AstroGnostic: Stanley Kubrick and the Reality Stargate


Gnostic scholar Jay Weidner has been making the rounds with a new film series called Kubrick's Odyssey. It's Weidner's contention that Stanley Kubrick was enlisted to help manufacture film and photography for a simulation of an Apollo 11 mission for public consumption, which would keep the real mission secret. That the making of 2001: A Space Odyssey was in fact an R/D project financed by interested parties and that the techniques Kubrick and his team developed were later used by NASA for the Apollo 11 fakery. Here's the pitch for Jay's DVD:
This famed movie director who made films such as 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut, placed symbols and hidden anecdotes into his films that tell a far different story than the films appeared to be saying.

Jay Weidner presents compelling evidence of how Stanley Kubrick directed the Apollo moon landings. He reveals that the film, 2001: A Space Odyssey was not only a retelling of Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick's novel, but also a research and development project that assisted Kubrick in the creation of the Apollo moon footage. In light of this revelation, Weidner also explores Kubrick's film, The Shining and shows that this film is, in actuality, the story of Kubrick's personal travails as he secretly worked on the Apollo footage for NASA.
The story has it that 2001 was based on Clarke's short story "The Sentinel," but anyone's who read the story will tell you the connections to it are thin. The tone (and intent) of the film is also quite different from Clarke's novelization, as it is from Clarke's fiction in general. One of the most significant differences is personified by Heywood Floyd, who's a hero to Clarke but a villain to Kubrick; a bagman and hush-up artist whose obsessive secrecy is responsible for the deaths of the Jupiter mission crew.



Now, dozens of people have written dozens of essays about 2001, interpreting the film in dozens of different ways, from the sublime to the cringe-inducing. It's a film that tempts people to read any number of symbolic or philosophic narratives into it, because the actual narrative of the film is unacceptable on its face.

You can expound upon myth, technology, sociology or even gender politics (believe it or not) in the film but you can't, you mustn't-- most especially if you work in academia, which blithely accepts all kinds of idiocy-- ever address what Kubrick himself went to unprecedented lengths to explain about the film's meaning. In Kubrick's own words:
[Extraterrestrials] may have progressed from biological species, which are fragile shells for the mind at best, into immortal machine entities and then, over innumerable eons, they could emerge from the chrysalis of matter transformed into beings of pure energy and spirit. Their potentialities would be limitless and their intelligence ungraspable by humans. These beings would be gods to the billions of less advanced races in the universe, just as man would appear a god to an ant.
They would be incomprehensible to us except as gods; and if the tendrils of their consciousness ever brushed men's minds, it is only the hand of god we could grasp as an explanation. Mere speculation on the possibility of their existence is sufficiently overwhelming, without trying to decipher their motives. The important point is that all the standard attributes assigned to god in our history could equally well be the characteristics of biological entities who, billions of years ago, were at a stage of development similar to man's own and evolved into something as remote from man as man is remote from the primordial ooze from which he first emerged.
The only reason the film is a mystery to polite society is that the extensive interviews that Kubrick gave about the film's meaning must be ignored at all costs by establishment opinion makers. Why? Because the actual narrative-- what is being shown on screen, not in the imaginations of amateur film critics and adjunct professors-- is a government cover-up of historical proportions.


The Heywood Floyd of the film is not the earnest science-hero of the Clarke novels, he's a duplicitous, well-trained overlord
, whose mission it is to remind the residents of Clavius to keep their god-damned mouths shut and sign the non-disclosure forms and security oaths already. Just how good Floyd is at his job is revealed on the space station, when he deviously leads a group of inquiring Russian scientists into buying into the bullshit cover story about an epidemic at Clavius.

For no reason at all he fails to inform the Jupiter mission crew about the true nature of their mission, leading the onboard AI to reasonably assume that they are a threat to the mission and hence decide that dead men tell no tales.


What is being covered up? Proof of the most dangerous idea in the world. That humankind is the product of outside intervention (using terms like "alien" seem ridiculous, if indeed this intelligence essentially created us). As always, theories and arguments are no threat to the established order-- they have all the money in the world to put forward counter-theories and debunkers-- but cold, hard evidence most certainly is.

A lot of theories have been put forth by Apollo 11 theorists, from the Van Allen Belt to the insufficient technology, even to theories that the Moon is crawling with aliens and mankind is forbidden to step foot on it. But 2001: A Space Odyssey itself presents us with another theory, hiding in plain sight.

Namely that too close a look at the Moon- especially the areas in which NASA most wanted to look- would provide that dreaded proof that someone (take your pick) besides us had been there first. In other words, the Moon missions weren't just some scientific lark- the crews were sent to specific locations that were determined to be of particular interest in order to see exactly who or what had been to the Moon before us.

There's no shortage these days of theories and stories that NHI (non-human intelligences, in place of more loaded terms like aliens or ETs) have bases on the Moon, or that the Moon is an artificial satellite. The new Transformers film will delve into this, fresh off the franchise's AAT bonanza of the previous film. But there's another narrative at work, one tying into the Ultraterrestrial theme of the Transformers franchise (that hidden Watcher race again) but also the induced reality of so-called alien abduction reports (that we discussed in Part 2 of this series).

Because an induced reality is exactly what we see Dave Bowman go through in the so-called Stargate sequence.

For all intents and purposes, Bowman's experience is identical to any number of abduction accounts in UFO literature. He's zooming along in his space-car, he's zapped by some kind of emission from the Monolith and all over a sudden he's zooming through the cosmos, missing time like you wouldn't believe.

But Bowman doesn't actually go anywhere- the entire trip is transmitted into his brain by the Monolith (the signal comes at exactly 2:01:42). Granted, Kubrick doesn't use the laser beam of the abduction reports he almost certainly had read (many of which were classified at the time the film was being made) but where does Bowman finish this trip?

In an oddly-lit white room, exactly as described in so many abduction reports dating back to the early 50s. In fact, one of the most famous cases involving the white room also includes a beam-zapping- namely the Travis Walton "Fire in the Sky" case:
He had now left the large craft, and entered a large room. Within this room he could see several other smaller saucer-type crafts. Travis was now taken through a hallway to another set of doors, which also automatically opened. Through this door he entered a totally white room with a table and a chair. Travis' attention was immediately drawn to three other humans in the room.
Bowman prefigures this in his own abduction (which itself is prefigured in the ancient Mithraic Liturgy). And what does he become?

The Starchild, so oddly reminscent of the alien Greys seen in so many of those same abduction accounts. Even more startlingly, the Starchild travels through space in a bubble, almost identical to an image that many Secret Sun readers are familiar with...

...the globular craft that Horus- the original Starchild- rides in with Osiris on his way to Sirius. This image is from Budge, but it's carved in stone in Philae, another site familiar to regular readers.


Sirius and beams bring us back to a motif I was looking at in the early days of this blog- the Heavenly Beam seen in so many posters for so many science fiction blockbusters. And as we discovered in the Stairway to Sirius posts, that heavenly beam at Ground Zero stands directly between the Stairway and the Monolith-- the Millennium Hotel based on the alien transmitter of 2001.

The Stargate and the Monolith in living color

So, when people talk about "disclosure," what's the real mystery to be disclosed?
Does anyone really believe that the world would flip out if contact were made with a bonafide ET race? What's more, given how long strange disks have been seen flying around in the sky (forever, basically) or how many times people have encountered weird little critters with bald heads and huge eyes over the past few thousand years does it really seem that we are talking about "aliens?" I don't think so anymore.

But believing they are extraterrestrial might be a lot more comforting to some people than what we have been dealing with since the beginning of our time on this planet. Not that I think it should be, but only a fool would underestimate humanity's need to see itself not only as the crown of creation but as the masters of its domain.

To summarize:

• Jay Weidner has put forth a very compelling argument that Stanley Kubrick was involved in faking visual documentation of the Apollo missions, using techniques he perfected in 2001, in order keep the real missions secret.

• Weidner also argues that The Shining isn't about the Stephen King novel but a veiled allegory as to Kubrick's role in the coverup.

• You don't need to look any farther than 2001 itself for an unveiled narrative about a coverup concerning a Moon mission.

• The Stargate sequence- which has puzzled so many people for so many years - might in fact be a stylized retelling of the experience commonly referred to as alien abduction.

And lastly, shit's getting weird out there....

TO BE CONTINUED

64 comments:

  1. Trying to think up some thing to cover for my gratuitous need to just be the first one on the thread :-)

    nah, listen, this is fascinating post. And Kubrick has always fascinated me as well.

    Great work Chris. One of your best. This opens up some things for me I never realized. I'll be re-reading and thinking on this.

    One thought, semi on-topic. The little crafts in the room. Curiously that reminded of someone I know who was sitting in his living room years ago, I guess during a storm, and with his family, btw, so this was not a dream, they all watched as and a ball lightning floated slowly right through the middle of the room in front of them. It materialized out from the telephone, floated across the room, and then disappeaed into a wall outlet. This man is not a BS'er. This has me wondering what is up with this mysterious phenomena. More than meets the eye ? Perhaps ?

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Does anyone really believe that the world would flip out if contact were made with a bonafide ET race? "

    I used to think maybe not. But after seeing people 'celebrate' on the streets to the news of Bin Laden's death, I can easily see a situation where the majority is led into a frenzy of blood-lust. Not only against the ETs, but their sympathizers as well.

    This is good stuff. Classic Sun material. The kind of post I will be revisiting from time to time.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous10:06 PM

    Powerfull writing : lovely read to.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well done Chris. Mirrors some of my thoughts in the "2001" post I put up. I knew you would dig Weidner's idea. Very compelling stuff, and right up our synchronistically sinuous alleys.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous1:24 AM

    Hell yes, shit's getting weird out there. The other day I told my wife: We are living in some bizarre times!

    I tend to think that people have always been saying that, no matter what decade. Especially how time seems to be irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Christopher Knowles

    Long time!

    Anywho, great article!

    I used to think, as you suggested, that "the official" primary fear behind the revelation of any alien presence or historic intervention was that people would "flip out". However, I've since changed my views on the matter.

    I believe that the unspoken primary fear of alien revelation is one based solely in greed.

    Let's start by looking at the primary 'world currency' (for the time being at least) or at least the most widely accepted currency in the world, that of the US Dollar.

    On every dollar is written the phrase "In GOD We Trust"...

    G = Gold and Guns (aka precious metals, stones and Weaponry)
    O = Oil (aka Energy)
    D = Drugs (aka Medical industry, legal and illegal substance)

    Basically with every transaction we are reminded by the bankers that "In G.O.D. THEY Trust" but the rest of us have to use this near worthless paper monetary instrument for our transcations.

    So back to 'the alien revelation'...

    How would humanity react and how would things change, in regards to the commodities and industries of "GOD", in the face of alien revelation?

    Alien Revelation would certainly cause a massive paradigm shift on this planet. How could humanity continue with the self-destructive "industries of G.O.D." in the face of beneficent aliens travelling the cosmos seeding life?!

    We'd have no renewable need for weapons as we'd no longer have threats!

    Oil and current energy production would be a thing of the past as whatever technology brought the aliens across the cosmos surely wasn't any in wide use today!

    We'd have no need for population control as we could inhabit other worlds which means that our medicine would have to cure instead of treat!

    So as you see WE need threats, damnit!!
    Real threats like some marfans-syndromed-kidney-dialysis-requiring Osama bin Laden to scare the proverbial crap out of the populace in order to keep those who have struggled for millenia to establish their power structures on blue planet Earth in charge - not some peaceful E.T. life creators messing up the very backbone industries of our commerce!

    To me, that seems a far more likely reason for the power brokers to be concerned about aliens than whether or not people will 'flip out' and lose their religion.

    And to comment on the MAN-ANT GOD theory - it only holds true for 1 to 1. 1 man 1 ant (or many men and 1 ant). When the opposite is true and it is many ants to 1 man, the ants will win out and destroy the GOD every time hands-down!


    ~SE~

    Visit The Sync List - a big list of synchronicity and semiotics blogs and sites.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Moon_(mockumentary)

    Have you seen this?

    ReplyDelete
  8. In reading this article Chris I was reminded of the sphere ship that Hugh Jackman, "a space traveler, traveling with an aged tree encapsulated within a bubble, moves toward a dying star that's wrapped in a nebula;" in the movie THE FOUNTAIN- http://www.spiritualteachers.org/thefountain.htm

    ReplyDelete
  9. This could well be worth a read to many a reader of this blog.
    Rob Ager's “Kubrick: and beyond the cinema frame -2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY."

    http://www.collativelearning.com/2001%20analysis%20new.html

    Especially the chapter;
    "THE MEANING OF THE MONOLITH REVEALED"

    ReplyDelete
  10. Interesting symbology, but I've never bought the idea that we didn't go to the moon. I'm pretty familiar with the technology, and it's not that far fetched... basically a big ballistic missile shot. The ideas put forward by the moon hoax crowd have never seemed that compelling to me. There's no reason we couldn't have gone.

    What the "moon hoax hoax" really reminds me of is the "Collins elite" aliens-as-demons meme. It strikes me as an attempt to deconstruct the post-human narrative, with the end result being to say: We never went in the first place! See! There's nothing out there. Now get back to your Bible and your nationalism and your careerism... nothing to see here in this dull universe...

    I would not be surprised if the idea has similar origins in the theonomist/reconstructionist milieu.

    In any case, we're going back.

    Now that would pose a problem for control of information...

    "Wow, the view from up here is incredible! Well worth a million bucks! Wait... what's that? Hey, why can't I reach Twitter anymore?"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous11:01 AM

    Speaking of "shit getting weird out there" does this strike anyone else as strange:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/05/ahmadinejad-allies-charged-with-sorcery

    Especially since this is the cradle, or at least damn near, where all the "gods" stories began?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous12:35 PM

    I'm not sure about any "actual" narrative in the film. I like what Kubrick said:

    You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film—and such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep level—but I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous12:44 PM

    Kubrick was an Artist with a capital A. He was anti-authoritarian and practically subversive. The idea that he would use his genius to collaborate with the creeps that run this country to screw over the American people... well frankly it's absurd.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Kubrick was an Artist with a capital A. He was anti-authoritarian and practically subversive. The idea that he would use his genius to collaborate with the creeps that run this country to screw over the American people... well frankly it's absurd.

    Very true.

    I've always seen 2001 as a variant on the shamanic journey, the Grail legend, etc. In particular, disconnecting HAL strikes me as an allegory to the disconnection of the autonomic nervous system and "larval circuits" that allows the shaman to journey further into inner space. 2001 seems more about inner than outer space.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Guys,

    I'll get back in detail later on but I just wanted to clarify what this post is about- it's not about subjective analysis of metaphor and symbol, it's about what is actually being show onscreen. You're free to interpret the film however you chose, but that's not what the post is about. It's about the plot of the film.

    As to Kubrick not working for the man, who do you think paid for all of those lavish productions of his? He knew he had made the old deal with the devil from the minute he stepped off the plane at LAX.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Apologies, it seems the link I posted earlier leads to the Floyd album and not the page I intended, it cut off the link where it says(mockumentary).

    Here's the IMDB page about the documentary I was linking to.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0344160/

    ReplyDelete
  17. "The old men in my village used to say, everything changes by the colour of the glass you see it through. Nothing is true. Everything is imagined. Do you notice this reflections? For me, sometimes the reflection is far more present than the thing being reflected."
    The Mexican, from The Limits of Control

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous3:53 PM

    Rob Ager took almost all of his ideas on Kubrick from Jay Weidner, only he forgot to give credit.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Donna4:19 PM

    I just watched Weidner's film a few days ago. I mostly felt he was stretching... until he showed that little boy in the Apollo 11 sweater (The Shining). Even a highly symbolic artist must, at some point in his work, reveal what the symbols mean.

    That spaceship on the sweater is so incredibly blatant. It's an anomaly, an oopart in the film. I just can't get it out of my mind. Very disturbing.

    By the way, did I just see 11:11 in Apo*ll*o *11*?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have to point out... if the major influence in 2001 is a 'hidden' message that ETI's were involved in human evolution, why oh why does the film *explicitly show them uplifting ape-men*? Doesn't seem that hidden to me!

    ReplyDelete
  21. As I contemplated the Starchild picture, just thought to myself. Is it the ultimate trip or trap?

    By the way some alien abductions have remarkable similarities with initiation rites of a secret society

    More about this here
    http://visupview.blogspot.com/2010/10/contact.html

    ReplyDelete
  22. I've read Jay's stuff on Kubrick and the moon landing before, and found it entertaining, thought-provoking, strangely compelling.....I think he adds interesting mythical layers to Kubrick's work, but on a literal level, I don't subscribe to the moon hoax theory. The Apollo tee-shirt is a doozy, though.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Joe- I don't know but that's one damn fascinating story. I've heard others like it. Thanks for sharing (and the kind words).

    JIm A- Well a real alien race would certainly realize how savage we are and would surely steer clear. Unless they decided to evict us.

    Ted- It's not new to me- I've read his work on the topic for some time. But the RIR chat certainly seemed to kick a few things loose.

    124- You make a good point, but these times are weirder than I remember. And shittier too.

    Strangey- You make some good points. In fact I realized the other day that monotheism is actually money-theism and has been since the days of its creator Akhenaten. That's the real message of the back of the dollar bill. But as I've said, I'm not sure what we've been dealing with every day for the past few thousand years are aliens per se, but overseers- a servant class of actors who've not entered the theatre yet.

    ReplyDelete
  24. G23- Wow, I wonder if Jay knows about that. Certainly the theory itself has been around since at least the 90s, though I don't know exactly who came up with it first.

    BTR- Yes, great movie. Good one.

    Justus- I'll take that as a compliment!

    Darren- Yeah, that's the kind of thing I was referring to. Kind of thing I was interested in 20 years ago for sure.

    Adam- Weidner doesn't think the whole thing is a hoax, he thinks the footage was meant as a cover. And if you stop to think of it there are a lot of reasons for doing so, like not wanting the whole world to be traumatized if the lander blew up before they reached the Moon, all kinds of stuff like that.

    1101- Yes, I linked to that story the other day on the FB page.

    1235- Of course- every filmmaker says that. I'm talking about what is going on onscreen in the actual plot. Symbols are good fun and all but not what I'm interested in here.

    1244- Those same creeps own the companies that bought up all of the movie studios in the 60s so he was already compromised.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Adam Redux- That's a very interesting interpretation, but again I'm working from the events seen onscreen.

    Goatchild- Nice quote. Cheers.

    Donna- Yeah, I know exactly how you feel.

    Cat- It's not hidden, it's just not allowed to be taken seriously.

    Pete- Well, as I've said before it could well be that those rituals themselves are based in ancient contact experiences.

    Tristan- Again, Weidner's not claiming there weren't real moon missions, he's claiming that Kubrick was hired to put on a show version of them for the public.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous2:20 AM

    "Adam- Weidner doesn't think the whole thing is a hoax, he thinks the footage was meant as a cover. And if you stop to think of it there are a lot of reasons for doing so, like not wanting the whole world to be traumatized if the lander blew up before they reached the Moon, all kinds of stuff like that."

    Very interesting, and similar to the Transformers 3 trailer - footage shot on Earth to cover the actual activities of the Moon mission (why call it "Apollo" anyway - god of the Sun?).

    What of Douglas Trumbull's involvement:
    http://kipplezone.tripod.com/id59.html
    Professionally, Douglas Trumbull started out as a technical illustrator at Graphic Films, working on documentary films about NASA and the Air Force.

    I did some obscure films for the Air Force about the space program and then there was this one film about the Apollo program that was kind of interesting. I was painting lunar modules and lunar surfaces and the vertical assembly building on Saturn 5 rockets and animated this space stuff. And then Graphic Films got a couple of contracts to do films for the New York World's Fair in '64. It was a two year fair in 1964 and 65, and one of them was this dome thing called To The Moon And Beyond, which was kind of a Powers of Ten movie. It went from the "Big Bang" to inside an atom in ten minutes.”

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous4:28 AM

    >>> "Adam- Weidner doesn't think the whole thing is a hoax, he thinks the footage was meant as a cover. And if you stop to think of it there are a lot of reasons for doing so, like not wanting the whole world to be traumatized if the lander blew up before they reached the Moon, all kinds of stuff like that."

    Exactly. Just so. I mean some of it is blatant. Guys being picked up by wires. But I have family in aerospace. Their slide rules clicked with a purpose.

    -Jon Spring

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfXYsRpe5YE&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  28. Peach5:46 AM

    As usual, really interesting post Chris, I didn't know about Weidner, although his theories have been picked up by numerous sources, the Shining connection is astonishing, I should revisit it now ;)

    On a side note, I've watched some raw footage of the moon missions under a different "perspective", by some guy on youtube, and whatever he shows imho it's possibly one of the most clear and honest analysis I've ever seen so far.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Chris: good point about Apollo faking... I have thought before that maybe portions were faked or "massaged" for various reasons. It wouldn't surprise me much.

    I've also read claims that there is evidence for doctoring of the images, like things were removed.

    I guess we'll find out when the private space travel gold rush gets going.

    On 2001... I sort of see it like this. Are you familiar with Timothy Leary's 8-circuit model of consciousness? HAL would correspond with the lower four circuits. He was the ship's (body's) autonomic nervous system.

    As such, he is required to get Dave Bowman to the brink of the shamanic experience in the same way that the shaman must breathe, walk, etc. However, to proceed into the monolith, he must disconnect HAL. The larval circuits are required to get him there, but in the end they hold him back and even try to prevent him from fulfilling his mission.

    There's also a Gnostic demiurge subtext here. The demiurge is a creator, but also attempts to prevent its creations from achieving enlightenment.

    I dunno... that's what I saw in it. I don't think my interpretation is original... I recall reading similar things. Another poster commented that the film's effectiveness can be seen in how many different interpretations there are, and I agree. It certainly has many layers of potential meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous1:21 PM

    Danny's sweater represents just one more myth that he holds to be true, something the adult world lied to him about. In fact, Daddy is not a nice man, mommy can't protect you, the television haunts your dreams, Mickey Mouse and Apollo 11 are fiction, and the visions and nightmares in your head are symptoms of abuse. All work and no play do not make Jack a dull boy, because Jack has never worked a day in his life. July 4th is the holiday of the rich elite who celebrate THEIR independence, while the slavery of the masses fuel their appetites. The Shining is god awful scary stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous1:52 PM

    I've been having trouble commenting signed in, but apparently anonymously posting stil works, so I hope you won't mind if I send you an e-mail.

    Terrific post. Heywood Floyd in the film is a company man in the extreme. It is interesting his name is somewhat backwards forwards in that Floyd is far more commonly a first name and Heywood's more often or just as often a surname.

    The just astonishingly awful not-really-a-sequel-to-2001 2010 pushes the Floyd as hero idea to the extreme by making Floyd the hero and also tragically regretful of his involvement in the loss of the Jupiter crew.

    As much as the film itself is something of Kubrick's meditation on other science fiction films in the genre as well as his attempt to achieve something of an epic for the modern age, it does involve what I think are overt attempts to have a palpable psychological impact.

    The pharmacological psychedelic experience is overrated as a method of consciousness expansion. In the end, drugs addle the mind, and the benefits users promote as expansion are actually contraction. Ecstasy for example, doesn't increase empathy or the ability to read others. Instead it reduces the user's ability to perceive negative emotions and traits in others.

    As therapy, the use of psychedelic drugs are beneficial, but they are not the agents of evolution. However, I think they may be the metaphor we use for the development of the mind and our perception. In that regard, sitting in a dark room and being exposed to flashes of light juxtaposing diverse images in special sequences and patterns is going to have just as powerful an effect on our consciousness. The star gate in 2001 is a compressed experience about the effect of the cinema on the mind using that effect to make the point.

    Through light projected into his eyes, Bowman experiences an encapsulated cosmic birth that focues down and becomes his personalized life-death-rebirth by the end of the film. That is the farthest expansion of the epic experience in human art.

    Personally, I feel a true "sequel" to 2001 may be Malick's Tree Of Life out in a few months.

    I believe it is important to note that the projector and audio-visual technology of 1968 is significantly different than the digital, IMAX, 3D options we have today as well as the transformation of mechanical effects into computer generated. Is this having a subtle, subliminal effect on the way cinema effects our consciousness? There are scientists, biologists and some on the fringe, who feel that flashes of light have an important effect on the development of intelligence and consciousness. That it functions in a way that makes the brain change to process the information it receives. From the firelight of ancient campfires to the cosmic rays bouncing off astronauts' retinas in space, is it possible light itself is the more powerful mind-altering substance we've ever encountered? At the same time, does our ability or need to see light also blind us to deeper reality? In some ways, the gnostic position is that the light you can see is really darkness - falsehood.

    I just saw THOR today. As far as epic cinema goes, it is a bust. Like the recent Star Trek film, it is barely fit to provide a couple hours enjoyment for friends and couples looking to unwind with a fireside tale. I am struck that we had many decades of popcorn science fiction films before 2001 came out. Just as the Western genre constantly obscured the true nature of the actual western expansion and settlement. In some ways, 2001 is a "superhero origin tale" with Bowman (don't forget, Odysseus was a "bowman" - a famed archer who possessed a bow no other man could string) gaining superhuman powers at the end. However, I don't get the impression that the Star Child is coming back to Earth to fight crime. Unless it is the crime of the cover-up he's going to expose and eradicate.

    I'd like to see that "sequel."

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous1:59 PM

    Ironically, as Chris points out, the Star Child returns to Earth in the novel and in the film he is orbiting the planet. What is the intent of this new Ubermann considering the theme of the movie is Thus Spake Zarathustra? What rough Beast slouches to Bethlehem to be born?

    Ironically, the pop cosmic comic book GODLAND, a comical homage to cosmic Kirby, is a 2001 superhero story in the mold of Kirby's 2001 series. In it Adam Archer (compare that to David Bowman) is the last survivor of a doomed mission to Mars who encounters a device that teleports him to a special ultradimensional cosmic training ground where odd Yoda-like creatures expand his mind and powers to demigod levels before sending him back to Earth.

    In the series, it's taken as a given that human authorities, especially the military, will be in charge of managing any such phenomenon and the people of Earth fear Archer despite his obvious and repeated acts of heroism. I believe this is mostly in part to the governmental propaganda plan that implicitly treats him like a potential threat to order.

    In the Marvel films, you see this same sort of assumption. SHIELD immediately covers up or tries to control any superhuman developments. Fortunately, it appears that the movies are aiming toward an eventual conflict where the Avengers will have to stop working for Nick Fury. He's just too much a watchdog for what is obviously an autocratic world order.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Have any of you guys ever heard of Alan Davis?

    It's amazing how you can't actually find anything about Davis in English, whereas in Spanish there are several videos and pages that deal with him and his story.

    Anyway, Davis was a NASA engineer (and apparently this has been sufficiently proven by others) that worked in the Apollo program, and was the chief engineer of telecommunications in the relay station that NASA had placed in the Antigua and Barbuda island. In fact, he was the very first person in the world (according to this story) to receive the signals transmitted by the Apollo lander on the Moon before they were relayed to Houston Control in the US.

    The relay system gave the controllers a 10-second delay between the capturing of the signal to the retransmission that would end up been seen by the general public on their TV screens

    So Davis' story is that he later came forward and admitted that the Apollo missions produced footage of buildings and several other remnants of an ancient civilization on the Moon.

    Here's a little vid (the first of a series) in case you can understand Spanish and want to know more:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6BUVt3k0q0

    ReplyDelete
  34. Adaml wrote:
    There's also a Gnostic demiurge subtext here. The demiurge is a creator, but also attempts to prevent its creations from achieving enlightenment.

    This is the essential doctrine of gnosticism, isn't it?

    In regard to Chris' blog, one thing that I find very interesting and nearly unique in his posts is the insistence upon taking the topic of discussion at face value.

    What does the film 2001 explicitly state? What is the overt storyline, rather than the subtext or mystical significance?

    This is an important approach when dealing with what are occult matters in the, again, overt definition of the word: "hidden."

    Take away the supernatural aspects - the essential magical idea of a creator who can conjure reality into existence - and what is the narrative of the gnostics? Essentially, the people who control our perception of reality - and this could simply mean the consensual "story" or "history" of events that shape our existence (the most obvious being the story of "currency" on a day to day basis) - understand that, obviously, any hard evidence contradicting that story would immediately take away their power to control it.

    Listened to the Red Ice Creations interview with Jay Weidner into the early morning last night, and his theories go far beyond faking portions of the moon landing. He believes that the real space program is far more advanced than what we believe and that it may have been possible for a mission to reach Saturn (the original destination for the Discovery 1 until the script changed) and its moon Phoebe in 1968.

    Also his narrative on the conflict between the gods Saturn and Jupiter (Satan, Set versus Jehovah, Jove, Zeus) and the existence of a Saturnine cult built on sexual deviance is fascinating and more than a little scary. Certainly, my dreams were a bit disturbed last night.

    ReplyDelete
  35. John:

    When I take gnosticism at face value, I can't help but think that "they" are "us."

    After all, aren't "the elite" just like us? Same genetic code, same basic psychology, same fears... Why are "they" such control freaks? Fear, of course. Fear, hate, primitive lusts, other simple conditional response emotions that live in the brain stem.

    The demiurge is us. Or rather, it's our own biological legacy. It's the animal inside that holds us in terrestrial drama-space, dooming us to repeat the same historical narratives over and over again.

    That's what I was getting at with Dave Bowman needing to "disconnect the larval circuits" in order to "ascend."

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous3:05 PM

    I think there must be something in our biology that is not shared by any other species on the planet resulting in this very odd, invisible social behavior. I recently read a short story called "The Imago Sequence" that put forth an idea similar to one I've had for a while. Essentially, the idea that we are not personalities but we are biological receivers picking up information that is sent back to a larger superorganic personality or entity for lack of a better definition. That we are cells for a very real "god" at the center of life on Earth and potentially all life in the universe.

    In this sense the demiurge is the infestation of life in an otherwise pristine clockwork universe. Or possibly the demiurge is comparable to conscious thought in a universe of life where most things are unconscious.

    ReplyDelete
  37. A bit more, continuing from above...

    This brings to mind one of the problems that I have with standard issue conspiracy narratives. They portray the "elite" as super-enlightened in some way. Even in the sinister devil-worshipping elite version, there is some notion of the elite as super-enlightened and super-human.

    I think the opposite is true.

    When I look at the world stage, what I see is the enactment of very primitive behaviors. Hidden behind all that complex ritual drama is the dance of the brain stem.

    I see a ritual drama of territorial pissing and fear-aggression dressed up with symbolism, not the actions of some kind of enlightened (even sinister-enligtened) "illuminati."

    If anything, we ought to try to illuminate the elite. They might actually be on a more primitive wavelength than the masses that they rule over... more like an un-illuminati.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous9:15 PM

    That sorta is the revelation near the end of Imago Sequence. The protagonist seeks a powerful cult and discovers a group of dirty, perverted cannibals and fornicators. As they grow closer to the godhood, the base of reality, their desires become basic: eating and screwing, whomever and whatever.

    It's akin to the irony in Erik the Viking and one of HP Lovecraft's stories in his dream cycle when the protagonists meet the gods and discover they are simply all powerful children playing cruel, stupid games like children can.

    It's the basic idea behind Nietzsche's interpretation of Greek myths and tragedy. A hero is not someone who sacrifices himself for others, but someone who pursues his own desires until they are satisfied -- in the same way, the desires of the gods establish the reality of their world. War exists because Ares wants it. Venus embodies lust. The gods are not wise, they are very powerful and filled with desire and basic impulses.

    However, they did not create these impulses - no one chooses what they desire.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anonymous12:04 AM

    Thinking more about Jay Weidner's hypothesis, it is a bit startling to see the amount of "conspiracy theory" ideology in Stanley Kubrick's films. Paths of Glory is overtly a conspiracy that leads to the unjust deaths of the soldiers accused of desertion. Barry Lyndon is about the folly of a well-meaning but ambitious man when he comes up against the closed walls of the aristocracy. Even when he plays by their rules, he still is not allowed to partake of their society. Obviously, conspiracy/cover-up/secret society ideas are all over Dr Strangelove, 2001 and Clockwork Orange, but even in Full Metal Jacket, you have the shooting range scene where the drill sergeant names a list of infamous assassins and mass murderers (including Oswald) and notes that they were all trained in the Marine Corps.

    Finally, of course, Eyes Wide Shut overtly presents the idea that there is a secret cult order among the most powerful people in the most notable city in the world and it is based on sexual excess.

    If anything, it would be amazing if Kubrick's conspiracy fixation went ignored by other critics and cinema academics, but it appears that it has been. I mean, it seems like Kubrick at least contributed much to the popular idea of the way conspiracies work through his films as much as Robert A Wilson or anyone else.

    -John H

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous1:59 PM

    http://mediaconnectiononline.com/?p=3558

    Just a quick note considering how often Kirby shows up on this site. Kurt Busiek and Alex Ross, the writer-artist team behind the Marvels mini-series about ten years ago or more as well as Astro-City, have taken over a revival of the independent Kirby projects he came up with after leaving Marvel and DC both. Primarily this would be Captain Victory and Silver Star, but it looks dang cool.

    Kirby: Genesis explodes into action with June’s issue #1! A message to space has been heard and answered — but what has come to Earth isn’t what anyone would expect! As cosmic visitors begin to be revealed to the world, a deadly battle begins — and three ordinary people are caught up in it. Featuring: Captain Victory, Silver Star, the Glory Knights and more! This is the beginning! This is the GENESIS! “Getting to work with all these great Kirby concepts is an amazing thrill,” says writer Kurt Busiek. ”Especially since some of them have never been seen in print before!”

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anonymous3:53 AM

    ". In that regard, sitting in a dark room and being exposed to flashes of light juxtaposing diverse images in special sequences and patterns is going to have just as powerful an effect on our consciousness."

    I'm gonna have to disagree with this. It takes bundles of courage to dive into the deeper ends of psychedelic experience (I'm referring here to psilocybin). It is not a party, it is no disco, it is absolutely no fooling around. McKenna said it very well that no one went into an ashram with there knees knocking, and he would argue the same about the dark room with flashing lights.

    The psychedelic experience is, especially at higher doses, is what it is. Brave, possibly insane, possibly enlightened, but most definitely brave people are called to it's realm. I can only echo others, as well as express my own opinion on this experience and say that there are moments when the possibility of death and annhilation become inherently real possibilities. It may be this quality, for me at least, that is the crucial and defining characteristic of the experience.

    Do not confuse the ability to use a calculator with the ability to derive an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Hey Chris,

    Another knock-out post. I find certain concepts in this essay particularly intriguing, especially since I’m always looking for resonance and connections between storytelling modalities, altered states of consciousness and conspiracy theories.

    I find 2001 to be a deeply subversive and dangerous work of art. It seems to me that Kubrick worked very hard to give the film an ‘off’ kind of energy – unbalancing, unsettling and provocative. Great art is often, if not always, all these things.

    I don’t know if I have the words to convey the subtlety of what I want to express here, but I’ll try.

    As one of the other commentators mentioned, there is a level of the film that is concerned with shamanic dream-space; the inner space of the psyche. Also, as you’ve highlighted there is the explicit narrative of cover-ups and treachery displayed on screen. Now, is it only me who finds the Monolith to be a hugely presumptuous and disturbing presence? Of course not.

    If we look at the explicate narrative then the Monolith is manipulating context, characters and events for its own opaque reasons. However, if we follow the implicate order of the film, we could be forgiven for interpreting it as a shamanic quest of self-actualisation.

    ReplyDelete
  43. (Continued...)

    Here is the crux of what I wish to convey – I think the film walks a fine line between Abuse and Gnosis. I mean, does Bowman have this done TO him, or is it created WITHIN him in some mystical ‘destiny’ sense? I think Kubrick was trying to draw our attention to a very dangerous threshold.

    It seems to me that we must on some level take the events depicted on screen at face value, if we are to learn all we can about the film’s secrets. This being the case, I can’t help but feel that the Monolith is a deeply presumptuous if not entirely malign presence – engineering events with some notion of self-entitled authority.

    As your quote from Kubrick tells us, there might be certain mysterious intelligences in the universe that might only be comprehensible to us as gods. Is it ok to be controlled by them if something ‘good’ comes of it in the end? My personal answer is a resounding “NO”.

    This fine line that I’m trying to express here – it brings up the uncomfortable rape/abuse/manipulation shadow that hangs over many alien abduction accounts, and indeed in the interactions between Mankind and our gods. It is my understanding that domination and control can often mask itself as liberation and a quest for spiritual freedom.

    I suspect that Kubrick wanted us to ponder such provocative terrain, because I further suspect he had some first-hand experience in this regard – and it pissed him off completely.

    It is my belief that any Archon or Demiurge’s most powerful tool is the manipulation of context, in all its manifestations. Manipulate the building blocks on which perception itself is based and anything within that remit becomes property and instruments within your dominion. It seems to me that virtually all of Kubrick’s films seem to be expressing some version of this idea.

    It’s clear to me that Kubrick had a bone to pick with the elites and his financiers. He was a very subversive character who died in what some might perceive as mysterious circumstances. Based on the films he left as his legacy, I suspect that he was not entirely bought and paid for by the Archons of Hollywood.

    There is a disturbing quality in every single film that Kubrick made – but it is a quality of transgression connected to a fierce and usually uncompromising intelligence. Contrast this with the disturbing qualities found in, say, the works of Christopher Nolan, (Following, Memento, The Dark Night, etc) – and come to your own conclusions.

    As to the moon, I’m a fellow Cancerian, so the moon has always been a part of my experience. It’s my intuitive understanding (for what it’s worth) that there are many important secrets connected to the moon, and there are things existing there that would stagger our imaginations.

    But honestly, this is no surprise since there are things right here on Earth that are just as staggering, for those with eyes to see. So yes, it is my belief that others have been there long before us – and that the Apollo missions were in some way connected to this understanding. Beyond that, the details remain far too elusive for me to comment upon with any confidence.

    However, your thoughts about a powerful Watcher race living mostly unseen alongside humanity - this closely correlates with my own high-wierdness experiences.
    Just my two cents.

    Truly amazing work, Chris. I find myself consistently impressed, and that’s very cool considering the shitty nature of our times.

    Peace

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anonymous12:33 PM

    Quote:
    I'm gonna have to disagree with this. It takes bundles of courage to dive into the deeper ends of psychedelic experience (I'm referring here to psilocybin). It is not a party, it is no disco, it is absolutely no fooling around. McKenna said it very well that no one went into an ashram with there knees knocking, and he would argue the same about the dark room with flashing lights.

    The psychedelic experience is, especially at higher doses, is what it is. Brave, possibly insane, possibly enlightened, but most definitely brave people are called to it's realm. I can only echo others, as well as express my own opinion on this experience and say that there are moments when the possibility of death and annhilation become inherently real possibilities. It may be this quality, for me at least, that is the crucial and defining characteristic of the experience.


    It's definitely risky, but so is skydiving and extreme snowboarding, but the adrenal rush from those experiences don't expand consciousness any more than LSD or psilocybin actually do.

    These chemicals do modify the brain in the sense that it makes the user much more open to being influenced and basically gullible which is why drugs are so often a component of cults led by strong personalities.

    However, as far as actually improving the user's ability to percieve reality, the brain's function or the mental capacity to obtain greater insight, intoxication does the opposite. It can provide an experience that the sober mind may be able to use, but there are many other methods which do not require the addition of external chemicals.

    However, the psychedelic experience as a cultural idea is often used as a metaphor for mind expansion but its use in film and fiction for that purpose does not match the reality.

    John H

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anonymous12:49 PM

    I always like Raj's commentary. Adds a lot to the reading of the post.

    One thing to point out, the "shitty" nature of our times is compared to what?

    Look at the opening of 2001. A group of dirty, hungry, hairy hominids scraping a terrible living out of barren ground. Along comes the monolith to give them the advantage of improved intelligence or possibly it simply activates the mostly unused cerebral cortex that gave the ape better processing capacity but lay dormant until its brain started listening to it.

    That gives the ape the ability to use weapons/tools and then we cut to the inevitable development to a spacecraft and station. The human bodies have lost the hair and grown longer to better manage heat, but essentially these are the same animals we saw bashing wild boars and each other with bone clubs in the opening sequence.

    So, compared to the environment our bodies actually developed to survive in, we are in far more blessed conditions than we might be, and if we are on the Internet and in or near a major urban area, we are likely far more fortunate than 75% of the rest of the world who are likely better off than 100% of people a century or so ago.

    So, it is a strange situation to be in if you think there are unseen or secret overseers to the human race. Whether a human secret society or non-human, can their influence be considered detrimental considering the whole span of human history?

    ReplyDelete
  46. RE John H’s quote:

    "However, as far as actually improving the user's ability to perceive reality, the brain's function or the mental capacity to obtain greater insight, intoxication does the opposite. It can provide an experience that the sober mind may be able to use, but there are many other methods which do not require the addition of external chemicals.

    However, the psychedelic experience as a cultural idea is often used as a metaphor for mind expansion but its use in film and fiction for that purpose does not match the reality."


    There are some interesting insights in these paragraphs, and I don’t entirely disagree. I just wanted to add that I think the psychedelic experience as a cultural metaphor for an expanded mind is highly charged and perhaps very appropriate – especially if there is any ‘literal’ truth to Gnostic philosophies.

    If we are indeed property and instruments living within the dominion of a trickster god, it makes sense to me that the idea of altered states of consciousness would be seen by many as the only way of truly escaping.

    This powerful desire in Man to ‘Break on Through to the Other Side’ could be interpreted as the genetic memory of a larger, imaginal reality from which we have been isolated.

    I see this as being connected to what I call the ‘Hell-for-leather Salvation’. In various forms of storytelling when the protagonist is facing their darkest hour, they can only escape/understand/achieve through letting go – by basically saying “Fuck it.” Through this leap of faith they are often able to invoke a favourable outcome (even if they are risking death, injury, damnation or toxicity in the process).

    Virtually every comic-book or action hero experiences some version of the ‘Hell-for-leather Salvation’ – and I think it is this provocative and dangerous letting go that charges the whole idea of psychedelics as a cultural metaphor with such potency.

    This is meant to add to rather than take away from the insights presented in your comment, John, since I agree that psychedelics are not the only means to Break on Through – and I also agree that psychedelics can be used as a powerful means of manipulation - but I have also experienced the ‘Hell-for-leather Salvation’ myself and feel I have grown as a result.

    Peace

    ReplyDelete
  47. "I just wanted to clarify what this post is about- it's not about subjective analysis of metaphor and symbol, it's about what is actually being show onscreen."

    A close viewing of Kubrick's finest work, Barry Lindon, supports Chris's thesis. Kubrick was the master of cognitive dissonance. "See what you will see. Hear what you will hear."

    ReplyDelete
  48. Anonymous6:23 PM

    Re: Psychedelics
    This is the key, and I don't think that it is a secret anymore, the ingestion of 4-5 grams on an empty stomach, in a pitch black room will reveal an infinitely more powerful visual and cognitive experience than any film ever made. It is a hyper-cube that extends through the past, present, and future, and is not to be judged without personal experience. Just know this, although it is a far more benign substance than alcohol, nicotine, or caffeine, it is illegal, and carries with it the threat of imprisonment.

    Re: 2001

    The Moon represents the first movie screen, as it provided the canvas for the first film--the projection of the Earths shadow. This recurring phenomonon triggered something vital, something that provided a focus for the genesis of human thought.

    Re: Kubrick

    It seems stunning to think that K would have been allowed to be so blatant in his revelations with an elite standing over his shoulder. Why allow him so much damn rope?
    I tend to think he was less of a rogue in his early days, but became impatient with the social and political progress near the end of his life. He wanted to see the end himself.

    "The world is a matrix of directors and the directed, and gravity rules us all" S. KUBRICK

    Re:

    ReplyDelete
  49. Chris,
    I have thought for a while that the original "Planet of the Apes" movie presented an ancient astronaut script (though slightly more veiled). If you get a chance, watch that "Dawn of Man" sequence from 2001 then put on "Planet of the Apes"

    Note that Heston (the falling astronaut) crosses his arms like he is being put in a sarcophagus and then says he hopes to become "a god to the primitive creatures" of what he assumes to be a newfound planet. Looking at it this way, shows an advanced spacefaring race coming to a primitive ape/human race and challenging their culture. Even the twist ending, revealing the POA to be Earth, would reinforce the idea that it was Earth that experienced this AAT/Intervention event.

    PS: Note that in 2001, just after "the Dawn of Man," we see Heywood Floyd coming to the space station, which is comprised of two Xs, one of which is still under construction. This would seem to reinforce the idea that "the double cross is in progress"

    ReplyDelete
  50. So much intelligent food for thought in these comments, guys. I love being a part of this community.

    RE: Alan's comment about the double-cross of the space station - the symbol of the X is often connected to the Sun in alchemical traditions - this might be significant in some way, especially considering the twin-suns theme that occurs in the 2010 'sequel'.

    Peace

    ReplyDelete
  51. hey chris, something that I could only answer for myself in an abstract way was the aging sequence in the white room. But your post has brought to mind that many abductees claim that they have been adbucted more than once -in fact they seem to have a lifetime of abductions. Could be that David Bowman's experiencing a number of abductions to the same place.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Chris -this article was beyond fascinating for me and as usually beautifully written!!
    I will have to look into the Weidner information asap.
    Not only are there a huge number of ET theories and who they might be and what they might be up to-but I believe many of these theories were intentionally injected into the debate to mislead by the PTB.
    all the best to you my friend!!

    O-ps-have you ever done anything on the Billy Meier case in Switzerland? if not would love to see you write about it when you have time.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Hey Chris,

    I just wanted to add some further speculations about Alan’s recognition of the ‘double-cross’ space station. It made me think of the Cross of Lorraine, a heraldic cross that’s quite familiar to students of conspiracy theories.

    Now, if the original X symbol had alchemical connections to the sun, and if therefore the famous Christian Cross is a figurative X symbol – what then does the Lorraine Cross represent? Here is a short Wikipedia quote about the Lorraine Cross:

    The Cross of Lorraine (French: Croix de Lorraine) is originally a heraldic cross. The two-barred cross consists of a vertical line crossed by two smaller horizontal bars. In the ancient version, both bars were of the same length. In 20th century use it is "graded" with the upper bar being the shortest.

    This means that the ancient version is in fact two X symbols, perfectly conjoined at the lower right of the first X and the upper left of the second X.

    Now, if the singular X is associated with the sun being quartered by the four elements in some alchemical traditions – what then is symbolised by the ancient twin-X variant of the Lorraine Cross?

    Might it be the occult knowledge of TWO suns having an influence on human affairs? Might there be hidden knowledge of the yellow sun and the green sun contained in this symbol? Or perhaps it symbolises the external star of Sol and the internal star of Psyche? Or perhaps both?

    Either way, I suspect there is some significance to the idea that the ancient variant of the Lorraine Cross is describing the existence of an observable sun, and a second secret sun – and is highlighting the fact that the two are inexorably linked somehow.

    It is my understanding that symbols are shaded with various layers of meaning, and that great truths are often hidden in plain sight. Just a theory, mind you, but perhaps a significant one since 2001 concerns itself with themes of manipulation, treachery, evolution and gnosis.

    Peace

    ReplyDelete
  54. Jay W. Rocks. To the puritan who disavows any psytropic enlightenment you are wrong minded. It is not a crutch, it very well may be an accelerent to Gnosis. Light therapy is key. More light in any manifestation is key. chris you and your dreams are legion. Thank you for sharing your psychic wonderland. May you continue to shine light on any and all shadows. Dennis from Bug-tussel.

    ReplyDelete
  55. wklaus2311:24 PM

    Fire walk with me?

    Check out Peter Kingsley's "Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic".

    ReplyDelete
  56. Raj … You've no doubt heard of the delightful raconteur, authoress, and podcast hostess, Tracy R Twyman. She's often seen with the Cross of Lorraine, the standard Cross of Lorraine, and I wondered, if after your double cross citation, you recalled the logo for a certain petrol interest? At any rate, Ms Twyman had quite an interesting take on the Royal Wedding (rolls eyes) right here.

    Over & out for the nonce,
    Magus AQE

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anonymous6:10 PM

    Always interesting, enlightening, and illuminating.

    Thank you Chris, Raj, and all the posters who share their thoughts so eloquently- much better than I could.

    Peace and friendship, Delorus

    ReplyDelete
  58. There is "A10 work and no play makes a Jack a dull boy" repeated several times on pages

    ReplyDelete
  59. RE: Alan's comment about the double-cross of the space station.

    According to Andy Colvin at;

    http://forteanswest.com/wordpress-mu/washingtonlowfi/2011/05/13/the-meaning-of-indrid-cold-part-3/

    "The “XX,” or Masonic “double-cross,” seems to be a way for the Masonic “compass and square” to be easily written on a typewriter or computer."

    Maybe the Freemasons were building their first lodge in outer space? As above,so below .-)

    ReplyDelete
  60. Anonymous6:00 PM

    Chris, your Secret Sun facebook page is no longer public - it requires log in. Not sure what has gone wrong but perhaps you can fix it so we non-facebook iconoclasts can have access. Cheers and thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Taken in one direction, IBM becomes the letters HAL. Taken in the opposite direction, IBM becomes JCN.

    There is one obvious way of looking at this: JCN, Jesus Christ the Nazarene.

    There is another less obvious way: If "C" is allowed to equal the number 3, then we have J3N. Could this refer to John Joseph Jack Nicholson?

    Hmm...I wonder if HAL and JCN are connected some way?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mariev Finnegan11:09 PM

    As a big fan of 2001, A Space Odyssey, And having read your article,I would mention that HAL, the computer, based totally on reasoning, was driven insane. Because it was lied to. It could not compute.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I won't take sides on Weidner's theory that Kubrick created a front for the public regarding the Apollo missions, but I'll state this. Hypothetically if Kubrick create footage designed for cover, it could be possible he did so with ulterior motives unknown to NASA and the government. Perhaps he wanted to stay true to his knowledge that space is Inner and not outer. He "helped" the man for HIS purpose and NOT theirs.

    ReplyDelete

Off-topic info, links are always welcome if kept brief, but please refrain from unrelated data dumps and off-topic lectures.

As always, I reserve the right to delete comments that I consider to be inflammatory or overly off-topic

If your comment doesn't show up, please email.

Please be aware that Blogger often dumps comments with hyperlinks into the Spam folder. Please try to avoid them, since it makes more work for me to read through the spam folder for your comments.