Friday, March 21, 2008

[chance] and the rejection of the dream


The fragility of life was shown yesterday in two incidents, one private and one public:

A 34-kilogram stingray killed a Michigan woman when it flew out of the water and struck her face as she rode a boat in the Florida Keys in the United States, officials said.

Judy Kay Zagorski, of Pigeon, Michigan, was sitting in a boat going at 40kmh when the spotted eagle ray, with a wingspan of 1.5 to 1.82 metres, leaped out of the water, said Jorge Pino, spokesman for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

"It's a bizarre accident," said Jorge Pino, an agent with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

What are the chances? The fragile impermanence of those things we hold dear.

And in the light of this savage rebuff to this, there is always this. How vehement the reaction, how effusive the praise for the rebuffer and how savage the rejection of any notion of goodness in human relations, of normalcy and happiness in the west.

All I see is anger and defensiveness of the indefensible instead. We can't see the forest for the trees.

8 comments:

  1. I assure you, James, my post was completely unrelated to any posts of yours.

    And let me reiterate again that I am neither anti-men nor anti-marriage; I love men and think marriage is a wonderful thing.

    What I don't like is being made to feel somehow inferior or incomplete because I'm not married.

    "All I see is anger and defensiveness of the indefensible instead. "

    What is the "indefensible?"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Indefensible is to persist, as society, not you Ruthie, is doing in placing the self first. From the greed [financial crisis] to the self [broken marirages in particular], I just think we need to really step back and examine who swe are.

    I think when we get so defensive about rights being trampled on, it's the beginning of the end. Better to go in with a more postive outlook, trusting that no one is going to make anyone feel inferior.

    If only my own friend could put whether she feels inferior or not in a traditional partnership.

    ReplyDelete
  3. James, I don't know whether you are missing my point, ignoring it, or what?
    Anyway, being as it's the day it is, I'll continue in a way that seems to occupy your thoughts in a major way, lately.
    Pre 4000bc, male and female gods were equal in powers and abundance. Bloodlines could be patri, or matri, linear, and if anything matrilinear was the ascendant. Half sisters were married to strengthen blood lines well into and past the roman times.
    IN AD633, a mysterious little boat sailed into the harbour of Boulogne-sur-mer in northern france. There was no-one on board, just a three-foot statue of the black Madonna and child, together with a copy of the Gospels in Syriac. The origin of the boat was unknown, but it caused quite a stir, as you can imagine, and its enigmatic occupant (known as Our Lady Of The Holy Blood) became the insignia of the Magdalene Cathedral of Notre Dame at Boulogne - an object of considerable veneration until it was destroyed by the French Revolution.
    Quietly, all through history, in contradiction of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, there has been veneration of sacred females. Mary Magdalene has been equated with Isis, and all the other panoply of female gods throughout history. But it is a story of brutal, suppression by Catholicism, including the Albigensian crusades, among many other Catholic inspired atrocities.
    But it had to be so.
    The original attitude came from Peter, a rural/feudal disciple who was afraid/envious/frightened, of the education, bloodline history, and high societal standing, of Our Lady, The Magdalene.
    The entire Messianic Teachings were thus captured and subsequently subverted by the Roman Church, in the name of control. All scriptural mentions of The Magdalene were either completely excised, or denigrated, in the subsequent re-writings of history, undertaken by the Roman Church, over the next four hundred years, in writings that have now become what we laughingly call, and venerate, the new testament. In this frenetic male dominated hierarchy, it became imperative to eliminate not only all references to The Magdalene in the scriptures, but also to the physical Magdalene Bloodline as it spread around the world.

    Archbishop Raban Maar's richly illuminated manuscript of "The Life of Mary Magdalene consists of fifty chapters, bound into six volumes. It tells, among other things, of how Mary, Martha, and their companions left the shores.
    "...and favoured by an eastern wind they traveled on across the (Mediterranean)sea between Europe and Africa, leaving the city of Rome and all the land of Italy to the right. (north). Then, changing course to the right, (north), they came to the city of Marseilles in the Gaulish Provence of Vienne, where the river Rhone meets the coast. There, once they had called upon God, the Great King of the World, - they parted.
    The libraries of Paris contain many manuscripts that bear witness to The Magdalene's mission in Provence.
    The Magdalene companions, Mary Salome (Helena), and Mary Jacob, (wife of Cleophas), are said to be buried in the crypt of Les Saintes Maries in the Carmague. Long befor the ninth century church was built, its predecessor was called Sanctae Mariae de Ratis, and near the present main nave is the remains of a sculpture showing the Marys at sea.
    BUT, suppressed it had to be, in order for the male dominated Roman Hierarchy to maintain its legitimacy, and the suppression of the true matri-linear bloodlines continues to this day. It is/They are, deliberately reduced to mythology, hence the Grail legends, the Isle of Avalon, Lady of The Lake, Lancelot, Percival, etc, etc, if you can follow the clues :)

    Now. I'd be the first to admit that what you are struggling to say has validity, and I equally have to say that while ever you try in the spiritual way to explain, you will fail, and maybe if you'd looked where I've looked, you'd realise the extent of that statement.

    However, the way I took the argument in the previous blog was done for a reason.

    The world we live in is a given. The banks will not be allowed to fail. They have insinuated themselves so far into our society, into our lives, that their baleful influence is almost universal, and (almost) impossible to remove. We can legislate in the coming aftermath, but we can't win. And they use the conspiracy of human nature to aid themselves. They have become too powerful in one sense, the control sense, but on the other hand they aid commerce, provide and lubricate medium of exchange.

    But as in all things, they too have been subverted by, and in turn they subvert, the politicians, the talking heads, the opinion dictators. The banks will not fail, politicians will not let them. The Banks will cry Armageddon to justify the bail outs, ultimately at tax payers expense, either as direct taxation, or a debasement of the currency.

    The databases maintained by the Banks will form the nexus of control to be forced on the sheeple in the coming years. This crisis is deliberate, part of the long term plan for control, and it will strengthen the hand of both the politicians and the banks, and at the same time will be the largest theft, covert and overt, of middle class standard of living, - EVER
    If you want to follow the progress of this ultimate control, follow the progress of western banks, as they gradually take a presence in the emerging world, both as "stand-alone" in their own name, and as part owners in other banks/enterprises. Link this in turn with the growth of control by the IMF, BIS, etc, etc, you know the others.

    Your search, your dreams/praises, etc, all have validity. They were hijacked 2000 years ago, and this has perpetuated to this day. Your historical like thinkers were branded heretics and burned at the stake, or drowned at the ducking stool.

    In a way you are correct, and I can go round in circles, and give many megabytes of explanations until I disappear up my own.......

    So I'll just wish you "Happy Easter".

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree that we have been overtaken by cheap cynicism and blame-searching. How quickly 1967 became 1968. I think we need to leave the doors of our heart unlocked, but also have enough humility to avoid taking on the cloak of a prophet.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Being the super protector and micro manager that I am, I was brought to reality when I read many years ago of a man who was putting on his socks in his own bedroom. Balancing on one foot he fell sideways into a wall mirror, cut himself and bled to death.
    Life indeed is fragile and sometimes you just can't protect it from bad things happening.

    How felt very sad to read Ruthie's article. Many women live the single life, by choice or by circumstance and yet they are treated so differently from the single men who are welcomed everywhere. Well this I am told by my single, widowed or divorced friends who feel society's discrimination.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Actually, when I was a single man I felt like a gooseberry if I did accept invites. There's a time in life when you feel like the only free atom in a world full of molecules.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.