Moving between the observation ambiguously anomalous phenomena as philosophical observation and incoherent acceptance is an edge that has no reconciliation to it. Probably in terms of ‘occult development’ in the ‘systems’ it may well be totally incompatible. Yet these observations such as I can come back from this world to make them is what I’m trying to do here. To this extent I want to share what happened to me yesterday and note how illustrative it is of the pneuminous-vector theory put forward here (accepting that is only one manifestation).

I went for a walk with some dogs. As it happens I was indulging in an old practice that I haven’t done with any regularity for years. This is that of eye crossing as mentioned in the much (possibly with good cause) maligned Casteneda books. If you don’t know it, it’s a bit like looking at magic eye pictures without the magic eye picture. You look to a point beyond everything in your vision, then look to a point in front of your vision, you repeat this for a long time. This activity is attributed with enabling a variety of things e.g. mind clearing, hypnogogic generating, other world perceiving.  Answering what it actually does involves submitting to a given manifestation (is it a psychological or a magickal effect) which one cannot do.

In this instance I am indulging in an incoherent non-directed magickal type interaction. I don’t know why I’m doing it as such but it seems an interesting exercise in what I might perceive -given that in the past it has yielded some anomalous results. If I indulge a projected feeling I note that I perceive the effect feels quite strong, this again is a kind of incoherent articulation of otherworldly perception, or the closeness of that world. Recent Keelian, Reichian  and Trevor James Constable readings have put me in a place of considering ultraterrestrial existence in the ether. There is an openness. Despite this general feeling I walk and eye cross with medium concentration success. The sensation is interesting but nothing really peculiar is perceived. I forget about this and continue to do this activity as I go through a small pine copse that has come to be known as ‘creepy wood’. I have no sense of perturbation by creepy wood, though it does look a bit creepy and I can note that if one pressed me for a feeling, I would say it doesn’t feel very nice (I have in fact owing to my Twin Peaks pathology, come to associate it with Ghostwood). Again though such feelings can just be a double projection based upon its appearance in relation to various media images of ‘spooky woods’ rather than to any innate iniquity that I am picking up on.

However as I go through a certain section, still crossing my eyes I see fairly clearly and with some alarm that a section of wooded area to my left moves like a shadow went across it. This arrests me and gives me a mild alarm. Not wanting to indulge in literally being startled by me own shadow I move back to test if the phenomena is cause by my blocking light. I discover this clearly isn’t the case and move on slightly hastily. I consider that whatever it was I saw might indeed be some product of the eye crossing activity, either a trick product or actually perceiving some kind of spirit type accretion. I consider in my mode of allowing these kinds of thoughts that it is close to midsummer which is classically a time of some thinness and that this idea, if only as accretion could facilitate such beings to be more visible. I continue the walk with no further weirdness. I go home finish the evening activities and go to bed.

About 12:30 I awake from an awful nightmare of some kind of being closing in on me in a situation there is no escape from. This sensation of trappedness causes me to jerk myself awake. Immediately my mind connects the vision from the wood with the nightmare invoking the paranoia that the whatever it was has followed me from creepy wood and now is plaguing me in its own special way. I commence  a series of banishing type rituals in my minds eye which I feel are being fought as I conduct them. I remember -because of the Castaneda crossing activity- some spouting of Don Juan’s about certain kinds of things that inhabit lonely places and will sometimes latch onto people. None of which is helpful. Eventually I calm myself and go back to sleep. There are no more nightmares.

None of the point of my telling any of this is the reality of a spooky story. The point is entirely about the ability of the NARP to accrete this tale and what it illustrates. My general NARP as confessed has a kind of openness to these phenomena and simultaneously a recognition of what the sceptic will say to deny them. From a strong occult perspective the story facilitates an image of beings that live in the woods and can follow the unwary home, or minimally some kind of encounter with a spirit/ghost in the wood -even the occultist would not believe it necessary the dream was directly brought about by the entity.

From a sceptical point of view it’s a kind of trick of the light/my eyes that I got into a flap about because I was predisposed to spooky thoughts. The dream may have been entirely unrelated -remember I had no negative sense from this encounter until after the fact- and had more to do with the red wine that than anything else.

Yet pneuminous-accretively we have a tale that sits astride both these versions. There is a good chance if I think that wood looks a bit creepy (whatever we mean by that) so do other people. Hence the vector region that is the wood will be infected with this feedback. If the strong pneuminous theory holds, then the seeing-the-wood-as-creepy is actually making it so. Our accreted fantasies attach to this vector predisposing the place to phenomena like I witnessed. Now whether or not I saw a something that could in any reasonable sense be said to be there without me -something that belonged ‘there’- is immaterial (pardon the pun). My perception of it, despite my sceptical checking decided it was some kind of spirit, the phenomena was seen-as that. The vector of whatever I saw is impressed with this notion. The nightmare is a perfect extra segment in the accretive story. It immediately summons the events of earlier in the wood and makes sense of the unity -combined with the warnings of a fictitious Yacqui Shaman. The fantasy of the nightmare summoning spirit from the wood is created and tenuously it is a real connection (because my NARP has connected it). The banishing rituals in  this sense did not attest to a real spirit that needed banishing, they were necessary to break apart the accreted pneuma by completing its own narrative (if I cannot flip to so stronger rational materialism as to rob the event of any effect it is better to seal it off on its own terms).

So in the quasi-rational way I tried to diffuse my own automatic accretion mechanisms. It is interesting to consider though how, had I not these reflections I might easily be swept along with a much more naïve occult-realist approach. This in turn would feedback into the existence of the same putative entity forming a greater pneuminous power as a ‘negative spirit’ in that region. Literally a optical trick would be transformed into an accreted entity that in turn would be visible to others and in turn perpetuate the notion of autonomous spirits (which in fairness is exactly what it would be).

Of course such claims are not claims to the explanation. I act here as an agent of various chaos magickal notions. The possibility of the outright utter nonsense of all it in a psychologically discrete materialist world is a serious contender as is the realist occult world in which autonomous ultra-terrestrial style entities can hover in and out of our plane of existence. This is the agnostic disjunction. The pneuminous accretive-vector version needs to be seen to be on the table as a third force. This is of course recognizable as chaos magickal doctrine, the addition I try to push here (on the site generally) is that the same notion is necessarily occurring for all our everyday objects and functions as a cogent ontology that covers magickal and regular phenomena equally.



A blur. A wedding party. A synthesis. A darkness. Are these identical? Of course not they differ wildly as accretions. Coffee, black coffee has accreted the power of a gateway, inextricably tied to scorched engine oil. But a blur, a wedding party, a synthesis and a darkness are all related. The blur is the blur of intoxication that belongs to the essence of celebration. The blur is also the blurring of two NARPs -a wedding. Such a blurring is of course also a synthesis. A darkness? Well it is a darkness for the previously disparate elements which are now forever altered. Even deaccreting is never complete. Pneuminous lines exist in their temporal points forever, their appearance of fading is just a temporal appearance. A blurring too is a kind of darkness. A celebration is accreted to darkness, intoxication brings darkness on many horizons. Coffee folds back in as darkness. But coffee does not blur in the same way. Coffee blurs by speed but separates by intensity. It jags and points. Coffee celebrates but does not bring darkness, it brings light and speed. Speed? Where have we heard that before? An occult/speed connection? Is Twin Peaks in this way not an accelerationist call? ‘Damn fine coffee’ sings the virtues of speeding things up. Here though the word virtue has a particular ring to it -we cannot simply negate the ‘damn fine’ part. Some accelerationism might advocate any old coffee, but not Cooper. His must be quality. Does this mean the acceleration is incidental to the quality or are the two related? Does Cooper hint at a ethical (left?) acc program as opposed to Earle’s (right?) acc. An interesting twist on the left hand path. As if we required a confirmation (to the general acc association), consider again the scorched engine oil-coffee accretion. Speed. Is. A. Gateway. That recognizes and perpetuates conscious-awareness as opposed to the synthesizing power that reduces it.

Inspired by Kaspar’s fascinating post.

We speak of umbratic resistance. An realm necessarily outside of our contact. Like a faerie gathering the umbratic vanishes before we can behold it. Its resistance is a necessity because it is substrate beyond awareness -non-information (and hence only ever a paradoxical phantasy).

What the show illustrates beautifully is that resistance is not necessarily on a plane of hidden spatio-temporal solidity. The topology that the pneuma lies along, parasitic on the umbra, is shown as far stranger. This is not just a case of observing the machinations of the various spirits/black lodge entities, which sometimes seem like warped nod at Harryhausen’s Olympians, for these too are relational entities and hence bound by pneuma.

Cooper knows something. Cooper has known since the beginning that the topology doubles back on itself sometimes and that it is possible to discern its traces -pneuminous interference. Cooper believes something else that is true, the pneuma can effect the umbra, or in more recent (though not identical) Freestonian terms the concept can effect the vector( Leland is a vector infected by Bob). His (Cooper’s) intent can bring about the correct outcome.

Cooper is correct insofar as the logic of magick demands not that negative concepts (such as we call them) can infect vectors but also those we regard as virtuous. What Cooper fails to understand is that the umbratic has a limit to its pneuminous give. In a kind of failed Prometheanism he seeks undo history but becomes locked into its folds. His failure can be interpreted as that of being thwarted by agency (Judy as active) or having simply run up against what is possible (Judy as resistance).  This reinforces our regular sense of temporality as solid whilst simultaneously showing a topology in which the doubling backs are not simply presentable as clues (synchronicity/pneuminous interference) but also as literal pathways (fable or not Castaneda described such pathways beautifully). Judy as Umbra is (like so much ontology) subject to the manifestation we choose (active or passive). This of course does raise the ontological possibility of cruelty by design -there are criteria for this suggestion.

The literal magickal ontological challenge is precisely that Twin Peaks seems to display a viable version of what we are stuck in. The Return emphasises more than the original (though of course it is there too) that we are not restricted to simply magickal hints but that the gate to the red room/zone may be less metaphorical than we might be comfortable with.


1) Twin Peaks as cruelty.

Whatever is your stance on the finale of Twin Peaks, one thing is for sure: it was cruel. Open ended and dark, it not only gave no answers to us, but it left our good, immaculate hero stained. After the doppelganger/worms have feasted for the last 25 years on his and his beloved’s carcasses, he then either became lost in an unknown time loop that brought him back to the past, before any of his effort even existed, or stranded in a future, in which every familiar face has been erased from the plane of existence. Of course, for some, this was an act of gratuitous ontological sadism. Far from that, others are convinced that this is a dark metaphysical statement, which doubles one of the most unsettling proposition of deleuzian philosophy.

In Difference and Repetion, Deleuze wrote: «Cruelty is nothing but determination as such, that precise point at which the determined maintains its essential relation with the undetermined, that rigorous abstract line fed by chiaroscuro» (Difference and Repetition, p. 29). The upshot of this statement, which, on a surface level, could just seem a pretty obscure form of philosophical mumbling, is, as Reza Negarestani noted in Differential cruelty, very clearly: existing in all of its varied significances = determination from an undetermined background/Umbratic plane = an act of cruelty. This, of course, doesn’t only entail the conscious processes that we trigger with our actions. For example, being born is, following this skeletal outline of Dark Deleuzism, the cruelest of all determinations, setting in motion an accretion-without-consent against the possibility of non-being/being-one-with-the-the-HyperUnCreation-of-Umbra and chaining each and every one of the newborns to an illusory fixity. As Artaud put it: «For it seems to me that creation and life itself are defined only by a kind of rigor, hence a fundamental cruelty, which leads things to their ineluctable end at whatever cost» (The Theater and Its Double, p. 103). This is, they think, the upshot of David Lynch and Mark Frost’s finale: Judy/the Red Goddess/Umbra eternally wins, because she is able to demonstrate to the starry-eyed Agent Cooper (any accretion whatever) that everything he could possibly do to right the wrongs that haunt him is, at the end of the day, cruel, an act of cruel accretion. He not only will always fail, like Morpheus – too weak not to look back to check the wellbeing of the simulacrum of his loved one, condemning her either to repetition or to non-existence – but he’s always confronted with the cruelty of an ontologically pluralistic universe made of accreted or volatile pneumas.

2) Cruelty as ethics. So that’s it? The non-cruel ontologists may ask. Luckily, the party of cruelty not only has a dismal metaphysics at their disposal, but also a blackened ethics to propose. After all, we know how Judy/the Red Goddess/Umbra wins. Cooper, in an act of all-too-human weakness looked back. He triggered, the party says, the disappearance of Laura Palmer and the destruction of the whole universe. He looked back and undid the whole world with his own eyes. Therefore, the cruel party proposes a radical, mercyless solution: let us be as cruel as Judy, as oceanic as Umbra, let us eat cosmos and let us follow her Chtonic left-hand path of pneumas-without-accretions. Rather than surrendering to Cooper’s humanist fears and behaviors, let us join Judy/The Red Goddess/Umbra. Never look back, no matter how long Sarah will try to capture Laura’s pneuma, without being afraid of the unknown consequences of our journey. After all, no one promised us that we will have the peace we are hoping for; the only thing we really know for sure, is the (existence of an) alien world, radically disfigured by our transgression of time and space. As Negarestani wrote: «In the wake of the philosophy of cruelty, ethics can return to the mathesis of the problem once again wherein the problem is not determined by its solution or conditions but by its capacity to generate fields of the problematic» (Differential Cruelty, p. 82). Judy demands to be destroyed with her own sword and daggers, and be reborn once again in us.

3) She’s universal emptiness. But that’s not enough! The party of cruelty says; if we want to appreciate David Lynch and Mark Frost’s sadomasochistic ontology, we have to push ourselves forward and consider the show in its entirety, not just the finale. This last season, they contend, was the actualization of a greater plan for this universe: the desecration of the fixity of the monistic substance and the annihilation of the World, both inside and outside the Twin Peaks’ mythos. As spectators, we witnessed a grotesque puppet show, whose protagonists resembled the lovely characters we have learned to love in the past two seasons, but felt way too hollow to be the “real” thing. They were as thin as our own breath. Two prime examples were, of course, Dougie Jones and Diane: Dougie Jones looked just like our beloved Coop, but he was, actually, just an empty, lost pneuma. An alternative and not fully realized accretion, stranded in a world in which he was probably never meant to be summoned, of an accretion (Agent Cooper) who, in what we think was our past, we have learned to love. On the other hand, for months, we grew attached to Diane’s loud mouth, only to find out that she was nothing more than a half realized accretion, directed by an alien, malignant will. She was the particular embodiment of a form of universal emptiness, in a dreadful cosmos where not even the owls are what they seem.

4) Us is Them. Therefore, for these theorists, the upshot of the cruel Frostian and Lynchian metaphysics is that there is no such thing as this world. Everyone and everything is a tulpa/accretion of some alien pneuma, set against the non-field (the kabbalistic dark Waters of HyperUnCreation of the Leviathan/Umbra) of the darkened powers/the left hand path/Umbra. Can it be our situation? It is.

5) The endtimes. Hail Umbra.