Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Sigilomania

(From Andy Diggle's Hellblazer run.)

Okay. I want you to do two things before anything else. Then you're going to give me a moment to gloat. And then I'll ask a question. Simple and straightforward. (Multiple sigils, indeed.)

First: Read Gordon's last post.

Second: Read Jhonn's first post.

Third: Gloat. Gloat. Gloat. Megalomaniac laughter! Etc.

Now (if you're a lazy ass who can't be bothered to do these simple things! … I understand entirely), Gordon's last post is about a sigil firing itself off. And Jhonn writes: “I loved sigilizing. It even got to the point that things I would sigilize the night before would manifest exactly as intended the next day before I even got around to launching them.”

Ladies and gentlemen, what happens when you have fully internalized the process of sigilization? Do you know what you learn to do after that little basic step?

I'm sure you can take a guess. And I'd never, ever lie about these things. Welcome to the Weird.

EDIT: Due to VI, I found this bit of information very... crunchy.

6 comments:

Gordon said...

What happens if I sigilise for your new wordpress blog? :)

Because tomorrow would be ideal for me.

I swear I'll do it. I'm pretty drunk right now and I can only assume that helped last night.

I kid. Take your time. (Actually, hurry up. You have fans, you know.)

Lady Scylla said...

You understand I'm going to have to blog about sigils now?

For me it was always impressed upon me that sigils were an internal thing. That, by digging through the upper layers of our brain, we dispersed the charge into the watery collective unconscious.

If we fully internalize the procedure, not requiring long work digging the trenches, it deploys into the Abyss directly, as potent as the first idea.

So what do you do then? YOU BECOME THE SIGIL. You are the form and function of the idea, a stone on the calm waters. The BLOOP heard 'round the world.

Jack Faust said...

@Gordon: Hmmm. I may or may not respond to that one privately. I can predict success on your part, however that success would also bring about three probable responses: favorable, unfavorable, and some possible admixture of the two (which is most likely for a variety of reasons, one of which being a distinct lack of aesthetics and broken-ass permalinks).

@Scylla: You nailed it on the head! What is "the magician," or "the sorcerer," or "the witch"? One who does magick in a variety of ways. Once that process becomes organic, the rules and tendencies change. One of which happens to simply be visualizing an outcome and bringing it about (though this is the most imprecise method).

A single night of pleasure (and varying degrees of such based on the practitioner themselves) after a brief duration of effective work can be far more empowering than even traditional methods of empowerment. Specifically, one might direct others to Gordon's focus on the sigil, his judgment, and his subsequent actions (releasing the organic structure of the sigil already in his unconscious mind and thus allowing the sigil to bloom before he even imagined it ready).

His problematic morning itself represents the exchange of possibilities following the path of least resistance, which leads to the sigil's full empowerment. In short, that bad morning turned out somewhat good, but had to be endured before the desired response. The irony is that Gordon couldn't have predicted this, because he seems unaware of his ability to do it.

I predict our man will be either further refining his success ratios very soon, or begin working with the internal and emerging structures of his Alphabet of Desire. (At this point "good sigils" vs. "bad sigils".)

And now I'm done showing off like a pretentious ass.

Jhonn Barghest said...

Huh.

Yeah, I read Gordon's post earlier today, which was awesome. I'm, uh, glad you made further mention of this actually.

Because I didn't really give it much thought as to why they worked without the 'traditional' launch. Which is kind of fucking stupid. Too much "whoa, dude" and not enough "what the fuck?"

I need to stop sucking like that RIGHT NOW. Arg.

Hieronymous said...

Sounds sorta kinda like a problem I've begun, well, causing (not saying you guys are having problems here, saying I am). Sometimes when, e.g., memorizing a ritual (I move my lips when I read) or writing an incantation or even a "non-magical" poem--Presto!--I've spoken or written what Patrick Dunn (linguists rule!) might call a performative utterance. Unintentionally I've done a working ex opere operato. If I weren't such a n00b I'd be so screwed ... maybe not just me.

A witch doctor might prescribe a change in praxis.

How not to "magick (v.i.)"? I'm thinking a good statement of intent before anything resembling magic, including art, which is magic if it's any good, might suffice. An invented mudra meaning "With this action I intend no magic" could be thoroughly associated with the statement and would then do the trick quick and silent. A closing meaning "Fiat magia." Could you call this an anti-ritual ritual? Maybe obviating this entire problem is one of the reasons magical personas were invented.

Tangential but relevant at least to me is: can/when does magic done in (non-lucid) dreams manifest in the magician's--or someone else's--waking-world?...

Gordon said...

@Hieronymous "Linguists rule"??

TESTIFY!