Meta-Mask Theory (or Aggregational Logick)

[Alysyrose]

META-MASK THEORY

Something that had been worked with by some underground Khaos groups (the DKMU being one currently engaged in this). This was explained in some responses to a former post, though perhaps a more concise explanation might be found here.

This technique entails the idea of Archetypes, first and foremost, and as time goes on, it appears an ever more viable approach to those 'obsessions', or 'godforms' which human kind had felt the need to embody within an anthropomorphic form or symbol throughout the ages. This would then situate itself with the "Information" model, out of the 4 historical models of magick.

It goes on that, instead of an objective (permanently existing) out-world of spirits which had always been, what we are dealing with when we engage the use of spirits of any type is a set of, let's say, pockets of information which deal with specific interests, states of mind and commonalities within the human spiritual condition, all of which are held within the subconscious (or lower) to some degree.

These are so prominent and mirrored in the external world that they might be worked with to an alarming degree of manifestation. Even though we had somewhat outgrown the idea that they exist "unto themselves", they continue to be real enough within the playing grounds of consciousness, and especially if the appropriate amount of belief is there to allow for their higher levels of manifestation. Still, they are nodes of energetic information buried deep within the psyche, and all of them correspond to an easily recognized external connection. It is the magickal style of thinking which causes these connections to become ever more workable, malleable and ultimately beneficial if such is the technique you wish to employ.

We might then regard any collection of these related types as "masks" set upon an archetype, with that archetype being given any number of masks by any number of cultures throughout time. If one wishes to work with the spirit of the sea, or waters, for example, then a culture gives unto it a mask so that a semiotic bridge of language, image and symbol is had in order to approach it. One may regard any of these individual masks, though as they are all intrinsically connected to a specific culture, and with that culture, a specific system, one may encounter some difficulty with that particular mask if he does not "play nice" with those other cultural requisites in question.

On the other hand, to form a meta-mask is to create a modern console or outlet for which any of these might be approached - it is a combined form of the many and any number of related cultural masks might be connected to it. Take the DKMU's meta-mask of "Ole Zalty", which appears as any sailor or seafaring type of figure. This meta-mask is then observed as being the sum combination of all such historical gods and goddesses which have been allocated to the Sea, Ocean, the waters, the traveling thereof, and all that they represent. It is a more compacted form of the singular archetype. One may still choose to allocate it towards any number of specific masks, though it alone is a singular which deals with the many.

And so on through, given any set of commonalities which you might observe (gods or goddesses of War, for example, etc.) This merely entails a different style of thinking for the Chaote, though as experimentation has said, this technique works just as well, if not, dare I say, better, being more inclusive and psychological in nature, than if one were to create an internal conflict between the God of War within one culture, and the God of War in another.

It is better and certainly more applicable in the digital age especially, we think, to take the Perennial approach and deal with the underlying archetype directly, with any singular mask being an option, but with none of them being the "only true mask" for any given archetype.

"O HEAR THE MULTITUDINOUS NAMES."