tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16352971524917545972024-02-20T11:21:16.234-08:00The Story Behind Life CyclesAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-87666824596071243852016-12-12T21:21:00.000-08:002016-12-13T19:24:44.490-08:00Queen and Beyond - Roger Meddows Taylor and Life Cycles<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAai5SojA_eSUieF6XVWDAOoloiXFpWUbIdCRoz9GTA9SSEsyU9iAl5zjYCA6fcAgFoXgC1y3N2RroMrEUPRh6Nc-6MHrhacVH-KKzJXIjgyOv76bPQ1K-NpPeyVaSIfz1m3v3j-_SXcg/s1600/Roger+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAai5SojA_eSUieF6XVWDAOoloiXFpWUbIdCRoz9GTA9SSEsyU9iAl5zjYCA6fcAgFoXgC1y3N2RroMrEUPRh6Nc-6MHrhacVH-KKzJXIjgyOv76bPQ1K-NpPeyVaSIfz1m3v3j-_SXcg/s640/Roger+1.jpg" width="492" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Here is a question for all you <b><i>Queen</i></b> fans (and I have met a few on FB, following my recent <b>Freddie Mercury</b> post). Who best fits this description? :-<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>1. Has an incredible 4 octave vocal range from a low E2 up to a shrieking E6 (that is such a good falsetto it has been mistaken for an electric guitar)?<br />2. Began his musical career early by taking up the band position he would be known for at or around 12?<br />3. Had a successful and prolific solo career outside of Queen?<br />4. Became the first person beside the British Royal family to appear on a postage stamp in 1999?</i></b></blockquote>
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Of course, you could have answered Freddie, but it is in fact, the other great singer/songwriter from Queen; the one and only Roger Meddows Taylor. While not neglecting world famous guitarist and astrophysicist, Brian May; it was Roger who has been credited as having a similar vocal range to Freddie and as having the most focused and prolific solo career. That's why I've used the post title, <b><i>Queen and Beyond</i></b>, as his <b>'Life Cycles'</b> analysis reveals some interesting correlations.<br />
<br />
I did this analysis as a result of Roger adding me as a FB friend after showing him the Freddie story. I suggested the possibility of a tribute article to him and he gave me a 'Thumbs Up' sign. Now analysing another band member in a famous group is an interesting theoretical challenge, since he obviously had a great deal of shared life experience with Freddie. Yet he was a couple of years younger and thus his <b>'Life Cycles'</b> <b>'Significant Years'</b> would all be different. So what am I going to find when I begin reviewing his biography? Can it still make sense and thus enhance the uniqueness of <b>'Life Cycles Theory'</b> under challenging conditions? The theory says there are new eras every 12 years in a person's life and a year of change some 7 years later. Let's find out.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiBLn5i3Tk-5UFDhXwt4isfKcZqIjS-Ty2UgwJN-w1rzbh4FeVX2vdmLwQxomWiB2GErq2lS59EqTYa7hUpoLny0EYQMh6neaDgDAmw1J7tY6-pXVhQAeLtCiNhN_-dVyIEyk3PksADss/s1600/Roger+at+school.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiBLn5i3Tk-5UFDhXwt4isfKcZqIjS-Ty2UgwJN-w1rzbh4FeVX2vdmLwQxomWiB2GErq2lS59EqTYa7hUpoLny0EYQMh6neaDgDAmw1J7tY6-pXVhQAeLtCiNhN_-dVyIEyk3PksADss/s400/Roger+at+school.jpg" width="303" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Roger at school</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<b>Roger</b> was <b>born July 26th, 1949</b> in Norfolk, England. He was most probably in his <b>age 12 'Year of Revolution' (July, 1961 to July, 1962)</b> when he turned his attention from the guitar, which he had been <b>playing</b>, to <b>the drums</b>, which was what he was known for. There is an interesting parallel here with Freddie, who was 12 when he formed his own school band, with himself as lead vocalist. When Roger was in his next <b>'Significant Year' </b>(ie. his <b>age 19 'Year of Broken Pathways' - July, 1968 to July, 1969</b>) he answered an advert on a student noticeboard for a drummer and through this met <b>Brian May</b> and <b>Tim Staffell</b>. They formed a band known as <b><i>Smile</i></b>. Of course we all know that this was short-lived, because in 1970 <b>Freddie</b> (who just happened to be almost in his own <b>age 24 'Year of Revolution'</b>) joined the band and said he wanted it to be called <b><i>Queen</i></b>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvvwbL4z4J6I1YJYxxGn3poCTUu47DriMHMWiRTaBl3EtrP9Ob-cwvZvjGbKAs5UDv7W1PyhTG450fvhyphenhyphenRtKPkK4LIQPn-l_ybhwJ4tXtDIetHIY80YCTDoQ2UuBqd9DC6HvljFv-uNp0/s1600/Roger+Smile+Group.GIF" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvvwbL4z4J6I1YJYxxGn3poCTUu47DriMHMWiRTaBl3EtrP9Ob-cwvZvjGbKAs5UDv7W1PyhTG450fvhyphenhyphenRtKPkK4LIQPn-l_ybhwJ4tXtDIetHIY80YCTDoQ2UuBqd9DC6HvljFv-uNp0/s400/Roger+Smile+Group.GIF" width="278" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Roger around his period with 'Smile'</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
So what happened with Roger when he was in his <b>age 24 'Year of Revolution' (July, 1973 to July, 1974)</b>? Was there evidence of the beginning of a new era in his life, which is what the theory would say? Well this period corresponded with the release of Queen's first two albums - the self-titled <b><i>Queen</i></b> in July, 1973 and then in March, 1974, <b><i>Queen II</i></b> . During this important early period of their career, the band received a good deal of positive publicity, particularly in the US, where they were seen as successors to <b><i>Led Zeppelin</i></b>. For Roger, it doubtlessly represented his entrance into the world of the musical big-time, following several years of trying to gain recognition. He also contributed one song for each of these two albums, so it represented a beginning for him as a published songwriter.<br />
<br />
Of course much success followed in the ensuing years for all band members, but the question I want to specifically address is :- <i>"what happened to represent a turning point in Roger's own </i><b>age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways' (July, 1980 to July, 1981</b><i>)?"</i> <b>'Life Cycles Theory'</b> says that for everyone there should be some form of direction change and challenge, following a period of <b>seven years</b> of more or less <b>'Unbroken Forward Momentum'</b>. Please note, these terms are self-explanatory and are solely based on collected biographic data. There are <b>no links to the occult and no weird other-worldly explanations.</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQZBr0ASvB6oDnNRkPGgQxmFYADUa0NGZXQ16pU_wTHxRzV2UOHDHB1Lv1OH-iPY_gnvdInQ6JtsrXBMLKv50CWCk-bSI89eEMUYcLK-NIC7NLKl2L7OV_slMxlhgh5lgK_YJxIPzogpU/s1600/Roger+Queen.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQZBr0ASvB6oDnNRkPGgQxmFYADUa0NGZXQ16pU_wTHxRzV2UOHDHB1Lv1OH-iPY_gnvdInQ6JtsrXBMLKv50CWCk-bSI89eEMUYcLK-NIC7NLKl2L7OV_slMxlhgh5lgK_YJxIPzogpU/s640/Roger+Queen.jpeg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Roger as Queen fans know him.</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b><br /></b>
So, let's continue our exploration. Roger released his first solo recording <b><i>I Wanna Testify</i></b> in 1977, made during Queen's recording sessions, but it didn't make the charts and he really didn't have time to promote it either. His budding solo career got more focused, however, with the release of his first solo album <b><i>Fun In Space</i></b> in April, 1981 (ie. when he was aged 31). This had various recordings made over several years including (<i style="font-weight: bold;">I Wanna) Testify. </i>He wrote, produced, sang and performed on various instruments, to make this a real statement of his abilities as a solo artist. The album peaked at No. 18 on the British charts and he also released a couple of singles with sales in Europe, US, Japan and Australia. I think it fair to say, he now had a challenge to follow this up with yet more successful solo recordings.<br />
<br />
He released a second studio album <b><i>Strange Frontier</i></b> in 1984, but again had no time to promote it. His solo career was always kept in the background, because of the heavy commitment of touring and recording with <b><i>Queen</i></b>. Things though, were about to change in a dramatic way, in just a short time. At the very height of <b><i>Queen</i></b>'s fame, tragedy was to strike in the form of Freddie's diagnosis of AIDS. After becoming the show-stopping act in the <i>Live Aid concert</i> in July, 1985 they reached a climax one year later with their last-ever concert with Freddie at Wembley Stadium (then at Knebworth Park for their third and last performance). Interestingly all this drama happened during Roger's important <b>mid-life age 36 'Year of Revolution' (July, 1985 to July, 1986</b>). What we are looking for again is evidence of beginnings of significant new eras. Same for everyone, with the exception that where a person has already achieved a lifetime reputation, it is more a case of some new aspect of their career.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeiTuAYsuQo3QCoa7rIadu1lyqJ4F7djNTARmTaBX-bKJL52cRts86SZDV1OhsQK0DTEbKp2LCDNlh0kkuXlpOkn1nv3RZdd_JqtdKyo7CZqE_s6liyyU9vF5cSe37SF-iOvDFEesj7Wo/s1600/Roger+The+Cross.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeiTuAYsuQo3QCoa7rIadu1lyqJ4F7djNTARmTaBX-bKJL52cRts86SZDV1OhsQK0DTEbKp2LCDNlh0kkuXlpOkn1nv3RZdd_JqtdKyo7CZqE_s6liyyU9vF5cSe37SF-iOvDFEesj7Wo/s640/Roger+The+Cross.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Roger as Lead singer and rhythm guitarist with his group 'The Cross'</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So, in Roger's case, he was about to take responsibility for his own developing solo career, by forming a band called <i style="font-weight: bold;">The Cross </i>at the end of <i>The Magic Tour,</i> in the second half of 1986.<i style="font-weight: bold;"> </i>Now I am going to play detective here, because I am going to contend that Roger and Queen's tour keyboardist, <b>Spike Edney </b>(who founded the group and then recruited others), might have discussed their futures during this tour. This would then place the genesis of Roger's expanded solo career within his age 36 year. Come what may, all these dates are very closely related and history shows again that this new vehicle for Roger's music lasted for seven years (ie. the <b>'Life Cycles'</b> period of <b>'Unbroken Forward Momentum'</b>), when they broke up in 1993 (again within his <b>age 43 'Year of Broken Pathways' - July, 1992 to July, 1993</b>).<br />
<br />
Although only moderately commercially successful, <b><i>The Cross</i></b> released three albums, with Roger on rhythm guitar and lead vocals and they held a one night only 20 year reunion on July, 23rd, 2013. Of course, throughout most of this era Roger was also periodically committed to studio recording with <b><i>Queen</i></b>, but he made the most of his opportunities to further develop the band.<br />
<br />
My final two dates I am going to mention, just kind of hit me in the face again, because of the sheer level of improbability of it all. Normally once I've covered the most obvious correlations of a famous life, I leave the remainder alone and sometimes just search for the single most prolific of all correlations, which is for life-changing events in a person's age 36 year. So, with that said, I found I was attracted to the phrase that :- "...in 2010 after nearly 12 years between solo albums, Taylor announced he planned to release a new studio album <i style="font-weight: bold;">The Unblinking Eye</i> .....".<br />
<br />
The single of the same name was released on November 23rd, 2009. How's your maths at this point? What are the <b>'Years of Revolution'</b> going forward...........yes, it's <b>12</b> and then <b>24, 36, 48</b> and <b>60</b>. Just how old was Roger, when this popular limited edition single was released? Could he have been in his <b>age 60 'Year of Revolution'? (July, 2009 to July, 2010</b>). Of course he was and it marked a return to a new era of solo recording.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZymdlFL49aA/hqdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZymdlFL49aA/hqdefault.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Roger on The Cover of Electric Fire in 1998</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Finally, you only have to do the maths to work out that 12 years previously his fourth solo album <b><i>Electric Fire </i></b>was released in 1998. I've got to admit that he was just past his <b>age 48 'Year of Revolution' (July, 1997 to July, 1998),</b> when this happened on September 28th, 1998, but hey it did lead to small tour in 1999 and Brian May joined him for one gig. At this time he also performed one of the first internet-gigs to promote the album, for which he got a mention in the <i style="font-weight: bold;">Guinness Book Of World Records. </i>It could justifiably be said to have represented the beginning of yet another chapter in his most interesting life and times.<br />
<br />
I'm now going to summarise all my findings.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>1. At or around his </i>age 12 'Year of Revolution'<i> he changed from playing guitar to </i>taking up the drums<i>, which is what he became known for.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>2. In his </i>age 19 'Year of Broken Pathways'<i> he forms </i>'The Smile'<i> with Brian May and Tim Staffell. This morphed into Queen soon after, when Freddie joined and Tim left.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>3. In his </i>age 24 'Year of Revolution'<i>, as a member of Queen, he achieved recognition when their first two albums were released and were successful. He also became a published songwriter, through contributing one track to each album.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>4. In his </i>age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways'<i> he released his </i>first-ever solo album<i> Fun In Space, which peaked at No.18 on the British charts and also a couple of singles released internationally.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>5. In his </i>age 36 'Year of Revolution' <i>he completed his last live concert as part of Queen and also began the </i>genesis of his own band, The Cross,<i> along with tour keyboardist Spike Edney.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>6. In his </i>age 43 'Year of Broken Pathways'<i> </i>The Cross break up<i> and he returns to solo project work.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>7. In his </i>age 48 'Year of Revolution'<i> he completes work on his </i>next solo album Electric Fire<i>. It was released only 2 months later, along with a record-setting internet promotional concert.</i></b></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i>8. In his </i>age 60 'Year of Revolution'<i> he </i>releases<i> a single </i>The Unblinking Eye<i>, which </i>goes on to become his next solo album<i> of the same name, released a few years later. </i></b></blockquote>
<br />
So, I think it safe to conclude, that a comprehensive <b>'Life Cycles' </b>analysis reveals a strong correlation with Roger's own solo work. Whilst not wishing to minimise the great influence that <b><i>Queen</i></b> had on his songwriting and performance skills, it seems clear that Roger alone, of the four band members, had the most focused and successful solo career. He was far more than a great drummer with <b><i>Queen</i></b> and he has stuck with his musical ambitions in a single-minded way. I hope you enjoyed this first-time exploration of someone, whose life on the surface, could simply have been linked with the other band members. For Roger, it was very much a case of <b>'Queen and Beyond'</b>.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<i><br /></i>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-83313124953817887522016-09-01T20:05:00.000-07:002016-09-01T20:05:55.727-07:00How Gene Became Willy Wonka<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1gQ-5KuJ65swi2kURFpBYBoyKe-oVfKPYlRUjSFoOODgrGxdRsy9CAfPTf25OI5YxyuhnershuS28s5kMh5i3xbSOKNHo1-7cP_bj3Lq_PIuPMGwmDu1Igm_h8_fETGSKJ5hLiQjg_QM/s1600/Gene+Wilder+1+%25281%2529.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="456" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1gQ-5KuJ65swi2kURFpBYBoyKe-oVfKPYlRUjSFoOODgrGxdRsy9CAfPTf25OI5YxyuhnershuS28s5kMh5i3xbSOKNHo1-7cP_bj3Lq_PIuPMGwmDu1Igm_h8_fETGSKJ5hLiQjg_QM/s640/Gene+Wilder+1+%25281%2529.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The recent death of much-loved actor <b>Gene Wilder</b> has received considerable media coverage. In line with my post on <b>Muhammad Ali</b>, in which I displayed an incredible <b>20 out of 20 recently-departed celebrity profiles with a verifiable match to 'Life Cycles Theory'</b>, I have decided to once again put myself to the 'blind test' of analysing the life and career of Gene. I have only two questions to try to answer initially:- <b>1</b>. <i>"Is there an agreed breakthrough role in his career that he is most remembered for?" </i>You know, like <b><i>Good Morning Vietnam</i></b> was for <b>Robin Williams</b>, or <b><i>Dracula</i></b> was for <b>Christopher Lee, </b>which I covered a little while back.....or sundry others. <b>2</b>. "<i>Does it in some way equate to Wilder's <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b>?" </i><br />
<br />
And that's about it. Just one year out of Gene's 83 year-old life. It's like I just flipped heads 20 times in a row..... and with an expectant crowd gathered and considerable betting on the side, I decide to flip it one more time. Gene was <b>born Jerome Silberman on 11th. June, 1933</b>, so the year when he was in his <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b> is going to be from <b>11th. June, 1969 to 11th. June, 1970</b>. Now it has been widely reported, that his breakout role starring in <b><i>Willy Wonka And The Chocolate Factory</i></b>, was how he made his name and what he is most remembered for.<br />
<br />
So, can we match up these two timelines? The first thing I noticed was that Willy Wonka was released in 1971, which is close to, but not quite, a match with our set dates. In line with my process of analysis, I'm not going to be satisfied that I got 'close but no cigar' to when he was 36. I'm going to visit the lead up events, including the making of the movie and see if there were any pivotal moments. As a result we're going to journey to the back-half of 1969 and follow the trail. OK? Deer stalker hats and magnifying glasses were supplied, so now's a good time to use them.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivPtNS2K2VjDxwKwx4wUM-BN4AhH_OTWi7nIONzuZwgPakaAyk0bNE0YQE1D5wOJmX-mZ1mhksJHSb9Zx8RMO3Lo2OaZaiooGzoocKMJxPPelED-YoT2MPrQphLb13PvnRwA7fKApwq_A/s1600/Gene+Wilder+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivPtNS2K2VjDxwKwx4wUM-BN4AhH_OTWi7nIONzuZwgPakaAyk0bNE0YQE1D5wOJmX-mZ1mhksJHSb9Zx8RMO3Lo2OaZaiooGzoocKMJxPPelED-YoT2MPrQphLb13PvnRwA7fKApwq_A/s1600/Gene+Wilder+2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The genesis of the movie began in the fall of 1969 when director <b>Mel Stuart</b>'s 12 year old daughter Madeleine read <b>Roald Dahl</b>'s book, <b><i>Charlie And The Chocolate Factory,</i></b> three times. She begged her father to make it into a movie. Even though he was noted as a maker of documentaries, he was fascinated by the bizarre and amusing way Dahl's simple moral tale was told. The next date I have is when filming of the movie began, which was in April, 1970 in Munich, Germany. So, the question is :- <i>"Just how did Gene Wilder manage to get this prized part?"</i> It was prized, of course, because of Dahl's fame and it looked to be a sure-fire winner in the heart-warming family movie genre.<br />
<br />
<i>'The story behind the making of the movie is often almost as interesting as the movie itself'</i>, is a phrase I have used more than once and this time it is no different. Actually the elfin actor <b>Joel Gray</b> was first choice, because of the recent success of <b><i>Cabaret</i></b>, but he was dismissed as not being imposing enough. Next <b>Ron Moody</b>, known for being <b><i>Fagin</i></b> in <b><i>Oliver</i></b> (1968), was offered the part but he declined. Dahl's first choice was <b>Spike Milligan</b>, but it wasn't his decision. Next cab off the rank to be offered the role was <b>Jon Pertwee</b>, but he had to turn it down because he was busy doing <b><i>Dr. Who</i></b>. <b>Fred Astaire</b> was considered, but he was too old at 70.<br />
<br />
Then all six members of <b><i>Monty Python's Flying Circus</i></b> - <b>Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones</b> and <b>Michael Palin</b> expressed strong interest, but were rejected, because they were deemed 'not big enough names' for an international audience. Made me think, this real-life scenario would have made a great Python sketch. If you look at this list so far, you can see how overweight it is with Brits, because Dahl was a very famous British novelist. Apparently <b>Peter Sellers </b>begged him to get this plum role.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLqedAP2Q161xCTbWWEUGtFr3jSuB6cr8tStZuXO_cKdlYVOdIi7kEsVSIEGmzlef0yTo6zJu-ZuSQs_BAjiO4J-yL1Klb2LNdXna3LCBCGGAbS8bdK_pn5Pgrk5Qhl6-kUXyhBh65pvA/s1600/Gene+Wilder+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLqedAP2Q161xCTbWWEUGtFr3jSuB6cr8tStZuXO_cKdlYVOdIi7kEsVSIEGmzlef0yTo6zJu-ZuSQs_BAjiO4J-yL1Klb2LNdXna3LCBCGGAbS8bdK_pn5Pgrk5Qhl6-kUXyhBh65pvA/s1600/Gene+Wilder+3.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Meanwhile the relatively untried American actor <b>Gene Wilder</b> would be considered somewhat left-field by comparison. His initial film role was in <b><i>The Producers</i></b> (1968), which was not well received by the critics and did not do well at the box office (although it did go on to become a black comedy cult classic). However, Wilder's performance as a supporting actor, earned him an Academy Award nomination. It was clear, none-the-less, that he did not have a hit movie to his name. The stage is now set for the entrance of Gene Wilder's audition and why it could rightly be called :- <b>"The one day that changed his life forever".</b><br />
<br />
Now I don't know when exactly this day was, but it would have been in early 1970 and probably closer to April, because of all the other auditions held. When Gene walked in Mel Stuart knew right away, before he had even uttered a single word that he was meant to be <b><i>Willy Wonka</i></b>. When he did a reading it only served to convince him all the more. There had been an arrangement between Director Stuart and Producer <b>David Wolper</b>, that no offers would be made at this stage of the selection process, but once Wilder left, Stuart forgot all this. He chased him down the corridor and grabbed him by the arm, as he was about to catch the elevator, saying :- <b><i>"You're doing this picture, no two ways about it! You're Willy Wonka!"</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<i>'The rest is history'</i>, which is another phrase I use a lot. So here we are again. One moment in time. Not just a one year phenomenon, or a one month phenomenon or even a <b>one day phenomenon </b>(although I do use this term); but one single mind-bending moment. The same moment <b>Napoleon</b> had at 36, when his troops reached the top of the hill in his most famous battle and the sun broke through a heavy fog at the same time. Or when 36 year old <b>Joy Mangano</b>'s friend phoned her after she had frozen in front of the TV lights and turned everything around (if don't believe me just watch the film <b><i>Joy</i></b>) or when 36 year-old <b>Muhammad Ali</b> had his arm raised as the only three-time Heavyweight Title holder in history..........and many, many others.<br />
<br />
The always gracious Gene Wilder is forever remembered dressed as Willy Wonka. Although the film did modestly at first, after it appeared on TV in 1975, it gained great popularity. It also did well on video and later DVD sales and came to be ranked <b>25th</b>. on a list of the<b> Top 50 Cult Movies Of All Time</b>. In short, it became a phenomenon that has resonated with audiences through the generations. RIP Gene, a job well done and a life well lived.<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-55651730729143918152016-05-11T17:45:00.000-07:002016-05-11T17:54:28.747-07:00The Revolutionary Hits Of Prince<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh15sqUF6BIckEqOJACDle6xDJV26NQA8hz1ISWLUj_kqq4IQVwIivu_yVfW1TWOlu9oy9AKG5RlLwA3w1DjzP0GP624S5yUC7l0tJeOT6DFdizOFhBfLENt5czQjlczMvFLR8oa6nq7x8/s1600/Prince-CTC.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh15sqUF6BIckEqOJACDle6xDJV26NQA8hz1ISWLUj_kqq4IQVwIivu_yVfW1TWOlu9oy9AKG5RlLwA3w1DjzP0GP624S5yUC7l0tJeOT6DFdizOFhBfLENt5czQjlczMvFLR8oa6nq7x8/s640/Prince-CTC.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The title of this tribute article will be appropriately mysterious, because there was always an air of mystery about <b>Prince</b>. Now he had only two <b>'Revolutionary Hits'</b> and they are altered or combined titles of two of his most famous songs; that more or less happen to coincide with his two most important adult <b>Years of Revolution</b> (ie. at <b>24/36</b>). For the man who created a personal icon by combining the male and female symbols, this should be right up his street. He should both know and understand my message and why I feel these songs define the essence of his life.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>A little background first. </b>Prince was born <b>Prince Rogers Nelson</b> on <b>7th June, 1958</b> the son of a jazz band leader/songwriter father and vocalist mother. Small wonder then that he was going to become musically talented at a young age. When he was in his <b>age 19 Year of Broken Pathways (Jun.1977-Jun.1978)</b> he recorded and released his first album <i style="font-weight: bold;">For You, </i>with Prince writing, producing, arranging and playing all 27 instruments used. At the beginning of 1982 his career was taking off, but he was yet to become a world-wide headline act. Then, in June, we enter his <b>age 24 first adult Year of Revolution (Jun.1982-Jun.1983).</b> Whereas for most people I study, their career high point usually begins or coincides with their <b>age 36 Year of Revolution</b>, in the case of early starters like champion athletes or musicians and entertainers, it is more their <b>age 24 Year of Revolution</b>. Was it to be this way as well for Prince?<br />
<br />
In Nov.1982 he released his breakthrough double album <b><i>1999</i></b>, which sold over 3 million copies world-wide and introduced Prince as a member of the musical 'big league'. The title song of the album was a protest about nuclear proliferation. It was Prince's first top ten hit outside the US. His other signature hit from the album - <b><i>Little Red Corvette,</i></b> was one of the first two "black music" videos heavily played on <b>MTV </b>(the other was <b>Michael Jackson</b>'s <b><i>Billy Jean</i></b>). The song <b><i>International Lover</i></b> also won him his first <b>Grammy Award</b> Nomination. Yes, when he was aged 24 it was indeed his year. His time had come come and I feel safe in saying he would partied pretty hard to celebrate all this success.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhovGrMsbpen_s6KaxIAYapO3_rt1YwFBESiMfATZe3AtzUfjMYrT88XPoGvFygdfbcyOndZkhHzJju4TcgqHEeSWEHw_PyQo9LDfaCcB9Nr9-wDJ-GvtRfRk00y6no1wfXpbBgZCTiSk/s1600/Prince+1999.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhovGrMsbpen_s6KaxIAYapO3_rt1YwFBESiMfATZe3AtzUfjMYrT88XPoGvFygdfbcyOndZkhHzJju4TcgqHEeSWEHw_PyQo9LDfaCcB9Nr9-wDJ-GvtRfRk00y6no1wfXpbBgZCTiSk/s640/Prince+1999.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Gonna Party Like It's 1982??</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
So this is the name I give to his <b>first age 24 Revolutionary Hit</b> :-<br />
<br />
<b><i>1. Gonna Party Like It's 1982</i></b><br />
<br />
It sums up the ushering in of his new era of unprecedented fame and influence ie. his <b>Golden Age</b>. It demonstrates again the presence of <b>Life Cycles</b> in his life, as it does in case after case that I write about. It is yet another <b>blind test </b>of the theory, since I have no idea which celebrity death will occur next and I basically knew very little about <b>Prince,</b> outside of a couple of his hit songs. It's also, of course, a modification of the well-known chorus line in <b><i>1999</i></b>.<br />
<br />
We're going to cover an awful lot of ground now and go to his second important mid-life, <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution (Jun.1994-Jun.1995)</i></b>. We are going to ask a slightly different question than I usually do, since Prince has already had his Golden Age. We are going to ask if this year will see the beginnings of some other important chapter in his life and maybe one that doesn't feature only his musical career? In spite of being linked romantically to a veritable who's who of leading singers, models and actresses, Prince only really had one outstanding love of his life. In this regard his story matches that of the uber-famous <b>Elvis Presley. </b><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGqjkmErAQ5TGEmBbi-5AC1CnFeHXzTs7enjOK1eXFsAyE1MMezYuWhOdcoDmuTDmWiEcwMWqo4HkM24bipTlDZe3Nhorcndg5hpSpzwA_R4kV_NI37PG4s5iOg94s14EoLBG9szdpCn0/s1600/Prince+%252B+Mayte+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGqjkmErAQ5TGEmBbi-5AC1CnFeHXzTs7enjOK1eXFsAyE1MMezYuWhOdcoDmuTDmWiEcwMWqo4HkM24bipTlDZe3Nhorcndg5hpSpzwA_R4kV_NI37PG4s5iOg94s14EoLBG9szdpCn0/s640/Prince+%252B+Mayte+2.jpg" width="568" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Prince and his backing dancer and muse Mayte Garcia</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b><br /></b>
<b><br /></b>
In 1990 a 32 year old Prince first met 16 year-old <b>Mayte Garcia</b> backstage after he watched a video of her bellydancing. They stayed in touch and two years later she joined his band and then became an integral part of his life. She became his muse and grand obsession eg. she was the focus of his next album <b><i>Love Symbol</i></b> and in August, 1994 she assumed the guise of an Egyptian Princess for the concept album and video <b><i>3 Chains O'Gold</i></b>. Now this was within Prince's <b>age 36</b>, mid-life, <b>Year of Revolution (Jun.1994-Jun.1995)</b>. Mayte, coming from a strict Catholic Puerto Rican family, was a virgin before they got together and they didn't even share a first kiss till she turned 18. No, she was the 'real deal' in Prince's life, just as <b>Priscilla Beaulieu</b> was for Elvis.<br />
<br />
A couple of months before turning 36, Prince wrote and recorded the song <b><i>The Most Beautiful Girl In The World</i></b> for Garcia. The success of this song meant a lot professionally to Prince as well, as he fought with Warner Bros. to get it released via a small independent distributor, <b>Bellmark Records</b>. Prince had a career-defining dispute with the major record company, that had first discovered him when he was aged just 17. He felt they were controlling his future by not releasing enough of his huge backlog of material. To cap it off he had just changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol, because Warner Bros. owned the rights to his name. Yes, he loaded up the dice on this single, by combining his grand love passion with his independent future as an artist.<br />
<br />
So, the question is :- <b><i>"How did all this turn out?"</i></b> The answer is quite well at first. The single reached No.3 on US Billboard Hot 100 (was certified <i>Gold </i>selling 700,000 copies) and No.1 in many other countries. It became his first No.1 in the UK under his own name. However, it did not prove a formula for subsequent releases. Warner's released it on the album <i style="font-weight: bold;">The Gold Experience </i>in Sept. 1995 and again it had some initial success, but is now out of print. It was to mark the beginning of the end of his Warner Bros. contract obligations with the last album <i style="font-weight: bold;">Chaos and Disorder </i>(1996) being the least successful of all.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzvjdpGZO6yk2C8mJXuJRZLhEUwHRGY9C_7E8XX3IaurB21K8HoDS1KUuLwNxfpLfOPNu9jFN5ttAcp5fXwh8qXDos3SLSExu0GChVwfzKNFo289oUxEAAlvwbKYDfsGxxjIO9f3wHn84/s1600/Prince+-+The+Most+Beautiful+Girl+In+The+World.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzvjdpGZO6yk2C8mJXuJRZLhEUwHRGY9C_7E8XX3IaurB21K8HoDS1KUuLwNxfpLfOPNu9jFN5ttAcp5fXwh8qXDos3SLSExu0GChVwfzKNFo289oUxEAAlvwbKYDfsGxxjIO9f3wHn84/s640/Prince+-+The+Most+Beautiful+Girl+In+The+World.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
In summary then Prince did not repeat the successes of his <b>Golden Age of Succes</b>s (begun at 24), with his new era ushered in by <b>age 36 Year of Revolution</b>. This was not only reflected in his professional life, but also in his personal life. In 1995 Prince produced a female version of his love song <b><i>The Most Beautiful Boy In The World</i></b> for an album by Mayte called <i style="font-weight: bold;">Child of The Sun.</i> This was the ultimate musical expression of love by both partners.<br />
<br />
So my title for the second <b>age 36 Revolutionary hit</b> of Prince is the combination of both these singles ie.<br />
<br />
<b><i>2 The Most Beautiful Girl In The World/The Most Beautiful Boy In The World</i></b><br />
<br />
But what looked like it could mark the beginnings of another Golden Era did not turn out that way. The couple married in 1996 with Mayte discovering she was pregnant two months later. Unfortunately their child (named Boy Gregory) died a week after birth in October, due to a rare skull disorder known as <b>Pfeiffer Syndrome</b>. She also related how they lost a second child and these two traumatic events led to a breakdown of their relationship, with the couple separating in 1998 and then divorcing in 2000.<br />
<br />
Mayte has openly expressed how her life was "screwed up" by this experience and that she cannot find lasting love anywhere else. On hearing of Prince's recent death she said :- <span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;"><i style="font-weight: bold;">"I can't even think of the words of what I'm feeling. This man was my everything, we had a family. I am beyond deeply saddened and devastated ... I loved him then, I love him now, and will love him eternally ... He's with our son now." </i>Though Prince remarried in 2001, he divorced several years later and there were no children. This is reflected now with his sister being the heiress of his estate. It would have been so much more fulfilling for both he and Mayte to have been together with their own family. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;">I must hasten to add, that I am not inferring any of these tragic events were somehow 'foretold' by <b>Life Cycles Theory.</b> I am not in the business of occult fortune telling. All I study is the actual events that did happen in people's lives from the unique framework of every 12th year representing the ushering in of a new age/direction. It certainly did that for Prince in his two adult <b>Years of Revolution</b> that I have analysed (ie. ages 24/36). For a musical polymath and someone deeply interested in spiritual matters, as Prince was, I'm sure he would have enjoyed the process.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.4px;"><b> </b></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<b> RIP PRINCE </b><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-53464953818846545592016-03-12T15:56:00.000-08:002016-03-12T16:07:15.655-08:001962 And The Beatles - The Life Cycles Of George Martin<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLPllhTw9x9UiaQ-iEwf0D9WY_t_ivwmeRCBGZCQG6NWV5N79u7mr9L2pb20liH5dD_-Vg-5YE5wJ8Ke30IlVNluLiOuxTFr0bOEt4S3xYTzRArTVn3A8oSUiiUbXRPpobBVaydz46tL8/s1600/George-Martin-conducting-Beatles-554-46.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="386" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLPllhTw9x9UiaQ-iEwf0D9WY_t_ivwmeRCBGZCQG6NWV5N79u7mr9L2pb20liH5dD_-Vg-5YE5wJ8Ke30IlVNluLiOuxTFr0bOEt4S3xYTzRArTVn3A8oSUiiUbXRPpobBVaydz46tL8/s640/George-Martin-conducting-Beatles-554-46.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Rarely does evidence of the most significant year in <b>Life Cycles</b> analysis (the <b>age 36 Year of Revolution</b>), lining up with life-changing and reputation-making events, come any clearer than this. <b>George Martin</b>, much-loved producer of nearly all <b><i>The Beatles</i></b> music (and referred to as <b>'The Fifth Beatle'</b>) died recently at the age of 90. That's a pretty long lifetime and yet his whole life could simply be condensed to key events in just one year - <b>1962</b>. The year he, at first reluctantly, signed this little-known band called <b><i>The Beatles</i></b>.<br />
<br />
He hadn't even heard them live, it was up to <b>Brian Epstein</b> to talk him into it. Yet this was to be his moment, the <b>USHERING IN OF HIS GOLDEN AGE</b> (the phrase I constantly use to describe events in this year), his date with destiny. Do you doubt me when I say to you :-<b><i> "Destiny has a timeline and fate a calendar."</i></b> ? Why should it be so? I have no answers, but I do have the most amazing set of case study statistics you will ever see. So read and think about what I am saying, that has never been said before. Forget my lack of celebrity, my relative ordinariness. You should always know the truth, because you can see it clearly for yourselves. Anyway, enough of this rant, let's return to George.<br />
<br />
<b>George Martin</b> was <b>born Jan. 3rd, 1926</b>, so therefore the one year that should (in theory) stand out above all others is 1926 + 36 = <b>1962</b>. Because he was born at the very start of the year, it is events in the whole of 1962, that should be checked to see whether they tell a story of a life-changing and career-defining nature. Oh yes, my second question is always :- <b><i>"Was the breakthrough moment preceded by a setback or frustration of a temporary nature?"</i></b> Finally my third question is the most enigmatic of all :- <i style="font-weight: bold;">"Did it all boil down to one fateful day?" </i>Please note I only say these seemingly occult things because in many, many easily verifiable cases this is what I have found.<br />
<br />
George worked for <b>Parlophone Records</b> (a subsidiary of <b>EMI</b>), which was originally involved exclusively in classical music. When he took over as Manager in 1955, he decided to broaden its catalogue by adding comedy records made by stars such as <b>Peter Sellers</b> and <b>Spike Milligan</b>. This managed to turn the rather obscure label into a commercial success. He had also wanted to add rock and roll to his label, but had struggled to find a hit-making artist or group. Then we enter the year <b>1962</b> and in <b>February</b>, an overly-enthusiastic young band manager named Brian Epstein talked a reluctant George Martin into listening to a tape of his unknown band, recorded at <b>Decca Studios</b> (who had also rejected them). Martin said they were <b><i>"rather unpromising"</i></b>, but did like Lennon and McCartney's vocals.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZxD1J2OmarTu9tQJVQ8iPkx6GUvVANPt4dmIBJxf7EdPJFTew5Kn5cWqfE4Vv0Qo8F-5n5bubFGxrvwTPHU79uZa06CDLjPBuq9MXLB4bFgBzlMcSX8vUZCR-W_4YlwAUODMVuL_doDM/s1600/_88655058_martin-studio-getty.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="356" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZxD1J2OmarTu9tQJVQ8iPkx6GUvVANPt4dmIBJxf7EdPJFTew5Kn5cWqfE4Vv0Qo8F-5n5bubFGxrvwTPHU79uZa06CDLjPBuq9MXLB4bFgBzlMcSX8vUZCR-W_4YlwAUODMVuL_doDM/s640/_88655058_martin-studio-getty.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
That should have been that. Just another knockback for Epstein........but think of the implications for us all. No <b><i>Yesterday</i></b>, no <b><i>Eleanor Rigby</i></b>, no <b><i>Sgt. Peppers</i></b>, no <b><i>Day In The Life</i></b> etc. etc. Does this equate to a period of frustration? Well, more for Epstein, but in the bigger picture it was also not what fate intended. Forward to <b>May</b> and Epstein was back in a meeting with George and this time he appeared to do the impossible. He got Martin to agree to a potential contract for an unknown band (once he had heard them in the studio), but at the time he had never met with or seen live! However it would be no ordinary contract and it meant <b>EMI </b>literally <b><i>had nothing to lose</i></b> - it offered one penny for each record sold, to be split among the four members. You know, in olde English terms, it amounted to a farthing each! Let's now hear from George about this meeting in his own words and you can see for yourselves just how it all hung by a thread :-<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">"What I said to Brian was, 'if you want me to judge them on what you're playing me, I'm sorry, I'll have to turn you down.'</span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">"He was so disappointed. I felt really sorry for him, actually because he was such an earnest young man. So I gave him a lifeline. I said, 'If you want to bring them down from Liverpool, I'll give them an hour in the studio.'</span></span></i></b></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivhlJSQ4GwxUoPNNAb2c0ENIRlSiVuEhyphenhyphen92BOFCMft70JByBcPqnagmObKzHt50zLZOaIhdpRROdG6QYploATHQ4ojGnnIWIp7dypZAxN2BlN7fQeBL99mmGnYQhb7K3J7JU_KeLhp5qk/s1600/_88655054_beatles_studio-rex.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivhlJSQ4GwxUoPNNAb2c0ENIRlSiVuEhyphenhyphen92BOFCMft70JByBcPqnagmObKzHt50zLZOaIhdpRROdG6QYploATHQ4ojGnnIWIp7dypZAxN2BlN7fQeBL99mmGnYQhb7K3J7JU_KeLhp5qk/s640/_88655054_beatles_studio-rex.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 17.6px;">Epstein sent a telegram to The Beatles, who were in residency in Hamburg, telling them they had just 'been signed' to <b>EMI</b>. Now let's go to the very day and place it all happened - <b>Studio Three, Abbey Road</b> on the afternoon of <b>June 6th</b>. There were sound problems at first, because of the band's poor equipment and then they recorded </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-family: times, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 17.6px;">Besame Mucho. </i><span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 17.6px;">It didn't work and Martin left for for tea. The next track they tried was their own song </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-family: times, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 17.6px;">Love Me Do </i><span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 17.6px;">and after this the tape engineer was sent over to the Abbey Road canteen to fetch George. And then......he fell in love with them?...........OK maybe not, he kinda just liked them a little??.........no, worse than that, he didn't like it at all. He said :-</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b style="font-family: times, 'times new roman', serif;"><i> <span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.375;">"I thought their music was rubbish! </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.375;">I couldn't really make out for myself what I was listening for - because I was so conditioned to [hearing] a solo singer with a backing group. But here I had four people who were all doing all sorts of things. </span></i></b><b style="font-family: times, 'times new roman', serif;"><i>It wasn't Cliff Richard and the Shadows, that's for sure."</i></b></blockquote>
Following the end of the session George gave <b><i>The Beatles</i></b> a long dressing down about what they needed to do to become recording artists. This included being critical of drummer <b>Pete Best</b>, who was then sacked and replaced by <b>Ringo Star</b> (when he was in his <b>age 24 Year of Revolution</b>.......but that's another story..). Following his rant he decided to ask the band :-<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.375; margin-top: 18px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b><i>"I've laid into you for quite a long time," he said. "You haven't responded. Is there anything you don't like?" </i></b></span><b style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.375;"><i>"Well, for a start," replied George Harrison, "I don't like your tie."</i></b></div>
<div style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.375; margin-top: 18px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b><i>The quip broke the ice and The Beatles relaxed into comedy mode. </i></b></span><b style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.375;"><i>"For the next 15 to 20 minutes they were pure entertainment, I had tears running down my face."</i></b></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip5S0JnLnuuGQOccPBAs-cutzJCeCdEf7wHAz5JzwoVwux9OnG4N0i9Hw_2VEL7Xk_myu29yJKrA70Yz9_hym5B8BlSzbFVm7OjbTu-NXW6ZfUZoQtg8AATMV9pVcmHwrY7t3c2H2LJyM/s1600/_88655056_martin-studio2-rex.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEip5S0JnLnuuGQOccPBAs-cutzJCeCdEf7wHAz5JzwoVwux9OnG4N0i9Hw_2VEL7Xk_myu29yJKrA70Yz9_hym5B8BlSzbFVm7OjbTu-NXW6ZfUZoQtg8AATMV9pVcmHwrY7t3c2H2LJyM/s640/_88655056_martin-studio2-rex.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Despite his misgivings George Martin signed them up to a contract (the draconian one I just described), because he decided they had the potential to make a hit record. But it was more than that :-<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b><i> <span style="background-color: white; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.375;">He later admitted it was their "tremendous charisma" rather than their music that won him over.</span></i></b></span></blockquote>
<blockquote style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #404040; font-size: 1rem; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.375; margin-top: 18px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b><i>"When you are with them, you are all the better for being with them and when they leave you feel a loss," he said. "I fell in love with them. It's as simple as that."</i></b></span></blockquote>
Now I have described the feeling of elation that can accompany the <b>breakthrough moment</b> in a <b>Year of Revolution</b> as being so exciting, it is <b><i>like "falling in love"</i></b>. It's described exactly this way in Chapter 3 of <b><i><a href="http://sbpra.com/neilkillion/">The Life Cycles Revolution</a></i></b>. Check it out sometime and see why my strange theory is so eerily correct. <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">It happened to <b>J K Rowling</b> and to <b>Napoleon</b> and a host of other notables and yes, it happened to me as well. So far this is just a psycho-biography of the life of George Martin in 1962, that precisely matches <b>Life Cycles</b> theory. Before I go and just to add a small note on other amazing coincidences with <b>Life Cycles</b> and George Martin try this :-</span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">When he was in his age 24 Year of Revolution (ie. the year 1950), he began his career with </span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Parlophone Records</span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> working with classical music (can you see how his later production career reflected this when he used an orchestra in so many Beatles songs).</span></i></b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">After a forward journey of 7 years to his age 31 Year of Broken Pathways (ie. the year 1957), he began to exclusively concentrate on Comedy records after the success of his Peter Sellers records in that year.</span></i></b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Then lastly, let's progress 7 years again from 1962 to the year 1969. What happened then to mark a 'break in his pathway, that he can never return to?' (ie. his age 43 Year of Broken Pathways). </span></i></b></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Not sure? Haven't got a clue? Then, of course, the only reason would be that you simply weren't alive then. Everyone alive then would know this is the year <b><i>The Beatles</i></b> (the greatest band the world has ever known) broke up. It is also the year when a disaffected John Lennon said to George that they just wanted to record what they played without all this studio production. George later admitted that this critique really stung him at the time. But history will recall only the triumph of what George Martin achieved, never those unkind words. The music of <b><i>The Beatles</i></b> and George Martin's arrangements/productions dominated and defined the music of the entire decade. They broke so much new ground in the often hackneyed world of pop music, that it was then and will remain forever, a unique and unmatched period in history. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3eGDyF0tkJUXacjMtss88cgT5JS2inpLqQQMd2pUjqxpjIIdqT_YDAT1dzdbBam-ZFLYqRnuKfO13iUL2yLq_qCs9CowH9R4X9Dp5PH-9fGwEoEmeMGTZIJqvmTQ78Nf23cIDvtaKAdU/s1600/_88655060_martin-studio-rex3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3eGDyF0tkJUXacjMtss88cgT5JS2inpLqQQMd2pUjqxpjIIdqT_YDAT1dzdbBam-ZFLYqRnuKfO13iUL2yLq_qCs9CowH9R4X9Dp5PH-9fGwEoEmeMGTZIJqvmTQ78Nf23cIDvtaKAdU/s640/_88655060_martin-studio-rex3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b> <span style="font-size: large;"> RIP George Martin.</span></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b><i> PS. I hope you and John and George Harrison are getting together right now.</i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-63317717500119086102016-01-20T19:24:00.001-08:002016-01-22T15:48:23.646-08:00Astrology Is Based On Nothing <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9gbt9hdYFIWbLRXMA-n1aQTPWyC4QsIS-_a9A7f0ChBTXN4VfuZYmEX7sbhyphenhyphenT3CvMf5NFY9aQWsP1lnTVURjLUe_m_JcG3QcVSPValxQ2jnz8b700AqnBxw_0zOntoQaJjTZvnWBeeQ4/s1600/astrology+1+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="459" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9gbt9hdYFIWbLRXMA-n1aQTPWyC4QsIS-_a9A7f0ChBTXN4VfuZYmEX7sbhyphenhyphenT3CvMf5NFY9aQWsP1lnTVURjLUe_m_JcG3QcVSPValxQ2jnz8b700AqnBxw_0zOntoQaJjTZvnWBeeQ4/s640/astrology+1+%25281%2529.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>This is the night sky as seen from the Jodrell Bank observatory. Very pretty on a clear night, but all it is, is numerous stars, galaxies and the odd planet.</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
I have been a consistent critic of the occult generally and astrology in particular, because it remains almost universally popular and is perhaps the worst example of a <b>‘popular mass cultural delusion’</b> (not my words) that I have ever seen. And worst of all it is actually based on nothing more than ancient civilisation’s desire to make some sense of what they see in the night sky.<br />
<br />
But it has a deep, deep hold on people’s thinking. I used to like it enormously myself and had many books on the subject. Since I have become a crusader against its lack of evidence, I have taken the opportunity to put my views to people in general conversation (not in a confrontational manner I hasten to add, I’m not like that). They either accept my viewpoint or look blankly at me. OK, they mostly don’t say things like :-<b><i>”I don’t buy what you‘re saying”</i></b> or <b><i>“Come on, there’s lots of evidence”</i></b>. You see most people consider themselves above believing in the astrology column.<br />
<br />
Then we get down deep. Now David is a retired journalist, who used to edit a magazine that featured Australia’s best known astrologer and he readily says he thought it was <b><i>“a bunch of nonsense”</i></b>. However, I was alarmed when he started idly ascribing some of his personality and career choice to his birth sign. Then he asked me when my birthday was. I refused to answer, as I could see where this was going and it only made him more interested. The same thing happened to a friend, who had listened to me outline my theory and why it was different to the occult. He nodded in agreement and then proceeded to want to know my birthday, presumably so he could find a ready explanation in the stars. When, again I refused, he too became insistent.<br />
<br />
You see, we all think at one level it’s just superstitious nonsense, but at another level we’ve been conditioned to so many people talking about it and using it in conversation as an explanation, that bits of it rub off. No different to me saying to the ruler of an ancient civilisation :- “Come on, we both know there’s no <b>Sun God</b>. The priests just use this to scare people.” Yet that same ruler would ask for a blessing from the ‘Sun God’ to ensure he wins the next battle. It’s just human nature. Now we all know there isn’t a ‘God’ in the Sun, it’s just a star. But did you know that the ‘Sun’ God still lives on and is ‘believed in’ by millions and millions of people?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq6_GTXFzFLX8fryepwLhxCDjWjuSXiFPJfATbCxyHY6Oeg5xeq7J4lyd9djFGu7WMe4Nnm7WA2_P9T_hrBSoXIgZ0WRQOpfscGhFN_tAarJ-NZ3KNHIrPu3MLSKf-ybxlSE1NLNmr5XY/s1600/Leo+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq6_GTXFzFLX8fryepwLhxCDjWjuSXiFPJfATbCxyHY6Oeg5xeq7J4lyd9djFGu7WMe4Nnm7WA2_P9T_hrBSoXIgZ0WRQOpfscGhFN_tAarJ-NZ3KNHIrPu3MLSKf-ybxlSE1NLNmr5XY/s640/Leo+1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>So this is what 'Leo The Lion' actually looks like. I mean the reason the ancients decided it was a lion was because all these stars appear brightly in the night sky and they joined the dots....I mean really!? If I didn't show you the lines what could you make out of it??</i></b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
His name is Leo - <b>Leo the Lion</b> and he ‘rules’ the sun. Probably lives there too. If you were born in late July to most of August you’re just like him. You like to be at the centre of things, because the sun is at the centre of the solar system. You have a large, sunny personality, because well, the sun is big and sunny. Sounds really dopey doesn’t it? Then again maybe not. I’ll go on. You probably have a mane of hair and a large chest supporting smaller legs just like a lion. You roar quite a bit and have a big appetite……(<b>NB</b>. In case you think this is just mockery, I am merely re-stating what astrologers say is the typical body shape of a Leo and their ‘roaring’ dictatorial nature and their supposedly large physical and sexual appetites. Told you I read a lot of astrology books!)<br />
<br />
Oh yes, there’s more isn’t there. The ancients looked up at the night sky and decided there’s a bunch of stars close together and we think we see a lion in it. No matter that some tribe thousands of miles away thought it was a tiger or a tortoise….. (a version of this is quite true if you look at cultural anthropology). Today we call that bunch of stars a <b>constellation</b> (you know, because they’re ‘with’ each other)….except that’s not true. Even a constellation is a man-made construct imagining a 2 dimensional universe when it is 3 dimensional and those stars are not together at all, ( eg. there can be giant stars in our line of sight, that are hundreds of light years further away than little stars in the same area, which look large to us). Einstein sorted all this out with relativity theory…it all depends where you are in the universe.<br />
<br />
Then these disparate stars (suns) are meant to somehow conjoin their mystical powers of influence over our sun and together they reign over us late July/August babies and make us into their likeness ie. Leo the Lion. It not only sounds stupid, but if you really think about it, it’s one of the weirdest ideas you’ll ever hear (and this from someone who used to love talking about <b><i>“Oh well they’re Leo, so that explains it all“</i></b>)<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE0ORMlsxaJU4Kxa75bVvhKRT098arrneLwasHJz2GTNRJUPW3ysUS7_d1k8z9ONq14G9SK1kSTpPMThiT7cXc6c3Js_E6hS8lRsQdMCpP9RshJGdlrEZ_rfc14uv1botFTNOF1J_Jxoc/s1600/Leo+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="459" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE0ORMlsxaJU4Kxa75bVvhKRT098arrneLwasHJz2GTNRJUPW3ysUS7_d1k8z9ONq14G9SK1kSTpPMThiT7cXc6c3Js_E6hS8lRsQdMCpP9RshJGdlrEZ_rfc14uv1botFTNOF1J_Jxoc/s640/Leo+2.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">This is what the ancients saw. Fair amount of artistic licence wouldn't you say? But the Celts thought they saw a horse not a lion. They called it the White Horse (see below). The astronomers tell me that the main stars in Leo vary in distance to us from 330 to 7.8 light years (which is a ginormous difference - a mere 30,482,750,000,000,000,000,000,000 kms or 30.48 trillion, trillion kms. Let's face it there's not much 'con' in this 'stellation') and vary in size from magnitude 1.32 for Alpha Leonis (obvious to the naked eye) to 13.5 for Wolf 359 (one of the nearest stars to earth). Not only that, but distant objects in this area include 6+ readily observable galaxies and numerous others, as well as a nebulous cloud of hydrogen and helium gas, known as the Leo Ring. Oh yes, and then there's the Leonids, a meteor shower which peaks on Nov. 14-15. As of 2002, the sun appears in the 'constellation Leo' area (and I use that term loosely), from August 10 to Sept. 10, as one of the 13 observed signs of the Zodiac (not what you expected to hear is it?) </span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Apologists for astrology (and there are many) will point to the fact that our nearest neighbour in space, the moon, can exert a strong influence over us, through its pull on water (and we’re 70% water), or the so-called full moon madness, or a woman’s ovulation cycle etc. They hope you’ll buy it and then think the rest is OK too. Now let’s have a look at the facts.<br />
<br />
<b>Ivan Kelly, James Rotton and Roger Culver (1996)</b> examined <b>over 100 studies on lunar effects</b> and concluded that the studies have <b>failed to show any reliable and significant correlation on around two dozen different factors</b> (i.e., ones not likely due to chance) between the full moon, or any other phase of the moon. Those correlations included psychiatric admissions. One study found that admissions were lowest during a full moon. Lunar myths are frequently presented in films and works of fiction. As Kelly states :- <b><i>"with the constant media repetition of an association between the full moon and human behavior it is not surprising that such beliefs are widespread in the general public"</i></b>. Same old issue isn’t it. The press runs full moon stories and prints astrology columns.<br />
<br />
Now let’s try the moon’s effects on the <b>menstrual cycle</b>. Despite the fact that there is no evidence of a significant correlation between phases of the moon, the menstrual cycle, and fertility, some people not only maintain that there is, they even have a 'scientific' explanation for the non-existent correlation. Some think the light of the moon affects fertility in women, the way it does in corals. According to science :- <b><i>“the light of the moon is a very minor source of light in most women's lives, and is no more likely than the moon's gravitational force to have a significant effect on a woman's ovulation.”</i></b> Furthermore, the average menstrual cycle is 28 days, but varies from woman to woman and month to month, while the length of the lunar month is a consistent 29.53 days. So they’re not even identical are they?<br />
<br />
OK, let’s talk about that 70% water thing, after all the moon causes the tides and the ocean is way bigger than little us. It must affect us and our behaviour by implication. However, funnily enough, it should be noted that the moon only affects unbounded bodies of water, while the water in the human body is bounded. <b>Astronomer George O. Abell claims that a mosquito would exert more gravitational pull on your arm than the moon would (Abell 1979).</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSlB9ET42Vw8z81YkIBXdoPQC2PwVbxZK3-Jsp0zvh2CCTVwmSMW8-EN4bhcF3CgeVyebexUAo_cdTA7mUsl4dPX7o0OcDWx0SBlDVr3pANK0fVwTYJNFf1vzfbFyBAXQV-qJIdQuAEik/s1600/Leo_the_horse.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="356" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSlB9ET42Vw8z81YkIBXdoPQC2PwVbxZK3-Jsp0zvh2CCTVwmSMW8-EN4bhcF3CgeVyebexUAo_cdTA7mUsl4dPX7o0OcDWx0SBlDVr3pANK0fVwTYJNFf1vzfbFyBAXQV-qJIdQuAEik/s640/Leo_the_horse.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">Yes, well if you can buy Leo the Lion, why not Leo the Horse? You know, has a mane of hair and long legs, quite athletic, gets hungry as a horse, is headstrong and opinionated etc. etc. This is exactly how it goes folks. Really, it's just made up like that?? Yes, really!! Check out the White Horse of Uffington if you happen to be touring the UK and have the time. See the bottom inset photo. </span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Higher tides do occur at new and full moons, but not because the moon's gravitational pull is stronger at those times. Rather, the tides are higher then because :- <b><i>"the sun, earth, and moon are in a line and the tidal force of the sun joins that of the moon at those times to produce higher tides"</i></b>. Actually the lunar force is a very weak tidal force.<b> A mother holding her child<i> "will exert 12 million times as much tidal force on her child as the moon" (Kelly et al., 1996)</i></b>. Betcha’ didn’t know that!<br />
<br />
So there’s no proven link between the moon and our behaviour and that’s the bottom line. Sure the moon exerts a much weaker gravitational pull on the whole earth, that helps to keep both in a stable orbit, but it’s got nothing to do with our behaviour. Mystical vibrations from the silvery moon belong in horror movies. You can keep your superstitions if you want, but the <b>‘Moon God/or Goddess’</b> (oops, I mean <b>Cancer the Crab</b>) is no more valid than the ‘Sun God’.<br />
<br />
Now think about what you’ve read and the next time you see <b>“Your Stars For The New Year - Advice For Romance, Career etc. etc.”</b>, just realise that it’s all made up. Astrology, which is thousands of years old and is derived from numerous venerable ancient civilisations is estimated to be <b>believed as scientific by 31 to 45% of Americans,</b> depending on which year the survey is taken (it’s currently at it’s highest point, which is a real worry). Apparently pop singer <b>Katy Perry</b> said in a recent <b>GQ </b>interview :- <b><i>“I believe in a lot of astrology”</i></b>. ………but that doesn’t make it so does it?? ….. (just a minute didn’t she have a recent hit with the song <b><i>Roar</i></b>…….doesn’t that imply she might be a Leo!?……what’s that about half of you stopped reading and raced over to check her birthday out!!……oh good grief!!!).<br />
<br />
Seriously, it’s time we took a good look at ourselves and all started to own up and discredit this mumbo-jumbo. It’s a pile of confabulations, none of which stand up in the slightest way to proper scientific enquiry. The reason’s simple :- it’s because <b>ASTROLOGY IS BASED ON NOTHING</b>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-21573671649273501942015-09-24T19:19:00.003-07:002015-09-25T20:33:25.669-07:00Struggle For Power - The Life Cycles Of Malcolm Turnbull<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdFvfPe5BJux7Qe9Sx0Ixy4A84DSyFyOqCizFdz4MD95L-I8zv0a5BkzZtYcYCfaJSxzZmTQHzNNR736i6lUcHDBeACuPoTZceqwNo694XWqN6jNvP1SiORK1B2NKTYAy7ntrJZ8gG-EU/s1600/malcolm-turnbull.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdFvfPe5BJux7Qe9Sx0Ixy4A84DSyFyOqCizFdz4MD95L-I8zv0a5BkzZtYcYCfaJSxzZmTQHzNNR736i6lUcHDBeACuPoTZceqwNo694XWqN6jNvP1SiORK1B2NKTYAy7ntrJZ8gG-EU/s400/malcolm-turnbull.jpg" width="371" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Australia has a new Prime Minister -<b> Malcolm Turnbull</b>. He successfully challenged the incumbent in the role - <b>Tony Abbott</b> - in a party vote. Now you might think that would simply explain the post title - <b><i>Struggle For Power </i></b>- because that's indeed what this was. But this is only a part of the overall picture of Malcolm's life and I'm going to show how his current actions are indeed related to what has happened to him on a regular cyclical basis in his career. Of course, the mention of 'a regular cyclical basis', means that I am going to analyse his life according to my new theory of life in 12 year cycles, known simply as<b><i> Life Cycles</i></b>.<br />
<br />
Now for any new readers I should first explain that in my 12 year cycle (which is based on detailed biographic evidence and nothing else), I only regularly study two years, which I call the<b><i> significant years;</i></b> because they often correlate with important changes, challenges and beginnings of new eras. These I call the <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b> (ie. ages of 12/24/36/48/60 etc.) and seven years later the <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> (ie. 19/31/43/55 etc.). The <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b> was so named because it seems to me to literally be like a revolution in your life. It may typically contain setbacks and frustrations of a temporary nature, before the new age/direction becomes apparent. The theme of this year is set to last for seven years, before a second important year of direction change and challenge occurs. Because in the many, many profiles I study it seems to be like a break in your journey, I have called it the <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b>. So my terms are literal and have nothing to do with unprovable connections to outside forces, which is typical of the occult. I don't know what causes it and to date I only study the effects of this seemingly widespread pattern.<br />
<br />
So, in this analysis we are going to study the middle to current sections of Malcolm's life, beginning with events that are usually first mentioned in any biographical summary of his life. It is typically stated that :- <b><i>'Malcolm first came to prominence when he acted as legal counsel in the famous </i>Spy Catcher Trial<i> in 1986'</i></b>. Malcolm was handling the defense for Peter Wright, a former MI5 officer, after the British Government tried to ban publication of his book <i style="font-weight: bold;">Spycatcher, </i>which alleged the former head of MI5, Sir Roger Hollis, had been a KGB agent. Though Wright's claims have later been disproved, it did not stop Malcolm, at the time, winning the case and embarrassing the British Cabinet Secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, who tried to pretend that the secretive foreign intelligence service, the SIS, didn't exist. The official historian of MI5, <b>Christopher Andrew</b>, called Malcolm's handling of the case <b><i>"brilliant"</i></b> and that he <b><i>"clearly had a big future ahead of him."</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhYhyphenhyphenJJ9bjdaHjvgIhh9yaKakQuKqHzj7oLAkJ9VZ50qgl0n5xF2Qly8ZP2kloUdIUy7ZH-V7rSuK7WThQltJfaXXYZxd0fzpxxxeV9cUqC7WCSg7cGbcPvCsSqvdQt7qBUBaDPed890Y/s1600/Malcolm+Spycatcher.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhYhyphenhyphenJJ9bjdaHjvgIhh9yaKakQuKqHzj7oLAkJ9VZ50qgl0n5xF2Qly8ZP2kloUdIUy7ZH-V7rSuK7WThQltJfaXXYZxd0fzpxxxeV9cUqC7WCSg7cGbcPvCsSqvdQt7qBUBaDPed890Y/s400/Malcolm+Spycatcher.jpg" width="235" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">A young Malcolm with Peter Wright</span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Why do I dwell on this well-known fact? That's because <b>Malcolm's date of birth </b>was on <b>24th October, 1954 </b>and so he would have been in his <b><i>age 31 Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> for almost all of the year <b>1986</b>. This, by my reckoning, was a challenging time and led to a clear break in his career pathway, because in the next year, <b>1987</b>, he switched direction from journalism/law to investment banking. He formed a company <b>Whitlam Turnbull and Co</b>.<b> Ltd.</b> in partnership with <b>Neville Wran</b> (former Labor Premier of NSW) and <b>Nick Whitlam </b>(son of former Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam).<br />
<br />
My findings have indicated that the next <b><i>Life Cycles significant year</i></b> - ie. the <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i></b> - is often (but not always), a standout in terms new career directions in the cases I have studied. It can come to define the person's whole career. Now this isn't so for Malcolm, but it does involve important change none-the-less and a theme -<b> Struggle For Power</b> - which has become a prominent feature of his whole life. So with that in mind, we'll turn our attention to events in the year <b>1991. </b><br />
<b><br /></b>
This period is marked by Malcolm's involvement in the aftermath of the disastrous attempt by a young <b>Warwick Fairfax</b> to buy back his family's media empire, <b>John Fairfax Ltd.</b> By Dec. 1990 the $2.25 billion bid to re-privatise fell apart and the sharks were circling. It transpired that the now disgraced, Canadian-born media mogul, <b>Conrad Black</b>, became principal shareholder. He wrote in his auto-biography :- <b><i>"A proposal was assembled by a stockbroker Neville Miles and by a merchant banker, Malcolm Turnbull, wrapping up the (mainly US) junk bondholders , who were in litigation with the Fairfax banking group and had a paper value of $450 million to defend...."</i></b> I don't pretend to be across these type of machinations myself and I'm assuming most readers won't either, but I think it a safe to say that there was an opportunity in the offing.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjarFIqUAU1YbooQGD_3sVK9N1Duf2m9tn61iLxaA2-oSdZ5rEgPviDN7Ra_ztiayhuXZei66dnESifMnccpnMt82vKWPjq1XhLHcmDZWv3BfXehbZkR8tHr7NV8QWcT-gEs-XBlB3CenU/s1600/Malcolm+Turnbull+1991.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjarFIqUAU1YbooQGD_3sVK9N1Duf2m9tn61iLxaA2-oSdZ5rEgPviDN7Ra_ztiayhuXZei66dnESifMnccpnMt82vKWPjq1XhLHcmDZWv3BfXehbZkR8tHr7NV8QWcT-gEs-XBlB3CenU/s400/Malcolm+Turnbull+1991.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">Malcolm Turndull in 1991 during the Fairfax US bondholders negotiations</span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Now Malcolm himself is really the only one who could fill in the blanks here, but it was stated that there were differences of opinion with the other two founders and that during this period they left the company and it then became known as <b>Turnbull and Partners</b>. It has been stated that Malcolm made his first "serious money" (reported as his first million or two) by representing the interests of US bondholders issued by doomed investor "young" Warwick Fairfax. Did any of this fit the bill as a period of struggle and achievement? I'd say 'overwhelmingly it did'! Did he manage to carve out his own career identity as a successful investor and businessman and step away from others in the process? Absolutely. These, of course, are the defining characteristics of an <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i></b>. Not quite as obvious to casual readers, if you merely skimmed his biography, but compelling evidence if you examined a bit more deeply.<br />
<br />
Black himself, a rambunctious wheeler and dealer, described Turnbull as :- <b><i>"mercurial and volcanic and had an immense agility at composing scenarios whose common feature was the happy ending of his ruling the world or whatever part of it was currently under consideration."</i></b> I think it safe to say that Malcolm was born to <b>'Struggle For Power'</b> and this is merely <b>Chapter One</b> in his major struggles. Now his life reads like a <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> textbook. It is so perfect, you'd swear I concocted the evidence to suit my own ends, but you know this isn't the first time, by a long shot, that famous lives fit the thin, exact and totally statistically improbable framework, that is <i style="font-weight: bold;">Life Cycles, </i>like a glove.<br />
<br />
OK, now on with his journey in merchant banking for seven years and we now hit most of <b>1998</b>, which is in his <i style="font-weight: bold;">age 43 Year of Broken Pathways. </i>What happened then to represent a turning point in his career and a break from where he was? This period coincides with the inspired negotiation to get a partnership in leading US investment bank <b>Goldman Sachs</b>, as part of his setting up of their Australian operation in mid-1997. The process of acquiring the partnership took most of <b>1998</b> (so the exact period in question) and a part of the deal was selling his own small investment bank, Turnbull and Partners, to the New York-based giant. This was an inspired move, because in the next year Goldman Sachs went public. His challenge (which is typical of what is said to follow on from a <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b>), in the period until his next <b><i>significant year; </i></b>involved a deal of controversy with the <b>HIH Insurance Group</b> and led on his leaving banking altogether in 2001.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipiP-ilPYupVXQRf91JURjtTbZDB5x-O9pDzfwqQLYbtcyJd4G0fjD4WKyuHxDd_jCN-7jIVuRGjMt-g4ZW7-kLuBMy60WsGGAeO1x1e1gEXLY73EPV6Tv-mrpcHrX_nP58XBtbjdTAB4/s1600/Malcolm+Turnbull+1996.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipiP-ilPYupVXQRf91JURjtTbZDB5x-O9pDzfwqQLYbtcyJd4G0fjD4WKyuHxDd_jCN-7jIVuRGjMt-g4ZW7-kLuBMy60WsGGAeO1x1e1gEXLY73EPV6Tv-mrpcHrX_nP58XBtbjdTAB4/s400/Malcolm+Turnbull+1996.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">Malcolm from his Goldman Sachs days</span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Now a wealthy man, Malcolm returned to his earlier unsuccessful efforts to enter politics in the 80's and capitalise on his considerable reputation gained when he was Chairman of the Australian Republican Movement from 1993 until his retirement in 2000. He re-joined the Liberal Party (having let his earlier membership lapse) and in 2002/3 became Federal Treasurer and a member of the NSW executive. During this very period he entered his next <b><i>Life Cycles significant year</i></b>, which was the important <b><i>age 48 Year of Revolution</i></b> (ie. <b><i>end 2002 to Oct. 2003</i></b>). The theory states that this often correlates with another period of change and new beginnings for many people. I use the phrase :- 'Leave the stage you have been upon since your major mid-life <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution.</i></b>'<br />
<br />
Was this to be the case in Malcolm's life? There is no doubt, that at 36 he had established his own merchant banking company out of a former partnership and made his first "serious money" , but that era was now closed. At 47 that he had re-involved himself in politics, but his true goal was to obtain a seat. This is really the aim of anyone with further ambitions and it was said of Malcolm from his days at Oxford as a Rhodes scholar that :- <i style="font-weight: bold;">"he was always going to enter life's rooms without knocking." </i>So what transpired at 48 that would represent <b>Chapter Two</b> in his <b>'Struggle For Power'</b>? Who, if you will, is Conrad Black/Nick Whitlam going to morph into? Well, we won't have to wait long, because in <b>2003</b> (the very time he was aged 48) Malcolm announced he was again seeking a parliamentary seat, which involved winning pre-selection for the blue ribbon Liberal seat of Wentworth.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyHiNcs_n2CKOiWsLUwvnn8CZ2lfBD2KKJRfNiORxq2IZyNzoJEkqNRhVc_hutJdZO-aioKb7yZ9bsQ42PXyhxz3hSlfqDLLRk2OQELHbxUQGqsM9cHCC3k_1TUq4ibxET2maKYTL9vOA/s1600/Maalcolm+Turnbull+Peter+King.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyHiNcs_n2CKOiWsLUwvnn8CZ2lfBD2KKJRfNiORxq2IZyNzoJEkqNRhVc_hutJdZO-aioKb7yZ9bsQ42PXyhxz3hSlfqDLLRk2OQELHbxUQGqsM9cHCC3k_1TUq4ibxET2maKYTL9vOA/s400/Maalcolm+Turnbull+Peter+King.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">Malcolm and his opponent Peter King in the struggle for the seat of Wentworth.</span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
There was, however, a major obstacle in the form of the sitting member, one <b>Peter King</b>. King, who was only in his first term, had in turn won the seat by ousting the former incumbent, and was a very well-matched opponent, when it came to in-fighting and branch tactics. Malcolm had stood unsuccessfully for pre-selection back in 1981, but there had been much 'water under the bridge' since then. Once the contest was official Malcolm began stacking the local branch with new members favourable to him. In the first half of proceedings he was clearly ahead with around 1500 in his camp. King (who was interestingly a founder of <b>Australians For A Constitutional Monarchy</b> - the opponents of the Republican movement); was alerted to this and hit back like a man possessed, counter-stacking with still more new members. It was like a political prize-fight and it has never happened to the party before or since.<br />
<br />
Everything was at stake for both candidates. Malcolm had resigned as Party Treasurer and it was reported in one newspaper article :- <i style="font-weight: bold;">"all will be forgiven if he wins, but if he fails memories will be long and bitter."</i> By early October 2003 (ie. still just within Malcolm's 48th year) the branch numbers were finalised. However, <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> is not science and the final result involving a selection panel of 112 members and 48 central party members, was not known till March, 2004. It would have involved Malcolm personally approaching any uncommitted panel members, but this obviously worked because he was duly elected. King then ran as an independent splitting the vote (the above photo shows campaigning at the polling booths by both men). In one of life's ironies it was King's preferences that enabled Malcolm to get over the line. Surely an excellent follow up example, mostly occurring in Malcolm's <b><i>age 48 Year of Revolution</i></b> and what I have called -<b>Struggle For Power</b>- <b>Chapter Two</b>.<br />
<br />
Now we progress ahead for seven years until his next <b><i>Life Cycles significant year</i></b> ie. his <i style="font-weight: bold;">age 55 Year of Broken Pathways (Oct. 2009 to Oct. 2010). </i>Malcolm has pushed forward with his political career and has made considerable progress, as it was predicted by many when he entered Parliament. Just like he did with his merchant banking career. When long-serving Liberal <b>Prime Minister John Howard</b> lost the 2007 election, he became Shadow Treasurer, and later on in <b>2008, Party Leader</b>. However, controversy happened to him again in mid-2009 (when he wrongly accused the Labor PM and Treasurer of improper conduct) and this was reflected in a large drop in the opinion polls. Another problem arose in November when he supported Labor's Carbon Reduction scheme and he lost the leadership in Dec. 2009 to <b>Tony Abbott</b>. This major change happened when he was in his <b><i>age 55 Year of Broken Pathways (Oct. 2009- Oct. 2010)</i></b>. His pathway was well and truly broken and he announced he was quitting politics. It took John Howard, himself, to talk him out of this decision.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAbDmssWCDLESXB1S2JOtx03ym7TXCbb-PCNhRNVDOJVQqkzTWbG1SQ7UWLGDfuW6SjC8mvrLVXE8-AuyflgIcm6UtQKuGLE6OcacuuFH38PKVzP4ntHZ2roR2DITidLGTlWaahj5Ve68/s1600/Malcolm+and+Tony.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAbDmssWCDLESXB1S2JOtx03ym7TXCbb-PCNhRNVDOJVQqkzTWbG1SQ7UWLGDfuW6SjC8mvrLVXE8-AuyflgIcm6UtQKuGLE6OcacuuFH38PKVzP4ntHZ2roR2DITidLGTlWaahj5Ve68/s400/Malcolm+and+Tony.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: small;">Malcolm with Tony Abbott after he lost party leadership.</span></i></b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
As the theory says the challenges that occur during a <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> can be both positive and negative, depending on what went before. Once again this major change was delivered to him on time and resulted in several years of adjusting, ie. getting re-elected in Wentworth in the 2010 election and working as a front bench minister. So, his fortunes in politics were mixed, just as they were with Goldman Sachs. Now we move to the present day. I need hardly spell out the sequence of events that have happened this year, because the print is barely dry on coverage of his recent successful leadership challenge, his new ministry and new visions for Australia's future. He is now the <b>new Prime Minister of Australia</b>. Could this be any clearer an example of exactly what I say is the expected sequence of events in someone's <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b>?<br />
<br />
Oh, you probably didn't notice that Malcolm turned<b> 60 </b>in late <b>Oct. 2014</b> and will celebrate his next birthday soon. Was there a period of temporary frustration and setback during this year? Of course you'd remember that in Feb. there was a spill motion against Tony Abbott, which was defeated 61 to 39. Malcolm was speculated to be considering running if the post of Party Leader was declared vacant. So it was back to the drawing board, but Tony Abbott was told he must lift the Party's performance in the polls. Even though the polls were consistently poor, it would be safe to say that if Malcolm moved against Tony, he must have his plans well orchestrated beforehand - his plans for the ultimate prize. In fact what he has always desired. This has now been publicly played out and is without a doubt his - <b>Struggle For Power</b> - <b>Chapter 3</b>. This time Peter King has morphed into Tony Abbott exactly 12 years later!<br />
<br />
I should stress that I'm no fortune teller and since we all live by free will, I don't know what will happen next, anymore than anyone else. But with the public record as evidence, I trust you can see for yourselves the almost 100% match of the Prime Minister's life with <b>Life Cycles</b> theory. I did a similar in-depth article on the last 2013 election with Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott <a href="http://lifecyclesstory-neil-killion.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/is-kevin-rudd-napoleon-is-tony-abbott.html">http://lifecyclesstory-neil-killion.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/is-kevin-rudd-napoleon-is-tony-abbott.html</a> and I did venture to say that history would suggest an Abbott victory. It would be like tightrope walking without a net for me, but I am going to venture to conclude, that there is every chance Malcolm Turnbull is set for another period of success in the country's top job. I join with many others in wishing him well for the future.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-29609247947806307232015-08-20T13:54:00.000-07:002015-08-20T15:23:25.394-07:00What's It All About? - Cilla Black and Life Cycles<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGafVpCR07CVuVu9zLtRFgw4VRMPmhtoXeIKoeHP4N5vWsAZdkNGNVsaX9yzb5JQ49hyphenhyphenELboiuUMH2-YR_jeb3PB0eLcYyiMm8hK5C6kE7rcPUYS98VF15Raqs46ZujmFSgk44xgs3-DY/s1600/Cilla+Text.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGafVpCR07CVuVu9zLtRFgw4VRMPmhtoXeIKoeHP4N5vWsAZdkNGNVsaX9yzb5JQ49hyphenhyphenELboiuUMH2-YR_jeb3PB0eLcYyiMm8hK5C6kE7rcPUYS98VF15Raqs46ZujmFSgk44xgs3-DY/s400/Cilla+Text.JPG" /></a></div><br />
It seems these days I am doing an awful lot of tribute-style posts and this one is no exception. The much-loved British entertainer <b>Cilla Black</b> left us recently and since I watched the TV mini-series on her early life, it was only natural that I get around to profiling her. I just didn't imagine it would be for the reason of her demise. This show made me fall in love all over again with her breakthrough hit - <b><i>Anyone Who Had A Heart</i></b>, as well as learn about her lowly origins and the role the <b>Beatles</b> played in her discovery. As usual I will tell her story only from the unique angle of <b>Life Cycles</b> and just concentrate on two of her early, but very significant, breakthrough moments. For Cilla had a second career on TV for many years and so both stories will be told.<br />
<br />
Let's go back to her humble beginnings in post-war, working class, sectarian Liverpool. <b>Priscilla Maria Veronica White was born May 27th. 1943</b> and grew up in the era of the Beatles playing at the famous <b>Cavern Club</b>, where she worked as a cloakroom girl. She used so do some impromptu singing there and also appeared as 'Swinging Cilla' in her first gig at the <b>Casanova Club</b>. It was <b>John Lennon</b> who encouraged Cilla (when she was in her <b>first adult age 19 Year of Broken Pathways, May 1962 to May 1963</b>) to sing <b><i>Summertime</i></b> with them for the Beatles new manager <b>Brian Epstein</b>. The TV Show recreates her disappointing performance. A combination of nerves and the fact that the Beatles played it in an unfamiliar key. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNm4ceCWUHAVxwdBWbyZping03yjUykE6eCR_0bDro01HJqDRs-awYn0xvxfQIBzI9jWg0Ny8lqsUufx0JcmVvCZlg3Yvg4npJtvryenyWmhv7-3lOW2JdqfkAeTcFlHH-eo7bRfIjRO0/s1600/Cilla+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNm4ceCWUHAVxwdBWbyZping03yjUykE6eCR_0bDro01HJqDRs-awYn0xvxfQIBzI9jWg0Ny8lqsUufx0JcmVvCZlg3Yvg4npJtvryenyWmhv7-3lOW2JdqfkAeTcFlHH-eo7bRfIjRO0/s320/Cilla+2.jpg" /></a></div><b><i>The moment: One night Cilla's friends shouted to The Beatles on stage: 'Give our Cilla a go!'. They were ignored until John Lennon sneered: 'OK, Cyril, what song do yer wanna do?'</i></b><br />
<br />
At this stage, she knew she had 'blown it' and couldn't see a way back. In her own words :-<b><i>"the music was not in my key and any adjustments that the boys were now trying to make were too late to save me. My voice sounded awful. Destroyed—and wanting to die—I struggled on to the end"</i></b>. However, John and Paul believed in her and months later got Brian to listen to her a second time at <b>The Blue Angel</b> jazz club, but this time it was unbeknownst to her. He liked her straightaway saying to John :- <b><i>"why didn't she sing like this before?"</i></b>. She became his first and only female vocalist signing and soon went on to her first minor hit <b><i>Love Of The Loved</i></b> (<b>Paul McCartney</b>) and then hit the big time in the next year with the <b>Burt Bacharach</b> song <b><i>Anyone Who Had A Heart</i></b> (originally meant for <b>Shirley Bassey</b>). She acquired her stage name of Cilla Black because the editor of the local magazine <b>Mersey Beat</b> mistakenly printed her name this way and she liked it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNm59d2qV-LabmUDsGaKbzOsTHwlG_kVA2c6cEjV4YKhNv6mh-kScEEYRpmhtJmuA2nkmlqjsN9s0aZxMYYzANEQlDV7OS0bgMF7IiyEdPk_lWCLiIPXw7tIw4keQZwVqzKwW0ZHN5-Ko/s1600/Cilla+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNm59d2qV-LabmUDsGaKbzOsTHwlG_kVA2c6cEjV4YKhNv6mh-kScEEYRpmhtJmuA2nkmlqjsN9s0aZxMYYzANEQlDV7OS0bgMF7IiyEdPk_lWCLiIPXw7tIw4keQZwVqzKwW0ZHN5-Ko/s400/Cilla+3.jpg" /></a></div><br />
So her second time around discovery by Brian Epstein, due to the Beatles efforts, all happened in her first adult Life Cycles significant year (ie. 19) and it was all dramatically shown in the mini-series. So what were the big events in her life in her next Life Cycles significant year (ie. <b>her first adult age 24 Year of Revolution, May 1967 to May 1968</b>) and did it amount to almost getting discovered all over again? Well we all know and love her great hits that happened during the middle 60's - <b><i>You're My World</i></b> and <b><i>Alfie</i></b> (hence the post title) and versions of other big hits like <b><i>You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling</i></b> (reaching No. 2 in the UK) and <b><i>Yesterday</i></b>.<br />
<br />
I'll pick up with the TV show now, which highlighted her dissatisfaction with Epstein in the previous year, because she felt he was ignoring her career. Then a big shock in August, 1968 at the beginning of her <b>Year of Revolution</b>, with the suicide of Brian Epstein. This however was to pave the way for her then boyfriend (and original manager) <b>Bobby Willis</b> to step up as her new manager (and they went on to be married in Jan. 1969). Because of her appearances on both TV (<b><i>Peter Cook/Dudley Moore Show</i></b> and her own TV special <b><i>Cilla At The Savoy</i></b> 1966) and West End shows, the <b>BBC</b> decided at this time to offer her, <b>her own TV Show - <i>Cilla</i></b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfGxI7cAXrqeyOFyMWfAKYB-hEAaCoR_-nlX1dRw0h7M1IGMB27l40MdfkDmy-6tvrkykE3UykXGNeP8zaLAB9g6u16li6JdbeFAu7PAzzo1ZmzXcUAKNfB7nP5DqRLFEksr8gpdzmLTs/s1600/Cilla+4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfGxI7cAXrqeyOFyMWfAKYB-hEAaCoR_-nlX1dRw0h7M1IGMB27l40MdfkDmy-6tvrkykE3UykXGNeP8zaLAB9g6u16li6JdbeFAu7PAzzo1ZmzXcUAKNfB7nP5DqRLFEksr8gpdzmLTs/s400/Cilla+4.jpg" /></a></div><br />
It first went to air in Jan. 1968 and it featured <b>Tom Jones</b> in a duet, a <b>Ringo Starr</b> interview and opened with the hit song <b><i>Step Inside Love</i></b>, specially written for her in the same period by Paul McCartney. Along with her warm engaging personality, the show went on to become a hit series and also launched her on a substantial career in TV featuring later shows such as host of <b><i>Blind Date</i></b> (1985-2003) and the Game Show <b><i>The Moment Of Truth</i></b> (1998-2001). She has been described as an 'institution of the British entertainment industry' and is a much-loved public figure.<br />
<br />
So there you have it, Cilla was discovered twice at her two earliest Life Cycles significant years (ie. 19 and 24). Firstly to be discovered as a talented singer by Brian Epstein and then as an endearing TV personality, something which does not happen to most singers and certainly not for the length of time she lasted. You must have gathered by now that Liverpudlians (as they call Liverpool natives) are a tight-knit bunch, who look after their own. You've only to see recent news that her funeral will be one of Liverpool's largest with fans lining a two mile route and Sir Cliff Richard singing a gospel song. Also in attendance were Sir Tom Jones and Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber. As her friend the actor Christopher Biggins so eloquently put it :- <b><i>"It’s marvellous that she’s coming home to Liverpool. It’s where she deserves to be. It’s something she would have approved of. Liverpool needs its Cinderella back again".</i></b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIlfg7a6iPgSzPu82o-Ltuy5Sbu2ddWQhEyieDixNbDURFN7le-jcgyNSIpKGPFocJ7-yqeICKppMDnsqyRIWToptmd6h4X6kh33xaDaw5Fr7I50IS-9uQrc3PEDkiokGIUuIF7js8jhs/s1600/Cilla+5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIlfg7a6iPgSzPu82o-Ltuy5Sbu2ddWQhEyieDixNbDURFN7le-jcgyNSIpKGPFocJ7-yqeICKppMDnsqyRIWToptmd6h4X6kh33xaDaw5Fr7I50IS-9uQrc3PEDkiokGIUuIF7js8jhs/s400/Cilla+5.jpg" /></a></div><br />
But <b>'Our Cilla'</b> will live on in the form of a musical based on her rags to riches story :- <b><i>Cilla Black The Musical</i></b> is destined to soon become a West End show and is bound to be a hit. If you happen to be visiting London around Christmas time, don't miss it!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAiRgwKKKkfskI-trygC7YU1RouMFldGMgVgtCgxT6cvfyvOISqwFsFMSAPqcLRBW19tTvhO9WfBV6xSENyQ5MSSjNcFOcD0glTDaBjqQcj_KbEKbAVvAhHTGeB8eBKhG49oca60hfakg/s1600/Cilla+6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAiRgwKKKkfskI-trygC7YU1RouMFldGMgVgtCgxT6cvfyvOISqwFsFMSAPqcLRBW19tTvhO9WfBV6xSENyQ5MSSjNcFOcD0glTDaBjqQcj_KbEKbAVvAhHTGeB8eBKhG49oca60hfakg/s400/Cilla+6.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-88521049226468249752015-07-02T16:02:00.000-07:002015-07-02T16:02:35.319-07:00The GOOGLE Story 2 - Anne Wojcicki - 36andMe<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6wggrnwdLN0HkbQiYoS5iQURmpVXLS-m33QSGiZ-ksM9Ex0mbBpvAoYVvZ-YGEhoyX0bDzhAaN-PO2hzRqISR2Gyc455-WXnzfPTHPzC_Y6y3BDo_s_XGRmXZs-ZkUE501PjylrTWfr4/s1600/Anne+Wojcicki.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6wggrnwdLN0HkbQiYoS5iQURmpVXLS-m33QSGiZ-ksM9Ex0mbBpvAoYVvZ-YGEhoyX0bDzhAaN-PO2hzRqISR2Gyc455-WXnzfPTHPzC_Y6y3BDo_s_XGRmXZs-ZkUE501PjylrTWfr4/s400/Anne+Wojcicki.jpg" /></a></div><br />
This is a linked post, which features <b><i>Life Cycles Families</i></b> from the perspective of the high-achieveing Wojcicki (pronounced Wo-jit-ski) sisters, Susan and Anne. The focus this time will be on the career and life of <b>Anne Wojcicki</b>. Why is this called <b>The GOOGLE Story 2</b>? Well Anne was, till a recent announcement of divorce, the wife of Google founder Sergey Brin. Given her sister's pivotal tole within Google and her own interesting career it has formed the basis of the link. Why did I call this <b>36andMe</b>? Oh, just to be my usual mischievous self. <br />
<br />
If you read the post on my main blog you will see that Google began when founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page rented out Susan Wojcicki's garage for $1,700 a month back in Sept. 1998. It also mentioned a constant stream of visitors, who had to come through Susan's living room in order to get to the garage. Well, what I didn't mention, was that one of those early visitors was Susan's younger sister Anne. This was where she and Sergey first met. <br />
<br />
Anne Wojcicki was <b>born 28th. July, 1973</b>, the younger sister of Susan. Unlike her sister she studied molecular biology and graduated in 1996 (the Wojcicki's had a formidable academic heritage with father Stanley being Head of the Physics Department at Stanford). When she was at or around her <b><i>age 24 Year of Revolution (Jul.1997-Jul.1998)</i></b> she commenced working at a New York biotech-related hedge fund, despite her parents being outright offended at this decision :-<i><b>"It was always embarrassing to come home,"</i></b> she says. <b><i>"People were like, 'Oh, Anne, you Wall Street girl.' "</i></b> She says she spent several years on Wall Street —mostly at Investor AB— watching how companies made money on sickness and listening to CEO's insist it wasn't their responsibility to understand how their companies' drugs worked.<br />
<br />
Returning to the story of her personal life however, during the course of 1998/9, as mentioned, Anne did find time to visit her sister and found that she and Sergey had an obvious vibe and they became an item, which eventually led to their marriage in 2007. So, until quite recently her personal life had been a straightforward affair, but an office romance between Brin and Amanda Rosenberg discovered by Anne 2013 changed all that. Notwithstanding the current media interest, this is not what Anne is principally known for. Her life's work at present is tied to a relatively new company she founded by the unlikely name of <b>23andMe</b>. This is the story that I am going to analyse in terms of <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhO4vUtcd1X_JfMQd5kYc0_mvCVDrR4FvwOcrpp409I9g0vnSwWgpo-E3qI8PgNQ-w7Ms1YexQhvF7cwRI6GvqwTl1CbpmTajGQFt3-Bel2JLoMHD6i1X4IVjXJdZ79CrlMesCl_Hdk7M/s1600/Sergey-Brin-and-Anne-Wojcicki.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhO4vUtcd1X_JfMQd5kYc0_mvCVDrR4FvwOcrpp409I9g0vnSwWgpo-E3qI8PgNQ-w7Ms1YexQhvF7cwRI6GvqwTl1CbpmTajGQFt3-Bel2JLoMHD6i1X4IVjXJdZ79CrlMesCl_Hdk7M/s400/Sergey-Brin-and-Anne-Wojcicki.jpg" /></a></div><br />
We are now going to progress our 7 year journey from her <b><i>age 24 Year of Revolution</i></b> to her next <i><b>Life Cycles</b></i> milestone, her <b><i>age 31 Year of Broken Pathways (Jul.2004-Jul.2005)</i></b>. The theory would say, that events in this period can produce and lead on to new directions and challenges, either positive or negative. Well you could see from Anne's above quote that she was rather equivocal towards the workings of the drug industry and the pure profit motive that drove them. There is recorded an interesting moment taken in <b>Feb. 2005</b> at the so-called <b>Billionaires' Dinner</b>, an annual event held in Monterey, California, when she asked her tablemates about their urine. <br />
<br />
She was curious whether, after eating asparagus, they could smell it when they urinated. Among those at her table were geneticist Craig Venter; Ryan Phelan, the CEO of DNA Direct, a San Francisco genetic-testing company; and Wojcicki's then-boyfriend, Sergey Brin. Most could pick up the smell of methyl mercaptan, a sulfur compound released as our guts digest the vegetable. But some had no idea what Wojcicki was talking about. They had, it seems, a genetic variation that made the particular smell imperceptible to them.<br />
<br />
Soon, the conversation turned to a growing problem: While researchers are amassing great knowledge about certain genes and genetic variations, there is no way for people to access that data for insights about themselves and their families — to Google their genome, as it were. As a biotech and health care analyst at <b>Passport Capital</b>, a San Francisco hedge fund firm, Wojcicki knew that the pharmaceutical industry was already at work on tailoring drugs to specific genetic profiles. But she was intrigued by the prospect of a database that would compile the available research into a single resource.<br />
<br />
This moment was to be the genesis of 23andMe, although it was just an embryo then. Someone who wished they were at that dinner was Linda Avey, who read about it later in <b><i>The Google Story</i></b> (the book not this series of posts!?). At the time, Avey was an executive at <b>Affymetrix</b>, the company that had pioneered some of the tools for modern genetic research. For nearly a year, she had been mulling the idea of a genotyping tool for consumers, one that would let them plumb their own genome as well as create a novel data pool for researchers. She networked her way to a dinner with Anne at the end of 2005. The two quickly hit it off, decided it make it into a company called 23andMe (ie. the 23 pairs of chromosomes in our DNA) and offered it to Sergey to be an angel investor. He said :- <b><i>"come up with a plan in 3 months."</i></b> They did but it took 18 mths to launch it with a $3.9 million investment from Google. <br />
<br />
Mind you Sergey's interest in the whole project took a monumental swing in 2006, when he put himself forward as an alpha tester. Even though his mother had contracted Parkinson's disease fairly recently he hadn't made any connection to his own risks of developing it. However, when Anne suggested they look specifically in a known area, it was found he shared the same mutation as his mother. It meant he could theoretically contract Parkinson's in as little as 10 years. At first he tried to keep this private, but then in 2008 he started a blog about it. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZorPwtLrYux-mk_tfdQS39uamU3XqCCrA6_jXiEqLwapAWnHb8MifxDk4oLNstbv5TAwsQSxF-SsVpC4fmf7RbNo638mslMZxF2GnFSo987oHBYHxWivCtSovePk3Iq5H3rTB-atqLpo/s1600/Anne+Wojcicki+and+23andMe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZorPwtLrYux-mk_tfdQS39uamU3XqCCrA6_jXiEqLwapAWnHb8MifxDk4oLNstbv5TAwsQSxF-SsVpC4fmf7RbNo638mslMZxF2GnFSo987oHBYHxWivCtSovePk3Iq5H3rTB-atqLpo/s400/Anne+Wojcicki+and+23andMe.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Back to the company launch in spring 2007. You probably don't know but it didn't coincide with any <b><i>Life Cycles significant year</i></b> in the life of Anne and it could reasonably be said to be her career-defining year, so I have to confess this will score a blank in terms of straightforward <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> statistics. I'm always happy to say there simply isn't a 100% match with every life-changing event. However, I am left with asking the question about events in her <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution (Jul.2009-Jul.2010)</i></b>? What do they have to say (if anything) about her life as a whole. Let's do this.<br />
<br />
It has been recorded that in the period 2009/10 the FDA met in Jul.2009 (and followed up with a letter in Jun.2010); to discuss concerns about the 23andMe's saliva-based personal genome tests having no analytical or clinical validity and remind them them that they are subject to scrutiny as any medical test is. This has led on to follow-up discussions and letters, but in 2013 the FDA told the company to cease marketing and sales. Of particular concern were false positive readings (eg. say for breast/ovarian cancers this could cause unnecessary surgery etc,) as well as false negatives (ie. failure to warn of an actual risk). As at the present day, it has just been announced that the FDA would allow a very specific testing for only one product ie. for a rare disease (known as Blooms disease), that is completely caused by genetic mutations and present before or in childhood. I don't think that will account for much in the way of sales revenue. <br />
<br />
OK, are you getting the message? Simply launching this new product as an interesting way to know about future medical concerns in 2007, only stirred up a hornet's nest of criticism from the FDA, beginning in Anne's <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i></b>. It has not quietened down even today and I think it would be safe to say, if it wasn't for the 'deep pockets' of Google and other backers, they would have shut up shop long before this (as 3 of its competitors who launched around the same time have). By my reckoning this drama has a fair long way to go and potentially threatens Anne's reputation in the process, even though she is honestly motivated to provide a valuable service to those willing to sign up. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvAfUra8znhcW9wchhKRS_2p8egzQUwZC75Da_W5jYgQ1McsfWTLhG5hUaWZdnCYLK7uPGyY_IpJw8EgALqmU2C_nqAeCZZd0b9Gs8xZGirkh4aMHYCy4-H1KpHQu4sRTjT7QycOIRZWM/s1600/Anne+Wojcicki+23andMe+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvAfUra8znhcW9wchhKRS_2p8egzQUwZC75Da_W5jYgQ1McsfWTLhG5hUaWZdnCYLK7uPGyY_IpJw8EgALqmU2C_nqAeCZZd0b9Gs8xZGirkh4aMHYCy4-H1KpHQu4sRTjT7QycOIRZWM/s400/Anne+Wojcicki+23andMe+2.jpg" /></a></div><br />
In early 2013 a report stated that though the company had signed up more than 150,000 people at $100.00 or so, it hadn't yet made a profit. The way forward was to sensibly diversify services offered (and outside of the US) and this has taken the form of offering customers a better understanding of their ancestral lines and the particular genetic markers they carry. This has been launched in Canada in 2014 and then the UK. They have also concentrated on the markers for Parkinson's disease, not unnaturally given Sergey's personal concerns. Their initial results in this area look promising. Somewhat ironically it is the very pharmaceutical industry, who Anne wished to initially bypass, that have become backers.<br />
<br />
The largest cloud on Anne's horizon has been both individual and class actions taken out in 2013 over their $99.00 spit-based assessments and their misleading advertising practices:- <b><i>"when there is no analytical or clinical validation for the PGS for its intended uses"</i></b>. Safe to say the jury is still out on this and other matters generally. This includes obvious concerns over privacy when large volumes of individuals hand over DNA information to a private company. Given I always say the same thing and that is to emphasise events in a person's <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i></b>, I would argue that 23andMe can be re-interpreted as being more a case of <b><i>36andMe</i></b>, when it comes to the beginning of the controversy which has bedeviled Anne's career.<br />
<br />
In the end, of course, I'm no fortune teller and this could play out any number of ways. Anne is known to be a single-minded and headstrong individual and she will certainly keep charging forward. I may one day have to congratulate her success in creating a genuine medical breakthrough, but as I write all this, it would appear that day is not yet to hand.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-59081390923268796712015-06-03T19:44:00.002-07:002015-06-03T22:17:30.549-07:00The Authority Is Life Cycles - Vince and Stepahnie McMahon and Paul Levesque<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWTmQXqE9oy29fiCwojD6x_bF4kaHwL0uXfRt22tOqKet6qD0SnWpZLs0HS01UPJHbfk1mpO2a5htddPSlCY2d3rUdWW716WDW1iQOa7h8EWLBSlCPg8tcww495VSKayRuOqo33w6NFPQ/s1600/Vince+%252B+Stephanie+%252B+Levesque.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWTmQXqE9oy29fiCwojD6x_bF4kaHwL0uXfRt22tOqKet6qD0SnWpZLs0HS01UPJHbfk1mpO2a5htddPSlCY2d3rUdWW716WDW1iQOa7h8EWLBSlCPg8tcww495VSKayRuOqo33w6NFPQ/s400/Vince+%252B+Stephanie+%252B+Levesque.jpg" /></a></div><br />
In the world of professional wrestling. there is one family name that stands head and shoulders above the rest - The McMahon Family. No question, their company - WWE (or World Wrestling Entertainment) is a phenomenon, that has transitioned from a relatively small regional wrestling organisation in the early days (when Vince's father ran the show) to the billion dollar corporation it is today. It is broadcast to more than 175 countries and directly to 12 million US consumers on a paid basis, as a 24/7 premium network. I have to own up to being a pro-wrestling fan from when I was a kid (now kidult). I have written a profile previously on the highs and lows of patriarch Vince McMahon's <b><i>Life Cycles career</i></b> and you can see it for yourselves <a href="http://my-madison-blog.us/2015/04/06/life-cycles-the-revolutions-of-vince-mcmahon-hes-pinned-1-2-3-4-5/">HERE - Life Cycles and Vince McMahon - He's Pinned 1,2,3,4,5.</a><br />
<br />
Today however, we're going to be looking at <b><i>Life Cycles and Families</i></b> and show how the McMahon's will apply almost perfectly to the theory. So perfectly, you'd swear the whole family was cooked up in a laboratory somewhere by a mad scientist. Not sure what I'm raving about? Well read on... <i><b>Life Cycles</i></b> is dead easy to follow. I have in the past (and continue to) study many lives on the basis of a <i><b>12 year cycle ie. what happens to people when they are aged 12/24/36/48 etc.</i></b>. My evidence shows that events in these years often mark upheavals and new beginnings, which I call <b><i>Years of Revolution</i></b>. Nothing to do with the occult, I only deal in real-world verifiable evidence. So naturally when I was able to show upheavals and new beginnings in the life of Chairman Vince at ages of 12,24,36.48 and 60, I said I'll call this "he's pinned 1,2,3,4,5" (like to old 5 count once used in wrestling - I hope some of you know about this).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJL9CQglN6t5OZkef_h8AymgyeZDP69eUxw9Wn6-3hcyGPOKlrspsNiXOxtYJtY2lQmSVIZUEuOCe9vaYjof_ULm9xMs1pBqAi7eNKd3IjfY-NXiPy51KqUhJ4CKZWlY-s8lCizmarg5o/s1600/Vince+young.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJL9CQglN6t5OZkef_h8AymgyeZDP69eUxw9Wn6-3hcyGPOKlrspsNiXOxtYJtY2lQmSVIZUEuOCe9vaYjof_ULm9xMs1pBqAi7eNKd3IjfY-NXiPy51KqUhJ4CKZWlY-s8lCizmarg5o/s400/Vince+young.jpg" /></a></div><br />
There are only two more concepts. It's easier than knowing which wrestlers are currently 'good guys' (so called 'babyfaces') or 'bad guys' (the 'heels'). OK, 7 years after your <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b> I study one more phenomenon - the direction-change and challenge I often see in people's lives. So the <b><i>ages of 7/19/31/43 etc</b></i> are all known as <b><i>Years of Broken Pathways</i></b>. That's because your pathway seems to break at this point. I call these two concepts the <b><i>Significant Years</b></i>. Finally I study the amount of overlap people may share with each other's <b><i>Significant Years</i></b>, because in theory it should make them better able to understand each other. The more overlap the better. I call the period of overlap <b><i>Confluence</i></b>. That's it, you're all done now.<br />
<br />
So how exactly does this work in the case of the <b><i>McMahon Family</i></b>? Well let's see shall we? <b>Vincent K. McMahon was born 24th August, 1945</b> and the record will show that his future son-in-law and wrestling great, <b>Paul Levesque</b> (known by his in-ring name of Triple H) was <b>born 27th July, 1969</b>. Now this means that when future Chairman Vince was in his <b><i>age 24 Year of Revolution</i></b>, baby Paul shared almost <b><i>11 out of 12 months of Confluence</b></i>. Would this mean they should understand each other, if and when they ever met - you know "speak the same language" so to speak? You bet it would. Remember the more <b><i>Confluence</i></b> the better. Incidentally this was the same year in which Vince, as a young man, talked his father into reluctantly giving him his first job in wrestling as an in-ring announcer (which is shown in the picture above). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgigDVWPW86AfF6Ad4hYptMrVcyTjCyf6ox5eC06agmo6T6pRnlSlxWUF8HasuKjA-WXXKhrV0d4Pdcmt5IH3eFHluRlVlcVu_Nxm7LX5ZzDRFD1zb_zFiVkqJnPmRwY8D_KZZuVy8zlnU/s1600/Stephanie+%252B+Paul.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgigDVWPW86AfF6Ad4hYptMrVcyTjCyf6ox5eC06agmo6T6pRnlSlxWUF8HasuKjA-WXXKhrV0d4Pdcmt5IH3eFHluRlVlcVu_Nxm7LX5ZzDRFD1zb_zFiVkqJnPmRwY8D_KZZuVy8zlnU/s400/Stephanie+%252B+Paul.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Now let's turn to Vince's daughter <b>Stephanie</b>. She was <b>born 24th Sept. 1976</b>. This was when Vince was in his <b><i>age 31 Year of Broken Pathways (Aug. 1976-Aug.1977)</i></b>. How much <b><i>Confluence</i> </b> did she share with her father? That would 11 out of 12 months again for every second <b><i>Significant Year</i></b>. Does that imply that she would most likely be "her father's daughter"? Yes, definitely according to my maths and stats. A veritable "chip off the old block"? You betcha! Also does it mean that she would be compatible with future WWE superstar Triple H, should they ever get romantically involved. No question it would, since they shared 10 out of 12 months <b><i>Confluence</i></b>, almost exactly like she did with her father. Would all three understand each other and potentially form a tight bond? Hell yeah! Like I said before this trio look so perfect in <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> terms it almost looks manufactured.<br />
<br />
Well let's translate all this theory and heresay to real life. When Paul Levesque was in his <b><i>age 24 Year of Revolution (Jul.1993-Jul.1994)</i></b> he joined World Championship Wrestling (WCW) billed as Jean-Paul Levesque, a French-Canadian aristocrat (he is actually an American). His new age/direction had begun. Exactly 7 years later, in mid-2000 the WWE had concocted a storyline where Triple H was to have an in-ring romance with Stephanie. They met both on camera and off, because Levesque says they actually started dating during this exact time. If you look at it this way, when they got together as an on-screen romance, that became an actual romance, it was like 'life imitating art' (an early photo of the couple is shown above).<br />
<br />
Now check this out for a perfect fit. Stephanie is beginning her <b><i>age 24 Year of Revolution (Sep.2000-Sep.2001)</i></b> while Paul has just begun his <b><i>age 31 Year of Broken Pathways (Jul.2000-Jul.2001)</b></i>. And they met in an imaginary way. This was so perfectly scripted you'd swear I was working behind the scenes as a creative storyline producer. When a strongly <b><i>Confluent</i></b> pair meet in their respective <b><i>Significant Years</b></i> it's fated. I call it meeting in <b><i>Real Time Confluence</i></b>. Should the sparks fly? Without hesitation, I would say. Would father Vince, who was himself in his own <b><i>age 55 Year of Broken Pathways (Aug.2000-Aug.2001)</i></b> approve of the match? Think Paul was good enough for his darling daughter? I would say "with bells on". Of course it's history that they married in 2003 and now have three daughters and a wonderful marriage. She now calls herself Stephanie McMahon Levesque.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYBG8ei8Vt5q8H9PMQkuV1L7Rbn9q-tqD7YyYTBh_3Kq2_UJh06DnCa32h0Z6iIqhpbb4QoT8njgzzLeLpMZkuF0n_gMdpUlo9zJ5cyx3D3JGWyXIWpL8ft91JfFjBx-gsf8FRy8sfWgs/s1600/Stephanie+%252B+Paul+The+Authority.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYBG8ei8Vt5q8H9PMQkuV1L7Rbn9q-tqD7YyYTBh_3Kq2_UJh06DnCa32h0Z6iIqhpbb4QoT8njgzzLeLpMZkuF0n_gMdpUlo9zJ5cyx3D3JGWyXIWpL8ft91JfFjBx-gsf8FRy8sfWgs/s400/Stephanie+%252B+Paul+The+Authority.jpg" /></a></div><br />
So now lets get mathematical once again. What happens if we take this whole 2000-2001 scenario and project it forward 12 years? What would we get? Well I'll tell you something for nothing - we'd get Stephanie in her important and often career-defining <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution (Sep.2012-Sep.2013)</i></b>. Why do I say this age is a stand out. Well I have seen it in case after case that I study. I don't know why and of course it's not foolproof, but it seems to happen with almost monotonous regularity. For instance in Vince's case it coincided with him buying out his father via use of financial subterfuge and gaining control of the then WWF. Not so much in Paul's case, as he had already established his pro-wrestling career at 24. <br />
<br />
OK, so what happened in mid-2012/mid-2013? During the first half of 2013 Stephanie started to make more regular appearances in what was a scripted storyline, that climaxed in August with her turning heel (or villain) while standing alongside her husband and father. She went on to sign a three year contract to join with Paul in becoming known as "The Authority" (an in-ring photo is shown above) - a thoroughly unlikable power couple. This allows Chairman Vince to largely disappear from on-screen appearances with the WWE and allow the next generation to do things their way. <br />
<br />
Was this scripting just for a bit of fun? I, for one, doubt it. Paul's role includes Creative Director and this would have been well worked out behind the scenes between the tightly-knit trio of Vince/Stephanie and Paul himself. I would say, that because the orderly hand-over of day-to-day responsibilities happened exactly 12 years after they all got together through Paul and Stephanie's on-screen romance; that this time the creation of "The Authority" as an outcome of discussions was a case of 'art imitating life'. This verifiable process of upheaval/new beginnings every 12 years is the essence of <b><i>Life Cycles Theory</i></b>. <br />
<br />
So I trust you can see how well it coincided with the same period back in 2000/1, where all three of them were in a <b><i>Significant Year</i></b> together. The difference is this time Stephanie was in her all-important <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i></b> (and this marks her running the show for the first time), along with Paul, who was in his <b><i>age 43 Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> and finally Vince, who was in his <b><i>age 67 Year of Broken Pathways</i></b>. Yes, Stephanie began her important mid-career identity just as her father and husband were changing their respective roles in the WWE. So you see from my perspective the evidence seems so good, it's almost "too good to be true". <br />
<br />
But this isn't, by a long way, the first time the correlations have been almost perfect. No I should be saying "here is my standout example", but if you have been reading any of my three blogs, you'll see I produce standout material almost every time I do a post. That's simply because <b><i>THE AUTHORITY IS LIFE CYCLES</i></b> when it comes to understanding lives and proving beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my evidence is here to stay and will stand the test of time.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-75524224230600099032015-05-05T16:46:00.000-07:002015-05-05T21:28:01.857-07:00Where Are These Blogs Headed?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPFVv6ZuNFxlt2klAGMYRdPIpYIx1lMpoZARQvoZAT1le5cwsGpKmHfmbUSncln-hUUC1woD7uf3ZGsb1C-dLdWWDJC_iJgj6eOhS1zhRhjvHaWPSZzjwjdX68UPmzytVFsnGECKtvsTA/s1600/NK01_mandalalogo%5B1%5D%5B1%5D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPFVv6ZuNFxlt2klAGMYRdPIpYIx1lMpoZARQvoZAT1le5cwsGpKmHfmbUSncln-hUUC1woD7uf3ZGsb1C-dLdWWDJC_iJgj6eOhS1zhRhjvHaWPSZzjwjdX68UPmzytVFsnGECKtvsTA/s400/NK01_mandalalogo%5B1%5D%5B1%5D.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
As I indicated in the <a href="http://lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com.au/">MAIN BLOG</a> there is an underlying structure to both these blogs. One compliments the other. You can see this for yourselves by the number of linked posts I do, that feature famous people with similar backgrounds :- like Peter L'Enfant and Walter Burley Griffin or Henry Ford and Nikola Tesla. It simply displays the breadth of <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> evidence. You can also see it in the fact I sometimes do, as I am doing now, that is to break the ordinary flow of case histories, with a post about process and format. You can also see it earlier on, with my emphasis on examples from Australia in this blog, to match international examples in the main blog. <br />
<br />
Some my earliest posts featured a combined explanation of process, along with a case history. I figure the best way to introduce a brand new concept is to simply keep reinforcing the fact that I have no trouble in backing up what I say. Unfortunately for others who operate in the esoteric field (you know astrology/numerology and the like), they cannot provide any real evidence. It should also be noted that even if they claimed some evidence, they can never prove what caused it eg. planets, stars or numbers etc. can't influence actions on earth. Therefore even though some of their ideas may seem plausible, they are scientifically bankrupt.<br />
<br />
I also need to reinforce the notion that <b><i>Life Cycles evidence</i></b> is not infallible. There are many events of importance in people's lives that do not coincide with either of the <b><i>significant years</i></b>. Sometimes there are life and career-defining moments, that do not coincide with the most important <b><i>age 36 Year of Revolution</i> </b> and other adult <b><i>Years of Revolution</i></b>, such as ages 24 and 48. <b><i>Life Cycles</i></b> is not good enough to be called science, but yet its methodology is statistical and quasi-scientific and it <b>shares nothing in common with the esoteric</b>. It is an exacting study of biographical (or real world) events, particularly in the <b><i>significant years</i></b> (12/19/24/31/36 etc.), to find matches with a prescribed universal definition for all lives. Yes, sometimes there is some subjectivity in my interpretations, but often the evidence backs up what I say in the most straightforward and extremely improbable way.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN-SDrTAPs47AYrzLrMrXaumUeTmdXJ4QMQP6BPKBP0W4NvBHH6qSeGEXd2YmwD2GiOh8Y5y4HRABoledlN0HOHz-L5EDXlXcl4HbO9156AYDWjIXiVxhPk_5miEPBtoO4zpFfqbjzLoQ/s1600/flames_of_the_phoenix_by_mithandir730-d6fghkz+(1).JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN-SDrTAPs47AYrzLrMrXaumUeTmdXJ4QMQP6BPKBP0W4NvBHH6qSeGEXd2YmwD2GiOh8Y5y4HRABoledlN0HOHz-L5EDXlXcl4HbO9156AYDWjIXiVxhPk_5miEPBtoO4zpFfqbjzLoQ/s400/flames_of_the_phoenix_by_mithandir730-d6fghkz+(1).JPG" /></a></div><br />
Please note, I don't know what causes this. I'm not interested in idle speculation either.....at least not until my ideas are more widely known. So there it is, now onto the blogs themselves. They were devised with the aim in mind of introducing a different aspect of <b><i>Life Cycles theory</i></b> with each new cycle of twelve, once a month, posts. Why do this? Well it simply reflects the core notion of <b><i>Life Cycles</i> </b> and that is :- we live our lives in 12 year symbolic cycles. So each monthly post corresponds to one year in our own lives. Now there is an overall shape to this 12 year cycle and in <a href="https://www.web-e-books.com/lifecycles/default.php">THE LIFE CYCLES REVOLUTION</a> I explain it in full. I'm afraid there's no other way to get this information except through the book.<br />
<br />
However, in these blogs I just concentrate on the easy-to-understand core elements of the theory. So far, beginning in 2009 we have covered the following themes :-<br />
<br />
<blockquote>2009/10 - 1st. Year - The <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b><br />
<br />
2010/11 - 2nd. Year - The <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b><br />
<br />
2011/12 - 3rd. Year - The <b><i>Life Chart</i></b>, which is all the <br />
collected data of these two <b><i>significant years</i></b> in a person's life. <br />
<br />
2012/13 - 4th. Year - <b><i>Confluence</i></b> or the amount of overlap of <br />
the <b><i>significant years</i></b> shared by two or more people.<br />
<br />
2013/14 - 5th. Year - The Dark Side, or the application of <b><i>Life Cycles <br />
Theory</i></b> to criminal or immoral acts.<br />
<br />
2014/15 - 6th. Year - <b><i>Life Cycles and Careers</i></b> or the <br />
application to career highlights and turning points.<br />
<br />
2015/16 - 7th. Year - <b><i>Life Cycles and Families</i></b> or the<br />
application between and within generations.</blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3PY_pYIE19AVz2F1mhSK8kAXYUDrrDmxHf_BUBTlaizwuqWXr2kxVxvJZG6pKWR7pg-CsKnLpJgJ34Nrl5QCunLT01rEtBGZH0Amng7n_Rgcd_GXrMNKSIjcblrzYImqL-cgZUh1n8-Y/s1600/The+Couple.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3PY_pYIE19AVz2F1mhSK8kAXYUDrrDmxHf_BUBTlaizwuqWXr2kxVxvJZG6pKWR7pg-CsKnLpJgJ34Nrl5QCunLT01rEtBGZH0Amng7n_Rgcd_GXrMNKSIjcblrzYImqL-cgZUh1n8-Y/s400/The+Couple.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Now here's a BIG QUESTION for you. What is one of the most primary concepts of <b>Life Cycles Theory</b> that is very relevant to where these blog are now? I'll wager that very few people, if that, might have a clue. OK, the answer is :- "Following your new age/direction, ushered in with the first year of the 12 year cycle, otherwise known as the <b><i>Year of Revolution</i></b> (ie. 12/24/36 etc.) you travel along in a more or less straight line for 7 years, until your direction gets altered again, by the second year of change, otherwise known as the <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> (ie.7/19/31/43 etc.). The remaining years of the 12 year cycle are said to be marked by a challenge (either positive or negative), that involves an uphill struggle to accommodate to the new circimstances.<br />
<br />
Once again, this is a universal definition for all lives. No magic here whatsoever. I study the nature of this uphill climb and begin to look at new components of <b><i>Life Cycles theory</i></b>. So here's where these blogs will mirror the 12 year cycle. Look above and check how many years these blogs have been going. We're into our 7th year now aren't we? What does this tell you? Well it should tell you, that if we keep to the structure I outlined above, it means that the next year of these blogs will be the equivalent of their <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> ie. changes and some form of challenge and uphill struggle. You know, it's the same structure.<br />
<br />
What will the challenge be and how will these blogs unfold in coming years? What will be the <b><i>Year of Broken Pathways</i></b> for these blogs? Of course that would be telling, wouldn't it? You'll find out in good time, which sounds a bit like what you were told to the universal question all kids ask on a journey :- "Are we there yet?" You'll be in for a surprise, as you won't expect where we'll go......but then again that's the fun of the journey.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-44295421860410871802015-04-04T18:32:00.000-07:002015-04-05T16:20:02.091-07:00Chicago Or The Bush - The Story Of Canberra - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Walter Burley Griffin<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5JR9aOMiJPGgwvONaPJ-bnWieRlMQmRaCjpj2l3rLJPLFe_ZIW7sM4RZyMGXMou-6Sn2SJyPyNK-yQroZ8YpJ4_JLhzc2ImkQXnAwgpWYylw3wBP5Az6leJbN7zMMnqda6IGerRRR2lg/s1600/Canberra+Icon+image+large.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5JR9aOMiJPGgwvONaPJ-bnWieRlMQmRaCjpj2l3rLJPLFe_ZIW7sM4RZyMGXMou-6Sn2SJyPyNK-yQroZ8YpJ4_JLhzc2ImkQXnAwgpWYylw3wBP5Az6leJbN7zMMnqda6IGerRRR2lg/s640/Canberra+Icon+image+large.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Does this title perplex you? It's designed to because it marries two ideas into one. The first is a famous saying we have in Australia - <b>"Sydney or The Bush"</b> - which means to go all out and stake total success or failure on one high-risk event. It's similar to <b>"Hollywood or Bust"</b>. "Sydney or The Bush" actually made an appearance in a Peanuts cartoon, where one of the characters was encouraging Charlie Brown with a bunch of clichés like that, ending with "Sydney or The Bush!" In the last panel, Charlie Brown was looking perplexed and repeating, "Sydney or The Bush?"<br />
<br />
But why in the heck would I morph that into <b>"Chicago or The Bush"</b>? Well that's because one native Chicagoan architect, by the name of <b>Walter Burley Griffin</b> (shown below), did make this exact call on his career. Known as the man who won a contest with a design for our nation's new Capital City, <b>Canberra ACT</b>, he very nearly didn't elect to follow this dream. This is his story, told as always, from the unique viewpoint of <b><i>'Life Cycles'</b></i> theory. Those of you who have read my landmark article on <b>Peter L'Enfant</b> in the <a href="http://lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com.au/">MAIN BLOG</a> will recognise straight away that this is a linked (almost a sister) article.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAB9389aOzJVBDAYD_QyCOAXb4ze404S8YRB2_idYx71iCRGgJ135A3UMXhqXBM3xjzmv_Pbc30uvWiG1YzI9J1LT8PGmPkpKjkZW5lrmanD4FDWJfHrXCmHZzoYocUjEZEFg1J_tJNcg/s1600/Walter+Burley+Griffin+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAB9389aOzJVBDAYD_QyCOAXb4ze404S8YRB2_idYx71iCRGgJ135A3UMXhqXBM3xjzmv_Pbc30uvWiG1YzI9J1LT8PGmPkpKjkZW5lrmanD4FDWJfHrXCmHZzoYocUjEZEFg1J_tJNcg/s400/Walter+Burley+Griffin+2.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Where did it all begin? Well, it happened by chance (as so much of my research does), when I was idly walking down a corridor of the <b>Cultural Centre</b> in downtown Chicago several years ago (gives you an idea of the size of my back catalogue). The Cultural Centre is a grand old beaux arts building (I learned this term when doing an architectural walk) on Michigan Avenue, that once housed the main Public Library. These days it has multiple uses (and an unmissable <b>Louis Tiffany Auditorium</b>), but in this corridor there were just some photos of the various city pioneers. Among them was a photo and bio. of Walter Burley Griffin, that only mentioned one year in his life. The Canberra year. How old was he then? You guessed it, he was in his <b><i>age 36 mid-life 'Year of Revolution'</b></i>. Like I said before, finding new <b><i>'Life Cycles'</b></i> evidence is like gold prospecting before the great hoards arrive. It litters the ground, I don't have to dig for it. <br />
<br />
Walter Burley Griffin was <b>born Nov. 24th 1876</b> in Chicago and grew up in the famous <b>Oak Park</b> suburb (if you haven't visited this you're in for a real treat as it is like stepping back in time). In his studies in Architecture and early work experience, his major influence was the equally famous <b>Prairie School</b> (with horizontal lines, flat roofs with broad overhanging eaves, solid construction and craftsmanship). In his <b><i>age 24 'Year of Revolution'</b></i> (Nov.1900 to Nov.1901) he joined <b>Frank Lloyd Wright</b>'s famous Oak Park, Illinois, studios. Although he was never made a partner, Griffin oversaw the construction on many of Wright's noted houses including the <b>Willits House</b> in 1902 (shown below).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit-u2JcXS1JEg-NaCQWRZeG3loDUnxBGasGAOCQmkSTT07GhGkKlsV9hfOgXnJcqoO6zCkW3vRX_P_9FVmyJaT6z7qB4CqiaZD5a7kBljdc-DMG4yih5Hh8sTmrBYdGTU8sF3OAr3jQ7s/s1600/willits1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit-u2JcXS1JEg-NaCQWRZeG3loDUnxBGasGAOCQmkSTT07GhGkKlsV9hfOgXnJcqoO6zCkW3vRX_P_9FVmyJaT6z7qB4CqiaZD5a7kBljdc-DMG4yih5Hh8sTmrBYdGTU8sF3OAr3jQ7s/s400/willits1.jpg" /></a></div><br />
He later left to open his own practice creating more than 130 designs in his Chicago office for buildings, urban plans and landscapes; with half of these built in the mid-western states of Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin. In April 1911 the <b>Australian Government</b> held an international competition to produce a design for <b>Canberra</b>, its new capital city. Griffin produced a design with impressive renderings of the plan produced by his wife. They first heard about the competition in July, while on honeymoon, and worked feverishly to prepare the plans. <br />
<br />
On May 23, 1912, Griffin's design was selected as the winner from among 137 entries (entry is shown below). This created significant press coverage at the time and brought him professional and public recognition. Of his plan, he famously remarked:-<br />
<br />
<blockquote><i><b>"I have planned a city that is not like any other in the world. I have planned it not in a way that I expected any government authorities in the world would accept. I have planned an ideal city – a city that meets my ideal of the city of the future."<br />
</b></i></blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjH5Fkcm63YuoY4k4cejrhg5vufC6zXKmiDtGC06gKIrybdOKJiDpwo2y9vbwBmoq_nQs7eObEDNKJBVTZhMKDaifjKyaSXGse7WgbFUiM7YObvwJ1QNCbvMw9fgFOH2HDfnwZ6G9UCo00/s1600/574858-120519-inq-canberra.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjH5Fkcm63YuoY4k4cejrhg5vufC6zXKmiDtGC06gKIrybdOKJiDpwo2y9vbwBmoq_nQs7eObEDNKJBVTZhMKDaifjKyaSXGse7WgbFUiM7YObvwJ1QNCbvMw9fgFOH2HDfnwZ6G9UCo00/s400/574858-120519-inq-canberra.jpg" /></a></div><br />
OK, now you know how particular I am about dates and accuracy. The more slapdash variety of researcher would say that this is close enough to Griffin's all-important, central, <b><i>age 36, mid-life 'Year of Revolution' (Nov.1912 to Nov. 1913)</b></i>, but I am not satisfied with being 6 months short. Was this the end of the story? Did Walter Burley Griffin and his wife Marion simply 'up stumps' (to use another piece of Aussie slang) and move to Australia? Was it smooth sailing in 1913? Were there life changing events in this year of years?<br />
<br />
I'm going to break in here and make an observation about just how closely this parallels the Peter L'Enfant saga, but with a couple of significant differences. L'Enfant didn't win an international contest to design <b>Washington</b>, he only received a brief to locate a suitable site for Washington and then he decided to expand on this and design the whole city. This design was his high point in his age 36 year and then things went rapidly downhill in the next. Walter Burley Griffin, in fact, won a major international design award for the city of Canberra 6 months prior to turning 36 and then.....well.....basically he had to come out and inspect where his new city was to be and he still had to complete a detailed plan. <br />
<br />
This was all to happen in <b><i>1913, the year in which the true birth of Canberra is celebrated</b></i>. You can see this on multiple sites and there were Centenary celebrations of Canberra in 2013. Walter arrived, on his own in July, 1913 to much local press fanfare. One reporter wrote:- <br />
<br />
<blockquote><b><i>"There resides under the fair billowing looks some of the finest ambitions that a person can cultivate for the service of his fellow creatures."</b></i></blockquote><br />
What he basically saw was sheep country in the middle of the bush around 300 km from Sydney. Canberra has been sarcastically referred to by locals as :- <i>"a good way to ruin a sheep farm"</i>. You know, <b>"Sydney or The Bush"</b>. It was <b>"The Bush"</b>. (the Canberra site in 1913 is shown below)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz92tZgeabHwY5ZqwVYaXsDAd7PenDaSObo1WrhlpjNRxx9TXwosIDQq_kBP9ViRQJpAdcyspWXBQO5-E_-dQJDaa0ANqH-Z2WY-crD_CNcncK60G7su16PweeGs9qtbgb7dNfnnK9RQs/s1600/Canberra+in+1913.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz92tZgeabHwY5ZqwVYaXsDAd7PenDaSObo1WrhlpjNRxx9TXwosIDQq_kBP9ViRQJpAdcyspWXBQO5-E_-dQJDaa0ANqH-Z2WY-crD_CNcncK60G7su16PweeGs9qtbgb7dNfnnK9RQs/s400/Canberra+in+1913.jpg" /></a></div><br />
However, Griffin loved the site. He took to bush walking and exploring the local flora and fauna. Construction commenced in 1913. <a href="http://oztypewriter.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/king-omalley-canberras-father-american.html">KING O'MALLEY</a>, the Minister for Home Affairs (himself an American who became an Australian and was a very colourful character), oversaw the competition proceedings and appointed a departmental board to oversee the construction of Canberra. Unfortunately, certain members of the departmental board had their own design ideas for Canberra. Without consulting Griffin, some changes were made to his original designs. This is absolutely parallel to the L'Enfant saga. His Commissioners also made changes and wanted a simpler, cheaper design.<br />
<br />
When Griffin learned of the changes he was facing he was furious (just as L'Enfant had been) and demanded that he be allowed to personally oversee the construction and overrule any interfering board members. So, in <b>October 1913</b>, O'Malley's board was removed and Griffin was <b>appointed as the Federal Capital Director of Design and Construction</b>. This allowed Griffin to bring his plans to life and include all the details and features that he had originally envisioned for Canberra. There's the rub you see. A grateful, fledgling Australian Government (with a former American at the helm) wanted to appease the genius of Griffin, whereas an ungrateful US Government dismissed L'Enfant.<br />
<br />
What about the <b>"Chicago"</b> tag in the opening? You've probably forgotten all about it haven't you? Well I haven't, because I know why I put it in (beginning to sound like a Monty Python sketch......sorry wrong story-line). Well during this whole unsettled period for Griffin, in which I'll lay odds he threatened to walk away and go back to Chicago if he didn't get his way, he had an offer of the position of head of the department of architecture at the <b>University of Illinois</b> (a beautiful campus located in Champaign, which is about 200 km west of Chicago). This was at the exact same time he was negotiating a three-year contract with the Australian Government to remain in Australia and oversee the implementation of his plan, which he felt had already been compromised. <br />
<br />
Now there you have it don't you?! Griffin was pissed-off at his treatment and he had been negotiating a perfectly viable Plan B at the same time! Things were certainly in the balance during this year of years. The veritable definition of the <b><i>'period of upheaval'</b></i>, that I say often accompanies a <b><i>'Year of Revolution'</b></i>. It was <b>"Chicago or The Bush"</b> for him, which would have forever altered history. A Canberra designed by a committee! Not the Canberra we know and love. Meanwhile no doubt, a stellar, but much more conventional academic career for Professor Griffin......<br />
<br />
But that's not it at all. In October, 1913 O'Malley (shown below driving the first survey peg in the Canberra site Feb. 20th 1913) made sure Griffin got his way and was kept happy. What a happy ending this turned out to be! Griffin and his wife Marion settled in and loved their new adopted country and in 1917 they closed their Chicago office permanently and came to live in Australia. His 'Canberra' was complete triumph. He gave Australia a political terrain to match European capitals but also a distinctly Australian identity. Griffin was internationally acclaimed for his creativity and ability to incorporate the aesthetics of the Australian environment in his town planning (see the title photo at the start).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGU7o6U14o4SSjG6Jlh6CJeEoHVx1g6P6MTyf_UuqAMjAqeZcI2cHUWRdqk6J_uf1CwBSiqYaZDIHO8YV6XYiCbRS1-q-KQo9TVIp00tmRibi3K-E6XUMg1OpcuYbU4a6ugh0IQ0T3mSA/s1600/King_o'malley_first_peg_at_canberra_1913.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGU7o6U14o4SSjG6Jlh6CJeEoHVx1g6P6MTyf_UuqAMjAqeZcI2cHUWRdqk6J_uf1CwBSiqYaZDIHO8YV6XYiCbRS1-q-KQo9TVIp00tmRibi3K-E6XUMg1OpcuYbU4a6ugh0IQ0T3mSA/s400/King_o'malley_first_peg_at_canberra_1913.jpg" /></a></div><br />
In 1914, he designed the town plan for <b>Leeton</b> in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area, and later on a design for <b>Melbourne's Newman College</b> and the <b>Capitol Theatre</b>. He opened offices in both Melbourne and Sydney designing numerous other buildings and town planning projects. He became a very important Australian indeed and we celebrate him as one of our own.....Everyone lived happily ever after....except good old Frank Lloyd Wright, who had earlier borrowed money off Walter for his 1906 Japan trip and tried to short-change him when he got back......in other words he had tried to screw one of his own trusted employees!!.....no wonder Walter left soon after and opened his own office.<br />
<br />
Well guess what? Frank got so pissed off when he read in the <b><i>New York Times</b></i> that Walter had won the Canberra international contest, that he never spoke to him again. Whenever his name was mentioned he tried to belittle him calling him :- <b><i>"nothing but a 'draftsman' and an architect of no great skill"</b></i>. Ah, Frank, Frank, I'd normally say that sort of cheap rhetoric should have been beneath you......but I've profiled <a href="http://lifecyclesstory-neil-killion.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/frank-lloyd-wright-and-two-time.html">YOU</a> haven't I?......and I'm not at all surprised.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-56504464704814137322015-03-08T17:48:00.000-07:002015-03-09T14:44:30.290-07:00The War Of Currents - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Nikola Tesla<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGOSPpxbwUBANEwbXX2n9XCnF8ZL1o6DMd_FmkWt5ldqMKnfR7v4lQ-_Ig5MfjyI1wc5XJwWKiF8aYFhwSxs2u_Op_q7CheEEnQnkQhSFKpjzCTD9tjRyw0ksnJIeIjBc2UJzEI6DwJRE/s1600/Tesla+Edison+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGOSPpxbwUBANEwbXX2n9XCnF8ZL1o6DMd_FmkWt5ldqMKnfR7v4lQ-_Ig5MfjyI1wc5XJwWKiF8aYFhwSxs2u_Op_q7CheEEnQnkQhSFKpjzCTD9tjRyw0ksnJIeIjBc2UJzEI6DwJRE/s400/Tesla+Edison+2.jpg" /></a></div><br />
As promised this is going to be a linked post to my <a href="www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">MAIN BLOG</a>, where I have featured the life and career of Henry Ford. Now many of you will only know this other great inventor because of his present association with the Tesla electric car. But it really doesn't have anything to do with his career. So just who is <b>Nikola Tesla</b> and why was he such a celebrated inventor, who lived in the time of Thomas Edison and successfully competed with him?<br />
<br />
Nikola Tesla was a Serbian-American inventor and electrical engineer, who is famous for pioneering the alternating current (AC) electricity supply system. He was originally employed by <b>Thomas Edison</b>, but left after a dispute (which was a feature of Tesla's career) and then joined the <b>George Westinghouse</b> camp in what has become known as <b><i>"The War Of Currents"</b></i>. At stake was the most lucrative electricity supply contract yet seen - harnessing the power of Niagara Falls to power the Eastern United States. It was largely a two horse race between Edison and Westinghouse (although many others entered as well) and it totally relied upon the suitability of Tesla's invention of AC power. It all came to a head when Tesla was - wait for it - <b>in his age 36</b>, major mid-life, <b>'Year of Revolution'</b>. This is his story.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbzCAC2tT3Uxjzf7LAX109_oH4xvaHY99k0cIitmiiYoqa_RH9l2OXXuT3ed2hbVOTQqkpfxeFhU9a-q1c80o-s1WdSyd0IiFttDokKJH0bLaIaBQqGWdLPSzl8PNc5AhkttB313axklo/s1600/Tesla+4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbzCAC2tT3Uxjzf7LAX109_oH4xvaHY99k0cIitmiiYoqa_RH9l2OXXuT3ed2hbVOTQqkpfxeFhU9a-q1c80o-s1WdSyd0IiFttDokKJH0bLaIaBQqGWdLPSzl8PNc5AhkttB313axklo/s400/Tesla+4.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Nikola Tesla was <b>born July 10th, 1856</b>. We are just going to visit his first three adult 'significant years'. In his first adult, <b>age 24 'Year of Revolution' (July 1880-July 1881)</b> Tesla began his professional career in a sidewards fashion. Due to his gambling addiction and failure to study for various courses he did not graduate from university and instead began his career in early 1881, as a draftsman working at the still-to-be-completed <b>Budapest Telephone Exchange</b>. It became functional several months later and he became <b>Chief Electrician</b> and made many improvements. He claimed to have invented a telephone repeater or amplifier, which was never patented. His <b>true career as an inventor was launched</b> and within a year he was working for the Continental Edison Company in France. <br />
<br />
Over the course of his <b>7 year forward journey</b> (a cornerstone of 'Life Cycles' theory is the 7 year forward journey from your 'Year of Revolution' to your next change year called your 'Year of Broken Pathways'); he both worked for and fell out with Edison. Next he found two wealthy backers and began work on electrical illumination systems. His backers, however, had little interest when he began working on new inventions for electrical transmission equipment. He was forced out of his own company and left penniless, having to take repair jobs and dig ditches, to his great chagrin. This was one year short of his next 'significant year' - his <b>age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>. He was yet to fulfill his promising talent. What would lie around the corner?<br />
<br />
In the period <b>July 1887 - July 1888</b>, Tesla had just found two other wealthy backers in New York and began work on <b>a polyphase induction motor that ran on alternating current</b>. He <b>patented it in May 1888</b>. In <b>July 1888</b>, Tesla's backers secured a <b>deal with Westinghouse</b> for his polyphase induction motor and transformer designs for $60,000 in cash and stock and a royalty of $2.50 per AC horsepower produced by each motor. Westinghouse also hired Tesla for one year for the large fee of $2,000 ($52,500 in today's dollars) per month, to be a consultant at the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company's Pittsburgh labs.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2_GJiWZaqPG_dANfSqr7q0u2XOFCDDI282V-e90Paq-VtkO86krcozYI7wzXDVhZgr4f5xFW8wUPL_HzXbspZYyrmyBV5Cysy_nDZwEJHJuHOql8Ni7TtKpIXrK3oBwxC99G-ftoq8UQ/s1600/Tesla+Westinghouse.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2_GJiWZaqPG_dANfSqr7q0u2XOFCDDI282V-e90Paq-VtkO86krcozYI7wzXDVhZgr4f5xFW8wUPL_HzXbspZYyrmyBV5Cysy_nDZwEJHJuHOql8Ni7TtKpIXrK3oBwxC99G-ftoq8UQ/s400/Tesla+Westinghouse.jpg" /></a></div><br />
All this activity in 1888 put Tesla firmly on the side of <b>Westinghouse's AC team</b> in the so-called <b>"War of Currents"</b> with <b>Edison's direct current (DC) model</b>. Edison held all the patents for DC and incandescent light, while Westinghouse now held a viable AC patent to power arc lighting. The electrical war was well and truly on, with of course the benefits of immense future wealth at stake. Edison soon realised that he couldn't fight the more efficient AC model and in the period 1890-1892, he began working on the development of his own version.<br />
<br />
Now we sit poised for events in Tesla's most important age 36, mid-life, <b>'Year of Revolution' (July 1892-July 1893)</b>. There was no doubt that the "jewel in the crown" of prestige and wealth was to secure the contract for the <b>Niagara Falls Power Plant transmission</b>. Now you can't just submit plans and hope for the best and there was an ideal opportunity to showcase your equipment in tendering for the <b>supply of electricity to the 1893 Chicago World's Fair</b>. Westinghouse beat out Edison for the contract by undercutting his price by $1 million and of course, had the superior <b>Tesla Polyphase AC System</b>. This was noted as being <b>a key event in the "War Of Currents"</b>. In other words it represented a knock-out blow. <br />
<br />
The World's Fair, which opened in <b>April, 1893</b>, devoted a whole building to electrical exhibits. It was a key event in the history of AC power, as Westinghouse demonstrated the safety, reliability, and efficiency of a fully integrated alternating current system to the American public. Tesla personally demonstrated a series of electrical effects previously performed throughout America and Europe, including using a high-voltage, high-frequency alternating current to light a wireless gas-discharge lamp. The Electricity Pavillion is shown below. He was a big hit with crowds. At 36, he was now public property and a <b>major inventor in the pioneering field of electricity</b>. What could possibly top this off in the couple of months that remained?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Y24xUXzTXHVROLCrWT06joEK01BNNkPoUVnPZJMglNQ3b4mBuLOMVtPI7CxYyIwHUshuvjsgmLk9pb5oGZitIIdJGFEHKEagtJrafpcfmTVpWwQ5Q9ILUKpbu6_81WdYqOr-mGHKk14/s1600/Tesla+World's%2BFair.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Y24xUXzTXHVROLCrWT06joEK01BNNkPoUVnPZJMglNQ3b4mBuLOMVtPI7CxYyIwHUshuvjsgmLk9pb5oGZitIIdJGFEHKEagtJrafpcfmTVpWwQ5Q9ILUKpbu6_81WdYqOr-mGHKk14/s400/Tesla+World's%2BFair.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<b>Richard Dean Adams</b>, who headed up the Niagara Falls Cataract Construction Company had for a number of years considered all manner of power transmission proposals from both US and European companies. This included two phase and three phase AC, high voltage DC, and even compressed air. However, after the World's Fair tender Tesla had become the 'go-to' man on AC power and after Adams consulted with him, he became convinced of the Westinghouse/Tesla system and incandescent lighting. In <b>May, 1893 he awarded the biggest prize in the history of electrical power to Westinghouse and Tesla</b>. This was, without a doubt, the single greatest achievement in his star-studded <b>age 36 year</b>. The <b>Adams Power Plant</b> went into operation in 1895 and the original Westinghouse/Tesla generators remained in operation in the transformer house until the plant closed in 1961. The modern day plant is shown here at night, just behind the falls.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuNbmL4eoRDXs2sEc4IwEJRecopO7U7aYE9I8ttahkTbSGxn1GcMUtK1jsrf9CARoxtxVRV5lynZoOTgsgYqGyF3kJpbcGp25M9Z2J3CCPpmBcXSPrwTz1piKhEBNSB6cliIXUv0J0Qgc/s1600/Tesla+Adams+Power+Plant.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuNbmL4eoRDXs2sEc4IwEJRecopO7U7aYE9I8ttahkTbSGxn1GcMUtK1jsrf9CARoxtxVRV5lynZoOTgsgYqGyF3kJpbcGp25M9Z2J3CCPpmBcXSPrwTz1piKhEBNSB6cliIXUv0J0Qgc/s400/Tesla+Adams+Power+Plant.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Of course, Tesla was a true polymath and used his fame and wealth in subsequent years to pursue many other projects. In his lab he conducted a range of experiments with mechanical oscillators/generators, electrical discharge tubes, and early X-ray imaging. He also built a wireless controlled boat and worked on a directed energy weapon, known as a Death Ray. Whilst it was never produced, it can be credited as a forerunner of the Laser Weapons System in use by the United States Navy, which was deployed in mid-2014. Tesla was renowned for his achievements and showmanship, eventually earning him a reputation in popular culture as an archetypal "mad scientist." However, there is no question that <b>his career-defining invention was AC Power Transmission and his greatest achievements happened in his 36th year</b>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-9577782693173005282015-02-03T19:17:00.000-08:002015-02-05T19:23:45.445-08:00The Real Imitation Game - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Alan Turing<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqQPKJjGqZjROAsUt_fWWKFDSgMb9bXrcuD0oxbx-j7bfOAtFlfenW6ArO32kBk4KRWknkqgDpQ5dlP0OYL6ZLec7mXmqGDOKyFcILn58PjrOZrjsVxxBwAAWo_kNFyxsj5RLCywcQ7ZA/s1600/Alan+Turing+Text.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqQPKJjGqZjROAsUt_fWWKFDSgMb9bXrcuD0oxbx-j7bfOAtFlfenW6ArO32kBk4KRWknkqgDpQ5dlP0OYL6ZLec7mXmqGDOKyFcILn58PjrOZrjsVxxBwAAWo_kNFyxsj5RLCywcQ7ZA/s400/Alan+Turing+Text.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Let me start by saying that <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b> was a very fine and well-acted movie. It deserves its nomination at the Oscars. It tells a riveting story of the life of the mathematical genius and father of computing science, Alan Turing, in a quite dramatic fashion. I enjoyed it and took it as a fair representation of reality. It showed him as a lone voice at Bletchley Park in the dark days of WW2, with his development of a code-breaking machine called 'Christopher', that would enable the unbreakable Nazi Enigma code to be broken. <br />
<br />
So I decided to ask a simple question I did not know the answer to :- "was any of this fabricated, and if so, how much?" Well you can read a detailed answer to this question for yourselves, including some very pertinent material in the comments section.<br />
<a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2mlrer/how_accurate_is_the_new_alan_turing_imitation/">HERE</a> OR <a href="https://blackse.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/the-imitation-game-art-imitating-real-life/">HERE</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirNlKNpgU8tp9nhA0VPVv9SIATariVZbO6RpE8r27f91pohVXRXoywkuo9eP0uRjoNII_i7WsVkEH9muASpBG4hufUhtc_T6cdD6ex_Xtyucu0E_-vqBTfFiWQGlLbkaLI6h0o1v5xCMY/s1600/Alan+Turing+The+Imitation+Game.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirNlKNpgU8tp9nhA0VPVv9SIATariVZbO6RpE8r27f91pohVXRXoywkuo9eP0uRjoNII_i7WsVkEH9muASpBG4hufUhtc_T6cdD6ex_Xtyucu0E_-vqBTfFiWQGlLbkaLI6h0o1v5xCMY/s400/Alan+Turing+The+Imitation+Game.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Once you read either or both these articles you'll see that question is best answered :- "Most of the key scenes and the characterisations and even the exact nature of Turing's involvement ARE fabrication." You know, you don't let the truth stand in the way of a good story....and it is a good story. So then something else got me thinking. The movies title. Why call it <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b>? There's a small scene towards the end where a policeman interviews Turing in the early 50's and begins to talk about a book he wrote called <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b>, but it didn't have anything to do with WW2 and code-breaking. So what was it about? And then I began to think as I always do, WHEN did things happen? What was the essence of Turing's career and life if it wasn't really what he did in WW2?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1Y-w86q7KS2n58JHVtPPW1_BuvmWDuWzScMTQKoNTMgJLSduVTELxWy9Cx-fNx-cPs2W8pcTWG5c-bR5Nl37yzSr0KGkXlx1PzL94IPl0hzjiLpoke3ZaQ-APzN2XgNju3N_gQd_hyeA/s1600/Alan+Turing+001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1Y-w86q7KS2n58JHVtPPW1_BuvmWDuWzScMTQKoNTMgJLSduVTELxWy9Cx-fNx-cPs2W8pcTWG5c-bR5Nl37yzSr0KGkXlx1PzL94IPl0hzjiLpoke3ZaQ-APzN2XgNju3N_gQd_hyeA/s400/Alan+Turing+001.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Turing's life and career were mostly about getting a machine, such as an early prototype of a modern computer to 'think'. More specifically to get it to perform well at a certain type of game that Turing describes as <b>The Imitation Game</b>. This came to be known as the <b>Turing Test</b>. There are three elements - a person, a machine (computer) and an interrogator and they are all in separate rooms. With the interrogator putting questions the object is to get the machine to fool them into believing they are the other person. This is <b>The Real Imitation Game</b>. This is what Turing published in his book of the same name in 1950 (well after the war). It relates to the scene in the movie, which shows him in his flat over-run by what looks like another one of those code-breaking machines. He really did fit the image of the 'mad professor', although he wasn't nearly as emotionally cold and socially awkward as the movie shows.<br />
<br />
This whole scenario is actually the forerunner of what we call <b>Artificial Intelligence</b>. This has a long philosophic history and for those who really like to dig around there's some fascinating stuff at <a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing-test//">THIS</a>. However, the question for me is different to the still vexed issue about machines doing something more than they are programmed to do ie. be creative as we are. My question now relates to the <b>'Life Cycles' of Alan Turing</b>. In a way this is yet another version of a game and I'll uniquely call it <b>The 'Life Cycles' Imitation Game</b>. So this is like using my 'Life Cycles' machine to break the wartime <b>enigma code</b> for finding something new about life. Will my theory work with Alan Turing, even if a little imperfectly? <br />
<br />
OK, now down to business. <b>Alan Turing</b> was <b>born June 23rd. 1912</b> and had a tragically short life, committing suicide aged just 41. He had recently been convicted of an offence of homosexual behaviour and in order to prevent going to prison, had opted instead for chemical castration. The movie does show, to some extent, how he had spiraled into a depression that he never recovered from. What the movie didn't show, however, is that he had been openly gay for many years and had even made some inappropriate advances during his time at Bletchley Park. So his conviction must have come as a great shock. It is a terrible tale of a life cut needlessly short.<br />
<br />
These details should be dealt with openly, but I must now leave this tragedy aside and return to my analysis. We are going to examine events in his only two adult <b>Years of Revolution'</b> ie. his <b>age 24 year (June 1936 to June 1937)</b> and his central <b>age 36 year (June 1948 to June 1949)</b>. We will be looking for evidence of milestones or beginnings of new eras, that are related to Turing's work with artificial intelligence. Please note that neither of these 12 month periods are used in the movie, but we have already demonstrated that the movie was not accurate and not representative of Turing's real work. <br />
<br />
During his <b>age 24 'Year of Revolution'</b> he published his first and arguably most major work <b><i>On Computable Numbers</i></b> in January 1937 (so squarely within this 12 month period). I'm going to quote from <b><i>The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</b></i> :-<br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>"The paper <b>“On Computable Numbers…” (Turing 1936–7)</b> was his first and perhaps greatest triumph. It gave a definition of computation and an absolute limitation on what computation could achieve, <b>which makes it the founding work of modern computer science</b>. It led him to Princeton for more advanced work in logic and other branches of mathematics." </i></blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsdCzGT-AapysWZWjkyTfyesN5KZylp8FAp0LTLbW1xg5zyykDgZNDwMrNtG1cHuIgGqr-Vc6RtI705fF4ZpzCzeXR-A8fc_2YcuczmMAKJ7ow19qQePYjp32N02JeeIcG_st5gA4iXew/s1600/The+Turing+Test.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsdCzGT-AapysWZWjkyTfyesN5KZylp8FAp0LTLbW1xg5zyykDgZNDwMrNtG1cHuIgGqr-Vc6RtI705fF4ZpzCzeXR-A8fc_2YcuczmMAKJ7ow19qQePYjp32N02JeeIcG_st5gA4iXew/s320/The+Turing+Test.png" /></a></div><br />
So there's your evidence and not in my words. The central importance of this to his career and life is not in dispute. I think in the movie Joan Clark (Keira Knightly) says she has read this paper. Score 100% for 'Life Cycles' correlation to real life events. Now on to the age of 36. This is not when <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b> was published, so this is not necessarily easy to mark and I won't be scoring it 100%, but I'm obviously more concerned that I'll have to score it 0%. This is a version of what I'm doing in my statistical validation study right now. My reference source here is one of quite a few articles mentioning a more minor, but none-the-less very important, paper he wrote in July 1948 called <b><i>Intelligent Machinery</i></b>. Again I'm going to quote a small section of a much longer article that appeared in Scientific American in 1999. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>"Written while Turing was working for the National Physical Laboratory in London, the manuscript did not meet with his employer’s approval. Sir Charles Darwin, the rather headmasterly director of the laboratory and grandson of the great English naturalist, dismissed it as a “schoolboy<br />
essay.” In reality, this farsighted paper was <b>the first manifesto of the field of artificial intelligence."</i></b></blockquote><br />
Here we are again with the words of another scholarly writer, describing this work as literally the birth of the modern study of artificial intelligence. It certainly fits my criteria for a 'Year of Revolution' as the 'ushering in of a new era'. Can you see something else very interesting about this? It contains precise evidence of an initial period of controversy, before the breakthrough moment when, no doubt, Turing gathered renewed determination to keep going, because he would have been writing <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b> very soon after. So, by my reckoning this was the beginning of his most important, mid-life, career-defining era. It's just such a pity that he didn't live long enough to see his ideas through. <br />
<br />
In terms of 'Life Cycles' it is a very good fit indeed, including the period of controversy. However, because it doesn't exactly fit with the book's publication I'll call it an 80% fit and I hope you can now see exactly why. Indeed the fact that 'Life Cycles' continues to produce such stunningly accurate predictions using the same basic formula is true evidence for a heretofore undiscovered pattern underlying lives in general. It's not perfect and it's certainly not good enough to be called science, but it is both compelling and unexpected. Yes, Alan Turing may have coined the term <b><i>The Imitation Game</i></b> to describe his work on artificial intelligence, but I'm also saying that my <b>Real Imitation Game is 'Life Cycles'</b> and it's stranger than anything anyone can imagine.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-57587556228086421892015-01-10T17:03:00.001-08:002015-01-11T14:11:36.256-08:00Why 'Life Cycles' Is NOT Synchronicity<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjC4t-dM67uuS7wd0wibuRCBSbkKF8Oa1lK7GACsq7OQR_fTAsRhb_7EMEfwgvZfJ1k40WH68yowx7ft2TbR_duZaHJ4ZLx_-SVeRf9lziZDFK-apkFu2b1-X_WwPTyNfJ5Bz7tZXSbag/s1600/sychronicity+text.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjC4t-dM67uuS7wd0wibuRCBSbkKF8Oa1lK7GACsq7OQR_fTAsRhb_7EMEfwgvZfJ1k40WH68yowx7ft2TbR_duZaHJ4ZLx_-SVeRf9lziZDFK-apkFu2b1-X_WwPTyNfJ5Bz7tZXSbag/s400/sychronicity+text.JPG" /></a></div><br />
On the surface, you'd think I was 'on the same page' as famous psychologist <b>Carl Jung</b>. He maintained that there was no such thing as 'mere coincidences' and that meaningful connections between everyday events in the real world and underlying symbolic interpretations could be found. In a somewhat similar vein, I look for meaningful correlations between actions undertaken within people's lives in 12 year intervals and similarities in either the events themselves, or the underlying themes.<br />
<br />
So why don't I also say it's due to this thing, which <b>Jung</b> called :-<b><i>'synchronicity'</b></i>? Aren't I just studying a form of <b><i>synchronicity</b></i>? My answer to this is a resounding :- "Definitely not!" It's all in how I define my terms you see. For <b>Jung</b> (who <b>embraced many occult theories</b> including astrology, spiritualism and clairvoyance), decided that some seemingly ordinary event (like a beetle flying into his room while a patient was describing a dream about a scarab), in fact meant something quite transcendental (eg. that both the scarab in the dream and the insect in the room meant that the patient needed to be liberated from her excessive rationalism?!).<br />
<br />
This is all down to Jung's imagination. Yes, the event happened, but so were many other random unrelated events at the same time. A sceptic would say :- "if you think of all the pairs of things that can happen in a person's lifetime, and add to that our very versatile ability of finding meaningful connections between things, it then seems likely that most of us will experience many meaningful coincidences. The coincidences are predictable but we are the ones who give them meaning." This phenomenon of finding meaning where none exists is given a name :- <b><i>apophenia</b></i>.<br />
<br />
I agree with this criticism. With <b>'Life Cycles'</b> analysis I do not try to 'put the cart before the horse'. For instance, I didn't decide later on, that after <b>Napoleon</b> awoke from a dream about being a giant and eating many small soldiers (which is not true), he meticulously cleaned his teeth before the <b>Battle of Austerlitz</b> (which is actually true as he was really into dental hygiene). Therefore his success was foretold by this, because it actually signified 'cleaning the battlefield of all of his enemies'. Or indeed of any other ridiculous association of events and subjective interpretations made "after the event" (like it was all down to Jupiter being well aspected that day...or the date reducing to the number 1...or similar drivel. This is what sceptics refer to as <b><i>post-hoc rationalisation</i></b>).<br />
<br />
I precisely define the terms of a <b>'Year of Revolution'</b> up front, that is meant to apply to all lives every 12 years and then search multiple reference materials for both objective data (like wide agreement among historians of the central importance of the Battle of Austerlitz to Napoleon's career and life); as well as subjective data (like a direct quote of Napoleon's words saying it was the proudest moment of his career). This allows a precise hypothesis to be tested, with events in that 12 month period, and also with other <b>'Years of Revolution'</b> within that person's life.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcKfDuoIKxQZh_Zv339H30Mrdrd6TK4a6bT8DKQpt7QoLJ3ppHOFnFXkKh6N8OXubcz3cwZ7UGqsEZ83gVzIlSKcAlBhfobxTRaoF2e6pHMU9Ru6QSvVP9FpRkp7rIZEU-6UbiPwj_JXo/s1600/Tons-of-fun-with-Spurious-Correlations.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcKfDuoIKxQZh_Zv339H30Mrdrd6TK4a6bT8DKQpt7QoLJ3ppHOFnFXkKh6N8OXubcz3cwZ7UGqsEZ83gVzIlSKcAlBhfobxTRaoF2e6pHMU9Ru6QSvVP9FpRkp7rIZEU-6UbiPwj_JXo/s400/Tons-of-fun-with-Spurious-Correlations.png" /></a></div><br />
<b>The two approaches could not be more dissimilar</b>. In fact, <b>a complete mockery can be made of synchronicity</b>, wherein almost any weird association and strange meaning can be concluded. There is a scientist blogger by the name of <b>Tyler Vigen</b>, who is quite famous for running a fun blog by the name of <b><i>Spurious Correlations</b></i>. He specialises in all sorts of weird data matches like :- "the amount of films Nicolas Cage appears in, has a direct correlation with the number of people who drowned by falling into a swimming pool." Or "per capita consumption of cheese (US) correlates with the number of people who died by getting tangled in their bedsheets"! All good fun.<br />
<br />
I wrote to Tyler telling him of my work and directing him to my books and blogs and inviting him to comment (or presumably to try to mock my evidence). I received no reply. This is not the first time I have done something like this. I have written to a sceptical journalist and invited him to judge my work publicly. This did not happen either, but he is now one of my LinkedIn contacts. I have invited a sceptical organisation, who ran a TV series, to investigate me, but I heard nothing back. My book has been favourably reviewed by alma mater, Sydney University, and I have made quite a few well-receieved public addresses <br />
<br />
Yet I'm all too aware of my deficiencies and limits. It's just that they are more at the edges (wherein not all cases are as solid as others), than the centre of the theory (which contains hundreds of cases with verifiable objective/subjective data). Frankly if I were <b>Carl Jung</b> I'd be embarrassed in putting these ideas forward, with virtually no systematic investigations. There was a scene in the excellent film <b><i>A Dangerous Method</b></i>, where <b>Freud</b> says pretty much the same thing to <b>Jung</b>, which of course was one of their chief conflicts. <br />
<br />
Then we get to the crux of things. According to psychiatrist and author, Anthony Storr, <b>Jung</b> went through a period of mental illness during which he thought he was a prophet with "special insight." <b>Jung</b> referred to his "creative illness" (between 1913-1917) as a voluntary confrontation with the unconscious. In symbolic terms "he went to the top of the mountain" and underwent some type of personal transformation. Similar to <b>Rudolph Steiner</b>, who embraced the occult and then came out with all these unsubstantiated claims about 7 year cycles. Sounds good at a surface level until you dig a bit deeper...<br />
<br />
I reiterate I'm not like that. I don't know what causes the unusual correlations I study. I'm only interested in the data itself, because there is no point in speculating about the unprovable. I discovered my theory by accident while working with <b>Levinson's data</b> on career development and slowly over many years things took shape. I now eschew the occult and I have no claim to "special insight". I am currently immersed in a validation study with an independent statistician. I won't be content until I've tested <b>'Life Cycles'</b> with data, which cannot be simply dismissed as self-selected. This will include objective lists of famous people and random studies of published biographies (using their texts for evidence) and finally studies on volunteer groups of ordinary citizens. You see <b>I'm much more like Charles Darwin than Carl Jung.....</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIcYbm8gbN8XWugEpWlXtOPKNosMOPXgAhDXoJW-xCeE9vOFv1Zzh_70YT30tv5UPjaZaJfDmYm820xykG9Ln4DmNfOOv-uVsUQ2ntrZTTFcHv-CxLP06FeEP0QkLwRPIexy6-XPaByNA/s1600/Carl+Jung.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIcYbm8gbN8XWugEpWlXtOPKNosMOPXgAhDXoJW-xCeE9vOFv1Zzh_70YT30tv5UPjaZaJfDmYm820xykG9Ln4DmNfOOv-uVsUQ2ntrZTTFcHv-CxLP06FeEP0QkLwRPIexy6-XPaByNA/s320/Carl+Jung.jpg" /></a></div><br />
.....which led to me to investigate the life of <b>Carl Jung</b>. Now my theory began with a simple observation that there was a much stronger than expected correlation between what <b>Levinson</b> called the <b><i>Be One's Own Man Age</b></i> (or <b><i>BOOM age</b></i> for short) and just the year when a person was aged 36 (rather than a 5 year block of time). <b>Levinson</b> said, in general, that this is signified by a person <b>"coming out from under the shadow of mentors"</b> and launching his (or her for that matter) mid-career identity and beginning the most productive phase of their life. My research has often found, that the singular year of 36 is so central, that events in this time define the person's life, or the beginning of their most important era.<br />
<br />
I came to give this year a name :- the <b>'Year of Revolution'</b>. I have further defined it by looking at events immediately preceding it, which often contained a period of frustration or setback, before the important breakthrough. This is my universal definition, now how does it apply to <b>Jung</b>? Carl Jung was <b>born July 26th, 1875</b>, so the 12 month period we will be investigating is <b>end Jul. 1911 to end Jul. 1912</b>. What happened then? <br />
<br />
Well Jung is known for being the founder of <b><i>Analytical Psychology</b></i> as a result of his disagreements with Freud, over the the role of the libido and the unconscious and his interest in the paranormal. Before this he was mentored by Freud and anointed as his successor. He became the first President of the International Psychoanalytic Association in 1910, which was just before he was about to turn 36. However, Jung did not like Freud's emphasis on psycho-sexual development to the exclusion of all other things.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfKf_gV5ZLmvcJpkWDfqnlhyag49d1gqOLoBoi20g2epRHTlxOmhyphenhyphenpQdt90YGm6amEOEVDVNd-qFDwJ1WD9PzOv0Ane4o81c_XjgUFbZEvu6okFLlveY3B1Bkp90n8q9igXunYgZ8L9_c/s1600/a-dangerous-method-a-dangerous-method-21-12-2011-18-g.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfKf_gV5ZLmvcJpkWDfqnlhyag49d1gqOLoBoi20g2epRHTlxOmhyphenhyphenpQdt90YGm6amEOEVDVNd-qFDwJ1WD9PzOv0Ane4o81c_XjgUFbZEvu6okFLlveY3B1Bkp90n8q9igXunYgZ8L9_c/s320/a-dangerous-method-a-dangerous-method-21-12-2011-18-g.jpg" /></a></div><br />
He became increasingly involved with concepts like <b><i>synchronicity</b></i> and <b><i>the collective unconscious</i></b>. So much so, that Freud now completely disagreed with him and the two were on a collision course, as each refused to admit that they could be wrong. This is dramatically shown in <b><i>A Dangerous Method</i></b> and the key scene is taken from when Jung was 36. Freud calls his interest in the paranormal :- "utter nonsense". <br />
<br />
Now many different sources of reference cite that the split was made manifest in 1912 when Jung published <b><i>The Psychology of the Unconscious</i></b>. This showed the differences between them and thereby marked the <b>"birth of the Jungian psychology"</b>. It is thus the central defining moment of his whole life and career. <br />
<br />
This is further evidenced by an event just at the end of <b>Jung's age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b>. Jung felt severely slighted after Freud visited his colleague Ludwig Binswanger in Kreuzlingen without paying him a visit in nearby Zurich, an incident Jung referred to as "the Kreuzlingen gesture". Their formal association ended in 1913 when Jung resigned as President of the International Psychoanalytic Association.<br />
<br />
My conclusion is therefore :- that <b>Jung</b> is just one more trophy example for <b>'Life Cycles'</b>. When he was in his <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b> he broke with his former mentor <b>Freud</b> and began what he is known for ie. <b><i>Analytical Psychology</b></i>. This is widely agreed as being related to his publication of <b><i>The Psychology of the Unconscious (1912)</i></b>. It was preceded by a period of frustration and conflict with Freud over his unbending views. <br />
<br />
Now can you see how I'm completely different to notions like <b><i>synchronicity</i></b> and the occult in general? Why I stand defiantly on the rock of my evidence waiting for the critics to come and tell me :- "it's just an example of one human mind finding meaning where none exists?" I'm the new kid on the block of ideas about life, so just watch out!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-5304775135095074752014-12-01T14:21:00.000-08:002014-12-01T14:21:09.441-08:00Learn To Write - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of James Clavell<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlIxdyGjrEHQSj-5M6Kx5D98JDZdDLnJdCSg8EgErSDsg9CESiL-83FlXwSwkMPyWmJ4VT1hSgOxSo9-fFAS7kCaGATwEivfi88TpfM6moxdy7oGZxQnw9TiGhFK45DPkUn46Q7YcdIyA/s1600/James+Clavell+King+Rat+Text.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlIxdyGjrEHQSj-5M6Kx5D98JDZdDLnJdCSg8EgErSDsg9CESiL-83FlXwSwkMPyWmJ4VT1hSgOxSo9-fFAS7kCaGATwEivfi88TpfM6moxdy7oGZxQnw9TiGhFK45DPkUn46Q7YcdIyA/s400/James+Clavell+King+Rat+Text.JPG" /></a></div><br />
The story of <b>James Clavell</b>, well-known author of <b><i>Shogun, Tai-Pan</b></i> and <b><i>Noble House</b></i>, among others, belongs in this blog, because he was <b>born</b> in Sydney on <b>Oct. 10th 1924</b>, although his father left for England soon after. In addition to his novels, for which he is most famous, he was also an acclaimed screenwriter and director, with his credits including <b><i>The Great Escape</b></i> and <b><i>To Sir, With Love</b></i>.<br />
<br />
He settled in Hollywood in the early 50's and worked in the film industry for quite a few years before attempting his first novel. Why was this such a personal and deeply-felt project, begun in unusual circumstances, and why would I call the title of this post <b>"Learn To Write"</b>?<br />
<br />
The answers, as they always do, lie in his past and the timing of events in his <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b>. No surprise to me, but as always very affirming for <b>'Life Cycles'</b> theory. Clavell, who had joined the British Royal Artillery in South East Asia during WW2, was captured when Singapore fell in 1942 and spent the rest of his time as a prisoner in the infamous <b>Changi POW Camp</b>. This was a hellhole, where around 90% of prisoners didn't survive and he learned some lessons to ensure his survival, that he would never forget. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUdAmtQpdfMFhN-IhB-7KEb0qY_YOxK02Xedk021yuf2bZW-eElyVF9JK5R618z_vEgFUViA7Gjl06pNsMwDmuecpyGhZU3azKHIUWe7AT0wZij8PNUEUaGMsYK2yGJBvU9mvd_zndKM0/s1600/Changi+Camp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUdAmtQpdfMFhN-IhB-7KEb0qY_YOxK02Xedk021yuf2bZW-eElyVF9JK5R618z_vEgFUViA7Gjl06pNsMwDmuecpyGhZU3azKHIUWe7AT0wZij8PNUEUaGMsYK2yGJBvU9mvd_zndKM0/s320/Changi+Camp.jpg" /></a></div><br />
He, along with an entire battalion, were reportedly saved by an American prisoner of war, who later became the model for <b>"The King"</b> in his first, breakthrough novel called <b><i>King Rat</b></i>. He learnt that you couldn't survive on your own and it was only by joining a group and doing black market trading, that you could get enough to exist. He also learned to appreciate the American spirit of entrepreneurship and adaptability (as opposed to the rigid class system of the UK) and was to spend most of his life in the US. He was an ardent individualist (as I am).<br />
<br />
He left the army in 1946 as a Captain and then in his <b>age 24 'Year of Revolution' (Oct. 1948 to Oct. 1949)</b> he married an actress, April Stride (you may see the links between this and his next 'Year of Revolution'). In 1953, he began working in Hollywood as a screenwriter and had success with a grisly science-fiction movie called <b><i>The Fly</b></i> in 1958. There would have been no reason to divert from this lucrative line of work, as his filmography would suggest. 'When you're on a good thing'.... Something would have to intervene to give him the time to try his hand at writing a novel. He was to turn 36 in 1960. Who knows their history? What event took place in Hollywood in that year?<br />
<br />
Try looking up <b>1960 Hollywood screenwriter's strike</b> and you'll find this protracted dispute happened between March and July. So, suddenly James had a lot of unplanned spare time on his hands. He had also suffered from flashbacks and nightmares for years, as a result of his time in <b>Changi</b>. They didn't use the term <b>Post Traumatic Stress</b> then, but that's what it was. His wife knew about his demons all too well and said :- "You should try to write about this now you have the time, as a form of therapy." The story goes that she locked him in his study each day and told him to get on with it. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRoMfTkth__nrePrIbaCpYt5uRqZgqGNRgH2G06lnhQSI9mnUsLJV8DtWgqpb3BsGXh_wysYM2MldO30-h6KLIy_ZWJpZSfyNam3qQQjUO5_Vh_w-ncMZS9QQoiFkkWJar7KTRU2IEM58/s1600/james_clavell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRoMfTkth__nrePrIbaCpYt5uRqZgqGNRgH2G06lnhQSI9mnUsLJV8DtWgqpb3BsGXh_wysYM2MldO30-h6KLIy_ZWJpZSfyNam3qQQjUO5_Vh_w-ncMZS9QQoiFkkWJar7KTRU2IEM58/s400/james_clavell.jpg" /></a></div><br />
He poured his emotions out on the pages with a largely autobiographical novel, <b><i>King Rat</b></i>, that took a mere 3 months to complete. Now I want to be precise here. You see, others may have claimed another black and white case, but this actually took place just a couple of months before he turned 36 (which was on Oct. 1960). So what happened next? He had written the book, but was that it?<br />
<br />
Well, no, is the answer. His editor, <b>Herman Gollub</b> of Little, Brown and Company, attacked the manuscript with a blue pencil calling it "pretentious" and "overwritten". Later Clavell confided to New York Post that Gollub really <b>taught him how to write</b>. He had to go back and completely revise the manuscript line by line and in this painstaking process, lasting well over a year, he learned his craft and his trademark accurate and insightful prose. Of course, more than this, <b><i>King Rat</b></i> was the novel he had held so long inside of him, that once it was finally finished he was ready to write novels based on his knowledge of the East. <b><i>King Rat</b></i> was the catharsis that allowed him to create a world view about Asia. Starting with the best seller <b><i>Tai-Pan</b></i> he wrote a string of very long, very carefully researched, intriguing historical Asian tales.<br />
<br />
So, in his <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b> James Clavell, the talented screenwriter and director, began his real life's mission to bring stories of Asia to the world. In order to do this however, <b>he first had to 'learn to write'</b>. I said in my <a href="www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">MAIN BLOG</a> that this was a linked post to that of <b>Ian Fleming</b>, the author of the <b><i>James Bond</b></i> novels. I'd like you to read both posts and tell me exactly why this is so. <br />
<br />
Just like in my book I bury my answers in plain sight. You didn't know <b><i><a href="https://www.web-e-books.com/lifecycles/default.php">The Life Cycles Revolution</a></i></b> was also full of hidden clues, that means you have to read it at least twice. Just like these posts.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-20527165153358889842014-10-29T17:29:00.001-07:002014-10-29T18:28:35.272-07:00The Day Berkshire Hathaway Was Reborn - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Warren Buffett<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmlEANpYYDxt7Sl4J7UBlfeDTkR3uX77G0eWfO5NKqy4k5HWqrTjAfgD0Ke64xFAcfVucrHuaQ-zU84uXPce49KrgYroIkr7EfSPbeyHjatL6-3S_LZ2tz3ZBsmPANvfDNnC3i05iSlUE/s1600/Warren+Buffett+Text.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmlEANpYYDxt7Sl4J7UBlfeDTkR3uX77G0eWfO5NKqy4k5HWqrTjAfgD0Ke64xFAcfVucrHuaQ-zU84uXPce49KrgYroIkr7EfSPbeyHjatL6-3S_LZ2tz3ZBsmPANvfDNnC3i05iSlUE/s400/Warren+Buffett+Text.JPG" /></a></div><br />
Now this post is going to incorporate two key elements, that I look for in 'Life Cycles' analysis. The first and foremost is still the simple stat of checking a biographic summary to see if the age of 36 stands out. This simple finding, of a startling amount of correlations of major career-defining events and this single year, is what got the whole of 'Life Cycles' going. I discovered this by accident, when I was attempting to validate the work of well-known psychologist, Daniel Levinson (<i>The Seasons Of Man's Life</i>).<br />
<br />
Levinson had proposed a 5 year span covering the age range of 35 to 40, for the ushering in of the 'Mid-Career Identity'. He also called it the 'Be One's Own Man' age (or <i>BOOM</i> age for short). Was this correct for a sample of Australian managers, who I had counselled on an outplacement program? You should note that Levinson based his work on just a small sample of 12 managers and he followed their careers over a 20 year period. I cannot recall my exact sample size, but it would have been in excess of this. <br />
<br />
This strange finding of mine I eventually gave a name to, that was quite different to Levinson :- the major, mid-life, <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b>. I have gathered so many publicly verifiable cases that it's in the hundreds and this does not include all my private citizen profiles, because I always represent my theory to others and most people will at least tell me if it makes sense to them (sometimes without providing any details). That, by the way, is my simple 'litmus test' :- if I can't reasonably easily find corroborating evidence (or just verbal agreement) then I'd give up. Consider. for a moment, if those systems of so-called 'occult knowledge', or even for that matter the myriad systems of religious belief, applied the same standards.<br />
<br />
BTW, be patient I'm getting around to Warren, but you see he's a very patient, exacting and logical guy and he understands long-term approaches. OK, so after a while I studied events at 36 (and 24/48 etc.) and found that often the breakthrough moment was preceded by a setback or period of frustration (exactly like the so called "head fake" criticism of Microsoft, which is in the Bill Gates post in the <a href="www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">MAIN BLOG</a>). Then when things really happen they often can be traced to one day (not always possible to research of course). You know:- "the whole concept of Harry Potter just fell into J K Rowling's head in ONE DAY"/"Napoleon virtually conquered Europe in ONE DAY"/and of course many more. It's all in <a href="https://www.web-e-books.com/lifecycles/default.php">THE BOOK</a>. So good you'll want to read it all in ONE DAY!<br />
<br />
Well we're here now at the life and times of the world's most successful investor, Warren Buffett. What name is synonymous with Buffett? I mean it goes together like peaches and cream. Yes, that's right it's Berkshire Hathaway. The company that has averaged an annual growth in book value of 19.7% to its shareholders for the last 49 years (compared to 9.8% from the S&P 500 with dividends included for the same period), while employing large amounts of capital, and minimal debt. How good a hands-on businessman is Warren? I mean, at the age of 84, he's still Chairman, President and CEO of the company. I did this research as part of a linked post, because Warren had invited his good friend Bill Gates to sit on the Board. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2Ze-sclqsr0cmduzS2yJqp8OYIJTj-SGyaSqh6AJAJZuGZ9KgjoyDPSEja3tc8seUv_Djb2FeM8u6SQ3Hqn9D5A2ALCxXe0BOsQ9U0jnRInmyzjZWyQbOWXo21WdEE6xIRYN-SPE-3Dc/s1600/Warrenn+Buffett+Mill.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2Ze-sclqsr0cmduzS2yJqp8OYIJTj-SGyaSqh6AJAJZuGZ9KgjoyDPSEja3tc8seUv_Djb2FeM8u6SQ3Hqn9D5A2ALCxXe0BOsQ9U0jnRInmyzjZWyQbOWXo21WdEE6xIRYN-SPE-3Dc/s400/Warrenn+Buffett+Mill.jpg" /></a></div><br />
.....But it wasn't always this way. Most people might think that Berkshire Hathaway was founded by Warren, but that isn't the case. Actually, it has been around since 1839, when it began life as a textile company founded by one Oliver Chace. It grew large and successful for many years, at one stage employing 12,000 staff at 15 plants and generating $150 mil. in revenue. Then, after surviving the depression, there was a general downturn and seven of the plants were closed in a decade, with large lay-offs. Fast forward to 1962 and a young <b>Warren Buffett (born August 30th. 1930)</b>, who was already a successful investor, began to take an interest in Berkshire Hathaway after noticing a pattern in the price direction of its stock whenever the company closed a mill. He kept steadily buying, even though the price was going the other way. He could see the underlying value of the company's assets you see. This is why he's streets ahead of most 'get rich quick' investors.<br />
<br />
In 1964, the CEO of Berkshire, Seabury Stanton, made an oral tender offer of $11 1/2 per share for the company to buy back Buffett's shares. Buffett agreed to the deal. A few weeks later though, Buffett received the tender offer in writing and the offer was for only $11 3⁄8. Buffett later admitted that this lower, undercutting offer made him angry. At that point he decided to buy more of the stock to take control of the company and fire Stanton (which he did). However, this put Buffett in a situation where he was now majority owner of a textile business that was failing. Berkshire Hathaway at this point was called <b>"Buffett's Worst Trade"</b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0EPRHF3Sej-W5utzwgZqxL4EOM0SzUZNwY4bHAU_eg2Hgwo8dYzScWz83HbMxxmSQOMQK-roz2tXsAcOZ0JGH4uKtqiJ53i73kS-Si1idKGmUULCob3c55rBu66YDPf4vPDSbRy2c1xs/s1600/Warren+Buffet+BH.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0EPRHF3Sej-W5utzwgZqxL4EOM0SzUZNwY4bHAU_eg2Hgwo8dYzScWz83HbMxxmSQOMQK-roz2tXsAcOZ0JGH4uKtqiJ53i73kS-Si1idKGmUULCob3c55rBu66YDPf4vPDSbRy2c1xs/s400/Warren+Buffet+BH.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Now we're perched. By Dec. 1965 Buffett was the new Chairman of a failing textile company and there was no policy as yet to diversify out of this. Why does this matter so much? What's in it for me? It's maths you see. If you add 36 to Aug. 1930 you get Aug. 1966. The beginning of Buffett's major mid-life, <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b>. You could certainly say this was (and indeed had been) a source of frustration in Buffett's life. He hadn't immediately changed course and this wouldn't have been enjoyable. Mind you he was a hedge fund manager and this was just one of his concerns. <br />
<br />
So when did things change? On Dec. 13th 1966 Warren Buffett made an announcement at the company's AGM :-<br />
<br />
<i>"Accordingly, it is the present intention of the directors to proceed toward interim investment of a major portion of these funds in marketable common stocks. This should hold promise not only of greater income than can be achieved through alternative investment possibilities in the field of non-equity marketable securities, but also provides us with <b>the opportunity to participate in earnings derived outside of our textile business</b>, even if only temporarily and indirectly."</i><br />
<br />
This was the <b>ONE DAY When Berkshire Hathaway Was Reborn</b> (gotta work those titles in eventually). Interestingly the market was quite pricey in the late 60's and Buffett might have just left funds in municipal bonds, but that wasn't the way he reacted. Bonds would have given reliable single digit returns, but you're never going to make 19.7% year on year this way. So, in 1967 (still within Buffett's 36th year) Berkshire Hathaway got into the insurance business by buying National Indemnity and the National Fire and Marine Insurance Company. It has marked an unbroken involvement in insurance, particularly when they took a big stake in the Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) in the late 70's. Of course he has diversified into many value-based companies (mostly without leveraging), for the long term and all of them worked. Buffett is currently listed as the world's 4th richest man.<br />
<br />
So there's the answers to my two questions. Firstly Warren Buffett's major mid-life, <b>age 36 'Year of Revolution'</b> was indeed a central, career and life-defining one. It marked the <b>birth of Berkshire Hathaway as an investment company</b>, that went on to become an economic juggernaut and a household name. Secondly the breakthrough moment emerged from a period of frustration and setback and it is on the public record as taking place on ONE DAY - December 13th. 1966. <br />
<br />
I hope you find this all new 'Life Cycles' theory intriguing and want to read and learn more. In the whole of the web and printed word you're only going to get it here. I hope to build up my evidence year on year as well. Just like Warren Buffett I'm in this for the long haul. So, stick around because there's plenty more to come.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-17920466847345916072014-10-08T20:48:00.001-07:002014-10-11T17:38:12.826-07:00The Stolen Revolution - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Gail Sheehy<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6mT1Lsfa5PDts_UO1KB4kDuTqID5F8beIsHDe-JBOEahGmfe0tD2F6H3ywSDMjFVuvBAZWVO-y4r5pXfBVGfIRhJHR5tfgCvpW0ptNhY3pcovxiEQfzq6u808gMcLzYFe4pKzRLrA57M/s1600/Gail+Sheehy+Text.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6mT1Lsfa5PDts_UO1KB4kDuTqID5F8beIsHDe-JBOEahGmfe0tD2F6H3ywSDMjFVuvBAZWVO-y4r5pXfBVGfIRhJHR5tfgCvpW0ptNhY3pcovxiEQfzq6u808gMcLzYFe4pKzRLrA57M/s320/Gail+Sheehy+Text.JPG" /></a></div><br />
Gail Sheehy was once a 'buzzword' among those who like to discuss the latest in self-analysis. She is the author of 16 books, including <b><i>Passages</b></i> (1976), named by the Library of Congress one of the ten most influential books of our time. I was one of the many who read, liked and was influenced by it. I am naturally drawn to all manner of self-analysis systems and her vernacular, pop psychology style, focusing on the issues in each decade, made it an easy read. When I wrote <b><i>Life Cycles</b></i> (2008), I included it in a section outlining some of the influential ideas in 'Stage Of Life' theories.<br />
<br />
Now all of this 'may not be your bag' and you 'don't know her from Adam', but for people like me she had left quite a footprint. So in this post I'm reaching into my extensive back catalog of unpublished cases. Every story is different and my motto is :- "all lives are interesting". Why is this a parallel post to the <a href="http://www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">ERIN BROCKOVICH POST?</a> What do they have in common? I'll tell you at the end. <br />
<br />
If you check out her bio, you'll see that first and foremost she is a high-profile journalist and she is neither a psychologist/researcher nor an academic. Yet it was <b><i>Passages</b></i> that put her on the world map, whilst both before and after it, she had written for the likes of <i>New York Times/Vanity Fair</i> etc., as well as a number of biographies/character studies on world leaders, such as Hilary Clinton, Margaret Thatcher and Mikhail Gorbachev. You'll also see that in 1975 (just before publication of <b><i>Passages</b></i>), she was embroiled in a plagiarism lawsuit with a psychiatrist named <b>Roger Gould</b> and that this case was settled out of court. You'll also see that as an outcome of this suit she intended to enjoin publication (which I presume is to mean sharing authorship), but has not yet done so. You'd have to suspect she never will either.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUbOgVyXeleI8YrB44oD1ONOLVN3z0TgaQ1G7TB4MVHK49h1JgM69LzW8XRpQrxrkwBMlUjIQpt-zxeRbBcs4hwW7bBSvxmJUKztxG6IxeFC4mPdf-NoH3_F0Iwo59Cd2fcPtxOUaayxA/s1600/SheehyPassagesCover.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUbOgVyXeleI8YrB44oD1ONOLVN3z0TgaQ1G7TB4MVHK49h1JgM69LzW8XRpQrxrkwBMlUjIQpt-zxeRbBcs4hwW7bBSvxmJUKztxG6IxeFC4mPdf-NoH3_F0Iwo59Cd2fcPtxOUaayxA/s320/SheehyPassagesCover.JPG" /></a></div><br />
There has to be some kind of story here doesn't there? I mean, how could a journalist suddenly come up with an, albeit populist, theory of adult life stage development? This article is, in part, dedicated to the work of <b>Roger Gould</b>. Now let's try some basic detective work. You don't have to consult many sources at all before you begin to join the dots.<br />
<br />
<b>Roger Gould M.D.</b> is, I'm told, an American writer and psychiatrist, regarded as <b>one of the world's leading authorities on adult psychological development</b>, as well as emotional eating. In his book <b><i>Transformations</b></i>(1979), Gould presents his view that adult psychological development consists of :- "dismantling the illusions of safety developed in childhood". Gould’s theory suggests that these illusions are confronted in a time-sensitive sequence as one progresses through the life-cycle. One neutral commentator said :- "his research was used extensively in <b><i>Passages</b></i>, by Gail Sheehy." Well that's about the best spin you could put on it. Those a bit less charitable have simply said she stole his work.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7vLUeExgA1QmrohTeeIHtk4yg9GGob0sWwJ07NYnYKfrBG4yVCpFv0Yzdfq65mL45xPoihmFesfafbSkGVw5kSUyB5PyqPTuVocJ9Qd_1QoO8LRe1bKmbpPY49v27ZagGQqletqjtcEY/s1600/Roger+Gould.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7vLUeExgA1QmrohTeeIHtk4yg9GGob0sWwJ07NYnYKfrBG4yVCpFv0Yzdfq65mL45xPoihmFesfafbSkGVw5kSUyB5PyqPTuVocJ9Qd_1QoO8LRe1bKmbpPY49v27ZagGQqletqjtcEY/s320/Roger+Gould.jpg" /></a></div><br />
So what started all this? Well, back in 1970, Sheehy received a fellowship to attend graduate school at Columbia University, where she studied under noted anthropologist Margaret Mead. Margaret Mead is a world figure in anthropology, who also influenced and inspired Erik Erikson. Sorry, if sounds a bit technical, but bear with me. Erikson was the original pioneer of adult 'Stage of Life' theories. So, if you join the dots, it's easy to see why Sheehy might do research in this area.<br />
<br />
What do you do if you conduct research and you're a well-credentialed journalist? Well you would usually go and interview all the leading lights in the field. This is exactly what she did. Not as a journalist, but as a student. That would include Yale psychologist <b>Daniel Levinson</b> (whose work I researched, thus beginning the brand new 'Life Cycles') and, of course, UCLA psychiatrist <b>Roger Gould</b>. Now I read one positive summary that simply said she :- "incorporated research studies from a range of experts". <br />
<br />
I know the work of <b>Levinson</b> and <b>Erikson</b> well and in neither case does it match up with what Sheehy said. <b>She has charted four separate periods of crisis in adulthood</b>, marking transition points between each distinct stage of development. She terms these stages “pulling up roots,” “the trying twenties,” “passage to the thirties,” and “the deadline decade.” <b>Roger Gould has charted four primary stages of adult development </b>called "when the child leaves the parent's world" (ie. "pulling up roots"); "I'm nobody's baby" 22/28 (ie. "the trying twenties"); "open to what's inside" 28/34 (ie. "passage to the 30's") and "the midlife decade" 34/45 (ie. "the deadline decade"). <b>Erikson</b> had an 8 stage theory covering the whole of life, but he is best known for his work on transition to adulthood (ie. "the identity crisis"). <b>Levinson</b> focused on career development in a small group of mid-level managers over a 20 year period (like a 'Seven Up' style of research). Nice try if you think you can sweep this little number 'under the carpet' and say she :- "incorporated research studies from a range of experts"!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzIQ6j2K4KRLicqPmhII5sRP6en_ss7UMCCCISxctgDEXzIVKsu-q-W5juaLJL9IraCnY_olnvKYErwq678yLYWbINMYjarPon_12ZSRSZHft-BLBzMHE0KzGvjXsAPw86x23NSkzDKfQ/s1600/Roger+Gould+Transformations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzIQ6j2K4KRLicqPmhII5sRP6en_ss7UMCCCISxctgDEXzIVKsu-q-W5juaLJL9IraCnY_olnvKYErwq678yLYWbINMYjarPon_12ZSRSZHft-BLBzMHE0KzGvjXsAPw86x23NSkzDKfQ/s320/Roger+Gould+Transformations.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Sheehy directly used Gould's unpublished research when she wrote her book. Something only a student (certainly not a journalist) might get hold of. According to a 1976 report in the <i>New York Times</i>, Gould won a settlement with Sheehy, collecting $10,000 plus 10 percent of all royalties for <b><i>Passages</b></i>. I'm then suddenly reminded :- "where's the 'Life Cycles' in all this?" Even I am wondering what I'm doing sometimes. OK, what got me started originally was her date of birth + 36 years. You know, same goddamn question again. It wasn't exactly when <b><i>Passages</b></i> came out. <br />
<br />
She was born Nov. 15th, 1937, so she would have been in her age 36, major mid-life 'Year of Revolution' Nov. 1973 to Nov. 1974. <b>Gould</b> instigated his lawsuit in 1975 and in 1973 she was busy with the release of book called <b><i>Hustling: Prostitution in Our Wide Open Society</b></i>. Interestingly, in what she called an editing error, she failed to disclose that the protagonist - a prostitute known as "Redpants" - wasn't real, but was a composite character. This is one her many missteps. However, I'm left to conclude that <b><i>Passages</b></i> would have been written mostly in 1974 and also that <b>Gould</b> would have somehow discovered what was going on around the same time. I don't always have all the answers (sad but true), but this is my best guess. You see Gail Sheehy stole her revolution and all the fame and wealth cannot disguise it.<br />
<br />
Just so you are aware here's a bit more of the error-prone Sheehy. She was criticised for using pop psychology to analyse world leaders - her work on Mikhail Gorbechev was called 'junk journalism'. Despite Sheehy's liberal leanings, Hilary Clinton wanted nothing do with <b><i>Hillary's Choice</b></i> which was published in 1999. According to the <i>New York Daily News</i>, the White House launched a counter-attack on Sheehy, which led to the "Gail's Goof Corner" feature in the <i>Washington Post</i>.<br />
<br />
The <i>Village Voice</i> offered a scathing review of Sheehy's book. The paper's media reporter, Cynthia Cotts, wrote :- "The real scandal is Sheehy's reporting style. She plays fast and loose with the facts, twists quotes to fit her agenda, and allegedly violated a confidentially agreement she made with Hillary Clinton." So here she is again, violating confidential information, just as she did with <b>Gould</b>. Franklin Foer in a column in <i>The New Republic</i> said she was :- "a journalist with a world-class reputation for getting it wrong."<br />
<br />
You know, once again I didn't know all of this beforehand, but it strikes me as very grubby stuff. I'm now sorry I even mentioned her name in my first book. If I ever do a revised edition I'll remove it and put the name of <b>Roger Gould</b> there instead. Oh, and what's any of this got to do with Erin Brockovich? The answer's always in the fine print of life. Erin had a degree in journalism, before she ever hit hard times. Ed Masry, didn't say to her :- "go and investigate this whole Chromium 6 in the drinking water thing". No, he said :- "here's some office work to do with conveyancing, concerning PG&E purchasing a Hinkley property." Someone else might have just stuck to the knitting, but a journo always has a nose for a story that could go big.......and unfortunately cannot always be trusted.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-77214319183153652652014-09-02T22:13:00.000-07:002014-09-03T15:42:01.285-07:00Our Greatest Olympian - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Ian Thorpe<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6kZVKBZB34seEO5ySoJ49g84TFzq09LWoKYCvomvdcsLWE9B0h4CMqVguL1hxNBCLUAPyeltjN_CCyJ8QyAFcNwbPLOmb4Du8SFMqWhdB8CR2k2DSWAUQOKos1z6YTti9iOsCA0n_OO8/s1600/Ian+Thorpe.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6kZVKBZB34seEO5ySoJ49g84TFzq09LWoKYCvomvdcsLWE9B0h4CMqVguL1hxNBCLUAPyeltjN_CCyJ8QyAFcNwbPLOmb4Du8SFMqWhdB8CR2k2DSWAUQOKos1z6YTti9iOsCA0n_OO8/s400/Ian+Thorpe.JPG" /></a></div><br />
We are a nation obsessed by sporting prowess. On the international stage we punch well above our weight and none more so than in the Olympic Games. In fact, it would be true to say, that the backbone of our amazing success has been our dominance in the pool. From the little-known Frederick Lane, who won our first Gold at the 1900 Paris Olympics, through Andrew 'Boy' Charlton and onto Dawn Fraser, Murray Rose, Shane Gould, Keiren Perkins, Susie O'Neill and Grant Hackett, we have dominated freestyle and other races from 50 to 1500 metres. <br />
<br />
However there is none greater than <b>Australia's greatest Olympian - Ian Thorpe</b>. He won <b>5 Olympic Gold Medals and 22 World Championship Golds</b>. Not only this, but it was the way Thorpie smashed world record times and was so clearly ahead of all others, during his reign at the top. Yes, there is no more naturally gifted and successful Australian swimmer and yet none more tragic. If you don't know his story, then read on and even if you think you know it, read on because you might not have heard everything I have to say. This time I am applying the brand new <b>'Life Cycles'</b> analysis to his life. It is instructive of the sheer 'blind predictive power' of <b>'Life Cycles'</b>.<br />
<br />
I did this analysis only because he's been in the news a lot lately and I am generally aware he is in his <b>age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>, as I write this. Beyond this I wasn't too sure. This is what I would be investigating :-<blockquote><b><br />
1. Would there be any evidence from his childhood age of 7? Things like challenges and direction changes. Such data is often not covered.<br />
2. What about his first age 12 'Year of Revolution'? Looking for evidence of a new age/direction.<br />
3. Checking his age 19 'Year of Broken Pathways' for challenges and more important direction changes.<br />
4. How about his age 24 'Year of Revolution'? Again, I am hoping to find this will introduce a new age for his career and life generally.<br />
5. Finally, what about the present as he is currently in a 'Year of Broken Pathways' at 31?</b></blockquote><br />
OK, this is my thin framework, the same for everyone. I'm not going to dig around too much for evidence. It will either appear readily or it won't. I'm basically a lazy researcher most of the time. That's why you must appreciate just how obvious 'Life Cycles' evidence can be. Let's go on.<br />
<br />
When <b>Ian Thorpe (born 13th October, 1982)</b> was <b>aged 7 he swam his first race at a school carnival</b>. This however, was a breakthrough, because (believe it or not), as a child he suffered from an allergy to chlorine! So, in order to race he swam with his head out of the water and still won because of his significant size advantage. Over the next few years he gradually overcame the ailment and progressed to the captaincy of New South Wales for the Australian Primary Schools Championships. This is a standout example of a challenge and uphill climb in his young life, that makes the age of 7 a <b>'significant year'</b> and what I refer to as a <b>'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz3mHg4iKtnUq_yOzPgHiCWh8GxHu83jUBmbetzXXt12UdU4mmyUwUluXygd2QR4WFb2RgGJ5g26Oa0XfaZUw1ubySrmrmoTzAJysYVqrmdevUvMTKbfwCbrGX9Eltv3yJMamMhFLq1aQ/s1600/Ian+Thorpe+Young.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz3mHg4iKtnUq_yOzPgHiCWh8GxHu83jUBmbetzXXt12UdU4mmyUwUluXygd2QR4WFb2RgGJ5g26Oa0XfaZUw1ubySrmrmoTzAJysYVqrmdevUvMTKbfwCbrGX9Eltv3yJMamMhFLq1aQ/s320/Ian+Thorpe+Young.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Interestingly, I have found similar type of breakthrough/challenge material in the lives of other elite athletes at the age of 7 :- eg. in the profiles I have done on Novak Djokovic and Cadel Evans. Now we move on to the age of 12. It is stated in his summary bio article, that at this time he switched coaches to swim alongside his sister under the tutelage of <b>Doug Frost</b>. He then won all ten events at the New South Wales Age Championships in the same year. Frost was a major influence on Thorpe's development to championship status and the driving force behind his competitiveness. This was surely the beginning of his new age/direction as a top-flight swimmer, which was ushered in during his <b>age 12 'Year of Revolution'</b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiw28YzQZCUEZQMjmWlAMuD_PDSbvwOkDKg-_Tox3E0pT4Us_VdzRRQ3K7gsUZ86-TczWtTEuiqlLg1tQkfF838WnTDlJ0JdrI8HD11Hx6ZT3BgeqBODW2wXzW9gC_OnICtBJta-kALqc/s1600/Ian+Thorpe+Sydney+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiw28YzQZCUEZQMjmWlAMuD_PDSbvwOkDKg-_Tox3E0pT4Us_VdzRRQ3K7gsUZ86-TczWtTEuiqlLg1tQkfF838WnTDlJ0JdrI8HD11Hx6ZT3BgeqBODW2wXzW9gC_OnICtBJta-kALqc/s320/Ian+Thorpe+Sydney+2.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Of course many accolades and achievements occurred in his 7 year forward journey of success. They included smashing world records and winning Golds at World Championships and the Sydney Olympics in 2000. As I often say, I obviously can't correlate all achievement material with my <b>'Life Cycles'</b> years, but what I look for instead, is evidence of major turning points in this forward journey at the age of 19 (Oct. 2002 to Oct. 2003). What will I find?<br />
<br />
The biographic record states, that in this <b>'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>, Thorpe and Frost had a major falling out. Thorpe had always insisted that his swimming was about enjoyment and improving himself in setting faster times, rather than victory or defeat. This contrasted with Frost, who had a more aggressive and combative mindset. <b>Thorpe announced that he was splitting with Frost</b> to train with one of his assistants, Tracey Menzies, who had no prior international experience. Admitting that tension existed between him and Frost, Thorpe asserted that the split was amicable. He cited waning motivation for the split, stating :- "I decided I either had to make the change or walk away from the sport." His seven year journey with Frost was over.<br />
<br />
It was also an obvious direction change and challenge, as critics said that Thorpe only went with Menzies, because he could call the shots. He had to prove them wrong. That wasn't the only big change in his life that manifested when he was 19. I am using the recent <b>Michael Parkinson 'tell all' interview here</b>. Thorpe had known he was gay several years beforehand, but when asked by journalists he had denied it and felt he had to stick with this version. He was also told privately, that sponsorship deals could be at stake if he 'came out', so he felt commercial pressure as well.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0xp_H-VvbSc8e7aMFQQEmauZKqNyY5Y8spdlxmrxUCtDnqaDQQGWgrTLU79xzBBhQNMy2FWyTqnqWf625jVoueLV5ibtNLDjkxXT2skB9_q9gTVb1AJ4U8iQqNU430DdwvVljmyyo61I/s1600/Ian+Thorpe+Sydney.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0xp_H-VvbSc8e7aMFQQEmauZKqNyY5Y8spdlxmrxUCtDnqaDQQGWgrTLU79xzBBhQNMy2FWyTqnqWf625jVoueLV5ibtNLDjkxXT2skB9_q9gTVb1AJ4U8iQqNU430DdwvVljmyyo61I/s400/Ian+Thorpe+Sydney.jpg" /></a></div><br />
He said that he had been taking anti-depressants since he was 19 and had battled alcoholism and even turned up to training hungover, now and again :- "I knew I was a little bit different, but there were times that I just wasn't happy," he said. "It was a lethargy that followed me that I didn't understand." He said the inefficacy of therapy and medication led him to self-medicate through alcohol abuse :-"[I thought] 'I'll have a drink so I feel better' then it becomes cyclical you start to drink you start to self-medicate."<br />
<br />
So there it is large as life. <b>At 19 he had also a 'Broken Pathways' moment with alcohol abuse</b>. It was probably a 'chicken and egg' scenario regarding his falling out with his coach as well, as they would have argued about his behaviour. I mean, I can't make this fit any better if I tried. It could all have happened at 17, or 18 or 20, but that wasn't how it went.<br />
<br />
OK, now we move on to events in Thorpe's first adult, <b>age 24, 'Year of Revolution' (Oct. 2006 to Oct. 2007)</b>. We are specifically looking for evidence of a new age/direction and also possible setbacks/controversies. That is the theory. So what do we find? Thorpe withdrew from the selection trials for the 2007 World Championships and <b>announced his retirement on 21 November 2006 (at age 24)</b>. He said he now regretted his decision to walk away from the sport at the age of 24, a decision he took "partly" because of his depression, but largely because of the pressures of media intrusion and expectation :- "I wish that I hadn't," he said. "I felt my career was not my own – it was other people's."<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhp_loldjqCE4hOggo6uLobSFLT8kgODXScUvg6t4BVxFCJSjiua6yozg8_kAX6_DxoLtjrqCboey7WWIxisQEI905zzM8U2G3Td2OWxwr-_Ta8gdDg31mZZ69_mbaXApkzcRzjSwcOJ6g/s1600/Ian+Thorpe+Quits.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhp_loldjqCE4hOggo6uLobSFLT8kgODXScUvg6t4BVxFCJSjiua6yozg8_kAX6_DxoLtjrqCboey7WWIxisQEI905zzM8U2G3Td2OWxwr-_Ta8gdDg31mZZ69_mbaXApkzcRzjSwcOJ6g/s320/Ian+Thorpe+Quits.jpg" /></a></div><br />
So here is his new age/direction in his <b>'Year of Revolution'</b>. It was an upheaval in his life. The stage he had 'burst upon' (my usual phrase) at age 12, was now left and altered 12 years later at 24. In spite of his statement at the time of :- "doing it for the right reasons", we now learn that this 'Revolution' was not of his making. He was to begin an era of finding himself 'post swimming' and it wasn't that enjoyable, which is evidenced by his failed comeback attempt several years later. And what of controversies and setbacks at 24?<br />
<br />
Also in <b>March 2007</b>, L'Équipe, a French daily sports newspaper, reported on its website that Thorpe showed <b>"abnormal levels" of two banned substances</b> in a doping test on May 2006. The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) later confirmed that Thorpe was investigated for abnormal levels of testosterone and luteinizing hormone (LH); both naturally occurring in the body. Thorpe's elevated LH level was what caused ASADA to initially investigate, and then to dismiss the result. Thorpe denied the rumours in a press conference on 31 March 2007 stating :- "I firmly believe I am clean, I have never cheated and have always fulfilled my obligations." So here it is again, plain as day as well as large as life.<br />
<br />
I'm going to end this slightly longer than usual post at his current <b>'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>, which doesn't end till October this year, which is a month away as I write. He is 31. What has happened to represent a direction change and uphill challenge? The answer to this is evening news material. In early Feb. 2014 he was found wandering the street in a dazed and confused state near his parents' home in Panania, Sydney. "He is battling with his health issues at the moment and he is having a tough time," Ken Thorpe said of his 31-year-old son. "But hopefully in six months' time he will be out the other side." Thorpe was then back in rehab where he was being treated for depression.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaV1QT70b7npl_DPPT8Hb0fg3QPyjLYCrH0eZuAUChOA3fat9E_N31bSNBlYEy_FLxPHha7CZ6mdpPbFA-gxsOhvc6vigbbV8dM_mvbyVETHG-niUq8ShQ1GFZi_hIVa4t1wmhlwETm58/s1600/Ian+Thorpe+++parkinson.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaV1QT70b7npl_DPPT8Hb0fg3QPyjLYCrH0eZuAUChOA3fat9E_N31bSNBlYEy_FLxPHha7CZ6mdpPbFA-gxsOhvc6vigbbV8dM_mvbyVETHG-niUq8ShQ1GFZi_hIVa4t1wmhlwETm58/s400/Ian+Thorpe+++parkinson.jpg" /></a></div><br />
The next chapter, was when he appeared on our news bulletin in July. Interestingly, it was around 6 months after he committed himself to rehab, when he did a 'tell all' interview with Michael Parkinson and admitted he had been gay all along. Only two years previously he had denied this in his autobiography, so while many found all the fuss hard to understand, there was no question it was a major milestone and turning point in his life. It seems to have been an inevitable journey leading up to this <b>'Broken Pathways'</b> moment. This is what originally caught my interest. He obviously has an uphill challenge ahead, as he comes to grips with his new public image. You could really 'feel the love' flowing to our national hero on social media, but as empowering as this no doubt was for Ian, life goes on. What are his new directions to be?<br />
<br />
He revealed that he would like to be a parent himself one day and that he has plans to get back to the pool, but this time more in a coaching capacity with elite swimmers, which is an area in which he has much to offer. In addition, he said he would be commencing a career on TV as a commentator for the Commonwealth Games :- “I much prefer the chair that you’re sitting in,” he told Parkinson. So, there are many exciting challenges on his horizon, which I'm sure he will succeed at. This again meets every criteria for <b>'Life Cycles'</b> theory. In future if someone asks me :- "What is your theory all about? I'll just say :- 'here, read this.' "<br />
<br />
I'll leave the final word to Ian himself :- “I look at my life, I’ve made mistakes, but I’ve made good choices as well and I think I’ve got back to one of the core values which is most important to me, which is my honesty and my integrity. This is one thing that I value more than anything else and I’ve just offered it to people.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-26188558555254153422014-07-30T15:36:00.000-07:002014-07-30T16:20:44.860-07:00Palmergeddon Rules, OK! - 'Life Cycles' And The Palmer United Party<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAHavzomcVMlgdqpfywUucJx2KHWnPU125GeD45cEbWJC4GUIqkODCZI8_wTLRgpbTWvQ7jOzIcryW9hxWb2ETnZlcdsiOV73rEDmZgfPPJ6YI7L3bK5QROIrbfodnAVbDirLbRQFMjcw/s1600/PUP+Cover.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAHavzomcVMlgdqpfywUucJx2KHWnPU125GeD45cEbWJC4GUIqkODCZI8_wTLRgpbTWvQ7jOzIcryW9hxWb2ETnZlcdsiOV73rEDmZgfPPJ6YI7L3bK5QROIrbfodnAVbDirLbRQFMjcw/s400/PUP+Cover.JPG" /></a></div>In Australian politics at the moment there is a lot of media attention and gossip surrounding our newest Parliamentary force :- the <b>Palmer United Party (PUP)</b>. They have had three Senators recently sworn in, which is in addition to founder and former long-time Queensland National Party member, miming billionaire <b>Clive Palmer</b>, who sits in the <b>Lower House</b>. However, the three unlikely new Senators, who just took up office, in fact, hold the <b>balance of power</b> in the <b>Upper House</b>, which means they hold an awful lot of power.<br />
<br />
The Government relies on their consistent support to get certain key legislation enacted. No better illustration was the <b>repeal of the Carbon Tax</b> - a key <b>Liberal Party</b> election promise. You'd think <b>Clive Palmer</b> would have ensured this sailed through, as his own company has much to gain, as well as business generally. He does have some rationale for his manoeuvres, because, in addition to ensuring consumers get the full rebate passed to them, he owes $8.4 million of this tax himself and wants retrospectivity in the legislation. However, aside from this, the Press simply had a field day when passage through the Senate got held up by the <b>PUP Senators</b>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB79VLXgDGISjtv2QkSd73X-Maa_m6x9jpELGS-ENMjQNCr2CwVHwkx-vpBuDyJmmA-gywAaCuEi3Lnbr9FtsoZ2HyCE2CzHbxaytpzCO1I1QETW-sSNoKCj_pGzTxGI96gxgO9CcsllI/s1600/gore+palmer.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB79VLXgDGISjtv2QkSd73X-Maa_m6x9jpELGS-ENMjQNCr2CwVHwkx-vpBuDyJmmA-gywAaCuEi3Lnbr9FtsoZ2HyCE2CzHbxaytpzCO1I1QETW-sSNoKCj_pGzTxGI96gxgO9CcsllI/s320/gore+palmer.jpg" /></a></div><br />
The ever-unpredictable Mr. Palmer seemed to relish the spotlight and after due discussion it did eventually pass the <b>Upper House</b>. The subtext of this exercise is about showing just who was in charge. Next he has stalled the repeal of the <b>Mining Tax</b> (that's right the mining magnate himself), as well as having shared a media platform with anti-fossil fuel crusader <b>Al Gore</b> (to an astonished Press gallery, who called them 'the odd couple'). His high-profile has been referred to as <b>'Palmergaddon'</b> and being called <b>'The Wrecking Ball'</b>. I think it's safe to say that, at the moment <b>'Palmergeddon Rules!'</b> Now how does all this fit into <b>'Life Cycles'</b>?<br />
<br />
Well <b>Clive Palmer</b> was <b>born Mar. 26th, 1954</b>, which means he is currently in the middle of his <b>age 60 'Year of Revolution'</b>. The theory says that during these years (ie. at 24/36/48/60 etc.) people can expect upheavals and new beginnings in their lives. I mostly focus on the ages of 24 and 36 and sometimes 48, however you can't assume that once past 48, life still does not hold achievements, new eras and general upheavals every 12 years. It is certainly this way for the mercurial Mr. Palmer. For someone who has had a life-long interest in politics and Party membership of the Queensland Nationals (now in coalition with the Liberals), this would be a cherished moment. <br />
<br />
Having read his Party's objectives I can see he has a vision to continue the spirit of the <b>United Australia Party</b>, which preceded the formation of the <b>Liberal Party</b> in 1944. So, this must seem like a 'green fields' opportunity to leave his true legacy. However, he continues to face uncertainty over his future, as minority parties can face extinction without generating a viable support base. It has been, and will continue to be, an exciting and unpredictable journey, that he has now set out on.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTJGSRXG8JsiBUGzTE4Hih2xkYIg5cCk_GBL0efUbm5GJie4C8OtN0lvJ3Et7Qx8S27mkZiwrOT0piaMz4hrFgPuvQlw0Rdyqjh70guYuVvtzWtbExvg9FxZYDHC-Gzq9hMAnZoFjVK6I/s1600/Glenn_Lazarus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTJGSRXG8JsiBUGzTE4Hih2xkYIg5cCk_GBL0efUbm5GJie4C8OtN0lvJ3Et7Qx8S27mkZiwrOT0piaMz4hrFgPuvQlw0Rdyqjh70guYuVvtzWtbExvg9FxZYDHC-Gzq9hMAnZoFjVK6I/s320/Glenn_Lazarus.jpg" /></a></div><br />
But that's only one part of the equation. The number two in the Party and Senate Leader is former champion NRL (equivalent to NFL) footballer, <b>Glenn 'The Brick With Eyes' Lazarus</b>. Glen was <b>born Dec. 11th. 1965</b>, which means he is right in the middle of his later mid-life, <b>age 48 'Year of Revolution'</b> as we speak. He too, is undergoing upheavals and new beginnings as the new Senators were only sworn in on Jul. 1st. He must 'find his political feet' and deal with both Clive Palmer's views and perhaps even suggest some of his own. Very recently a Queensland Nationals Senator has goaded Glenn to :-<b><i> "come out of hiding.....and speak up and declare if he supports the Clerk of The Senate"</b></i> (who had been criticised by Clive Palmer). Mind you, I for one, can't see 'The Brick With Eyes', all 6 foot 2, 18 stone of him, taking a backward step. <br />
<br />
However, those of you, who have read a little of the theory, will know that when two or more people, who are sharing a relationship (either personal or work-related), and who are both sharing time in respective <b>'Life Cycles' 'significant years'</b> (ie. either <b>'Years of Revolution'</b> or <b>'Years of Broken Pathways'</b>), they are said to be <b>'Confluent'</b>. This means they are sharing their mutual upheavals and dramas and it should promote greater empathy. I have previously shown how this is currently so for <b>Prime Minister Tony Abbott</b> and <b>Treasurer Joe Hockey</b>. Basically it is a case of the greater the amount of <b>'Confluence'</b> the better and Clive and Glenn share 8 1/2 months out of a possible 12.<br />
<br />
You can see how this translates to the friendship/career side with Clive and Glenn. The story, as I read it, is that Glenn was introduced to Clive through Rugby League former great <b>Ron Coote</b> (so there is an element of destiny) and that they met over a dinner with respective wives and 'hit it off straight away'. Since they are both currently living through this now, I use the phrase <b>'Real Time' 'Confluence'</b>. It simply makes for more compelling current affairs research.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFeAO0_Bg77ye7ZidOms2ZIDLedTzZ1gBdFHdL_rQYw1fccQHzg4q700K3yNAU-cqArkNRNCUqE1eNlYkvlaI27N7xe9kjU0Rsy85aUqt-kQRXpmLfFiAsEjw2VHF6ay2eLBdmzWcurCY/s1600/jacquie+lambie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFeAO0_Bg77ye7ZidOms2ZIDLedTzZ1gBdFHdL_rQYw1fccQHzg4q700K3yNAU-cqArkNRNCUqE1eNlYkvlaI27N7xe9kjU0Rsy85aUqt-kQRXpmLfFiAsEjw2VHF6ay2eLBdmzWcurCY/s400/jacquie+lambie.jpg" /></a></div><br />
But, we are not yet done with the <b>Palmer United Party</b>. There is one more protagonist, with a considerable public profile, thanks to erratic statements to the media. That would be the newly sworn in <b>PUP Senator, Jacquie Lambie</b> from Tasmania (our island State to the south, which has a reputation for eccentricity). Jacquie was <b>born Feb. 26th. 1971</b>, meaning she is also right in the middle of her <b>age 43 'Year of Broken Pathways'</b>, which has been correlated quite a few times, with a significant rise in the careers of many politicians. This means she is quite <b>'Confluent'</b> with both Clive and Glenn and right now all three of them are together in a <b>"whorl of 'Real Time' 'Confluence'"</b>. In spite of their very different backgrounds and careers, they should share a good level of empathy and understanding.<br />
<br />
Mind you, they probably would have to considering Jacquie's outbursts, which have included calling the Prime Minister a <b><i>"political psychopath"</b></i> for taking his daughters with him during the recent Election campaign and talking with a 22 year old tradie (tradesman) on radio and saying what she was looking for in a man was :- <b><i>“must have heaps of cash and they've got to have a package between their legs”</b></i>. She later asked him whether he was <b><i>“well hung”</b></i> and he responded by asking her for a date. <br />
<br />
Her background is one of growing up in a Housing Commission home and being a young single mother of two, but she boldly asserts that she could one day be Prime Minister. She has advised <b>Tony Abbott</b> to :- <b><i>"take a bucket of cement and harden up."</b></i> She has been involved with both the Labor and Liberal Parties over the last several years, but seems to have found her natural home with the <b>PUP</b> and could prove to be the greatest maverick female politician since <b>Pauline "Please Explain" Hanson</b>.<br />
<br />
However as they say :- "all publicity is good publicity". She later apologised over the talkback radio comments, leaving our Prime Minister unsure what to make of her, and he simply called her "colourful" and "quirky". Yes, politics in Australia could be likened to a three ring circus at the moment, and all three rings feature the highly <b>'Confluent'</b> members of the <b>PUP</b>. Clive Palmer is not on record as making any comments regarding Jacquie Lambie's behaviour, and I'm sure even the much more measured Glenn Lazarus, was used to a whole lot worse than this as prop-forward in the roughhouse world of the NRL. Strange bedfellows though they may be, they are a walking, talking advertisement for <b>'Life Cycles'</b> theory. Their mutual period of <b>'Confluence'</b> extends to the end of the year, so the motto going forward will, I'm sure, be :- "expect the unexpected".<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-14072973094109772182014-07-03T20:57:00.000-07:002014-07-04T16:22:58.529-07:00Stop In The Name Of Business - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Diana Ross<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><blockquote><b>"There are three versions of every story:- yours, theirs and the trurh." Robert Evans</b></blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBU0Xdf3ecmF7kIRNX9ZszwSpz2AKhAMMJkUT2m2ejnACcxQz7kG76g_yTpWxVcGjlWXM0WENMX1lKc5Wj0CM_lHX5MYCbbC5Dtybkj0QhyphenhyphenFbzwAgSZvLDt7hsV_SEiuYJLIQRPeYXew/s1600/Motown+the+Musical_Horiz_KD1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBU0Xdf3ecmF7kIRNX9ZszwSpz2AKhAMMJkUT2m2ejnACcxQz7kG76g_yTpWxVcGjlWXM0WENMX1lKc5Wj0CM_lHX5MYCbbC5Dtybkj0QhyphenhyphenFbzwAgSZvLDt7hsV_SEiuYJLIQRPeYXew/s400/Motown+the+Musical_Horiz_KD1.jpg" /></a></div>I recently saw the popular show <b><i>Motown The Musical</i></b> at the Chinese Theatre in Chicago. A great night of entertainment, however you know me, I couldn't just sit through what amounted to a re-telling of most of Berry Gordy's life. He was the founder of Motown and the inspiration, for what amounted to not just a record label, but a recognisable genre of music ie. the Motown sound. I started to try and marry up dates with events. Quite frankly, I was finding it a bit difficult with his life, until <b>Diana Ross</b> entered the picture, as Motown's biggest star.<br />
<br />
I suddenly realized, some of her key scenes were worth investigating. Diana was far bigger than I had thought. She was named <b>Female Entertainer Of The Century</b> by Billboard Magazine, and in 1993 Guinness Records called her <b>"the most successful female artist in history"</b>, with 100 million record sales and an incredible 70 hit singles. She actually challenged The Beatles for supremacy in the 60's. In the show there was one small scene towards the end when Berry Gordy, whose relationship with her had ended some years ago, was now rather pleasantly wishing her all the best, as she said she was leaving Motown, because RCA had made her a much better offer. Huge, in fact, at $20 million. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh68fHufRGRs64MB9LRr8sksSs4-elbdRuhORRncWzvjgBFSb3CJWZAbhJgtN6SHxa988gB145M0z-eczoN58SN9tWHAG5s4C4znOJt11xYBajHtZLtSa_jBeT3CFyi4kWOnXU0_rdTqkA/s1600/Ross+Gordy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh68fHufRGRs64MB9LRr8sksSs4-elbdRuhORRncWzvjgBFSb3CJWZAbhJgtN6SHxa988gB145M0z-eczoN58SN9tWHAG5s4C4znOJt11xYBajHtZLtSa_jBeT3CFyi4kWOnXU0_rdTqkA/s320/Ross+Gordy.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Then I was drawn to the back story about the making of the musical. Gordy, who had written his autobiography <b><i>To Be Loved</b></i> back in 1994, was very unhappy with his virtual portrayal in the 2006 movie <b><i>Dreamgirls</b></i>. It showed him as unethical and insensitive to his artists and he said it was "100% wrong". In 2007, Paramount Pictures issued an apology, which was accepted. He decided to write a 'book', designed for the musical based on his autobiography, to set the record straight. Now <b><i>Motown The Musical</i></b> contains many (some would say too many) excerpts of hit songs without doing the whole song, but it has also been criticised for its thin plot line. I'll quote from one prominent review :- " rather than giving us a complex portrait of this fascinating businessman, the show's shoddily written book is essentially a self-serving theatrical memoir in which Gordy gets to tell his life story. But just as importantly it serves as a celebration of the music that brought America's black and white populations together, in a way nothing else ever did." <br />
<br />
So, here we are then. Imagine you're Berry Gordy. <b>Their</b> version of the truth paints an unflattering portrait of a business owner, who ruthlessly exploited his musical stars. You rant and rave and decide to give <b>your</b> version of the truth. It gets a luke-warm tick from the critics. So just what is <b>the truth</b> and what the heck does it have to do with <b>'Life Cycles'</b>. I look like I'm just off on some unreasonable witch-hunt on Gordy for no good reason. The reason is all about how old Diana Ross was at the moment of her scene, where she left Motown and the <b>"real story"</b> behind it. So this post is really about the career of Diana Ross.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdrZZnLKnEtxxyxn56rrZ_RrdHcVYNCWiw5IurkfuKJ0gJ-rIcOFbLys_LOZ3NEcCy9Hk5IXYqHDcEFgnAxIqFhji69hRU2tq9wG4P-_eDtvw5sk-kAxsf6Ph5jzwkJqlS5y1qfdKZ_l8/s1600/Ross_Diana_006.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdrZZnLKnEtxxyxn56rrZ_RrdHcVYNCWiw5IurkfuKJ0gJ-rIcOFbLys_LOZ3NEcCy9Hk5IXYqHDcEFgnAxIqFhji69hRU2tq9wG4P-_eDtvw5sk-kAxsf6Ph5jzwkJqlS5y1qfdKZ_l8/s320/Ross_Diana_006.jpg" /></a></div>Now the scene we are talking about in the musical refers to a series of events, that actually took place in the years 1980 (towards the end) and 1981 (the early part). Diana was born on 26th. March, 1944. What does your maths tell you? That's right it was happening in her important, mid-life <b>'Year of Revolution'</b> when she was aged 36. So, just how life-changing and career-defining was this year for Diana? Firstly, if we back-up a little, we can see that following several years of disappointing record sales and high production costs (which was Gordy's counter-argument for not offering her a more lucrative contract renewal); <b>1980 was to become a stellar year in the career of Diana</b>.<br />
<br />
She began it with the release of her album <b><i>Diana</i></b> in May, 1980. Before this was released, she was advised to re-mix it to lessen the disco sound. One prominent critic even said it would ruin her career if she didn't, due to the anti-disco backlash at the time. After a shaky start, and without a lead single, it went on to become one of - if the <b><i>the</b></i> - biggest selling albums of her career, eventually featuring the hit singles <b><i>Upside Down</i></b> and <b><i>I'm Coming Out</i></b>. Berry had nothing to do with the production of this, which added fuel to the fire of her desires to gain more control over her career.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO9aD-1akh-ORkaUOzEFFi4ZvPlhGgl6USbOkka1XP0Qsif3sNu8KzAf0AoUS1wyXcxp-dy7aUGzl5X6rBNjZxXSWk1L3Rh1MZ53I_imj_7W-V3eHBQ1ufyeX1FnmW7BxPWZ4OraKK_Xo/s1600/Diana+Album.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO9aD-1akh-ORkaUOzEFFi4ZvPlhGgl6USbOkka1XP0Qsif3sNu8KzAf0AoUS1wyXcxp-dy7aUGzl5X6rBNjZxXSWk1L3Rh1MZ53I_imj_7W-V3eHBQ1ufyeX1FnmW7BxPWZ4OraKK_Xo/s320/Diana+Album.jpg" /></a></div><br />
She followed this up with one of her most passionate ballads ever, <i><b>It's My Turn</i></b>, which was mirroring how she was beginning to feel. Berry however, still exerted strong emotional control on her, which is easy to understand since she had been totally dependent on him throughout her whole career. This wouldn't be easy to break. Her contract ran out in December and for the first time in over 20 years she didn't automatically renew it. What was going on? Is this another case of a career-defining <b>'Year of Revolution'</b> but without the <b>"one-way tunnels"</b> and the <b>"dark cellars"</b>? If you think I've just lost the plot here with these strange phrases, by the way, I explain all in the post on Maya Angelou in the <a href="http://www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">MAIN BLOG</a> so give it a read.<br />
<br />
OK, what happened next? All the biographic summaries talk of her discovering just how little she actually had coming to her if she left and then shopping around to find the deal of a lifetime with RCA. But, you know me, I want to know <b>the truth</b>. The unvarnished 'warts and all' truth. It's quite a story and it'll take you in a direction you might never have guessed. <br />
<br />
Enter Gene Simmons from Kiss! Yes, that Gene Simmons. The 6 foot 2, fire-breathing (on stage that is), vampire-costumed and snake-tongued rock star, who claimed over 1,000 conquests, most with his stage face still on. He had been having a brief relationship with Cher, who in turn introduced him to Diana, since she (Diana that is) had just split up with Ryan O'Neill on the re-bound from her recent divorce. I know, it's hard to imagine a less likely duo and they were rated number 5 on a list of the top 10 weirdest Showbiz couples. Incidentally the number one spot was 'Cher and Anybody'. She was 36 and he was 31, so this all happened in a small window of <b>'Confluence'</b>. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGajxPhW6HC1ry7vGV7C8WocWR-tYpBIKB3cMTTVHcD3wQmfYruNtL7s-NtJITxnIByYnWpAED86OUhmEudeIoHHsxFWNRGdSirzZK93lhom9UGXU3EZgCiacnSCvA9WsZCzRyBXopddc/s1600/diana-ross-gene-simmons.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGajxPhW6HC1ry7vGV7C8WocWR-tYpBIKB3cMTTVHcD3wQmfYruNtL7s-NtJITxnIByYnWpAED86OUhmEudeIoHHsxFWNRGdSirzZK93lhom9UGXU3EZgCiacnSCvA9WsZCzRyBXopddc/s400/diana-ross-gene-simmons.jpg" /></a></div><br />
She actually joined Simmons in wearing a handkerchief over the lower half of her face when going out in public....weird or what? Anyways, it has been agreed that it was Simmons who convinced Diana to leave Motown. Simmons was known to be a brilliant and confident businessman and when Diana confided her problems with Motown he said, more than once :- "Get the hell away from there. What are you nuts?". He added :- "You only have one chance to cash in when you're in this business and this is it baby. You may never be hotter than this. You have to go for the money." After a top selling album and three hit singles in one 12 month period, he was right of course. Still she was unsure and this amounted to <b>"bumbling and stumbling around in the dark".</b><br />
<br />
In December, Simmons sent one of his entourage, a heavy-set rock manager over to negotiate with Berry. He said she already had a $20 million offer on the table and asked him to match it. It is highly likely this was pure bluff. This must have been a truly comical moment. After Berry recovered from shock he told this dude that he wanted to speak directly with Diana. She was now <b>"at the bottom of the cellar".</b> After this he tried stonewalling procedures into early 1981 and then begging her to stay, but eventually she found out how little she was worth at Motown (reported to be around only $200,000), which was a ludicrously small sum considering the millions she had earned for them.<br />
<br />
It is now history that in March 1981, just at the close of the most momentous year in the career of Diana Ross, she signed a record-setting $20 million deal with RCA. She had now <b>"emerged into the the warmth of a sunny day".</b> Interesting since that was the amount originally suggested by Simmons. He was the real deal maker and in terms of <b>'Life Cycles'</b> theory, he was what I have come to term <b>'The Agent Of The Revolution'</b>. In his case this took on a literal meaning as well. <br />
<br />
So, there it is. Again, it meets all the criteria of an age 36, life and career-defining year. Not always pleasant as you live through it. Simmons was quite right. Just like her last hit record this was <b>'her turn'</b>. Her one chance to cash in big. By the way, the RCA contract dissolved after 4 years and the studio lost money on her and she and Gene Simmons parted ways well before that, but in one brief shining moment they were all joined. Her, Berry, Simmons and RCA in a knot of destiny. They all, more or less, sang from the same song sheet :- "STOP IN THE NAME OF BUSINESS.....before you break my heart....think it o-o-over!"<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-71668652435708248472014-05-20T16:06:00.000-07:002014-05-23T17:50:13.317-07:00Business Or Lifestyle? - 'Life Cycles' And The Career Of Collette Dinnigan <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH2v3mxWR4A8EPOp07pMiCKAf8KNpZv2-7_xc64bgJmweYp5JMJRi1ULplSWdGQIalOh5-3QbGKBg2Haza6iQuUmPGRRCr7GdeVwOUH6-lhuoRWXeqpiR-jstUJGcaBk51EJca0RmWy9A/s1600/Collette+with+cildren+(1).jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH2v3mxWR4A8EPOp07pMiCKAf8KNpZv2-7_xc64bgJmweYp5JMJRi1ULplSWdGQIalOh5-3QbGKBg2Haza6iQuUmPGRRCr7GdeVwOUH6-lhuoRWXeqpiR-jstUJGcaBk51EJca0RmWy9A/s320/Collette+with+cildren+(1).jpg" /></a></div><br />
Collette Dinnigan is a household name in Australia for her trademark romantic and exquisite bohemian dresses. OK, I'm a mere male, so this is what my research tells me; but having looked at a range of Collette's designs, I can say they grab me straight up. She has dressed the likes of Oprah Winfrey, Helena Christensen, Crown Princess Mary, Madonna, Nicole Kidman and Pink. She is also a very successful businesswoman, who developed her original Sydney-based company into a global empire. Why am I featuring Collette? I mean apart from enjoying a glimpse into the world of fashion. <br />
<br />
The answer became very obvious to me one Sunday, when I read a quick summary of her career in the paper. It featured every single adult 'Year of Revolution' (ie. ages of 24/36/48). There it was, large as life, and I didn't have to go digging to find it. Her career is the very embodiment of 'Life Cycles' theory. She has been in the news lately because of a decision to walk away from her 24 year-old business in order to focus on her family and lifestyle. How old is she right now? That would be the age of 48, or what I would call one of her 'Years of Revolution'. According to the theory, all of these years are often marked by new directions and upheavals. <br />
<br />
It's a simple matter of maths to see, that if she had been in her own business for 24 years, she must have begun it at the age of 24, or again what I call your first adult 'Year of Revolution'. This not only marks a new age/direction, but in career terms is often tied to your first 'career identity', or what it is that you are known for. She 'fits the spec' perfectly in this case. Also the theory states that often things don't go to plan during this time of upheaval.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxi80FD7VIE9DEf8QmwJskmbmSjdHNp5q79ML8GEbIEVq4knf36FhxXKcdhkJzB6q0e71vSWQAZ8xwseSx2zFx-Fv1yKH8hg4p3eJKl06vgf0vby7kSTk4ZoH51Ju8S4RRw1HP1Cg3Lyc/s1600/Wild+Hearts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxi80FD7VIE9DEf8QmwJskmbmSjdHNp5q79ML8GEbIEVq4knf36FhxXKcdhkJzB6q0e71vSWQAZ8xwseSx2zFx-Fv1yKH8hg4p3eJKl06vgf0vby7kSTk4ZoH51Ju8S4RRw1HP1Cg3Lyc/s320/Wild+Hearts.jpg" /></a></div><br />
In Collette's own words:-"...in the nineties, when the government stopped the subsidies for the film industry, it was just a disaster. Everything fell apart and I had to do something, so I just decided to set up my own lingerie business." She designed her own bra collection and sold it from her home, not knowing what would happen, but word of mouth made it successful. This is a first-hand picture of exactly what the 'Life Cycles' theory says. At the time you live through it, it can be quite stressful.<br />
<br />
OK, that was 24, how about her now current new age/direction ushered in during her age 48 'Year of Revolution' (Sept. 24th 2013 to Sept. 24th 2014). Is there some upheaval in her life during this current 12 month period? Again, in her own words :- " Paris Fashion Week (last week in Sept. 2013) proved to be the deal breaker. When I returned from the hectic business trip, I felt my 11-month-old son Hunter didn't recognise me"<br />
<br />
So, in early Nov. 2013, she announced she was closing the doors on her eponymous label to spend time with her family of 2 children. This includes closing her boutiques in Sydney, Melbourne and London. She also stated:-"I'm not expecting the transition to be completely smooth. I'm used to 14-hour work days and relentless travel, so finding moderation will not be easy." Does this sound like another type of upheaval process, not dissimilar in nature, to that which saw her begin her business at 24? Once again, this is textbook 'Life Cycles'.<br />
<br />
What about when she was 36, I hear some saying? If you've read some of my many articles, then maybe you're one of those? Can your 'Life Cycles' theory work here? Also you usually say that big things can happen to all sorts of people during this one year in their lives. A career-defining time is the phrase you use. Is this true? Will it feature both frustration and success? Remember, there is NO OCCULT in this theory. It is based solely on biographical facts. If there's something mystical about it, I have no idea what it is, and I reject any attempt to link it to other unprovable theories (like astrology/numerology etc.).<br />
<br />
So, here we are in the period Sept. 2001 to Sept. 2002. What was going on then? Well, Collette had recognised, that you can't effectively run a global fashion business from Sydney. The world of Paris, London and New York demand you be geographically closer in some form. So, what if this period included opening up her first flagship store outside Australia? In essence, the beginning of her new direction for 'going global'? Again, I'll use Collette's own words:-"London was a real challenge and I was very ambitious in setting up that store... We actually set it up soon after September 11.." In other words around the time she just turned 36. She continues:-"I thought I was going to die when I opened it!...nobody walks past a shop in Chelsea Green." Does this sounds like an initial period of stress to you? <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt1PGEIs2TsT3pViCQSfYzPBuao3zbgv2bCEWim-tErwtjw4fW25Lx7WEPvjfWL-g0eSuadaCnRpUE67LQOD9zM_B4WuC7VSkAwjBLo6lqB-3LXAbgCpkCwpCCXdWov5PrMMcxC06JpR4/s1600/Collette+fashion+show.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt1PGEIs2TsT3pViCQSfYzPBuao3zbgv2bCEWim-tErwtjw4fW25Lx7WEPvjfWL-g0eSuadaCnRpUE67LQOD9zM_B4WuC7VSkAwjBLo6lqB-3LXAbgCpkCwpCCXdWov5PrMMcxC06JpR4/s320/Collette+fashion+show.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Her store was well away from the Bond Street fashion district and there was concern about whether customers would come, but come they did. This was helped by Marks and Spencer getting her to design a branded collection of lingerie - 'Wild Hearts' - exclusively for their stores around the same time. More upheaval was occurring in her personal life, as she was getting divorced from her first husband, Eurogliders guitarist Bernie Lynch, during 2001. Remember I said the age of 36 is pivotal in so many lives I study, I've come to find it almost commonplace. Well, in Collette's case we aren't finished, because there's quite a bit more to go in 2002. Let's move on.<br />
<br />
In the early part of 2002 she seriously considered moving to Bologna in Italy:-“I had someone in Bologna, who pretty much wanted to buy the business, the manufacturers of Pucci. All the deals had been done, they’d been out here a few times and I’d been there, and I’d sent my team over to look at Bologna." This would have definitely been a life-changing move, but her personal life again featured, because not too long after this she met her former partner, TV personality Richard Wilkins, with whom she went on to have a daughter and she decided to stay in Sydney.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFqOFYeeLj9KaWwhwsZTq6tVwtgZsXE3ryc0M19AeO2iDZl_J9JpZz7ACtWf2g6du0VYoxk_7GHRXlBJsdul1hLtCSfCC2rrtI_hvbPAFLVfxBzfwSpJlUspVGqttpgzOFuselY5ZfUbA/s1600/Just+Collette.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFqOFYeeLj9KaWwhwsZTq6tVwtgZsXE3ryc0M19AeO2iDZl_J9JpZz7ACtWf2g6du0VYoxk_7GHRXlBJsdul1hLtCSfCC2rrtI_hvbPAFLVfxBzfwSpJlUspVGqttpgzOFuselY5ZfUbA/s320/Just+Collette.jpg" /></a></div><br />
So, I think that about sums up one tumultuous year of change. New beginnings with her London store, almost selling out and moving to Italy and big changes in her personal life. I'm sure she'd agree it was 'a hell of a year'. It is one of the clearest examples of the influence of 'Life Cycles' in a career and a perfect match with my phrase:-"at 36 you 'burst upon the scene' and often at 48 you 'leave the stage you have been upon'". At 24, Collette begins in business as a response to outside career pressures. At 36, she begins her global push with opening her London store, as well as almost selling the business and big changes in her personal life. At 48, she closes her shops and says for the present at least:-"I quit."<br />
<br />
In terms of statistical theory you could say such an example shows strong evidence of 'face validity'; or literally that it measures what it sets out to measure. It's black and white or you could simply add 'it's as plain as the nose on your face'. I enjoyed compiling this post because of the extensive media file Collette has, that was full of first-hand quotes. This is the subjective proof of the influence the individual themselves feels as they are living through these years. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-2787701485823489762014-04-25T22:36:00.000-07:002014-04-26T16:12:32.800-07:00The Lesson Behind 'The Lessons'<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYomD5f63kOfjeIfWR09K6gqDia-y5TuGnqzWBbw40oPhy4b-E7NU-Qn7Yr7NPppt8elDNd0NfKAfcq1ixeiTTb_4E-z-BzOEb6nwnxOZTiUsdNMTCpdDbm36JxnyzJYLEfp0QrapImUI/s1600/Neil+Killion-Photo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYomD5f63kOfjeIfWR09K6gqDia-y5TuGnqzWBbw40oPhy4b-E7NU-Qn7Yr7NPppt8elDNd0NfKAfcq1ixeiTTb_4E-z-BzOEb6nwnxOZTiUsdNMTCpdDbm36JxnyzJYLEfp0QrapImUI/s320/Neil+Killion-Photo.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
If you read any of my posts, from either blog, you will see I make reference to how <b><i>"nothing I write about is by chance"</b></i>. You will also see me make the claim :- <b><i>"the most unique blog/s you will ever read"</b></i> along with <b><i>"you will not get this type of information anywhere else"</b></i> (and that includes the entire web and whatever is left over). Are these simply bold and unsubstantiated claims, like those product endorsements you see in ads? Why do I talk about <b>'Lessons'</b> and how you get 12 monthly posts on each blog to do with one particular type of <b>'Lesson'</b>? <br />
<br />
Well, it's simply because no-one has ever written about a brand new comprehensive theory of life (akin to saying I've just discovered astrology/numerology etc., but this time it's based on real world evidence) and decided to dedicate two blogs to slowly unveiling it to the world. It's part psychology, part philosophy, part history, even part sociology, but it is a unique and separate discipline in it's own right.<br />
<br />
I have a mission and that is to unveil different aspects of the theory slowly, by illustrating with usually well-known and often newsworthy case history examples. I do this, because if I want to talk to a wide audience, then I have to talk about high-profile people most of us have heard of. It means you can check my research out for yourselves. If I've :- <b><i>"got the wrong end of the stick"</b></i>, then I invite you to tell me so. Mind you I'm pretty careful with my research, but not infallible.<br />
<br />
So <b>'Life Cycles'</b> theory is totally unique. I'd love for someone to attempt to prove otherwise and just remember, that as of yet you don't fully understand it, at least not in it's entirety! It's central premise is that evidence strongly shows how you can meaningfully analyse lives in <b>12 year cycles</b>. So every <b>'Lesson'</b> in <b>'Life Cycles'</b> terms is presented to you in 12 posts of each blog. Each post represents one year in your life. A <b><i>"month is unto a year"</b></i> so to speak.<br />
<br />
Now you probably know by now, that my research has identified the first year in each <b>12 year cycle</b>, as being important for new direction-setting events and often correlates with milestones and achievements, however they might be measured. I call it a <b>'Year of Revolution'</b>, because it seems to me, that it is literally like a revolution in your life. So it is with the blogs. Each cycle of 12 posts sets a new direction and theme for the following 11 posts. It is a <b>"revolutionary post"</b> if you like. In it I introduce the new <b>'Lesson'</b>.<br />
<br />
So, OK I hear some saying :- <b><i>"Just what have you introduced us to so far?"</b></i> Here's your answer. The main blog began in <b>April 2009</b> and introduced you to the <b>"First Lesson"</b>, which was all about the <b>'Year of Revolution'</b>. It figures because it's the single most important concept. Then in <b>April 2010</b> you were introduced to my second important discovery :- that 7 years after your <b>'Year of Revolution'</b> you encounter a second fateful year, which can include direction-change again and a form of prolonged challenge for basically the rest of the 12 years. I called this year the <b>'Year of Broken Pathways'</b> in the same vein, because you path literally seems to break in this time, whether you like it or not. It corresponds to the ages of 7/19/31/43 etc.<br />
<br />
Then in <b>April 2011</b> you were introduced to the concept known as the <b>'Life Chart'</b>, which graphically displays all the biographical data to do with both these years in a person's life. You were given several comprehensive case histories, which support the theory in such a way, as to make it statistically 'almost a miracle' to have happened by chance. Supporting the <b>'Life Chart'</b> is a further analysis of the similarity of the underlying themes from all the collected <b>'Years of Revolution'</b> and separately for all the collected <b>'Years of Broken Pathway'</b>. When I do this you can see for yourselves the power of the analysis.<br />
<br />
Next in <b>April 2012</b> I introduced you to <b>'Confluence'</b>, which in <b>'Life Cycles'</b> terms literally means combining your <b>'Life Chart'</b> with someone else's; to see if there is any overlap in your <b>'significant years'</b> (ie. <b>'Years of Revolution'</b> and <b>'Years of Broken Pathway'</b>) and just what events of significance may have taken place in these special combined periods. It is a wonderful concept, not quite the same as compatibility, but in my view even more interesting, because it looks at the fated nature of certain relationships. I actually could not believe how much evidence of significance I unearthed for so many high-profile relationships. My next book will be about this subject. Keep in mind though, the formula is straight maths and has no occult connotations whatsoever. <br />
<br />
Then in <b>April 2013</b>, I introduced you to the application of <b>'Life Cycles'</b> to criminal and immoral behavior in a <b>'Lesson'</b> to do with <b>"Life Cycles And The Dark Side"</b>. You've been there recently and explored the way <b>'Life Cycles'</b> correlations apply to forensics and immoral behavior. Your <b>'Year of Revolution'</b> new age/direction can invert to become the commission of a crime, or public scandal, or getting caught, or even getting released from gaol.<br />
<br />
Now in <b>April 2014</b> you have begun your new 12 part <b>'Lesson'</b> in <b>"Life Cycles And Careers"</b>. You will look at a world I used to inhabit totally as a recruitment and then an outplacement consultant. However, my usually famous subjects might not have what you would call 'a traditional career path'.<br />
<br />
So, to sum up :-<b>'The Lessons'</b> so far have been as follows :-<br />
<br />
<b>1. April 2009 - April 2010 : Introducing the 'Year of Revolution'<br />
<br />
2. April 2010 - April 2011 : Introducing the 'Year of Broken Pathways'<br />
<br />
3. April 2011 - April 2012 : Introducing the 'Life Chart'<br />
<br />
4. April 2012 - April 2013 : Introducing 'Confluence'<br />
<br />
5. April 2013 - April 2014 : Introducing 'Life Cycles and The Dark Side'<br />
<br />
6. April 2014 - April 2015 : Introducing 'Life Cycles and Careers'</b><br />
<br />
Finally, keep in mind that the second blog was formed to occasionally help explain what is behind the main blog (as I am doing now). It was also formed to be a channel for case histories, that might not have made the main blog, with particular reference to my home country of Australia. In fact, this represents but a portion of the many cases I could feature. However, I realise, that for those who might want independent scientific validation, all my work suffers because it is self-reported.<br />
<br />
That however, does not change the objective nature of my analysis. Or the fact that I am often driven by who's been featured on current affairs, and I'm usually as amazed as anyone else would be; if they decided to test a theory again and again, and it keeps yielding relevant data. No, it's obviously not science, but it's a whole lot more than empty speculation and vague generalisations and totally unproveable pseudo-science, like so many outrageously popular theories are. No, just because I haven't had the population of Shanghai independently tested for <b>'Life Cycles'</b> evidence, I sleep well at night, because I know that my evidence is so far ahead of the rest, they can never catch up.<br />
<br />
As I said in <b><i>The Life Cycles Revolution</b></i> :- <b><i>"The answer's simple; if I couldn't fairly easily find meaningful correlations on a continuous basis, then I'd give up."</b></i> Hit the link for the <a href="http://sbpra.com/neilkillion/"><b>BOOK</b></a> or the <b>ebook</b> and do yourself a favour. Find out what nobody else will ever tell you. Why <b>'Life Cycles'</b> is like:- <b><i>"the missing piece in the jigsaw puzzle that is 'The Meaning Of Life'".</b></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-51330328141890089562014-03-30T15:30:00.000-07:002014-03-30T21:33:23.281-07:00Mary Queen Of Scots, Part 2 - The Life And Legend Of Bothwell <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9m1FpO9xQe7dEG698fckrHjMcUbVIe7sonL78QoM88za8PSkomZ3wZna7DlF0Po4Ct0mrSJ8EedIWQH6oTlIbu7YoJF7759EMVY9suKSsJ_u1sHwERsl7mDY24QtWtVoTn-aCww_MjsI/s1600/tn_bothwell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9m1FpO9xQe7dEG698fckrHjMcUbVIe7sonL78QoM88za8PSkomZ3wZna7DlF0Po4Ct0mrSJ8EedIWQH6oTlIbu7YoJF7759EMVY9suKSsJ_u1sHwERsl7mDY24QtWtVoTn-aCww_MjsI/s320/tn_bothwell.jpg" /></a></div>In a linked post to <b><i><a href="http://www.lifecycles-by-neil-killion.blogspot.com">Mary Queen Of Scots - The Darkest Revolution</i></b></a> - I am going to further explore the life of the third husband of Mary, namely the dastardly James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell. Why do this? I was originally going to do a post on Justin Beiber, but hey his story is so straightforward, it's almost boring by comparison to this arch-scoundrel. And the gossip magazines think that modern celebrity behavior is outrageous and vastly more interesting than historical celebrity behavior. What do they know?<br />
<br />
Just about every detail of his life seems to be conjectural as well, so it's impossible to know the real truth, but reasonable guesses can be made. I don't even have a definitive date or year of birth for 'Life Cycles' analysis. We can say however, that he became the Earl of Bothwell and Lord High Admiral of Scotland on the death of his father in 1566. He was thus the most powerful nobleman in the south of Scotland. In <b><i>The Great Historic Families of Scotland</i></b> it was stated that he was about 19 or 20 when this happened. So, maybe in his first adult age 19 'Year of Broken Pathways'. <br />
<br />
In October 1559, along with a party of 24, he wounded and robbed Cockburn of Ormiston of 4000 crowns, that he had received for the Protestant Party to be used against the Catholic dowager Queen, Mary of Guise and he had to flee his home. He decided as Admiral to sail around Europe, where he met and fell in love with the daughter of a famous Norwegian Admiral, by the name of Anna Throndsen. To be more precise, he kidnapped her from her family and "ravished" her or as they put it in 'ye olde English' :-<br />
<b><i><blockquote>"and thair keep her surelie, or otherwyse demayne hir <br />
person at your plesour, quhill sche aggre to quhatsumevir thing yo <br />
shall desyre."<br />
</blockquote></i></b><br />
<br />
This must have been reciprocated, because they pledged marriage to each other, although there was no formal ceremony. In Flanders, he said he was out of money and asked Anna to sell all her possessions. She complied and then visited her family in Denmark to ask for more money. Anna was unhappy and apparently given to complaining about Bothwell. Bothwell's treatment of Anna was to play a big part in his eventual downfall.<br />
<br />
After this he deserted Anna and one account even alleges he marries a woman in France. All this, before coming to call on Mary as Queen Regent in the autumn of 1560. He was flat broke, but must have charmed Mary even then, because <b><i>"The Queen recompensed me more liberally and honourably than I had deserved"</b></i> — receiving 600 Crowns and the post and salary of gentleman of the French King's Chamber. This may have been in his age 24 'Year of Revolution', which would have marked the beginnings of his relationship with the young Mary. He visited Paris twice more before Mary was widowed and came to Scotland in 1561.<br />
<br />
With the Protestants now in charge, he was little more than a troublesome noble at court. However, he became restless and turbulent, and made violent attacks on other barons, hatched conspiracies against the Government, and was at length imprisoned in late 1562, and then banished from the kingdom, for a conspiracy against the Earl of Moray (Mary's Protestant half-brother). Walsingham, the English spymaster, called him :- <b><i>'This glorious, rash, and hazardous young man'</i></b>. He was to be in exile until 1565, but continued the whole time to be in close correspondence with Mary. These two actually plotted that Darnley would make a good husband for her (little did they know how wrong they were!). Then, on his return, Mary chose one of her court, Jean Gordon, to be his wife and gave a generous wedding gift. Her image is below. None appears to exist for Anna, although she has been descirbed as being dark and of latin appearance, so not a tall blonde it appears.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRGFTzCc_zFcdwh4BAn3M9XJHYqmbvFSXsm4QFygw_S_SbG4gmTLtsD9geW_A7UZEDAsQuEbUc0P_anstohH3xInnKdgCl00ThmffI7HlaGIzMURla0sa5Js0VjUv32R7b3RWsDGij_Rk/s1600/Jean+Gordon.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRGFTzCc_zFcdwh4BAn3M9XJHYqmbvFSXsm4QFygw_S_SbG4gmTLtsD9geW_A7UZEDAsQuEbUc0P_anstohH3xInnKdgCl00ThmffI7HlaGIzMURla0sa5Js0VjUv32R7b3RWsDGij_Rk/s320/Jean+Gordon.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Before this, however, Anna had spent several years in Scotland until 1563 and the main reason is suspected to be, that she had Bothwell's child; his only son William. She was probably both exceedingly vexed and still in love with this scoundrel. She wrote him an impassioned letter of undying love that became a possible <b>'Casket Letter'</b> (ie. secret letters written by Mary to Bothwell before Darnley's murder). It seemed to matter little to him however. Indeed it was said of Bothwell's character :-<br />
<b><i><blockquote>The Earl of Bedford wrote of him to Cecil, 'I assure you Bothwell is as naughty a man as liveth,' and accused him of crimes of which 'it is a shame even to speak.' There were scandalous reports widely spread respecting his connection with a certain Lady Reres, and her sister Janet Beaton, both disreputably associated at a later period with Queen Mary and him.</b></i></blockquote><br />
Because I've dealt with it in the other post, I'll leave aside his main crimes of murdering Darnley (Mary's second husband and a cousin of Elizabeth I) by explosion, stabbing and strangulation in February 1567 and his scandalous affair with Mary. Even if they plotted her kidnapping and story of being "ravished" at Dunbar Castle, soon after in April 1567, it would have been totally in keeping with his style. Let's not forget he still had his own wife and had had an affair with their servant, resulting in their divorce in May 1567, just a week before he marries Mary and then let's not forget goings on with:- <b><i>"a certain Lady Reres and her sister Janet Beaton"</b></i>. OMG! Why Errol Flynn, Richard Burton, even Tiger Woods of a few years ago, and the rest of them, are starting to look tame by comparison. Oh, I almost forgot, throw in getting Mary pregnant with twins before the sham kidnapping! He was indeed <b><i>"as naughty a man as liveth".</b></i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiieXeAplKZPy_t2oXUKs3Imp3uGcTs8s2dAZFLF5zBg9SCtRHRkwISwia-Z4L48UQSwCgY77rDgLJyJbrCJxGmqzgOVhwCOSkZ9oth7jdF3p7XOzTaaeohAGgzoGfPJU3Zw8dL9daPZCQ/s1600/Bothwell+++Mary.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiieXeAplKZPy_t2oXUKs3Imp3uGcTs8s2dAZFLF5zBg9SCtRHRkwISwia-Z4L48UQSwCgY77rDgLJyJbrCJxGmqzgOVhwCOSkZ9oth7jdF3p7XOzTaaeohAGgzoGfPJU3Zw8dL9daPZCQ/s320/Bothwell+++Mary.jpeg" /></a></div><br />
Now all this happened in 'Life Cycles' terms, when Mary was in her age 24 'Year of Revolution' and Bothwell was conceivably in his own age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways', so it was one almighty mess of a period of 'Confluence' and the only time they were 'Confluent' together. We left Bothwell, in June of 1567, kissing Mary in front of the army of the Protestant Lords and galloping off into the sunset to try and raise an army abroad. Mind you, he only just escaped Scotland with his life, but this cat seemed to have plenty. So, where to next?<br />
<br />
Well truth is stranger than fiction, because his travels lead him almost straight to the city of Bergin in Norway, where he was detained for lack of proper exit papers. Who should happen to be living in Bergin at the same time? You guessed it - Anna! His goose was cooked. She made sure his detainment turned into imprisonment in Rosenkrantz Tower on the order of her cousin the viceroy of Denmark. He had to face charges of having <b><i>"three wive's alive"</b></i> (ie. Mary, Jean Gordon and Anna herself). She sought restitution of her sizable dowry. A woman scorned you see.<br />
<br />
He settled the dowry out of court offering her as restitution one of his ships and promising her an additional annuity, which he never was able to pay, as he never regained his freedom. The scoundrel knew she'd never see a penny. The King of Denmark had taken notice of him as a political pawn. Elizabeth I was calling for Bothwell's extradition back to Scotland to stand trial for the murder of Darnley. Rather than turn him over to England, the Danish King transferred Bothwell from Malmo to Dragsholm Castle. Bothwell aided his cause by showing papers to King Frederick II, proving he had regency over the Orkney and Shetland Islands and could potentially, with Mary's help, cede this to the Danes, who had long coveted them. He was an expert in playing 'both ends against the middle'. He was thus treated generously, allowed to wear velvet clothes, read books and occasionally go hunting or shooting under guard.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQvoN1SKEhziDoOvEtvOeM5Sc3_xuNRJgVfSGERM3GPTjYAu-hORfsZEK0d7C3hBiAsGoidwP_LwNDOG6HWZuSbTF7uq8lU2PSQSmVrA9iVVVkt6UgrC2VstaHy4kZ3U4b7q7XttwPyBk/s1600/The+Final+Night.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQvoN1SKEhziDoOvEtvOeM5Sc3_xuNRJgVfSGERM3GPTjYAu-hORfsZEK0d7C3hBiAsGoidwP_LwNDOG6HWZuSbTF7uq8lU2PSQSmVrA9iVVVkt6UgrC2VstaHy4kZ3U4b7q7XttwPyBk/s320/The+Final+Night.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Now the final piece of his life is as shrouded in mystery as most of the rest of it. The usual story put about is that once Mary's supporters in Scotland had begun to crumble, his influence and plotting to return the Orkney and Shetland islands to Denmark, all vanished and he was put in close confinement (ie. in chains). This was in June 1573 and again quite possibly in his age 36 'Year of Revolution'. It was said he lived out a miserable existence and went insane and dying five years later.<br />
<br />
However, there's another version of events that I like even better. A certain mercenary officer, one Captain John Clark, had been sent to facilitate an extradition, however he had somehow fallen foul of Frederick II and instead, ended up a prisoner in Dragsholm Castle, along with Bothwell. This actually happened. Now Bothwell was always larger than life an a great gambler and opportunist and in <b><i>Queen of Scots - The True Life of Mary</b></i> by John Guy, it was stated that Bothwell and Clark buried the hatchet and both being professional Scots military men, became buddies. "By June 1578, their unbridled drinking and revelry had taken its toll and first Clark died of excessive drinking and even Bothwell's ox-like constitution started to collapse." Reports reached London that "he is great but swollen and not yet dead." <br />
<br />
More intrigue follows as Mary's supporters on the continent claim he made a deathbed confession exonerating Mary of all responsibility for Darnley's murder. He died of liver or kidney failure, without so much as a final word. Now that's more like it wouldn't you say? In fact, I'm going to suppose an imaginary final day for Clark and Bothwell. I'm going to add to the Bothwell legend and hell, it's my blog and if I want to, I can rewrite a little bit of history:- "quhatsumevir thing yo shall desyre."<br />
<br />
OK, their final day together in June 1578, was spent by a morning hunt with each claiming a stag. Exhausted by their labours, they read and rested for the afternoon and then Bothwell tells their gaoler, that he has a secret map of buried treasure somewhere in the Orkney Isles, and in exchange for an evening's entertainment, he can have it. Then, they duly summon a couple of wenches into their quarters and spend their last night on earth, feasting on roasted venison, and then drinking and carousing and carousing and drinking some more, till they are so spent they can't stand upright. Their last deed is to clink their goblet's, toast each others health and then pass out, never to awaken.<br />
<br />
I always remember this poem I read many years ago called :- <b><i>"Oh, Let Me Die A Young Man's Death"</b></i>. Why, I can hear Bothwell roaring with laughter down the corridors of eternity......................<i><i>"So be it. Thou impudent scribe. So be it!"</i></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-27989498314499850352014-02-26T19:28:00.000-08:002014-02-26T20:27:57.655-08:00Unfulfilled - Michael Hutchence and 'Life Cycles'<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1adEsN8KFTeB7hNPtsjoLkeKiyta5yVpHlodsArnAZjkyRAPCNiiYCRoUwe5CbBL9DDEYFZ67gD2YHXGDE-asSZAoaRLkackVxD3EGSgjAVvTaH6mAMfYpbo6PjJ07N3PXuNCu6LtKzU/s1600/Michael-Hutchence-photo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1adEsN8KFTeB7hNPtsjoLkeKiyta5yVpHlodsArnAZjkyRAPCNiiYCRoUwe5CbBL9DDEYFZ67gD2YHXGDE-asSZAoaRLkackVxD3EGSgjAVvTaH6mAMfYpbo6PjJ07N3PXuNCu6LtKzU/s400/Michael-Hutchence-photo.jpg" /></a></div>INXS are suddenly big news all over again. There was an excellent TV documentary, that made everyone realise just what a talented band they were. Their greatest hits album has rocketed them to the top for the first time in 24 years. But alas, without front man Michael Hutchence, things were never the same. His death really did "...Tear Us Apart". They brought the remaining members back for a TV interview and it was obvious how conflicted they still felt about his passing.<br />
<br />
Why do I feature Michael in this post? His untimely demise happened in his 37th year and not his 36th. What does 'Life Cycles' have to say about him, that is derived directly from the hit TV Show "Never Tear Us Apart"? I know what I do is not an exact science, and the fact that I study events in my 'significant years' first and foremost, has the potential to create allegations of subjectivity. <br />
<br />
I was actually at his hotel -The Ritz-Carlton at Double Bay- on the day he died, to attend a birthday function. I saw some small candlelight tributes, but there were no crowds. His death proved unusually messy in terms of allegations and meant that the focus was not on his achievements. So, let's backtrack a little. <br />
<br />
The first 'significant year' of Michael we'll visit is his age 19 'Year of Broken Pathways' (Jan. 22nd, 1979 to Jan. 22nd, 1980). This was a big year in the career of INXS. In this year they transformed from a band called "The Farriss Brothers", who were supporting leading local band, "Midnight Oil", and had a manager, who wanted them to become a big-time Christian rock band (believe it or not!): into a band called INXS, with a new manager called Chris Murphy.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj28tQ4s2xL566RZ8J0XacT2i3GXU1qFtyQejBVea3Mt3wWgeO_DntrKlZqCnR2lTlA7HwaVZp7K3gupzCvtoqJ-qdy1ugYRoW_jBqYaLb7VrTwGTkVWRTiK5o9ASitSdToT4FXp1-WXHY/s1600/INXS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj28tQ4s2xL566RZ8J0XacT2i3GXU1qFtyQejBVea3Mt3wWgeO_DntrKlZqCnR2lTlA7HwaVZp7K3gupzCvtoqJ-qdy1ugYRoW_jBqYaLb7VrTwGTkVWRTiK5o9ASitSdToT4FXp1-WXHY/s320/INXS.jpg" /></a></div><br />
The TV show covers the accidental discovery of the name, which was a combination of English band XTC (ecstacy) and Australian jam makers IXL (literally 'I excel'). It also shows how the band solicited Murphy, who refused saying he didn't want to do it. However, when he did, he soon negotiated a 5 album record deal. Their success wouldn't have happened without Murphy. It was the genesis of the band, and Hutchence was totally transformed by it. His challenge was to sell their new image through lots of hard work, touring pubs and clubs.<br />
<br />
Now we skip to Hutchence's next 'significant year', which was his age 24 'Year of Revolution' (basically all of 1984). What happened then for him? Did it see a new age/direction ushered in, as the theory would say? The answer to this is 'yes'. Murphy had directed the band to start working in the US, and in 1983 they toured as support act for artists like Adam and the Ants, The Kinks and Hall & Oats. <br />
<br />
Then in April, 1984 the album called 'The Swing' was released and it proved to be their first major international success. It was also their first international recording project, done in New York and the UK. It reached No.1 in France, Argentina and Australia (but not in the US or UK). The song 'Original Sin' was seen as controversial in the 'Bible Belt' states (they were certainly not a Christian band now). The TV show highlights Michael's pure joy when he learns of the No.1 in France, while in a Paris Hotel. <br />
<br />
This was to begin an era of dominance on the world stage. It was to culminate some 7 years later with the famous sell-out concert at Wembley Stadium in July, 1991. This 7 year journey in a forward direction, until there is a direction-change and uphill climb, is fundamental to 'Life Cycles' theory. It was this way for Michael. He was 'at the highest point' that night, but looming in the near future were a series of disappointing events.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2ODbEfTZ7c2YQDU-g-9W9c5Abei1b2pejQA4-pVSblHzUO26e_deabRD0v4D4Q6fty3bIUx2I4VNA9qCeOGXVI06m9zmwrJ5Y7lbx0VIUYNHPmDG6sH-ldkYAXmsdpYvdMhyIaedST3U/s1600/Hutchence+at+Wembley.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2ODbEfTZ7c2YQDU-g-9W9c5Abei1b2pejQA4-pVSblHzUO26e_deabRD0v4D4Q6fty3bIUx2I4VNA9qCeOGXVI06m9zmwrJ5Y7lbx0VIUYNHPmDG6sH-ldkYAXmsdpYvdMhyIaedST3U/s320/Hutchence+at+Wembley.jpg" /></a></div><br />
They released a live album, based on filming of the Wembley concert, in Nov. 1991, but it wasn't well received, critically or commercially. Also in 1991, still within Michael's age 31 'Year of Broken Pathways'; they began recording their next album 'Welcome To Wherever You Are' in Sydney. They tried to establish a new direction for themselves, using a 60 piece orchestra and sitars. Upon release in August, 1992, it reached No.1 in UK, but had much less success in the US and Australia. Also the band was criticised for taking part in the 'Concert for Life' fundraiser in Centennial Park, which was affected by bad weather. <br />
<br />
However, the most disturbing event happened to Michael in 1992, when he was in Copenhagen. He got into a scuffle with a taxi driver and fell to the ground hitting his head. This caused him to lose his sense of taste and smell and to create violent, unpredictable mood swings. Basically he wasn't the same after this. Several years of diminished success followed. In fact, after the release of the album 'Full Moon, Dirty Hearts' in Nov. 1993, the band took several years off to be with their families. The album had mixed reviews and was their last recorded by Atlantic in the States.<br />
<br />
Now we enter the important, age 36, mid-life 'Year of Revolution' of Michael Hutchence (1996). I'm forever thankful to the producers of "Never Tear Us Apart" for making my job easier. I doubt I could have found the detail I wanted, without reading the full biography and I have already stated I'm actually a poor reader of books. Anyway, we now cut to two scenes in the documentary, which tells the story and I do my best to pinpoint the date of these.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5eoiYByiyHJ9aF-Xii8WNHVxlXY6dn5CfuJf8r-SxLm988CGXLkh4CUmXmlFZzW2ByX4FlOCAHaNKhXO0hHbwqdqZGYCuOtvdSH-arGBvwGhyphenhyphen19VMeLFA4YG4obM-MWEp6rZL41HaBZ8/s1600/never+tear+us+apart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5eoiYByiyHJ9aF-Xii8WNHVxlXY6dn5CfuJf8r-SxLm988CGXLkh4CUmXmlFZzW2ByX4FlOCAHaNKhXO0hHbwqdqZGYCuOtvdSH-arGBvwGhyphenhyphen19VMeLFA4YG4obM-MWEp6rZL41HaBZ8/s320/never+tear+us+apart.jpg" /></a></div><br />
The first shows Hutchence talking with his ex-girlfriend and long-time confidant, Michele Bennett, about how he was thinking of "breaking up with the band". She chided him about always talking 'break-ups' with her and said he belonged 'on the road'. Then there is a scene showing Andrew Farriss (co-writer of all INXS's hits along with Hutchence), talking about being separated a lot from Michael and saying that it may be time to quit the band. He actually responded to a fellow incredulous band member, by saying "it's like the end of a cycle." Yes, those exact words.<br />
<br />
Now my research tells me that the group began rehearsals for their comeback album 'Elegantly Wasted' in April, 1996 in London. So, I'm playing detective here, but the next scene in the doco shows a pivotal moment when Farriss and Hutchence meet and Farriss leads by indicating he has thought about their futures. What would he say? He didn't say "let's split up", instead he says "let's get back to basics and start writing like we did before". This to me is an important moment in both lives and could well have happened just prior to April, 1996. Why do I care so much? What's in it for me? I also must state I don't know the full answer, it's my best guess.<br />
<br />
OK. Andrew Farriss, co-writer of the music half of the duo was born Mar. 27th, 1959, so he was also 36 in the period Mar. 1995 to Mar. 1996. He and Hutchence shared about 2 months of 'Confluence' (ie. mutual time in their 'significant years'). This is generally meant to enhance empathy and understanding. So, the rapprochement of Andrew and Michael could have occurred in this very period (ie. Jan. 22nd to Mar. 27th, 1996).<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfR-eJa-OcCQFbIL-Q-9Gfl7BbekK9zdg94oJAzE931PhP_fS3MinDZDhoHFZ6x8ArmGa_lfts6Ib-zirEsubSgz-Hw-_mSdsqyL29ZjbFGBhuEppql9KEB2Xo5KZLbqtz9I11vUnBrTU/s1600/tigerlilybirthday.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfR-eJa-OcCQFbIL-Q-9Gfl7BbekK9zdg94oJAzE931PhP_fS3MinDZDhoHFZ6x8ArmGa_lfts6Ib-zirEsubSgz-Hw-_mSdsqyL29ZjbFGBhuEppql9KEB2Xo5KZLbqtz9I11vUnBrTU/s320/tigerlilybirthday.jpg" /></a></div><br />
However, there was an event much greater than this in Michael's central, mid-life 'Year of Revolution'. It was to be the birth of his only child, his daughter Tiger Lily on July, 22nd. His partner, Paula Yates had begun living openly with Hutchence, while still being married to Bob Geldorf in 1995. They divorced in May, 1996 and set in train a bitter custody dispute for their own three daughters. The acrimony embroiled Hutchence and was to be a major contributing factor in his untimely death. <br />
<br />
Yate's fated love affair with Hutchence also featured a period of 'Confluence' (she was born Apr. 24th, 1959 and so she shared 3 months with Michael). She was aged 36 when she separated from Geldorf. The much greater period of totally unrealised 'Confluence' however was between Michael and Tiger Lily (would have been 6 months for every 'significant year'). I have written on this before, but I believe there is no greater or more fated bond in all of 'Life Cycles', than that between a parent in their age 36 'Year of Revolution' and their newly born child. <br />
<br />
So much was unfulfilled in Michael's tragic death and none more so, than to see his daughter develop and grow. She looked very much like him and I'm sure you would also echo my good wishes for her coming adulthood, as she is soon to be aged 18 (the legal adulthood year in Australia). <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635297152491754597.post-75234399314269248912014-01-26T14:49:00.000-08:002014-01-26T14:49:56.487-08:00How Many Other Robert John's Are There?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJ6ksTuia-DaBqjWt7FlmM4YVYNUAAuY_DRGARPGGFvDic4x1hDKPYnU4XBkEiEBOOV8Jh_n6cYKfp5sKNLfY4N5l9bJVKbhLH9zd81JKzkFX-JQQ7BqjSSFqDsBsMzE-7q6I1JyXDO60/s1600/Robert+Johns.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJ6ksTuia-DaBqjWt7FlmM4YVYNUAAuY_DRGARPGGFvDic4x1hDKPYnU4XBkEiEBOOV8Jh_n6cYKfp5sKNLfY4N5l9bJVKbhLH9zd81JKzkFX-JQQ7BqjSSFqDsBsMzE-7q6I1JyXDO60/s320/Robert+Johns.jpg" /></a></div>Unless you followed the minor coverage given to Robert Clinton Johns in 2012, this title would be meaningless. However, he represents an instructive story of just what is wrong with the current easy availability of all sorts of weaponry and the ineffectiveness of the mental health system to screen for potential trouble. And I'm talking trouble of the James Holmes or Adam Lanza kind. Now does that grab your attention? Let's wind the clock back to mid-2012....<br />
<br />
I was visiting San Francisco for a couple of days. when I decided to read the Saturday edition of the San Fran. Chronicle. On page one was the story of a homeless man, one Robert Clinton Johns, who has been arrested for possessing illegal weapons, When officers searched his vehicle, which he lived out of, they found his arsenal of weaponry; with 5800 rounds of ammunition, at least 9 handguns and rifles and numerous knives (plus survival equipment, a methamphetamine 'cook book', and a telescopic sight). It would be no exageration to say he was 'armed to the back teeth'. He also had complied a list of top politicians' names (eg. the President, Vice- President and Speaker of The House). This took place on July, 21 the day after James Holmes killed 12 and wounded 58 at a movie theatre in Aurora, Colarado.<br />
<br />
This was disturbing enough in itself, but even more disturbing was the fact, that only three weeks ago police had searched the same car of the same man, who had been having several run-ins over his strange behavior and found a shotgun and .22 rifle. Apparently at this time he had been talking of "harming a family member". They impounded the guns and took him to a psychiatric hospital for evaluation, but he was released by the hospital inside the mandatory 72 hour detention period. This raises a plethora of questions. Firstly how did he manage to put together a new gun collection three weeks after his guns were confiscated? Surely his strange behavior should have sparked a full psychiatric evaluation, with ongoing treatment and not just a quick release? Could he have been another potential James Holmes (or even a Lee Harvey Oswald)? The answer to these questions raised in the press at the time is "probably not", but that is not the issue here.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYnGTWANXKduYMSJfJbOOxRjNsSOmnFJlyANkmG5SwTUtrKrmINqsVZ2npt4ub-fc43vxvdCbKLY2qudVOlV-u2y_mkBLBKifE9GwhrQv7l5R16JTZDr4SSy0MoIB89zZ6RvrltbJsh-k/s1600/Weapons+Cache.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYnGTWANXKduYMSJfJbOOxRjNsSOmnFJlyANkmG5SwTUtrKrmINqsVZ2npt4ub-fc43vxvdCbKLY2qudVOlV-u2y_mkBLBKifE9GwhrQv7l5R16JTZDr4SSy0MoIB89zZ6RvrltbJsh-k/s400/Weapons+Cache.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Police arrived as he was pulling out of his parking lot at Golden Gate Park. Since Johns earlier said he didn't have a driver's licence, he was stopped and when he got out police spotted a sawn-off shotgun in the door compartment, and that led to the discovery of his weapons cache. It could have turned out much differently. Police were only sent to check him out, because four days earlier he was reported for harassing members of a Haight District Yoga Studio. This was a fortunate chain of events for the police, who would have suffered if he had used those weapons.<br />
<br />
What do I have to say about all this with my 'Life Cycles' cap on? Well 'Life Cycles' simply says that in everyone's life there is an upheaval and start of a new age/direction every 12 years. This first year of the cycle is when big changes usually occur and it is known as the 'Year of Revolution'. Thus it happens at 12,24,36.48 etc. If you turn to crime, then in some cases it can be the year that sees you commit the crime /start on the road that sees you later commit the crime/get caught or some big breakthrough/get sentenced or released etc. In other words it can mark some milestone of your criminal life. <br />
<br />
OK, let's look at James Holmes first. He was aged 24 and in his first adult 'Year of Revolution', when he turned from a citizen with a clean record into a mass murderer. It now emerges that he was having behavioral issues, including failing a key oral exam and withdrawing from his Ph.D course, and having contact with the student mental health service. It also appears that he was basically a loner, who had an increasing obesessional interest in Batman and particularly the character 'The Joker'. There is no doubt his life was in a state of turmoil and upheaval, and represented just about the most extreme negative version of what can happen in a 'Year of Revolution'. However from a criminal standpoint, he had no prior convictions and no contact with police. Since his arrest, his behavior in court so far, can best be described as bizarre.<br />
<br />
Now let's turn to Robert Johns. He is aged 37 and is thus just a short period since his important mid-life, age 36, 'Year of Revolution'. I would want to know what happened to him when he was aged 36. It transpired he had a criminal record and was "busted for domestic assault" and was admitted to a Correctional facility in Barboursville, West Virginia just 12 months prior. So it was domestic abuse that led to a short prison sentence at 36, which in turn led to where he was in 2012. So his erratic behavior, which drew him into contact with police on several occasions, does not suggest a careful strategy to harm others, like the sinister James Holmes had. However I always stress :- I'm not a fortune teller, and in any event I maintain we have free will at all times, and therefore no-one can precisely know the future. His case, to me, seems as much a failure of the system to manage his mental health issues, as it is of a potential copy-cat mass murderer.<br />
<br />
My question back in 2012 was simply:- "Was Robert Johns the next James Holmes?" Johns probably rues the unfortunate coincidence of the dates, but his case does raise the far more telling question for 2013 :- " How many other Robert Johns are out there right now?"<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831219021529377067noreply@blogger.com0