A Taste of Bacon Sir? - The Secret of Shakespeare

[David Guyatt]

Mundanity apart, it might be relevant to the discussion to simply note that the Globe is often a way to describe this planet upon which we live (globe, earth, world etc). And as Shakespeare wrote in the monologue in As You Like It, "All the world's a stage - and all the men and women mere players," suggesting the Globe Theatre was simply a microcosm of the greater macrocosmic theatre - thereby expanding the meaning to a different level - dramatisation as a collective psychodrama.

Is all analysis, then, to be based on mystical speculation and not hard scholarship? Are we to see all human actions and creations as simply a manifestation of Jung's supposed collective unconscious, his transparent attempt to talk about "God" without appearing to use religious methods to do psychology? Seriously?

Why would I want to leave this alone, Steve? I started the thread, after all? It's dear to my heart. This is a discussion forum not a soap-box.

I did look at your book that I linked earlier and found it interesting but not outstanding or remarkable. You seek a rational material explanation for your world and for the history that interests you. Fair enough. But, so far as I can see, all the subjects that interest you, quite strangely also directly intersect with esoteric subjects? An accident perhaps, or intention, or something else, I wonder? Perhaps the Fool is having fun with you? If you had chosen exoteric subjects this would not happen. Anyway, in your historical quest you so seem to wish to remove the one element that actually makes history. Man himself and his psychological drives and flaws.

I have no objection to that if that's what turns your head. But if you post on this forum, you can anticipate other views and perceptions to balance your limitations. And if I may say so, it is evident that you are subject to preaching your own religion of rationalism and material science. It is no better or worse than any other form of myopia, or intolerance, that many of us are so wearingly familiar with.

I think you're getting over-fixated on and confused about the word "occult" - which simply means concealed or hidden. Hidden from you in this case. But also hidden from a great many other people too. And to a greater extent the hiding is self imposed. It's not wishing to look and, therefore, not wishing to see. As a kid I thought that when I hid in the game of hide and seek, and covered my eyes I couldn't be seen. I couldn't see therefore, I couldn't be seen. A similar psychology exists in adults, a sort of... won't see - can't see. Ergo it's not real and it doesn't exist.

Although you say you have read Jung, your unfamiliarity of the subject is apparent throughout all you have contributed in this thread. And I seriously doubt you have a genuine grasp of Freud either (a college course on psychology is my guess?) for the reasons cited below (both were close friends and associates and both analysed each other btw - but differed over one major point that Magda hit upon). I would be unfair of me to stipulate each and every error of misunderstanding you made between Jung and Freud or your general ignorance on the subject itself. Because you can't rationally demonstrate the Collective Unconscious satisfactorily to yourself, doesn't mean it isn't demonstrably real. But it is hidden. Especially from you at the moment, I would say. Perhaps it's all that hampering honest scholarship and science that's to blame?

While I think you could do worse than spending time to get a better understanding of depth psychology, I'm sure you would reject the idea as being unimportant. You are content to be locked into a model of obtuse material reasoning. For you, man's psyche - his driving force - has little - or, in fact, nothing - to do with these subjects. Whereas the fact is that have everything to do with them.

That's the recurring key that is missing from your everlasting puzzles and, forgive me for saying this, but you seem determined to ensure this remains the case. But that's your choice, of course. An open mind is a wonderful thing that we most often witness in children, sad to say.

Mythology has accompanied man since the very beginning and continues to permeate us as a species. Also fairy tales, recounted by mother's to their children all over the world (although crap kiddies TV is taking over in the west). We can add to this mix subjects like Tarot, Alchemy, Astrology, the mystery of Shakespeare etc etc. There really are a great many subjects - always renewed and with new permutations always appearing. Permeating all these is a symbolic language which is the key to the heart of them all. Freud also recognised this and symbolism was a very significant part of his psychological method. Adler likewise (in other words, the three grandfathers of modern day psychology). And it may come as a surprise to you, I think, but dream analysis sits at the core of all psychological analysis of whatever school. It is the objective way to access the unconscious psyche.

Symbolism and humanity are inseperable handmaidens.

Not to be inclusive of both elements, the symbolic and that material is to be half a man.

While I understand that none of the foregoing will make the slightest impact upon you, it is fair notice that I will continue to engage - not to attempt to change your mind, that is your responsibility - but to ensure a degree of balance is presented.