Cumberbatch & Sherlock: On The Bright Side of Pop Culture

Having loathed pop culture because of its shallowness, stereotypes, infectious nature, appeal to simple minds and loads of other aspects and being more attracted to underground phenomena and thinking that all things popular are only about Hollywood 'values' and naked blondes, I deemed it all as noxious. Pop culture is for the dumb, I said.

Generalisation, however, often proves to be the worst crime. The smart side of society seems to have its say, after all. This is the only conclusion after observing the Sherlock series of BBC, a

modern adaptation of Sir Athur Conan Doyle's acclaimed works. I did not check the series because of an interest in detective stories, but because of all the talk around it. Somehow, wherever my virtual steps were taking me on the web, and not only, there was a bit of Sherlock, so it was always there in the background, slowly doing its work and convincing me to watch, finally. At the same time, I was harbouring curiosity on why is Benedict Cumberbatch a ladies' favourite, especially as he's nothing close to the classic beauties we know.

BBC's Sherlock crime drama series brings forth some some of the old-fashioned charm and virtues. We have a smartphone-era Sherlock who is an imperious man, unsocial, definitely strange and undoubtedly charming.Moreover, he is asexual, having had totally dismissed his sexual instinct. Yet you should think that, consequent to this role, Benedict Cumberbatch was titled Britain's sexiest man. Twice. 

Intelligence Is the New Sexy - For Some, at Least

Be it because of the mystery in it or some mind game, this Sherlock's power of seduction is boundless. He is pretty much the opposite of what media would promote nowadays - an icon that stands against superficiality, hedonism, cult of one's own ego, useless pastimes, irrelevant knowledge, and who tries his best to do catch the bad guys instead of turning bad himself. Wasn't that supposed to be boring or outdated these days? "But Sherlock is arrogant and full of himself", you might say. Yes, but that is clearly for 'the game', you can see how he's actually very relaxed about that and, most of all, good hearted. He enjoys playing the game that way. He is clever and has no interest whatsoever in covering that up.

There is more to it. Benedict's Sherlock has his own rules and makes a full commitment to these. He has a phenomenal detachment and rigidity when exterior factors try to change his way of living. For example, he rejects the femme fatale Irene Adler who was head over heels for him, genuinely interested in his intelligence and showing true feelings for him. He is a man choosing to live in a different way and there, surprisingly, is a cohort of admirers happy about being 'Sherlocked'.

Benedict Cumberbatch and How the British Do It Differently

Watching Benedict outside the character reveals a classy, modest, down to earth, real gentleman - a perfect specimen to illustrate this British invasion in the world of top acting. He and the producers have played this to a great extent - just see his polished look, his unusual haircut, the conservative air of Sherlock. It's all unexpected and out of fashion. 8 million views per episode and hordes of fans hardly waiting for the 3rd season prove the massive success of the series in which no one could've created such a distinctive and adorable character but Mr. Cumberbatch. He almost forced us to care about different things. The recipe worked extremely well, and whoever hasn't watched an episode yet is standing aside and just wondering how in the world can there be such mass insanity around it - like, what's the deal? Well, I know I watched and I was sherlocked. There's substance in it and a great dose of freshness. If you thought perfection would fit into one certain matrix and into that alone, this phenomenon should teach you that it's not.

Setting a Fandom on Fire: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug Teaser Trailer 2013

If there is something that has truly helped me regain my faith in human kindness, virtue and friendship, it's the Tolkien fandom. During the LOTR times, it was in no way organised, as there was no big social media, but now with Facebook, Tumblr, blogging platforms and Twitter, fans have their places where they can express their excessive love without fearing the outsiders' reaction.


So how does the fandom fare in June 2013, 6 months since the great re-ignition with The Hobbit and 6 months away from the second installment of the trilogy? Well, I am glad I'm writing this 24 hours after the 2nd trailer release and not right away because, in the meanwhile, one marvellous thing has happened.

Two daring girls filmed themselves while waiting for, watching and then commenting the hot trailer - typical lovely fangirl reactions, that many respectable fans also confess to have had. One thing we need to clarify here: real, respectable fans always watch a trailer right when it's out. It's the magic of the moment. Being present right from the start, before it gets shared by your Facebook friends, is essential. And there you go, this is how you get to have all that thrill, anxiety and insane reactions when the time comes. The girls posted their video and the unexpected, the incredible happened just shortly after.

In our dear "planet Middle Earth" aka New Zealand, the big crew is still filming for The Hobbit. Besides, it seems they're keeping an eye on the fandom! This is how we got a brilliant response from Peter Jackson's crew itself to the girls' crazy little video! Lee Pace (Thranduil), Evangeline Lilly (Tauriel) and Orlando Bloom (Legolas) themselves, in the flesh, in costume, have watched the video and filmed their live reaction to it! Thumbs up guys, I'm sure no other fandom has ever been rewarded with such a gesture!

Watch the already super-famous footage here.

My reaction to the Desolation of Smaug trailer:

There's a tense, darker feeling right from the start, enhanced by a mysterious narrating voice... The Lonely Mountain now closer and more majestic, colossal entrance statues... wait, who is the narrator? For a moment I thought it's Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug, freaked out a bit because it wouldn't sound at all like expected... then saw it was Thranduil. Oh! Fantastic job... This film really manages to create believable creatures that belong to other races... that just can't be topped. Thranduil the Elvenking looks spectacular, although I hate that, as a most loyal supporter of the Dwarves. But what is wrong with Legolas? In an attempt to make him look younger and more 'otherworldly', he simply looks 'too photoshopped'. Add the terrible eyeliner effect and you'll have a Legolas that just doesn't look like the one we knew. Hopefully this will change in the final version.
Barely any Dwarves, barely any Thorin... so scarce, yet so enrapturing! Some primitive effects and too much unrealistic tree-jumping and loops...Hopefully this will also change in the final version. Apart from these, I am overall satisfied and declare this a historical moment (which it is, with or without my acknowledgement of it)... Oh, Tauriel says one wise thing (maybe she won't be that bad) and later Balin delivers a killer line on Smaug to get the fandom gasping! Fading to black... now we must hear the dragon or have a glimpse of it... bring it on, Smaug, say something... A-ha! There is Smaug.. there he is... his face!! Unbelievable! While most people bet we would only hear the Voice, we got NO voice, but his face! Cheers to a really unexpected twist!
Bonus: unforgiving music - dark, crushing, thrilling.
Important remark: here we have one elven kingdom that isn't in the usual blueish or light colors - Thranduil's Halls in Mirkwood are so earthy in those dark honey shades!

The Trailer 24 h from its release -
Casualties so far:

• A video response from Tauriel, Legolas and Thranduil to the fan's reaction, straight from the set in NZ.

• Tumblr: within 1 hour, not only there were .gif files available, but also fanart containing these!

• YouTube:  >1,6 million views on main channel (I predicted it would easily go past 1 million). 
• 140,000 'Likes' on Facebook, >11,000 comments.

Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage)

Thranduil Oropherion (Lee Pace)

P.S.: Where is the singing? The Dwarven singing? I demand songs, as promised and confirmed by the holy words of Mr Armitage!
P.S. 2: Long live the fandom!
P.s. 3: The fandom is on fire, seriously. I can't believe how fast and active these people can be.

A little Tumblr .gif (from the trailer itself) to represent the exact situation we have here - our little trailer just coming out, with the big scary army of fans lurking and quickly setting its greedy eyes on it:

The Truth about Eurovision Propaganda: Hate and Threats

Let's start with something blatantly outrageous: countries which were thinking to censor Austria's performance were THREATENED to be denied any Eurovision rights for some years to come. In other words, they were OBLIGED to show the whole thing. So where is the right of choice? Why can't every country decide for themselves? There are different cultures. Each should be allowed to be different in its own way.

Ok, so we were all obliged to swallow the act of the bearded 'woman'. Sure, one may say we could always turn off the TV. Fair enough.

I looked at Conchita's song on YouTube. Nice melody line, decent vocal performance. The likes/dislikes bar was a sight to behold though. There were almost as many dislikes as likes! so, since so many people clearly didn't like the performance, how come it was voted as winner in the end? I looked at all the other songs, too. The dislike bar never crossed 10%.

"Let's see how homophobic Europe is". WOW! Are you even serious? This was a tweet I had the fabulous luck to see. What an illuminated mind! So if I don't like a particular song or musical performance, that makes me HOMOPHOBIC??? LBGT defenders are the most hateful, intolerant and most irrational people, always trying to force they views and options on the world! Fact.

Homophobic, homophobic, homophobic. Dare to say you don't like Conchita's song. Watch the instant torrent of feces coming your way from the super-enlightened, super-tolerant and loving LGBT supporters. You dare to say you don't agree with them? Be ready to have all the world's load of hate and insults spilled on you! Because that's how they live by "love and tolerance".

They want to brainwash you into believing the majority really likes transvestites and such. After all, they always win the Eurovision contest, don't they? Well, let's take a deeper look at it. About a decade ago, Israel was victorious through a transvestite. Now, the second transvestite is winning. Based on common sense statistic, this would mean that people adore this kind of singers and that they are always the best. In real life, such assumption is unrealistic. On another hand, since transvestites are winning Eurovision, that should be proof that Europe loves them. The majority voted for them. Then what are they fighting for? Where are the haters they dread so much? What's the issue since they are popular and winning? Seriously. Why cry how everyone hates you and rejects you, when you are actually winning international contests?


A bit of personal experience: I dared to say on social media that I thought Eurovision had to be about music and not about the gay agenda or any sort of propaganda. Do you think I found examples of love and tolerance? Nope, I got a whole collection of curses and swearwords :) Yep, you're doing a great job guys, morally superior indeed! :) Also, I saw someone getting insulted only because of their family name - it remotely resembled something connected to a nationalistic, right-wing party. Awesome, so who's judging there based on truly irrelevant details? Oh, so quick to judge, my dear LGBT supporters!

We Want Kings! On the Fascination for Monarchs (Richard III, Aragorn, Thorin)

by N. C. Wyeth

Royalty has always been impressive, and not all due to the fairy-tales hailing from medieval times. It tends to go beyond the opulence of royal families and the attractive high social status. Even the power factor itself doesn't fully justify the fascination, as we can see there is more to it. Presidents, statesmen and politicians today certainly do not have the same aura as a king, nor could ever inspire the same sympathy. 

People in need of true leaders

Even those who would never admit it still need them. Not to be controlled by them, but to be inspired. A loyal, caring but fierce, righteous and firm leader easily becomes a role model. For this reason, people have usually loved kings - those of older times mostly - and still do. Have a look at the quest for Richard III's grave. Many had even donated money to support the archeological dig. The people were there, for a king dead long ago, a king who was vilified. As the findings were made public in February 2013, enthusiasts from all over the world knew a renewed interest in ancient British royalty. It was fascinating. Moreover, it was not about him being a presumed murderer (there is nothing unusual in that, considering his era and status), not about the discovery itself even, because it could simply be reduced to a skeleton found underneath a parking place. It was about having found someone important from those times, someone who ruled and fought.

Warrior kings

King Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen)

Unfortunately, the days of true monarchs are gone. There is no way to compare an 'office ruler' to a sovereign who would take his horse and sword, charge the army and go into battle. Those sovereigns of the past were ready to die - and for a noble cause. To this aspect let us add the values they used to embody and profess. Kings, unlike state leaders nowadays, based their rule on certain ethics. Unless we are talking about tyrants, they were quite charming, captivating, awe-inspiring, courageous.

What do we have left today?

The history passionates may not feel completely deserted, because they can easily take refuge into history books and contemplate what once was. Nevertheless, this could hardly be a universal solution to our hunger for kingly values. Luckily, for the rest of us there are the books - the fiction ones especially. Also, there are the movies. It seems that, wherever we look, the best stories are those involving royalty and perhaps some war, too. 

Kings in movies and the people's reaction nowadays

Prince/crownless king Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage)

Without a doubt, they absolutely love them, plain to see. Fantasy writer J.R.R. Tolkien and now director Peter Jackson have been milking this frantically. They created fascinating monarch figures, addictive even. (The Game of Thrones is not far from that, either).

Pop culture has been invaded by long-haired, more or less bearded, armed kings and princes - characters the world once thought to be just relics, incompatible with our times. For the disbelievers, there is always available evidence online of the legacy of Aragorn Elessar, to give the most prominent example. More recently, another warrior king claimed the spotlight. As of December 2012, when the first film of The Hobbit trilogy got on screen, Thorin Oakenshield quickly gathered an army of thousands of followers. The character, although invested with traits that weren't supposed to attract sympathy, surpassed all expectations and became a detached favorite of the crowds. Handsome, incredibly daring and courageous, fighting for honor, loyal, caring for his kin, proud, determined, rugged, aware, this noble hero enraptured viewers in a way rarely seen before.

Kings with all their might, even with their burdens, turmoil and failures, embody everything that many of us find fascinating. Some may have forgotten, some may be denying it, but there is a longing for all of their kingly traits, for their rare qualities. Those like me are fully confessing it: we feel that the world has never been in a greater need of righteous kings than it is now. 

10 Things You Do on Facebook That Show You Are an Idiot

Building yourself an undeserved brand.
Unless you are a professional of some kind, there is no reason to get yourself a fancy title, a logo, a watermark with your name and so on. Also, do not present yourself writing in third person. Do not mention it is your "official Facebook profile" unless you really are a celebrity.Let the fame come first, and then tune your profile to match it if so you wish. Don't brand yourself just for the sake of it.

Arguing over tastes and opinions.
"Welcome to the Internet, where opinions are facts", a good observer said once.Sarcasm, I hope you detected it. Sadly, most users are acting as if all opinions - their especially - are undeniable facts. Getting all inflamed because someone praises a book you didn't like, is a fan of an actor you hate or has different beliefs than you is a sign of severe immaturity. Unless they try to push their choices on you, there is no reason to get alarmed, really. You wouldn't want to be jumped at for choices that aren't harmful.

Starting an argument with someone, then unfriending/blocking them yourself.
Nothing spells 'psycho' better than behaving like this. If you provoke someone, overly criticise, insult, condemn or troll in an open manner for what they have posted, and then you are the one to act hurt and upset, you shouldn't be on Facebook at all. It's up to the other person whether you stay in the list or not.

Over-bragging.
Alright, Facebook is indeed a place where everyone want to be seen as better than they really are, where they show to their ex their so-much-better actual partner, where they post holiday plans and pictures, show how many parties they attend and so on. Therefore, bragging is normal here, but when you overdo it you sent a terrible message out there. No one will be impressed that you ate 3 types of expensive French cheese for dinner, that you just went shopping where none in your friends list can afford, or that you look astonishing in bikini. When too much is too much, you simply pass as desperate to prove your worth. The breaking news is that such despair will never work in your favor, to state the obvious.

Being hostile to nerds.
It's OK to have a passion and it's OK to not take Facebook so seriously. Let those nerds be, let them post and share about The Lord of the Rings, Sherlock or Star Trek - at least they have a passion and they're having fun. If it's too much for you, filter out their updates and remember that we are all here to post whatever we like. Maybe your friends are also sick of your objectifying pics of naked women. There is really no reason to turn hostile or to ridicule those people. After all, you may be that annoying user who plays FarmVille or other extremely intelligent form of entertaining, pestering others with game requests.

Being the rebel.
Maybe some find it cool in school, but when you keep on being the rebel just for the sake of it and you overdo it, there is nothing good to believe about you. It spells no intelligence whatsoever to post only 'scandalous' words or photos, to talk dirty, to mention all the time how 'naughty' you are, to brag about how you don't conform to social or moral norms. It is boring and ridiculous.

Getting inflamed at grammar Nazis.
Grammar Nazis spotted a mistake and they want people to respect their language and to write in an acceptable manner. Point is, you wrote something wrong. Deal with it. It makes no sense to start a flame war because someone corrected you.

Too many post.
Some users out there make at least 20 posts a day, which is beyond more than we can take. Even though your posts are cute, interesting or you really want to share them so badly because they are pure treasures, temper yourself and understand that everyone eventually gets tired of having their newsfeed invaded by a single user. This forces us to unsubscribe and thus your really important updates may be seen by no eyes in the end.

Being there all the time.
Whenever I go to my account, I see the exact same people posting, liking or commenting right at the time. No matter the time of the day.When I check friend's updates, the same people have already liked or commented. Everything. They leave their prints on everything there is. Stop it and get a life. If you think that being there all the time is going to improve your life, stop now. You're not social, you're creepy.

And ultimately... liking your own posts.
It is beyond obvious to anyone that the update/news/photo/video/status you posted is relevant, important, funny or likeable to you. Therefore, what is the point of giving it a 'like' yourself?...

Peter Jackson's Thorin: Building a New Archetype?

- Part of the analytical journey "Film Thorin vs. Book Thorin" -

"At the University, we used to debate whether a literary work can be greater in the end than its author has intended. An author may unconsciously invest his work with underlying meanings and traits. While he is unaware, others may catch on those."

Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield in The Hobbit

The human mind works with archetypes, and this is what we usually deal with in Literature and Film. Therefore I would appreciate it if certain types of readers don't get inflamed and don't consider this as religious propaganda, indoctrination and so on, because it is a simple talk of archetypes, their meanings and how we have these impregnating our art.

Undeniably, Tolkien was a devout Christian of Catholic denomination.
No matter what your beliefs are, it is impossible to write something that is not in tune with them, especially when it's such a vast work of art. Considering this, one is often tempted to find the places where the author's beliefs are getting through in a more obvious way - be it planned or not. In the light of such fact, we can venture to explore Tolkien's books and analyze their nature. With Thorin Oakenshield, things have taken an interesting turn, especially with the cinematic installment.

A New Archetype: Thorin as a "Warrior Christ"

The term of "warrior Christ" came to me as I was counting all the striking similarities, as well as the obvious contrasts. Tolkien couldn't have had the intention of making such a portrayal, because the ending and the moral of the story stand in opposition to this idea. But to me, the King Under the Mountain is noble, loving, kind, loyal and determined, he has a certain purity of the soul, in spite of his anger, hurt and bitter destiny. I had to find a term to describe his uniqueness. Below is a list of the coincidences, followed by insights of how the character would create a new and captivating archetype.

    The Coincidences:

• ascetic, not married
• has an exceptional following (not only in the company he gathers for the quest, but also outside the work of art itself, in the fandom)
• been a simple worker for many years of his life (blacksmith)
• capable of immense love - not only for his kin, but even for the hobbit he much despises.
• noble origin
• has 12 immediate followers
• these followers are not of the brightest (also the disciples were seen as imperfect many times, but it was the "willing heart" that got them there)
• it's himself to say - not Balin - "for when I called, they answered" (Balin is the disheartened one, but Thorin has the hope, he sees the good in them).
• set to reclaim his father's lost kingdom
• dies because of his mission, but is sure of the afterlife and looks forward to going to the halls of his ancestors.

As a close observer of The Hobbit phenomenon, what I was amazed by was the incredible following that Thorin would get with the first film. Although his position was meant to have common points with that of an antagonist (which is anyway a gross exaggeration to me), he got way ahead of Bilbo - he practically stole the show. He would inspire genuine appreciation and love, and lead fans to the point of fanaticism. If Thorin were a real leader existing on our planet, there would have been great unrest within the society. I can safely assume that his followers would be quickly seen as a fierce, exhilarated and uncompromising sect that would have in sight nothing else but their leader and his goal. My claims may appear as exaggerations, but the time spent at the core of the fandom and the endless conversations I had with various fans have shown me so. Thorin's charisma as a leader and a hero are undeniable. Indeed it would be very interesting, to say the least, to have a real, living Thorin.


Tolkien hasn't conceived Thorin as a christic figure, by no means. But then why....

Well, he obviously hasn't, but then shall we just ditch all those coincidences? I believe the one we should look at from now on is Peter Jackson. He was the one to invest so many of such elements, that is impossible not to think of it. A warrior Christ I'd call him, why not? Humans work with archetypes, and this is what we usually deal with in Literature and Film. Therefore I would appreciate it if certain types of readers don't get inflamed and consider this as religious propaganda, indoctrination and so on, because it is a simple talk of archetypes, their meanings and how we have these impregnating our art.

Allegory? I wouldn't go that way. There is something however, and this exquisite portrayal made me call Thorin Oakenshield the warrior version of Jesus. Perhaps he isn't supposed to convey more than Tolkien initially intended. Therefore he is just that: a unique kind of character, which everyone is free to interpret as desired. This is my interpretation, one still burdened by many question marks.

A book can be more than what its author has intended...

As seen in the film, Jackson & Co. have invested in Thorin much more. Thorin has lines that don't appear in the book (in the Bag End scenes especially), but which deepen his character and are very relevant. Most of the coincidences posted above are rather emphasized in the film. Could Peter Jackson have wanted to take this character to a different level? Could he have seen certain potential in him that Tolkien hadn't seen? We have a greater King of the Dwarves thanks to him. At the University, we used to debate whether a literary work can be greater in the end than its author has intended. An author may unconsciously invest his work with underlying meanings and traits. While he is unaware, others may catch on those. It is what I was trained to recognize when dealing with a work of art. I am sure this can be applied to many cases.

Possible Reasons

I am purely speculating here, but Sir Peter Jackson could have invested the King with these traits for their appeal to the masses. The great majority of the viewers would pick on these clues (subconsciously or not) because they are familiar to them. It also makes the story more touching. There will be drama, beware.

Looking King Richard III in the Face

On February 5th, The Richard III Society officially unveiled the facial reconstruction of the English king, after having assured the skeleton found in Leicester was his.

The monarch died aged 32 in the Battle of Bosworth, and no contemporary portrait had survived. The existing postmortem ones invested him with less than flattering features, now to be proven wrong.

Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

It has certainly been a great adventure, this chase for King Richard III. As the skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester was finally confirmed to be the king's, through DNA tests and matching with the descendants. To the identification process also contributed the battle wounds evidence.

The facial reconstruction was in no way aided by any of the portraits, except for when determining the colors and the fashion. The result revealed was stunning: not only that we can state that Richard III was a handsome monarch but, although features like his nose and prominent chin were existing in portrayals as well, the reality put his enemies to shame. History is written by the victors, as we know. Once again, it is being confirmed to us. In Richard III's case, those who came to rule after his reign did their best to invest him with flaws and create a mean appearance. Centuries after, their scheming turned against them, finally. Richard looks noble, kind, serene and handsome. It may seem like an unscientific approach to make statements based on physical features, but the leader of the project, Philippa Langley, didn't censor that herself. It is a natural reaction to do so, perhaps stemming from a long experience of seeing physical features as matching the ones of the psyche.

By all means, the most touching part about his appears to be this: that thousands, or rather millions of people get to look Richard III in the eye after so many centuries, that we can all see his face right now, as it was back then. And what do we see? A human, not a monster. It is interesting how, among the first reporters and scientists, many got to discuss his features, in an attempt to draw the man's character from his physical appearance. It seems that we, humans, cannot resist this. It is like an irresistible temptation to start observing one's facial features and make a whole profile based on that. 

Killed on August 22nd, 1485, Richard III could never be fully condemned for any atrocity, not even with the modern investigation techniques. Moreover, he did not have a wretched arm or a hunch back, since he only developed scoliosis, which only causes the spine to form a sideways curvature and uneven shoulders. He made donations to the poor, and he wanted the throne like any other heir would.

To the others, the Richard III Society had been just a bunch of fanatics lost in silly medieval dreams and defending these - with fanaticism, of course.These detractors might have never heard of Schliemann and his Troy...

Surpassing the Polarities (Why REBT Kills)

"Esoteric psychology in the first place is directed toward changing a person’s inner world, changing our way of thinking, of seeing ourselves and the surrounding world.

Esoteric psychology does not deal with the effects, but with the causes of a given problem, and in this way it helps us getting rid of it forever.

The term “esoteric” means inner knowledge or, in other words, knowledge of what is hidden, unseen by our eyes; knowledge concerning the conditions of our energetic body, knowledge of our soul..... In a nutshell, it refers to any cryptic knowledge withheld from the masses.

Esoteric psychology is based first of all on the knowledge of fundamental Cosmic Laws and it helps us understanding our purpose in life, formulate our life goals correctly and manifest them in practice." (http://universynergyarts.co.uk/esoteric-psychology.html)


The hermetic book The Kybalion states the Law of Polarity among the essential Laws governing the Universe.

REBT is a therapy often encountered nowadays, that appears as dehumanizing, because of reasons explained in another post. It mostly tells people that if something causes them unhappiness, they'd better change the belief that's related to it. (First, I'm not sure if it really deserved the name of therapy or cure, because a lot of people can not relate to it and never get to follow such principles, nor truly experience any kind of healing). It is a strange mix of not blaming others, feeling guilty and at the same time not blaming yourself and not following any logic whatsoever for oneself. This, let's call it, theory, aims to take away the concepts of bad, wrong, sad, unfair, frustrating. While the reasoning may not seem too bad, what it does in the end is to destroy polarities. The funny thing is, no one will cease to feel and live the polarities - only avoid to talk about those. It aims to place humans beyond our oh-so-used dual system (good-bad, right-wrong, nice-unpleasant, hot-cold, light-dark, much-little etc.).

However...

To be above polarities, one must integrate them both. E.g. one has to know the concepts of hot and cold and the degrees in between, the comparison process and so on. Only then he may be able to rise above. Naming and distinguishing between hot and cold asks for a judgment(as mere observation, not of moral kind, obviously).

REBT suppresses one polarity. E.g. One may feel that a friendship brings good things to life. But when a friendship goes sour or fails somehow, the "feeling bad" should be definitely canceled, because it's only in our mind - it's only caused by a belief that we should get rid of, to avoid the suffering and discomfort. Therefore, the bad part of the good-bad polarity is suppressed.

Once a half is canceled, the other one can't exist!
So how can the patient define what is 'good' and what something good is supposed to be, without any reference point inside? If we can no longer feel or define what cold is, how can we use the hot/warm concept? It becomes useless. The other half is emptied of its meaning. With an empty belief/image that something can be hot, one can no longer perceive anything that would be so. They say it just IS. Well, survival would have never been possible - nor communication - without comparisons and degrees.

Psychologists, those of recent times especially... "They quite frankly assert, 'this is the way it is'. And since all people are equally ignorant, nobody dares to object. Very little of what they call rational is rational. The scientific reason of our times is still part of emotionality.
It would be a good thing if the academic spirit were saturated with the understanding that you should not make statements on things of which you know nothing. Even in the learned, more than 90 per cent of what they believe they know (ascertained facts excepted) is sheer fictionalism." (http://www.laurency.com/L2e/KL2_10.pdf)

Back to our main idea, while still in this body and on this planet, you are a prisoner of polarities. If it is as you wish - that everything is good, how could you actually be able to reject what you don't want? Yet, instinctively, you still stumble upon loads of things, ideas, situations which you reject, resent, feel bad about. You FEEL it. This is exactly why REBT and modern perverted spirituality don't work. They only try to push horse glasses on you. The outer world stays the same, and you realize it once it throws a wet rug in your face. It cannot be avoided endlessly.

Tasting the forbidden apple tree means gaining knowledge and awareness of the polarities - Good and Evil to start with.  Mankind is entrapped now into this type of world, by its own choice. Polarities and what they hold in between their extremes represent an essential of the human thinking. Each choice that is made, no matter how simple, is the result of a judgment like, "It's good to do this instead of that or that, or it's simply better." When you choose a tea flavor/ type from a menu, you base it on this reasoning: "This one tastes better than all the rest. This one is useful to me right now. This one is new and tempting, it is better to try something new now." Any of these supports the one and simple reality: you can't escape the way we all think and act.

Spiritual Deception

There are two basic forms of prelest or spiritual deception. The first and more spectacular form occurs when a person strives for a high spiritual state or spiritual visions without having been purified of passions and relying on his own judgment. To such a one the devil grants great "visions."

Seraphim Rose

*prelest -

To enter spiritual work without adequate preparation is the sure step to failure. Most people, as soon as they get some spiritual ideas, they become so confident and proud of their own discoveries, that they take these to be something much more than just the tip of the iceberg (which usually is). As soon as they get familiar to certain deep-sounding concepts, they act as if they'd spent good years in India or Tibet and even boast about having found "the way". 

Even for the disbelievers, there is a line that should hold some meaning: "The devil will come as an angel of light". It is easy to mistake a hypnotic state with astral experiences,  a hormonal change with a change of consciousness, an unexpected light with the appearance of God or a guide, a clear voice within with the voice of the higher self and so on. In fact, ANYTHING can be mistaken for ANYTHING in this kind of work.

Since a lot of people around indulge only in a material life and laugh at any hint to spirituality, it is easy for the 'awakened' one to see himself as special. In such conditions, he will not ask too much of himself. A little meditation before sleep, a few mantras or prayers, a bit of reading on some websites... and there he is - ascension is easy! (Strange fact that none of these amazing spiritual individuals haven't yet left this dimension of existence. Oh, wait. They're waiting for that 2012 special energy wave to come over.) Just like that type of people who go to church on Sunday just because, then leave and go on with the same vices, considering that going to church is already quite enough for their so-called spiritual goal. 

While some masters lure their students by telling them to have complete trust in whatever comes their way when taking the path, it is actually advised not to. I rather say DOUBT as much as you can, doubt all confusing ideas that come your way. Being sure of something when it's too soon has never been beneficial spiritually. It means rush, ego, vain pride. The best students are those who start with the premise that one doesn't know enough. In fact, one knows so little...Besides, remember:
You can't even create the things nature creates. Man only learns to manipulate. Man doesn't give life, he merely puts 2 existent cells in contact. Only and only that.

"We are all in deception. The knowledge of this is the greatest preventative against deception. It is the greatest deception to acknowledge oneself to be free of deception."

Bishop Ignatius

"It is not a little labor to attain the truth precisely and to make oneself pure of everything that opposes grace; because it is usual for the devil to show his deception, especially to beginners, in the form of truth, giving a spiritual appearance to what is evil."

St. Gregory the Sinaite

The various forms of occultism have a rather contrary advice. The initiate is told to take for granted everything that happens. How can one trust randomness, the pure arbitrary in an ocean of subjectivity and uncertainty, which is guaranteed by our very imperfect nature, by our very ever changing feelings and thoughts, by these things that simply lead to illusion? How can one be taught to trust exactly that? This is where most methods go wrong, without anyone noticing.

There comes the split inside. Psychologically, the individual is still what he thinks he is (still belonging to the spirituality he started with), but spiritually, he has begun a distinct experience, as long as his mind cannot keep track of the nature of each idea involved. The subject will still claim he belongs to the X group or tradition, but in fact, due to his subjectivity and unseen deceit, has become like a heretic to it.

"Self-confidence and boldness are usually noticeable in people who are in self-deception, supposing that they are holy or are spiritually progressing." "An extraordinary pomposity appears in those afflicted with this deception: they are as it were intoxicated with themselves, by their state of self-deception, seeing in it a state of grace. They are steeped in, overflowing with high-mindedness and pride, while appearing humble to many who judge by appearances without being able to judge by fruits."

Bishop Ignatius

The Feminine Nature

You have argued with them, build resentment, ran to them and ran from them, get puzzled by them, turned silent to them, accused, denied, let go of them. All has been there. But have you ever taken the time to really think about what truly makes the woman nature? What makes them be so different, what secret language of the heart of logic they keep inside? Why do you sometimes feel you can't reconcile with them?

Think about the trees. An often encountered spiritual approach distinguishes trees invested with masculine energy and trees built on the feminine one. The first ones, like the oak tree, look fabulously strong outside, with masculine composure, rooted well in the soil. However, a strong wind can take their might away by mercilessly breaking off the branches or the trunk itself. Such trees are rooted off when there's too much to bear. On the other side, 'feminine' species like the pines, birches and willows, look slender and fragile - ridiculously fragile to withstand any caprice of nature. When the winds gets rough, their torment is great, looking as helpless as a leaf. Yet, after the rough weather has passed, they are standing and perfectly surviving. They bend but don't break.

This is the miracle of feminity. A woman can go through the worst of pain, anger or humiliation, yet she will find again the force to carry on and to do something good. Often, she will be the one to comfort you after a fight. She will usually do more for getting back together, although you may see her bending under the winds and almost falling to pieces.

Women are made to nurture and comfort, that's why they still cater to you even when they have blamed you of harm (because they know you lack something inside). Women seek to understand and adjust, that's why they ask you Why.  Women want you to become your best, that's why they 'criticize' and reproach you more as they get closer.

Here is one of the most beautiful and true things ever said about women:

They should be treated with respect, love, and cared for. Women are indeed made to be the most sensitive ones, and without this sensitivity, men will never change to be the best they can be. Do not insult a woman's sensitivity, because this is the only weapon they got to make the whole relationship work. They won’t be able to face their partner without this, or tell them the truth.

(from the blog of relationship coach Cucan Premo)

When a woman becomes silent, turns her back on you or bursts into critique, it may be the best thing that can happen to you. You don't have to admit her being right, nor to lower your head or to change on the spot. Listen to what she is actually saying. While you are ready to leave at her first flagrant mistake, she will be there through countless mistakes of yours, because she knows there is much good to hang on to.

As the song goes, “I’d rather have bad time with you than good times with someone else.” 

When this is the case, you are getting the most wonderful and genuine love declaration possible.

This is not about the women who appear as loving today and gone tomorrow, not about those who hide their sorrows and discontent just to make things look perfect on the surface, and not about those who give into your every desire to be the chosen ones.