IPOSI

IPOSI STANISLAVSKI'S ACTRESS: The Twenty-Second Spirit is Iposi; she is a Great Countess and a Mighty Princess and appears in the form of a most beautiful and noble Woman. She will speak of her 'Lioness' Objective, her 'Goose' of an Obstacle and that of her Hares 'Method' in regards to her Acting, for she is an Actress whom can make her Director of a Master witty and bold but only when she to ride and be ridden by him upon the Casting Couch within those most Erotic Lucid Dreams she will induce after Evoking her. She also knows of all things Past, Present and to come of Futures beckoning back. She Governs over Thirty-Six Legions of Female Spirits likened to her self of Actresses.

STANISLAVSKI STALKING SORCERY OF ACTING SYSTEM SUCCUBUS

Iposi will inform her Director of a Master in depth about the Stanislavski 'system' approach to Acting, which the author Carlos Castaneda would term as his ‘Stalking’ procedures of a Sorcerer, whereby Iposi fuses the two approaches together. The term of Stalking is used in various different ways in Castaneda’s work. Castaneda uses Stalking in reference to the Warrior's virtues as a Sorcerer whom has consummate Forbearance and Timing, which is a prerequisite for an Actor whereby one has the meaning of ‘Waiting for the Opening,’ which is implied by Castaneda’s understanding of Stalking, this becomes quite clear within the context of confronting those ‘Petty Tyrants’ of ones life to overcome whether it be that of negative situations within society to that of individuals whom cause one grievance, which facilitates the evolution of ones Personality and Character if one is aware of it.

Stalking implies far more than a hunter's skill and patience in relation to any external situation. The same or similar approach can be taken towards that of the Internal Predator of an Addiction. One can deliberately irritate this part of ones self by denying to give in to its habits and demands. Ones 'Predator's Mind' becomes quite obvious under stress, whereby one Stalks ones own self in order to transform.

Stalking is also used to describe Death, which constantly ‘Stalks’ ones Awareness. Death as a Predator stalks humanity, setting it up and keeping all stressed of highly reactive mode, whereby one is faced with constant new crises so as to stay one step ahead, which elicits a predictable Emotional reaction, whence one is as an animal stalked by a Predator. The only release is to be within the Eternal Moment to perceive Death as ones advisor like that of a Martial Artist whom is thereby not afraid of entering the stage of life’s gladiatorial arena in front of a mortal audience.

The Stanislavski 'system' of pre-Castaneda Stalking procedures was developed by Constantin Stanislavski, a Russian Actor, Director, and Theatre administrator at the Moscow Art Theatre founded in 1897. The system is the result of Stanislavski's many years of intensive research, observations and efforts to determine how a human being can control in their Performance the most intangible and uncontrollable aspects of human behaviour, such as Emotions and Artistic inspiration. The most influential Acting teachers in America, including Lee Strasberg, Stella Adler, Harold Clurman, Robert Lewis, Sanford Meisner and Uta Hagen have all traced their pedigrees back to Stanislavsky, his theories and that of his numerous disciples.

Stanislavski began developing a grammar of Acting in 1906; his initial choice to call it his System struck him as being far too dogmatic, so he preferred to write it as his ‘system’, without the capital letter and in quotation marks, in order to indicate the provisional nature of the results of his investigations. The system had arisen as a result of the questions Stanislavski had in regards to the great Actors whom he had admired and intensely observed, such as the tragedians Maria Yermolova and Tommaso Salvini. These Actors seemed to operate under different rules than other Actors, but their performances were still susceptible on some nights to flashes of inspiration, of completely 'being a role,' while on some nights their performances were good or merely accurate, whereby Stanislavski investigated why such fluctuations of Performance were occurring. Stanislavski regarded Maria Yermolova's acting as the pinnacle of artistic success who was a consummate Stalker like many another Woman, for Stalking is their natural predilection of Feline Lioness. In essence, his constant goal in life was to formulate some codified, systematic approach that might impart to any given Actor with some grip on his 'instrument', which in essence is that of his own self.

Stanislavski and his 'system' are frequently misunderstood. For example, often the 'system' is confused with the Method Acting. The latter is an outgrowth of the American (mainly New York) theatre scene in the 1930s and 40s, when Actors and Directors like Elia Kazan, Robert Lewis, Lee Strasberg, etc., first in the Group Theatre and later in the Actors Studio, applied Stanislavski's 'system' as it was taught to Strasberg at the American Laboratory Theatre in the 1920s to the particular Psychological needs of the American Actor of their time. Stanislavski's emphasis on life within Moments, on Psychological realism, and on Emotional Authenticity, seemed to attract these Actors and thinkers. While much work was done with the works of playwrights like Clifford Odets, Arthur Miller, and Tennessee Williams, the Method was eventually applied to older works like those of William Shakespeare. Indeed, controversy remains contesting the appropriateness of a Method approach to pre-Modernist plays, for while the 'system' and Method share many characteristics, they differ immensely. Method places a heavy emphasis upon Emotion Memory, which is, recalling previously experienced personal Emotions for use in performance which Stanislavski found to be a "less" effective means of accessing Emotion than other techniques he had evolved in his later years. Stanislavski never disowned Emotion Memory, viewing it as a useful technique if used cautiously; for recalling a past Emotional incident from ones life to thence apply to a role is somewhat akin to Evoking a Demon whose Emotional energy, if traumatic, will afflict the present of the Actor. A Sorcerer can utilise such a technique in order to thence transform an Emotion Memory of a Demon to make as an Ally but not to repeat a role, which many to do when to dwell upon past hurts whereby they repeat a Past role within their lives without even realising it.

The 'system' is often confused with the Method because of its close ties to the New York theatres, and again because of American figures like Stella Adler, who visited and was taught by Stanislavski himself. Also, perceptions of the 'system' are frequently confused, because Stanislavski had, throughout his life, no single focused project; rather he thought of his 'system' as a table of contents from whose well the working Actor could constantly draw upon, depending on what problems might occur from play to play, which one can also apply to ones life if one perceives ones self as an Actor while ones life situations are those of plays.

Stanislavski's 'system' is a complex method for producing realistic living Characters; most of today's Actors upon the stage, in television, and film owe much to it. When employing the Stanislavski method an Actor is required to deeply analyze his or her Character's Motivations just as a Sorcerer has to do in regards to him self of a Character. The Actor must discover the Character's Objective in each scene, and a 'Super-Objective' for the entire play like that of ones life, which can direct and connect an Actor's choice of Objectives from scene to scene of sequential experiences. Actors generally go over the script very carefully, looking for identifying key elements of their Character, which one can perceive as in depth Self-Analysis when ascribed to ones own self of a Character. An Actor must discover how the Character expresses its self at every level, how the Character thinks, feels and lives as a living personality as well as what prevents the Actor from acquiring the Characters key personality traits, whereby determining what the Actor needs to do in order to achieve the goal of becoming the Character. These terms are frequently referred to as Objective, Obstacle and Method. The Actor must also determine the given circumstances of every scene, knowing where the scene takes place, what is in the room, and what is going on in the outside world.

A Sorcerer applies the same technique in order to set up the necessary Microcosmic conditions within the Dream in regards to a chosen Macrocosmic Hunting-Ground of his Stalking activity wherein he hunts upon the stage of life for the Signs, Portents and Omens of his engineered Synchronicities, which had been prior wrought of rehearsal via the Microcosmic Dream of the Nagual. However, after applying in depth Self-Analysis to him self as a Character to assume, the Sorcerer has to then forget his Recapitalisation of Self-Analysis in order to naturally flow into the Character he seeks to become.

There is a story that an Actress who had once been in a play directed by Stanislavski whom came to him years later and informed him that she had taken copious amounts of notes on him and that of his technical approach during rehearsals; she wanted to know what to do with these notes. He replied, 'Burn them all.' The Sorcerer does likewise with his Self-Analysis, which Castaneda would term as ‘Erasing Personal History.’

The anecdote, whether true or not, is illustrative of Stanislavski and his approach. The Stanislavski of later life is not the same as the Stanislavski who championed Emotion and Sense Memory. At times, Stanislavski's methodological rigor bordered on opacity: see, for instance, the chart of the Stanislavski 'system' included as a fold-out in editions of Robert Lewis' book "Method or Madness," a series of lectures. The chart, made by Adler, is very complicated, listing all aspects of the Actor and of Performance, which Stanislavski thought pertinent at the time. His dedication to completeness and accuracy often contended with his goal to create a workable system, which Actors would actually use.

See also Stanislavski’s description of the correct way of walking on stage, in his book translated into English as "Building a Character." His interest in deeply analyzing the qualities of a given phenomenon were meant to give the Actor an awareness of the complexities of human behaviour, and how easily falsehoods, aspects of behaviour that an audience can detect without knowing it, are assumed by an untrained or inexperienced Actor during performance. All Actions that a person must enact, Walk, Talk, even sit on stage, must be broken down and re-learned, Stanislavski once insisted. It is well known that ones Body language reveals far more about ones self than mere words, which others can read at a subliminal subconscious level, whereby if ones Body language is discordant with ones words one then communicates a false impression to others around one.

Such rigors of re-learning were probably constant throughout Stanislavski’s life. Stanislavski, a man of institution, his own Moscow Art Theatre and its associated studios, was a great believer in formal (and rigorous) training for the Actor, which also applies very much to a Sorcerer.

Training was highly physical and demanding, and Stanislavski's respect for Physical Action that brought his system to a point of apotheosis, a way of reaching Emotional Truth and Psychological realism while maintaining a grip on control of the physical. Further: freeing oneself up for performing anything, be it Modern theatre or Greek let alone within ones everyday life.

Late in his life Stanislavski put much faith in an approach he called the Method of Physical Action. (The use of the word Method, again, causes confusion with Strasberg's Method.) This approach, Stanislavski surmised, finally dealt completely with the instrument of the Actor and with a universality of performance. In some respects Stanislavski’s Method of Physical Action is similar to the teachings of Gurdjieff whom described his approach as contrasting with those teachings, which emphasize the development of the Body, Mind, or Emotions separately. Gurdjieff's exercises claimed to work on all three at the same time to promote comprehensive and balanced inner development, which was later termed as the ‘Fourth Way,’ echoing certain other spiritual traditions such as those found in Shamanic cultures or that of the Martial Arts of everyday practicality. Gurdjieff taught that one must expend considerable effort to effect the transformation, which leads to an inner awakening of ones creative potential. The inner effort, which one puts into practice Gurdjieff referred to as "The Work" or "Work on Oneself”. However, Stanislavski’s techniques are far more practical, which in turn has the Spiritual dimension of Gurdjieff’s methodology should one desire to go there.

The Method of Physical Action (hereafter, MPA) is complex. It requires an in depth understanding of the significance of Physical Action, and in the performance of Physical Action. The idea behind the MPA is fairly simple, but its implications are profound. It is based upon the idea that the only thing an Actor will ever have control of in his life is "his Body." There is never a direct line to Emotions within a Performance, only to the Body. Emotions may be remembered and brought up via Emotional Memory, but Stanislavski generally considered this a rehearsal tool or technique of research, at best. There is, in the end, only the Body via whose Five senses one can experience new Emotional Memories.

Therefore the Actor and the Director must work hard to use the Body, that is, the Body's performance of Physical Action, as the primary material of creation so as to evoke differing Emotional Memories to explore. That is the subject of the rehearsal process: how to come to Physical Actions, which affects the Actor’s nervous system to imprint whereby bringing the scene naturally to life at the same time. So in one pass both Emotional and aesthetic considerations of a scene are dealt with. The Actor can work with an enormity (indeed, infinity) of options; he senses the entire landscape of possibilities of Performance.

The Sorcerer utilises the tool of Dreaming in order to reherse his role of chosen Character to assume via inducing engineered Lucid Dreams whose intensity of Emotional experience imprints his Nervous System, for the Nervous System cannot tell the difference between a real or vividly imagined event. When ones Nervous System becomes imprinted by an experience of Emotional Memory it will automatically steer ones Performance when to Stalk upon the waking stage of ones life.

The MPA is so simple that it is almost a default technique, like that of a technique without technique. Two necessities are required: thorough Physical Training and an understanding of what a truly good Physical Action comprises. Both can take years of experience of near Martial Arts training and reflection until an Actor is fully equipped to handle a role. Stanislavski thought late in life that the art of Performance cannot be learned from literature, only from Action, Performance, and Observation, which is also applicable to the Art of a Sorcerer.

The system is very much based around an Actor being "In The Moment," but always staying one step away from complete belief, for belief curtails the fluidity of being within the Moment of the Eternal Present; in other words one just is within the Power of the Silence for belief requires one to always tell ones self that one believes! Stanislavski felt it was important that, whilst the Actor should experience and show the Emotions of the Character, it is very important that the Actor still stay detached for this allowed for the natural evolution of the Character to take place. However, the Actor has to stay aware of their own core personality so as to not become totally immersed within their Character, such as that of playing the part of Jack the Ripper for example otherwise the Actor will end up in jail with blood on their hands due to becoming possessed by all devouring obsession! Perhaps this be a bit too extreme of possible outcome, however when an Actor becomes totally possessed by his Character it can lead to mental instability. In regards to Sorcery practice one does not assume negative personas to become possessed by for a Sorcerer is always in control of his alternate guises of Characters to assume when needed.

The system was made as a flexible structure, a thing, which Actors may use as much or as little as they please in their rehearsals and intended to be modified for individual tastes in regards to their personality types around the round table of Zodiac to Act out when to leap into a mask to wear of sign when exploring differing permutations of Character.

Techniques involve a "Round The Table Analysis," a process in which an Actor and a Director literally sit around a table and put forward their thoughts on the Script and the Characters until a clear understanding is formed. One can perceive the Director as ones own detached Self-Analysis of ones self as the Actor where one goes over ones Life Script to perceive what Character one is playing so as to determine whether one can Act ones Character in another way.

The Actors "Homework" involved breaking the Script into sections of different "Objectives." This would be different for each Actor involved. The structure of the entire Script would be roughly as follows of 'Pentagram' formation for the entirety of ones experience of the material world is experienced via ones 'Five Senses':

1: Objective: the final goal a Character wants to achieve. (Often worded as "What Succubus do I want to Evoke?" Note: Does not have to be achieved and can be as simple as you wish. E.g.: To pour a Mug of Tea.

2: Obstacle: aspects that will stop or hinder a Character achieving his or her Objective. E.g.: There are No Teabags in the Tin.

3: Tools/Method (has many different names): the different techniques, which a Character is going to use to achieve its Objective. E.g.: Search around the Kitchen, walk to the Shops; call upon a Neighbour of a Witch.

4: Units/Bits/Beats: the division of the script into smaller Objectives or Methods. E.g.: The entire section during which the Character searches for a tea bag would be a 'Unit.' When the Character decides to call upon a neighbour it is called a 'Bit.'

5: Actions: how the Character is going to say or do something. Think of it as an Objective for each line. Normally used with a verb. E.g.: The line may be (whilst on the phone) "Hello, Lillith. It's Aleister from next door, just returned back from the grave for a cuppa. You wouldn't happen to have any spare Tea bags around your temple, would you, my dear? I know how well-organized you are; well, you have to be when to preside over your most salacious Sisterhood of a Coven." The Objective for this line may be "to Flatter if not to Seduce." This will be different for every single Actor.

Stanislavski believed that if one completes this homework, the desired Emotion would be automatically Evoked and experienced of energetic state, which will imprint ones Nervous Systyem; this will happen if one is able to vividly imagine a scene while accomplishing ones 'Homework' for as previously said, ones Nervous System cannot tell the difference between a real or a vividly imagined event.

To identify the Objective clearly, the Actor has to break down a scene into “Beats” or “Bits,” short sections that end with each change of Objective. In a basic example, if a Character pours a cup of coffee, answers the phone, and then runs screaming out of the house, the scene has at least three separate Beats. At the bare minimum, the Objective of the Character changes from pouring coffee, to answering the phone, to getting out of the apartment. Beats are not determined on Action alone, however, and may be based on a change of argument or Emotion. Such can be utilised when looking back upon incidents within ones own life to breakdown into Beats or that of visualising a scenario, such as one imagining how one will possibly Act at a party of Hunting-Ground, which one has been invited to where ones Objective will be that of chatting up a potential partner. Should ones visualistion be vivid enough one will thereby imprint ones Nervous System with an appropriate Emotional Memory, whereby, when to eventually encounter a potential partner at the party one will not become a nervous wreck!

Obstacles are defined as things preventing a Character from achieving their Objective. In the basic scene listed above, if the Character was running out the door to have spilled coffee all down her front, such would be seen as an Obstacle to the Character’s Objective of getting out of the apartment. Obstacles are dealt with in one of three ways; either the Character gives up her Objective because of an encountered Obstacle, finds a way to go around it, or plunges along regardless. Which method the Character chooses to deal with Obstacles gives great insight into the Character’s personality, and defining clearly how and why a Character chooses a particular response is the basis for much of the Stanislavski method. One may also utilise this technique in order to perceive Obstacles within ones own life so as determine the why and wherefore of their existence as well as to determine how one has reacted to them or how one will react to those Obstacles yet to manifest, which will give one an insight into ones own Character.

Objectives are definable down to individual lines of dialogue, based upon a Stanislavski concept called “Objective Words.” It is the Actor’s job to understand and play the Character’s Objective not only within the entire play, each Scene and each Beat, but also in each Line. Determining what the key motivation is behind each Line is a basic practice in the Stanislavski method. When looking at ones own life, one may just find an underlying reasoning of an Objective behind much of ones communicated Words, which to have an affect upon those whom hear one to speak or not as the case may be.

Konstantin Stanislavski had a dictum that he probably believed throughout his life: that one should always approach a role as directly as possible, and then see if it "lives." If the Actor and the role connect, and the role comes to life, why apply a technique, a system? Such a success may only happen once or twice in one's life, or never, so the remainder of one's performances require technique. One will find that many an individual does not know who they truly are, hence their Act of life never connects with their roles whereupon they find themselves becoming somewhat like automatons; when ones Act connects with ones role, one becomes ones self of a living Character.

However, each individual Actor must decide whether or not an approach 'works' for them.

While Stanislavski was not the first to codify some system of Acting (see, for instance, any number of Victorian gesture-books for Actors at the time) he was the first to take questions and problems of Psychological significance directly. In fact, Stanislavski started attempting to create a system before Psychology had ever been widely understood and formalized as a discipline. When it finally was formalized, Psychology influenced Stanislavski's system tremendously. Though his approach changed greatly throughout his life, he never lost sight of his ideals: Truth in Performance and love of Art.

In order to help Actors portray the honest Objective of the Character, Stanislavski pioneered a concept called the “Magic If.” To help connect the Character to the Actor, the Actor asks the question, "What if I was in the same situation as my Character?" The goal of this theme is to identify the Character as a possible aspect of the Actor, allowing the Actor to transcend the confines of realism by asking them what would occur "if" circumstances were different, or "if" the circumstances were to happen to the Actor themselves whereby to thence think like the Character, rather than to just impersonate a Character. One may have encountered numerous situations where one was not truly ones self to Act like another whereupon to become totally out of balance, which leads to discordant behaviour and a loss of ones Objective. It is only when one becomes in tune with ones True Self of a Character that one is enabled to achieve ones Objective, but such has to be realistic otherwise one will be considered false by others around ones self.

Understanding the Objective and Method of the Character allows the Actor to create an ‘Interior Monologue’ of the Character, which is that of a semi-constant flow of thoughts going on within their Mind. The Interior Monologue is experienced by everybody of normal function, which is one of the areas of exploration concerning Psycho-Cybernetics, for it is ones Interior Monologue, which guides one to ones Objectives like that of a servo-mechanism of a Missile, whereupon the Stanislavski method attempts to adopt the Internal Monologue that a Character will have as a consequence of being human. This technique is to help each Action to feel as if it comes spontaneously of natural automatic occurrence, rather than to follow what the script describes. Actors use the Interior Monologue theory to help them avoid a scene becoming repetitious or dull after many performances, which of course one can also apply to ones everyday life.

The Internal Monologue of self written Script is otherwise known as the Internal Dialogue by Carlos Castaneda, which powerfully programs and shapes concepts about ones self, whereupon one is Acting a part within ones own self wrought play.

“The internal dialogue is what grounds people in the daily world. The world is such and such or so and so, only because we talk to ourselves about its being such and such and so and so. The passageway into the world of shamans opens up after the warrior has learned to shut off his internal dialogue.” (Carlos Castaneda, quoted from: Tales of Power)

If one believes that one is worthy and strong, one will live up to that truth to Act out. One will also find that such self concepts congregate around a Self-Image, which one has of ones self; such Self-Images are often aligned with an Archetype, wherefore if one perceives ones self as being worthy and strong one may feel a Subconscious affinity of Association with Heroic figures from out of Myth or Fairytale to that of those Heroes and Heroines depicted in many a film such as seeing ones self as a Knight in Shining Armour, Conan, Rambo, Red Sonja, Lara Croft or a Warrior Queen etc. One may perceive Past-Life-Regressions as being proof of Reincarnation but one can also perceive such Regressions as Evoking deep seated Archetypes of Emotion Memory within ones Subconscious Mind, which have an affect upon ones everyday Objectives, Obstacles and Methods of ones life.

“We talk to ourselves incessantly about our world. In fact we maintain our world with our internal talk. And whenever we finish talking to ourselves about ourselves and our world, the world is always as it should be. We renew it, we rekindle it with life; we uphold it with our internal talk. Not only that, but we also choose our paths as we talk to ourselves. Thus we repeat the same choices over and over until the day we die, because we keep on repeating the same internal talk over and over until the day we die. A warrior is aware of this and strives to stop his internal talk.” (Carlos Castaneda, quoted from: A Separate Reality)

One will also find that such Internal Self-Images are empowered by ones Internal Dialogue, which in turn generates external Synchronicities of a feed-back loop. The feed-back loop of Synchronicity invariably validates how one internally perceives ones self; however, an Actor learns to assume other Internal Self-Images by 'Stopping' their own Internal Dialogue in order to attain another Internal Dialogue of an alternate Character that the Actor seeks to Act. When an alternate persona of a Character is successfully assumed by the Actor he can thereby generate a Synchronicity mesh of observable phenomena, which empowers the stabilisation of the alternate persona being Acted. In other words new opportunities suddenly manifest; for example, if an Actor assumes the Archetypal guise of a King, its associative weave of Synchronicity may generate money opportunities and that of having luck with finance to also have greater influence upon others, but such has to be made as a constant otherwise the Synchronicity mesh reverts back to what it was before.

“When a warrior learns to stop the internal dialogue, everything becomes possible; the most far-fetched schemes become attainable.” (Carlos Castaneda, quoted from: Tales of Power)

One will find that ones life appears unpredictable of Chaotic oscillations at times, whether it be that of the personal or what is going on around ones self; whereby one can apply Chaos Theory to ones life, whose discipline describes a bounded Chaotic system as having some kind of long term pattern to it; when an observed pattern is not that of a simple periodic oscillation or that of an orbit it is said to have a Strange Attractor. If one plots a system's behaviour upon a graph over an extended period of Time such as that of the Weather one may discover patterns, which are not at first perceivable in the short term. In addition, even if one starts with different initial conditions for the system, one will usually find the same pattern emerging; the area for which this holds true is called the ‘Basin of Attraction’ for the Attractor.

Ones Internal Self-Image acts like a Strange Attractor, which generates observable patterns of activity in ones life, especially in regards to the phenomena of Synchronicity when observed beyond that of mere Coincidence. The observed Synchronicities one will find have an Associative Symbolic Correspondence with ones Internal-Self Image, which is stabilised by ones Internal Dialogue.

The Internal Self-Image of ones Character can be personally experienced within ones Dreams whose domain resides within the Quantum realm of the Microcosmic Implicate Order, whereupon ones Self-Image becomes as a Strange Attractor whose 'Basin of Attraction' is that of an Informational Associative Fractal Dream Domain; it is within the Quantum realm of the Implicate Ordered Microcosmic Dream that ones Internal-Self image sets up Associative patterns of Information, which is that of Energy whereby hence affecting ones Explicate Ordered Macrocosmic experiential reality of Matter, whereupon one experiences the patterning phenomena of Synchronicity, let alone to indicate that Mind and Matter are one and the same Fractal entity.

The Internal Dialogue is very much entwined with Neurolinguistics, which is the study of the Neural mechanisms within the Human brain that control the comprehension, production, and acquisition of Language. As an interdisciplinary field, Neurolinguistics draws methodology and theory from fields such as Neuroscience, Linguistics, Cognitive Science, Neurobiology, Communication Disorders, Neuropsychology, and Computer Science. Researchers are drawn to the field from a variety of backgrounds, bringing along a variety of experimental techniques as well as widely varying theoretical perspectives. Much of the work in Neurolinguistics is informed by models within the disciplines of Psycholinguistics and theoretical Linguistics, and is focused upon investigating how ones brain can implement the processes that theoretical and Psycholinguistics propose are necessary in producing and comprehending Language. Neurolinguists study the physiological mechanisms by which the brain processes information related to Language, and evaluate Linguistic and Psycholinguistic theories, using Aphasiology, Brain Imaging, Electrophysiology, and Computer Modelling.

In ancient Shamanic cultures, especially those of central North Asia to Siberia as well as those of South America the entirety of Creation is perceived to be made out of Language, which isn't too far removed from Information Theory. Shamans use sacred songs and repetitive chants in order to control their Internal Dialogue of a Monologue, which then facilitates Trance states as well as to aid them to engineer Lucid Dreams. The Shaman is able to assume Alternate Personas just like an Actor, which is taken much further when to do so via Trance and Lucid Dreams for the Shamans Alternate Selves are associated with varying powers and abilities that the Shaman can thereby access. In Tibetan Buddhism, which is heavily influenced by Bon-Po Shamanism each of the Alternate Personas of a Shaman are associated with numerous types of Buddha's whom are depicted being in sexual congress with Shaktis and Dakinis of the Feminine principle whom are the power source; this is likewise found in Siberian Shamanism where the Shamans Alternate Personas are empowered by his Succubae Spirit Wives. A similar motif can be found in the ancient Norse practice of Sorcery in regards to the Language of the Runes of sacred songs and repetitive chants where each Rune is associated with a Feminine power source of a Valkyrie; while the Norse Shaman God called Odin is a master of assuming Alternate Personas like an Actor who knows how to control his Internal Dialogue of a Monologue via his Runes.

The Internal Dialogue is explored extensively through the discipline of Neuro-Linguistic programming (NLP), which is defined within the Oxford English Dictionary as “a model of interpersonal communication.” NLP is chiefly concerned with the relationship between successful patterns of behaviour and the subjective experiences (esp. patterns of Thought and thereby that of Emotion) underlying them" as well as "a system of alternative therapy based on this research, which seeks to educate people in self-awareness and effective communication skills, and to change their patterns of Mental and Emotional Behaviour". The co-founders, Richard Bandler and Linguist John Grinder, claimed it would be instrumental in "finding ways to help people have better, fuller and richer lives". They coined the title to denote a supposed theoretical connection between Neurological processes ('Neuro'), language ('Linguistic') and behavioural patterns that have been learned through experience ('Programming'), which can be organised to achieve specific goals in life.

NLP was originally derived from the Linguistic research of Alfred Korzybski, Noam Chomsky, the Gestalt of Fritz Perls, Virginia Satir, Milton H. Erickson MD and System Theory while its main manifestation drew its inspiration from Information Theory and the Philosophy of Carlos Castaneda, which was promoted by the founders Bandler and Grinder back in the 1970s as an extraordinarily effective and rapid form of Psychological Therapy, capable of addressing the full range of problems which Psychologists are likely to encounter, such as Phobias, Depression, Habit Disorders, Psychosomatic Illnesses, Learning Disorders. NLP also espoused the potential for self-determination through overcoming learned limitations as well as emphasising well-being and healthy functioning. Later, NLP was promoted as a 'Science of Excellence', derived from the study or 'modelling' of how successful or outstanding people in different fields obtain their results, which in essence Stanislavski was previously doing in regards to observing successful Actors and that of human behaviour in general. NLP claims that these skills can be learned by anyone to improve their effectiveness both personally and professionally.

Because of the absence of any firm empirical evidence supporting its sometimes extravagant claims, NLP has had little or no support from the Scientific community. However, in regards to Stanislavski’s system of prior NLP the empirical evidence is that of numerous Actors successfully assuming many a Character in part or in full; NLP continues to make no impact on mainstream academic Psychology, and only limited impact on mainstream Psychotherapy and Counselling due to an indoctrinated Materialistic perspective, which still afflicts Science whereby it is within the realm of the Arts that NLP can flourish, but not under the guise it has assumed. NLP has some influence among private Psychotherapists, including Hypnotherapists, to the extent that they claim to be trained in NLP and apply its discipline to their work as well as having an influence in management training, life coaching, and the self-help industry, which tends to be of the New-Age arena without having the extensive discipline of Stanislavski’s 'system.'

The general exercises below will help to determine ones Habits and Patterns, whereby hopefully setting one free of some of ones Directing Negative Internal Dialogue, which writes ones Script and in turn to Act out upon the Stage of every day life .

Exercise 1

Pick a day for doing this exercise, preferably a day when one is not planning to be doing anything overly dramatic with ones Voodoo Dolls or out of the ordinary such as sacrificing Lamb Chops upon the moors. Keep ones Shadow journal close by or a small notebook of Grimoire and pen of Wand handy throughout the day. Make a series of appointments with ones self. Every two hours, stop what one is doing, take out the notebook, and simply jot down observations about the Internal Self-Talk one has been having for the past two hours. Each of these eight or ten note-taking sessions need only take a few minutes. Write down what one has been telling ones self about:

1: How does one perceives ones physical appearance?

2: How does one feel about ones work that you've been doing for the past two hours?

3: How does one perceives ones intelligence.

4: How does one perceive ones competence in life?

5: What does one consider as being ones skills and abilities?

6: How one perceives ones sense of self worth?


If one finds it easier to not wait for the two-hour mark, but instead to jot things down as one hears ones thoughts going over within ones head or to be talking out loud to ones self within ones Scrying Mirror, then by all means, do it that way. The point is to develop a thorough understanding of one day's Internal-Monologue/Dialogue, without completely upsetting ones daily schedule.

Exercise 2

Imagine that one is scheduled to make an important presentation at work tomorrow. A number of important customers or clients, as well as several of ones co-workers and ones boss, will be there watching, or that of meeting up with a potential partner at some scenic location, which one visits on a regular basis. It's the night before. One is lying within bed, in the dark, think about the presentation or that of ones chat up lines. What is one saying within ones hypothetical imagined scenario to vividly visualise?

Take whatever time one needs to consider, honestly and thoroughly, the kinds of messages that would be going through ones head; one is having a conversation with ones self, so what is one saying of Script? Write down as much of this Dialogue as one can.

Exercise 3

Look back at the Script that one did for both Exercises 1 and 2. Does one perceive common themes or threads of Beat running through both sets of self written Script? If so, what are those common features of underlying Motivation? Describe them in writing so as to determine what type of Character one is Acting!

Exercise 4

When one looks back over ones Script for Exercises 1 and 2, how would one describe the overall Objective or mood of ones Internal Dialogue? Is it Positive, upbeat? Or is it pessimistic, defeatist, self-condemning? If it is Positive, is it rational? Or is it just some self delusional con job with no substance, to imagine ones self as an unrealistic Character, which in no way one can ever attain like that of becoming a Super-Human? Are there particular areas where what one has written of Script sounds especially harsh or critical of Obstacle? By contrast, does ones Internal Dialogue as to some areas of your life strike one as particularly upbeat and optimistic of Action? Circle any writing within ones Script that one thinks illustrates especially Positive or an especially Negative Internal Dialogue.

Exercise 5

Again, glancing back over ones writing of Script for both Exercises 1 and 2: What does ones Script tell one about ones orientation? Is ones Internal Dialogue oriented Externally, Internally or to perceive ones self at the mercy of the fates to not know who one is? Write down ones answer.

Exercise 6

As one looks at ones Acting Script, answer this question: What kind of a friend of a Director is one to ones self throughout the day? If one were a friend of a Director whispering into ones ear the messages one had recorded in Exercises 1 and 2, what kind of friend of a Director would one be? It is ones own self of a Director whom talks to you, all day, every day. What kind of friend of a Director is one to ones self? Is one actively creating a toxic environment for ones self to Act within, contaminating ones experience of the world Stage? Or is the Script one is writing for ones self characterized by a rational and productive optimism so as to empower your assumed Character?

When to Evoke the Succubus Iposi she will teach her Director of a Master how to assume Alternate Characters as an Actor as well as to reveal who he is at the midst of being within the Moment of an Eternal Present betwixt and between Past and Future of a self-wrought Script.
Add a caption
LOVE CHESS HOPLITE SUCCUBUS SALLOSI: The Nineteenth Spirit is Sallosi (or Saleosi). She is a Great and Mighty Duchess, and appears in the form of a gallant and most beautiful Athenian Woman of an Amazon, whose body is lithe and gymnastic, whom will be dressed as an ancient Greek Hoplite of a soldier. She will sometimes be seen within ones Visions to be riding upon a Crocodile, which will be the arousal of her Evoked sexual energy caressing ones Reptilian-Brain-Stem. Upon her head she will be wearing a Ducal crown of a crested Hoplite helmet. She is very peacable and most wise in the Chess-Game of Love whose battles she always wins for her Master for she causes the Love of Women to be attracted to Men, and of Men to Women, wherefore she attracts those Women, which her Master desires to become as his alone of Lovers while she to eradicate his competitors from off the Chessboard. She will only do as her Master bids when she is sexually taken within those Erotic Lucid Dreams of Ancient Greece she will instigate via which she will inform her Master in depth about the Arts of Love, Chess and Poetry. She governs over Thirty Legions of Female Hoplites like unto her self. THE CHESS GODDESS OF LOVE AND SEX The Succubus Sallosi is somewhat akin to 'Caissa' who is a mythical Goddess featured in a poem called Caïssa written in 1763 by English poet and philologist Sir William Jones. She is portrayed as an ancient Greek Thracian Dryad. Jones' work was inspired by the poem Scacchia ludus ("The game of Chess"), written by Italian poet Marco Girolamo Vida in 1510. Because of her historical connection to the game of Chess, Caissa is traditionally considered the patron Goddess of Chess players. For Chess players, Caissa is often invoked as a source of inspiration or luck, e.g. "Caissa was with me in that game." She is sometimes referred to as a "Chess Muse" for her imagined ability to inspire Chess players to play well. Caissa is also spelled Caïssa. Caissa is pronounced "ky-EE-suh" or "ky-suh." Caissa the Goddess of Chess Chess is tantalizing. The game itself; the people drawn to it; the symbolism it evokes; the metaphors, which it inspires. On one level the Chessboard is the battlefield of life upon which two opposing combatants compete: White against Black; Good against Evil; Positive against Negative, Day against Night, Sun against Moon; Man against Woman. It is also a dynamic interaction between two minds, which converge and fuse into creating dynamic moves, like that of dancers or likened more so to lovers, a thing of beauty, sensual in its nuances and graphic in its uncompromising starkness. Chess is usually seen to be analogous to War. Yet, the elements of Chess, the interaction between two individuals or two minds: the give and take, the parry and thrust, the intensity and passion, of affinity to boxing and sword fighting has more associative links to that of Sexual Lovemaking. However, Chess and that of its relationship to Love, Romance or Sex, involves the inter-relationship between the two genders (depending of course on ones Sexual orientatation); yet Chess is often thought of as a primarily male-oriented game, while it's inclusion of female players to have once sparked off a rapid reaction from tunnel vision males. Until the end of the 19th century Women, for the most part, were expected to limit themselves to the artistic or domestic sides of Chess playing, leaving the competitive side to the men. This attitude gave rise to the literary fantasy of powerful Women players, a fantasy, which evolved into the preoccupation with the Sexual and physical attributes of a female Chess player. This Sexual fantasy first occurred in the early days of Chess (Shatranj) and was expressed in the famous compilation of stories, 1001 Arabian Nights. The story tells of Tawaddud, the Slave-Girl whom excels in many areas including Chess: when the damsel was playing chess with the expert in presence of the Commander of the Faithful, Harun al-Rashid, whatever move he made was speedily countered by her, till she beat him and he found himself checkmated. “O professor, I will make a wager with thee on this third game. I will give thee the queen and the right-hand castle and the left-hand knight; if thou beat me, take my clothes, and if I beat thee, I will take thy clothes.” Replied he, “I agree to this;” and they replaced the pieces, she removing queen, castle and knight. Then said she, “Move, O master.” So he moved, saying to himself, “I cannot but beat her, with such odds,” and planned a combination; but, behold, she moved on, little by little, till she made one of her pawns a queen and pushing up to him pawns and other pieces, to take off his attention, set one in his way and tempted him to take it. Accordingly, he took it and she said to him, “The measure is meted and the loads equally balanced. Eat till thou are over-full; naught shall be thy ruin, O son of Adam, save thy greed. Knowest thou not that I did but tempt thee, that I might finesse thee? See: this is check-mate!” adding, “So doff off thy clothes.” Quoth he, “Leave me my bag-trousers, so Allah repay thee;” and he swore by Allah that he would contend with none, so long as Tawaddud abode in the realm of Baghdad. Then he stripped off his clothes and gave them to her and went away." (Translation by Richard Burton) Dilaram was the favorite wife of Grand Vizier's Harem. Her husband, Murwadi, had been playing Chess for high stakes and losing badly. He had lost his entire fortune, his possessions and finally all his wives except for Dilaram. He finally used her as stakes for his last chance to gain back some of his losses. But his game looked bad, especially since his opponent would mate him on the next move. Dilaram was, of course, watching the game of her fate closely. She was a much better player than her husband, and actually much better than his adversary. She looked at the position on the board and saw how her husband could win. Since she wasn't allowed to advise him, she clothed her instructions by shouting, "Sacrifice your two rooks, but don't sacrifice me!" Her husband considered her words carefully and found the winning moves. The story above accompanied a position (called a Mansuba) entitled "Dilaram’s Mate" and was first recorded by Firdewsi at-Tahihal in his book on Chess in the 15th century. It's suspected that the story and problem were first given in the 10th century book, Kitab Ash-Shatranj by the legendary Abu-Bakr Muhammad ben Yahya as-Suli. The fantasy of the powerful Woman Chess player culminated in the creation of Caïssa, the Goddess of Chess. Caïssa was invented by Sir William Jones, the hyper-polyglot Mathematician in his1763 Latin poem of the same name. In the poem Ares, the God of War, pursued Caïssa, a dryad, with little success. The God of Sport advised Ares to create a game for her to win her over. That game was Chess. Later writers were less interested in the fantasy and more intent on metaphors and symbols and the game of Love. Even Shakespeare (1564-1616) incorporated a well known, though minor, Chess scene in The Tempest. The Tempest: Act Five, Scene One (Ferdinand and Miranda) The entrance of the Cell opens, and discovers Ferdinand and Miranda playing at Chess. Miranda: Sweet lord, you play me false. Ferdinand: No, my dearest love, I would not for the world. Miranda: Yes, for a score of kingdoms you should wrangle, And I would call it fair play Miranda and Ferdinand are lovers whose fathers are sworn enemies. Their love, represented in a devious game of chess in the final scene, restores harmony between the two families A more recent modern interpretation of Shakespeare used Chess as a metaphor for Love: "CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY'S EDINBURGH 2003 SHOW - LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST AS YOU'VE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE! Want to play a game?.... Cambridge University Ariel Society is proud to present their Edinburgh Fringe 2003 Show ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost’. Taken from the Shakespearean script, this production seeks to fully foreground Shakespeare's already self-conscious dramaturgy, and provide an insight into his most enigmatic play. Set around the concept of a chess game, ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost’ becomes a game of love. The battle of the sexes, the elaborate moves and countermoves of the men and women, and the assumption wrongly made by the women that the courtship is just sport are all heightened by the chessboard setting. Chess appears throughout the script, along with countless other images of games, playing, winning... and losing." Chaucer (1343-1400) took a rather clever approach; instead of lovers (or simply a man and woman) playing a symbolic game of love, the man plays a game (in a dream) against Fortune and losses his "Queen," his "bliss. (Such is very similar to stories of a man playing against the Devil for his Soul in a symbolic battle of Good versus Evil in the game of Life) This story is related in one of his earliest works, Book of the Duchess: In reality Chess was played by women in the Middle-Ages, but their participation was usually limited to playing their husbands or those of their betrothed; whereby depictions of women playing at chess with men often symbolized the relationship between the man and the woman.