Lay Down all Thoughts, Surrender to the Void.
The
million dollar question that most people ask themselves about the Manson story
is: how did he do it? How did he take a group of young people whose
attitudes of alienation from their parents and society weren’t at all atypical
of people of their generation, and instil in them a degree of obedience and
loyalty so extreme that some would ultimately commit acts of extraordinary
brutality, and many others acquiesce to those acts? How did he instil in his followers a
conviction of his personal purity, sincerity, and divinity, which would endure
for many years after the Tate/LaBianca murders?
But people are always asking questions of this type. How did Hubbard do it? How did Jim Jones do it? Why do cults work? On the other hand, we never, or at least very
rarely, ask ourselves why we acquiesce to the myriad things which have been
presented to us as societal norms by our dominant culture. In the same way that average or “normative”
physical relationships contain subtle elements of domination and submission
which are reflected in an extreme fashion in the practises of sadomasochism,
the cult reflects in miniature the ordinary habits of coercion, conditioning,
and control exhibited by cultures and societies everywhere. The dirty secret of society’s loathing of
cults is that it is the loathing not of an aberration but of a rival.
To paraphrase Ismael Reed, the history of the world is the history of
the warfare between cults of varying degrees of general acceptance.
Cults
work primarily for two reasons. The
first of these is that there is always an extraordinary degree of private
dissatisfaction seething under the surface of apparently smooth-running
societies. The discontented members of a
society always out-weight its more contented grazers, however silent this
majority frequently tends to be. At its
most basic level, this discontent expresses itself as a feeling that the
individual does not sufficiently exercise their will over their lives and
environments – the feeling of life happening
to them, as opposed to being something which they can actively shape in
order to meet their needs and desires.
This pervasive sense provides the bread and butter of the various self-help
cults and publishing fads which have proliferated since the New Thought
movement emerged in the early 19th century. (The self-help industry was estimated at the
beginning of this century to be worth about 2.48 billion annually in the US
alone.) This feeling of a lack of
autonomy and control, of dissatisfaction with one’s position within society, is very often merely the
indicator of a far deeper malaise: the feeling that all the roles and
activities proscribed by society are somehow insufficient or unsatisfactory,
however successful we may become within their parameters. This is perhaps why so many of our most
envied icons wind up more neurotic, depressive, and self-destructive than
ourselves; having acquired the carrot that dangles over the rest of our
horizons, they realize its essential insufficiency. The social revolution in which Charles Manson
found so many willing subjects was, as Theodore Roszak points out in The Making of a Counterculture, a
revolution of plenty and abundance:
What I have called
“the counter culture” took shape between these points in time as a protest that
was grounded paradoxically not in the failure, but in the success of a high
industrial economy. It arose not out of
misery but out of plenty; its role was to explore a new range of issues raised
by an unprecedented increase in the standard of living.
A revolution
of plenty is the most threatening kind to a society because it does not emerge
from grievances which can be annulled within the existing societal framework, but
rather is directed against the whole value structure of the society
itself. It cannot be bought. It is
precisely this kind of existential estrangement from the whole structure of
society which makes the cult’s offer of an alternative miniature society so
persuasive.
The second
reason why cults work is the same basic impulse which allows societies, however
flawed and corrupt, to function. Arthur
Koestler used to argue that the great calamity of the human species was not its
propensity towards selfishness and aggression, but rather the opposite:
We are then driven to
the unfashionable conclusion that the trouble with our species is not an excess
of aggression, but an excess capacity for fanatical devotion. Even a cursory glance at history should convince
one that individual crimes committed for selfish motives play a quite
insignificant part in the human tragedy, compared to the numbers massacred in
unselfish loyalty to one’s tribe, nation, dynasty, church, or political
ideology, ad majorem gloriam dei. The emphasis is on unselfish. Excepting a small minority of mercenary or
sadistic disposition, wars are not fought for personal gain, but out of loyalty
and devotion to king, country or cause.
(Janus: A Summing Up.)
The urge then
to follow, to subjugate one’s self totally to a cause, leader, or ideology, is
already present in the subject when the cult acquires them. It is a very basic and strong human impulse
and forms the raw material which the cult’s conditioning methodologies attempt
to maximise. Ironically, the subject
shows considerable autonomy and independence in rejecting and turning their
back on their initial society, but quickly find themselves merely replacing the
old programme with a new one. The new
programme becomes the truth and the old one the brainwashing from the
perspective of the subject, while the new programme is the brainwashing from
the perspective of society. A lot of
conspiracy theorists start out by realizing that much of the information they
receive through mainstream news channels is a pack of lies; they then replace
the initial programme with a series of conspiracy scenarios which they now regard
as uncritically as they once did the mainstream news channels. The same principal is at work where
overzealous atheists apply the same kind of uncritical sectarian commitment to
the atheistic programme which they decry in those who subscribe to the older
theistic programme. Swapping one
programme for another, like lovers on the rebound; it’s the oldest con in the
world.
Tapes and Programmes: Manson and Scientology.
In
1961, Charles Manson was transferred to the McNeil Island Correctional Centre,
and it was here that his story first started to get a little weird around the
edges. On McNeil Island, Manson
encountered Alvin “Creepy” Karpis, a legendary figure from the Great Depression
golden era of American crime. The
mastermind behind the so-called “Ma Barker Gang”, Karpis was the last of the
“Public Enemy Number 1’s” on the loose until his FBI arrest in 1936 which was
personally overseen, for publicity purposes, by J Edgar Hoover himself. In McNeil Correctional, Karpis was
sympathetic to Manson’s troubled and institutionalized past, and agreed to
teach him how to play the guitar.
Inadvertently, the final volley of Tommy-gun shells blazed at law and
order from the Great Depression would be Karpis giving Manson’s decidedly dark
Orpheus his lyre. Manson was convinced
at this point that he would be as big as the Beatles. In Terminal Island, he also encountered a
convicted marijuana smuggler who would become a remarkable figure in the
footnotes of rock history: Phil Kaufman.
Kaufman gave Manson the name of a contact in Universal Studios which
played a significant role in his pre-Helter Skelter bid to establish a musical
career.
Gram Parsons at Joshua Tree.
Via his
friendship with Keith Richards, the same Kaufman later became very close
friends with Gram Parsons. (Parsons had
visited Stonehenge with the Stones, during a period in which Richards owned a
house near the site. This must have been around the time that the Stones were enthralled by John Michell’s psychedelic
earth mysteries trip.) In the states,
Parsons developed a mystical attachment to the Joshua Tree National Monument,
having been out there many times with Keith Richards and others to get high and
watch the sky for UFOs. (The area held a
strong significance to the pre-beat bohemians and occultists of the 50s, having
once been haunted by the considerable presence of Marjorie Cameron.) At some point, Parsons made a pact with
Kaufman that whichever of them died first would insure that the other’s body
was taken out to Joshua Tree to be cremated.
In September 1973, Parsons, just a year shy of the mystical 27, died of
an overdose of alcohol and morphine while staying in the Joshua Tree Inn. Parsons’ stepfather made provisions to have
the body flown to New Orleans to be buried there. Phil Kaufman, polluted with vodka and
self-recrimination, decided to make good on his promise. Together with a friend named Michael Martin,
Kaufman commandeered a hearse, and stole Parsons’ body from Los Angeles
International Airport. They then drove
it out to the desert, and attempted to cremate Gram by pouring five gallons of
gasoline on the open coffin and lighting a match. This caused a massive fireball and only
partially charred the remains, but the pair had to flee the police. They were arrested a few days later, and
fined just 750 dollars for their nobly intentioned, albeit chaotic memorial to
their friend. Kaufman paid the fine with
the proceeds from a party which he called Kaufman’s Koffin Kaper Koncert. (Bonus Mansonoid connection: Gram Parsons
lived with Terry Melcher for a brief period in 1970, a mutual fondness for heroin
and cocaine rendering their musical collaboration largely unproductive.)
Back to McNeil
Island in the early sixties. Along with
music, Manson also concerned himself with a variety of more esoteric
subjects. According to Sanders in The Family, “It was while counting the
days at McNeil Island that Manson began studying magic, warlockry, hypnosis,
astral projection, Masonic lore, scientology, ego games, subliminal motivation,
and perhaps Rosicrucianism.” He was
particularly fascinated by subtle methods of suggestion and control, as though
planning to be a cult leader – or Madison Avenue tycoon or member of the CIA –
when he got out. Scientology, however,
was his biggest kick in the joint.
According to Alvin Karpis, ‘Charlie was hooked on this new thing called
“Scientology”. He figured it would
enable him to do anything or be anything.
Maybe he was right. The kid tried
to sell a lot of the other cons on scientology but got strictly nowhere.”
At this point,
scientology was not the universal hate object it is today, but rather a
quasi-religious psychotherapy programme which was making healthy inroads into
the popular consciousness. The root of
scientology at this point was dianetics, and at the root of dianetics was the
idea of the engram. The term engram was initially coined in 1904
by the influential German biologist and memory researcher Richard Wolfgang
Semon. According to Semon, the engram
was a physiological memory trace written or engraved in the cellular matter of
the brain which would be reactivated whenever a similar stimulus to the cause
of the initial overwriting was encountered.
In Mother Hubbard’s system, the engram occupied a similar role to that
of trauma in Freudian psychoanalysis; according to Jean Leplanche, Freud characterized
trauma as an “event in the subject's life, defined by its intensity, by the
subject's incapacity to respond adequately to it and by the upheaval and
long-lasting effects that it brings about in the psychical organization."
In essence, Freud’s concept of traumatic events meant that we could never
really live in the present; our lives are tyrannically controlled by events in
the past which we haven’t properly processed.
Hubbard’s engram was based on a similar sense; to quote an earlier post:
According to Hubbard’s
system, the Freudian unconscious became the “reactive mind”, which he
contrasted with the rational, calculating aspect of the psyche, labelled the
“analytic mind.” The reactive mind created precise “mental image picture”
recordings of traumatic and painful events in the individual’s life. These were
called “engrams”, and the purpose of the dianetic process was to erase the
traumatic content of these memories, until the subject was clear of “engrams”
and free to exist rationally and analytically in the present.
It isn’t
difficult to see the potential appeal of all this to Manson, whose mother once
reputedly gave him to a childless waitress in exchange for a pitcher of
beer. He clearly had some heavy engrams
to clear. We can also see that Manson’s
later preoccupation with the “Total Now” derived from his study of scientology. Just as the clearing of engrams allowed the
scientological “clear” to be utterly unencumbered by the past, Manson’s
conditioning was designed to erase all the automatic and unconscious programs
which society had engendered in his subjects since birth. While working on Spahn Ranch, the girls
happily walked around barefoot in horseshit, as part of their general programme
to erase conditioned responses and binary good/bad thinking. In many respects, Manson was playing the
classic Western guru game, albeit on a small scale and in a shambolic and
ultimately tragic fashion. The Western
guru offers his followers the opportunity to shed the inauthenticity they
perceive in the roles society has allotted them; to transcend the limited,
utilitarian societal identity, and discover a Higher Self, a more authentic way
of being. Thus for Crowley, the goal was
to attain communion with one’s Holy Guardian Angel or Higher Self, and live
thereafter according to the dictates of one’s own true nature or Will.
For Gurdjieff, it was to discipline the mind so as to awaken it from its
habitually robotic thrall to societal convention and its own fitful, fleeting
moods and fancies. Both systems
contained a failsafe, in that it was assumed that in order to reach the higher
state, the initiate would have to have gone well beyond the mental propensity
to do evil. Gurdjieff believed that it was
impossible for a fully conscious individual to commit an evil act; Crowley’s
maxim do what thou wilt shall be the
whole of the law had its less often quoted rejoinder love is the law, love under will.
But the programme is only as good as the programmer, and this is why
gurus can be a very dangerous habit.
Underlying
both dianetics and Manson’s occult conditioning was the idea that the mind can
be manipulated like magnetic tape; that it can be rewound, erased, and
ultimately re-recorded with a new programme.
In The Family, Sanders claims that
this idea was very common among some of the more sinister late 60s occult
groups:
The hype was similar
to other groups including Manson’s: tearing down the mind through pain,
persuasion, drugs and repetitive weirdness – just like a magnet erases recording
tape – and rebuilding the mind according to the desires of the cult.
Brion Gysin gazing into the Dream Machine
Interestingly,
during the early sixties, William S Burroughs became obsessed with both the
dianetic auditing process and the subversive potential of tape-recording. Burroughs was a long-time connoisseur of unusual
fringe ideas, having previously explored Korzybski’s General Semantics and
championed the orgone heresies of Wilhelm Reich, two obsessions later passed on
to Robert Anton Wilson. The precise
circumstances of Burroughs’ discovery of Scientology are not known, but at some
point he encountered John Starr Cooke and his wife Mary in Brion Gysin’s 1001
Nights Restaurant in Tangier. Cooke is a
fascinating character in his own right, a lifelong mystic who travelled the
world at the behest of a Ouija board, and designed three acclaimed Tarot decks. The Cooke’s were also significant figures in
the early Church of Scientology, with John reputed to have been one of the
first “Clears”. To Burroughs’ obsession
with circumventing control, the engram was another control system to
demolish. Scientology had a huge
influence on the “cut-up” trilogy: The
Soft Machine (61), The Ticket that
Exploded (62) and Nova Express
(64). Burroughs was much preoccupied
during this period with the idea of language as a constrictive virus which had
colonized human consciousness, and he further associated this idea with the calendrical
control systems of the ancient Mayans, and the mind control barrage of modern
electronic media technologies. In the
same way that Scientology proposed that psychically harmful engrams could be
erased by means of repeatedly rewinding them, Burroughs proposed to attack the
societal control system by means of repeating
certain crucial control images and words (until they lost their power) and cutting them up until they formed
anarchic new juxtapositions. The Cut-up
trilogy can be read as an a form of positive artistic brain-washing or
de-conditioning, with its long sections of disjointed, white noise prose
designed to disorient and de-pattern the readers thoughts. Burroughs’ fascination with Scientology and
tape manipulation can be seen in this short Bill and Tony aka Who's Who (1972):
Sanders’ description
of the occult/Mansonoid conditioning method - tearing down the mind through pain, persuasion, drugs and repetitive
weirdness – just like a magnet erases recording tape – could double up as a
perfect summary of the goals of the CIA’s MKUltra programme, which was running contemporaneously
with Burroughs and Manson’s experiments with Scientology. The MKUlra programme also envisioned the mind
as being akin to a roll of tape which could be rewound, erased, and
re-recorded. Hence, we find some very
strange bedfellows converging on a core of similar ideas during the same time
period: the CIA to produce advanced interrogation methods and zombie mind
control methodologies; Burroughs to break up and demolish the same coercive
technologies that the CIA sought to enhance; and Manson, the wildcard in the
pack, to create avid followers to fellate his LSD expanded ego (and cock), and
participate in his increasingly hare-brained criminal hustles. This strange overlap between the
counter-culture and the underworld of the national security apparatus would
continue well into the seventies. It is
worth remembering that Manson, so often presented as the bogeyman and Pandora’s
box of the counterculture, largely succeeded where the CIA appear to have
failed: in using LSD and conditioning to create lasting obedience and loyalty
in his subjects. Maybe they should
have tried sex and rock and roll as well.
Burroughs and Scientology.
Soft Machine cover from a great selection of vintage Corgi covers here.
Continued shortly.
2 comments:
I read "The Family" when it first came out and that Carpis/Manson geetar thingy musta slid right past me. Granted I was pretty fucking stoned back in those days and that book is some serious sensory overload. Damn, dude, yer givin' me flashbacks. lol
Well, as long as you're not driving, or operating heavy machinery, flashbacks are harmless enough!
Post a Comment