| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Bandler and nested loops |
| Posted by: | John Schertzer |
| Date/Time: | 18/03/2004 15:39:25 |
|
I loved GIG and read about ten of his and Ouspensky's books way back when. I did like Meetings (and yes there is a film and my first impression was that it was awful -- one of the many sprout organizations of Gurdjieff work did it), especially the stuff about ambling through the desert sand storms on stilts and fixing people's typewriters for exorbitant fees, all those pokes at belief structures in favor of testing the world for what's actually possible. If I complain that his looping is perhaps a bit obvious and awkward, it's probably because he was overly self-conscious (not in the way he used the term) in its use in that it was explicit, controled by 7+or-2 bits, and not something he trusted at least partially to the unconscious -- though that would have been against his philosophical bent, the way I understand it. The film has the value of at least hinting at some of the movement practices (dances) of the G work. Love RAW, though I've only read his nonfictions. A. Crowley said somewhere that most great magickians performed their work through writing, and were unaware of their status as magickians. best, JS |