On Lacan's meaning of the Phallus

 

 

From, " Lacan, the meaning of the phallus and the ‘sexed’ subject [online]".
Hook, Derek (2006)
London: LSE Research Online. 
Available at:http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/960
Available in LSE Research Online: July 2007

The human in language: an unnatural fit

....The role of language in all of this, we should emphasise, is pivotal; as Freudian psychoanalysis had initially borrowed notions from medicine and biology to strengthen its conceptual purchase on the human psyche and sexuality, so Lacanian psychoanalysis borrows from (and extends) the study of structural linguistics so as to further its engagement with the unconscious processes of subject formation. In investigating the structure and operations of language, Lacan is also intrigued more generally with the power and structuring principles of the larger category of the Symbolic, which is the pre-existing domain of language and law, the social and cultural structure into which the child is born.

So, importantly, for Lacan, masculinity and femininity are not biological essences but are instead symbolic positions. The assumption of one of these two positions is an obligatory component of human subjectivity. Each sex, furthermore, is defi ned separately with respect to a third term. In the words of Fink (1995: 105): ‘Men and women are defi ned differently with respect to language, that is, with respect to the Symbolic order.’

There is an entire ‘world of language’ which pre-exists the infant; it is into this world of symbolic exchanges and meaning that the ‘human animal’ of the infant is born. As Mitchell (1982: 5) states:

Language does not arise from within ... [it] always ‘belongs’ to another person. The human subject is created from a general law that comes to it from outside itself and through the speech of other people, though this speech in its turn must relate to the general law.

Being in the Imaginary

We can emphasise the ‘unnaturalness’ of language (along with the forced imposition of sexual identity to which it is related) with reference to the state of being which precedes the child’s acquisition of language. This is where Lacan introduces his concept of the Imaginary. The Imaginary is an order of experience, a ‘state of being’ that characterises the infant’s earliest pre-verbal and ‘pre-social’ interactions with the mother.

Here no clear distinction exists between the ‘self’ and other, between internal and external worlds. There is no clearly defi ned ‘I’ at this point, rather a loosely bounded and undifferentiated mass of sensations in which the body, much like the emerging ego, has not taken on a coherent form. We have here a ceaseless exchange where the ‘self’ seems to pass into objects, and objects into it. (Lacan is suspicious of all conceptualisations of a ‘self’ that imply that there is in fact some substantive or cohesive entity underlying the sense we have of what we are. He hence avoids this term altogether, preferring the notion of the ‘subject’ who is always divided, split, or barred.)

The Imaginary is thus an order based on the incorporation of sameness; there is no separation or gap between the experience of the child and the world it inhabits, with which, as Minsky asserts, it is fused:

Objects in the Imaginary repeatedly refl ect themselves in a kind of sealed unit where everything is an extension of the self which has been projected onto the external world so there are no apparent differences of divisions (Minsky 1996: 146).

This is the pre-Oedipal world of narcissistic identifications and mirror reflections. It is a world, as Wright (2000) explains, in which the child patterns its emerging ego on Imaginary counterparts that appear to offer the promise of unity, cohesion and integrity. It is also however a domain of rivalry and aggressivity. Not only does the child narcissistically identify with, fall in love with, its mirror image (or refl ection in others), it also experiences confl ict and hateful relations with these images, from which it is as yet not wholly differentiated.

The absent object

Despite the intensity of the mother–child bond, it is never an exclusively dyadic relationship; there is always, insists Lacan, a third term present, something beyond the child to which the mother’s desire is aimed: the phallus. To be clear: the child is situated within the ‘fi eld’ of the mother’s desire – the infant does, after all, represent a nodal point of love, investment and care (at least for most mothers) – but it does not exhaust this desire. We are in a position now to offer a fi rst tentative defi nition of what Lacan might mean by his understanding of the phallus: the phallus is the Imaginary object of the mother’s desire which remains outside of the child’s reach, something it can neither grasp nor bring into being, something quite ‘other’ than it.

Being the phallus

The child then must realise that, as important as it may be to the mother, it will never be the exclusive object of her desire. It experiences itself as marked by a lack by virtue of the fact that it does not possess the phallus. It is, in other words, not able to fully satisfy her desire. The mother, however, is also marked by lack; she is incomplete because she does not possess the phallus she desires. Indeed, she must be incomplete: why else does she desire? Both mother and child are hence bound to the phallus; as Benvenuto and Kennedy (1986) emphasise: ‘the infant is bound to the mother, who is herself bound to the phallus in so far as she does not have it’ (131)

We now begin to understand something of the quandary in which the child fi nds itself. It is situated within the fi eld of the mother’s desire, but is not able to fulfi l it. This attempt by the child to be the object it thinks the mother lacks/desires permits for an endless amount of variation; it takes no one form or given set of activities.

What might the attempt ‘to be’ the phallus entail? Well, it is an Imaginary position that would permit for as much variety as there are different mothers and children; it seems to be the child’s attempt to be everything for the mother. Leader (1996) gives some examples: it might mean to be a glowing, seductive child, or the effort to enchant or puzzle the mother, to impress or seduce the adults it comes into contact with – whatever form seems to interest the mother the most.

Phallus as signifier of lack

What we need to remain aware of here is the fact that, although the phallus is the signifier of the mother’s desire, it is also always the signifier of lack. It helps here to reiterate that the phallus (for the child) is both that which the mother desires, and that which she does not have, both a signifier of desire and a signifier of lack. Adams (1992) and Luepnitz both comment on this paradoxical aspect of the phallus. On the one hand the term ‘phallus’ refers to our wish for completeness, ‘the phallus is what no one can have but everyone wants: a belief in bodily unity, wholeness, perfect autonomy’ (Luepnitz 2002: 226). The phallus, in this respect, is a wishful means of defending ourselves against castration. However, given that the phallus is the ‘covering of lack par excellence’ (Adams 1992: 77) it also becomes the signifier of lack, of the fact that there is something that needs to be covered. The paradox here is that the very thing that promises an Imaginary completeness comes also to signify the very opposite of completion; it calls attention to the fact of a lack that needs to be attended to.

The phallus as it exists in the Imaginary and in the Symbolic

The phallus is not only an Imaginary object; it also exists in the domain of the Symbolic. The Symbolic of course is a very different order of existence. Unlike in the Imaginary, the phallus here is not an Imagined object locked into a succession of images with which the child is constantly attempting to identify itself. Here the phallus is a signifi er of the mother’s desire. A signifi er, as discussed above, is something capable of conveying meaning – such as a sound, a mark, a letter, a gesture. In speaking of the phallus as it exists in the Symbolic as a signifi er, we are reiterating the fact that there are a great many things that can stand in for ‘the mother’s desire’. Just as any number of words can stand in for a given concept, an infi nite number of activities and objects can stand in for ‘that which is worthy of mother/father’s desire’.

In Lacan’s reading of the Oedipus complex during the 1950s, the child comes gradually to recognise (not in a conscious way) that it cannot somehow ‘incarnate’ the phallus for the mother. It comes to understand this because the phallus is not an attribute of an individual, but instead a signifi er of sorts.

Indeed, the attempt to be the Imaginary object of the phallus gives way to the realisation that there are many, many different possible things, activities, relationships that seem to hold the desire and fascination of the parents. It is at this point when the child understands the phallus in a Symbolic capacity. Luepnitz (2002) is helpful here when she asserts that the phallus is here not so much a thing as a position through which different objects circulate:

Adults can use wealth, accomplishments, or their own children as phallic objects. In this way, the ‘objects’ are desired for their representative value, their capacity to make the subject feel complete [for how it places them in the eyes of others] (226).

 Here are the basic co-ordinates then of what the phallus means for Lacan: initially an Imaginary object that the child wishes to be, so as to secure the desire of the parents, to be that desire, yet, eventually, the phallus takes on a Symbolic signifi cance as a signifi er of what the mother or father desires, a token of what the child does not have. As such it is equally a signifi er of lack.

The phallus can thus be understood – in the dimension of the Symbolic – as a ‘signifi er of desire’, a ‘signifi er of the other’s desire’, a signifi er of overwhelming importance to the child. It is crucial we grasp the difference between these two different versions of the phallus: the Imaginary phallus is perceived by the child in the pre-Oedipal phase as the object of the mother’s desire, ‘as that which she desires beyond the child; the child thus seeks to identify with this object’ (Evans 1996: 142).

The Symbolic phallus is, by contrast, the signifi er of the other’s desire. So, whereas the castration complex and the Oedipus complex revolve around the Imaginary phallus, the question of sexual difference revolves around the Symbolic phallus (Evans 1996). This is explained in more detail as we continue.

It should be becoming clear that Lacan’s conceptualisation of the phallus means it never has to be identifi ed with a physical aspect of the body, or, indeed, with the penis. As an Imaginary object, the phallus is always something the child cannot reach, something it does not have, something it understands as lacking. As a Symbolic element, as the signifi er of the other’s desire, the phallus could potentially be an infi nite number of possible things.

Disavowal and the Fetish...

"The fetish is a substitute for the mother's penis." [1]

This may seem a particularly outlandish statement for Sigmund Freud to make, talking about the way an infant processes the dawning awareness of their parent's anatomy, he continues: "for a particular and quite special penis that had been extremely important in early childhood but had later been lost. That is to say, it should normally have been given up."

The realization of the absence of a Female phallus -knowledge which owing to castration anxiety the child disavows[2], results in a simultaneous belief and disbelief in the existence of the Female phallus, what one sees is not what one expected or desires to see.

Freud had met a number of 'Fetishists' in his psycho-analytic practice , he noticed in them all an aversion to the actual female genitalia, the natural curiosity one would normally experience being sublimated onto a number of other stimuli; body parts; objects and situations.

This traumatic perception of a lack persists, but "a very energetic action has been undertaken to maintain the disavowal", to deny the reality of it. This compromise, the antagonism between perception and counter-wish, results in the development of an ersatz fetish, which "remains a token of triumph over the threat of castration and a protection against it", and "inherits the interest formerly dedicated to it's predecessor."

 Much as in bygone epochs the lives we lead in this modern age, being so palpably deprived of pleasure --notwithstanding the all too fleeting glimpses we may catch in the attainment of a goal; the subjugation of an enemy; participation in a productive enterprise; the exhilarating intensity of sexual climax; in satiating our desires; or in one's favorite meal eaten in good company-- are filled with multifarious counterfeit joys; fetishized, frequently monetized outlets & forms of enjoyment[3], with which we numb our fear and trembling; acute, or general dissatisfaction with a real that is becoming increasingly unattainable.

Completely disabused of our illusions, what one does see may undermine the very tenuous stability of the infantile human psyche altogether, therefore, owing to "the portion of narcissism Nature, as precaution, attaches to that particular organ" the Fetishist retains the illusion in an altered form.
God, which is to say an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, divine master, is the substitute for the absence of a God, Hierarchically revealed Truth™  is the substitute for the absence of truth, resulting from the individuals inability to apprehend 'it'.

____

[1] S. Freud, Fetishism (1927) [paraphrased]
[2] The term "disavowal" (Verleugnung ), often translated as "denial," denotes a mental act that consists in rejecting the reality of a perception on account of its potentially traumatic associations.
"The process I would like to describe as denial [Verleugnung ] . . . appears to be neither rare nor very dangerous for the mental life of the child, but in adults it could lead to psychosis." S. Freud, Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction between the Sexes (1925)
[3] Sports here offers it's opium for a number of unfulfilled desires: the sense of community; identification with shining examples of vitality, prowess, ability etc; the vicarious thrill of competition;victory; the unifying sadness of defeat...Social media is another interesting example, in this case indicating the reality of social atomization, alienation; and irreconcilable antagonisms between everyday life, and the phantasmagorical portrayal of celebrity culture presented to us daily in the media, which so many use these platforms in attempts to emulate and reproduce, with themselves (portrayed particularly favourably) represented as the object of fascination.

Adverto Pervertum

The creation of the fetish is the manufacture of an object or concept purported to contain some desirable essence; an ascribed content capable of exerting an influence or similar effect upon the mind or 'spirit' of other people, endowing the object's possessor with a certain social power and through them contributing to that fetishes prestige, it is the endowment of natural or constructed objects with a value or content external to them.

The production of these objects is undertaken with a specific aim in mind, somebody might visit their local hierophant seeking a blessing, lucky charm, or similar tool to enhance their sexual prowess, protect them in battle or which will ward off evil spirits, in effect transferring their sense of inadequacy, apprehension or anxiety to the objects creator, an authoritarian vessel who absorbs this psychological energy then produces it's mediation in a tangible form.

During this process the object is fashioned so as best to convey it's ability to achieve it's particular purpose: a protection charm would be small, versatile and lightweight so as not to impede the wearer; a dream catcher woven with numerous interlaced strands as any net used for hunting or fishing; a figurine designed to root out a traitor or thief in the tribe, would represent a humanoid figure for potential suspects to more easily identify with it[1].

Employed alongside these more obvious requirements are: colours with their ascribed mystical properties; materials such as crystals or stones with their distinctive colouration and 'properties'; a representation like Rome's Imperial Eagle or part of an actual animal said to contain it's desirable properties, for instance a Rabbit foot, Eagle feather, Shark teeth, Rhinoceros horn or Tiger blood; objects of particular shape and form important to a culture; the inscription of symbols or runes upon an object and so on.

Every potential feature and device is employed to establish an object's credibility within a hieratic framework, the value of the fetish is dependent not only upon the certainty their fashioner can project to facilitate belief in it's efficacy, but also upon an underlying relation to the world and explanation of it's various phenomena, the rudimentary awareness of which is exploited in the construction of each particular fetish.

An 18^th century bard wrote “my love is like a red red rose”, a more contemporary bard stated “In every dream home a heartache”, needless to say in our fascination with the “nice” and revulsion toward the accurate, the former remains far more popularly known.

The explicit objects of identification in each religious ideology differ, the implicit truth of our submission to an oppressive external hierarchy permeates them all, as W. Mcgaffey states of the Congo ritual system: “Fetishism' is about relations among people, rather than the objects that mediate and disguise those relations.”

Even words such as truth, freedom, love, power, success, or knowledge; general concepts, slogans or phrases, through repetition become fetishized objects people feel and are encouraged to believe are essential, for the navigation of a world still steeped in no small amount of error.

Like the Congolese Warriors encountered by Che Guevara while combating Imperialist forces in Africa, who, being equipped only with Mulele Water (or Dawa Potion) from their castes of holy men; fetishes designed to deflect bullets; and no small measure of credulity, being thus convinced of their invulnerability ran blindly into battle towards their own destruction. A person clothing themselves in certain symbols, phrases, ideas or slogans; who believes they possess bravery, beauty, knowledge or truth; who has been convinced they are honest, pure, attractive, funny or pious; or who has obtained some object embodying one or more of these attributes, can derive from these symbolic forms no small measure of confidence in their efficacy.

These fetish objects are effective in proportion to the amount of certainty the individual selling them -the shaman, psychic, priest, salesman, seducer, teacher or political leader- can project. Their social prestige, the purely contingent validation of it's owners confidence in them, and perpetual affirmation of a range of fetishes' efficacy in hierarchical human culture throughout history. [1.1]

'Beautiful' feelings are taken as arguments in themselves; the 'sustaining breast' as the bellows of divinity, and mere conviction as the criterion of 'truth'.

By the puritanical preacher inspiring enough 'faith' amongst his congregation, even the convoluted doctrines of the New Testament can become, if not convincing then certainly emotionally rousing, this is why advertising companies and public image gurus are employed by corporations and individuals, to inspire confidence in certain products, ideas or marketable commodities for a considerable fee.

Taken at superficially appealing face value then eventually being adopted by multitudes, fetishized ideas, explanations, objects or factitiously constructed 'realities' become irresistible, particularly when the tension between their demonstration by one and absence for another, becomes unbearable to the unconscious of the latter.

This is due not only to the natural human desire to 'fit-in', our inherent susceptibility to persuasion, taste for novelty and fear of alienation, but is facilitated by coercive behaviour such as psychological or physical bullying and manipulation, often unconsciously seeking to enforce one's own adherence to cultural 'norms' by attacking those of others, or in the case of religious morality; attacking and debasing a people's very nature to coerce their conformity.

A concept, slogan or phrase general enough to superficially appeal to and be adopted by as many people as possible such as: “faith is good”; “doubt is bad”; “economic growth”; “technological progress”; “the poor are feckless and indolent”; or “the rich are greedy and ruthless”; “love is all you need”, like any material objects believed to be endowed with 'mystical' power, may create a perpetual feedback loop, becoming self referential 'truths'[2], first hierarchically bestowed then reinforced through repetition, they become socially enforced overtly and implicitly.

These reified concepts mediate and determine our social relations and interactions with the world, giving shape to the unconscious desires, drives and actions which constitute our activity, have you heard somebody say “I want happiness”, or “I want love”, then seen their life become a constant process of acquisition, an eternal recurrence of aspiration, attainment and disillusionment?

These are merely ways of expressing an otherwise undetermined urge through language, giving these deep, instinctual aspects of our nature an outlet in consciousness, the power lies in defining the content of these terms, determining what they actually represent or mean, their relevance to our individual lives.

One can be active about this process, or passively accept the multitudinous versions created, reproduced or marketed for consumers at considerable financial and 'spiritual' cost.

As Joseph Geobbals so adequately demonstrated in Germany during the 1930' and 40's;“[propaganda] must make use of painting in black-and-white, since otherwise it cannot be convincing to people”, an object's ease of availability, it's effortless adoption by the widest number of people is what matters, the confidence a particular fetish inspires, not it's factual accuracy, authenticity or ability to fulfil claims made about it, indeed many modern consumables are produced so as to be insufficient to requirements, thereby instituting not only a cycle of submission to the consumption of constantly emerging reproductions, but also an implicit justification for the unrelenting production of 'needs'.

Like the shipwrecked sailor driven to drink the sea water surrounding him to quench his thirst, these superficially appealing constructs merely exasperate our situation.

As this becomes ever more apparent; the gap between the attainment of our 'desires' and our inevitable dissatisfaction narrows, is it any surprise that religious fundamentalism; the conspiracy cult of easy answers; fetishism of nations, sovereignty, the economy; and other manifestations of black and white thinking are enjoying such a resurgence amidst this degeneration?

Advertising agencies as previously mentioned exist not only to appeal to, but also to produce human needs; utilizing the social technological mediums available, their audio-visual productions are designed to captivate and transfix the viewer upon certain things that they lack all the better if these are entirely non-existent: the need to get ahead of the curve; the need to be more connected; the need to go faster, be fitter, stronger, better looking; to be loved; to gain enlightenment; inner peace ad infinitum, thereby affirming the sense of inadequacy, apprehension or anxieties, which channel people towards perpetual passive consumption of various products designed to 'save' us.

Those skilled in the marketing of conceptual or physical objects, are fundamentally indebted to the advancements made in psychological research -which advanced our understanding of the unconscious nature of human beings- during the 20^th century, whether that knowledge was given freely, taken or earned, it is unfortunately overwhelmingly employed in manipulating and further enslaving, rather than empowering those who don't have it.

The theologians of the numerous cults of easy answers are well aware of the same techniques, “What's that, you lack understanding of an often incomprehensible world?

Here, have mine.... It will only cost you one mortal soul”.

Constructed fetish objects; the symbols, become mistaken for the things they are intended to signify, in the case of the dream catcher it is the owners subconscious temporarily convinced and put at rest, rather than the efficacy of the object itself, the consumer of a particular brand of deodorant, feeling confidence in his appeal to the olfactory nerves of the opposite sex may exude this confidence, which -rather than how an individual smells- is what appeals to the target audience.

The object or symbol in question, merely provides a framework or container in which various fears and desires can be expressed, it mediates the existence of these uncomfortable aspects of human consciousness, and temporarily allays them for as long as it takes for the next 'stop-gap' to arrive.

______

[1] In the Congolese system and what are known as Voodoo dolls this included sticking pins into the doll and gauging the response of potential suspects, demonstrating the painful torturous punishments they might experience when found out, the idea being that guilt would manifest in a wince, panic or even pain where the object representing the guilty party has been pierced.

[1.1] For example astrology, christianity, numerology, etc etc.

[2] This is a logical fallacy “appeal to popularity”: a thing widely valued becomes established as 'politically correct', can be considered right regardless of it's factual accuracy merely by the absence of criticism, sometimes, as in the case of Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany criticism being violently suppressed but more often drowned out by the infatuation of the masses.

[3]  'Joseph Goebbels' Principles of Propaganda', by Leonard W. Doob

The Economic Fetish of Gideon Osborne

I really prefer the more subtle examples of fetishism over the borderline psychotic ramblings of professional fetishists or mystics like David Icke, so this entry will correspond to a recent speech given by Gideon Osborne in which; he ascribes to 'The Economy' a whole range of properties and actions more properly belonging to the subjugated masses of people forced to partake in 'it', often against their will.

While delving into the decrepitude on display in a recent televised Conservative Party conference during a particularly damp and dreary Autumnal afternoon, I was unfortunate enough to observe the insidiously absurd speech of the particularly dull witted decadent; Gideon Osborne, the son of a wallpaper tycoon & one of the foremost financial fetishists in this congregation of aspirational loons.

When one encounters such typecast examples of the moral turpitude which sadly passes for rectitude, that this decaying nation of class distinction is known to frequently exude, one is coerced into taking notes in the possibly misguided hope that such relics of British Social order face imminent extinction.

So that future generations may at least benefit from a record of the animosity constrained behind the façade of respectability such brigands display, the disdain for the way real people without inheritances live, perhaps that they may never again fall foul of 'the act' and be lead astray, from the long march of progress fraught with obstacles and traps such as these ravenous Tory wolves set in our way.

It's apparent the fundamental attribute of a Conservative politician, is the ability to maintain the fetishism of various things in the face of all evidence against them, predominantly those most despicable attributes and institutions which mar the collective history of our species: privilege; self obsession; servile flattery in accordance with social rank; the expectation others behave the same way; the worship of Kings; of money, banks and ostentatious display of things obtained by one means or another; of morality beneath the knout; of dominance above; of the clout of ancient teachings; on grasping and reaching for more and more; of opulent decor; decorum and whoredom in various forms.

The prime fetish of the conservative of the modern world, now that the last whiff of God has all but evaporated, is the economy.

Now the white bearded man in the sky no longer provides for them they have erected in 'His' place, a less imaginary estranged saviour.

A more productive provider of souls for them to savour; as the multitudes were gathered in a bygone age, beneath the incomprehensible capriciousness of this alien, 'divine will', they now serve the endlessly increasing abstract extravagances, of the Economic priesthood's demands upon them.

The ancient Aztecs were at least upfront about the endless human sacrifice demanded by their priests, now the least amongst us sacrifices their self to grease the gears of a machine, the only purpose of which is to prepare a feast from the products of our labour, of the life's blood of all beasts of burden.

While the priests of Mesoamerica or Druidic castes from the East had to drive a dagger through the cartilaginous casing our rib cage provides, to obtain the wonderful bloody treasure hidden inside, today we offer our hearts up to idolatrous lies willingly; we give our lives up for the price of a cup we make but have to buy from which our misery overflows, but why?

So our pleasure and happiness grows?

Sadly no, but rather so the economy may continue to colonize every aspect of human existence, so profits may continually rise while our dreams are left to die, entrenched wealth conserved so the lofty ideals of fair trade are never realized.

Is it fair the "the party of Freetrade" can fetishize, the entirety of human social relations beneath the Leviathan called Economy, attributing to it the ability to make the sun rise, to raise our children correctly and the power to decide, "whether we can pay our bills, whether we provide for our families, have rewarding jobs and enjoy decent retirements"?

Gideon is quite adamant the answer is yes; "the economy means everything to the people of Britain" he replies, smiling smugly hands raised towards the sky, but were he ever to speak to a member of this homogeneous tribe, to ask them what the term means, it's more likely they'd reply that it means little more than any other term glibly spoken which eludes our evil eyes, but Gideon has greater faith than us mere mortals to whom he lies, to him the economy is a mystical creative force more alive than we; the permeating substance facilitating every facet of modern life.

Sandra Silberzweig~The Economy

_____
All quotations taken from George Osbornes Conservative party conference speech given on the 29th of September.

The Fetishes of David Icke

Besides the obvious obsessive interests conveyed by David Icke in his work of the last 20 years: Ariosophy; conspiracy theories; pseudo science; revisionist history; mythology; anti-semitism; mysticism; "love"; aliens and reactionary political ideology, there are two particularly esteemed fetish objects which define two distinct periods of his career.

Icke heralded his arrival as messenger of the gods in 1991 appearing adorned in bright turquoise tracksuit.

Known as his Turquoise period, this transition signified his departure from purely environmental concerns and political action towards more spiritual subjects.

The use of Turquoise appears to have corresponded with his initiation to the practice of channelling through Mari Shawsun and Betty Shine, defined in his writing by the repetition of 'channelled' information and philosophy; warnings of environmental catastrophe; reproductions of spiritual systems of the past, reinterpreting their main idols and repeating their imperatives for the new age; the affirmation of his semi-divine nature as a member of "the evolution called Sons of the Godhead"[1].

In Tales from the Timeloop Icke writes: "I became famous for wearing turquoise clothes because after the experience on the mound I began to want to wear only turquoise, which is a very powerful and sacred colour to many native and esoteric beliefs."

Turquoise beads dating back to 5000 B.C. have been found in Iraq used by royalty and warriors, there is evidence the raw material was being mined in the Sinai peninsula by 2500BC, won from the underworld, brought to the surface, manufactured and traded, a process ongoing throughout the middle ages when Venetian merchants obtained the stones -manufactured from raw material found on the south slopes of the Iranian Al-Mirsah-Kuh Mountains- in Turkish bazaars from whence it's name derives, bringing back the shining stones to Europe for their rarity and resale value.

The earliest uses and industrial extraction known by our historians, took place in and around the region of modern day Egypt where it has been found upon grave furnishings and the death masks of some Pharaohs, Iraq and Iran where it was valued for it's immediately apparent aesthetic qualities aswell as ascribed, intangible fetishized properties; utilized by kings, shamans and warriors for it's assumed value as a channel for power, luck, and divine protection to the wearer, it became a symbol of nobility, wisdom and high social status,

Turquoise gems are most commonly seen today in New Age crystal shops, or adorning the fabulous domed architecture of formerly great Islamic Empires, some of the most striking examples being: Tilla Kari Mosque in Uzbekistan; the Mosque of St Petersburg; upon the facade of Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem; the Goharshad Mosque in the Khorasan province of Iran; and the Blue Mosque known as "The Turquoise of Islam", in the city of Tabriz located in Iran's East Azarbaijan province.

The arrival of the Mughal Empire[1.2] in India brought Turquoise for use in the art & architecture of the period, where it was formerly unknown, it was also sourced and used in Pre-Columbian America in extensive trade networks and used in art by various cultures, particularly the Maya, from which the oldest examples found have been dated to around 700bc. [1.5]

Although David mentions "the esoteric significance" of Turquoise, he never actually explains what it is in his books or -to my knowledge- lectures, he explains how it was used by various nobilities, as those in South America, and that his Zulu Shaman Credo Mutwa wears the colour, but never actually gives an example of
it's "esoteric power" or uses.

Norman Flag, English Royal Arms and Dalmatian coat of Arms on the Right in 

descending order

His present work, which following a transitional period of conspiracy writing in the nineties and early 21st century, has come to be characterized by his appropriation and fetish of the symbolism of "the Lion", despite retaining many of the earlier 'spiritual' motifs, his later writings are more focused on "The Global Conspiracy", his leadership of a popular conspiracy subculture who come in their thousands to view his sermons at Wembley arena; his repeated calls for revolution & suggestions on how to end "the NWO agenda".

"More than anything at this extraordinary time of transformation, the human race must get off its knees. It has been down there for far too long. ENOUGH! We are All That Is, All Possibility, All Potential, AIl Existence. What are we doing with our knees on the floor and our hands clasped together in worship or pleas for mercy? We are lions, not lambs, and lions refuse to be herded. Stand up, wake up and let's get this sorted. We are lions disguised as sheep; but we don't have to be. The lion within can awaken whenever we choose to set it free."[2]

The development he describes here parallels the development of symbolism apparent in the Safavid Dynasty's flag; going from the golden moon, to a Sheep in front of the Sun, to a Lion in front of the Sun which is an ancient symbol of Mesopotamian origins, one of the oldest examples of which is found on a Greco-Persian seal housed in the British Museum, apparently of King Artaxerxes II worshipping a figure thought to be the Goddess Ishtar, standing upon a Lion in front of the Sun.

Those from England will be no stranger to the symbol, but it's use in History is by no means limited to the country David is from, many other Nations have historically used the emblem on Flags and Coats of Arms, particularly India during the Mughal Empire, Denmark, Dalmatia, Iran, Morocco, Sri Lanka, Finland, Congo aswell as smaller European principalities and states particularly in modern Germany as shown in the standards of Saxony, Hanover, Hesse or Baden Wurtemburg, but also in Leon, Spain; Lyon and Normandy in France, Estonia and many others, where it would frequently represent the dominions of family dynasties such as the House of Welf, or the Normans having come to own lands in opposition to the Holy Roman Empire.

The symbol in heraldry is always indicative of the dominance of Royalty, the "King of Beasts" or "King of the Jungle" representing strength and nobility, was appropriated by various Kings of great renown and military prowess, for example Henry the Lion Duke of Saxony who helped Emperor Frederick Barbarossa wage war against the Lombards and the Papacy, and was awarded ownership of numerous Principalities throughout Germany; "The Black Prince" Edward a founding member of the Order of the Garter who fought numerous battles, utilizing means of Terror such as burning and pillaging towns, villages and farms on his enemies dominions.

Richard I (the Lionheart) of England was a Plantagenet descendent of the Norman Kings who introduced the symbol to the Royal arms of England, he spent more time on Crusades and in Aquitane much like; his father Henry II who ruled various parts of France along with his English territories, fighting over Northumberland with fellow descendent of the Norman's and bearer of the Lion motif; William the Lion of Scotland, Grandson of Scottish reformer King David I who continued to apply the Norman feudal system to governance in Scotland, substantially changing the culture to a system more compatible with the rest of Western Europe.

The first use of the Lion motif in England is apparently by King of the Normans; William the Conqueror Great Grandfather of Henry II, who raised the standard of Normandy in battle, highlighting the fact that "the Lion" prowled the full length and breadth of Europe, and was not confined within the borders of the UK at any point, "Scottish" names most frequently associated with noble families such as Bruce, Gray, Ramsay, Fraser, Ogilvie, Montgomery, Sinclair, Pollock, Douglas and Gordon to name but a few, including the later royal House of Stewart, all have Norman ancestry at some point in their lineage.
 

The now extinct nation of Dalmatia used the symbolism of Sheep and Lions, it's name derived from the Illyrian word delme or Albanian dele meaning "sheep", highlights the pastoral origin of the Illyrian tribe known to the Romans as the Dalmatae who inhabited the region near Split in Croatia along the Adriatic coast North of Italy, Dalmatia was a Roman Province until around 475ad when the Western Roman empire disintegrated and the Ostrogoth's took ownership of the land.

In the Gothic War of the 6th century the Eastern Byzantine Empire retook the region, but it was greatly reduced following various incursions of the Avars, Magyars and Slavs in the following centuries, from the 9th Century the Franks, Venetian Nobility, Croatian Princes and emerging Hungarian Empire, vied for control with the Byzantine Empire, each asserting their claim, until the the invasion of the Mongols distracted the Hungarians, and internal rivalries of the Capetian and Luxembourgian Royal houses in Croatia, forced the sale of the region to the Venetian Republic.

The coat of arms consisting of three crowned lions open mouthed roaring fiercely betrays a certain historical truth about the region, not to mention a worthwhile lesson for conservationists perhaps endeavouring to keep these predatory beasts in captivity.

As highlighted in a previous entry on this blog; the re-creation of the land, the fetishism and attribution of value, culture and identity foreign to it, was enacted by the irresistible force that the Norman Kings represented in Western Europe, and various forces attempting to assert their claims, 'stamping' their authority upon this small region on the Adriatic coastline.

The Lion as an emblem of Royalty is known to all children who have seen "Bedknobs and Broomsticks", "The Lion King", or who have read "Aesop's Fables"[3], it's use far predates the European Monarchs of the medieval period, being found in ancient stone carvings surviving the ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations where venerated images held important fetishized functions; particularly pertaining to Royalty and violent warfare in the Egyptian pantheon, as deified in the forms of: Bast, Mafdet, Menhit, Pakhet, Sekhmet, Tefnut, and the Sphinx.

The symbol has been frequently used in Persia, noteably the theocratic Safavid Dynasty; originators of the "Twelver" school of Shi'a Islam who at their height controlled all of modern Iran, Azerbaijan, Bahrain and Armenia, most of Georgia, the North Caucasus, Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan, as well as parts of Turkey, Syria, Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the symbolism and state they introduced remains in modern day Iran particularly by Monarchist factions in exile as a symbol of opposition to the Islamic Republic.[4]

"Mithra was often portrayed as a winged lion, a symbol for the Sun still used by the secret societies today and a major symbol of the Reptilian hybrids like the British Royal Family. References to the lion and the 'grip of the lion's paw' in the Master Mason Degree of Freemasonry originate with this same stream of Mystery school symbolism. Initiates into the rites of Mithra were called lions...
Mithra was said to be the son (Sun) of god who died to save humanity and give them eternal life. He was called the good shepherd and the vine. One classic symbol of Mithra was as a lion with a snake curled around his body while he holds the key to heaven."[5]

It's use carried similar connotations in the ancient Civilizations of Mesopotamia, including the City states within the Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian Empires, more than 100 artistic representations of lions were created in polychrome tiles lining the processional way from the northern entrance of Babylon through numerous gates to the famous "Gate of Ishtar", the entrance point into the extravagant inner city adorned by depictions of Lions, Dragons and other semi-mythical beasts, archaeology from the period depicts important cultural figures such as Ishtar and Gilgamesh exhibiting a degree of mastery over lions, perhaps symbolizing their protection of the nomadic herdsmen exterior to the walled cities.

Is it any wonder military leaders of States such as Mussolini, Himmler and Hermann Goering, were particularly fascinated by this symbol of strength, violence, animalistic brutality and domination?

"The memorial to Rhodes at Cape Town, South Africa, is dominated by the Illuminati symbol of the lion and is located on the slopes of a place called Devil's Peak. Isn't synchronicity wonderful? 

The [Round Table] group consisted, like all similar organisations, of at least two levels. One was the inner circle, the 'Society of the Elect' (in the know), and the outer circle was called the 'Association of Helpers' (not in anything like the same know). 

This is the familiar technique of using a group of largely innocent people to hide and defend, through lack of knowledge, the organisation they think they understand, but don't."[6]

______
[1]    pg 141,  Love Changes Everything
[1.2]    Mughal empire of India flag:

"A tradition of tiling commenced in Delhi and its environs during the reign of the Lodhi Sultans (1451–1526 CE), the employment of glazed tiles in shades of blue on their buildings marking the first consistent use of tiles here. Later, an increase in tile-work commissions in an expanded palette comprising yellow, green, white, turquoise, and dark blue glaze colours occurred during Mughal rule, especially in the reigns of the Mughal emperors Akbar (1556–1605 CE) and Jahangir (1605–1627 CE). Art and architecture now became to be increasingly influenced by Iran and Central Asia, spurred by the emigration of architects, artisans and craftsmen from these lands (Blair and Bloom, 1995 and Nath, 1989)."
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440314002283


[1.5]    Martin Brennan's The Hidden Maya: A New Understanding of Maya Glyphs, pg 260 appendix 2
[2]    pg 645,  Human Race Get Off Your Knees 2010 
[3]    The Greek Aesop recounted many tales of the "King of Beasts" such as the story of  

The Lion and the Statue:
The Sick Lion
The Lion and the Mouse
The Ass in the Lion's Skin
The Lion's Share
The Four Oxen and the Lion
The Lion in Love
The Lion the Fox and the Beasts

[4]

[5] Guide to the global conspiracy and how to end it,  pg 125-126 (2007)
[6] Guide to global conspiracy and how to end it, pg 194-195

Reading David Icke

Part I
Who actually is David Icke and what exactly does he stand for?

This is probably not a question many people have found themselves spending a lot of time trying to answer, most will be altogether unaware of him or his work, a fact lamented by Icke and his followers which is framed as; the continuing attempt to “suppress the quickening vibrations of awakening humanity”[0.7] or the suppression of truth essential to the 'Brotherhood manipulation of humanity',“while the versions presented by 'science' and religion were given free reign”[0.9].

Among those who are aware of him he is not only adored, but scorned, revered, and mocked in equal measure, to many he will simply be the ex-Professional footballer turned BBC presenter, who dabbled in politics with The Green Party before donning a turquoise tracksuit and hitting the UK talkshow circuit in the early 90's: announcing his 'spiritual awakening', the immanent destruction of the planet, and his new direction as a spiritual messenger for humanity in interviews with Fern Britten, Nicky Campbell and Terry Wogan throughout March- April 1991.

During these first forays into fame he imparted his 'teachings' on: the environment; politics; morality;spirituality; the mystical forces governing reality; truth; lies and more besides, only to receive the derisive laughter of the audience, and “unimaginable national ridicule”[1] in return.

The media exposure of March/April 1991 came during a very tumultuous period in his personal life, the previous month he had “intuitively” flown to Peru, where he describes having an extremely intense psychotic episode atop a mound in the centre of a Pre-Incan, Sillustani burial ground, he calls this “the experience that transformed my life”[2], undoubtedly news of his father's death and burial reaching him while there, and a random encounter with a mysterious blonde Argentian from La Paz Bolivia, had no less a dramatic effect on his mental and emotional well-being.

This voyage of discovery appears to have immediately followed one of numerous meetings with British Canadian Psychic Deborah Shaw, who he had visited for advanced 'channelling' sessions[3] in Canada, and with whom he'd been working closely since August 1990 writing Truth Vibrations, a book largely comprised of channelled information outlining David's “new age spirituality”, along with reinterpretations of various religious and historical figures he has continued to subscribe to and publish in his later work.

Fresh upon his return from “the experience that transformed his life”, David and his Wife Linda Atherton appeared alongside Deborah (now called Mari Shawsun, who would later that year have a daughter by Icke) in a press conference for the UK media, in which Icke proceeded to introduce himself as “Son of the Godhead”[4]; a divinely inspired messenger for humanity or channel of a supernatural force he has since come to refer to as “infinite consciousness”, endowed with the task of expounding various prophecies of geological upheaval and natural disasters including the immanent destruction of the Isle of Arran; the concepts of spiritual hierarchy governing the “earth's energy matrix”; reincarnation; earth energy; balance and the human equivalents of these concepts in the body ie the Chakra system and minds of human beings on national television.

These are all subjects which came to constitute a significant proportion of all his later work, forming the basis of his “story of the spiritual renaissance”.

“Then, in March 1991, I went over for a third visit to Canada to work with a channeller, Mari Shawsun. I can remember the time vividly: it was just as if someone had flicked a light switch. Suddenly, the David Icke I have just described had taken a step back. He was still there, but no longer controlling events. I think the same thing must have happened to Mari also. It was such a strange feeling. It was as if the real me had become an observer, just looking on, sometimes in horror, at what was happening.”[4.5]

The media branded the three of them “The Turquoise Triangle”, the controversial, outlandish nature of his theories combined with the seriousness of his warnings launched him into the Newspaper headlines and subsequently public awareness,so that in the midst of what can surely without exaggeration be called his psychological disintegration, the media paraded David, subjecting him to the razor sharp wit of Terry Wogan and public mockery in the name of entertainment, “This period of unbelievable ridicule did not make my subsequent work more difficult; it made it possible.” [5]

“I was speaking the words, but all the time I could hear the voice of the brakes in the background saying, 'David, what the hell are you saying?'”[5.5]

“When you survey the world today ... when a child dies in this world of preventable disease every two seconds, when the economic system of this world must destroy the Earth simply for that system to survive; when you see all the wars, and when you see all the pain, and when you see all the suffering, is it a force of love and wisdom and tolerance that is in control of this planet?”[1.5]

Regardless of how coherent some of his concerns actually were, in the context of the supernatural claims made in the press conference, -not to mention the mystical way in which he described events; assuming an overtly religious air while presenting his theories of forces of negativity and thoughts destroying the planet- a large majority of the rational secular public were inevitably alienated from his message, as I too am sympathetic to the concerns he mentions above, but am alienated by his implicit demand for a dictatorship of “love wisdom and tolerance” to be put “in control of this planet”, exerting influence on 'things' is what a “force” 'does' is it not?

These events though apparently earth shattering for David, were merely the external manifestations of a process which had been underway at least since writing: “It Doesn't Have to be Like This” in 1989, about this period he writes: “I began to feel a presence around me. When I was in a room alone it felt as if someone else was there and this went on for months as I continued my work with the BBC.”, before recounting the story of months later being in a Newsagents with his Son Gareth, where he was drawn by a voice in his head to look at a book by psychic and healer Betty Shine: “As I stood there, my feet fixed to the spot, I heard a very clear voice in my mind say: "Go and look at the books on the far side..... The author' was a professional psychic and 'hands on' healer and I thought at once of the presence I had been feeling around me for all these months. Would this lady be able to tell me what was going on? I read the book in 24 hours and contacted her to make an appointment.”[6]

Icke's mission to “heal the world” was imparted over four meetings with her, after having: “talked with her about other dimensions or frequencies of existence and a much wider vision of life and Creation.”[6], obviously indicating David's credulity to this professional charlatan, “I was told ... that I would be given the 'spiritual riches' to, in effect, lift the veil of illusion that held humanity in servitude. Knowledge would be put into my mind and at other times I would be led to knowledge, the psychic told me. 'One man cannot change the world, but one man can communicate the message that will change the world'.....I would be led to this knowledge and communicate it on a global scale. One said: 'Arduous seeking is not necessary. The path is already mapped out. You only have to follow the clues'.”[7]

I actually found a copy of Betty Shine's book “Mind Magic”[7.5] having recognized her name while browsing local charity shop bookshelves, opening the pages I found the foreword is actually written by David himself, signed and dated “1990 from the Isle of Wight”, this two page eulogy which was worth the £1 alone reiterates the fundamental aspects of the ideology he retains to this day, he writes: “Through Betty, I received some astonishing revelations and predictions of fundamental importance to the future of humankind... We have lost touch with our spirit, the real us, over recent centuries and become obsessed with the purely material”.

This opposition to 'the purely material', (meaning the material/physicalist world view) forms the basis of many of Icke's apparently disparate opinions on subjects such as medicine, science, history, education and society to this day, it's the moralo-religious sub-stance or interpretation of reality that colours his perspective on historical figures like Charles Darwin: [see footnote 6]“It is destroying our values and it is destroying our world and the time has come to take another path. It is no coincidence that the planet we depend upon for life in all it's magnificent forms, has been taken to the brink in the very period in which the spiritual has been suppressed by the obsession with more material wealth for the few at the expense of the vast majority.” 
 

This is another aspect of Icke's worldview which is particularly befitting his pastoral pretensions, namely; his advocacy of the dispossessed and representation of the concerns of the “vast majority” of humankind, particularly in matters where financial freedom and institutions, have come to negate the power of traditional religious morality to conserve a particular social and environmental equilibrium.

Based on this we would expect his theories regarding the English Civil War, French Revolution, American Wars of Independence, numerous other historical events, historical or modern Nations he considers opposed to traditional values, Individuals or families of wealth obtained since the Industrial revolutions, philosophers who argued in favour of the materialist worldview, or against religious mysticism, superstition etc,. to be marked by antagonism towards their rejection of traditional feudal values[7.55]: “We have lost touch with our spirit, the giver, and, as a result, we have lost touch with the values of the spirit, like compassion caring and sharing. Those are the values that we need now to turn us back from the road to self-destruction, and we do not have very long to find them. Understanding the mind ,,, holds the key to the awesome task that we face in our battle for the planet and the future...It is not just nature we are destroying, it is also our own souls...It is no coincidence that as we have allowed the material to dominate the spiritual so emotional problems,,, go up and up with every year....We are coming to the end of the road both as people and as a world,,,it is time for a new way of thinking.”

These urgent warnings and hyperbolic style, delivered beneath a veneer of moralo-religious concern, are not at all uncommon to David's work in the 20 years following his earlier contributions, the concerns he outlines here loosely centred around the environment, in favour of a more spiritual way of life new ways of thinking etc, are a central theme in all the later work which I have reviewed, neither has the regressive attitude towards historical progress shown any sign of abating, rather, more elaborate conspiratorial schemes have been dreamt up -or derived from the numerous questionable sources listed in his bibliography- to support his rejection of human progress and our collective history, the entirety of which he attempts to frame as a conspiracy enacted by a secret cabal, using gradual reforms to implement a “totalitarian World Government” in attempts to dominate every aspect of human life.

In his narrative science and medicine are used not for their ability to alleviate the suffering of people diagnosed with mental illnesses, eradicate Smallpox, Polio, Measles, Rubella or cure cancers, but rather to hurt human beings in numerous ways, and eradicate 'our connection with God', which he comes to define later in his career as: “Universal Consciousness”, and Betty Shine calls in similarly Deistic fashion “Universal Mind”.

“Contrary to what medical science is obsessed with telling us, the physical body is not the whole human being. It is the fantastic physical shell through which the eternal us experiences this physical world. There is far more to us than a body. Creation is the expression of one infinite mind and all lifeforms are aspects of that one mind: what many people call God. We are each other. We are all God”[7.6]

The book that contains the most insight to this period is apparently “Love Changes Everything” and though I haven't been able to source a copy, excerpts show how far into the practice of 'Channelling' Icke was during the nineties: “Since the publication of The Truth Vibrations I have learned so much more as I have communicated almost daily with Rakorski, the one known as Lord of all Creation, who is directly responsible for the changes the Earth will undergo. I also communicate often with the one we know as Jesus, the Spirit of the Earth, and many others.”[8] 
 
From what little is available online of these first few productions of a long career, it appears his earlier work was predominantly based around mystical revelations, stark warnings about the environment, events that never occured, and reproductions of religious ideology which he retains in his later work with various adaptations, which is bolstered by numerous historical and conspiratorial theories apparently lacking in his earlier books, but which came to make up the majority of his output from the publication of The Robot's Rebellion in 1994.

Despite the quantity of unusual, “esoteric” facts littered throughout his books and superficial appearance of creditability this bestows upon them, the historical information he provides is far from exhaustive, in his narrative much is left in shadow, to the imagination or completely neglected, in his quest to undermine the “official narrative” his speculations often border on science fiction, leading to numerous people and events being misrepresented, instead of factual history David prefers to focus on particular points of interest to his main thesis, namely the manipulation and control of human beings for thousands of years, by the hidden forces of chaos or imbalance loosely defined as: the “Illuminati”, “Brotherhood”, “Elite”, “Black Nobility”, “Hostile E.T's” or “an Interdimensional Race”, all are symbols embodying this constantly maligned 'negative force', which the reader is told exerts control over the entire global economic and political systems from the time of “Atlantis”, throughout history to this day.

“your consciousness is being challenged to reject the accepted history of humankind, and to see through the smokescreen that much of it is. This is not always easy when you have been through the education (indoctrination) system, and the establishment version of past, present, and future are constantly fed to us through the media minute by minute.” [9]

Repeating ad-nauseum those aspects of his narrative that lend credence to his overall theory, he sets about re-framing the development of the sciences, psychological techniques, international political cooperation, transcendence of religious mysticism and development of industrial productive power, as steps towards a totalitarian world government hell bent on control of the entire human race, favouring the repetition of sensational accusations, along with slander and unfalsifiable 'theories' reproduced against the general idea and most obvious symbols of historical progress, including more specific targets of certain political persuasions, family history, genetic lineage or cultural identity, to substantiate his theories and galvanize opposition to these “negative forces”.

Numerous participants in these aforementioned fields, the historical and present day enemies of David's such as the Rothschild's, Warburg's, Rockefeller's, Peter Mandelson, Blair, Bush, the Clinton's, Karl Marx, Charles Darwin, Alfred Milner, etc, are all accused of complicity in numerous conspiracies, their political leanings, associations and activities are a good indicator as to Icke's personal ideology which becomes ever more apparent the more he defines it's enemies. 

Re-appearing with Wogan on the BBC in 2006 Icke highlighted what a formative time this was in his life, expressing his bitterness towards the people he came to refer to in his books as “The Sheeple”, he explained: “I couldn't walk down any street in Britain without being laughed at by most of the people, going into a pub caused uproar”, and how this revealed: “the level of immaturity that passes for adulthood in this country” since, “humans are little more than controlled clones”, this antipathy towards the large majority of people in the world is still revisited consistently in his writing, video presentations and lectures, and not only by him, but his followers aswell.

“History is clearly not what it appears to be, and yet the official version is being indoctrinated into generation after generation through the ‘education’ system and the Brotherhood-controlled media.”[10]
______
0.7.... TFTTL pg 196

0.9.... TFTTL pg 21
1....TFTTL pg 13
1.5.... transcribed from the only available footage of the 1991 Wogan interview online

2.... TFTTL pg 11
3.... LCE pg 141,“Then, in March 1991, I went over for a third visit to Canada to work with a channeller, Mari Shawsun. I can remember the time vividly: it was just as if someone had flicked a light switch. Suddenly, the David Icke I have just described had taken a step back. He was still there, but no longer controlling events. I think the same thing must have happened to Mari also. It was such a strange feeling. It was as if the real me had become an observer, just looking on, sometimes in horror, at what was happening.”
taken from http://darrylslibrary.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/love-changes-everything-by-david-icke/

4.... What exactly did he mean by “Son of the Godhead”? From LCE page 103 taken from http://darrylslibrary.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/love-changes-everything-by-david-icke/ :
“Some find it hard to accept that there is more than one Son of the Godhead. They believe that Jesus is the only Son of God. It is true that Jesus is the most evolved of these beings, but there are many of this evolution around the universes. Sons and Daughters of the Godhead carry and channel energies which can have a very powerful effect on the energy system [of the planet], and they can also restore links between a planet and the network. They have a different role to that of a Son of Man, and the two are not the same. They are created by the Godhead to serve Creation and the energy system, and are given a particular energy package that allows them to channel and generate incredibly pure and powerful energies. The more they evolve the purer and more powerful those energies become. They also have the ability to stimulate energies in other life-forms when they travel to or through an area. However, Sons and Daughters of the Godhead should not be seen as more important or special than anyone else. They have a role to play, but then so does every single life-form, nor are they super-human. They struggle with the same emotions and problems as anyone else.”

4.5..... LCE pg 141  

5.... TFTTL pg 14
5.5.... ITLOE pg 193 excerpted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke#Turquoise_period

6..... TFTTL pg 6 he continues to elucidate his perspective: “ I had always rejected religion and also the absurd idea pedalled by 'science' that we are all 'accidents' of 'evolution' who cease to exist at 'death'. Unbelievable rubbish”...

7..... TFTTL pg 5 
7.5.... Guild Publishing 1991
At this point I feel it may be informative for the reader, if I share a selection of quotes from HRH Prince Of Wales, Charles Windsor the future King of England: “during the last three centuries, in the Western world at least, a dangerous division has come into being in the way we perceive the world around us...
Science has tried to assume a monopoly - even a tyranny - over our understanding...
Science has attempted to take over the natural world from God, with the result that it has fragmented the cosmos and relegated the sacred to a separate, and secondary, compartment of our understanding...
We are only now beginning to gauge the disastrous results of this outlook. We in the Western world seem to have lost a sense of the wholeness of our environment, and of our immense and inalienable responsibility to the whole of creation. This has led to an increasing failure to appreciate or understand tradition, and the wisdom of our forebears accumulated over the centuries. Indeed, tradition is positively discriminated against - as if it was some socially unacceptable disease”.
As you can see from this selection of quotes taken from one speech by HRH, the message of this old word traditionalist is not too dissimilar from the general message “brought to humanity” by David Icke, infact at it's root it's a fundamentally similar story about the need for a Spiritual renaissance in opposition to the excesses of materialism and “disastrous results of this outlook”, on the tangible environment and it's intangible “creator”: “Our Environment has suffered beyond our worst nightmares, in part because of a one-sided approach to economic development which, until very recently, failed to take account of the inter-relatedness of creation.”

from A speech by HRH The Prince of Wales titled 'A Sense of the Sacred: Building Bridges Between Islam and the West', The Wilton Park Seminar, Wilton Park, West Sussex Published on 13th December 1996 available on "his Highnesses" website. 

7.55.... Robot's Rebellion pg 138, “It inspired scores of ‘people’s revolutions’ and civil wars to replace the monarchies and it achieved this in the normal way - by working through both sides to create the conflict and the atmosphere of unrest. Sometimes the monarch would hold on, more often the revolution would usher in a people’s dictatorship or ‘democratic government’.”

7.6.... TTSSYF pg xv of the Introduction to the 21^st Century edition, 2004, these are the opening words of the book:“We Live in a multidimensional universe, which is part of a multidimensional and infinite consciousness we call God and Creation. We are multidimensional beings. Therefore this book has to be multidimensional if it is to make a significant contribution to human freedom. It exposes both the daily manipulation of our lives by a secret clique and presents the spiritual causes and solutions which will bring true freedom to Planet Earth and all who live upon her.”

8..... From the 2^nd page of the introduction, taken from http://darrylslibrary.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/love-changes-everything-by-david-icke/

9.... pg194, Ch12, Robot's Rebellion
10.... pg177, Robot's Rebellion