These notes are not a definitive position but rather reflect the current state of a process.

Content, Expression and the Structure of Pneuminous Physical Objects.

It appears productive to try to synthesize PA theory with some of the concepts found in Deleuze and Guattari’s Thousand Plateaus. Here the focus is on the possibility of employing some of the language of content and expression that D & G borrow from Hjelmslev.

To briefly recap for anyone new to it pneuminous accretive theory unambiguously exists to propose an account of most paranormality where paranormality is presupposed to be ‘real’ in the sense of something other than current science understands and not something subsumable under neuroscience or otherwise. This does not mean such a belief is held, rather it says that if the phenomena are real then something like pneuminous accretive theory is probably the only place for occultism to retreat to. In this way it is a phenomenology of the appearance of the phenomena under the auspice of rational belief.

The explanation that PA offers is to say that conceptuality should be conceived as a quasi-substance that is attached to regions of existence. The presence of this substance (pneuma) is not some inert force only held within the subject but rather something present in what we call the object or the external. The plug-in of concepts (pneuminous accretions) into regions of being, under certain circumstances can cause radical shifts in existence that we call magick or paranormal phenomena. In short, usually what we think of as the solidity of the world does indeed determine the concepts, but sometimes the reverse happens.

How can we begin then, to translate or engage pneuminous accretions (PAs) with the process language of ATP. The first thing we can try to do is to note that since pneuma is considered to make things (accretions) it has this quasi-substantiality to it. In the Geology of Morals we are asked to consider three kinds of strata: the physical, the organic and the linguistic. Following this line of analysis we can ask ‘can pneuma be thought of in the sense of strata and what would this look like? At a glance it would seem to be hybrid of the linguistic and the physical strata, minimally it will draw on these two elements, though maybe the organic stratum will yet have more to do with it.

Let us consider a particular pneuminous accretion and see if it will be illustrative. The pen on my desk is a PA. Through the original use word pen, I have come expand the rule for pen to many instances. The multiple possibility is the accretion, though it may present itself to me in image as a contingent archetypal form e.g. a biro. The pen accretion is attached to a vector region. By vector region we just mean a region of existence that must in this case be capable of taking the pen accretion. I cannot pick up the mouse and pass it to someone who asked for the pen. I cannot apply the pen accretion to the vector region that would normally take the accretion mouse. The pen accretion will only (aside from the magickal act of trying to attach the pen accretion to another region for whatever reason) attach to those vector regions that allow for the rules of it -hand holdable, can write or at least used to write. When I see the pen, I literally see the accretion (in the language of hermeneutic phenomenology: everything is already interpreted). I see the concept not the vector region. The only difference here (to hermeneutic phenomenology) is that we are hypothesizing that the concept we see is a substance imprinted into the vector region i.e. it is ontologically altering the vector as opposed to being inert (purely psychological) in relation to it.

How can we begin to understand this in terms of the language of ATP? If we are speculating that there is an active force/substance that is conceptuality (pneuma) then we can initially ask: what is the substance and form of content and what is the form and substance of expression of an accretion?

Before we can answer this, we must supply the caveat that the answer may be quite specific to a certain kind of accretion. In this case it is a human-formed physical object. The PA structure could be though of as something like this:

Content substance: Smooth pneuma (the vector field region see the PDF linked above), the possibility of the pen region existing without being processed as a pen.

Content form: Possible structuring codes, designs.

Expression substance: The PA as it is described as a physical, comprised on analysis of composite PAs which tend towards the limits of our ability to enumerate/taxonomize these.

Expression form: The use ability of the object and the appearance of it, the name of it.

To this structure we must add two extending movements. The first of these is the line that extends from both kinds of substance. Content substance is marked as the vector field region. This, in the case of a human-formed object is the region of the objected re-imagined after the object’s creation as not the object but just an unknown nothingness. This is the vector field region into which the PA is projected. Expression substance is described as comprising of the composite PAs that we may analyse the PA into. Both of these categories tend towards the umbratic region i.e. the totally unknowable beyond current scientific and perceptual taxonomies. This line is necessary, for it is here that connection to mystery obtains. The potential that the region can connect to obscure parts of existence the anchor between the PA and the depths of existence that need to be manipulated in order to bring about anomaly.

The second movement is an exit most clearly thought of as from the level of form of expression. This is the line of subjectification (to borrow and slightly adjust a term for ATP). Subjectification pertains to the interaction between a being of awareness and the PA. What we mean by this is attachment to objects of any kind. This attachment is the formation of more layers of pneuma —memories. This formation of ‘special’ objects. In this way the line of subjectification is also related to paranormality. In particular we are thinking here of magickal objects and relatedly the ability to magickally interact with objects and or people at a distance. Subjectification is the accreting of pneuma that allows for the PAs particular identification —most usually through its name  This has in mind specifically human type beings of awareness, though we do not deny it may happen in others too. The accretion of subjectifying pneuma occurs in the use history of the object in relation to other PAs (e.g. of people/events). Its notable (intensive) interactions accrete pneuma to it, meaning it is not simply psychologically special/unique it is also ontologically-magickally (pneuminously) so.

By Jim Meirose

It wasn’t supposed to start this way, but since you insisted, here are your team’s assigned purposes. Nyah, nyah; get, from the kitchen, a raritangle of chopped bosnias served on a belch of kleenex on a clean plate toward each paying customer—who will be labeled as such—because, Das Minotour, risen in off the sea, told each quite clearly; here it is, citizens; Pacha’ pounded on, pounding, pounding out with, but ended up nonetheless shouting, like always, Everybody! All of you! Come here, get this drip; anyphase, after my establishblink up Back City, they said what d’we do for foodie and drankdowns, but—they are stupid. With rare exception—always very stupid. And, even though the big senior class mathematically specialized finals are over, but, still, always; yes, always. No egg’sathrecisation! Plus, my God, ‘s being me ‘ly myself, of course, as usual, it’s spilled out all over here. At exactly the next six p.m., like all of you do once a day. All of you, ‘cause of you. 

Spill it all out over here once a day!  

Jesus Christ! Swear to God! As D’ Spanish Tyrant’s big Rant’n Rave! Why must it take this to teach you? Why? Why? So? What the ‘uck?  

But. 

Even so, we’re confident the more robust among you, your quietly solid core of noncomplainants, will crisply start over, as, new fresh; so; so-o, this; so-o-o he, new fresh; as’d this; and as’d ‘it off-gain; so-o-o, and this restart’s well-advised at this juncture, partly because two time signatures are normally used in this kind of attempt, yas yas, so-o, to provide a satisfying end for each and every listener with no sexteptions.  

Hip!  

Fat hooey.  

You should not find this necessity surprising, since we all swore to God, then, that ess, God hun-self had made it so-so, guvvernmendt men thrust f’um his bush, stating, We know your plight, we are here to help, like all’s of those always react, of course. That’s their reason—though it seems most laborious, twisty and non-intuitiviteed. And, most of you already may know what we said, what they said, back then, that, Your Back City is speckulumly unicornique, and muss’ be hairy-served, often as daily r’ hourly or more, so—you need to know, eh, new fresh; got to know, eck eh, new fresh; will be told, rip, ‘cause that’s my mission. This swamp’s a devil; does not want you here; strains to—no, no, look into the black greenie face of the solidified stinking rotmass o’ Back City swamp and we won’t need to tell you, you’ll see for yourself, that it’s coming. It and all its big stink of a past implies, entails, or—quite simply, means. For God’s sake, insurer. You’ve a brain, you will see; day and night, it strives to take you. New fresh. It’s coming. Sure as knot soup. New fresh. Take you. Take you. What hard words these; it comes to take you. 

That simple. Simple as; 

‘m new lin-n’geries, to b-bail!  

Yope. 

As this’s-ll perfectly circular and intentavittebelle right now, contact local law enforcement immediately local law immediate-hic local enforcement. Local. Hic. Of the law. 

Yes! I said! Enforcement! With an e! Because, if Das Minotour risen in off the sea comes up to save, but can’t never, if that’s ‘t, all’s done for. You, too. Run fast now. 

What?    

Run fast. Right now—buh huh, wuss; huh. New fresh. Uh! B-b’, s’ ‘ot soo f’st; so what, ess, ‘s, so. Move over there just a tiny ‘fore you go, though, would you? I need to reach those things over there. Sure. But, I may not go. I really do feel good, but—someplace down deeper, I’m not glad I do. You know?  

Not really. 

You know? You know? You— 

Han’ d’ d’ palmup! 

Okay, Willy. Stop. Calm down. Der booster’s widdyu, okay? Now, anyway; so since you’re too stubborn to take the easy way out, gi’in that, then so, know that much like you, struggling Pachasandrim pushed on relentlessly with that very same shriek-type, waving down all the while; ‘cause it sank into her there’s a sea on the tipside, and a swamp on the glandside. If they press together, she might just canc-l-null downdyflop. Abracadabra! And so, then imagine, if their deeply elemental untiring strive to engulf Back City crashed together right ‘top your great big central city hall, and whirlwring yo’ round themselves big and tight, you’ll all engulf each other, and all you two ‘s well, transforming most instantly into multiple deep flows of peagreen calm slush! 

Oh—like slap? 

Yep! Like slap! And then, like probably, this Big One Production operation will, then, ‘ig its vacuum t’ rush in takin’ your surviving crowd, if any, down a murmur or two; here or there. Or partial, if s’. But—hope’s her-e, and hey. Read that off that tallyscroll up there. It says;  

Current denizens. Do it now. S’create non-account. 

S’create non-account. S’create it now. All current denizens. 

All currently registered denizens use “TFFKJXC376BQM24K37M89KMWM” to s’create your non-account now, or, yes be denied, yes, be denied, yes be-ee-e-e-e, denie—d-d-d-d— 

New fresh. 

What? Phooey! 

Schratcha-count newly cr-reated! Gosh oh gee. So jot down these details. Oop. Where’s my sharpened das yellowish pinckle? An m’ blankiedink’d-papro? There—one of those—of those nonessential kinds. That whole stack can be wasted without a worry. Write that down. That code’ll always get you in, but, my God, again. It’s spilled out all over here, again; what the ‘uc’? Oh, hokay. Blue bumble, by gosh, I always— 

Calm down. Sit that slap-panel. 

What? There? Why? 

Because. Do not always run off with yourself—stop! Bad habit. Here, do not worry. By use of your own fully exact unique key, regardless of your tote or your styles, you’ll always be let back in. 

Sure? 

Yas, see. See? Do you see? 

Of maybe, but. 

Oh, come on; what I mean, Martin. Get it up. Think a little. 

But; why? They said Das Minotour’s risen in off the sea. 

It’s—nah, nah. But hey. My God it spilled out all over here; what the ‘u’? That happens every single time. Don’t you care? Yes, of course; that happening every single time’s why we the guvernoir-mente hass com to bail from you. New fresh. ‘cause, Das terrible Minotour’s risen in off the sea. Eighteen-sixteen for the—wait, oh mosh, we need to survive, eh, but we just hit the bricks, eh, ahhhhhhh, ahhhhhhhhhh! Das terrible! Oh, Minotour’s mosh risen in we just off the t’ hit the sea bricks, ahhhhhhh. Too weak! Too weak! Why does this happen again and again? 

Who’s to blame? 

Oof! 

Y’ know. But—poor Martin. Good God, he ought of got it. Knew better. Y’ know? 

Yes. But not all can always be saved. 

‘n the truth. New fresh. Tube. Poor Martin indeed. But he’s only the first. When the killer which cuts its own arms with its knife makes long wet red lines down its forearms, it’s time then to immediately call the police. But, yet; it’s funny how I feel that’d also be—wrong. 

Overkill? That, you mean? 

Yep. The first. 

Nah. Nonsense. No one’s ever that simple; only Begobah. 

New fresh. New fresh. 

By Laurence Raphael Brothers 

For a long time, I used to go to bed early…. 

I shut the book. The opening of Swann’s Way was so familiar that I could summon an image of the first page from memory. There was hardly any point to reading the printed words. 

“Hey,” said the woman. “I was in the middle of that.” 

She was reading over my shoulder in bed. I realized this was a dream, one of the sort that Proust wrote about on the first page of his great work. Marcel (not Proust!) describes how he used to summon imaginary women into his dreams as a sickly youth. 

Having realized I was dreaming, I took stock of my situation. The linen undersheet was cool and smooth, and the white quilted comforter which covered the two of us was even more pleasant. I could feel her breath in my ear. I didn’t know who the woman was. I didn’t want to turn to face her. I was afraid of what I might see. 

“Hey!” She poked me in the side, not hard, though. “The book,” she said. “Open the book.” 

“What?” This was more initiative than I was used to from people in dreams. 

“I was in the middle,” she said. “Open it back up and let me read it.” 

The book’s gilt-edged pages gleamed in the dim candlelight. It was heavy for its size, with maroon leather covers chased in gold. There was no title or other printing on the cover or spine, but I knew it was mine and that I’d had it for a long time. 

I felt a little uneasy about the situation, so I temporized. “Why do you want to read it? There’s no way we’re getting through even a single volume of Proust in one night.” 

“But we were reading together,” she said. “Please.” She moved her hand to my shoulder. It felt nice, but I hesitated anyway. 

Maybe she sensed my reluctance because she sighed. “It’s not really Proust. But it’s got all of Proust in it that you remember, and all of every other book you remember too. And more besides.” 

“And you want me to give it to you.” 

“No!” she cried. “You mustn’t do that!” 

“What? First you say you want it, then you don’t.” 

“I want to read it with you. You could guide me through it.” 

“Please,” I said. “Give me a hint, at least. I don’t understand at all.” Talking over my shoulder at her was annoying, but I had the feeling I shouldn’t turn toward her. It was a very strong feeling. 

“Look,” she said, “if you have an infinite thing and you give it to me, you won’t have infinity yourself anymore. You wouldn’t like that. It would be bad for you.” 

“That’s kind of you, I guess, but I still don’t know why you want to read it.” 

“All I know is I’ve lost something. And I think maybe you can help me find it again.” 

“Lost something? Like a memory? That’s the only thing you can find in a book.” 

She hugged me then and laughed in delight. 

“Yes! Now I remember. I don’t have a book of my own. I lost it, somehow.” 

“I get it,” I said. “Proust is all about recalling lost memories. The madeleine. His mother’s kiss goodnight. Gilberte; Mademoiselle Swann. And if you read the book–” 

“If I read your book. Everyone has a book that contains all the things they know, all the things they care about. Well, almost everyone. I guess I lost mine. But I bet your book has lots about memory and stuff like that in it. Because you love Proust so much. And if I read it–” 

“You can find your own book again?” 

“I hope so.” 

“Okay,” I said. “Let’s read it together.” 

She scooched up to better look over my shoulder, and I moved the book to where she could read it more easily. And then I felt it happening. The dream was coming to an end. Things were already turning gray and fuzzy. Soon I’d lose her and she’d lose me and the book too. 

I turned to face her and I had no problem doing that, but my vision had deteriorated to the point I could barely make her out; just a vague silhouette. And yet I thought I knew her. I thought I remembered her from a time long gone. From when I was young, perhaps. I held the book out to her. 

“Quick! Take it!” 

“But–” 

“I know! Just do it! This could be your only chance!” 

She reached out and I let her take the book…. Her fingers brushed against mine, and we fell away from one another into darkness. 

I awoke in my own real bed, alone, with no woman, and no– what? I couldn’t remember. I managed to get to my feet despite the gaping hole in my head where things I’d treasured had once resided. As I rose the dream faded and I could barely recall it at all. Something to do with Proust…. I fumbled for my copy of Swann’s Way there on the nightstand. It seemed I’d never read the final page before. Tears ran down my face and I didn’t know why. I blinked them away and the last line came clear in my vision. 

…remembrance of a particular form is but regret for a particular moment; and houses, roads, avenues are as fugitive, alas, as the years. 

In the CEO Zonetology project, zones have previously been described in three basic modes:

1 Spatial -This place is actually connected to an exterior power e.g. another dimension etc.

2 Temporal -This particular time brings this other kind of world/influence closer e.g. twilight.

3 Projected -The otherworldly effect is contingent upon the being of awareness e.g. pneuminous accretive theory.

The possibility we wish to look at here is that the zone is better understood in a more fluid sense than this admittedly heuristic taxonomy suggests. This more fluid conception though, may free the zone up from its slightly parochial usage to something much closer to the transcendental (in the Kantian sense).

We begin by suggesting that zonal instances are primordially affective. The zone is a feeling. The feeling is one of a certain alien/other-worldness. The zonal theory (as found in various zonetology writings) that the withdrawal of the accretions (the human concepts that covered the region) and the creation of a vacuum into which alien accretions are drawn is an explanation of the feeling, but it is not a description of the zone per se -unless we want the zone to be a very restricted concept.

The affective feeling of the zone suggests an ontology other than the one of the everyday world (at least for most people). Even if you ‘believe’ in weird occurrences, their actual happening still supplies a moment of strangeness. This is true also for rationalists, the difference being that the rationalist (as I use the term here) is an agent for the solid continuous world idea and discrete psychology. This means they have answers to paranormal oddities; they can be amazed by them but nevertheless explain them. Whereas agents for anomalies as anomalies have no clear answers, the above mentioned accretive theory is an attempt to supply a quasi rational answer that pares away all specific religions and magickal systems, but no matter how rational pneuminous accretive theory might be it still has none of the force of the explanations of the solid world model.

The agnostic disjunction points out that anomalous experiences as anomalous (contra the rationalist) have a fundamental epistemic equivalence to their rational counterparts. However despite this, the ability to give a more easily accessible looking answer (coincidence, hallucination) still gives the rationalist an apparent edge of explanatory power.

The modified zonal idea here is that the zone can be considered the space (in broad sense of the term) before alliance is made with either anomaly or rationality. So for instance when the synchronicity/coincidence occurs, the null state or ‘vector region‘ of the event can be considered the zone. The interpretive apparatus of the organism goes to work on the event and depending on what accretions (conceptual entities) are dominant in the organism, an interpretive decision will be made about its ontological status (rational or anomalous). In general this will be pre-determined by the accretive set up in the organism, though of course an extremely powerful zone might sway a previously rational agent to consider the anomalous possibility.

This raises an important structure of zonal dynamics: the zone only tends one way —towards anomaly. This is obviously true when you think about it, as an event or place that tends strongly towards normality is just, well, normal. However because rational explanation is much clearer (on an Ockham’s razor type principle) than anomalous explanation, the rational tendency of explanation is more powerful than the anomalous. Ultimately though, neither version can totally overpower the other.

How then do we assimilate both synchronicitous type phenomena and more spatial ones (like the eerie derelict) under the zonal? The answer to this lies in the affective nature of both. That is, both are constituted by a feeling of anomaly. Any vector region that gives criteria for being interpreted as anomalous can be defined as zonal. Thus the derelict car park that has the other-worldy look to it, does so by feeling. This is the zonal appearance of anomaly; the rational discourse says that this is just an appearance generated by the emptiness and unused appearance, whereas the anomalous discourse says that there really is something other-worldy about the car park —yet is unable to furnish you with any way in which this is so. In this (to reiterate) we see the above described double motion of the zone. It suggests anomaly by appearance and begs explanation by rational cognition more than by occult system.

The recent Castaneda investigations make for an interesting correlate or even extension of this idea. In these writings much is often made of ‘illusory’ phenomena. For instance, we get a description of how Castaneda perceives a dry branch for some time as an incredible creature. After Castaneda loses this image he discovers it was ‘really’ a branch. Don Juan (the shaman type figure) tells Castaneda that the branch had ‘power’ in it and that he has wasted an opportunity. The same zonal idea can be applied. The ambiguous branch that looks like the creature is the zonal phenomenon, suggesting the anomaly. For a while Castaneda sees the creature only and is spellbound —the zonal anomaly is in charge. Then he discovers the branch and has understanding of the ‘reality’ of the situation. This ‘reality’ is, especially in this instance, so overpoweringly tempting that it overcomes him immediately and he is relieved no such creature was there. But Don Juan will not yield to this ontological reduction, for him the zone was there and now it has gone —and it was Castaneda that sent it away. Even though one side has an explanation and the other has none, yet both are real on their own terms. This is the zonal logic: non-explanation does not count to deny the phenomenon.

Don Juan often refers to part of the practice of sorcery as ‘hunting for power’. ‘Power’ is these ontologically ambiguous opportunities that should be seized upon to extract the maximum anomalous interpretation from them. Given our connecting line between zone and power we cannot help but feel the echo of a related hunt in Twin Peaks i.e. William Hastings ‘Search for the Zone’. This ill fated ‘hunt for power’ contained classic zonal elements of dereliction and anomaly —though in a much stronger sense. It also suggested the strong draw that the zone has upon people. This maybe highlights another dynamic of desire related to the zone.

The zone is attractive, as people want reality to be mysterious, yet as soon as mystery turns into real anomaly the mystery might become terrifying and needs the rational mode to ‘explain’ it. ‘Explain’ here though is not about the desire to comprehend, it is about repression. Curiously this repressive explanation comes with the hope of inverted magick. That is, though the anomaly may have been terrifying, the explaining in rational terms seeks to mend reality, to normalise it, to erase the anomaly: it is the desire for the solid rational worldto reassert itself. Under all this though, the zone remains, for the zone is not the anomaly the zone is the ambiguous space that is its condition of possibility.

Many thanks to Bec Lambert (@LadyLiminal1) for the zonal image.