#holy grail mythos

[gawrkin]

(From Visions of History: Robert de Boron and the English Arthurian Chroniclers by Edward Donald Kennedy)

The way I interpret the French Tradition is that it "started" with Robert de Boron. In a way, Robert de Boron is like the "Second Father of Arthuriana". Robert de Boron didn't so much alter King Arthur's story as he instead gave it a new context.

Despite Chretien de Troyes and Robert Wace introducing the Round Table, the Holy Grail and Sir Lancelot, it was Robert de Boron who truly established the "Christian Chivalric Universe" - by writing about the history of the grail and the introduction of Joseph of Arimathea as a patriarch, Robert de Boron gave the (Literary) Chivalric genre a Mythic Past and a continuity of sorts. It fits in the Christian worldview of history as part of a giant plan - and story - of God's for Mankind's salvation.

It fully establishes the Christian origin and heritage of (Literary-)Chivalry-as-an-institute by not only having Joseph bring Christianity to Britain, where the future fantastical setting of Arthur and his warriors was to be established, but also having him serve as the ancestor to multiple Arthurian characters such Percival, Tristan, Lancelot, King Lot, his son Gawain, and Arthur himself (fulfilling the aristocratic need for genealogical fantasy).

This essentially pushes away, and negates the symbolic consequences of, the original narrative set forth by Geoffrey of Monmouth - the almost kind-of secular and worldly portrayal of Arthurian History.

For all intents and purposes, Joseph of Arimathea replaces Brutus in importance for the Era of Camelot. This is why (in Vulgate cycle, at least) Joseph is said to be a knight.

Nowhere is that felt more than in Robert's introduction of one of the most iconic pieces of Arthuriana: The Sword in the Stone.

The Sword of the Stone, an item not mentioned at all in Historia Regum Britannia, and its attendant story arc of Arthur's hidden upbringing by Antor/Ector, essentially functions as a second origin story for King Arthur without having to negate or omit Geoffrey's older story of Arthur being born through a thoroughly un-Christian manner.

Whatever or whoever Arthur was before pulling the sword doesn't particularly matter, the sword in the stone effectively grants the same Divine privilege to rule as if he was conceived and raised as a normal royal.

AND

Arthur's ignorance of his heritage affords him synergy with his knights, many of whom are often of the "Fair Unknown" archetype, including Lancelot, Gawain, and of course, Percival.

[prokopetz]

For all its dumbfuckery, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is genuinely the closest a film adaptation of the Arthurian mythos has ever gotten to capturing how deeply weird the source material really is.

[melrosing]

a while back you mentioned bran being a fisher king type of figure if he becomes king. i am so intrigued by that concept. can you tell us more?

so full disclosure, I don't have a great deal of familiarity with Arthurian legend or British/Welsh mythology, which is what the Fisher King really draws upon, so I don't think I can say anything of real substance on this subject! i keep meaning to just sit down and swot up on this stuff but it's. not really something you can do in one sitting lol

HOWEVER i think even to a wiki peruser it's patently clear that GRRM is drawing on the Fisher King concept with Bran (as in, once you know he's doing that, you realise he isn't even trying to hide it). and I do tend to think that GRRM is more likely to stick with the top line of a myth or historical event he means to parallel rather than get lost in the minutiae - e.g. Matilda v Stephen succession crisis inspiring Rhaenyra v Aegon, the Black Dinner of 1440 inspiring the Red Wedding, this is GRRM taking the substance of an event but not the details of how it came to pass.

I'm going to guess that rather than getting into the finer details of the Fisher King mythos, GRRM is going to utilise it much like he's used Shakespeare's Richard III for Tyrion, which is another inspiration that seems painfully obvious from the moment you spot it, but is hardly lifted beat for beat, and I seriously doubt that Tyrion's story ends up anywhere like the end of RIII. but you can see GRRM taking the bits and pieces of RIII he finds interesting and twisting them for Tyrion in ASOIAF.

so with that in mind, I'm just going to quickly list the key points I can personally gather from the Fisher King myth that seem to gesture to Bran, and why I think these are probs interesting to GRRM as a writer (but as I say there are people who know lots about arthurian legend and british/welsh mythology who would probs have a lot more to say here):

the Fisher King is usually depicted as being wounded in the groin/legs/thigh - this is considered synonymous with his inability to have children and so propagate his line. immediately obvious parallel to Bran, and I think through both ASOIAF and F&B, GRRM is trying to show that ruling through dynasties where everything hinges on how the next guy's son turns out, is not a viable way to run a country. Bran will not be succeeded by children of his own blood, but I think much in the way that he himself has succeeded Bloodraven

the Fisher King is one with his land as such: his welfare is the welfare of the land, and when he takes a wound (and becomes infertile), the land too becomes barren. the Fisher King awaits a hero who will heal and restore him and so the land (but I can only imagine GRRM would subvert this - it's clear through GRRM's writing of disability that he doesn't see value in just 'curing' his characters. he wants to actually write them as disabled people). and I think there's a lot in Bran's story about man learning to respect the land he lives upon - the children and the first men's peace pact was agreed upon the grounds that the first men would essentially preserve Westeros and its weirwoods etc, and so I think it's generally agreed ASOIAF could end with a similar kind of pact to end the Long Night (or after the end of TLN)? so again, think this point is about Bran representing a renewed relationship between the lands of Westeros and its peoples - the welfare of all is tied together through him

the Fisher King is guarding the Holy Grail. im way out of my depth on this point, someone with more knowledge re. the Holy Grail needs to weigh in here lol, but I would guessssss that maybe this has something to do with Bran ending the story on the Isle of Faces, protecting the peace from there or SOMETHING idk

then the most obvious point: the Fisher King as he appears in Arthurian legend is thought to draw on the figure of Brân the Blessed, a character of Welsh mythology - which immediately recalls Bran the Broken (something Bran literally calls himself several times). the name 'Bran' also translates to crow or raven in Welsh, so, duh. and Brân the Blessed's story ends with his requesting that his head be buried on the White Hill of London - and as long as it remained there, Britain would be safe from invasion. more about Bran being tied directly to the welfare of the land and its peoples

(again there's doubtless a lot more that could be added here by someone who understands the Fisher King myth better than I do, but these seemed like the most obvious points that anyone could draw on)

anyway I absolutely take it as a given that Bran will be King at this point, and whilst it's really hard to imagine what that looks like, I do think it resonates. GRRM likes writing about dynasties but I don't think he believes in them. I'm sure he feels much the same way about feudalism, but I doubt that will be gone by the end of ASOIAF, too, so this is how I picture it??

KL: destroyed. red keep: fucked. some level of politics may continue here post-series, but I think it will no longer be the heart of westeros. the fact that it is in AGOT is I think GRRM trying to show the corruption at the heart of this country - KL is constantly described as a cesspit where the rich play their games and live and eat luxuriously directly atop the shoulders of the poor and downtrodden, divorced from what's happening in the rest of the 7K.

the new heart of Westeros will be the Isle of Faces. this is where I think Bran will end up. we don't know much about it, bc noone is able to sail there, but this was where the pact between the COF and the First Men was created, and it's one of the last places in the south where weirwoods still grow (here, in abundance). and apparently there was once a Green King of the Gods Eye?? if the Green King, of the Rivermen, is in any way the role Bran will soon be occupying, maybe this is where his Tully heritage is somehow relevant. and also like 'god's eye', Bran's whole thing is about learning to see all, so. likely place for him to be. ultimately, I don't think Bran will remain in Winterfell; the story is supposed to be about unity I think, and not northern exceptionalism, so a remaining Stark sibling will take up that seat and as I said before, I tend to think that will be Sansa.

and I guess the most I can imagine beyond this point is Bran living alongside the COF (perhaps in the company of Meera idk?), functioning less as a political entity and more as a figurehead, perhaps an oracle, who lives for the welfare of his people. there will still be politicians to run the country, but they will be guided by Bran in some way, and like Bloodraven, Bran will choose his own successor. what the intricacies of any of this look like i have no idea, but this really does sound to me like the start of GRRM's answer to all his concerns re. dynasties and corruption etc etc

sorry this was all garbled as hell but this is basically what the Fisher King endgame means to me for now. in short, not a whole lot that I can make sense of but I like the feel of it, I think it's consistent with the themes of the text and suggests the start of real change at the end of the story, rather than the start of yet another dynasty.

[revoevokukil]

Sapkowski the Pagan: The Grail & The Goddess

Andrzej Sapkowski and Stanisław Bereś. 2005. Historia i fantastyka

One of the more fascinating features of Sapkowski's writing is the intertextuality of his works; their relation not only to preceding legends and fantasy, but also to his own works. There are several topics and ideas that repeat, in various shapes, throughout. As I am going through the Hussite Trilogy right now, I am taking notes.

Among his works I herein count The Witcher, The Hussite Trilogy & The World of King Arthur. Maladie. The latter must constitute the closest we have gotten so far to authorial research notes on ideas of interest.

The ley lines (so far):

Humanim, i.e. decency

(Erotic) Love's salving & dooming qualities Amantes amentes. Those who love are out of their minds. Take heart. Have pity.

Woman, the Grail of being

Fairy tales brought to life (but there's a snag)

Prophecies/Grand narratives

Folk stories & beliefs

Witchcraft

The Cult of the Goddess, the Great Mother, The One who is Three

The perishing of the old (but not quite disappearing) & the brutal onset of the new. Change and upheaval.

Common sense vs idealism vs pragmatism

Anti-taxes, anti-clergy

Anti-fanaticism

The Grail & The Goddess

"For the Goddess has many names. And still more faces."

First, Andrzej Sapkowski construing Ciri as The Holy Grail is documented. It's not merely conjecture based on the text(s), although the text overwhelmingly declares it.

Cutali, Daniele. 2015. Interview with Andrzej Sapkowski

But so what?

The Witcher is an extremely allusive and meta-literary work. It deconstructs mythical matter and fantasy canon in the same breath as establishing itself in the eternal mythical present of legends. It completes itself as a self-aware analogue, because everything has already happened, and everything has already been written about. And Ciri - Cirilla Fiona Elen Riannon - sits at the centre of its method and madness; not only the axis of plot events, but also the spindle of its meta text. It's apparent already in her name. O Elaine, O Rhiannon. All Christian legends have a pagan origin. This Polish newborn has Arthurian origins. And Arthurian itself…?

In The World of King Arthur, Andrzej Sapkowski gives his account of the Arthuriana's transformation through centuries of re-writes. It is self-evident for him that for anyone to understand anything at all about Arthur, they need to orient in the history of the British Isles and in Celtic mythology.[1] Arthur was, in all probability, a Celt. And so was the Grail, if not even more ancient. 'The Grail - like almost every element of the Arthurian legend - has its origins in Celtic mythology. This is absolutely certain and has been confirmed many times,' he writes in Świat króla Artura. So what did Arthur believe? What views and values lay at the heart of the world in which he originated? Why is this relevant for a more meaningful reading of The Witcher?

Because the world of the Celts, as so many pre-Christian cosmologies, was a living world - an animistic, self-eating and self-renewing entity, cyclical, circular, without beginning or end, embracing life out of death - and Ciri is a living Grail. Ideas repeat in Andrzej Sapkowski's writing.

Ciri, a living Grail. A girl. A young woman. A Goddess. She who is Triple. A source of rebirth and hope, of death too. Strange magic is enclosed in her veins, as in Ceriddwen's Cauldron, that is of the essence of life. Cauldrons abound in Celtic mythos (be you Dagda, hero Cuchulainn, Brân or Pwyll, you got your hands on a cauldron eventually). But Ciri does not need to be rendered an artefact in order to hold power, because… she is a woman. That alone is enough.

Sapkowski's appreciation for compelling female characters should be well-known.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

'Celtic mythology,' Sapkowski notes in Świat, 'is mainly about the love life of the gods.' Gods fighting, scheming, and transcending themselves for goddesses. It's called the oldest story in the world; girl meets boy. But that's not quite the beginning of it: in the beginning, we're all born to a mother.

The Grail's functions and characteristics are notably maternal and feminine, and the mystery and nature of the Grail's power is love.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

Great, White, Triple

Who? And what features?

The ability to provide food is the property of the Grail most often referred to. Nourishment. Revitalization. Mother is the only parent who may truly feed her child with her body. Or give birth. The Chalice symbolically representing the "Womb of the Mother" is a very old idea. Old and basic. The most basic. Bernard of Clairvaux even calls upon Mary, saying: "Offer your son, sacred Virgin, and present the blessed fruit of your womb to God. Offer the blessed host, pleasing to God, for the reconciliation of us all" (qtd. in Bynum, 268). But we'll talk about the role of Christianity and symbolism another time. For first, we are pagans.

"Drawing from various sources, I assumed that – although I am not a blind follower of this theory – the feminine element dominates in nature. If there is any cult not related to politics, it is the cult of the Great Mother, the Goddess. The belief in the male God, Yahweh, worshiped by Jews, had a political character – Yahweh was invented because he had to be invented to maintain certain social structures. For primitive people, the mysterious, divine element was exclusively femininity, the ability to give life. However, I emphasize that I am not defending these theories from a religious studies standpoint; they simply resonate with me." - Andrzej Sapkowski and Stanisław Bereś. 2005. Historia i fantastyka

This idea that resonates with Andrzej Sapkowski so strongly as to appear in virtually everything he has written was re-kindled as an ideology by the neo-Celtic, neo-pagan Wicca movement (Gardner, Murray, Starhawk, et al). Foundational text: The White Goddess by Robert Graves. The idea precedes the Celts though, and, at heart, revolves around nature and man being inseparable.

Ceridwen is one of the forms of the Celtic Goddess, and her cauldron is the womb-cauldron of rebirth and inspiration. In early Celtic myth, the cauldron of the Goddess restored slain warriors to life. It was stolen away to the Underworld, and the heroes who warred for its return were the originals of King Arthur and his Knights, who quested for its later incarnation, the Holy Grail. The Celtic afterworld is called the Land of Youth, and the secret that opens its door is found in the cauldron: The secret of immortality lies in seeing death as an integral part of the cycle of life. Nothing is ever lost from the universe: Rebirth can be seen in life itself, where every ending brings a new beginning. Most Witches do believe in some form of reincarnation. This is not so much a doctrine as a gut feeling growing out of a world view that sees all events as continuing processes. Death is seen as a point on an ever-turning wheel, not as a final end. We are continually renewed and reborn whenever we drink fully and fearlessly from “the cup of wine of life.” - Starhawk. 1979. The Spiral Dance

Nature's heartbeat resounds in reincarnation through reproduction. The gentle fury of love.

“Listen to the words of the Goddess, whose arms and thighs are wrapped around the Universe!” called the shaman. “Who, at the Beginning, divided the Waters from the Heavens and danced on them! From whose dance the wind was born, and from the wind the breath of life!” “I am the beauty of the green earth,” said the Domina, and her voice was like the wind from the mountains. “I am the white moon among a thousand stars, I am the secret of the waters. Come to me, for I am the spirit of nature. All things arise from me and all must return to me, before my visage, beloved by the gods and mortals.” “Eiaaa!” “I am Lilith, I am the first of the first, I am Astarte, Cybele, Hecate, I am Rigatona, Epona, Rhiannon, the Night Mare, the lover of the gale. Black are my wings, my feet are swifter than the wind, my hands sweeter than the morning dew. The lion knows not when I tread, the beast of the field and forest cannot comprehend my ways. For verily do I tell you: I am the Secret, I am Understanding and Knowledge.” "Worship me deep in your hearts and in the joy of the rite, make sacrifices of the act of love and bliss, because such sacrifices are dear to me. For I am the unsullied virgin and I am the lover of gods and demons, burning with desire. And verily do I say: as I was with you from the beginning, so you shall find me at the end." Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

It is for this reason the Irish recorded so many songs of aitheds - motifs of female abduction. It is for this reason one of the earliest legends of the search of the Grail is the tale of the hero Culhwch's quest for the hand of Olwen, who, wherever she stepped, made four white clovers bloom under her feet.[2] It is why Ciri, the living Grail in whom the function of the Goddess has been doubled, finds herself in a double-bind; as the keeper of power and immortality she is more frequently seen as means to an end rather than an end in herself. Not unusual for any failed relationship where the parties confuse love for something else. And while we are confusing notions of erotic and spiritual love, the Question of the Grail which must be asked of the Fisher King, undoubtedly, still comes down to a question about love.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

Celtic mythology is about the love life of the gods. The longing for a union; that completes. That turns the wheel and closes the cycle. That revitalizes, heals, nourishes, allows for flourishing. That immortalizes; if not oneself, then at least a moment. And what is life but fleeting moments, grains of sand passing through an hourglass?

Sapkowski, A. Something Ends, Something Begins

It can get confusing. The Goddess has many names and many faces, and three aspects.

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

As to the inherent eroticism of the Grail, well…

Sapkowski, A. 1995. The World of King Arthur. Maladie

He wanted to tell her everything, but the words stuck in his tight throat. She saw it. She knew. How could she not? For only in Reynevan’s eyes, stupefied by happiness, was she a maiden, a trembling virgin who was embracing him, eyes closed and biting her lower lip in painful ecstasy. For any wise man—had there been one nearby—the matter was clear: she was no shy and inexperienced young lass, but rather a goddess proudly receiving the homage due to her. And goddesses know and see everything. And do not expect homage in the form of words. She pulled him onto her and the eternal rite began. - Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

Sapkowski's interest for the fates of men in the power of the Goddess is only surpassed by his hope for the triumph of common sense and humanism. And the mystery of the Grail - what unleashes its power? - is of both sexual and platonic variety. Humanity is important. Heart. As in Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival. As per Campbell: 'The big moment in the medieval myth is the awakening of the heart to compassion, the transformation of passion into compassion. That is the whole problem of the Grail stories, compassion for the wounded king.' [4]

Thanks to Ciri, the story of Geralt of Rivia - a grail knight who set out with his hanza in search of a dream - is ennobled and raised on par with King Arthur. It is Yennefer and Geralt's love and compassion and sacrifice for Ciri, which ultimately heals them. An echo of love for his daughter melts the ice shard in the heart of an Emperor. The mystery and nature of the Grail's power resides in love.

"Love has many names,” said Hans Mein Igel suddenly, “and it will determine your fate, young herbalist. Love. It will save your life when you won’t even know that it is love. For the Goddess has many names. And still more faces.” - Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

By the end of The Witcher, Ciri's journey as the Goddess has barely begun. And what has begun has begun traumatically. Her journey to know herself, to find, forgive, understand, and accept (or reject) the Grail within, has not yet dawned. She remains in a liminal space between the Maiden and the Woman after having, already and much too early, worn the guise of Death, the Crone. The author doesn't tell; he lets the reader wonder. For before Ciri is everything. But Grail, the Goddess, requires something, and also empowers with what she requires.

Sapkowski, A. 2002. The Tower of Fools

Love leads spring into the Waste Land of the human heart.

Love, compassion, willingness to suffer with and for another, readiness to transcend one's own pain, selfishness, and rage. For three things last forever: faith, hope, and love - and the greatest of these is love.[3]

-----

[1]: Sapkowski mainly used Mythology by Thomas Bulfinch, Celtic Myth and Legend, Poetry and Romance by Charles Squire and Mabinogion. [2]: In order to marry Olwen, Culhwch must take her from her father, but Ysbaddaden will first set him on an endless quest; a list of long and laborious tasks. In the name of a woman. [3]: Or, as The Tower of the Swallow renders it: 'Are, then, Chaos, art and learning according to you, the Powers capable of changing the world? A curse, a blessing and progress? And aren't they by any chance Faith? Love? Sacrifice?' [4]: Campbell, J. 1991. The Power of Myth

[thedupshadove]

Like, I suspect, many people, I first watched Monty Python and the Holy Grail before I really knew the first thing about Arthurian Legend, and rewatching it after I do adds extra layers to a lot of the humor.

For instance, the sequence wherein Lancelot "rescues" Galahad from the castle full of women who at the very least have Designs On His Virtue, Galahad protesting said rescue all the while. Funny on its own merits, but absolutely hilarious when you're aware that, in many versions of the mythos, Lancelot is Galahad's father.

[blue-cat-shitposts]

My mutuals will already know this, but after a while I decided it was funny enough to share on Tumblr too. Today I watched OSP's video summarizing the legends of King Arthur, for the sole purpose of finally learning the context for High Noon Over Camelot. Because beforehand, the extent of my knowledge on these mythos was:

there's a king named Arthur

he pulled the sword out of the stone and that's how he became the king of England (I know that from the Disney movie)

he's fabled to return from the grave to rule England again? I remember that from a Tumblr post about some flour called King Arthur "rising" to the top of popularity charts

there's a holy grail. What's the significance of it? Fuck if I know

there's another sword but given by the Lady Of The Lake. The only reason why I remember this is because Ciri in the Witcher books got isekai'd into the Arthurian legend and got confused for Lady Of The Lake, but refused to give out her sword.

Which of the swords is Excalibur? Unclear, probably depends on the telling

there's Merlin, he's a wizard. There's a TV series about him where I think he's a twink and possibly banging Arthur? Sources unclear on that one

there are the knights of the round table

not to be confused with the knights who say.... Ni

[reikiajakoiranruohoja]

While these books are not fanfiction, the way they impacted the world versus what they were is hard not to put in fanfic terms. Sometimes you write a self-insert crossover fic so good that it becomes how people see hell, purgatory and heaven from then on out (Divine Comedy.)

Sometimes the fanfic you wrote to showcase how cool your OC is ends up creating a holy relic out of nothing that people think is real (King Arthur mythos-Galahad and the Holy Grail.) Sometimes a switched perspective fic about a mixture of Satan and Lucifer is so well done that people start taking it as Biblical canon (Paradise Lost.) The fact that we have sources for all of these and for two we know the very authors, yet they still get treated as part of Biblical canon is hilarious.

To explain, as far as I know; Hell in the bible is nothing like the one in Inferno. It is as far as I understand it from Revelation, a waiting line for souls to be judged until judgement day. After which it is an absence from God. The lake of fire is for the Beast and co. The Holy Grail does not exist in the bible. Jesus drank from a normal cup that stayed normal. The Grail is from a written version of the Arthurian Myth. Given how insane the relic collecting got in the Middle Ages, you'd have a lot of cups chilling alongside 'saint' bones if it was mentioned in the bible at all. (Actually, aside from the Arc of Covenant, I don't think bible has many relics in it.) Lucifer and Satan are not the same character and Lucifer is thought to be a mistranslation from a king's name. Satan had no tragic backstory or was forced into Hell.

[alkalinefrog]

Since you've been doing some background research on Arthurian content, did you know that a lot of the mythos involving the Round Table, chivalric romances, & the Holy Grail was developed by 12th century French poet Chrétien de Troyes; 400 years after the core Arthurian elements were first recorded in the Historia Brittonum?

Yeah, one of the first things I did when I started researching for the fic was to get a comprehensive look at the origins of the mythos! I found an ebook in the library that had a super digestible summary of the timeline, covering Historia Brittonum and Malory of course, but ALSO going into the Welsh and Celtic influences that predated Christian influence, which was SUPER COOL. Unfortunately the book only focused on the King Arthur character, and didn’t go into much depth about the other knights, ladies, faeries, etc.

The book didn’t go too in depth about Chrétien de Troyes other than to mention the titles of his contributions, so that’s another area for further reading I want to get into. I know him best for the story of Sir Yvain and the Lion, which was one of the first stories I stumbled across that just screamed HTTYD.

Like. Yvain meets the Lion by cutting its tail off??? (albeit it was to save it from a dragon where Hiccup was trying to kill Toothless at first alsjdfkalsdjf) and then the Lion becomes his best bud???? AND IT’S THROUGH THIS FRIENDSHIP THAT YVAIN IS REDEEMED??? AAAHHHH

At one point the Lion gets injured after defending Yvain, and Yvain makes a bed of grass on the back of his shield and literally drags the Lion to a town, then cuddles up next to him while he’s healing up, even though everyone’s hella scared of this wild animal BAWWWW

Other than that, I haven’t looked to deeply into his work! I made a bunch of notes on what early influences pre-dating Malory and Geoffrey of Monmouth that I wanted to use in combo with modern retellings that most people are familiar with!

[juniaships]

As much as I want to ignore Shrek the Turd I think it's a lot rewarding to address its flaws than take the easy way out. So here us a list of what I would've changed had I wrote the movie.

Harold's death

- the choice of song is rather out of place

- only serves to push a dramatic moment/shove Artie into the plot

- I actually like Harold :/

How to fix it:

- Harold doesn't die. Instead he gets an old man crisis & Lillian decides to take him on vacation to recuperate; naturally leaving Fiona and Shrek in charge

- Harold does die but the moment is treated with actual respect.

- Harold doesn't die BUT there is a death: Artie's father. The Royal Family go to Camelot for the funeral and meets Uther's estranged son Artie. That way Artie's daddy issues has more purpose in the story bc he truly can't reconcile with his dad, and Shrek a more sympathetic reason to steps up as a father figure.

- Alternatively, Artie's mom dies and he is sent to live in FFW bc his father doesn't want custody. So Shrek AND Fiona has to deal with a teenager and both have fear of parenthood byt still wants to give Artie the best. This also allows Fiona and Artie to interact with each other

Artie

Problem: suffers what I call Chicken Little Syndrome, he's kinda bland and we don't know much about him. Also his bullied nerd background Only serves to make him sympathetic cuz everyone is so mean to him! Beyond being kind and kinda dramatic Artie doesn't have much else

How to fix it:

- Everyone has beef with Artie because of his father's reputation. Perhaps Uther had a bad spending habit which left Camelot in financial ruin or his habit of flirting with women left a lot of illegitimate children now they're all fighting over rightful inheritance and puts down Artie bc he's the youngest/weakest

- Camelot has a very warrior like society but Artie is more diplomatic/soft, which makes him look weak in the eyes of everyone else. Eventually his softness saves Camelot

- Artie has a legitimate flaw (his trust issues) which makes him unable to properly communicate with others.

- Artie has a few true friends who are outcasts like him. But their support drives him to pursue a career in politics so he can help them and ppl like them (giving his speech more credibility)

The Princesses

Problem: most of them were boring at best, unlikable at worst.

How to fix it:

- Give the princesses more likable personalities: say they WERE strong and capable but got so caught up in glamor bc they don't want to remember the painful past

Problem: Charming and Rapunzel

- Comes right out of nowhere

- doesnt make since given Charming's arc is all abput becoming villain why would he date ANOTHER princess?

How to fix it

- Rapunzel's new motivation is she doesn't want an ogre on the throne, or she got tired of the princesses bullying her for her baldness. Or that she's jealous the princesses still have their princes yet Rapunzel lost hers. Or maybe Charming DID save her and she's working with him as a favor.

- However she discovers Charming is not as cool as she thought bc he still treats her (and any princess) like objects and not their own person

- Keep Rapunzel in the princess group and create a new character from scratch

- this new OC is a part of the villains not because she is one herself but because they're the only ones who accepted her for one reason or another. This makes her a foil for Charming and Godmother's relationship. She's wants to help them & save the Poison Apple from closing.

- however Charming is very bad at being evil so she teaches him how to be more assertive and this sets up a romance.

Issue: Arthurian myth

Problem: Aside from being retooled as a school campus, the Arthurian mythos doesn't have much prominence in the story

How to fix it:

-change the main goal to finding Excalibur or the Holy Grail (kiddie Monty Python)

- or have it where Camelot is in a crisis of succession so an election or tournament is held to decide the new king. Noblemen from all over participate (introducing us to the Princesses). Shrek and Fiona helps Artie while Charming joins so he can finally get his own kingdom

- Artie turns out to have magic instead of Merlin (who is just a wacky alchemist/scientist) but he lacks confidence

- At the end have it where Artie forms the knights of the round table (with some of the characters and villains as members)

- Maybe make Charming "Lancelot"

Girl Power Message

Problems: They were sidelined most of the movie, preventing Fiona from truly delving into her responsibilities as Queen. Also most of the girl characters like the Princesses & Guinevere were portrayed as shallow b*tches or not having much relevance

How to fix:

- Make Fiona the focus character this time and her story is juggling queenly duties and her trauma in the tower

- Have the princesses be an underground guerilla force they help her take out Charming during the movie

- or have it where the tower was actually a school to train princesses-to-be and Fiona's Kiss was part of a sceret test of character to see if she really is fit to be Queen; accepting her ogress form means she accepts EVERYONE, so she passed the test

- Fiona demonstrates her leadership skills by planning and carrying out targeted attacks, & taking care of civilians

- MAKE ARTIE A GIRL it makes a cool twist fitting for a franchise like Shrek. Or give Artie a female companion/love interest who accompanies him on his quest (perhaps Guinevere or a new character)

- instead of Merlin they meet Nimue/Lady of the Lake who takes the role of the kooky mentor

- Like I mentioned, explore why Rapunzel betrayed the team; perhaps make her have a change of heart and help her ex friends escape.

- Or like giving Charming a new love interest one who is a caricature of the Evil Sexy Villainess or YA Novel Girlboss Protagonist (have her learn it's okay to be vulnerable)

- have Shrek puss and Donkey be the ones in danger and fiona and her princesses are the ones to go on a journey to save them

Puss and Donkey's subplot

Problem: it doesn't do much to serve the story but for cheap comic relief. Donkey is a father himself but doesn't seem to do much to help Shrek and Artie

How to fix it:

- make Puss absent of stay with the princesses to help them

- Donkey talks with Shrek about his experiences as a father

- Remove the body switch entirely

- or have a subplot where Donkey and Puss still aren't getting along and Merlin switches them so they can learn to see from a new perspective.

- Maybe have Puss admit he doesn't have a good relationship with his own dad or something, or is actually great with kids (stunning Shrek and Donkey)

Shrek's arc

- Issue: we don't delve much into his backstory, he only wants to shirk his royal duties instead of doing the smart thing and actually confronting them

How to fix:

- introduce more Ogres or Shrek's dad. Have it be a family reunion or Shrek's dad finds out he married into royalty and that sets up the overall conflict

- Have the babies born before the movie and the plot is spent with him being a stay at home dad or caring for them while in Camelot while Fiona is tbe working parent

- also sets up an arc where Fiona struggles to balance mother hood and her job

- artie gets more used to ogre (children) leading to a realisation he has to step up to make a better future for their sake (again a more sympathetic reasoning)

The Villains

Issue: Charming is just Farquad 2.0, the rest seem to be props in their own story, Rapunzel

How to fix

- Make a new character who represents the villain side we get an intimate look at how society treats outcasts

- Give the villains more screentime like say we follow a group of them during theur trip to capture Shrek. They eventually have a confrontation and in the fray Artie ends up helping a villain much to their shock. They realise Artie isn't a threat. Or have it set at the play

- give Hook or Doris a prominent role

- or a new major villain; make it Charming's dad who takes him under his wing under the guise of wanting to help his son but is just manipulating him for the throne

- Make Charming struggle how ti adapt to being a villain due to his upbringing

- make some of the villains less open to wanting him in his group or have it where they try to help him be more evil (setting up potential jokes)

- Have Charming and Fiona have an actual moment with Fiona pointing out she did dream of a prince but is happy with Shrek and warns Charming that he still wouldn't be happy even if he did get everything

- Give Charming an actual villain love interest as a foil to Shrek and Fiona

- Don't include Charming at all (marry him off to Doris even lol) and create a new villain inspired by Arthurian lore. Maybe the Black Knight? Mordred? Morgan le Fay?

- Or even Artie himself! he wants to use his new position to enact revenge on his bullies

- Instead of the villains taking over it's the other fairytale heroes led by a jilted Charming and Shrek teams up with the villains to save FFW

- Make Uther the main villain

[tellthemeerkatsitsfine]

Stand-up show I watched this week: Monty Python – Live at the Hollywood Bowl (1982)

It’s weird that I’d never seen this before, as I grew up with Flying Circus and the Monty Python movies. In 2015, I went to the cinema with my parents to see the Monty Python reunion live. When I was a teenager and went to England for two weeks, I saw Spamalot live and loved it. I think I tend to gloss over Flying Circus when remembering the British TV shows I watched over and over as a kid, but that was definitely in there, as were Holy Grail and Life of Brian and Now for Something Completely Different. My dad wouldn’t let me watch The Meaning of Life because it was too sexual, so I watched I on my own when I was 19 and was surprised that this got banned, given the other shit my dad let me watch. I’m pretty sure it was the Every Sperm is Sacred song that made me dad not let me see it as a young kid, which I guess is reasonable, or would be if there weren’t dick jokes in at least every couple of Flying Circus sketches as well.

I re-watched Flying Circus and the four movies in 2020, and it struck me that as a kid, I remembered and repeated and recited the best bits. I hadn’t realized before that there is quite a lot of filler in Flying Circus, definitely not every sketch was funny. And there was a fair bit of “funny for the time” humour. Not even because of the stuff being offensive (I mean, there was some of that, but let’s not get into that right now), but because it was a much simpler form of humour that’s been taking so much farther and in so many other directions since then. Stuff that was funny because it hadn’t been done before in the early seventies. There are a few Flying Circus sketches that I’m pretty sure would bomb my local open mic nights. But there are also a lot that were still absolutely hilarious today.

I tried, while I was watching their Hollywood Bowl recording for the first time, to imagine what it would be like if someone did one of those sketches at a new act competition somewhere in 2023. Would the judges instantly recognize it as the greatest work of genius in a generation and be shocked that some ordinary person could do something so funny? Or would it place, like, third? Or would it do badly – not because comedy has gotten better since then, but because the type of comedy that’s in fashion has changed, so it’s not unfunny but it’s just not what judges (or fans) look for these days.

Obviously this hypothetical scenario would have to exist in a world where Monty Python never happened (because otherwise all the judges would just say “You’ve plagiarized this”). But I don’t know if we can imagine how that would go, because if Monty Python never happened, maybe large parts of the comedy industry as a whole would have developed differently, and Python-esque stuff that seems overdone would actually seem fresh in that hypothetical 2023, because all those Python influencees wouldn’t have made that stuff over and over again in the intervening years. Or maybe that’s buying way too much into the Python mythos, the idea that no one on Earth except for these six absolute geniuses could possibly have ever worked out that men in frumpy dresses look funny (again, let’s not get into whether the Pepper Pots are misogynistic and/or transphobic right now).

Anyway, all that aside, whether they’re good because they influenced a generation or whether they could also objectively hold up today even without the mythos and nostalgia (personally, I think lots of what they’ve made holds up great… but definitely not every single sketch holds up), I do have nostalgia from growing up on Python and I enjoyed nostalgically reliving some of that. From childhood hours spent memorizing all the cheeses in the cheese shop so I could recite that whole sketch, to the time I took a philosophy course in university would sing the drunk Philosopher’s Song to myself and giggle during exams.

Incidentally, I recall thinking, when I was a kid, that the fact that they make lowbrow jokes about highbrow things like philosophy means they’re geniuses who are great intellectuals as well as comedians. Now, I see their sketches about philosophers the same way I see Bo Burnham’s poetry about William Shakespeare. It sounds like students learned some basic stuff in English class and then wrote a thing to make fun of it. The Pythons probably know exactly as much about ancient philosophers as I knew from that one university course I took that one time. But it’s still funny. Writing silly songs to puncture the importance of the highbrow stuff you’re taught in school is always funny.

During the Hollywood Bowl show, Graham Champman kept saying “skit”, which I found funny, because surely American audience members who have gone to a Monty Python show know what a sketch is. Or at least could work it out from context.

It’s especially funny because they picked that as the only British thing to translate into American for their audience, and that’s definitely not their most opaquely British thing. They did the Four Yorkshiremen sketch, which requires understanding of what regional accents means. When I was a kid, watching the Four Yorkshiremen sketch was actually the first time I learned about the concept of British regional accents. I remember watching it with my dad and he asked me if I noticed their voices were different, which of course I didn’t, because I didn’t learn to recognize Northern English accents until 2021. But my dad told me they were putting on accents from the North of England, and it’s funny because people from the North of England are more likely to be poor, so then when they grow up, they may talk about how poor they were, but exaggerate the extent of it. And from thence the humour arose.

(Let’s also not get into whether there’s something classist in a group of extremely successful people writing a sketch about how weird it is that all those Northerners reminisce about difficult childhoods, rather than reminiscing about growing up in private school and Oxbridge the way normal people do. But fun fact: The Four Yorkshireman sketch was inspired by a short story by Canadian writer Stephen Leacock. So I guess it isn’t entirely a British story that Americans cannot understand, because socioeconomic inequality exists everywhere, and exaggeration that escalates into absurdity is funny. Fun fact: My dad went to a school called Stephen Leacock Institute when he was a kid.)

It's also interesting to see Monty Python with a live audience, which I’d rarely seen before. A bit weird and at times annoying, the frequency with which they’d whoop and cheer. But I also find that interesting, just as a bit of history. Seeing how wild American crowds went for Monty Python in 1982. It’s interesting to see that Python was so big they transcended the rule that music fans want to hear the old stuff when they go to gigs, but comedy fans want to hear the new stuff. Monty Python wasn’t making new stuff at the time, but if they were, and had done it instead of their classics, I’m pretty sure this crowd would not have liked that. They were very happy to see the classics.

Oh! Here’s another thing I realized while watching it. I have seen that argument sketch so many times, it was one of my favourites when I was young. As kids, my brother and I used to recite it to each other. We’d get into real arguments that would devolve into quoting those characters. But in all that time, I never realized until today that the customer was right. This has nothing to do with comedy analysis or whatever, I’d just missed that part of the sketch before. I’d thought it was a story where a customer tries to get extra time for which he didn’t pay, when John Cleese says his time is up and he argues that it hasn’t been five minutes. But I realized on this watch that it hadn’t. I don’t think the whole sketch lasts five minutes, the argument certainly doesn’t. John Cleese is, in fact, scamming the customer by saying it’s been five minutes and he has to pay again.

So that's my main takeaway from that show. Americans in 1982 went really wild for Monty Python, and John Cleese was scamming the customer in the argument sketch. I've downloaded their 1998 live show too, I'll probably watch that soon and I'll let you all know if I learn anything else important.

[notmuchtoconceal]

Yo, bro.

When you're talking to a dogboy, phrase everything like a quest.

Not a task, a quest. A quest is a task with a mythos.

It will teach the dogboy to engage with his literary sensibility from the boots up. It will compel him to think out the mechanics and the logistics of the task more deeply by netting it in a shroud of intrigue.

If you look back, you might notice this was a dominant literary mode for centuries. You send the dogboys out lookin for the holy grail, you tell em they're lookin for a cup, cause they don't know what lookin for enlightenment looks like. They know what a cup is, though.

A magic cup. Maybe the magic cup was enchanted by the Josh's spit like that magic spear was enchanted by the Josh's blood.

The Josh is the ultimate dogboy. The Josh is crowned in thorns and tied up dead and naked to a tree, lashed and welted in his psychic pain aura.

The Josh is a radiant mind of the world, from which all light and grain emerges in a paradoxical unity of give and take, receive and deceive.

Dogboy's gonna go around lookin for that cup, thinkin real good, makin all sorts of connections, and then he's gonna realize -- holy shit, bro!

It's not about my mother-sister's warm hot fertile cunt and how she can bring me back to life after I nut in her, it's like -- that scene in the Last Crusade where you pick the old bronzed dimmed and subtly lustrous antique cup over the big shiny bejeweled cup cause Our Lord Josh was a Humble Servant of the Lord Himself... bro that's like...

Is it like half the story or is it a further obfuscation? Are people gonna come away from that thinkin like ... aw, damn. I got this all wrong. I gotta be lookin at like ... old dingy worn out shit instead of pretty, shiny, shimmering, googling like ... shit that screams "touch me".

Bro, why's it asking to be touched so bad, bro?

It gonna hit me with its venom?

Then it's like... bro, you gotta realize. Who cares what other people do?

If other people haven't yet learned that their desires are an expression of their values (or lackthereof) it's not your place to teach em.

Still got to much left to teach yourself, bro.

Just smack your forehead, explain all your reasoning to big bro, and be like "bro, am i a dumbass, be honest, please? i dunno the truth from lies?"

to which he'll be like "yeah, lil bro you're a dumbass. you ever stop and wonder why your dick gets hard when i call you a dumbass?

it's cause you're so smart not to run and accept it. more you accept and call yourself a dumbass, smarter you're gonna be, lil bro."

and it's like ... damn, bro.

Fuckin preach.

[warmth-and-wonder]

PERSONAL MUSINGS ON THE KING, ARTHUR

As an Arthurian pagan, I find myself clutching to scraps of fiction and impossible quests. Arthur loves sending us to little few pdfs of ancient to somewhat modern texts, panning the past for the truth. Whether or not Arthur even existed is a grail quest within itself! So when I read stories offering something as supposedly concrete as a prophecy, especially a prophecy foretelling the coming of Arthur, I get excited.

This post contains an excerpt from King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, by Thomas Malory and edited by Rupert S. Holland. This book is free on the Apple bookstore where I read it. Here is my personal commentary and understanding of, again, this prophecy, or moreso a specific quote from it. Take this with as much or as little salt as you desire.

A young Merlin kneels before King Vortigern, weeping as he foretells the coming of Arthur.

“and his end shall no man know; he shall be immortal in the mouths of the people, and his works shall be food to those that tell them”

I found this incredibly profound upon reading it. Merlin foretells not just the war and it’s results, but I believe he foretells Arthur’s place as a figure of fiction. Arthur is meant to be hard to define. He was destined to be a character as much as he was to be King.

“So many scholars have spent so much time trying to establish whether Arthur existed at all that they have lost track of the single truth that he exists over and over.” -John Steinbeck.

Arthur’s very fate is to exist again. So every time an author adds a piece of plot line, a character, a mcguffin, or a new twist to the tale of Arthur, it sustains him. It feeds us just as much as it keeps Arthur alive. Every new ahistorical piece of the tale was destined to be. The addition of a grail to quest for, a knight to seduce his wife, the pulling of Excalibur, and generally getting absorbed into Christian mythos. It was all necessary to pass the story down to the next age by whatever torch would carry it.

The idea of finding concrete, undiluted truth to any fraction of Arthur’s story sounds like the greatest honor in the whole world. The tragedy is that we may never have that truth. For as hard as we clutch to Arthur, as fiercely as we proclaim his return, we blur his features each time. Arthur remains as king by reigning in fictions. Half truths, made up stories, tales too old to be discarded. To keep Arthur, we must lose him in the process. The truth of Arthur must be lost to maintain the story of Arthur, and thus his existence and kingship.

Arthuriana has several unending, impossible quests and questions. From grails, to questing beasts, to raiding the otherworld. These quests are fated to be undertaken, though. Including their impossibilities. The Knights must quest for the grail despite never being able to find it. Camelot must patiently wait for her King to return. Mordred must be the betrayer, and Merlin must be his guide. And we, the seekers, must continue searching. We must continue trying to dig out fact and UPG and what young adult novel does it best.

The perfect rendition of the truth will only be found when he comes back to us. Otherwise, we will just have to continue searching. I believe more and more as I continue reading that it is our holy duty to ensure he exists over and over again. To make sure there are those who know his name, regardless of it’s surefire truth, when he returns again.

That is the terror of any prophecy. For no matter how great Arthur may be, who may escape the doom of god? Who prophesied to exist in fractions might remain whole?

[metaphysicalpistolsoraclemine]

THE RISE OF KING ARTHUR.

When the Albion Lightbody is activated through the Emerald Order Cosmic Heart and fully awakened by the Amethyst Order Holy Father, England, Scotland, Ireland and France will be the first demographic areas to align to the King Arthur Timeline through the Rise of Arthur in Albion. This phase of the ascension timeline awakens the stasis beings that have been buried deep in the lands, and brings on oceanic waves of the God Source and the Christos-Sophia rainbow rays or roundtables to pour into the Earth grids. The Albion Lightbody is the Diamond Sun template of humanity’s world soul from Tara as the Christos incarnate masculine-feminine identity, and it holds the instruction set of the Paliadorian Covenant which is the future record and destiny of all humankind to return back to their original spiritual home. Their inner Sun-Star, which is found deep in the RA Center of the still point in the angelic human lightbody.

We have learned that the Rise of Arthur in Albion, is describing the means by which the Holy Father and Cosmic Christos Consciousness are returning to manifest into the planet. The current events have sounded the trumpet announcing to the world that the ascension timeline is here which leads to global disclosure. Currently, it appears the global disclosure timeline will commence with the topic of child trafficking and SRA practices of Child Sacrifice, made by the satanic entities ruling this world, both human and nonhuman.

Reference: from Historical Timeline Trigger Events: 1,400 YA, Invasion of UK to take over territory and 11th Stargate, kill Templar Grail King Arthur and his support team. The Last benevolent Grail King. False King of Tyranny 

(The Bkack Suns Roman Catholic Church replaces rulership.)

 King Arthur is in Stasis in UK.

*Related to the Awakening Albion and

stasis beings.

Albion

In ancient days, the oldest name for England was Albion. The names for Scotland in the Celtic languages were also related to Albion: Alba in Scottish Gaelic, Alba in Irish, and Alban in Welsh, Cornish and Breton.

These names were later anglicized to Albany, which was once an alternative name for Scotland. Many myths and legends have long existed that giants were either the original inhabitants of the United Kingdom, or were the founders of the land named Albion. The mystical significance of Albion has been memorialized through poems, stories and mythos.

Together they suggest the nature of Albion is related to collective human consciousness and the World Soul, to which we are all intimately connected.

The Albion is the androgynous human template created from the twelve spheres of the Tree of Life which, during the fall of humankind, became buried in the lower dimensional fields of the earth, waiting to be awakened.

This elemental structure of the primordial human template is located in the earth body, and is made from the Original Cosmic Blueprint. This original Blueprint records the divine plan for humanities ascension to the Silicate Matrix and holds the celestial records of humankind’s evolution throughout the Solar System.

The Awakening Albion 

occurs in progressive stages, and recent 

Sirius and Canopus star transmissions are intelligently designed to stimulate the higher mind activation throughout the Albion body in the earth.

This gently accelerates the shift in the mental body of the earth to reflect the higher mind consciousness which is reflected in the stages of Awakening Albion.

This is the divine plan of the Holy Father in compassionate action, to restore balance and unity within the eternal light of Cosmic Christos Consciousness in which all of humanity is connected to the Solar Logos and Star systems within the Albion Lightbody. We come from the stars, for we are the stars. This holds the profound meaning of the return of the benevolent and rightful Christos Solar King to planet Earth, the restoration of the beloved Maji Grail King Arthur, the resurrected Solar Michael Anointed Christ is rising to be the protector of the Holy Mother and Sophianic Grail, which is the Cosmic Heart principle of Earth.

King Arthur’s cosmic consciousness body is directly connected to the Family of Michael, who are also protectors of the 11th dimensional gates of Aveyon-Avalon upon the NAA invasion, so he can be considered the patriarch of the Michael avian genetics and Seraphim memories throughout time.

[fmp2benhines]

"The Holy Grail is a legendary artifact central to the Arthurian mythos and Christian tradition. Its origins can be traced back to medieval European literature and folklore, particularly the Arthurian legends. Here is a summary of some key aspects and research on the Holy Grail:"

"The earliest references to the Holy Grail can be found in medieval literature, particularly in French romances of the 12th and 13th centuries.

One of the most famous works featuring the Holy Grail is the "Vulgate Cycle" or the "Lancelot-Grail Cycle," a series of Arthurian romances written in Old French prose.

Another notable text is the "Perceval, the Story of the Grail" (French: Perceval, le Conte du Graal) by Chrétien de Troyes, written in the late 12th century.

The Holy Grail symbolizes purity, spirituality, and the quest for divine knowledge or enlightenment.

It has been interpreted as a symbol of Christ's blood or the divine feminine, among other interpretations.

In addition to its traditional interpretations, the Holy Grail has been reimagined in various modern contexts, including literature, film, and gaming.

These reinterpretations often explore themes of quest, spirituality, and the search for meaning in contemporary society."

[branded-perceptions]

Love is the affective desire for PRESENCE over any elevating👽 mind constructs, impulsive triggers or subjective emotions' symbolic in mind converted fake "attachment".

Love is the biological force that transcend the innate psychosis of all of peoples and societies' self-justifying mind constructs. Remember the last time you where fighting or arguing with someone you love, and all you actually wanted to do is hold each other to find the objectively overlapping aspects? Hegelian dialectics is driven by presence.

If we would not feel the intrinsic motivational pull of love, would we ever be able to let go of and look behind your subjective habits, by social constructs defined reward incentives and to ones FAMILIAR "conscious" identity-constructs tied "logic" self-justifying psychosis like C-19 $cience or any type of reductionistic argumentations?

🎥"Scientists should be humbe! Vandana Shiva"

Essentially, this function of love is what seperates artificial intelligence, computer programs and robots from humans. Are you a psychotic computer program? 🎥"Are machines smarter than humans? Vandana Shiva".

Love is what allows us to evolve from reductionistic perspectives (all we subjectively with our limited mind capacity believe objective reality or "causality" to be: 🎥"Real Science is Spiritual - Vandana Shiva - THRIVE Movement")

to "systems thinking Benjamin Egerland" (youtube video) which requires (Vandana Shiva explains why science is fundamentally spiritual) to constantly shed and restructure all for causal wellbeing unsuitable emotional cathexis in fictional mind constructs

(everything in mind is mythos more or less)

which only works if one is vulnerable with oneself which is encapsuled by question of WHO ARE YOU? Your or anyone elses' identity, story, "logic" constructs of reductionistic "causality", status, reputations, desires, drives, self-justifying ideologies, impulses, subjective emotions (all subjective dreams) or a causal being with your PRESENCE (🎥Authenticity vs. attachement Dr. Gabor Mate) in causal reality (shared objective reality: KANT) grounded joys and needs like PRESENCE of everyone else's simple "PRESENCE"?

🎥"The problem with endless growth and globalization. Vandana Shiva"

Purpose & direction (MOTIVATION) of all our th-oughts, actions and inevitably dualistic expressions

is fundamentally driven

("holy grail" of nerves in our neck connecting conscious and unconscious centers of intelligence)

by the (way we consciously repress thereby consciously unaware)

spectrum of contrasting emotions of our unconscious minds charging as natural ironic process our conscious linguistics and definitions and explanatory constructs and out of this emerging value-exchange (🎥"What's wrong with the myth of progress? Vandana Shiva")

that turn us into ALIENS (adaptable alien veeFriends)

if we value these constructs

[[group-identities (in-group rewards' in-group "positivity" psychosis like 🎶"We are veeFriends" = 🔍Hitler only had one ball = 🔍why were the Nazis looking so happy?), value-exchange, social customs, storytelled legacies, group self-justifications, brand love, ... metaphorical UFOs (mythos, shared psychosis) as they are Unidentified Flying Objects if their purpose cannot be related (logos, Occam Razor) to all our globally most basic shared life needs causal TOUCH🤝 of dialectic PLAY (Hegel) between psychological ID🍌 whistle (life needs) and superego🤥😷😇 (kant) sense-makings' symbolic🎅 projections🍌💦🎅❤️🛐🤯 # GAGA]]

of our "fallen" and via symbolic convergence theory entraining consciousness (the reflection (mirror) of greek story of narcissus)

more than the thereby ALIEN-ATE-D most basic causal life needs (like "holy grail" of daily causal food joys) of us all around the world

that many (especially the most "successful" ones) pathologically run away from if their parents have not provided them a stable via shared meritocratic interpersonal boundary setting in causal reality (not any stories, subjective intends or glorifications) grounded

🎶AFFECTION - CIGARETTES AFTER SEX

they thereby chase (bank) via obsessions with symbolic converted reference points' psychosis like by such socially rewarded repressions arising self-justifying peer-pressures of all sorts of "shots"

(🎵I KNOW THAT YOU SAY I GET MEAN WHEN I'M DRINKING)

that similar like pleasure derived out of music naturally link into neurochemistry & for that evolved biological reward systems

(🎵BUT THEN AGAIN SOMETIMES I GET REALLY SWEET)

for which we need to evolve meritocratic superego🤥😷😇 dialectics🧠 as shared boundaries👑🥜 to not just protect our by (various childhood acceptance issues induced)

lack of self-love

[[which is grounded in our out of "boring" causal reality not social fantasies springing selves: 🎥"How to Become Authentic through compassion, Dr. Gabor Mate." boredom🔑 = self-acceptance = ability to redirect subjective motivations and restructure conscious psychosis. Some mistakenly try to do it with compulsive "meditation" to obsessively "master-mind" themselves ("clarity") which does the opposite of what is intended. Simply reserve time for yourself to be bored, listen (authenticity) to yourself, your unconscious mind (📚intuition Gary Klein), make fun about your own motivations and thought structures: 📚creativity: unleashing the forces within, Osho Insights for a new way of living = 📚"to have (mind constructs) or to be (authentic with yourself) Erich Fromm". If you do it together with others that is intimacy]]

and resulting alien-like indirect communication (🔍brand love) exploited (🔍big food and big pharma killing for profits)

global most basic causal life needs' presence

(🎵SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF I TELL YOU TO GO FUCK YOURSELF)

but nourish it via upon that (by the above mentioned mirrored mind dynamics' chase of social constructs) calibrated🧭❤️🧭 internal values, behaviours and motivations: 🎵OR IF I SAY YOU'RE BEAUTIFUL TO ME

[thebrokencrescent-blog]

📆 10 Sep , 2021 📰 We’re Asking the Impossible of Vaccines ✍️ Katherine J. Wu 🗞 Atlantic

Complete protection against infection has long been hailed as the holy grail of vaccination. It might simply be unachievable.

COVID-19 vaccines were never going to give us sterilizing immunity; it’s possible they never will. But the reason isn’t just their design, or the wily nature of the virus, or heavy and frequent exposures, though those factors all play a role. It’s that sterilizing immunity itself might be a biological myth.

The classic tale of sterilizing immunity unfolds something like this: A pathogen attempts to infiltrate a body; antibodies, lurking in the vicinity thanks to vaccination or a previous infection, instantly zap it out of existence, so speedily that the microbe can’t even reproduce. No symptoms manifest, and most of the body’s immune cells never get involved, a bit like an intruder smacking up against an electric fence around a building, leaving the security guards inside none the wiser.

This is a very neat story. And it is “almost impossible to prove,” Mark Slifka, an immunologist and vaccine expert at Oregon Health & Science University, told me.

With measles, for instance, scientists initially lacked the tests needed to show them otherwise, Diane Griffin, an immunologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. When virtually no one fell ill after an inoculation campaign, researchers figured that infections had evaporated as well. Now, however, techniques are far more powerful, giving researchers the ability to zero in on even tiny blips of infection. Post-vaccination measles infections, though still uncommon, are much more “regularly observed” than they were once believed to be, Griffin said.

As detection tools improve, each data point further erodes the mythos of sterilization. With enough scrutiny, the experts I spoke with told me that similar illusions can probably be shattered against supposedly “sterilizing” shots that guard against other pathogens, including poxviruses such as smallpox, bacteria that cause meningitis, and the parasites that cause malaria. “I think it’s literally chasing rainbows,” Slifka said. “The closer you get, the sooner you realize it’s not there.”