The Real, the Unreal, and the Irreal in The Dream Society

I may have hit a wall of incomprehension — or perhaps even incredulity — in my previous posts and commentaries on the meaning of “The Dream Society”, and how the logic of this Dream Society is now playing out in all the strange and surreal events of the present, inclusive of the Trump phenomenon. So, I’ll redouble my efforts here to try to clarify what I mean in saying that the “market”, as now presently imagined, has become the manifest domain of the Jungian “collective unconscious”, and that this “Dream Society” can’t even be comprehended except in those terms. If, in the past, the so-called “real economy” trafficked in “real estate”, we might say that the market of the Dream Society trafficks in “irreal estate”. And if some indigenous cultures sometimes speak of “the White Man’s Dreaming”, then that dreaming is what is now made explicit and manifest in The Dream Society.

Before I do the deep dive into the meaning of the Dream Society, we have to be clear on the terms “real”, “unreal”, and “irreal”. The irreal is not synonymous with the unreal. Dreaming is a fact. Dreams are real in that sense. But what transpires in dreaming is irreal rather than real or unreal, you see. If therefore, the “real economy” once trafficked in “real estate” — that is, in actual physical products — the “irreal economy” of the Dream Society trafficks in what I call “irreal estate”, which are “meanings” in terms of “brands”, images, fantasies, myths, magic, or “spirit”. Even the phrase “irrational exuberance” as applied to the market now recognises that “the market” is no longer “real” or “rational” at all, or that the economy now is almost completely dependent on what are called “bubbles” and “perception management”, which is just another way of describing what Algis Mikunas refers to as “technocratic shamanism” in his essay “Magic and Technological Culture”, and which is quite evidently, also, an aspect of the Dream Society.

So, it is quite important not to mistake the “irreal” for unreal, although some aspects of the “collapse of reality” also have features of the unreal, and that what Stirk refers to as “the Triumph of the Irrational” in reference to Technology as Magic, has, as it’s counterpart, the irreal, which is probably related to the word “eerie” as well.

Now, I’ve also stated that we can’t really understand the Trump phenomenon either except in relation to the Dream Society, and that was brought home forcibly this morning upon reading something about that

“Former White House staffer Omarosa Manginault Newman in her new book Unhinged: An Insider Account of Trump’s White House describes the world around the President as a cult in which he creates his own reality. She told the New York Times on Sunday: “I think it’s incredibly important in Trump world that you protect yourself, because everyone constructs their own reality” and “People around him try to reinforce that manufactured reality”.

Well, that’s something that Gary Lachman writes about in his book Dark Star Rising: Magick and Power in the Age of Trump. But it is also completely Dream Society logic, as are matters like “meme magic”, which are what Trump’s incessant tweets are — spell-casting, and seemingly pretty effective spell-casting, too. But much of the precedent for this was prefigured in Rolf Jensen’s book The Dream Society: How the Coming Shift from Information to Imagination Will Transform Your Business.

This “shift to imagination” is extremely important to understand in relation to the reconstruction of the “market” as being identical with that which Jung called “collective unconsciousness”. In fact, it’s quite impossible to understand the “Dream Society” at all in this sense except in the context of the market as the collective unconscious or, for that matter, the resurgence of myth and magic and its appropriation by and as “marketing 3.0” (or “holistic branding” or “spiritual branding”, and so on), and especially the exploitation of Jung’s archetypal psychology for the purpose. None of this would make much sense at all unless the “market” were, indeed, the same as “the collective unconscious” and the domain of the irreal. In fact, the Dream Society is somewhat inconceivable, too, without this breakdown of distinction between subject and object, between fact and fiction, and between the real and the irreal. The “market” in Jensen’s Dream Society is total, and is total environment, or what we have been describing in “the field concept”.

Most uncanny and eerie about all this, too, is how much “The Dream Society” of “imagination” resembles, albeit in aberrant and perverse manifestation, William Blake’s Golgonooza, “city of the imagination“. It might be most revealing, in fact, to compare Jensen’s The Dream Society with Kathleen Raine’s book on Blake’s Golgonooza too, keeping in mind Henri Bortoft’s distinction between “authentic and counterfeit wholes”. (I’ve read both books, but never to compare them in that sense). Equally eerie and uncanny is how much Jensen’s “market mysticism” (as I’ve called it) and his “Dream Society” seem to affirm what cultural philosopher Jean Gebser described as the “irruption” of older factors and energies of myth and magic hitherto dormant or latent in our psychic constitution (that is, all those matters equally ascribed to Jung’s “collective unconscious”), but using an inappropriate business or economic model or paradigm to impose “market discipline” on this irruption.

As mentioned earlier, Jensen’s “post-rational” market and the Dream Society are definitely “post-modern” in conception. It is also definitely “post-truth” inasmuch as it’s chief artifacts are “stories” and narratives that do not necessarily have to have any relation to truth or fact. They just have to seem meaningful or “spiritual” in the bizarre sense the Jensen seems to understand that. The “image” is all that matters. In other words, the underlying metaphysical justification for the Dream Society is that “perception is reality”. And while “perception is reality” is true, to a great extent, it also matters whether your perception is clear or clouded with delusion, or transparent or opaque, as Gebser puts it (or revelation or velation). “Perception is reality” is a pretty obvious enticement to the manipulation of perception and the images or “collective representations” (as Owen Barfield calls them) or the manufacturing of “reality”, or “social construction of reality”, and to magic or Mikunas’s “technocratic shamanism”.

So, you can see why William Blake felt that “cleansing the doors of perception” was such an urgent task, which is equally Gebser’s “diaphaneity” or the “transparency of the world”. In fact, maybe it’s the very dangers of this “Dream Society” and its sorcerer’s apprentices that will compel us to undertake the task seriously, or be enslaved by it and in thrall to it. As the German poet Hölderlin once expressed it “where the peril is greatest, there lies the saving power also”, or Rumi: “the cure for the disease is in the disease”. And that is especially the case with “the Dream Society” and now especially the need, as Paul Levy puts it, “to awaken in the dream”.

In fact, becoming masters of what is called “lucid dreaming” may be even a survival technique. (It was certainly the first task that Castaneda had to undertake in his apprenticeship to don Juan).

I have to say, too, that I’m pretty much in awe of Jean Gebser’s prescience in his insights into how these older forces of myth and magic are once again becoming animated and active in us and the culture, and his warnings about this and the need for insight into their manifestations. Given the unnerving events of the day, can there remain much doubt about this at all?

We have only one option: in examining the manifestations of our age, we must penetrate them with sufficient breadth and depth that we do not come under their demonic and destructive spell. We must not focus our view merely an these phenomena, but rather on the humus of the decaying world beneath, where the seedlings of the future are growing, immeasurable in their potential and vigor. Since our insight into the energies pressing toward development aids their unfolding, the seedlings and inceptive beginnings must be made visible and comprehensible.

 

Advertisements

18 responses to “The Real, the Unreal, and the Irreal in The Dream Society”

  1. Scott Preston says :

    Maybe put another way…. Is it not necessarily so, that the concept of the “Global Brain” must also necessarily include all those matters Jung associates with “the collective unconscious”, including the imagination of the “market” as this collective unconscious as an aspect of the Global Brain, and so the Dream Society also? And doesn’t, too, this “Global Brain” also imply that the boundary between the subject and object becomes fuzzy? And is this not exactly what is happening?

  2. Scott Preston says :

    Maybe we should call this “Age of the Uncanny”, because there is also an uncanny parallel in the relationship between Jensen’s “market” and his “Dream Society” and that described by McGilchrist as “Master” and “Emissary”.

  3. Scott Preston says :

    The Flourishing Business of Fake Views:

    Certainly also one small part of perception management.

    • Scott Preston says :

      “The meta-information war is fascinating—constant battles to control what people think other people are paying attention to.” — that’s Aviv Ovadya responding to the above NYT article. “Meta-information war” is an interesting term.

  4. edlevin2015 says :

    Algis Mikunas refers to as “technocratic shamanism” in his essay “Magic and Technological Culture”,
    Is there a free copy of this essay on the Internet? I’ve never been able to find it. I may have asked this before but every time you refer to it I get curioser and curioser.

  5. Scott Preston says :

    Three questions interest me at the moment: What is the connection of Jensen’s “Dream Society” with Howard Bloom’s “Global Brain”? How do Blake’s four Zoas (who “reside in the Human Brain”) manifest in Global Brain/Dream Society? And how is Blake’s Golgonooza, “city of imagination” (or the spiritual fourfold city) related to “Dream Society”.

  6. Mikyla says :

    Food for thought. I think, to add to the eerie aspect, that many who manipulate the dream society (think, heads of marketing), are blind to the nature of the field/ forces with which they work. They are in the dream, unconscious; unaware that lucid dreaming is even an option.

  7. Scott Preston says :

    “….in your own Bosom you bear your Heaven And Earth & all you behold: tho’ it appears Without, it is Within, In your Imagination.” (William Blake)

    This becomes rather key to interpreting what I’ve posted lately about Jensen’s “Dream Society”…. “although it appears Without, It is Within”. So, in those terms, the “Dream Society” would indeed be a distorted or aberrant manifestation of Blake’s “Golgonooza”, city of the imagination. And yet, it suggests perhaps the incipient manifestation of “Golgonooza” at the same time.

  8. Scott Preston says :

    “‘Traditionalism’, as understood by followers of Guenon, for all their insistence on ‘revealed’ knowledge and the metaphysical order, seems unconnected to the living source itself and highly suspicious of those very inner worlds from which it ultimately derives. That inner world both Blake and Jung affirm, and both appreciated the value of the alchemical symbolism and the alchemical “work” of self-transformation.” — Kathleen Raine, commenting on Blake.

    This was exactly Gebser’s objection to Traditionalism as well, and it’s important that people not confuse Gebser or Blake with Traditionalism.

    “It is our task to presentiate the past in ourselves, not to lose the present to the transient power of the past. This we can achieve by recognizing the balancing power of the latent “future” with its character of the present, which is to say, its potentiality for consciousness

    http://www.gaiamind.org/Gebser.html

  9. Scott Preston says :

    We should be careful, as well, not to confuse Blake’s “Imagination” with mere fantasy. Imagination for Blake is equivalent to Gebser’s “diaphainon”, and with the ever-present origin. So, for Blake “Divine Imagination” is identical with what we call “God”.

    So, if you’re reading Blake, you may also substitute “diaphainon” wherever “Imagination” appears.

  10. Scott Preston says :

    “What is now prov’d was once only imagined” (Blake). Understand that, and you have the rationale for the surreptitious (ie “stealth”) manipulation, control, and exploitation of imagination in The Dream Society, too, or for what Mikunas calls “technocratic shamanism”.

  11. Scott Preston says :

    “To live by the Imagination is Blake’s secret of life. The ‘gods’ of reason, feeling, inspiration and the physical senses, are but aspects of that single life of Imagination, ‘the human existence itself’ which embraces all in unity. There is nothing outside the Imagination, which is immortal, eternal, and boundless….”The Eternal Body of Man is the Imagination, that is, God himself…It manifests itself in his Works of Art (In Eternity All is Vision)'”. — Kathleen Raine, Introduction to Golgonooza: City of Imagination p. 6.

    This actually seems equivalent to de Chardin’s “noosphere”, but in The Dream Society becomes “the market” or even as market religion.

  12. Scott Preston says :

    The “market” in Jensen’s Dream Society is the mind of Urizen. The “Dream Society” itself is the “sleep of Albion”. The mind of Urizen is “the dark Satanic Mill”. Still, there is the potential of awakening here.

  13. Scott Preston says :

    Some folks, I notice, are using the phrase “our cyberpunk future” — a dystopian concept — to refer to something that looks very much like Jensen’s “Dream Society”. “Cyberpunk future” is more likely than not a reference to William Gibson’s book Neuromancer, probably a synonym for Mikunas’s “technocratic shaman”.

    I came across that phrase “cyberpunk future”, in fact, just after reading yet another lengthy piece in the New York Times on data mining and “surveillance capitalism” (which is a pretty good term for this).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: