Romantic Fiction, Reality Shaping and The Work

Even though the subject is romance and the focus is on romantic couples there is still positive growth in the characters non romantic connections and attachments - siblings, parents, extended family and social connections where there isn't intractable personality malignancies. I don't think it's necessary to actually directly experience a romantic connection to take away some examples of growth of being. Standards can be identified through the reading to measure self against in all sorts of interactions with family, workmates, friends and acquaintances. As one of the committed singles for the forseeable future, there's still plenty of useful material in the books.

Maybe the growth comes easier, goes faster or has a deeper impact if there is a colinear romantic/sexual attachment. That doesn't mean that it's not a worthwhile endeavour to adjust personal aims through examples given and have a go if there isn't a romantic sexual attachment. Reading fiction can be kind of like living other lives vicariously. I'm reminded of those studies where athletes were instructed to visualise themselves completing their athletic performance while they were hooked up to a bunch of machines recording their neurons firing off and it was found that the patterns were the same as if they were actually physically taking part in the sport or competition. Maybe something similar is happening here and new paths are being formed as part of the exercise.

On a deep subconscious level I think there's a good chance that there is some recognition that the orgasmic moments have one in an incredibly vulnerable state. An old neighbour was a retired forensic scientist and he had some fascinating tales to tell. He was once giving brief details of a case he worked on where a woman was being drugged by injection into the sole of her heel while she was orgasming and she had no idea. So I think that if there is enough trust to be that vulnerable with someone then opening up to them and sharing deeper stuff is maybe just a matter of time.
And finally, I would like to point out that as many of our members mentioned on the following thread including Laura on many occasions by reading the novels without prejudice, without anticipating anything one may be lucky enough in "growing our being" and if it will happen, it will happen naturally, it's a process.
From a Laura's new book point of view, this state of being would both know and do what is right. You ideally gain the ability to see the unseen and kill off the false "I" of the flesh. At this point I think my current incarnation is great with the seeing the unseen and knowing part but totally useless in the doing and killing off the false "I" flesh part. Innocent quiet in-person I never got the girl but the naughty online I could.

My wife recently kissed me after re-reading a courtship letter of mine she kept along with a couple cards from sent flowers. The cards were quite romantic, I'm quite impressed with younger me there. The letter is a tad naughty in places but OK but my wife mentioned she thinks she only saved that letter because the others were way too naughty. I think way too naughty has kind of ruined me even though it's all just from my thoughts, nothing like porn or actual physical experience needed. Process/repeated acts/more reading hopefully will help but just finding this forum makes me quite happy with this incarnation even if I ruined innocent me somewhere along the line. I guess just staying innocent wouldn't be learning anyways. That's kind of a Laura point about Paul.
I collected a few quotes from Mouravieff and Gurdjieff where they talk about awakening the emotional center. It is interesting that they both talked about the exercise of imagination in order to awaken the emotional center. I am not sure if they had the books such as these romance novels in mind, but it seems to me that perhaps they can be a part of an exercise that they are talking about.

In such a being, the intellectual centre is generally very developed.
Although this phenomenon is positive in itself, yet the result is that
the intellectual centre weighs heavily on the remainder of the Personality.
This imbalance is exaggerated even further by the fact, explained
above, that the positive part of the emotional centre - the most precious
organ in the whole organism of man's psyche - is semi-paralysed
. From
then on the negative part, left to itself, is deprived of all possibility of
fulfilling its useful or constructive role of supporting the other in its work.
It only comes into movement to allow man to express his negative emotions,
so he does so over and over again in spite of their destructive effects.
Let us note once again that this state of man's emotional centre is analogous
to that of wild animals, in which the positive part of this centre
generally remains unawakened. In cultured man it falls into lethargy
because it is neglected.
The difference is that an animal cannot awaken it
except by ceasing to be an animal, whereas man can do this at any time by
conscious efforts made in appropriate exercises.

As the diagram above shows, in the majority of cultured men of our
times the positive part of the emotional centre is practically paralysed after
the highly intensive development of an intellectual culture: feelings too
easily give way to calculation.

As for the motor centre, in the case that concerns us this works at full
capacity. Responsible for the natural instinctive and motor functions that
ensure the life of the organism and the movements of the body, it has
always been the object of special training: military, sporting, artistic
etc. But in addition, because of the state of lethargy of the positive part
of the emotional centre in contemporary man, for good or ill the motor
centre also replaces it in its functions. The motor centre replaces the
positive tenderness of affection, which the dormant emotional centre is
incapable of providing, by the passionate tenderness of sensations dominated
by a spirit of possession. In this domain too, the life of man's psyche
is then lowered to the level of that of an animal.

All this allows us to better understand the structure of man's Personality,
which is then practically reduced to bicentrism, the very characteristic of
the chimera: a lion's head to represent intelligence and an animal's body
with the tail of a dragon to symbolize passions deprived of all feeling. The
fire and flames vomited from its mouth are the fire of discord and the flame
of intellectualized passions stimulated by usurped sexual energy.

That is a schematic but realistic representation of the Personality of a
cultivated man of our times, whose emotional centre is neglected.
That state is full of danger. For without the compass represented by the
positive part of that centre, man, although inheritor of a great intellectual
culture which can be of considerable value to him and those around him
and finally for human society, remains entirely weaponless when faced
with his own passions, especially if those are induced by or even associated
with a sexual inclination that is deformed in one way or another. This can
even bar his path to esoteric evolution.


When the emotional centre is deprived of its normal functions, the
number of links between centres is reduced from twelve to four. The
eight chords which correspond to the finest and most subtle components
of human morality are eliminated. This is due to the changes that occur in
the structure of both the intellectual and motor centres; changes that lead
to the impoverishment of both as the emotional sectors of these two
centres practically disappear, due to the disappearance of their source
since the emotional centre is in a state of lethargy. Because of this, the
intellectual as well as the motor centre is left with only four active sectors
instead of six.

Psychologically, this means that, having reached this state of disequilibrium
in his Personality, man is from then on governed only by intellectual
and instinctive-motor considerations. This human type - the chimeric - is
often found among the cultured classes of our time. It can produce people
of great intellectual ability, but since intelligence is agnostic by nature and
they are not oriented by the compass9 of the emotional centre, such people
become amoral. For them everything is perrmissible except what is forbidden: or
rather, what is not punishable.

When man of this psychological type feels the need for relaxation-which
is legitimate in itself-he falls under sway of his bodily instincts. His 'I' of
the body then takes the place of the 'I' of the unbalanced Personality.
However, the 'I' of the body only has the use of the motor centre, which
is equally mutilated. Since this is reduced to four sectors instead of six it
too is deprived of a compass. Man then turns towards 'small pleasures' or
'grand passions' in which he satisfies all his senses, driven by an inventive
intellectual imagination while the two centres, motor and intellectual, are
fed by energy stolen from the sexual centre.

9. The lack of this is felt as a lack of purpose. (Ed.)


When the emotional centre is plunged into deep sleep, as it is in the first
stereotype described in chapter XVI, it dream. It dreams in the daytime, in
the midst of activity, as well as at night. The emotional centre conceives
dreams by using its innate capacity for creating images. By elaborating
these while inspired by ideas from the intellectual centre, it can create
images of grandeur to compensate for the failures or half-failures of
. If inspired by impulses from the motor centre, it imagines itself moving
on the ground, on the seas or in the air. Under the influence of innate
elements rising from preceding films it can relive these films in fragments.
With the aid of impulses proceeding from the sexual centre via
the motor centre, the emotional centre has erotic dreams which can seem
entirely true. On the other hand, if it dreams with the pure and direct aid of
the sexual centre it creates ideal images of its polar being, founded on the
experience of its present life or previous experiences. With the sexual centre's
direct intervention the emotional centre can also create idealized images of
living beings that the man has met, or who resemble his polar being.
In the two latter cases, the positive part of the emotional centre functions
fully and enables a man to meet in his dreams a pure and elevated feeling
which he is incapable of experiencing in his life as an exterior man.

This process explains the meaning of the prayer that is recommended to
disciples in which they ask God to permit sleep to become awakening in Life. In
the two cases where the emotional centre calls on the energy of the sexual
centre in dreams without going through the motor centre, the intellectual
centre, being asleep, does not interfere with the work of the emotional
centre with doubt or criticism. As it enters the emotional centre the energy
SI-12 accelerates its vibrations, and this enables it to transform this sexual
energy into SOL-12, following a momentary intervention by the higher
emotional centre.

These few indications give a brief glimpse of the work of the lower
emotional centre while it is still under-developed- but which the unbalanced
contemporary life of man can no longer anaesthetize or degrade,
particularly when, as a faithful, he climbs the steps of the Staircase.

Mouravieff, Gnosis II

Generally speaking, even though the man 2, who is born in the environment
3 of our epoch, is inept for the practical struggle of everyday life,
he has considerable potential for esoteric evolution, due to the constitution
of his psyche. By consciously working on the development of his
intellectual centre-his emotional centre being already awake, and perhaps
even somewhat developed-he more easily balances his Personality. This
is an important thing to know. For the people destined to be the forerunners
of the New Era (which is that of the Holy Spirit) will be chosen
from this group of highly cultivated men 2 who have attained a certain
equilibrium by taking their intellectual development as far as possible.

The position of the man 3 in ambience 3 does not give him the same
advantages from the esoteric point of view. Of course, he has more opportunities
in practical everyday life than the man 2, but he does not have
the same aptitude for balancing his Personality. He has to begin by developing
an emotional centre which is partially or entirely dormant. So he first
has to awaken it. This awakening is naturally more difficult for the man 3 in
ambience 3 than it is for the man 2 to develop his intellectual centre in the
same environment.
For neither in its form nor in its content does Religion
offer anything constructive to the intellectual type, who is agnostic by
nature. Besides, until now no institution has made provision for schools
or universities where emotional aptitudes may be formed or scientifically

If a man 3 feels the need for emotional development, for lack of anything
better he will be forced to work empirically.

However, we can give him a valuable hint: human nature has an aptitude
for being trained, and this can be profitably used to awaken the torpid
emotional centre. With subtle and highly refined reasoning, the man 3
must in every circumstance imagine the reaction of the man 2 who is
obedient to the call of his emotional centre. And he must by conscious
effort react in the same way when not driven by emotion.
It is a game. He
will make mistakes and stumble many times, especially at the beginning.
But if he takes the game seriously and makes it a permanent methodical
exercise for all occasions, he will succeed in liberating his emotional centre
from its state of torpor. He will then notice its spontaneous reactions and
this first success will encourage him to continue this work.
He must
tirelessly persevere in this exercise of awakening until the emotional centre
is completely aroused and quite ready for development.

The man 3 can find that this condition is an advantage. Except for
negative emotions, his emotional centre is not greatly sullied, as it is so
often asleep. If afterwards during the course of these awakening exercises he
takes care that this centre does not become stained by all sorts of
considerations and, above all, is not used for false aims, the man can become
like a little child whose emotional centre is awake although undeveloped
and is neither deformed nor tarnished.

Mouravieff, Gnosis II

The first of the aforementioned secrets is that as a means for selfperfecting a man can use a certain property which is in his psyche, and which is even of a very negative character. This property can serve as an aid to self-perfecting and exists in people in general, particularly in contemporary people, and especially in you, and is none other than that which I have many times condemned and which people themselves consider an unworthy manifestation for a man who has reached responsible age—of course in this respect also excluding themselves—and it is called "selfdeception."

Such an, at first glance, illogicality and deduction not corresponding to any human sane reasoning, namely, that such a property unbecoming to the psyche of a man of adult age can consciously be made use of for such an immeasurably high aim, is obtained owing to the fact that the cognizance of truths concerning the possibilities of self-perfection, and the real forming in oneself of what is required for this, must proceed not in the ordinary consciousness of a man, which for the given case has almost no significance, but in what is called the subconscious, and since, thanks to all kinds of accidents ensuing from the various abnormalities of our ordinary life, it has become impossible for a man, particularly for a contemporary man, to take in anything at all and so to say "digest" it directly with his subconsciousness, therefore it is necessary for him, as has in the course of many centuries been experimentally proven by persons of Pure Reason, to use a special means for inculcating in his subconsciousness some reasonable indication accidentally grasped by his ordinary consciousness and not contradictory to his instinct, and this can be done only by means of this self-deceptive imaginativeness inherent in him.

If you have understood without any doubt what you must do, and how, and fully hope at some time to attain this in reality, you must at the beginning often imagine, but imagine only, that this is already present in you.

This is necessary chiefly in order that the consciousness forming in oneself during an active state should continue also during a passive state.

For the correct understanding of the significance of this first assisting exercise, it is first of all necessary to know that when a normal man, that is, a man who already has his real I, his will, and all the other properties of a real man, pronounces aloud or to himself the words "I am," then there always proceeds in him, in his, as it is called, "solar plexus," a so to say "reverberation," that is, something like a vibration, a feeling, or something of the sort.

This kind of reverberation can proceed also in other parts of his body in general, but only on the condition that, when pronouncing these words, his attention is intentionally concentrated on them.

If the ordinary man, not having as yet in himself data for the natural reverberation but knowing of the existence of this fact, will, with conscious striving for the formation in himself of the genuine data which should be in the common presence of a real man, correctly and frequently pronounce these same and for him as yet empty words, and will imagine that this same reverberation proceeds in him, he may thereby ultimately through frequent repetition gradually acquire in himself a so to say theoretical "beginning" for the possibility of a real practical forming in himself of these data.

He who is exercising himself with this must at the beginning, when pronouncing the words "I am," imagine that this same reverberation is already proceeding in his solar plexus.

At the beginning it is necessary to pronounce the words "I am" very often and to try always not to forget to have the said reverberation in one's solar plexus.

Without this even if only imagined experiencing of the reverberation, the pronouncing aloud or to oneself of the words "I am" will have no significance at all.

The result of the pronouncing of them without this reverberation will be the same as that which is obtained from the automatic associative mentation of man, namely, an increase of that in the atmosphere of our planet from our perception of which, and from its blending with our second food, there arises in us an irresistible urge to destroy the various tempos of our ordinary life somehow established through centuries.

This second exercise, as I have already said, is only preparatory; and when you have acquired the knack, as it were, of experiencing this process imagined in yourself, only then will I give you further definite real indications for the actualization in yourself of real results.

First of all, concentrate the greater part of your attention on the words themselves, "I am," and the lesser part concentrate on the solar plexus, and the reverberation should gradually proceed of itself.

At first it is necessary to acquire only, so to say, the "taste" of these impulses which you have not as yet in you, and which for the present you may designate merely by the words "I am," "I can," "I wish."

I am, I can, I am can. I am, I wish, I am wish.

In concluding my elucidations of this assisting exercise, I will once more repeat, but in another formulation, what I have already said.
If "I am," only then "I can"; if "I can," only then do I deserve and have the objective right to wish.
Without the ability to "can" there is no possibility of having anything; no, nor the right to it.

First we must assimilate these expressions as external designations of these impulses in order ultimately to have the impulses themselves.

If you several times experience merely the sensation of what I have just called the "taste" of these impulses sacred for man, you will then already be indeed fortunate, because you will then feel the reality of the possibility of sometime acquiring in your presence data for these real Divine impulses proper only to man.

And on these Divine impulses there is based for humanity the entire sense of everything existing in the Universe, beginning from the atom, and ending with everything existing as a whole—and, among other things, even your dollars.

Gurdjieff, Life is real only then, when "I am"
Everyone seems to be searching for Compatibility. It is important but its not the whole bundle. We may have flawed views of our notion of who is compatible for us, and be "looking for love in all the wrong places".
Another thing to consider is finding a partner who is also Complementary. A Complementary partner fills the empty gaps that are lacking and a Synergy occurs. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
But that entails knowing your gaps and giving oneself over to allowing your partner to enter and fill them. I suppose that's where Cupid comes in.

My concern was that people should learn that there is a healthy sexuality WITHIN LIMITS, and those limits include spiritual and psychological considerations and something our society has lost sight of: decency that is born out of care and concern for others and what is best for them.
Going slightly further, I would like to propose that in these books the various described visual phenomena of light experienced during orgasms is not sex-related, but are clues to Fragments of an Unknown Teaching.
One 'sex-unrelated part' of it we habitually employ: During meditative exercises we experience bright clouds of light, moving bright points / bright blobs and beams of light in gold, blue, purple, and white silver colors.

I think the clouds of white light and stars described in these books - that women see during orgasm -, ought not be translated as "sex". Especially what happens, when this 'Light Energy' - experienced at the point of "ecstasy" - is consciously unified in a 'polarly compatible' couple, their Light of such, having become As One, - to be utilized - as it was meant to be how it was probably done aeons ago, when Earth was mixed 3rd-4th density.

The C's mentioned pure energy mastery. I think probably The Eleusinian Mysteries managed to retain parts of this, but had to be kept under locks in order for the uninitiated not to severely mistranslate parts of it as "plain motor activities for human reproduction".

I think these romance writers are inspired by, are channeling, the same spiritual technology. If written down into a manual, I think, its "Contents"-section would look something like this:
1. Code of Chivalry;
2. Developing Being / The Work;
3. True Love;
4. [Ecstatic] Unification of Light in Polar[ly compatible] Couples for Purposes of:
---- (a) Healing,
---- (b) Rejuvenation = longevity;
---- (c) Induce Fertility to arid / desert environments in Nature: Tribal Terraforming;
---- (d) Spear Armed Dances and similar trance methods throughout history: receiving coded instructions from higher densities, Stone Circle People.
Last edited:
I had a bit of an epiphany yesterday, although I feel I struggle a bit explaining it. So this may sound a bit confused ...

It relates to commitment vs love. In my view the two were directly connected. But I have realized that this is not so, or rather not in the way I thought they were. In fact I never had much problems to commit to a relationship, once I had made the decision to enter into one. Commitment as in “let’s make it work”, ”you are my prime interest around which I organize my life”, emotional support etc. However, I may have been ‘in love’ with my partner, but to truly let myself love her (and to express it this way) was an entirely different kettle of fish. I was always holding something back, keeping myself veiled, so as to not bring myself into a position, where I would say “I love you” and the other then might reject me. So out of fear from rejection, I would just always keep a foot outside the door, so that when things became difficult, I could shift my weight onto this foot and getting ready to run.

The funny thing in all this is, that in many instances it was the woman who broke up - and in one of those I was totally devastated. Today I could well imagine, that maybe part of the ‘disenchantment’ from the side of my partner might well have been not letting my feelings of love flow freely, to not ‘open up’ - to just be me, and not to try to ’please’ or appease the partner, and to give her what I (double-capital I) thought she needed.

And in this respect, maybe love IS commitment, just another commitment, one that I previously hadn’t thought about - the commitment of “well, I love you, this is how I feel, and I am truly committed to this feeling, whether or not you feel the same, whether or not you reciprocate”. But to do this, one must feel that I am fundamentally lovable, and I didn’t really feel that this could be the case. Like in so many of the romance novels I have read in the last few months, one - and sometimes both simultaneously - feel that no-one in their right mind could possibly love them the way they are.

And in those relationship were the woman broke up, I actually did say “But I love you!”, but it seems to me that this was more like a ‘puppy love’, a dependency, a feeling rising out of the imminent loss, not a mature feeling of love towards a person, that in a sense is almost disconnected from her reaction to it.

And that would also have meant to let her go, if she was not prepared to share my feelings, even if it hurts - not whining like a puppy, but with grace.
Well explained nicklebleu and well done, bravo.
I was referring to romantic love, however it could apply to most other situations as well. I'm an only child and was never particularly close to my cousins, so sibling interaction is nonexistent. I've had close friends, but nothing I would categorize as "love," per se. Parental love I experience as a sense of duty, i.e. I should be there for someone who was there for me. I don't know if that counts. Maybe, maybe not.

There are probably more gradations of love than I really consider here; I tend to have an all or nothing view of it. What I define as genuine love is when you can peer into someone and feel that you are them and they are you; in that moment all of your thoughts and experiences are one, connected as if you are different facets of the same being, harmonized with the pulse of creation. Anything less is a dilution and not real. It's like asking if 10K gold is really gold. In my opinion it's not, but maybe I'm too regimented. By that analogy, I'm looking for at least 18 karats to truly label it love.

Correct, this is what primarily drives my behavior. I've only experienced the intellectual rapport to explore the level of relationship mentioned in the previous paragraph once, and I was really too young to know what I was dealing with. I lost that and the subject of relationships became pure torment for a number of years. I do not want to repeat that experience. So I don't see any way I can fulfill my ideal, while also having more prosaic biological drives and the desire for closeness, touch, and companionship which are also unfulfilled. Sexuality becomes something of a wayward child without some higher purpose to channel it into, and I've long debated whether I want to settle with comfort+sex, since it is more realistically attainable. It may temporarily absolve me of some of my issues, but it certainly won't last forever. I wasn't convinced one necessarily led to the other, but in the novels it often does. After these novels stirred up my sex center so much, I considered that this is just the way things are done here, and maybe what I am most opposed to is actually what is required to get the motor running. I decided that should I find myself in a situation in the future that is a little more sexual and a little less mental than I would like but am otherwise comfortable, I will roll the dice once and only once to see if the result proves my previous attitude to be incorrect. If it does, I'll probably be at sea for awhile and sound like some of the characters in the books, "I didn't know it was possible to feel such things in this life,""How did I ever live without it," etc.

I'm not willing to put a woman up on a pedestal and build my life around her, but that's not the impression I got from the books. The main thing I got out of it is that you have to talk about everything, even if it hurts or scares the crap out of you. If you can't be totally honest with each other by about the third major date about anything that is going on and whatever skeletons you have in your closet without fear of judgment, then you really aren't meant to be with that person. A substantial number of romance plots seem to seek to demonstrate what kind of suffering occurs when this rule is broken. There is also the aspect of seeing that person as you and you as them as I described earlier, but I feel I could only really do that with a very specific type of person. It's more of an equal footing.

My attitude is simply a reflection of what I observe in the reality around me and doesn't really have any bearing on what other people do. Even on the Cassiopaea forum, which supposedly has the cream of the crop of humanity, what I get from perusing various swamp threads and stories here and there about people's relationships is that they are primairily a negative experience. Some people seem to able to go along to get along, but aren't really happy. A few do seem to be right for each other, but they are outliers and I'm not necessarily convinced it would work for me if I were in their situation. A lot of mods and admins strike me as "hopelessly single;" a category to which I probably belong as well. It is possible that with more knowledge I could make better decisions, but as someone who is trying to wisely learn from the mistakes of others instead of having to suffer through my own, none of this inspires a great deal of confidence. I am also up against such things as only 12% of the US population being able to think deeply about anything according to the Cassiopaeans, and having to find my "type" within that 12% against a backdrop of Great Reset social engineering that whittles down the probabilities to near nothing. The flip side of that coin is perhaps my rigid attitude towards such things also makes me unavailable for the person who actually "needs" me, and is a way of determining the needs of another. It seems like a stretch to me, but is indeed possible, and I remember reading a couple of romance plots to this effect. I had never thought about it that way, and it did result in twisting my surety in my rather straightforward "Victorian Morality" into a bit of a pretzel.

This first bit sounds a little bit like escapism, which we all need a little escapism, (I tend to do it with sci-fi things) but the romance books do not interest me for that purpose. I read books because I expect to go out and actually do something with the knowledge gained therein. This is why I became interested in esoteric books, I figured with the Wave and the closing of the Grand Cycle and the transition to 4D, some of that stuff would be useful to know one day. One can spend one's entire life within the confines of a library, and have entertained many complex and nuanced thoughts about many subjects, and have never truly experienced anything. I'm a reader, and I believe reading is an important foundation for knowledge which provides crucial support for one's life, but the actual edifice is lived experience. If the purpose of the romance books is to add to my philosophical repertoire before moving on to the next subject of study, then I've seen enough to get the overall gist and I'm done other than maybe picking up the occasional Balogh book for when I'm in a romantic mood. With each book it becomes harder and harder for me to tell myself that "I don't need anyone," or "it's better to be single because I enjoy my freedom," or "intimacy is nice but I can survive without it because it's not really important." I have to be VERY careful how I let these books affect me.
Reading your posts since the beginning of this thread, you're actually the potential hero of a novel that's just waiting to take full shape, yeah! You'd make a great duke.

It's a bit off topic, but it's still in the search and understanding of "dell'amore".
The premise is simple: Different people with different personalities express love in different ways. Therefore, if you want to give and receive love most effectively, you’ve got to learn to speak the right language.
I collected a few quotes from Mouravieff and Gurdjieff where they talk about awakening the emotional center. It is interesting that they both talked about the exercise of imagination in order to awaken the emotional center. I am not sure if they had the books such as these romance novels in mind, but it seems to me that perhaps they can be a part of an exercise that they are talking about.

Thanks for this, Persej! Exactly the problem we are looking at and dealing with.
Thanks for this, Persej! Exactly the problem we are looking at and dealing with.
Indeed, and I've suspected for a while that there's a recognition of this fact in humanity, i.e. the stagnation of the emotional center. And it's truly sad how today that possible recognition has been hijacked to make everyone look for their very own artificial hurts in the form of discrimination of one sort or the other, essentially making people believe that they're awakening their emotional sides, that could connect them to others and to themselves, whilst in reality they're simply encouraging everyone to collapse within the weight of their own self image.
I've just finished Someone to Hold by Mary Balogh, book 2 in the Wescott series. This one hit close to home as it expanded on orphan and parent-child themes, the story moved at a better pace, in my opinion, on the second book than it did on the first of the series, and the way she connected them both was rather brilliantly done. I will do some discussion on a few ideas that I found interesting on the spoiler section below:

The story picks up right after the first book ends, Ana's half sister, Camille, moves to Bath, the town where Ana grew up. In an effort to reinvent herself, she becomes a teacher on the same orphanage where Ana lived and even moves in there. While living and working there, she meets Joel, an art teacher, former resident of the orphanage and Ana's best friend, they (Camille and Joel )fall in love and by the end of the story they are married.

Their interaction is very enjoyable, Joel is a painter and so he's commissioned by several people in town to make portraits of them because of how good of a job he does at capturing people's essence. As it happens, Camille's mother commissions a portrait of her daughters so incentivizing Joel to get to know Camille and see her essence.

This idea of seeing someone else's essence made me think of networking, and mirroring, we have personas that we put up in different situations, but our essence is sometimes, if not almost always, only visible to other individuals. This was beautifully explored, as Joel explains throughout his process of painting a portrait, how he not only needs to see the person but interact with her, talk to her, and actually SEE her in order to be able to capture as much as possible in a single instant to be immortalized.

He starts to see Camille from their first few interactions, needing to revise a few assumptions he had made about her, despite her conscious efforts at not allowing herself to be seen by him.

It made me think of this notion of how we're perceived by others, not the vain "I wonder if they see me as I want to be seen" but rather, "I wonder if I am seen as who I think I am" I think there's a difference, not the image you cultivate that most would simply take for granted and never dig deeper to uncover all the dynamics that govern it. But if someone really knew me, what would they see? it's a terrifying thought.

And it's an idea that is explored in their story, Camille grew up to be an aristocratic lady, so she was perfectly trained to have the right personality in every situation, once her world came crashing down after Ana ended up inheriting everything leaving Camille with nothing, she went through a process of disintegration that she comes out on top of. But as she let down her guards and realized that most of who she was, was simply the result of her being trained to respond "properly" to every situation, she found herself not knowing who she was.

Pushing away love and emotions, seeking a "perfect" husband and completely ignoring herself, once her conditions changed, there was something there that she didn't recognize and she had to learn to integrate it successfully, albeit painfully.

The theme of love was explored in this story, but there was an interesting idea, in order to love you also must allow yourself to be loved. It's not a one way street. It made me think of something the C's said once about "if you're experiencing a blockage of a particular type in your life, try giving that to the universe" or something along the lines, and it makes sense.

Joel goes through a similar disintegration in his life, though not as drastic nor is it as explored, but I think this was done on purpose, he was more aware of who he was and once his life changed, after a long lost great uncle leaves everything to him, he needed to add that to the core of he being, and grow from that foundation.

Being the story that it was, it hit close to home for me, themes of anger and frustration at one's parents and life. Sadness, jealousy and the inevitable fragile independence that one learns to develop when one learns to grow alone, the pride and the walls one builds to never ever let anyone see the ashamed kid, are all explored gently. Tied but not explored are the clingy outpouring of oneself into whoever holds a promise to fulfill the role of someone to hold you and love you, that you can hold and love (and the very predictable self fulfilling prophesies when this backfires), the inability to ask for help, the fear of disappointing, and the very paradoxical fear of being left alone yet the familiarity that makes one seek loneliness and self reliance.

And those are all behaviors that, in terms of the story, could be seen by a painter seeking to capture your essence by interacting with you, surely not what you would be attempting to convey. Being so preoccupied with how the world perceives you from a young age, sacrifices you and thus your ability to allow yourself to be loved. And it's a sad thought, but I think it's true.

And sadly, it's something that self perpetuates because we all have the tendency to see life from the point of view of what validates our preexisting notions of who we are, and what the world is, and sometimes we miss opportunities to shine, if you will, on purpose just so that we can remain where we are.

Thus the need of a network and a mirror, a loving mirror, and perhaps that is a good way to condense the story in one phrase, a loving mirror. Not one that simply accepts you as you currently are, but one that at leasts reflects back on to you who you actually are, encouraging you to choose daily.

Sorry if I got too gloomy at the end.

It is truly a blessing to see it all from the outside and be able to integrate some of those ideas without much trouble and at a peaceful pace. This was a personally moving story that shook a few things within me but with enough distance to see them more carefully, I felt a lot of nostalgia once I finished the story but I was also peacefully joyful.

For now, on to Someone to Wed :) thanks for reading.
Persej said:
I collected a few quotes from Mouravieff and Gurdjieff where they talk about awakening the emotional center. It is interesting that they both talked about the exercise of imagination in order to awaken the emotional center. I am not sure if they had the books such as these romance novels in mind, but it seems to me that perhaps they can be a part of an exercise that they are talking about.

A few years ago my wife had a vivid dream- She and I were kayaking on a lake or seaside and we came upon a bay or cove that had an old coal mine village in the hill rising from the shore. It was being renovated into an amusement park. We spoke to the owners (didn't see them) asking what they were doing and they said "we like Carbon", the same 3 words carried the meaning "we have an affinity for Carbon."

Definition of affinity​

1: relationship by marriage
2a: sympathy marked by community of interest
b(1): an attraction to or liking for something
(2): an attractive force between substances or particles that causes them to enter into and remain in chemical combination
c: a person especially of the opposite sex having a particular attraction for one
3a: likeness based on relationship or causal connection
b: a relation between biological groups involving resemblance in structural plan and indicating a common origin

Choose the Right Synonym for affinity​

ATTRACTION, AFFINITY, SYMPATHY mean the relationship existing between things or persons that are naturally or involuntarily drawn together. ATTRACTION implies the possession by one thing of a quality that pulls another to it. AFFINITY implies a susceptibility or predisposition on the part of the one drawn. SYMPATHY implies a reciprocal or natural relation between two things that are both susceptible to the same influence.

Didn't the C's say the core of DNA was an unknown enzyme related to Carbon?
I think "Victorian morality" is the realization one comes to when one observes that there is a lot of sex out there and none of it is worth anything, even having a negative value in a lot of cases. Acknowledgement of this fact does not make the urges go away, and can actually make them worse, and can be likened to an alcoholic who realizes he has a problem but his entire life is structured around getting that next drink, even if it leaves him penniless. Those who have studied some neuroscience and psychology of addiction arrive at the conclusion that this aspect of the machine is useless and must be short-circuited in order to keep one's life "on track." Why allow yourself to long for something that is merely a poison? If disruption of sexual complementarity and harmonization between humans so that they can't access a higher level of creative existence was a plan of 4D STS, I'd say it's been a resounding success.

The novels can be quite arousing and threaten to undo the work one has put in to overcome one's "alcoholism," and I've held the opinion for quite a while now that if you came here to experience love and elope with your soul mate you came to the wrong planet. This planet is a meat grinder and if you're clever enough to run the gauntlet and avoid getting shredded then you may get something out of it. Romantic love is not really part of the package; it doesn't exist here or is a luxury few can afford. While I think everyone should read a sampling of the novels and it's fun to dream of what may await in the next world in moderation, I found myself getting too "into" the sex scenes after being able to initially fight them off. I started looking at women differently; instead of being immediately dismissive of their sexual features, my gaze would linger. I was being put into a mate-seeking mode led by my sexual instincts, hoping I would stumble across my lady fair who saves me like they save the emotionally unavailable men who appear in the beginning of some of these stories. After a certain number of repetitions of this process I decided that "none of that is real" and my mind has kind of switched off from the whole project. While there were some stirrings within me on a couple of occasions, I've never really loved anyone and I don't expect that to change.

Nonetheless, I can't quite go back to the way I was, something has shifted in me which makes me a bit more amenable to experimentation, however I anticipate that to blow up in my face and remind me why I went "Victorian" in the first place if and when it occurs.
Hi Neil. Thanks for bringing this topic up again. Your observation about the rarity of "true love" is spot on. My observations of romantic relationships are that there is a bell curve pattern. There is 10% that you have no interest in and 10% that have no interest in you. Of the remaining 80%, it is even split of 50% mostly negative and 50% mostly positive. The top 10% of possible relationships are difficult to find and required a great deal of self sacrifice to acquire the correct frequency.

During these end-times our main focus is on cleansing our hidden darkness. We do recognize that true love is possible but may not be the right time for it. To me, it feel like that the need is to get "our work" done first before we relax and seek the joy of true love.

I too suspect that my main purpose to to clear the path towards 4D existence and avoid 3D desires. Sexual bliss is the mother of all 3D desires.
There may be some hints and clues about history and peoples in these stories. For instance in Book 4 "The Escape" of the Survivor series, Samantha McKay (who has some Gypsy blood) runs away with Ben and finds her grandfather who owns coal mines in Wales. Sir Ben Harper (who is near crippled) becomes her husband and eventually takes over the family business.

"Old King Cole" is a British nursery rhyme first attested in 1708. Though there is much speculation about the identity of King Cole, it is unlikely that he can be identified reliably as any historical figure. It has a Roud Folk Song Index number of 1164. The poem describes a merry king who called for his pipe, bowl, and musicians, with the details varying among versions.
It is often noted that the name of the legendary Welsh king Coel Hen can be translated 'Old Cole' or 'Old King Cole'.[3][4] This sometimes leads to speculation that he, or some other Coel in Roman Britain, is the model for Old King Cole of the nursery rhyme.[5] However, there is no documentation of a connection between the fourth-century figures and the eighteenth-century nursery rhyme. There is also a dubious connection of Old King Cole to Cornwall and King Arthur found at Tintagel Castle that there was a Cornish King or Lord Coel.[citation needed]

Further speculation connects Old King Cole and thus Coel Hen to Colchester, but in fact Colchester was not named for Coel Hen.[6] Connecting with the musical theme of the nursery rhyme, according to a much later source, Coel Hen supposedly had a daughter who was skilled in music, according to Geoffrey of Monmouth, writing in the 12th century.[1]

A legend that King Coel of Colchester was the father of the Empress Saint Helena, and therefore the grandfather of Constantine the Great, appeared in Henry of Huntingdon's Historia Anglorum and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae. The passages are clearly related, even using some of the same words, but it is not clear which version was first. Henry appears to have written the relevant part of the Historia Anglorum before he knew about Geoffrey's work, leading J. S. P. Tatlock and other scholars to conclude that Geoffrey borrowed the passage from Henry, rather than the other way around. The source of the claim is unknown, but may have predated both Henry and Geoffrey. Diana Greenwayproposes it came from a lost hagiography of Helena; Antonia Harbus suggests it came instead from oral tradition.[citation needed]

Cole-brook theory[edit]​

In the 19th century William Chappell, an expert on popular music, suggested the possibility that the "Old King Cole" was really "Old Cole", alias Thomas Cole-brook, a supposed 12th-century Reading cloth merchant whose story was recounted by Thomas Deloney in his Pleasant History of Thomas of Reading (c. 1598), and who was well known as a character in plays of the early 17th century. The name "Old Cole" had some special meaning in Elizabethan theatre, but it is unclear what it was.[1]

Illustration by William Wallace Denslow

Coel (Old Welsh: Coil), also called Coel Hen (Coel the Old) and King Cole, is a figure prominent in Welsh literature and legend since the Middle Ages. Early Welsh tradition knew of a Coel Hen, a c. 4th-century leader in Roman or Sub-Roman Britain and the progenitor of several kingly lines in Yr Hen Ogledd (the Old North), the Brittonic-speaking part of what is now northern England and southern Scotland.
Coel's name was rendered "Coil" in Old Welsh. It may be the same as the common noun coel, meaning "belief, credence; confidence, reliance, trust, faith" (a secondary meaning is "omen"), derived from Proto-Celtic *kaylo- "omen" and ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *keh2ilo- "whole, healthy; blessed with good omen".[2][3][4] Coel is often named as "Coel Hen", Hen being an epithet meaning "old" (i.e., "Coel the Old"). The genealogies give him an additional epithet, Godebog (Old Welsh: Guotepauc), meaning "Protector" or "Shelterer".[5] His name is thus sometimes given as "Coel Godebog" or "Coel Hen Godebog".[2] However, some of the Harleian genealogies list Godebog as Coel's father's name.[6] Geoffrey of Monmouth rendered the name as both Coel and Coillus in his Historia Regum Britanniae. Some modern authors modernize it to "Cole".[7]

Coel Hen appears in the Harleian genealogies and the later pedigrees known as the Bonedd Gwŷr y Gogledd (The Descent of the Men of the North) at the head of several post-Roman royal families of the Hen Ogledd.[5] His line, collectively called the Coeling,

Geoffrey's largely legendary Historia Regum Britanniae expands upon Henry's brief mention, listing Coel as a King of the Britons following the reign of King Asclepiodotus.[21] In the Historia, Coel grows upset with Asclepiodotus's handling of the Diocletianic Persecution and begins a rebellion in his duchy of Caer Colun (Colchester). He meets Asclepiodotus in battle and kills him, thus taking the kingship of Britain upon himself. Rome, apparently, is pleased that Britain has a new king, and sends senator Constantius Chlorus to negotiate with him. Afraid of the Romans, Coel meets Constantius and agrees to pay tribute and submit to Roman laws as long as he is allowed to retain the kingship. Constantius agrees to these terms, but Coel dies one month later.[21] Constantius marries Coel's daughter, Helena, and crowns himself as Coel's successor. Helena subsequently gives birth to a son who becomes the Emperor Constantine the Great, giving a British pedigree to the Roman imperial line.[22]

The Diocletianic or Great Persecution was the last and most severe persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire.[1] In 303, the Emperors Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius, and Constantiusissued a series of edicts rescinding Christians' legal rights and demanding that they comply with traditional religious practices. Later edicts targeted the clergy and demanded universal sacrifice, ordering all inhabitants to sacrifice to the gods. The persecution varied in intensity across the empire—weakest in Gaul and Britain,
The Boernicians, who were a mixture of Scottish Picts, Angles, and Vikings, were one of the ancient clans of the Scottish-English borderlands. Considered to be the ancient founding peoples of the north, the Boernicians inhabited the tract of rugged territory that stretches from Carlisle in the west to Berwick in the east. In the 4th century, Scotland was composed of five different kingdoms, which were each home to a different race: the Gaels, Vikings, Picts, Britons, and Angles all held land, each had their own realm.

The Border Clans consisted of the Strathclyde Britons on the Western Border and the Boernicians on the Eastern Border Marches. The history of the Boernician peoples reached a crucial turning point in the 13th century. The dramatic escalation of Clanwarfare brought chiefs from both the English and the Scottish sides of the border to meet at Carlisle in 1246. At this meeting the chiefs cooperated in drafting a new and unique set of laws for the entire borderland territory. For example, it was a greater offense to refuse to help a neighbor recover property or possessions that it was to steal them in the first place. Additionally, for refusal of assistance, a person could be hanged without trial. These laws were unlike any prevailing in Britain, Scotland, Irelandor Europe.
Top Bottom