Jay Michaelson Talks The Talk To Ben Carson
October 11, 2015
Jay Michaelson Talks The Talk
To Ben Carson
by
R.E. Prindle
The redoubtable Jay Michaelson, spokesperson for the Jews, is at it again. This time his out of control rage is directed at a poor Negro, Ben Carson. Knowing that Negroes have suffered almost as much as Jews I was truly surprised at Jay’s hitherto concealed bigotry.
Ben, who as we know is running for president made some innocuous remark to set Jay off. Naturally Jay began spewing the usual ad hominem vitriol over the whole Republican Party that indirectly includes a little old domestic terrorist like me. Jay, I take personal offence at your comments.
Check this:
Carson’s exact argument has been made by morons as disparate as Matt Drudge, Ted Nugent, Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano, racist ex-ballplayer John Rocker (now a favorite on the Tea Party circuit), current NRA president David Keene and former NRA president Wayne LaPierre.
Morons all says Jay, offending at least that bunch. Maybe, but Nugent is a great guitar player and that should count for something. Charlton Heston deserved at least an honorable mention even if he is dead. Oh, that’s right he was Jewish. Excuse me.
All Republicans aren’t bad according to Jay because:
There is a very decent Republican Party out there, that is…strong on Israel…’
Now we know what makes a good Republican, they’re Neo-cons.
Jay who looks to have been born around 1980 or so still considers himself a victim of the holocaust, you knew this was heading there, didn’t you? Jay rants on:
Second, Carson’s (the poor Black fellow) statement is so offensive as to beggar the imagination. [That is if you’re of Jay’s persuasion, my own imagination wasn’t beggared.] Most of my grandparents, and many of my grandparents generation, died when the Nazis and their Ukranian [Now you know why the US is assaulting the Ukraine.] collaborators rounded up entire villages and massacred them in the forest. So, Dr. Carson [Son of Dr. Mengele] what killed them was gun control?
No, what killed them was anti-Semitism, bigotry, hatred and extreme nationalism [All strong Jewish characteristics.] all of which, incidentally are far more prevalent on the right than on the left. In the ADL’s words, “Gun control did not cause the holocaust; Nazis and anti-Semitism did.”
Now, hold on there a minute Jay. Let’s examine that past passage a bit. you seem to imply that the Jews were totally innocent in this matter, innocent collateral damage. Yet it is absolutely clear that the Jews were first to declare war on Germany and not the other way around. In early 1933 before anything had been done to the Jews, they publicly declared war on Germany. True, check it out. As Roosevelt’s henchmen they instituted a worldwide boycott and blockade on shipments of food and medicines to Germany that got tighter and tighter as the thirties wore on. Germany depended on imported food Jay so what your Jews were doing was committing genocide on the German people. Be fair Jay, if you can, if you don’t eat you die. Yes, the Jews were using food as a weapon of mass destruction.
So, ask yourself a question Jay, would you leave an enemy sworn to your destruction behind your lines? Of course not. What would your own Jews do in a similar situation Jay? I’m asking you to remember the Amalekites now Jay. You know what you would do. And that’s what the Nazi’s did.
I think you’re right though Jay. Gun control had nothing to do with it.
The European Holocaust Part One
March 14, 2015
The European Holocaust
by
R.E. Prindle
Prologue
Softly and tenderly
Jesus is calling, Sinners o sinners
Come home.
–Thompson
In order to tell of the horrendous European Holocaust it is necessary to give a background to the protagonists of the contest for Europe, the Jews and the Europeans.
In analyzing the background of the Jewish influence it is necessary to place the analysis in the Freudian concept of group psychology. The issue here is the conflict between two distinct Weltanschauungs. While the Jews portray themselves as of very ancient lineage the fact is that they rose as a dissident sect to the Astrological religion of the ancient world. The Astrological religion certainly developed in ante-deluvian times being well developed by the time of the deluge itself in the Age of Leo.
As the Sumerian histories or legends tell us four ages of kings passed since the deluge, or Zodiacal Ages, before history essentially begins with the fifth king or Age of Aries. Thus in the transition from the Age of Taurus ruled by ‘king’ Saturn in the Mesopotamian version, Cronus in the Greek, a man, most likely the Jewish ancestor Terah, refused to abandon the old king Saturn declaring that he was eternal, not changing with each new astrological age.
A body of followers grouped themselves around Terah producing their first resident genius, Abram, who they believed could confound the wisest and most learned of the astrologers. According to the later Jewish writer, Josephus, Abram was the greatest astrologer of all time.
The old school disagreeing and being the stronger party declared Abram and his party cranks and drove them from Sumeria and on a restless wandering in search of redemption, hence the idea of the redeeming messiah.
The wandering group embraced the idea that the Jews hold today that they are smarter than anyone else while creating a myth of extreme antiquity predating everyone else. Adam the Jew is portrayed as the first man. Over the Ages they have quite simply appropriated the myths, legends or history of the people they live amongst in their millennial wanderings. Hence the legend of the Wandering Jew. Today for instance, they are preparing for their move to China, a new promised land.
Their insistence that they are superior in every respect to the peoples within which they reside is a source of perpetual conflict often resulting in their expulsion while frequently being accompanied by wholesale slaughter.
They have always been a thorn in the side of the civilization within which they reside. Their goal is always to seize control of that civilization. While thinking themselves superior, as they feed off the dominant culture, the facts contradict the fantasy causing bloody conflicts. So the Jews developed a split psyche, one half dissociating itself from the other, a dual personality.
The belief they developed was that on top of the pyramid of creation was their god, Yahweh. Beneath him were the angels and then half man, half god were the Jews. Beneath them came the humans and on down through the various forms of creation. The humans were jealous of the semi-divine Jews hence hating them. Thus we have the origins of anti-Semitism. In other words a reaction to the over-weaning pride of the Jews.
For the other the Jews have created the image of themselves as a totally benevolent, kindly upright people who wouldn’t hurt a fly. As Samuel Untermyer as spokesman for the People said in a speech delivered over the radio on 4/6/33 and reproduced in transcript in the NY Times the following day:
[The Jews], a proud, gentle, loyal, law abiding people, a people who have shed their blood for their Fatherland, and to whom Germany owes in large part its prosperity and its great scientists, educators, lawyers, physicians, poets, musicians, diplomats and philosophers, who are the backbone of its past cultural life.
The absurdity of these extravagant claims are manifest on the face of it. The dissociation from reality is nearly psychotic, perhaps it is. Inwardly the Jews know of the absurdity while that knowledge conflicts with the things they really are. In defense then the Jews project their failings, their inability to live up to their fantasy on the other. The Other consequently become hated.
Samuel Untermyer goes on to contrast the Other to his Jews:
…why dwell longer on this revolting picture of the ravages wrought by these ingrates [the Germans] and beasts of prey, animated by the loathsome motives of race hatred, bigotry and envy.
For the Jews are the aristocrats of the world.
So, Untermyer projects an image of what the Jews would be and then with split psyche projects Jewish short comings, how they actually behave, on the Other, for as he believes, the Jews are the aristocrats of the world, or in ancient terms, the Chosen People of God. The Children of Light versus the Children of Darkness. The Master Race.
The conflict was ever present and is ever present. The Old Testament protests that the temple of Solomon was the premier wonder of the world. But when the Jews were transported to Babylon they realized what back water people they were. While entering Babylon through a gate that dwarfed their imagination, they were confronted by rows of palaces and temples that made their temple look like the stable in which Jesus was born. This had a devastating effect on their minds giving the whole group a severe inferiority complex that could be countered only by preposterous claims of superiority.
This psychic split between wonders they thought they had created and wonders far exceeding theirs was a constant contradiction that had to be dealt with. The Jews lived in denial while they were forced to belittle the achievements of the Other. Hence we have Samuel Untermyer virtually denying a German contribution to their own culture. This terrible dilemma bedevils their imagination. There is no appeasing it. By 1940 the Jews were taking credit for the creation of the America claiming to be the true Americans while men like Ford and Lindbergh were anti-American destroyers of the Democracy.
After disturbing the peace of Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Hellenistic States and Rome for two thousand odd years of the Age of Aries the Age of Pisces arrived. The avatars of Aries were sent off to what the Greek astrologers called Far Tartary. The Sun had entered Pisces.
I’m sure that many readers will ask, what is this Astrological nonsense? A good and worthy question. While today the stars have lost their mystical nature while ‘the third rock from the Sun’ is spoken of as a tiny insignificant speck in a fourteen billion year old universe, prior to this Scientific age the earth was seen as the center of what was a very small universe while the heavens mirrored the earth ‘as above, so below.’ Thus astrology was a living presence for our ancestors.
The ancients studied the heavens which are nearly invisible above the smog of our cities today, over a long period of time, probably at least three or more Great Years. The air being much clearer the naked eye could apparently detect what only the Hubble can see today. The Great Year is not known to many today, and indeed, if intelligence was distributed back then as it is now there were not more than five or ten percent of the population capable of understanding the problem.
Understanding the problem, in a limited way, the intelligentsia had to keep it to themselves as the less intellectually gifted would have killed them for uttering nonsense. The hoi polloi could only understand the exoteric while the esoteric had to remain hidden from them. Thus the colleges of priests arose to mediate between the hoi polloi and the cognoscenti. This is really the story of the European epic, Homer’s Illiad.
The transmission from of this knowledge generation to generation over a probable hundred thousand years was a great achievement, a difficulty that had to be surmounted, especially without writing and certainly without an adequately developed spoken language. The ability to draw circles in the sand depicting the heavens and the earth must have been their only means, thus the significance of the mandala.
The Great year. Today as then the fact is known only to the cognoscenti but available to the curious in dozens of books which is how I came across it. Because the planet is tilted off center by twenty-three and a half degrees, over a period of twenty-five thousand years and some odd the North Pole traces a circle in the sky. The North Star of today will in twelve thousand plus years be in Far Tartary while Vega now in Tartary will return to the position of the Pole Star. But that will be Ages from now.
There can be no doubt that the Zodiac and the Ages are a fiction but the Great Year is real based on valid observation. The ancient explanation of the Great Year is based on incomplete information. Still, once set up far gone Great Years ago the fiction was taken literally and acted upon by all peoples from China to Europe with the exception of the Jews. Thus when the Sun passed from Taurus to Aries the Jews refused to acknowledge the world wide system living through the Age of Aries with a Taurian and/or Saturnian mentality.
Inevitably Aries edged into the Age of Pisces. The world began to adapt while even the Jews in part if not in whole acknowledged that the Age was changing even though their god, Saturn/Yahweh remained eternal.
Thus Jesus heralded the New Piscean Dispensation declaring the Old Taurian Dispensation null and void.
Now, during the Age of Aries the Jews had been dispersed throughout world including China, India and naturally what became the Roman Empire. The Chinese colonies were eventually absorbed and disappeared while the Indian colonies have existed as very distant memories.
In the Roman Empire as Jews were part of the metaphysical speculation of the Mediterranean Basin while being the odd fellow outside the pale they were part of the psychological whole and prospered accordingly while they dispersed themselves in every province but still owing primary allegiance to the Jewish State within the Empire. Thus a Rome and Jerusalem warfare existed for dominance as they would later challenge the European Peoples in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries AD. Just as the Roman Empire was involved in a destructive Jewish War from 66 AD to about 135 AD so Europe was engulfed in a hideous murderous Jewish War from 1789 to 1950 in its first phase. The War has changed faces since then but a Jewish War against what they call Whiteness continues and will continue until either the Jews or the Whites are wiped from the face of the Earth as with the Amalekites of old.
Thus Jesus who was merely a Jewish prophet in the mold of Jeremiah challenged the structure of the Jewish dream and had to die. The Jews of the Sanhedrin ‘relaxed’ Jesus to the secular authorities, much as the Rosenbergs would later be ‘relaxed’ to the US authorities, as the phrase was in the Spanish Inquisition, who per request executed the Jew Jesus. Religious authorities don’t kill they employ others to do it for them.
The Jews then began to persecute, that is kill, the Jesusites on the order of the Amalekites. By some perverted historical accident Saul who was born again as Paul rescued the Jewish avatar of emerging Pisces universalizing him as the avatar for the whole of Europe. The Jew Jesus became the universal Christ figure when he displaced the successor to the Arien Age Zeus, Dionysus. Not as Jesus the Jew but after the Greek Christ has Christianity been named and taken its form.
Hating Jesus as a renegade Jew the Jews had no more love for him as the Christ. Hence the deep hatred of Christianity existing to this day and Christian Europeans by the Jews.
The open war between Rome and Jerusalem broke out in 66 AD, having nothing to do with Jesus who was still unknown outside Judaea, continuing for nearly 70 years of incredible brutality and savagery no different from the abysmal horrors inflicted on Europeans by them during the hideous European Holocaust from 1914 to about 1950.
Defeated, Jerusalem was razed with the Jews being forbidden to set foot in the ruins. Of course the Mesopotamian community which had refused to return to Judaea, possibly larger than the Judaean faction, was unaffected until they were expelled around the year 1000 AD. Numbers of those joined their fellows in Spain making that unfortunate country the largest Jewish community in the world for perhaps 500 years.
By another incredible stroke of luck the Christian Catholic Church awarded the Jews the greatest boon any people on Earth has ever enjoyed. They awarded the Jews a monopoly on usury. Christians were forbidden the right to charge interest. Thus for nearly two thousand years Jews had the sole right to explore the mysteries of compound interest and the absolute power thus conveyed to them by the Popes. Oh, glory hallelujah! With emancipation in 1789 came the destruction of Europe through usury.
Their reliance on usury got the Jews into constant trouble because while they were successfully exploiting the various peoples they in their turn resented their exploitation often visiting their resentment on their tormentors by physical means. Thus a species of warfare existed between Europeans and Jews that was irreconcilable. The contest often resulted in Jews being expelled from the various countries. England in 1290, France a few years later at the beginning of the 14th century and as the Jews moved East various German principalities.
The Jews moved further East into Poland and the sparsely settled areas of what became the Pale of Settlement which Russia annexed in the eighteenth century.
The defining moment in the conflict with the Europeans came in 1492 when Ferdinand and Isabella expelled the Jews from Spain. The peasants had groaned too long under the exactions of the Jews as tax farmers on the one hand and usurers on the other. This had gone on for hundreds of years.
Nevertheless the Jews characteristically saw only one side of the question, what they considered injustice to themselves. They consequently swore revenge on Europe as Christianity as they phrased it which meant, as with the Amalekites, genocide. The only question was how and when. The Jews had patience, they could wait.
The how was made difficult by the close supervision of the Catholic Church that allowed them little latitude. During the years of the formative civilization of Europe their situation probably seemed hopeless but as time does not stand still while the European mind was developing its qualities the future may have been dimly perceived as religious and political institutions were slowly being altered during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. And then…it happened. The French Revolution declared that all men were brothers so they emancipated the Jews removing them from the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church.
The condition of emancipation was essentially that the Jews abandon their peculiar customs and become one with the great European family.
Not likely, but at that time a division was created between the ‘enlightened’ Western European Jews and the benighted Eastern European Jews. While Western Jews basked in the scientific West the Eastern Jews unaffected by Western developments remained sunk in the Medieval Age. The true Jewish society developed in the East emerging at the end of the nineteenth century modified as Zionism. There was no genius in the East although they were the ‘fabled’ Ashkenazi Jews.
The requirements of European society changed from one of landed wealth to one of money wealth. The fate of the old European landed aristocracy was sealed as they were slow or unable to embrace the new money economy governed by usury otherwise known as compound interest. Cut off from the concepts of usury for nearly two thousand years they had little or no understanding of what borrowing on a compounded 43% rate meant.
The Jews were at home in usury hence as the nineteenth century developed the Jews transferred the wealth of Europeans to themselves and rose from pariahs to equals to potential or real masters.
The struggle was certainly not over as the end of the nineteenth century neared but to the discerning observer the future was far from obscure.
Continued in Part II: Europeans and Americans
The Rising Tide Of Anti-Semitism And Jewish Hysteria
February 4, 2015
The Rising Tide Of Anti-Semitism
And Jewish Hysteria
by
R.E. Prindle
One has to wonder about the Jews. In 1964 when there was no anti-Semitism in the US except in the minds of the Jews caused by their reaction to events of WWII, perhaps from boredom and needing some excitement the Jews decided to create some anti-Semitism. In 1965 they pushed through a new immigration law that invited their Moslem arch-enemies into the US.
While billing themselves as the most intelligent people on earth they failed to learn from their own 1900 immigration experience. In Poland, for instance, where they were a minority, they claim there was outrageous anti-Semitism. Well and good. But, when the Jews and Poles mixed in the US the tables were equalized so that Jews were able to punish Poles.
Now, in Israel backed by the financial and military might of the US with additional billions of guilt dollars from Germany Jews were able to maintain an oppressive upper hand punishing Moslems.
Today, as a result of the ’65 immigration law Moslems outnumber Jews in the US and the roles are reversed as with the Jews and Poles. So, the ‘smartest people in the world’ claim anti-Semitism is on the rise in the US. That’s a surprise isn’t it? They imply that the country as a whole is increasingly anti-Semitic. In fact Whites in the US have been cowed, yes, Whites exist under civil disabilities instituted by the Jews. They’re called ‘hate laws.’ The problem is between Jews and the Moslems they invited into the country. The Middle East war has been translated to the US. Let’s face it, it is purely a Jewish problem. What do we Whites care?
Now at UC-Davis we are told by someone called Michael F. Haverluck that a great crime has been perpetrated against a Jewish fraternity house. The ‘crime’ is what was called a harmless prank back in the fifties. A number of swastikas were apparently placed on the frat house walls. (See link above.) How you can spray anything on an inhabited frat house on an active campus and not get caught in the act mystifies me.
Nevertheless there the swastikas are. But the perps are unknown. In the rising tide of Jewish hysteria the Jews fail to note that, if not their own hoax which is probable, then the only possible perps must be Moslems. Who else? Why don’t the Jews make the obvious claim rather than pretending that perhaps Chinese, did it? Mexicans? Maybe Martians? Who in their multi-cultural paradise are the Jews blaming?
Instead the Jews pretend that they are alone in a totally hostile environment. I don’t know if the Jews on the UC campi have looked around them but if they do they will have to search hard for a White face. I was on the Berkeley campus a couple years ago and passing through a long row of kiosks there were Moslem, Mexican, Filipino and whatever else info booths and I was hard pressed to find anyone who wasn’t Asian- East or West. In fact, there were no White exhibitors.
The Whites I did see on campus were wasted drug addicts walking around in rags, literally.
So, if anti-Semitism is becoming a problem for Jews on UC’s campi I suggest they address their fellow Moslem Semites to see if they can smooth out the problem. It’s you Jews, stupid, not us. We’re functioning under the civil disabilities imposed on us by them. All I can say is a plague on both Semitic houses, Jews and Moslems. We don’t care what happens to either.
As for Haverluck, he should try for a less tendentious style
The Charlie Hebdo Moslem Outrage
January 8, 2015
The Charlie Hebdo Moslem Outrage
by
R.E. Prindle
As we are all aware Moslem bigots murdered the staff of the magazine Charlie Hebdo. There are French and there are Jews and there are Moslems. Speaking for his Jewish community, as he says, Laurent-David Samama in the above Jewish Daily Forward article makes some inexplicable comments demonstrating a cognitive disconnect on the Jewish relation to the crime at the very least:
Like all French citizens, my particular community- the French community- is reeling from the news. Concerned as we have been for years about the spiraling communal tensions, the anti-Semitic attacks on Jews and the steadily mounting anti-Muslim sentiment, this hits an especially raw nerve.
——–
The majority [of Jews] is now increasingly attracted by radical speeches offering solutions to the problem of French anti-Semitism
Mr. Samama is apparently not living on this planet or he is incapable of evaluating the situation. What problem, one might ask, is there concerning French anti-Semitism. There is no problem among the French concerning anti-Semitism as defined by the Jews. There is only the hatred of Jews instilled in Moslems by Jewish atrocities in Palestine. There are no French Jews; there are only Jews living in France.
As such it they who have created the problem of ‘French anti-Semitism’ by promoting Muslim immigration in France, Europe and the Americas.
The incredibly obtuse statement- anti-Semitic attacks on Jews and mounting anti-Muslim sentiment- is such an oxymoron as to stun the objective intellect. Anti-Semitic attacks in France are made exclusively by Moslems, no French are involved. That war is exclusively between Jews and Moslems. No French involved. If the Jews cannot be reached in Palestine then Moslems will attack them wherever they are vulnerable. So Jews and Moslems- it is an intra-Semitic problem, not Europe and the Americas.
As to the war between the Moslems and the French only one mental system can survive, the Scientific, or secular in Mr. Samama’s language, or the Moslem religious bigotry which is no different than Jewish religious bigotry and both are deadly to the West.
The hypocrisy of Mr. Samama’s comment “Leaders and religious representatives of [the Jewish community in France] are calling for peace and unity at a time when France is divided over the question of Islam.” is unbelievable.
Oh, please. Having created the ‘disunity’ the wise benevolent Jews are calling on ‘divided’ France to come together under their direction. We know that song and dance.
France is not divided over the Moslem ‘question.’ The Moslems and France are at war as the Charlie Hebdo murders clearly indicate. It is the Moslem way or the highway. Perhaps it would be better if all Jews did leave France, Aliyah sounds good to us, rather than complicate and becloud issue.
A Review: Peter Ibbetson by George Du Maurier
May 8, 2009
A Review
The Novels Of George Du Maurier
Peter Ibbetson, Trilby, The Martian
Part IV
Peter Ibbetson
Singers and Dancers and Fine Romancers
What do they know?
What do they know?
-Larry Hosford
Review by R.E. Prindle
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II Review of Trilby
III. Review of The Martian
IV. Review of Peter Ibbetson
Peter Ibbetson is the first of the three novels of George Du Maurier. As elements of the later two novels are contained in embryo in Ibbetson it would seem that Du Maurier had the three novels at least crudely plotted while a fourth dealing with politics but never realized is hinted at. Actually Du Maurier has Ibbetson who writes this ‘autobiography’ write several world changing novels from inside the insane asylum to which he had been committed. In the Martian Barty Josselin wrote several world changing books while ‘possessed’ by an alien intelligence, in a way, not too dissimilar to the situation of Ibbetson. Du Maurier himself comes across, as I have said, as either a half demented lunatic or a stone genius.
He has Ibbetson and the heroine, The Duchess of Towers write in code while they read encrypted books. Du Maurier says that Ibbetson and hence the two following books deal with weighty subjects but in a coded manner that requires attention to understand.
On page 362 of the Modern Library edition he says:
…but more expecially in order to impress you, oh reader, with the full significance of this apocalyptic and somewhat minatory utterance (that may haunt your fever sense during your midnight hours of introspective self-communion), I have done my best, my very best to couch it in the obscurest and most unitelligible phraseology, I could invent. If I have failed to do this, if I have unintentionally made any part of my meaning clear, if I have once deviated by mistake into what might almost appear like sense, mere common-sense- it is the fault of my half French and wholly imperfect education.
So, as Bob Dylan said of the audiences of his Christian tour: Those who were meant to get it, got it, for all others the story is merely a pretty story or perhaps fairy tale. The fairy tale motif is prominent in the form of the fee Tarapatapoum and Prince Charming of the story. Mary, the Duchess of Towers is Tarapatapoum and Peter is Prince Charming. It might be appropriate here to mention that Du Maurier was highly influenced by Charles Nodier the teller of fairy tales of the Romantic period. Interestingly Nodier wrote a story called Trilby. Du Maurier borrowed the name for his novel Trilby while he took the name Little Billee from a poem by Thackeray. A little background that makes that story a little more intelligible.
Those that watch for certain phobias such as anti-Semitism and Eugenics will find this story of Du Maurier’s spolied for them as was Trilby and probably The Martian. One is forced to concede that Du Maurier deals with those problems in a coded way. Whether his meaning is derogatory or not lies with your perception of the problems not with his.
Thus on page 361 just above the previous quote Du Maurier steps from concealment to deliver a fairly open mention of Eugenics. After warning those with qualities and attributes to perpetuate those qualities by marrying wisely, i.e. eugenically, he breaks out with this:
Wherefore, also, beware and be warned in time, ye tenth transmitters of a foolish face, ye reckless begetters of diseased or puny bodies, with hearts and brains to match! Far down the corridors of time shall clubfooted retribution follow in your footsteps, and overtake you at every turn.
Here we have a premonition of Lothrop Stoddards Overman and Underman. The best multiply slowly while the worst rear large families. Why anyone would find fault with the natural inclination to marry well if one’s handsome and intelligent with a similar person is beyond me. Not only is this natural it has little to do with the Eugenics Movement. Where Eugenics falls foul, and rightly so, is in the laws passed to castrate those someone/whoever deemed unworthy to reproduce. This is where the fault of the Eugenics Movement lies. Who is worthy to pass such judgment? Certainly there are obvious cases where neutering would be appropriate and beneficial for society but in my home town, for instance, no different than yours I’m sure, the elite given the opportunity would have had people neutered out of enmity and vindictiveness. that is where the danger lies. There is nothing wrong with handsome and intelligent marrying handsome and intelligent. How may people want a stupid, ugly partner?
Du Maurier had other opinions that have proved more dangerous to society. One was his belief in the virtues of Bohemians, that is say, singers and dancers and fine romancers. On page 284 he says:
There is another society in London and elsewhere, a freemasonry of intellect and culture and hard work- la haute Ashene du talent- men and women whose names are or ought to be household words all over the world; many of them are good friends of ine, both here and abroad; and that society, which was good enough for my mother and father, is quite good enough for me.
Of course, the upper Bohemia of proven talent. But still singers and dancers and fine romancers. And what do they know? Trilby was of the upper Bohemia as was Svengali but Trilby was hypnotized and Svengali but a talented criminal. What can a painter contribute but a pretty picture, what can a singer do but sing his song, I can’t think of the dancing Isadora Duncan or the woman without breaking into laughter. And as for fine romancers, what evil hath Jack Kerouac wrought.
I passed part of my younger years in Bohemia, Beat or Hippie circles, and sincerely regret that Bohemian attitudes have been accepted as the norm for society. Bohemia is fine for Bohemians but fatal for society which requires more discipline and stability. Singers and dancers and fine romancers, wonderful people in their own way, but not builders of empires.
In that sense, the promotion of Bohemianism, Du Maurier was subversive.
But the rules of romancing are in the romance and we’re talking about Du Maurier’s romance of Peter Ibbetson.
Many of the reasons for criticizing Du Maurier are political. The man whether opposed to C0mmunist doctrine or not adimired the Bourgeois State. He admired Louis-Philippe as the Beourgeois king of France. This may sound odd as he also considered himself a Bohemian but then Bohemians are called into existence by a reaction to the Bourgeoisie. Perhaps not so odd. He was able to reconcile such contradictions. Indeed he is accused of having a split personality although I think this is false. Having grown up in both France and England he developed a dual national identity and his problem seems to be reconciling his French identity with his English identity thus his concentration on memory.
In this novel he carefully builds up a set of sacred memories of his childhood. He very carefully introduces us to the people of his childhood. Mimsy Seraskier his little childhood sweetheart. All the sights and sounds and smells. In light of the quote I used telling how he disguises his deeper meaning one has to believe that he is giving us serious theories he has worked out from science and philosophy.
Having recreated his French life for us Peter’s parents die and Ibbetson’s Uncle Ibbetson from England adopts him and takes him back to the Sceptered Isle. Thus he ceases to be the French child Pasquier and becomes the English child Peter Ibbetson. A rather clean and complete break. From this point on his childhood expectations are disappointed with the usual psychological results. He develops a depressed psychology. The cultural displacement prevents him from making friends easily or at all. His Uncle who has a difficult boorish personality is unable to relate to a sensitive boy with a Bohemian artistic temperament. Hence he constantly demeans the boy for not being like himself and has no use for him.
This is all very skillfully handled. We have intimations that bode no good for Peter. The spectre is prison. The hint of a crime enters into the story without anything actually being said. But the sense of foreboding enters Peter’s mind and hence the reader’s. This is done extremely well. It’s a shame the Communists are in control of the media so that they can successfully denigrate any work of art that contradicts or ignores their beliefs. For instance the term bourgeois itself. The word is used universally as a contemptuous epithet even though the Bourgeois State was one of the finest created. Why then contempt? Simply because the Communists must destroy or denigrate any success that they canot hope to surpass. I was raised believing that what was Bourgeois was contemptible without ever knowing what Bourgeois actually meant. It is only through Du Maurier at this late stage in life that I begin to realize what the argument really was and how I came to accept the Communist characterization. I’m ashamed of myself.
Hence all Du Maurier criticism is unjust being simply because it is the antithesis of Communist beliefs. The man as a writer is very skillful, as I have said, a genius. If I were read these novels another couple of times who knows what riches might float up from the pages.
Colonel Ibbetson apprentices Peter to an architect, a Mr Lintot, which, while not unhappy, is well below Peter’s expectations for his fairy Prince Charming self. As a lowly architect he is placed in a position of designing huts for the workers of the very wealthy. The contrast depresses him even further. He has been disappointed in love and friendship and then he is compelled by business exigencies to attend a ball given by a wealthy client. He definitely feels out of place. Psychologically incapable of mixing he stands in a corner.
At this ball the most beautiful woman he has ever seen, The Duchess of Towers, is in attendance. From across the room she seems to give him an interested glance. Peter can only hope, hopelessly. As a reader we have an intimation that something will happen but we can’t be sure how. I couldn’t see. Then he sees her in her carriage parading Rotten Row in Hyde Park. She sees him and once again it seems that she gives him a questioning look.
Then he takes a vacation in France where he encounter her again. After talking for a while he discovers that she is a grown up Mimsey Seraskier, his childhood sweetheart. Thus his French childhood and English adulthood are reunited in her. Wow! There was a surprise the reader should have seen coming. I didn’t. I had no trouble recognizing her from childhood in France but Du Maurier has handled this so skillfully that I am as surprised as was Peter. I tipped my imaginary hat to Du Maurier here.
Perhaps I entered into Du Maurier’s dream world here but now I began to have flashbacks, a notion that I had read this long ago, most likely in high school or some other phantasy existence. I can’t shake the notion but I can’t remember reading the book then at all. Don’t know where I might have come across it. Of course that doesn’t mean an awful lot. If asked if I had ever read a Charles King novel I would have said no but when George McWhorter loaned me a couple to read that he had in Louisville I realized I had read one of them before. Eighth grade. I could put a handle on that but not Peter Ibbetson. Perhaps Du Marurier has hypnotized me. Anyway certain images seem to stick in my mind from a distant past.
It was at this time that Mary, the Duchess if Towers, formerly Mimsy, enters Peter’s dream, in an actual real life way. This is all well done, Peter dreamt he was walking toward an arch when two gnomish people tried to herd him into prison. Mary appears and orders the gnomes to vanish which they do. ‘That’s how you have to handle that.’ She says. And that is very good advice for dreams that Du Maurier gives. As we’ll see Du Maurier has some pretensions to be a psychologist.
She then instructs Peter in the process of ‘dreaming true.’ In such a manner they can actually be together for real in a shared dream. Now, Trilby, while seemingly frivolous, actually displays a good knowledge of hypnotism. More than that it puts Du Maurier in the van of certain psychological knowledge. Hypnotism and psychology go together. Without an understanding of hypnotism one can’t be a good psychologist. If he wasn’t ahead of Freud at this time he was certainly even with him. Remember this is 1891 while Freud didnt’ surface until 1895 and then few would have learned of him. He wrote in German anyway.
Freud was never too developed on auto-suggestion. Emile Coue is usually attributed to be the originator of auto-suggestion yet the technique that Mary gives to Peter is the exact idea of auto-suggestion that Coue is said to have developed twenty or twenty-five years on.
Du Maurier speaks of the sub-conscious which is more correct than the unconscious. He misunderstands the nature of the subconscious giving it almost divine powers but in many ways he is ahead of the game. Now, Ibbetson was published in 1891 which means that Du Maurier was in possession of his knowledge no later than say 1889 while working on it from perhaps 1880 or so on. It will be remembered that Lou Sweetser, Edgar Rice Burroughs mentor in Idaho, was also knowledgable in psychology in 1891 but having just graduated a couple of years earlier from Yale. So Freud is very probably given too much credit for originating what was actually going around. This earlier development of which Du Maurier was part has either been suppressed in Freud’s favor or has been passed over by all psychological historians.
So, Mary gives Peter psychologically accurate information on auto-suggestion so that he can ‘dream true.’ I don’t mean to say that anyone can share another’s dreams which is just about a step too far but by auto-suggestion one can direct and control one’s dreams. Auto-suggestion goes way back anyway. The Poimandre of Hermes c. 300 AD is an actual course in auto-suggestion.
Peter is becoming more mentally disturbed now that his denied expectations have returned to haunt him in the person of Tarapatapoum/Mimsey/Mary. Once again this is masterfully done. The clouding of his mind is almost visible. Over the years he has generated a deep seated hatred for Colonel Ibbetson even though the Colonel, given his lights, has done relatively well by him. Much of Peter’s discontent is internally generated by his disappointed expectations. The Colonel has hinted that he might be Peter’s father rather than his Uncle. This completely outrages Peter’s cherished understanding of his mother and father. The Colonel according to Peter was one of those guys who claimed to have made every woman he’d ever met. One must bear in mind that Peter is telling the story while the reader is seeing him become increasingly unstable.
While Peter doesn’t admit it to himself he confronts the Colonel with the intention of murdering him. He claims self-defense but the court doesn’t believe it nor does the reader. It’s quite clear the guy was psycho but, once again, Du Maurier handles this so skillfully that one still wonders. Given the death penalty his friends and supporters, the influential Duchess of Towers, get the sentence commuted to life imprisonment.
Then begins Peter’s double life in prison that goes on for twenty years. By day a convict, at night Peter projects hemself into a luxurious dream existence with his love, Mary, the Duchess of Towers. Quite insane but he has now realized his expections if only in fantasy. Now, this novel as well as Du Maurier’s other novels is textually rich. The style is dense while as Du Maurier tells us it is written in more than one key, has encoded messages, so I’m concentrating on only the main thread here. That concerns memory.
While it is possible to subconsciously manage one’s dreams, I do it to a minor extent, of course it is impossible for two people to dream toether and share that dream. This is to venture into the supernatural. Spiritualism and Theosophy both dealing with the supernatural as does all religion including Christianity, were at their peak at this time. Du Maurier has obviously studied them. Just because one utilizes one’s knowledge in certain ways to tell a story doesn’t mean one believes what one writes. Ibbetson is written so well that the writer seems to have fused himself with the character. If I say Du Maurier believes that may not be true but as the same themes are carried through all his novels without a demurrer it seems likely.
Du Maurier seems to be pleading a certain understanding of the subconscious giving it as many or more supernatural powers as Freud himself will later. This might be the appropriate place to speculate on Du Maurier’s influence on Mark Twain. We know Twain was an influence on Burroughs so perhaps both were.
Before he died Twain wrote a book titled the Mysterious Stranger. This was twenty-five years after Peter Ibbetson. Operator 44, the Mysterious Stranger, is a time time traveler who has some sort of backstair connecting years as a sort of memory monitor. Peter and Mary over the years work out a system that allows them to travel back through times even to prehistoric times. Thus Peter is able to sketch from life stone age man hunting mastodons, or Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo. They are present at these events but as sort of ghost presences without substance. they have no substance hence cannot affect reality.
This would be a major them in fifties science fiction in which, for instance, a time traveler steps on a grub, then comes back to his present time finding everyone talking a different language. Change one item and you change all others. Du Maurier avoids this problem that he very likely thought of in this clever way.
We can clearly see the future of twentieth century imaginiative writing taking form here. One can probably trace several twentieth century sci-fi themes back to Du Maurier.
Peter and Mary have a magic window through they can call up any scene within their memories. In their dream existence they are dependent on memory they can only re-experience, they cannot generate new experiences. The memory extends back genetically although Du Maurier speaks in terms of reincarnation. Peter hears Mary humming a tune he has never heard before. Mary explains that the tune is a family melody written by an ancestress hundreds of years before. Thus one has this genetic memory persisting through generations. This gives Du Maurier room to expatiate on the persistence of memory through past, present and future.
Du Maurier has worked out an elaborate scheme in which memory unites past, present and future, into a form of immortality. This is actually a religious concept but a very beautiful concept, very attractive in its way.
Peter and Mary had elected to stay at one age- twenty-six to twenty-eight- so for twenty years they retained their youthful form and beauty. Then one night Peter enters the mansion of his dreams through a lumber room to find the way blocked. He knows immediately that Mary has died. He then learns that in attempting to save a child from a train she was herself killed.
Peter goes into an insane rage attacking the prison guards while calling each Colonel Ibbetson. Clearly insane and that’s where the send him. The mad house. Originally he continues to rage so they put him in a straight jacket where he remains until his mind calms enough to allow him to dream. In his dream he returns to a stream in France. Here he believes he can commit suicide in his dream which should be shock enough to stop his heart in real life. Something worth thinking about. Filling his pockets with stones he means to walk in over his head. Then, just ahead he spies the back of a woman sitting on a log. Who else but Mary. She has done what has never been done before, what even Houdini hasn’t been able to do, make it to back to this side.
Now outside their mansion, they are no longer young, but show their age. This is nicely done stuff. Of course I can’t replicate the atmosphere and feel but the Du Maurier feeling is ethereal. As I say I thought he was talking to me and I entered his fantasy without reserve.
Here’s a lot of chat about the happiness on the otherside. When Peter awakes back in the asylum he is calm and sane. He convinces the doctors and is restored to full inmate rights. Once himself again he begins to write those wonderful books that right the world.
One gets the impression that Du Maurier believes he himself is writing those immortal books that will change the world. Time and fashions change. Today he is thought a semi-evil anti- Semite, right wing Bourgeois writer. I don’t know if he’s banned from college reading lists but I’m sure his works are not used in the curriculum. I think he’s probably considered oneof those Dead White Men. Thus a great writer becomes irrelevant.
It’s a pity because from Peter Ibbetson through Trilby to The Martian he has a lot to offer. The Three States of Mind he records are thrilling in themselves, as Burroughs would say, as pure entertainment while on a more thoughtful read there is plenty of nourishment. Taken to another level his psychology is very penetrating. His thought is part of the mind of the times. Rider Haggard shares some of the mystical qualities. The World’s Desire is comparable which can be complemented by his Heart Of The World. The latter may turn out to be prophetic shortly. H.G. Wells’ In The Days Of The Comet fits into this genre also. Another very good book. Of course Burroughs’ The Eternal Lover and Kipling and Haggard’s collaboration of Love Eternal. Kipling’s Finest Story In The World might also fit in as well, I’m sure there are many others of the period of which I’m not aware. I haven’t read Marie Corelli but she is often mentioned in this context. You can actually slip Conan Doyle in their also.
Well, heck, you can slip the whole Wold Newton Universe, French and Farmerian in there. While there is small chance any Wold Newton meteor had anything to do with it yet as Farmer notes at about that time a style of writing arose concerned with a certain outlook that was worked by many writers each contributing his bit while feeding off the others as time went by.
I don’t know that Du Maurier is included in the Wold Newton Universe (actually I know he isn’t) but he should be. He was as influential on the group as any other or more so. He originated many of the themes.
Was Burroughs influenced by him? I think so. There was no way ERB could have missed Trilby. No possible way. If he read Trilby and the other two only once which is probable any influence was probably subliminable. ERB was not of the opinion that a book could change the world, so he disguised his more serious thoughts just as Du Maurier did his. He liked to talk about things though.
Singers and dancers. What do they know? What do they know? In the end does it really matter what they know. Time moves on, generations change, as they change the same ideas come around expressed in a different manner. They have their day then are replaced. The footprint in the concrete does remain. Genius will out.
Exhuming Bob 13, Fit 3: Bob As Messiah
October 13, 2008
Exhuming Bob 13
Fit 3;
Bob As Messiah
by
R.E. Prindle
What was really an innocent exploration of Bob’s religious development is being given a sinsiter cast by various elements with an apparent axe to grind.
The latest to join the fray is something called Mick Hartley: Politics and Culture. It goes on this way:
As David T. at Harry’s Place publicises a forthcoming conference at Goldsmith’s, University of London, on Jews and anti-semitism, it’s interesting to note the odd places where you find anti-semitism cropping up nowadays. Expecting Rain as anyone who follows Bob Dylan’s career will know, is a website which provides daily links to all things Bob: concert and record reviews, articles, whatever. There is, of course, no presumption that every article they link to is something they agree with or aprove of, but, as RightWingBob notes, it was nevertheless extremely odd to see them linking last Thursday to this piece, “Exhuming Bob X: Lubavitcher Bob.”
One would have to obsessed with anti-Semitism to find it in my scholarly essay. Coded in the above quote is the notion that Andersen’s site, an aggregator, Expecting Rain, and my site, I, Dynamo, colluded to publish this ‘anti-Semitic’ essay on the first day of the Jewish New Year, or Yom Kippur in Jewish parlance. This notion was put forward by Sean Curwyn and his alter ego Dov Kerner on his RightWingBob site. This is what is known as a paranoid delusion in psycho-analytical circles.
Curwyn and Kerner note that my essay was written in June and they think cleverly withheld until Yom Kipper when apparently as they believe as some sort of insult to the Jews Expecting Rain and I, Dynamo in collusion published it. Karl Andersen who runs his site and I mine don’t even know each other and have never communicated about anything except contributions and that in the most perfunctory manner.
While it is true that I wrote the essay in June it was only in October that I suggested the link to Expecting Rain. I only became familiar with the aggregator a couple months ago after I wrote the essay. Since then I have been a regular contributor to the site.
So, this October I decided to suggest the link to ER as I thought it a very thoughtful essay on Bob’s religious attitude. As Monday through Thursday have the heaviest traffic on ER I waited until Monday afternoon to submit the link. As it happened Monday was a heavy newsday for ER which listed 30 links therefore excluding mine as a late submission. ER carried it over using it on Tuesday which was a slow newsday.
I doubt very seriously whether Karl Andersen was aware of when Yom Kippur was and I sure as heck didn’t know so if the essay was published on Yom Kippur there was no conspiracy to do so. But as conspiracy theorists have no trouble making non-existent connections Messers Kerner, Curwyn and Hartley see the ugly head of anti-Semitism looming above the horizon like Fantomas over Paris.
My compassion and pity goes out to them. I hope they get well soon. It is too bad Mr. Hartley who read psychology at Oxford (in England not Mississippi) became disillusioned with the discipline; all three need it badly. Should they enter an analyst’s office the term they should employ in seeking help is…paranoid delusion.
Fit 4 will follow in another posting.
I, Dynamo 