.  Neither Richman nor his song had any influence in record circles.  The record wasn’t even available for sale.

     As Mr. Marcus neither owns up to being in the SI or gives any idea of the direction of the SI and ‘revolutionary’ groups I find that his book while full of interesting details is pointless.  I have read the thing five or six times for this review.  I have given the book more thought than it deserves.  If the intent is a sly joke I don’t find it very funny.  If the intent is to recruit members for the SI I find nothing agreable in the organization.  I remain unrecruited.  As a collection of non-sequiturs I find the book actually unreadable.

     If Mr. Marcus modeled himself on the Firesign Theatre his choice was admirable but his execution was execrable.  As a historian I’m afraid I would have to grade him below a C.  Perhaps the quality of the book is best expressed by the cover.

Why is he nothing when he should be everything?

End Of Review

 

 

 

A Mother’s Eyes

Part II

The Baby Marie.

by

Dr. Anton Polarion

     Well, yes.  What is this Baby Marie you ask.  I’m going to tell you even though it’s a story I’m sure you won’t be able to understand.  It is perhaps the most real story ever told but it’s reality will probably be too transparent for meager intellects.  I almost said, like yours, but I didn’t because I want to retain your sympathy at least to the end of the story; after that you’re on your own and I don’t care.

     You think that’s just a little bit too truculent do you?  Well, maybe it is but I have my reasons which I am not going to divulge to people like you.  Not least is the way I was treated as a child.  Not only by strangers like you but by my own mother.  I had enough problems with those others all my life.  They gave me psychological complexes that it took me a long time to resolve.  But then the unkindest cut of all was my mother.

page 1.

     You say, oh pshaw, everyone has those kinds of problems.  I’ll grant you that but you’ve got them in spades and haven’t resolved a single one.  I’ve got a clean slate having resolved them all.  Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.  Well, so maybe everyone does have those sorts of problems, what’s that got to do with me?  Let everyone else live their own life; I’ve got me to worry about.  Besides if this generalized public you talk about is any kind of example look at the world these mutants have made.  I’d laugh if I weren’t terrified. 

     I’ll take my own problems any day.  Besides all my problems, psychological that is, have been solved since the Baby Marie came to live with me.  Since then I’ve known only peace.  Before the Baby Marie I only had problems with my mother’s memory and my eyes.

     Yes, that old fraud Freud was right about one thing.  The mother is the most important influence in a man’s life.  Yes, I know, I should  have said person’s but here’s a fact for you to digest, I’m a man not a woman.  Let the little girls work out their own problems with their mothers.  All that politically correct crap doesn’t have anything to do with my own mind so leave me alone and let me get on with my story as happened to me.  I’m not going to acknowledge any more interruptions.

     Speaking of fraud Freud this story doesn’t have much to do with him.  All he ever did was take eggs out of other bird’s nests and sit on them himself like he was the one who laid them.  If you know your sources you can write the whole substance of Depth Psychology without having to mention his name.  It was all there, all the Fraud did was gather it into his own nest.  He didn’t even do a good job of that.  His notion of the mind is just a big joke.

page 2.

     Well, no matter, you have to start somewhere and Freud did at least succeed in imprinting his ridiculous notions on the mind of more than one generation.  He got the ball rolling now we have to get it moving in the right direction.

     No, you’re wrong.  I’m not writing this from inside an insane asylum.  I’m saner than you are or ever will be or even could be.  If you must know I write from the lap of comfort with a beautiful sylvan view out of my window.  No Landor’s cottage but then that nineteenth century quality of perfection is lost for the next thousand years.

     I’d say I’ve got a tall cool one in my hand but since the Baby Marie came to live with me I’ve had no desire to drink.  In fact, if I do she’ll leave.  I don’t want that.

     So, my mother.  She rejected and abandoned me when I was five.  This is where Freud comes in.   Freud didn’t understand how the mind works.  More specifically he didn’t know how it was organized.  Not his fault really; there wasn’t that much information available at the time.  He was only a pioneer.  Still, he shouldn’t have let on that he knew more than he did.

     Let’s skip this nonsense.  Suffice it to say that the brain is divided into right and left lobes and a conscious and subconscious mind.  When the brain is presented with a Challenge which it cannot successfully handle the failure becomes a fixation in the subconscious.  For every mental fixation there is a physical affect.  The mind automatically converts its mental failure into a physical consequence.  You see, that’s where the talking cure comes in.  When you identify, recognize and express the fixation it and its’ physical affect are exorcised.

     Real simple, not as easy as it looks for the central childhood fixation, but simple.  The talking cure is one of those eggs Freud plucked from another’s nest; in this case his benefactor and friend, Breuer.  Oh well, Breuer didn’t know what to do with it anyway.  He could never have hatched that egg if he’d sat on it till he was a hundred or as old as Methuselah or possibly the hills.

     Now, you see, these other people gave me a number of Challenges my mind couldn’t resolve and a whole bunch of fixations with detestable physical affects.  As the affects all emanate from the mind you may include mental afflictions also.

     OK.  So I found my fixations and exorcised them.  Straightened myself out in body and mind.  Got rid of my constipation, post-nasal drip, everything.  There were dozens.  I felt great afterwards.  But after a while you forget how great it is and concentrate on other problems.  The amazing thing is after you get rid of the major ones the least significant fixations demand attention thereby assuming a significance they never had.  They’re easy to understand and get rid of though.  After exorcising the central childhood fixation all the other stuff is an anthill compared to the mountain of the central childhood fixation.

page 3.

     So, now I think I’m home free but then I discover I’ve got another problem.  My mother.  But she isn’t anywhere in my conscious or sub-conscious mind.  So where is she?

Aha!

     I found her way down deep below both the levels of consciousness and subconsciousness.  The brain stem.  There’s one Freud missed.  An obvious one, too.  The Brainstem.  The first brain in the evolutionary scheme of things.  First you have the brain stem then the midbrain and finally the pre-frontal lobe evolves.  So then Man can sneer as he looks down on the other vertebrates who have a lot more sense that he does.

     Now all we have to do is rise to our scientific knowledge and get rid of that miserable attitude of the bible.  There is no longer any reason to enshrine that immature consciousness with its primitive monotheism.

     Here’s an obvious thing you probably never thought of before.  Since the brain stem came first the sensory organs are associated with it.  That’s right.  The optic nerves are associated with the brain stem.  When you get that REM, Rapid Eye Movement, when you’re dreaming?  That comes from the brain stem.

     What’s as old as the brain stem?  Yo’ mama.

     That’s right.  Freud was right on that one.  That’s a main reason why your mother is the most important influence in your life.  Your mother’s eyes.  Never thought of that one, huh?  Well, plenty of song writers have.  As an infant your mother’s eyes drilling into your own as you looked up from your breast feeding established that connection to the brain stem and your own eyes.

page 4.

     So here’s what I found out.  That connection between your mother’s eyes and your own is paramount.  When your mother rejects or abandons you that connection between your mother’s eyes and your own is broken.  That fires a lightening bolt right through your brain stem down below the subconscious part of the mind.  At some time in your life you’re going to have trouble with your eyes.

     The circumstances of the break will dictate the nature of your problem.  If a scientific survey were conducted some sort of general rules could be drawn up.  Heck, someone could catalog fixations and their affects.  They will be the same with everyone.  Nobody’s that unique.  The exact form may vary but the affect will be same.  We’re closer to mental health than most people think.  It’s just that you people prefer to be crazy.

     My mother remarried and reclaimed me when I was ten so I didn’t have any real trouble with my eyes until I was after forty.  I’m younger than that now but that needs no explanation.  I’ll die soon anyway.

     I had to have these operations on my eyes a few years ago.  I thought I would have to go blind.  While I was waiting I read Sybille Bedford’s biography of Aldous Huxley.  He was rejected and abandoned by his mother also, she died when he was fourteen.  Then his eye problems started when he was sixteen.  I realized immediately that my eye problems were connected to my mother too.

page 5.

     My problem was that I knew my subconscious had been cleared out long before so that my problem with my mother couldn’t be in my subconscious.

     The answer was revealed as answers of that type are, in one’s dreams.

     I dreamt that I went down to the deepest spot known to man and there I knelt before a well.  The well was dry; there was no water in it.  It might be romantic to say I filled it with my tears but that’s not what happened.  You know, science fails when you refuse to observe its tenets.  That’s one of the big things wrong with world now, you want override obvious truths for emotional reasons.  Think about it.

     Since I had identified the ‘fixation’ and expressed it, by all the rules of Depth Psychology it should have disappeared, but it didn’t.  The brain stem is different than the upper brain.  Returning to the surface by the way I came I woke up.

     Now I did have a dilemma.  I thought I had the solution to my problem but I didn’t know how to apply it.

     For a couple months I could only worry about it.  Which is to say that by applying auto-suggestion I hoped to have my mind show me the answer.  Naturally, it did.

     The Baby Marie came to me.  The Baby Marie is real but she’s just not flesh and blood.  She came to me as all balms do, in dreams.  I almost didn’t recognize her.  It was close.  I might have lost her with terrible consequences for myself.

     I was at a party, in my dream, strange enough in itself as I never go to parties, wouldn’t know how to act at one; didn’t know how to act at this one.  Fact is for some reason I never get invited.  Who’d want to go anyway?  There was much hilarity and boisterousness, two qualities I lack.  I began to wonder why I went.  Then a man, who while he may have been an alter ego, I still don’t know, asked me to come into the other room where they were delivering a Baby Marie for me.

     I’d never heard of Baby Maries so I was really annoyed; so annoyed that I could hardly relate to the situation.

     This dream is related to another dream I had once and is actually a fulfillment but why interrupt this story.  If you want I can send you the other one, just ask.  Well, they brought in this big barrel or keg.  The barrel came apart in the middle so the upper part was slid aside.  I have never seen a stranger sight.  The barrel was half filled with the clearest water you ever saw.  Sight for the blind you might say.  I couldn’t believe my eyes.  Floating, not so much in, but under the water was the head of a little infant with these large loving eyes that met mine.

     I can tell you I was nonplused.  ‘What’s this?’ I asked truculently enough.  ‘It’s for you.  We got this Baby Marie for you.’  Said my alter ego in his Hawaiian shirt.  ‘It’s a Baby Marie.’

     I was disgusted.  The idea, putting a baby in a barrel of water and shipping it from god knows where.  The poor thing would drown, should have already drowned.  I almost missed my connection over past grievances and meaningless technicalities.  Then I realized that if the Baby Marie was still alive she must be floating in living water.  That must be why she hadn’t drowned.  I knew the value of living water if I didn’t understand the importance of a Baby Marie.

page 6.

     More for the sake of the living water than the Baby Marie I accepted the gift.  The water and the Baby Marie were then poured into the dry well in my brain stem down below where the sea monsters go.  The eyes of the Baby Marie which were so loving replaced those of my mother who had rejected me.  The connection was restored.

     Unable to reach the problem through conscious Depth Psychology my mind had nevertheless found a way to resolve the dilemma.  Or, perhaps problems of the brain stem function independently of the methods of Depth Psychology.

     That’s how the Baby Marie came to live me completely changing my life.   That’s why I don’t and won’t drink alcohol again.

     The details of the dream are not clear to me but perhaps this crowd of people at the party are the people who laid my central childhood fixation on me and are offering me compensation for their crime.  I certainly can’t be sure.

     I suppose it right to speculate some on who or what the Baby Marie might be.  Since she is a construction of my own mind that may not be as hard as it may seem.

     Obviously with the Baby Marie I am born again.  In fact, I had been reading Jung and I was struck by his analysis of the bapismal font and the idea of the infant being born again in that holy or living water.

     I had also read of a dream of Bob Hunter’s, the song writer for the Grateful Dead, you know.  He had a recurrent dream that terrified him for days after.  In his dream he went down to the lowest place in the world where he stood before a black muddy river.  I had no trouble recognizing this river as a symbol for his relationship with his mother.  I also knew that it would take more than a box of rain to unsully those waters, but if he knew how to use the box of rain it would be a good start especially if the rain was living water.  You see, he had the problem and the solution in his mind all along.

page 7.

     Last and perhaps most important is a song that had been playing in my memory for over fifty years.  It was a song about a man trying to reach a person over the phone known only as Marie.

     He knows neither her phone number nor her address.  He pleads desperately with the operator to help him get in touch with his Marie.  The operator cannot help him even though the man explains quite explicitly that Marie lives only half a mile from the Mississippi Bridge in Memphis, Tennessee.  As it turned out Marie was merely an infant.

     I had fixated on Marie, the Mississippi Bridge, the Mississippi River and Memphis, Tennessee all my life without realizing why.  Why I should have done so is not clear to me.  How I might have associated my unrealized problem with an inexplicable answer is a mystery of the mind, yet both problem and answer were ever present in my mind just as they were in Bob Hunter’s.

     It took several decades to cross that bridge over the river but at last I have gotten in touch with my Marie.

     This is a true story.  You may believe it or not as you choose, but if you heed it you will find it a major contribution to the understanding of human psychology as well as your own.

     That’s all I have to say.  I bid you goodnight.  Don’t call me, I’ll call you.  Don’t wait up.

Afterword.

     Dr. Polarion can be cantankerous at times.  Don’t let his attitude in this relation fool you.  He’s actually a nice guy, not as cranky as he allowed himself to sound.  He’s a pretty deep psychologist, kind of look through and behind his narration.  I mean, you know, he’s got literary ambitions.   Wants to be another Freud.  Get the Nobel prize for literature.

     As a more gradual transition to Part III let me lead you through the art gallery of the mind to the Salvador Dali Room.  Over on this wall here, look at this picture called ‘The Temptation Of Saint Anthony.’  This was done in 1946.  I’m not sure of Dali’s sources.  For all I know he may have been reading Poe.

     Look down here in the corner at the naked Saint Anthony recoiling on the ground from the horse figure, holding out his cross to exorcise the demon.  See that skull of death on the ground between his legs.  Look at the rearing mare or the Mother Archetype, you can tell it’s a mare, look back between the legs, look at those horse shoes all askew on those enormous front feet.  See those teeth showing between the parted lips, look on these baleful eyes.  What could be more clear?

     Then see, coming behind the Mare are the pack elephants of memory on their precarious spindly legs.  Memory is like that but the bulk of the elephants is such that you know the memories must be important.  The first bears a female figure on the pedestal.  The Mother Archetype.  See her holding up her breasts like some antique figure of Mother Earth promising all and delivering nothing.   Give her a baby, that ‘s all she wants.

     Behind her comes a symbol I can’t really understand.  Perhaps a triangular cenotaph.  I don’t know what Dali means.

     Finally comes the elephant bearing the house or symbol of the self.  Now, let us turn to Part III, ‘Cow Eyed Hera And Edgar Allan Poe.’

    

A Mother’s Eyes

April 27, 2007

A Mother’s Eyes

by

R.E. Prindle

Part I: The Remarkable Case Of Aldous Huxley’s Eyes 30 pages

Part II:  The Baby Marie: 10 pages

Part III: Cow Eyed Hera And Edgar Allan Poe: 21 pages

Part IV: The Hand That Rocks The Cradle: 9 pages

Part I

The Remarkable Case Of Aldous Huxley’s Eyes

     This essay will deal with certain unconscious relationships between the Indo-European male and the Mother Archetype.  This essay is retricted to the Indo-European sub-species because the author is not convinced that all Homo Sapiens sub-species are identical in intellectual makeup nor are they subjected to the same cultural influences which would produce a uniform effect across all sub-species of mankind.  What Jung calls the Collective Unconscious of Man does not use the same symbolism in every period of time, every place and with all sub-species.  While the Horse will be a central focus of the Indo-European after minus 2000, for instance, prior to its introduction to the Middle East the beast could not have figured in the Collective Unconscious of either the Indo-Europeans or Semitic Mesopotamians.  Thus the Black, Semitic and Mongolid sub-species may be subject to the same relationship with the Mother Archetype but may express the same issue in different symbolism.

page 1.

     The female of the Indo-European or other sub-species is structurally different from the male hence subject to different responses to the same issue in different symbolism.  I will touch on that briefly in Part IV.

     Further, one ought not to confuse the role of female with the role of mother.  The female is a different person until she becomes a mother.  Once a mother her response to the role will depend on female societal desires which will control her attitude to motherhood.  The intelligence and intellectuality of the female person is in conflict with the Structural Psychology of the Mother.  Not all females are intellectually adapted to become mothers although most do become mothers.

     The topic will be approached from the point of view of Depth Psychology based more on the approach of Carl G. Jung than that of Sigmund Freud.  Freud’s approach was based on the personal psychology of the upper brain while Jung approached the subject more from a Special angle hence his notion of the Collective Unconscious with a universal heritable symbolism regardless of education or sub-species.

     Because he was dealing with a more homogeneous population unlike the heterogeneous population of the United States he was able to believe that all people are subjected to identical influences even though he had the obvious sub-special differences of the Jewish Semitics before him.

page 2.

     There can of course be no such thing as a collective mind hence no Collective Unconscious.  Neither can this Collective Unconscious be inherited.  There can only be a shared sub-special understanding of phenomena.  This shared understanding will express itself in certain common symbols induced by a universal field of education depending on one’s level of consciousness.

     Specifically I wish to examine the relationship between the mother and the eyes of the Indo-European male as well as the mother’s identification with the Horse by the male.  All three are intimately related. 

     The difference between Jung’s Collective Unconscious and the individual unconscious or, rather, sub-conscious, is that Jung without having actually differentiated the two was referring to Structural Psychology by his notion of the Collective Unconscious.

      Before the human organism can be subject to personal psychology there must first be an organism.  The construction of that organism will then determine its psychological potential.

     Thus while all the higher vertebrates share the same Structural Psychology the addition of the upper brain separates man from the beasts while causing a conflict between the Structural Psychology and Personal or Intellectual Pyschology.

     While a human entity appears to be an organic whole it is actually a construction of component parts.  The nature of those parts determine the psychological potential of the completed construction.

page 3.

     Not enough attention has been paid to how a human is constructed or the signficance of that construction.  The basic organism seems to be taken for granted.

     The human is a combination of two different components which are then integrated.  On the one hand there is the passive ovum which is provided by the female of the species; on the other hand is the active sperm provided by the male.  Passivity and activity are important and should not be passed over lightly.  The ovum provides one half of the structural elements as well as all the mitochondrial DNA.  These are significant facts and not merely incidental.

     The ovum is always female or an X chromosome.  Thus the male always has this female X chromosome component which Jung and Freud using the imperfect data of their time referred to as a man’s ‘feminine side.’  Jung called it the Anima in the male, the corresponding role in the female the Animus.

     The presence of an X chromosome in the male in no way affects his sexual identity as a male.  It is not a cause of homosexuality or effeminacy.  Using the imperfect data of his time Jung acted on the notion that sexuality was caused by a ‘preponderance’ of male or female genes.  This would of course distort his vision of sexuality creating non-existent possibilities.

     An unfertilized ovum is, of course, of no value.  The male provides the fertilizing element in the form of the sperm.  The sperm contains the other half of the structure which when joined with the ovum completes the structure.

page 4.

     The sperm can be either X or y.  There must be a difference in nature between the ovate and spermatic X chromosomes.  If X the completed structure is a female.  But the spermatic X contributes the gene pool of the mother of the male which is part of the Anima so that the female has two female components.  Without the X chromosome the male could not provide X sperm.

     It must also be true that the spermatic side of the female provides a set of genes received from the father while the ovate side provides a set of genes from the mother, so that not all of the female’s ovum are the same.

     In the case of either an X or y sperm the ovate or female mitochondrial DNA is always and solely the source of mitochondrial DNA in the resulting construction whether male or female.  The Spermatic mitochondrial DNA is always expelled from the united ovum.

     Thus the Mother Archetype establishes itself in a much more intimate connection with the male than the Father Archetype.  This is a physiological fact with real consequences and not a matter for sexual pride.

     When the ovate and spermatic parts combine the ovate X chromosome assumes the left side of the structure while the spermatic X or y forms the right.

     Many organs which can function independently are therefore duplicated such as kidneys, lungs, gonads or ovaries.  Those which can only function as a unit are formed of two separate lobes which are seamed such as the heart, liver, penis or clitoris.

     Now, this may be controversial but the gonads or ovaries, the spinal cords and brain from an integrated unit like the power train of the automobile.  All three are parts of consciousness.

page 5.

     The ends of the spinal cords, it follows that one each must be provided by the ovum and sperm, anchored in the gonads or ovaries intertwine up the spine until they cross over at the brain stem so that the passive ovate left side of the body becomes the passive right side of the brain while the active spermatic right side of the body crosses over to become the active left side of the brain.

     The two cords, spermatic and ovate anchored in the gonads or ovaries pass up the spine to emerge from the brain stem as ‘loose wires.’  To give them a name we will use Jung’s terminology but assert that male and female have both an Animus and Anima rather than as Jung has it, the male an Anima and the female an Animus.

     Now, as man evolved he began with what is referred to as the serpent’s brain or the brain stem followed by mid- brain, parietal lobes, upper brain and pre-frontal lobe.

     Thus structurally to the point of the brain stem all vertebrates function more or less identically.  By which I mean to say that to that point the psychology of say, sub-species five of the lion is identical to man.  If this isn’t true than evolution is bunk.

     Of necessity the optical nerves are associated with this very primitive organ of the brain stem.  This fact must have some relation to the association of the Mother with the eyes.

     Such a psychological association must operate independently of personal psychology as Structural Psychology or, as Jung would have it, the Collective Unconscious.

page 6.

     There are then tree levels of consciousness: the autonomic system, the brain stem and the upper brain.

     In fact the as the brain stem is not intellectual as in personal psychology, it may function independently of the upper brain and require a different technique for therapy.

     At any rate the symbolism Jung discusses is related to Structural Psychology and not the neuroses and psychoses of personal psychology.

     When the male Indo-European experiences rejection or abandonment by the mother this rejection may be evidenced by eye problems associated with a horse symbolism.

     Having laid the frame for my discussion I wish to begin with the case of Aldous Huxley, his relationship to his mother and his celebrated eye problems.  Aldous Huxley is, of course, the important literary figure who wrote ‘Brave New World’, ‘Eyeless In Gaza’, ‘Point Counter Point’ and other intriguing and important novels.

     All his adult life from the age of sixteen on Huxley endured terrible problems with his eyes.  He was frequently able to improve his vision remarkably only to suffer setbacks.  He first suffered maternal rejection when his mother opened a girl’s school relegating Huxley to an inferior status in both his and her eyes to her female students.  This alone had a permanent effect on his character and his adult relationship with women.  Then, when Huxley was fourteen his mother died abandoning him completely as it were.

page 7.

     No matter how natural or unavoidable death may be, those affected are under no obligation to react rationally.  While on a conscious or even sub-conscious level Huxley seemed to handle his mother’s death well he was devastated on the structural level.  First rejected and then abandoned by his mother, Huxley, at the age of sixteen was attacked in his eyes.  Actually the reaction could have been predicted although how and when would have had to await manifestation.

     Huxley developed an inflammation of the cornea called Keratitis Punctata.  Thus his reaction to his mother’s rejection and abandonment was of the most serious sort.  In the days before modern medicine he would have successfully blinded himself in both eyes.  Given the medicine of the day he might have been cured with minimal or no loss of vision.  As it was he was misdiagnosed allowing the disease to take almost full course.  By the time he was treated he had lost his vision in his right  or ovate eye while being as good as blind in his left  or spermatic eye.

     The nature of Keratitis Punctata is such that it damages or scars the surface of the cornea while the internal functions of the eye remain intact.  The effect of the scar tissue allowed his vision to fluctuate.

     I think that if a survey were taken it would be found that the right or ovate eye is always affected the worst.  This would strengthen my contention that certain eye problems are due to relationships with the mother or ovate side.

     It may be argued that Keratitis Punctata is a physical problem and not subject to psycho-somatic influence.  It is my contention that Huxley’s psyche in search of a satisfactory ailment subconsciously sought the affliction out.

page 8.

     Over the years Huxley was able by an act of will to improve his vision dramatically but he always suffered relapses as his structural need for the infirmity overcame his conscious will.  While had he been diagnosed and treated promptly he would not have lost his vision still his Structural need was such that he would have had a continuing series of eye problems over his lifetime.

     Medical science poses problems to psychotic needs by being able to overcome psych-somatic reactions; the sub-conscious must search for new ways to gratify its need for affliction.

     I too suffered abandonment by my mother beginning when I was five and ending when I was ten when she remarried.  I was first put into two foster homes and then placed in an orphanage.  The orphanage was critical.  While I had very acute vision until I was forty a variety of eye problems have plagued me since.

     While all the problems were quite natural therefore seeming to be of a strictly physical nature yet I had been plagued  by fears of going blind since I was ten when my mother remarried.  I therefore left myself open to attack in the appropriate time and place.  Finally at sixty-four I had a cataract operation on my right or ovate eye followed by one on the left.  I realized the psycho-somaic source of the problem while I was reading Sybille Bedford’s biography of Aldous Huxley.

page 9.

     Prompted by the reading I had a dream of a horse.  This is the only horse dream I can remember ever having.

     The horse clearly represented my mother staring at me with large guilty eyes not unlike the description of the Greek goddess Hera who was styled ‘cow-eyed.’

     Sometime in the near past, two or more years ago, I had seen a TV show about a horse trainer who I can remember only by the name of the Horse Whisperer.  He had developed a new technique of gentling a horse rather than breaking it.  In my dream I was using his technique to gentle a mare.  She seemed to want to be affectionate to me but I kept pushing her away or she shied away in my attempt to gentle her.

     By that time I had already developed my ideas of Structural Psychology.  I had also integrated my personality clearing all fixations from my subconscious.  As I expressed it then, all the way down to my brain stem.  Now I realized I was dealing with the brain stem itself having spoken more truly than I knew.

     While I had made progress in rectifying my Animus I cannot say for certain that the process was complete.  In all probability I have reconciled my Anima and Animus.  I have never had trouble with my Anima although my Animus was seriously blunted as a child affecting my ability to express my manhood.

     However, contrary to Depth Pschology, having recognized and spoken this apparent fixation caused by my mother’s abandonment the fixation did not respond by immediately being exorcised as had my fixations of the upper brain.  Thus the problem of Structural traumas obviously requires a different technique for treatment.

page 10.

     The appearance of a horse figure in my dream was startling to me.  I have never liked horses.  All my life I have had an irrational hatred of them even to the point of verbally abusing them at sight.

     Aldous Huxley, characteristically of the trauma, expressed his own reaction through horse imagery.  Huxley wrote his first novel ‘Crome Yellow’ in 1921 followed by ‘Antic Hay’ in 1923 and ‘Those Barren Leaves’ in 1925.  Those three novels lead up to 1928’s  ‘Point Counter Point’ in which his problem with his mother finds expression in varied symbolism.  In this last novel Huxley portrays himself in the character of Philip Quarles.  He has a wife, Elinor, as a mother substitute and a son called signficantly, Little Phil, in other words a doppelganger.

     In the novel Quarles has a limp rather than bad eyes.  Huxley, through Quarles, expresses his mother’s abandonment and his attack of Kertitis Punctata this way:

     Quote:

     ‘…Philip…was remembering that immense black horse kicking, plunging, TEETH bared and ears laid back; and how it suddenly leaped forward, dragging the carter along with it: and the rumble of the wheels; and ‘Aie!’ his own screams; and how he shrank back against the steep bank, how he tried to climb, slipped, fell; and the appalling rush and trampling of the giant; and ‘Aie, aie!’ the huge shape between him and the sun, the great hoofs and suddenly an annihilating pain.’

page 11.

     Note expecially the teeth which will appear more prominently in Part III.

     This very vivid picture is done so well that one might actually believe such an event really occurred.  It didn’t.  Here Huxley transforms his mother into a huge black horse.  The steep bank I interpret as the brain stem which appeared in my own imagery as a deep dry well.  There was a huge shape between Huxley/Quarles and the sun which must represent both the loss of his mother, when the sun went out of his life, and the onset of Kerititis Punctata.

     In the novel Quarles had his leg crushed by the cart but in this version it is not clear where he received the injury while it was definitely caused by the huge black horse.  There was only the annihilating pain.  One assumes that the pain was the loss of Huxley’s mother.

     Huxley gives his hurt a full scale treatment here.  Quarles and his wife live in a mews in London.  A mews is a converted stable.  Horses had formerly been kept there.  Now the ‘huge machines’ or cars of a hundred horse power or more are kept there.  The arch at the end of the mews through which the horses were led stands as a constant reminder to Huxley/Quarles of his tragedy.

     Not content to retell his own pain, Huxley then goes on to punish his mother in his imagination as he feels she punished him by dying.  Remember a man in Huxley’s situation uses a woman as a surrogate to avenge himself on his mother who is beyond retaliation.  In ‘Point Counter Point’ Quarles’ mother is still alive.  It is she who has care of Little Phil when he is stricken with meningitis so the guilt remains with her.

page 13.

     On the eve of the meningitis attack Elinor Quarles, Little Phil’s mother, was about to commence a dalliance with another man.  Quarles’ mother’s telegram reached Elinor in time to prevent her beginning the affair.  Elinor believes that Little Phil’s meningitis was caused by her intended infidelity and suffers accordingly.

     Elinor’s intended infidelity corresponds with Huxley’s mother’s betrayal of her love for him by relegating him to a secondary role while she lavished attention on her girl students.

     Huxley’s descriptions of Little Phil’s suffering are quite gruesome.

     Quote:

     ‘…she found the child already awake.  One eyeball was wide open and the eye, all pupil, was looking straight up at the ceiling; the other was half shut in a permanent wink that imparted to the thin and shrunken little face an expression of ghastly facetiousness.

     ‘He can’t open it,’ the nurse explained.  ‘It’s paralyzed.”

     Unquote.

     Thus the crux of Point Counter Point is the punishment of Elinor Quarles qua Huxley’s mother for the crime of rejecting him in favor of her female students and later dying.  Huxley quite rightly associates eye disease with his mother through his wifely surrogate and the symbol of the giant black horse with giant hooves and teeth bared rearing in the brain stem.  He obviously had no clear idea of what this imagery meant to him personally.  No doors of perception were opened for him there.

page 13.

     While this horse imagery is clear in ‘Point Counter Point’ Bedford also quotes Huxley as noting emphatically the remarkable deeds of horses in Homer’s Iliad.  I think the horse symbol is replaced in a man’s active life by his relationship with women.

     I now intend to devote a few pages to the relationship of mothers and women to horses and eyes in Greek mythology leading back to the present time.

     My two lines of argument will concentrate on the nature of the God of Waters, Poseidon and the relationship of that greatest of all mama’s boys, Achilles, with his mother, the sea nymph, Thetis.

     I follow the Jungian concept of attempting to penetrate the symbolism by this narrative of action.

     In the divine dispensation of spoils in Greek mythology the preeminent god, Zeus, was awarded the sky, Poseidon preeminence in the oceans and rivers, Hades possession of the underworld.  Obviously Hades got skunked  which made him a sour sort of guy.

     The surface of Mother Earth was common to all three.

     The significant fact here is that the three gods are male while the Earth named Ge, Gaia or Demeter was female.  Thus you have three men with equal claims to the same woman, Mother Earth.

     In ancient Greek sourcs as well as in Biblical story Man realized that there was a time before consciousness.  Thus the story of the creation of the universe is less a story of creation than one of the crystallization of consciousness.

page 14.

     In the creation myth all objective reality is confused; all is seen as one.  In other words, there was only an animal consciousness.  Then a divine wind blows across the plane of consciousness separating the upper and lower spheres; the conscious and subconscious.  Thus the upper sphere of consciousness became heaven  and was allotted to the mind of infinite power, Zeus.  The subconscious was given to the Father of Waters, Poseidon while the underworld of the brain stem went to Hades.  The plane of consciousness was shared by mankind and the gods.  This is as it should be.

     Poseidon’s dominion is the seas, oceans and rivers.  The waters of oblivion are associated with the subconscious and irrational  which is to say the female or matriarchal consciousness.  The subconscious and irrational are therefore equated with the matriarchal order.  Thus Poseidon, who must actually predate Zeus as a carryover from the Matriarchal consciousness has relations with a number of domineering women who are very hard on men.

     The question of why Poseidon is also closely related to horses is very difficult to answer, especially as Poseidon was early on the scene while horses arrived later.  I offer only a working hypothesis.

     It has been suggested that the rollers of the sea are reminiscent of horses’ heads.  It has also been suggested that rivers as they dash down mountain slopes and race to the sea are quite similar to the flight of the horse.  There may be truth in both suggestions as when the horse arrived it had to be associated with some god; in association with Poseidon that may possibly explain how horses came to be associated with the Mother Archetype.  Their association with the Mother can only have begun after the Indo-Europeans brought horses to the Aegean world which was after the year minus 2000.

page 15.

     Of the mean flesh eating mares or mothers with whom Poseidon is associated it is only necessary to give two examples.  The most important of the two by far is the Medusa and her Gorgon sisters, the other is the enchantress, Circe.

     The Medusa is a very important study.  She apparently dates back to an early period of the Matriarchate.  While in the Patriarchic myth of Perseus and the Gorgon she is a hideous evil witch whose mere glance can turn a man to stone there is evidence to point to a time before the rise of the Patriarchate when she was a belle ideal; a tower of strength.  Shields with the Medusa head continued to be used in classical times as a magical charm to repel the enemy.  The snakes which form her hair were once a symbol of her authority rather than hideous emblems of hatred.  She was then one of Poseidon’s wives or , more probably, he was her consort.

     When the Patriarchate displaced the Matriarchate Perseus was chosen to destroy the Medusa or, in other words, the symbol of the Matriarchate.  This he did by decapitation.  Decapitation or the separation of the head from the body is a powerful symbol in itself which should have destroyed the Medusa’s power to lithicize men with her EYES.  Even in death, which is to say after the power of the Matriarchate was broken, the mere sight of her now dead eyes continued to turn men to stone.

page 16.

     The myth of Perseus is a keystone story that tells of the birth of the new order of the Patriarchate.  When the old order of the Matriachate was beheaded a remarkable thing happened; two beings that correspond to the male Anima and Animus emerged from her neck or, shall we say, brain stem.

     The Animus of the liberated Patriarchate was represented by the Golden Knight named Chrysaor.  As the Animus he had no concrete identity.  He represented the mind of infinite power and rationality possessed by Zeus and shared by men but not by women.  He consequently fades from view.

     The Anima that sprang from Medusa’s severed brain stem was the great winged horse or mare, Pegasus.  The great mare allowed man’s imagination to soar as though godlike, above the earth’s plane that was the dominion of the Matriarchate.

     Further having now passed through the dawn of consciousness as represented by the creation myth the male had now reached the level of consciousness where he could begin to attack and destroy his subconscious demons.  Thus Perseus finds the maiden Andromeda chained to a rock awaiting destruction by the monster of the sea depths of the subconscious.

     Soaring above the Leviathan on his Anima, Pegasus, in the conscious sphere, Perseus is able to destroy the monster of the subconscious and liberate Andromeda, or the female, from destruction by the subconscious.  In his arms, under his protection Andromeda, or the female, was freed from animalism.  She too was released to find her full potential under men’s guidance and protection.

page 17.

     As decapitation wasn’t totally effective there was more than one way to handle the attempted suppression of the Matriarchate.  It has been truly said that you can kill men but you can’t kill ideas.  Perhaps because of the Iliad with its gathering of the tribes at Troy one thinks of Greek mythology as an indissoluble whole.  This is not the case.  There are many strands and traditions to Greek mythology.

     It is highly probable that when the Greeks invaded the Peninsula that their route bypassed Athens which was shielded from above by the Boeotian Semites.  Thus the Greeks were shunted West where they fell on the Pelopponesus bypassing Attica.

     While the Athenians avoided military invasion they were yet unable to resist the Patriarchal tide.

     The myth of Perseus and the Gorgon which belongs to the Argive or Pelopponesian cycle gives only one view of the suppression of the Matriarchate.  That was how it happened West of Attica.  In Athens itself the transition from the Matriarchate to the Patriarchate was more evolutionary.  This would be the result of being bypassed by the Greek invasion.

     Perseus on his way back to Argos from Palestine gave the Medusa’s head to Athene who then wore it as an emblem on her bosom.  This would be another way of saying that Perseus influenced the Athenians to convert to Patriarchalism.

page 18.

     I would suggest that, even though the Iliad lists a contingent of Athenian ships present at Troy, there were no Athenians there.  As the Greek heroes for the most part are from the Pelopponese or other Greek locations and the quarrel is between them and Troy while none of the Greek heroes was Athenian.  I would suggest that the Athenian contingent is an interpolation.  Agamemnon and the Argives as invaders would have had no influence over  non-Greek Athens such as they had over Odysseus in Ithaca.

     The Athenians always claimed to be an autocthonous people, that is that they sprang from the soil or, in other words, were there before the Greek invasion.  Of necessity that would mean that they were not Greek per se.

     Their early heroes are half snake, half human, which I understand to mean that on the one hand as snakes emerge from the soil the Athenians were autocthonous; on the other hand that they were half Matriarchal and half Patriarchal.  In other words, there was an evolutionary transition.  This idea is borne out by subsequent Athenian mythology.

     If this is true then it must follow that the gods of Athens had formerly been Medusa and Poseidon- the Queen and her consort.

     Imagine Perseus handing the head of Medusa to Athene.  Athene must have neutralized the power of Medusa because as of the handing of the head to Athene it was still capable of turning men to stone at a glance.  As Athene’s emblem displayed on her breast where all men must see it, it could no longer do so.

     As the Athenians told the story of the suppression of the Matriarchate, Zeus swallowed a matriarchal goddess known as Metis.  This is a normal method of disposing of one’s enemies.  As the Africans down to the present day say when they intend to destroy an enemy- We will eat you up.

page 19.

     When you eat someone up you obtain their qualities.  Metis was the goddess of Wisdom.  Whether she was one of the Gorgons I don’t believe is recorded but I suspect so.  Perseus and the more primitive Argives believed that destruction was simply a matter of cutting off a head, the Gordian knot approach.  The Athenians thought differently.

     Having eaten up the Matriarchy Zeus found that it gave him a serious case of indigestion.  His eyes were bigger than his stomach.  The Matriarchy would not stay suppressed.

     As it was necessary that some other expedient be employed the Matriarchy was allowed to exist but only as subordinate to the Patriarchy.  While not abolished, the Patriarchy attempted to reform it in an acceptable way.  The attempt was made to replace the uncontrollable Matriarchal figures as represented by Ares and Aphrodite with a more rational goddess embracing both.

     Thus the indigestion of Zeus gave him a headache.  In other words, he had to give the problem some serious thought.  He had an idea, as why wouldn’t the mind of infinite power have an idea.  He transformed the old wild undisciplined Matriarchal god and goddess into the superbly rational and controlled Athene.  Her idea formed in the Patriarchal brain then sprang fully formed and armed from Zeus’ forehead.  Actually she didn’t spring but was chiseled out by Hermes and Hephaestus who are both gods of resource.

     Thus when Perseus handed the head of Medusa to Athene he was passing the torch for the application of Patriarchy in Athens.  The destruction of Poseidon’s consort in Athens left that god without a female counterpart and that’s the way he stays throughout the Patriarchate.  Athene was a chaste virgin who would have nothing to do with men.  As a goddess with a technological sideline she came into conflict with the Matriarchal technological god Hephaestus.  He attempted to rape her or in other words reimpose an aspect of the matriarchy on her which she successfully resisted.  Instead he spurted on her leg in a pre-mature ejaculation which she, as the goddess of weaving, wiped off with a piece of wool.

page 20.

     Unable to seduce Athene and reestablish his supremacy in Athens on his part, Poseidon then had a contest with Athene to see who should be the tutelary deity of Athens.  In other words, should Athens be Patriarchally or Matriarchally inclined.  Should it be named Athens or Poseidonia?

     Poseidon peformed the seemingly impossible task of making water spring from the rocky high crown of the Acropolis.  Athene countered by making an olive tree grow on Rocky Top.

     The Athenians opted for the olive tree but it was not a clean cut victory for the modified Patriarchy.  The Athenians ever after nurtured several snakes on the Acropolis along with both the olive tree and Poseidon’s spring.  Thus the Matriarchal past was not forgotten.

     Further Athene retained some attributes of the Matriarchy.  She was sometimes theriomorphically represented with a horse’s head while her attribute of the owl is represented in statuary and she is referred to as owl eyed, undoubtedly a reference to the wise Metis.  A snake was also shown coiled on the ground in the shelter of Athene’s shield as she leaned on it.

page 21.

     In point of fact all Greek heroes were symbolically horse headed by virtue of the horse hair crests on their helmets.  They were always under the protection of the Mother Archetype while sharing in the qualities of her symbol the horse.

     The wearing of lion and leopard skins is also an aspect of theriomorphism.  Obviously one hopes to share in the prowess of the lion or leopard by wearing its skin.  Thus Heracles armored himself in the skin of the Nemean Lion which, in itself, was a symbol of the Matriarchy.

     I hope this exposition established the nature of the relationship between the Mother, horse, eyes and the brain stem to the Son in ancient Greek thought.  These are not irrelevant details of myths but important symbols when understood in the Jungian sense.  The Ancients were not just amusing themselves with strange tales.  The message for the initiate is different for that of the hoi polloi.

     The myth of Circe explains what happened under the Matriarchate when men allowed themselves to be dominated by their carnal desires.  It is only when one controls one’s sexual needs that one escapes domination by the female to dominate the female.  In that way one rises from the level of the beast to that of a man.  Nor is this ‘repression’ in the Freudian sense.

     Before attacking the issue of Achilles and Thetis let me point out the significance of Oedipus.  Oedipus was abandoned as an infant by his mother Queen Jocasta of Thebes.  On his way to Thebes as a young man he was jostled out of the road by a chariot and a team of horses.  Enraged he killed the driver who he later learned was his father.  By killing this man, who was king of Thebes, he made the widowed queen his wife.  He then learned that she was his mother.  Horrified at the thought of having married his mother he gouged his EYES out using the clasp of a woman’s dress.  Thus one has son, mother’s abandonment, horses and eyes.

     Achilles, on the contrary, had an excellent relationship with his mother, too good.  He remained tied to her apron strings all his short life.

     His mother, Thetis, is one of the more interesting mythological characters.  Zeus had it mind to make Thetis his own but backed away when he learned that she would bear a son who would be greater than his father.  No god would then touch her so she was married to the mortal, Peleus, to whom she bore Achilles.

     Thetis and Peleus lived apart.  As she was a Nereid or sea nymph, closely related to Poseidon or the subconscious, she lived at the bottom of the sea whence she always made sure that Achilles had a superior team of horses, fabulous armor and an incredible shield.  Thus while Achilles was a formidable warrior his success depended as much on his doting mother as it did his own prowess.

     It was fated that Achilles could have a short life if sought glory on the field of battle or a long life as sort of an effeminate mama’s boy.  You see, the relationship to the mother.  This was his and his mother’s dilemma in the Iliad.

     To protect her boy as long as she could Thetis had him reared among the girls in the girl’s quarters in girl’s clothes.  He was so good at female impersonation that when the Greeks sought him out to serve in the war it was impossible to identify this giant amongst men among the girls.

     Think about this.

page 23.

     Still it was reputed that he was a mighty warrior who was destined to defeat the Trojans.  He should have had such a physique that he stood out head and shoulders above the girls.

     When the Trojan War began his mother desperately wanted to keep him out of harm’s way among the girls.  Odysseus, surnamed the Wily, smoked him out by raising an alarm.  While the girls ran screaming Achilles true to his heroic nature seized his arms to meet the threat thus betraying his identity.  Abandoning his transvestism Achilles is conscripted into Agamemnon’s Folly.

     Quite frankly the Greeks have been coerced into a war for the sole benefit of the Brothers Atrides.  What did Achilles care if Paris abducted Menelaus’ wife.  She went with him willingly anyway.  Menelaus behaved like a fool in leaving the guest Paris in his house with Helen while he left on a business trip.  Would you do that?  I wouldn’t.

     Nevertheless Agamemnon was the sole representative of Zeus on Earth; he ruled by divine right.  Zeus had given him the nod to assure victory.  In point of fact he couldn’t lose.  One wonders what would have happened if he had refused to help himself.  How would Zeus have affected victory as the gods help only those who help themselves?

     Homer in his brilliance depicts a very detailed picture of this society.  Agamemnon is especially suited to command although he is not the greatest of the heroes nor a totally admirable man.  In fact, his pettiness injures Achilles to the point where the latter must make a retort.

page 24.

     Achilles’ first thought is to take arms against the slings and arrows of outrageous Agamemnon but Athene counsels him to suffer that particular sea of troubles in his mind.  Achilles heeds her advice and goes into a pout befitting this greatest of mama’s boys.  He self-centeredly withdraws himself and his troops from the war.

     This act is very serious as he is the greatest of all Greek warriors while it is a known fact that the Greek’s can’t win without him.  Now, Achilles has some serious mental problems.  After his alter ego, Patroclus, is killed Achilles opines:

…O Zeus and Athena and Apollo

If only death would take every Trojan

And all the Achaeans except for us two,

So we alone might win that Sacred City…

     That’s a prayer he hopes will be anwered.  In his anger and spite he even wants his own side to be defeated and destroyed so long as he and his friend alone find salvation in that Sacred City.  The City Of God?

     After being robbed of his prize by Agamemnon he goes to the seashore to summon his mom from the deeps.  Arising from the sea of the subconscious she comes to him.  The result of this interview between a doting mother and a spoiled rotten son defies all concepts of morality both in Achilles’ request and his mother’s response.

page 25.

     Achilles asks his mother to intervene for him with Zeus to cause the slaughter of the Greeks until they are fighting the Trojans among their ships in the camp.  There is nothing that Thetis won’t do for her boy no matter how criminal.  She is willing that the Greeks be destroyed if that is what her son wants.  Thetis and Ma Barker would have gotten along just fine.

     Not only did Zeus have a soft spot for Thetis but in a past time when the gods rebelled and had overpowered Zeus in an attempt to depose him Thetis had come to his rescue.  Zeus owed her one.

     Zeus and the gods are away in Ethiopia for twelve days but she promises her son to visit him him as soon as he returns.  On his return she implored Zeus by grasping his knees with her left arm, Homer is explicit, thereby immobilizing him with her feminine side, with her right hand she grasps his chin arresting his attention.  She implores him to smite the Greeks unto death to appease her son’s sense of affront.

     Understand the enormity of Achilles’ request to his mother.  She does not reprove him in the least instead she rushes off to Zeus for his complicity which Zeus in his profundity of mind grants.

     Nor is this an easy thing to fit into his schedule.  He has already given the nod to Agamemnon which must be fulfulled while he can refuse nothing to his Grecophile daughter Athene and also while he is being badgered by his wife Hera to favor the Greeks.

     In the face of all these conflicting demands even though he has given the nod of victory to Agamemnon and once his nod has been given his decision cannot be altered he agrees to at least hurt the Greeks for the benefit of Thetis’ son with no possible reward for himself from Thetis as her sexual favors would cost him Olympus.  Now you know what a mind of infinite power is capable of.

page 26.

     Zeus then unleashes Hector and his Trojans until they breach the Greek walls firing a number of ships.

     Still unrelenting, Achilles refuses  to help but does allow his faggot, Patroclus, to don his armor frightening the Trojans into thinking Achilles has entered the fray.  Patroclus exceeds his authority being killed by Hector who appropriates the splendid armor of Achilles as well as those great horses.

     Now horseless, armorless, shieldless and friendless, in other words completely defenseless and emasculated, Achilles runs once again to mom.  Mama is always there for her boy.  Now, for those of us whose moms have not always been there for us this is a cause of deep envy and anguish.  She promises to have the technological god, Hephaestus, make him a new shield and armor to be ready the NEXT DAY.  Even Hephaestus is not too busy for this paragon of mothers; he sets aside all else and gets down to it.  You see what a good relationship between mother and son is worth.

     Aldous Huxley thought about such matters deeply.  He never consciously associated his mother with his eyes although his attachment was such that he said that if you wanted to know how polite educated people of his mother’s time spoke his speech was a living example.  In other words he thought that he emulated his mother down to her speech patterns.  In essence he had become his mother.

page 27.

     He had been unable to penetrate his ‘unconscious’ but he had studied the subject carefully.  Sybille Bedford quotes his thoughts on the unconscious in which Huxley says that, obviously, Freud did not invent psychology or even the ‘unconscious.’  Huxley discusses a book by one F.W.H. Myers who laid out a theory of the unconscious in a book titled ‘Human Personality’ in 1886.

     Myers dealth with the Homeric concepts of the unconscious qualities of Ate and Menos.  Ate was the destructive or dark side or the unconscious while Menos was the creative or positive side.

     Freud appropriated the concept of the unconscious but only the dark or destructive aspect appealed to him so he went no further than that.

     Obviously Huxley realized subconsciously that with his mother’s eyes he was in a constant struggle between Ate and Menos, darkness and light.

     It has always troubled me as to why Hephaestus, or Menos, was married to Aphrodite, or Ate and why the goddess of love and god of technology should live at the bottom of the sea.

     If you remember Aphrodite arose from the sea as a sea foam riding on the half shell.  Obviously love has all the substance of foam while seeing only one half of the truth.  This is a form of Ate.

     She and her husband live at the bottom of the sea because they represent Ate and Menos which reside in the subconscious.

page 28.

     Aphrodite as Ate is so thoughtless and self-indulgent that she causes pain to everyone in her willfulness.  Hephaestus was not too pleased to be awarded Aphrodite as his wife by the council of the gods.  No sooner were the two married than, while Hephaestus was off on business, Aphrodite invited her natural complementary aspect of the subconscious Ate, Ares, to bed.

     Aphrodite and Ares  are the two parts of destructive Ate.  When they are caught by Hephaestus in union they form the ‘beast with two backs’ or, in other words, they hatched from the same egg.  As unreasoning hatred and love they are Ate in its complete form or aspect of the subconscious that Freud chose to exploit with much less subtlety.

     Hephaestos is Menos, the god of invention and technology, also seems to send his good ideas up from the subconscious.  Ideas just seem to occur to us.  Hephaestus as Menos therefore resides at the bottom of the sea where he is in close contact with the Mother Archetype in the brain stem in union with Aphrodite and Ares as Ate.

     It should be remembered that the mother of Hephaestus is Hera who give birth to him parthenogenously.  Hephaestus has no connection with the Father Archetype.  In fact, he was thrown out of heaven by Zeus.  Thus Achilles’ mother is able to obtain from him whatever she wishes at a moment’s  notice.

     Being in close contact with the Father of Waters, Poseidon, Thetis is able to procure the finest horses for her boy.  Achilles has a team that is the envy of both Greece and Troy.  It goes without saying that he has no trouble with his eyes.

page 29.

     The imagery of mother, horse and eyes has persisted in the Indo-European male down to the present.  Let us give two examples here with more to follow in Parts III and IV.  Bear in mind that the imagery is subconscious so that it is not necessary for an author to knowingly select his imagery.

     In Rudyard Kipling’s novel ‘The Light That Failed; the hero, Dick, was an orphan who was placed in a foster home with an orphan girl, Maisie.  There were very close as children, one might say that she became Dick’s mother surrogate, but they became separated going about their careers apart.

     They met again as adults in London where Dick has his attachment to Maisie renewed although in an irrational manner while she only reluctantly acknowledges him ultimately rejecting his attentions at which point Dick loses his sight.

     Kipling doesn’t make the connection between mother’s abandonment, Maisie’s rejection and Dick’s eyes but it must be there in his subconscious.

     Dick, a war correspondent, returns to a war in the Sudan as a blind newspaper correspondent.  Traveling through hostile territory, just as he reaches the safety of the British camp he is shot dead off, not a horse, but a camel.

     The second example is the play and movie Equus by Peter Shaffer.  I saw only the movie.  The plot centers around the psycho-analysis of the male figure.  The story concerns a stable boy who blinds the mares under his care by slicing their eyes.  Whether based on a true analysis or not Shaffer has a very confused presentation of his ideas which he probaby does not understand.

page 30.

     As the protagonist is a stable boy it follows that he was drawn subconsciously to the job to be around horses indicating a weak mother relationship.  That he sought a job in a stable to be around horses is a subconscious indication of his pain.  We have seen what a doting mother, Thetis did for her boy Achilles and conversely what happened to Oedipus.

     The mother substitute appears in a girl who seduces him in full sight of the horses.  Unable to perform sexually in full sight of the horses, or Mother Archetype, he revenges himself on his mother by blinding the horses.

     It is only speculation but I infer that the stable boy had been rejected, abandoned psychologically or both by his mother causing a deep abiding anger.  It is forbidden to retaliate one’s rage on the mother so he vented his anger on both a young woman and the mother symbol, the horse.  He disappointed the girl while putting out the horse’s eyes.

     The flesh eating mares of Greek mythology is a difficult image to understand but perhaps they represent filiophagus mothers who victimize their sons knowingly or unknowingly.  The opposite of Thetis.

      The subsequent relationship of the rejected or abandoned son to women is important.  In the stable boy’s case he was impotent with women.  Dick needed to affirm his relationship to a childhood mother surrogate to avoid the consequences of abandonment.  In Huxley’s case he was very fortunate in recognizing a woman who would serve him as he felt his mother should have served him and in finding a woman who realized the exact need for unconditional love of a man in her own makeup.

page 31.

     One hesitates to say that Huxley created conditions by which his wife would predecease him but she did.  After a marriage of nearly forty years Huxley quickly married a self-sufficient woman while apprearing to be relieved at the loss of his mother surrogate.

     I hope I have made the connection between mothers, horses and eyes clearly.  As the problem is not in the upper brain but the brain stem the fixation cannot be voided by the normal means of identification and expression.

     In my own case in attempting to resolve the matter I have taken the approach of trying to reconcile my mother’s actions with my feelings about it but I haven’t been too successful.

     Obviously the primitive brain stem presents different obstacles than the mid-, upper and pre-frontal brain.

End of Part I.  Go to Part II, The Baby Marie.