Real surrealist methods
Clayton Francis
we have surrealist intentions. Do we have common ground that avoids
theoretical BULLSHIT discussions that centre on redundant arguments
about the nature and meaning of terms and the ability to integrate
surrealism Taoism and what not?
YES. The fact we have interest in surrealism means that reality in the
ordinary sense is too limited and lacks the creative and ecstatic power
that we long for. IMAGINATION AND DREAM.
So how do we actually achieve surreality? I am here, observing a glass
that rests upon my desk……yes, I can stand on my head and observe it.
Yes, I can go without sleep for several days and gaze at it….or induce
headaches. But if you think this is capable of actually achieving
surreality, in that the perception is somewhat beyond reality, then you
have no idea of real surreality…….dream on. If you think this is
powerful enough to alter the reality that is bashed in your brains for
at least 20 years to the extent that it is surreality then you are
fooling yourselves.
The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing reality to
the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is LSD and what not. I
HAVE AN IDEA, LETS ALL BECOME CHEMISTS AND MAKE PILLS CALLED THE ANDRE
BRETON PILL, or PERHAPS THE JAMES JOYCE PILL. LETS JUST TAKE consume a
PILL AND WRITE LIKE JOYCE. ITS THAT EASY…….YER…….ANYBODY CAN ACHIEVE
SURREALITY BY LSD COMSUMPTION EACH AND EVERYDAY…..BUT IF YOU ASK ME IT’S
A FUCKING COPOUT……TOO EASY.
IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO HAS A BETTER METHOD TO ACHIEVE SURREALITY
THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES MORE PERSONAL PERSEVERANCE THAN CONSUMING ACID.
NO MORE FUCKING SHIT………..TIME TO REMOVE THE REDUNDANT BULLSHIT……I WANT
SURREALITY……WHO HAS A METHOD.. I HAVE IDEAS….BUT WHO SHOULD I BOTHER
WITH A GROUP THAT USUALLY TALKS A LOT OF SHIT!
Brandon J. Freels
>The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing >reality to
the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is >LSD
Brandon:
I disagree. LSD manipulates reality, it does not enhance it.
sub...@my-dejanews.com
> THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES MORE PERSONAL PERSEVERANCE THAN CONSUMING ACID.
i prefer the black geltabs myself... take a couple of those brothers, and
reality will vomit forth from yr asshole. if you ever run across a drunken
indian in yr travels, it would probably be a good idea to kick his ass and
leave him for dead after pocketing his peyote. or if you want to go with a
classic: try cocaine, and you can be just like Freud and explore the
subjectivity of existence, ready to be manipulated, seething and bubbling
inside yr own subconscious mind. and then... lord yes, is the almighty PCP:
sybthesized and marketed to dada perfection. sweet as sugar. take a couple
hits of the almighty, and it is my personal guarantee as a roman catholic
that Breton will come again and shake yr hand, again and again, many times.
but he hates jews as well...
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Brandon J. Freels
>I disagree. LSD manipulates reality, it does not enhance it.
"It is not poetic to take drugs. It is simply pitiful."
---Aragon, Treatise on Style (trans. Alyson Waters, p. 56)
Of course when Aragon wrote this I don't believe LSD was around. He was
mainly speaking of hash, coke, heroine, etc. He saw them as a form of
escapism rather than enhancement.
But we should also note that in the first Surrealist manifesto Breton
compares the Surrealist image to the drug image, and I believe in Paris
Peasant somewhere Aragon states that Surrealism is a drug.
I am rather split on the subject.
---BJF
Nikolaus Maack
Brandon:
> "It is not poetic to take drugs. It is simply pitiful."
> ---Aragon, Treatise on Style (trans. Alyson Waters, p. 56)
> I am rather split on the subject.
I've eaten hash and had some very interesting experiences. Time lapses
are so much fun. That sensation of perpetually waking up. Whoa! I'm
in the living room! Whoa! I'm in the kitchen. Whoa! I'm getting a
glass of water. It's a very fascinating sensation. Great fun to play
with. And the visions I get when listening to music. Wow.
Never done acid. But I might be trying mushrooms in the next week or so.
I'll report on what happens, if anything interesting happens.
All experience, I feel, is useful. Drugs can provide some interesting
experiences. Check out the sensations and then ditch it. That's my take
on the matter.
Some have argued, in my presence, that a real writer has to do everything
to excess. Booze yourself until your liver turns into a lump of coal.
Nope, no thanks. Get drunk a few times, real hard, flat on your ass, take
as much from the experience as you can, then find something else to play
with. After all, there's a lot of experience to play with. Why stick
with one thing forever?
Nik
--
"Many people (mostly young children) are killed each year by dogs. Also,
if you keep up with the news, it is not uncommon for criminals to have
dogs." --Paul Francis explains why dogs are evil
Talysman
:)>The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing
:)>reality to the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is
:)>LSD
Brandon:
:)I disagree. LSD manipulates reality, it does not enhance it.
LSD has neither hands nor fingers. it manipulates nothing.
in your other post, you mentioned disparaging attitudes towards
heroin, cocaine, &c. this is reasonable, because although these
drugs alter perception, they alter them in a very *limited* way
(which isn't compatible with surrealism,) and are also addictive,
which is a further form of enslavement.
hallucinogens are different. LSD can be habit-forming, but it
isn't addictive. certainly, regular use of LSD isn't conducive
to total freedom. but as a kickstart... I've never taken LSD,
but I took shrooms twice, and I'm glad for the experience. I
recommend at least one reality-challenging experience per person,
to give them first-hand knowledge of how *unreal* our sensory
experiences really are.
--
Andy Whorlhaul guarantees our giggling threats.
His Most Feathered Eminence, the Ur-Beatle
Perceptor
> Clayton Francis wrote
> >The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing >reality to
> the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is >LSD
>
> Brandon:
> I disagree. LSD manipulates reality, it does not enhance it.
I believe it only minipulates the perception
Perceptor
> I previously wrote:
> >I disagree. LSD manipulates reality, it does not enhance it.
>
> "It is not poetic to take drugs. It is simply pitiful."
> ---Aragon, Treatise on Style (trans. Alyson Waters, p. 56)
>
> Of course when Aragon wrote this I don't believe LSD was around. He was
> mainly speaking of hash, coke, heroine, etc. He saw them as a form of
> escapism rather than enhancement.
>
> But we should also note that in the first Surrealist manifesto Breton
> compares the Surrealist image to the drug image, and I believe in Paris
> Peasant somewhere Aragon states that Surrealism is a drug.
>
> I am rather split on the subject.
>
> ---BJF
Artauds experiences with drugs are revealing
1936: January-November in Mexico,
experiments with peyote,
Perceptor
> So how do we actually achieve surreality? I am here, observing a glass
> that rests upon my deskЕЕyes, I can stand on my head and observe it.
> Yes, I can go without sleep for several days and gaze at itЕ.or induce
> headaches. But if you think this is capable of actually achieving
> surreality,
your getting warmer except for the achieving part
If I am understanding the question behind the statement I think you are
talking about
perceiving the surreal via external senses rather than achieving the state.
Which would imply (if I am reading you correctly) that one can be surreal
having achieved that state.
> IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO HAS A BETTER METHOD TO ACHIEVE SURREALITY
> THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES MORE PERSONAL PERSEVERANCE THAN CONSUMING ACID.
Speaking strictly from personal experience
and not as an advocate of any dam thing at all, I can tell you Clayton that
Breton's
goal as expressed by Barrett in his sig quote can be arrived at by as simple
a means as looking at a glass of water and understanding that reality and
its perception can have more than just one definition that is valid.
This can't be perceived as possible until one has experienced the impossible
in as simple an act as looking at a glass of water.
I know I am going to get my ass singed with the flames that are sure to
follow a statement like this and that's ok I just wanted to share my
experience with you.
don.....
Dale Houstman
Salvador Dali said "I am LSD. Take Me!" but I didn't see how we
could fit that much Catholicism into a gel cap.
Henri Michaux did extensive experimentation with Mescaline
and only Moloch knows what Artaud did.
But given Breton's predilection toward intellectual clarity and control,
I don't think LSD would tempt him much.
Personally I found the "psychedelic" experience helpful in clarifying
my position vis a vis "reality as taught" but find too many people
have a difficult time internalizing the experience. Or maybe they
take it too personally? At any rate, one has to come down at some
point and it depends on where you land.
At my age Tums are an hallucinogen.
DMH
Brandon J. Freels
>I believe it only minipulates the perception
Brandon:
Yes, I used the wrong word.
Perceptor
> At my age Tums are an hallucinogen.
>
> DMH
May an hallucinogen age in your tum.
Perceptor
We all knew that, I was just being the smart ass for
a change. I don't get to do it often on purpose.
barrett john erickson
Clayton Francis wrote:
> [...]
> So how do we actually achieve surreality?
i think it's important to recognize that the greatest obstacle is revealed in the
word "we".
(sur)reality, in my opinion, can only be achieved on the "shared" level. that is,
_all_ imaginations must be liberated and integrated into daily living before it is
achieved.
no matter how close i, as an individual come to liberating _my_ imagination,
_integrating it into daily living_ requires overcoming practical limitations on the
social plane (and matters of "practicality" or "utility/usefulness" are always
limitations). (sur)reality cannot coexist with such concerns, and such concerns
cannot be eliminated unilaterally.
so, it seems to me, first efforts (social and personal) must always be toward
contesting the practical (social) obstacles to the imaginative pursuit of desire.
> [...]
> The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing reality to
> the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is LSD and what not.
while i see nothing wrong with drug use, i don't think it furthers the cause much.
drugs will only alter personal reality (and temporarily). granted, at some point
enough individuals can amount to social change, but its more likely that the existing
order will simply absorb the innocuous characteristics of the "deviant view",
demonize the dangerous aspects, and use the energy released by this process to
strengthen its most oppressive characteristics.
after all, marijuana use is still criminal (and demonized by the "leaders") in the
USA, in spite of the vast numbers of people who have used it. in such contexts,
enhancements to personal reality come at the expense of shared reality. the example
of those who "get caught" is used to intimidate, the example of those who "get away
with it" is used to manipulate desire and make it safe for those in power.
so the "war on drugs" and "heroin chic" can exist concurrently as instruments of
manipulation and falsification which reinforce the existing order.
it seems to me that focusing on overcoming the practical (while enhancing the
imaginative) aspects of _shared_ reality, is less likely to be "useful" to those in
power.
the question, of course, remains: how best to do that?
-- barrett
bar...@MagneticFields.org
http://www.MagneticFields.org/
"Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a certain point of the mind at
which life and death, the real and the imagined, past and future, the communicable
and the incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as contradictions."
...André Breton
scot...@earthlink.net
<mor...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>So how do we actually achieve surreality? I am here, observing a glass
>that rests upon my desk……yes, I can stand on my head and observe it.
>Yes, I can go without sleep for several days and gaze at it….or induce
>headaches. But if you think this is capable of actually achieving
>surreality, in that the perception is somewhat beyond reality, then you
>have no idea of real surreality…….dream on. If you think this is
>powerful enough to alter the reality that is bashed in your brains for
>at least 20 years to the extent that it is surreality then you are
>fooling yourselves.
>
But what goes on in my head is:
but if you forget what the glass will serve you and love it up like a
baby who does not know how to love, loves its newly found toe ....
touch it any way you can... connect it's physical reality with your
body/mind... as completely and directly as you can...
it may comfort you, as your body/mind is reminded in its own way that
it is a living organism meeting a bit of the universe...
and in some small way within the interaction you will be altered
...recreated.. in some small way the neural pathways in the brain
will be restructured. Other tiny bits of the body/mind will change.
The tuning of the motor skills, the ability to perceive
sensation, the potential to experience desire will be altered....
the universe --as you can know it-- and --as you are part of it-- will
be changed... in some small way..
the inter play between the mind body and the universe (and between the
mind/body and itself) is a kind of trajectory that has no fixed
course. Regardless of what has been bashed into your head, your
potential reality is created by your actions. To some degree your
actions alter what the universe will be.
I don't think there is a way of avoiding this. The process is simply
the force of life.
The problem is that our own private trajectories evolve and move
within a large box that is our culture and our language,,, that has
it's own trajectory.
... and at the center of this box is a revolving marble, a spectacle,
made of mutual funds, twenty dollar bills, ford broncos, deutsche
marks, yen, F-16s, and dali prints...
We walk on the marble and it is so dense and heavy that when we jump
it's gravity causes our private trajectories to arc back down to it's
surface and glue our tongues to it. ....but not like a baby would put
it's tongue to your glass.
The marble is so dense and heavy that it's gravity defines the
location of the walls of the box it spins within.
Perceptor
> FUCKING HELL.....MY POST WAS NOT FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT OTHERS USE FOR
> DRUGS........NO MEHTOD.....WELL DON'T COMMENT SHIT HEAD! BESIDES MY ORIGINAL
> POST WAS NOT REALLY ABOUT DRUGS....IT WAS JUST A PASSING
> QUESTION..................SURREALISM IS DEAD.....DEAD DEAD
DEAR CLAYTON,
i MAY APPEAR AS A SHIT HEAD TO YOU AND THAT'S OK BY ME AS IT IS JUST AN OPINION.
YOU ARE MISTAKEN AND WRONG WHEN YOU ACCUSE ME OF TALKING TO YOU ABOUT "OTHERS
USE FOR DRUGS".
I WAS ADDRESSING NICK IN ONE POST AND DALE IN ANOTHER, not, i REPEAT NOT you.
As I recall my posts to you in response to yours were positive and helpful,
addressing
the issues you spoke of.
As for your demand that I "DON'T COMMENT SHITHEAD" , I want you to clearly
understand that I will make any comment to anyone at anytime in any forum
as I choose to whenever I wish to and in any way that I wish to. The only thing
on this earth could ever prevent me from my saying what I want to say would be
my own judgment , my premature death, or murder at your hand. As for the latter
I shall be glad to provide my home address if you feel up to the task. Your
wishes have nothing at all to do with my actions nor do I consider your demand
against my free speech as valid in any way.
I do not even wish to give you the benefit of my opinion of you for making such
a demand.
If you ever accuse me of saying anything that I have not said or written I shall
brand you as a liar.
In the future If you wish to discourse with me and do not demand any part of my
freedoms in exchange then I shall put to one side this distasteful experience of
your personality.
don
barrett john erickson
Clayton Francis wrote:
>
> NO FUCKING NO. I DID NOT ASK FOR COMMENTS BARRETT. I WANT TO SEE AN ACTUAL
> METHOD.........besides I am not for drugs either as my original post states. YOUR
> RESPONSE IS EXACTLY WHAT I DID NOT WANT......I AM FUCKING SICK OF DISCUSSION AND DEBATE
> ON THEORY ETC.......I STUDY PHILOSOPHY AT UNI FOR THAT. I WANT TO SEE A METHOD THAT ONE
> ACTUALLY PERFORMS TO RISE ABOVE THE ORDINARY EXISTENCE. WHO SHALL SHOW ME A METHOD WHERE
> IMAGINATION IS SO POWERFUL THAT REALITY CAN BE CLASSED AS SUR-REALITY........NO MORE
> BULLSHIT PLEASE (sorry but I have the shits tonight.)
i'm sorry if you didn't find my response to be a sufficient blueprint toward the
construction of (sur)reality, but there is no such blueprint any more than there can
be a clear understanding of what that (sur)reality would be like to live.
my comment:
so, it seems to me, first efforts (social and personal) must always be toward
contesting the practical (social) obstacles to the imaginative pursuit of desire.
was intended to start a discussion on the potential for a systematic approach to
surrealist intervention which could be based in our daily living. an acknowledgment
that we have (often very low-risk) opportunities _every day_ to provoke and
destabilize the existing order and further the surrealist project.
my comments on drugs were only meant to illuminate my contention that we are faced
with a _social_ project, not a "personalist" project.
when i said:
it seems to me that focusing on overcoming the practical (while enhancing the
imaginative) aspects of _shared_ reality, is less likely to be "useful" to those in
power.
the question, of course, remains: how best to do that?
i was not evading your question, or engaging in what you refer to as "DISCUSSION AND
DEBATE
ON THEORY", i was admitting that i haven't yet figured out how to best enact this
project on a daily (and unfortunately isolated) basis and inviting a common
exploration toward such engagement.
so, to re-address your point (even if you don't see it that way) -- to achieve
(sur)reality we need to bring the entire human species to a more imaginative
engagement of their daily living. luckily, we can attend to this larger task by
enhancing our personal reality through more creative engagement of our daily lives
amidst others.
the question is: how do we best identify and transform the potential of mundane
daily activities into inspiring moments of surrealist intervention? i do think nik's
dolls head adventure was one good example. i was hoping your post would provoke more
discussion about how each of us can recognize and grasp such moments.
but no one is going to hand this to you, it is something we have to figure out for
ourselves.
Talysman
write in alt.surrealism:
:)FUCKING HELL.....MY POST WAS NOT FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT OTHERS USE FOR
:)DRUGS........NO MEHTOD.....WELL DON'T COMMENT SHIT HEAD! BESIDES MY
:)ORIGINAL POST WAS NOT REALLY ABOUT DRUGS....IT WAS JUST A PASSING
:)QUESTION..................SURREALISM IS DEAD.....DEAD DEAD
well,
since just about everyone here is in agreement that surrealism
must destroy divisions, such as those between the subconscious
and the conscious mind, or between both of these and unconscious
(autonomic) processes, between mind and body, and between self
and other, merging all reality into a seamless whole... the
short answer is that all surrealist methods (methods to reach
a surreal state) must destroy divisions.
blueprint for surrealism:
1) imagine a concept;
2) define its opposite;
3) destroy the boundary between the two in your mind.
there are many techniques that can be included in step three;
you simply have to keep trying. a few examples:
find a door you have never walked through
before, and walk through it.
(this works best if the reason you have never walked through
the door before is because you are not "one of the people who
can walk through that door". go into the ladies' room.)
practice talking to the trees in your front
yard for a year. listen to the wind whisper
through their leaves. transcribe what they
are saying.
walk blindfolded for an hour.
decide that Dan Rather is putting coded messages
in his broadcasts for you. listen carefully,
figure out what he's trying to tell you.
let a book fall open at random. pick a sentence
from that page. do what it tells you.
--
dogs of flesh and semen hunt in humanity's night.
Clayton Francis
Clayton Francis
method.....or fuck off. (no personal offence to be taken....but do you
blame my for my frustration?)
Clayton Francis
POST WAS NOT REALLY ABOUT DRUGS....IT WAS JUST A PASSING
Clayton Francis
Nikolaus Maack wrote:
> Brandon:
> > "It is not poetic to take drugs. It is simply pitiful."
> > ---Aragon, Treatise on Style (trans. Alyson Waters, p. 56)
> [snip]
> > I am rather split on the subject.
>
Clayton Francis
Brandon J. Freels wrote:
> Clayton Francis wrote
> >The only method I know that is actually capable of enhancing >reality to
> the extent that we can DARE CALL IT SURREALITY is >LSD
>
> Brandon:
scot...@earthlink.net
<mor...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>.I AM FUCKING SICK OF DISCUSSION AND DEBATE
>ON THEORY ETC.......I STUDY PHILOSOPHY AT UNI FOR THAT. I WANT TO SEE A METHOD THAT ONE
>ACTUALLY PERFORMS TO RISE ABOVE THE ORDINARY EXISTENCE. WHO SHALL SHOW ME A METHOD WHERE
>IMAGINATION IS SO POWERFUL THAT REALITY CAN BE CLASSED AS SUR-REALITY........NO MORE
>BULLSHIT PLEASE (sorry but I have the shits tonight.)
Tatsumi Hijikata and Butoh dance.
Although he probably did not think of himself as a surrealist.
--------
(Dances of darkness to dances of light...)
------
Then I began thinking of Lynn Hill and what she did when she "freed
the nose in a day". I'm sure she would never consider herself a
surrealist or consider her climb an "artifact of surrealist
exploration", but it may be.
Then I reread an essay I first saw about 6 years ago about John Gill.
John Gill was a research mathematician who loved to climb. His climbs
made sense to no one but himself. He would climb the overhang side of
boulders no bigger than houses. His routes seemed to have no holds.
Others tried his routes. They were difficult and fascinating. The
sport of bouldering grew out of this. Now 35 years later I think
there are several of his routes that still have not had a second
ascent.
When John Gill drank wine he would sometimes speculate that the mind
might have the capability to cause the body to slightly levitate.
"A few ounces could make a tremendous difference. I've seen people
go beyond their limits."
I doubt that John Gill considered himself a surrealist. The essay
indicated he was a student of Zen. (I'd forgotten that.) It doesn't
matter. I think the routes he created were "artifacts of surrealist
exploration".
CHENNO
mention a free country.....So you yell out loud anything you have to say, I for
one, always have my ear open to your opinions!
Angie
CHENNO
Perceptor
Hi Chenno
If this was addressing moi, then thanks for the thought .
I can't find the reference because I go back every few days and delete most of what
I post.
Oh, btw nice to see you posting here again.
don