Graham Hancock - Supernatural

One of my favourite authors is Graham Hancock. His hypotheses centred around alternative histories of civilisation are fascinating, his research is in depth and personal and his arguments are written in as eloquent a manner as an author writes a best-selling novel. Furthermore, he has the wonderful support of his wife during research, who as a professional photographer publishes pictures alongside the text, which outline beautifully what is being discussed.

His latest offering ‘Supernatural’ didn’t disappoint me in the slightest. The book is centred around ancient cave art and premises that our ancestors painted what they had seen and felt during altered states of consciousness brought about by natural drugs or extreme physical exertions.

Graham Hancock then brings the exact reality of altered states of consciousness into question: Is an hallucination an invention of the brain? Or does the brain act as a receiver, enabling it to change the frequencies of reality it can perceive in altered states of consciousness? And if there is another reality, what is it? Another dimension of this world? A spiritual otherworld? Why are the stories of Shamanic trips to the spirit world, tales of trips to fairy land and reports of alien abductions all remarkably similar, regardless of time and culture? Surely we can’t all hallucinate the same thing when that same thing confers no evolutionary advantage to us? The more I became fascinated in the book the more I started to wonder: Are my regular wine-sipping dinners with my girlfriends actually a spiritual awakening? When I hallucinate dancing sushi in a restaurant and hallucinate my bed in the corner of a bar and hallucinate a giant elephant on my balcony, maybe I am in fact entering an altered state of consciousness and a spiritual otherworld full of spirit guides and lessons about life. Surely this is too convenient?

Of course I am only joking. Alcohol is not an hallucinogen. And, the aim of Supernatural is not to make an excuse for the misuse of hallucinogenic drugs. It merely looks at the possibility that if hallucinogenic drugs were to be used correctly, as they have been by Shamans for thousands of years, then maybe they have a purpose that in our sterile landscape we are willing and almost obliged to ignore.

Since fairies and aliens have developed as separate phenomenon in our culture, with fairies firmly situated in a childish, fairytale land at the bottom of the garden and aliens situated firmly in the scientific world as psychological fantasy or psychological ‘issues’, we are dealing with intangible factors and using them as potential evidence for the other intangible issue of brain capabilities. It takes an enormous amount of ‘thinking outside of the box,’ forgetting personal prejudices and forgetting completely what other members of society think in order to dedicate to this kind of research and Graham Hancock makes it look so possible and so easy. If all academic study was tackled with such an open mind and a mind that has undone all of the ‘facts’ entrenched within it to start afresh, we would probably be a lot further on in many medical and technological developments. I fully recommend ‘Supernatural’ and think it should be compulsory reading in schools to encourage a new generation of ‘thinkers!’

Contrary to popular assumption, perpetual debt is actually quite liberating. It’s proof that we have access to loans, credit cards and overdrafts when we really need something. In some parts of the world people are not so fortunate as to have such resources at easy access for the improvement of their lifestyle, education or health.

Of course most people with these resources access these resources, not as a matter of need, but as a matter of want. This is how the banks make money and how the average person in the UK grows an ability to complain constantly about debt: “Why did I buy that pointless object? What’s wrong with me? WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!”

But I’ve learnt that there is a much more symbolic way of thinking:

• To have access to a credit card is liberating because you know if you need it you can use it.
• To be in debt is proof that the debt system works. No longer, is the credit card  just lying there, now you have proof that it actually gives you money. This is extremely satisfying for the subconscious. The subconscious now feels secure.
• If you maintain your perpetual debt, you will have a credit rating that enables future mortgages etc… to be possible. Without debt, you have no credit rating, without a credit rating you can’t get a credit card/mortgage etc…

I’m not an eternal optimist or deluded, just trying the ‘glass half full’ tactic.

The power of communication

From the legend of King Arthur to the more substantiated claims to the existence of the Queen of Sheba, our past has produced an overwhelming amount of historical references, stories and myths in a variety of formats, from written accounts to oral traditions. The challenge of modern-day historians is to separate fact from fiction. Unlike a detective who can piece together a case against a background of reference points, a historian must work in a sea of intangibility. An oral tradition could have changed many times from the original. The original could have been flawed due to a biased opinion. The psychology of the author could have had a great influence on the work, but who is to know anything concrete about the author?

This leads us to deliberate mainstream ideas about our history and contrast against more unorthodox hypotheses to form our own interpretations. These problems of communication are just as ubiquitous now as they have been in the past. In the modern world we are faced with an ever increasing suite of communication methods and devices, we have the technology to explain ourselves clearly, to understand one another and to send an articulate message to future generations. However, the more powerful communication becomes, the more powerful miscommunication becomes.

Our sense of reality is changing everyday. In the Middle Ages information was suppressed as a form of control. These days, in spite of our sophisticated culture, control is still a watchword and is more likely to be achieved through making available large amounts of contrasting information as opposed to suppressing it. Spin and propaganda are words we are all familiar with. So the question is; will future generations know anything more accurate about our existence than we know about the Queen of Sheba?  

Bad publicity equals perfect marketing

It’s a well-known fact that if we don’t like the service in a restaurant we tell more people than if we really like the service in a restaurant. This facet of human nature is exploited through the concept ‘bad publicity is better than no publicity.’ Celebrities use bad publicity as a way of getting into the minds of people and increasing their fame. They also use it as a way of staying in the minds of people and achieving an increased level of longevity in their career as a famous person, since we also remember bad things for longer than nice things. We can all remember the ‘Beckham wears a thong’ story but I personally don’t know the position Beckham plays. This method of publicity has the secondary affect of bringing a celebrity into the mainstream. If publicity was only centred on Beckham’s fantastic football moves the non-football fans would have less of an idea who he was. His type of publicity puts him into the minds of everyone.

Along these lines are the shock tactics used in advertising. When the advert of a nude Sophie Dahl was removed from the market through controversy, the sales of that particular perfume didn’t exactly go into reverse. It’s difficult to imagine that a sophisticated marketing team who spent millions on the advertising campaign could make such a mistake as to cause a controversy and waste money. But of course they didn’t waste money; it was all, more than likely part of the plan.

If this method of bad publicity could be honed to perfection and used more universally than just for A-List celebrities or big name brands, we would have the making of a finely tuned marketing concept. 

Is hippy fashion purposefully intended to look unattractive?

I don’t pretend to be a fashion expert, but how can female, hippy fashion be considered attractive? When I refer to hippy fashion I don’t mean the “bohemian look” or the latest vintage style to come off the catwalk. I mean the typical rucksack clad, dreadlocked, loud print wearing, non-shaven female hippy trekking around a developing country. Furthermore, far from living a non-conformist lifestyle whilst travelling in poorer countries they are in fact conforming to one another and taking a pain-staking amount of effort to achieve this. Braids take hours to have done, not shaving in a hot country makes you perspire more and therefore takes a lot of effort to maintain and wrapping yourself in a kanga is an art form that local people do skilfully, but for the hippies it’s just a lot of effort, especially when you are walking a lot and the cloth is likely to fall off if wrapped incorrectly.