|Robert Nichol's |
by Alfred Lehmberg
What about the fakes?
Isn't it true that these strange constructions in our cereal crops are, and entirely, of human crafting?
Don't they have to be entirely of human construction for the skeptic's position to have any validity at all? Just ONE genuine circle, consider, and the game a'foot is altogether new! Yet, impossible and not happening, some maintain.
...Graciously admitted! Crop Circles get faked! Conceded [eyeroll].
Though, when those "fakes" occur... don't we, generally, know who the fakers are? Don't THEY tell us who they are? Don't they strut and crow... preen, smirk and patronize?
...Aren't they stealthy people haters the likes of "Doug" and "Dave," even as these self-aggrandizing psychopaths die off and evolve, change their names with the years, upgrade their techniques over time, and justify or attempt to legitimize their crass sociopathy... as art? Could it be that these offensive fakers are behind all the circles? Builders of all the constructions? Composers of all these captivating glyphs?
Then how is it, as Robert Nichol informs in his compellingly sincere film documentary StarDreams, that these alleged "hoaxers" always finish what they start? Where are the failed attempts? Where do they practice their competency and completeness of vision, this exponential magnitude of astonishing endeavor... this meticulous perfection of flawlessly breathtaking execution and timing? ...Finally, where are the "blunders" in these huge constructions, extant, errors otherwise abundantly found in other human executions of highly complicated tasks from rocket science to brain surgery?
Why are the "greater" circles never duplicated in a time alloted? Why don't we see a balanced explanation for complex circle construction making it into the "National Geographic" or a Postmodern Art periodical. Spin me a "Catherine's Wheel", again—'Doug'! Stomp out an additional "Adams Grave," for me—'Dave'.
Speaking of art and artists, where is this extremely improbable army of gifted performers, performers "without egos"—astoundingly selfless and undeniably talented men and women—anyway?
Flatly, these uncharacteristically secretive persons are REQUIRED to execute—without the smallest flaw, remember!—the delicate artistic balances of line and curve, light and shadow... amidst other conventions of accomplished artistry (...to include knowledge regarding the sacred or eternal geometrical... ...the strict adherence to the enlightened measure—meanings within meanings—or an educated unity in utility that is an artistic "golden mean"...), and this over a HUGE area on an entirely unique cereal canvas in a limited amount of time! A perishable message... that one can eat! ...And what if that is not metaphor, reader... I digress.
These "artists" ARE the real deal, friends and neighbors ...And we haven't a clue who they really are! No. We're too well rewarded by society for not wanting to find out, for not being brave, and for not seeking out those ephemeral clues. We're punished effectively for obstinately seeking them, too... ...served painful irony in the form of reward for negative, back-stepping, and cowardly behavior ignoring UFOs in existential "felt presence" and punishment for the positive forward-looking pursuit of same... ...that's tragedy.
Verily, WHO hoaxes roughly tens of tens of quality circles a year, world-wide, for the last ten years? Who operates with no professional "recognition," no lucrative "pay-off"—no "reward" of any kind? Who?
Clearly, few to none. Those who do are known to us, ply their trade for money, and even had their own trendy flash-fronted websites.
No... it becomes obvious as one scratches the surface of this thing that these people are NOT the whole show. Something's hidden behind the official cultural tarp that is our corrupt and duplicitous mainstream... one just knows they're not getting it all or any efficacious portion of it either.
On the subject of "who are these anonymous hoaxers," let's beat this dead horse a little; artists produce their work to be associated with it, to be defined by it, to be enriched by it... materially AND intellectually. I'm an artist of small note and legitimate award and I feel that's a fair statement.
We won't ordinarily BE the artistic Samaritan (rare creature, THAT!) who disappears from the scene of the artistic "accident" before they can be celebrated and feted by admiring fellow humans. An artist signs his work, boyo! It's been that way since the renaissance from the middle ages, reader, and even before that the interested knew who their artists were.
...And those people of the renaissance were baffled by (officially intimidated by) CropCircles then too, remember. CropCircles have long legs in history.
Let's cut to the chase. Most circles could be FAKE, respected reader. But MANY are not, I suspect! Nichols suggests in "StarDreams" that this should, at least, give the reader pause... even if it does NOT fuel an ongoing epiphany of boundless optimism for the reader... like it does for ~this~ writer as alluded to before in previous essays on this subject.
This writer wept with joy during the first of what has been (and will continue to be) many viewings of Robert Nichol's documentary. I won't apologise, what can be taken for genuine sincerity will move me to a state of profound appreciation. They are cathartic and appreciating tears, astonished and inspired tears... thankful and enlightened tears. They are tears that elevate, reassure, and validate. They are tears that cement conviction, legitimize confidence, and lubricate assurance, too.
...But assurance for, confidence about, and conviction with regard to... what?
Ok... a few of the high points.
Resolved: That reality is more fully featured and abundant than we are otherwise manipulated to believe by our duplicitous culture? Perceive the relationship between those two words.
Resolved: That we are not now, have ever been, or will ever be alone in the unending light and darkness that is the expanding and changing universe.
Resolved: That 'existence' is not so much a "competition to survive" as it is a "cooperation to understand."
Resolved: That we—you and I!—are the entire universe trying to comprehend itself.
Finally, resolved: that it is the individual understanding ...the understanding individual, who is truly key?
You matter, reader, forgetting for a moment that I do, too. You, reader, are the person that is reached out to with these crop glyphs, perhaps. That's the message of "StarDreams". The individual is key... my favorite theme of many years. Never "top down," ever "bottom up."
It's all about people, individual persons, Nichol implies... persons who can open their minds and hearts to an immensity of creative purpose, a plethora of quality potentials, and an infinity of efficacious intellectual productivity! It is no more simply stated than that.
It's all about people willing to break free, at last, of the attitude we have collectively regarding an aggregate Earth we presently abuse like an unvalued rental property... and return to it the respect the truly intelligent would give any living creature! Any other behavior lacks intelligence.
We would treat the aggregate Earth—you and I and everything else 'on', 'in', 'about' or 'of' this Earth!—as we ourselves would be efficaciously treated. ...That sounds familiar...
For this, you and I and our kid's kid's, kids [>] would inherit the stars! What do we lose? Nothing. What do we gain? Everything. That's not the end of conviction, confidence, and assurance by any stretch! That is its beginning!
Nichol's documentary is filled with individual persons, none of them seeming to scramble for individual recognition regarding the phenomenon, but standing out like individually shining stars, none the less, for their lack of apparent desire to do so! It is easy to have "regard" for these people—these individuals. See how that works?
Watchers can even feel they might bask in the rich warm golden glow of the sincerity and honesty these folks seem effused with and which frankly exudes from the screen. We are reassured by their integrity and frankness and openness and truthfulness...
See, if they're lying? That's on them. The reader remains an innocent seeker, one willing to pierce the veil of existentiality to the "higher math" beyond. ...To grow as a species and secure a greatness that could be had with the Kingdom truly here at hand if we but wished it so.
These are serious people, intelligent and educated people... scientists, philosophers, researchers, and persons without a lot of formal education. I found myself loving all these persons in the absolute best and most efficacious sense of that word. ...And these persons love, without doubt and beyond question, those "artists" who anonymously compose the strange glyphs on a parchment that we can EAT. Think about that. What does one make of that? One can make much is this writer's intuition.
Is there analogy there? I think Mr. Nichols thinks so. I think so, too.
Who are these anonymous teams of selfless and talented artists manufacturing these compelling images? Who captivates our collective human intelligence so universally and further compels, at the same time, such intelligent love? Agape, the high-test grade.
Well—they are artists, likely, NOT beholden to human agency, institution, government, culture or religion.
They are, likely, NOT artists who celebrate the soulless corporate while they venerate the cloistered celibate!
They are likely NOT artists who pander to duplicitous media while they sell their souls to officious and psychopathic sponsors.
They are likely NOT artists who would dupe and disrespect you like they were somehow doing you a favor. They are likely NOT "artists" we would... know, sadly.
...It's ironic that they are likely artists we have always known, just forgotten, I'd bet...
...Be that as it may, their works are charming letters thoughtfully composed, magically engineered, beautifully rendered, and then "slid under the doors" of our consciousness while we're not looking... by some one or some thing who would attempt a communication of some type... one so wholly non-threatening and perhaps as nourishing to us as the grain that the artists compose in, on levels, quite simply, that we are incapable of appreciating, as yet.
I'm gratified they take the time... and further gratified that Robert Nichol has produced something about this ...evolving reality... ...so enduring, informational, and prescient... that I'm moved to joyful tears. Thank you, sir.
The film can be viewed here. See this film.
...One more illustrative point before I go. Earlier, I wrote that William Gazecki produced an equally fine documentary about Crop Circles (I was as excited about!) called "Quest for Truth", and I provided, for it, a similar glowing review.
The point: On the radio, once, I heard Robert Nichol interviewed and pointedly asked a question comparing his film with Gazecki's. I wondered if Nichol would ruffle his feathers, even if only a little bit, that his was the "better film." That didn't happen.
Rather, he embraced Gazecki's film as his own, graciously making indication that both films were short chapters in the same compelling non-fiction... the same story that needed to be told. He implied that Gazecki's more pragmatic approach complemented the more metaphysical approach Nichol employed in his film and that the films, taken together, made for a more inclusive accounting of the more complete story... a stepping stone to even MORE inclusive chapters...
No reflexive competition here, good reader. Nichol's reflex, his astonishingly TELLING reflex, was for reflecting cooperation. Is that what the circles do to you? If so, I'll have more of that, thank you.
...See the sedition? I digress.
I've seen both films numerous times, and I can attest that the documentaries complement one another, magnificently. Do not tell yourself that because you have seen one film that you have seen the other. That would be unfortunate and inaccurate. Seriously, I think it would be synergistic if these gentlemen could get together, somehow, and provide both films in a boxed set or package. The films are extremely powerful individually, but together they are, I think, greater than the sum of their parts. See these films and begin to "understand."
That's enough—read on!
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Posted by Alfred Lehmberg at 17:28