Wake Up, Donnie

“First of all, Papa Smurf didn’t create Smurfette. Gargamel did. She was sent in as Gargamel’s evil spy with the intention of destroying the Smurf village. But the overwhelming goodness of the Smurf way of life transformed her. And as for the whole gang-bang scenario, it just couldn’t happen. Smurfs are asexual. They don’t even have… reproductive organs under those little, white pants. It’s just so illogical, you know, about being a Smurf. You know, what’s the point of living… if you don’t have a dick?”
–Donnie Darko

Today is one of those “resonant” days.

For starters, October 2nd was the day in the 2001 movie Donnie Darko upon which all that business with “Frank” started.

Frank, of course, was the Pooka-type human-sized bunny that the titular (huhhuh…titular) character began interacting with. Later in the movie (spoilers) we find out that Frank is actually a dead person inside a “bunny suit.”

Which prompted, of course, the famous exchange:

We then immediately after get this:

Fans of the movie Donnie Darko consider October 2 to be the date when a “tangent universe” was created. They do not actually believe a “tangent universe” was created in our reality. Though, to be fair, there are some people out there who do believe we are living in a universe that “branched out” of the common one; and perhaps, some Donnie Darko fans are indeed among them.

My mom used to say that people who cook up such outlandish bullshit theories probably have too much time on their hands.

Today is also the birthdays of both Richard III and Groucho Marx. I’d like to believe that if the two of these historical personages ever met in some Bill And Ted like slaphappy time-traveling romp, they would exchange some jokes and pleasantries. Or perhaps Groucho would just mercilessly make fun of a clueless Richard. Either one would be entertaining to me, and “bring history to life”–which of course is what we want.

It is also the birthday of rocket scientist and occultist Jack Parsons…the “unofficial” history of whom I have written here.

jackparsons.jpg

Now, I have a very funny story about Jack Parsons I’d love to share with you. But in order to provide the requisite amount of context, I direct you first to author Robert Anton Wilson’s musings about the idea of reincarnation.

So in The Cosmic Trigger I, Wilson describes various forms of mind-expansion he indulged in during the Sixties and Seventies. Among them were various meditations and consulting of psychics which yielded information about a number of his supposed past lives; among them, an Irish bard and ancient Asian philosopher.

image-original.jpg

Wilson noted that while such esoteric speculations were momentarily intriguing–they also were, like his sporadic “contacts” with aliens on Sirius, not really provable and likely to be just “mind exercises.” That is why he said he would rather promote the idea of a human-sized bunny like the Pooka–or, if you will, Frank–so nobody would take any of this mental masturbation seriously.

Anyway, at one point after 2012 or so, I began to get the following info in my meditations: that I was the reincarnation of Jack Parsons.

giphy.gif

Now obviously, I don’t really believe that. But as one of Wilson’s “mind exercises”–perhaps my left brain talking to my right–it’s pretty goddamn funny. Certainly, there’s a lot metaphorically I could read into that; and as a writer, especially of comic books and science-fiction, I traffic a lot in these exaggerated metaphors.

aleister-crowley-jack-parsons-beast-and-geek.jpg

So here was the basic idea: Jack Parsons, in life, fucked up. He fucked up not because he was an “evil” guy…but simply because he was an irresponsible asshole. And because he fucked up–per the law of Karma–he would have to spend his subsequent lives addressing all the bullshit he committed because he was an irresponsible asshole.

jp.jpg

And part of the reason he fucked up–per the self-indulgent LARP I no doubt mistook as a genuine meditation–was that he massively profaned the Creator with all that sexual magick.

Again: he didn’t do it because he was an “evil guy,” but rather just an irresponsible asshole.

jp4

So per Karma, the Creator thought it would be really funny if Parsons reincarnated as a woman. And then he’d be born into the “Information Age” so he could spend his time exhaustively researching exactly how and why he fucked up and what the (continuing) consequences are.

You know: a “time out” for him to reflect on what he did, as you’d do with any misbehaving child.

Now: this is all a very adorable story, but, as I noted before, I do not actually take it as literal fact. I have created hundreds of stories, fictional stories for books and comics and etc., many of which I’ve by now forgotten but are listed on a spreadsheet in one of my files.

So if we move away from the LARP bullshit and just get to the “meat” of why Parsons “fucked up”–outside of the drug-fueled black magick orgies–I would have to say it’s because he might have just opened up a bunch of portals willy-nilly and a horde of “aliens” flew through them.

But I don’t even believe that. I don’t even believe there’s frickin’ aliens.

I don’t believe nuthin’!

Again: these are all metaphors we use to make sense of—and perhaps add a little extra meaning to—our lives and the Universe.

But what we do know–what is indisputable–is that on this day, Richard III, Groucho Marx, and Jack Parsons were all born.

And now, here’s Weezer:

Related Posts:
My Life As A Hypersigil, Part One
The Dark Side Of The Moon Landings (And Other Folklore)

Support Val’s Work On:
Patreon (Exclusive blog & content!)
Paypal One-Time Donation
Follow More of Val’s Work On:
Twitter
Tumblr
YouTube

2 comments

  1. I have chosen this page to comment, but what I write here references several of your articles that deal with Parsons, Crowley, etc.
    As childishly simplistic as it may sound, I would preface matters at hand with the following observation: when it comes to Crowley and all things related to him, nothing is what it seems.
    You have written that much of Crowley’s work (and, Parsons’ as well) is misunderstood. That is true. But, there are actually two primary modes of misapprehension that are at work.
    The most obvious are those who condemn it from an outside perspective; born again Christians and such who have no grounding in the ideas, and who just throw out knee-jerk judgments.
    But, by far more important is the misunderstanding that emerges from those who call themselves Thelemites; i.e. those persons in the occult world that revere Crowley, and related persons like Jack Parsons. They are insistent that despite all of the graphic illustrations of the flaw at the core of the Thelemic idea (the lives of Crowley and Parsons being two of the most obvious examples), it is still a vision that holds the hope of humanity’s survival and improvement. Like any number of true believers out there, they have an astounding capacity to censor out any facts, mundane or metaphysical, that shown them that their faith is poorly chosen.
    I could go on at some length on this matter, as I myself was a kind of Thelemite for a period of almost 15 years. I have had ample time to study Crowley, Parsons, and the Thelemic practice itself. What I found from both the standpoint of philosophical/metaphysical analysis and personal experience, is extremely disturbing.
    But, as I have to limit what I set down here, I will focus on only one key element of the issue. It’s something that you observed yourself, in your alternate history of Parsons and Crowley.
    In that article you observed that Crowley’s method of altering his disciples was that of breaking them open and remaking them from within. Knowingly or not, you really hit on the central issue and the central defect of Thelema.
    Crowley’s magical system is entirely predicated on trauma. On the use of trauma in breaking down a core personality, and opening it to other influences. While this may be true to some extent of many forms of magic, in the case of Crowley’s work it is far more pronounced. And, his methodology is far more flawed than other systems as well.
    Crowley’s system reflected his own life; and not merely his magical one. He was himself traumatized as a child with sexual predation almost certainly being one of the forms of abuse he endured. Everything in Crowley’s magical methodology is predicated on this abuse. It replicates, directs, and enhances the traumas that Crowley was subjected to.
    Thelema has as its ultimate purpose not the liberation of humanity, but the indoctrination of humanity with Crowley’s traumatized psyche. And, all the elaborate language of Thelema about “transcending the ego” is nothing but a facade. What is done in the Thelemic school is the subjecting of aspiring adepts to calculated traumas that are used to break down their sense of self, and then open them to Influences that Crowley was opened to. While it may strain credulity to have this stated so plainly, the Influences in question have no interest at all in improving humanity. Not in any way, shape or form. Their interest lies in gaining control of human bodies so that their presence in the physical world can be anchored and expanded.
    But, you need not look to my (admittedly) subjective experiences for validation of the fact that there is something rotten at the core of Crowleyanity. If you take the time to really analyze Crowley’s written work, you will find ample evidence of it there.
    For instance in comments to his essay on what he called Energized Enthusiasm, he openly declares that the revolution in human values he advocates is an aristocratic revolution; (his exact words.) He goes on to state that his intent is to re-order society along elitist lines. To create a world where a select few will dominate all others, and where the vast majority of human beings will be kept as fodder for the use and amusement of those at the top of the hierarchy.
    By the way, in the same essay he holds forth at length on the his support of sexual interference with children at the earliest age of their development.
    A final note: Jack Parsons was in no way an improvement on his mentor. What was different between Crowley and Parsons was a question of emphasis; not of essence. But, to elucidate that point would require more time.

    Like

  2. To offer a few clarifications to my comments about Crowley and the Thelemic concept (as well as the real difference between he and his magical son Parsons) I submit the following.

    “And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.”

    Revelations, 17:16

    “Although seemingly united, Scripture reveals that the two powers are in conflict, each struggling to dominate the other. In fact that the Harlot rides the Beast is a figurative portrayal of her initial dominion. But “the beast will hate the harlot” and in the end he will conspire with ten kings, who burn the Whore (Rev. 17:16). The Beast will triumph over the Whore.”

    Scarlet and the Beast: A History of the Ware Between English and French Freemasonry

    In your alternate history of Jack Parsons, you reference Babalon, and say that the source of the entity is unclear. That is not the case. Crowley’s first and most direct inspiration for Babalon was the Book of Revelations. It is true that he incorporated elements from various other sources, including the various Great Goddess and Sacred Whore cults of the ancient world. But, Crowley’s ultimate focus was derived from his own Neo-Gnostic interpretation of the Bible. And this passage, combined with Crowley’s actual track record of interactions with women, tell us what we need to know.
    Crowley’s mindset was typical of some abuse survivors. As you are probably aware, many such survivors evince different coping mechanisms and psychological (mal) adaptations. Often you will see them show either a compulsive sexuality or a marked aversion to sexuality. In some cases, they oscillate between the two.
    In Crowley’s case, he indulged, but always harbored resentment and disgust at what he desired. This is why, for instance, he described the Scarlet Woman as an office that could be filled by different women, but the Beast as a singular and unique being. It reflected the fact that inwardly he despised women, and most often exploited them to the point of their death or disintegration.
    This is why the passages above illustrate the inner workings of his mind and his ideology. Because they describe the Beast and the Scarlet Women as being temporary allies that will one day be at war. Crowley saw Babalon, and all the women he used to incarnate her, as a resource to be exploited. And, he treated the women in his life accordingly.
    The main point of contention between he and Parsons was that Parsons did not conform to Crowley’s essentially misogynistic view of the Female Power. In this sense, Parsons was the inverse to Crowley. Because whereas Crowley wanted to rule over and exploit women, Parsons ultimately wanted to be ruled by a Feminine power, and to loose himself in it.
    When Parsons related to Crowley that he and Hubbard were engaged in attempting to incarnate a Babalon fueled elemental, Crowley took him to task for it. Part of this was doubtlessly just Crowley’s ego. He didn’t want his heir apparent undertaking any magical activities without the Master’s input. But, what really bothered Crowley about it was that he saw that Parsons’ attempt would place him (I mean Parsons) in a subservient position to the Power called. He specifically referenced this, stating that “the magician’s love of such creatures (a Babalon elemental) was insensate, and would destroy him.”
    I realize that in today’s social and political climate most assume that anyone or anything that opposes misogyny is good. But, a close analysis of the power that Parsons treated with, especially his interactions with it in his last years, will show that this power is conceited, predatory, and ultimately dismissive of the value of human life.
    Do yourself a favor and (if you have not already done so) read the works that emanated from Parsons’ last magical activities. The intent of this entity (Babalon) is clearly shown. She/It intended Parsons to be the human sacrifice that opened the gate to her return and ascendancy. This is the reason why his life ended in that explosion. In fact, Parsons eventual death in this manner was even foretold by Babalon.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s