Castaneda Dissection

[cloud recluse]

So,is anyone up for a Castaneda debate ? My favourite references for this are Richard de Mille's CASTANEDAS JOURNEY ,as well as THE DON JUAN PAPERS:FURTHER CASTANEDA CONTROVERSIES that he edited.Also Amy Wallaces SORCERERS APPRENTICE:MY LIFE WITH CARLOS CASTANEDA is a must!Im in the mood to sling some venom about,& will start of by saying that his 'feildwork' was plagiarism,his 'wisdom' fraught with a cowardly fear of intimacy,his" shamanism" ripped off from pop-occultism,his teacher an unconvincing composite of his university lecturers and his legacy the misogynistic exploitation & disempowerment of his personal students (some nice bits of poetry here & there though).There,that should be enough to start the ball rolling,someone out there MUST disagree with me Regards,Cloud.

[Mandrake]

Somewhere I found a link discussing this. Essentially the other claimed that he may have used aliases and a set up story to conceal his teachers or something. Will try to find it.

 

Don Juan Matus, Real or imagined?:

http://www.geocities.com/the_wanderling/don_juan.html

 

 

 

Castaneda

http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/carlos.html

 

 

 

Even though the books may be fiction, they contain a lot of good thoughts in a nice setting!

 

Mandrake

[cloud recluse]

Ya,there is definetely inspiring stuff in there,if taken as fiction,and he probably met people from various actual traditions.But he used his "work' to get a Ph.D ,& evenyually set up what only can be called a cult.And mixed in with the wisdom of the ages is the neuroses of the current age.I do find it kind of interesting to track the origins of his anecdotes.Like many compulsive liars,he derived his fictions from fact.Ithink its in the book on Tensegrity that he states how Don Juan caught him off guard one day by commenting that Carlos was getting a bit podgy.The actual incident was repoted many years earlier,I think by a UCLA colleague,who noted Carlos' surprise when she said that very thing to him,& how it was one of the few times he didnt seem to be in control of his responses.So what Im proposing is twofold.For the info-obsessive like myself,working out the 'Ordinary Reality' of Castaneda-I dont actually hope to accomplish this,but I think its fun-and,more relevant to the Tao Bums perhaps,assesing the actual 'wisdom' of Castaneda,whatever its alleged source.When is it inspiring,when is is toxic?That sort of thing. Regards,Cloud.

[cloud recluse]

Mandrake,just looked at those links.THANKYOU Now Ive got to actually read them Regards,Cloud

[Trunk]

So,is anyone up for a Castaneda debate ? My favourite references for this...

Regards,Cloud.

I'm not clear on your contention. Are you stating that your view is that Castaneda himself was a fraud re: unusual mystical training entirely? Or that he actually did have a mystical training but skewed it for writing purposes? Or that no such mystical traditions exist in central america, or perhaps anywhere?

[cloud recluse]

I'm not clear on your contention. Are you stating that your view is that Castaneda himself was a fraud re: unusual mystical training entirely? Or that he actually did have a mystical training but skewed it for writing purposes? Or that no such mystical traditions exist in central america, or perhaps anywhere?

My SUSPICION is that Castaneda ripped off feildnotes from other anthropologists & presented it as his own,mixed in with encounters from various sources in pop-occultism & a lot of tall tales This got him a PhD & a ready made audience.I dont think his life bears the fruit of any real practice,just a cunning spin on self-promotion,and saddling the study of real central american traditions with a lot of baggage.I think he was a fraud of no significant attainment,and towards the end crumbled into a abusive exploiter unable to live up to even half of his mythology.I think his books,which make a wonderful addition to the fiction section of any library,do contain a few pearls of wisdom,but they also have a lot of justifications for his own neurosis.I think its a shame that so many peoples first notions of the central american traditions are by way of his 'work',I think its time he was forgotten,and Im happy to be proved wrong on any of this,or even just proved to be unreasonably harsh. I do think such mystical traditions exist,I just dont think hes relevant to them Regards,Cloud.

[thaddeus]

My SUSPICION is that Castaneda ripped off feildnotes from other anthropologists & presented it as his own,mixed in with encounters from various sources in pop-occultism & a lot of tall tales This got him a PhD & a ready made audience.I dont think his life bears the fruit of any real practice,just a cunning spin on self-promotion,and saddling the study of real central american traditions with a lot of baggage.I think he was a fraud of no significant attainment,and towards the end crumbled into a abusive exploiter unable to live up to even half of his mythology.I think his books,which make a wonderful addition to the fiction section of any library,do contain a few pearls of wisdom,but they also have a lot of justifications for his own neurosis.I think its a shame that so many peoples first notions of the central american traditions are by way of his 'work',I think its time he was forgotten,and Im happy to be proved wrong on any of this,or even just proved to be unreasonably harsh. I do think such mystical traditions exist,I just dont think hes relevant to them Regards,Cloud.

I think what you are saying is most likely 'true' with the exception of the statement about being a 'fraud with no significant attainment'. His contribution since the 60s is unquestionably signficant. Many 'teachers' now quote him and his wisdom including chopra, dyer--whatever you may think of them, we can't say they are not 'signficant'. My only contention with what you write is that Castaneda was soo interesting that there is a ton of literature out there exposing him in various lights. I don't think there are many people out there who would fare much better in such scrutiny--even ourselves.

T

[cloud recluse]

I think what you are saying is most likely 'true' with the exception of the statement about being a 'fraud with no significant attainment'. His contribution since the 60s is unquestionably signficant. Many 'teachers' now quote him and his wisdom including chopra, dyer--whatever you may think of them, we can't say they are not 'signficant'. My only contention with what you write is that Castaneda was soo interesting that there is a ton of literature out there exposing him in various lights. I don't think there are many people out there who would fare much better in such scrutiny--even ourselves.

T

By "atainment",I was referring to spiritual attainment.I am not denying for a second his impact on the New age ,or whichever term might be suitable.And it is this that makes him interesting,how did so much come out of so little,why did people buy it,and keep buying it for so long?How much is wisdom,how much is destructive ? At this moment ,I do think a lot of people,including ordinary "unspiritual" people, would fare a lot better under the scrutiny that Castaneda struggled so desperately to avoid.While its true that Ive fucked up massively in my own life,and will most likely do so again,I dont have to conceal the origins of my "feildwork" to protect a PhD gained through plagairism.And while my spiritual practice is fairly basic and unglamourous,at least it exists.Castaneda just seems to have set up a cult to collect vulnerable women in,and the odd male to intimidate too,while claiming that ALL other spiritual paths were false & hypocritical.

 

I actually think he was a very sick & destructive person to be around,and at best is a bit of an embarresment.But then,thinking about what Ive just wrote,exactly the same things have been said about me !! Hmmm.Thaddeus,you may have a point,Im not sure I seem to be driven by a particular desire to trash him,far more so than other 'fallen' gurus.Whatever my motives,I think spiritual celebrities should be subject to INTENSE scrutiny,and should at least be capable of the integrity that the ordinary 'uninitiated' display on a daily basis Regards,Cloud.

Edited April 26, 2006 by cloud recluse

[spyrelx]

Castaneda was the first truly esoteric stuff I read, and I've read all but the last of his books. Ultimately I came to believe (on my own, w/o reading any of the critiques of his work) that he had ripped off other spiritual practices (including Daoism) and made up most if not all of it.

 

Regardless of what anyone thinks of the above statement, I think this much is clear -- he did not chronicle any sort of system that could be followed. All the books and programs over the last few years that use references to him, the Yaquis, etc. are just basically using his name and a few catchphrases to sell some sort of (other, wholly made up) system that doesn't really track his books.

 

So, I think delving into his stuff is ultimately not a very efficient use of time if you're trying to get somewhere spiritually. Better to find a system that actually IS a system, where there's a verifiable history of people who've gone through it and come out the other side with some actual benefits. Nothing related to Castaneda fits that description.

[sean]

I seem to be driven by a particular desire to trash him,far more so than other 'fallen' gurus.Whatever my motives,I think spiritual celebrities should be subject to INTENSE scrutiny,and should at least be capable of the integrity that the ordinary 'uninitiated' display on a daily basis Regards,Cloud.

We all have our trigger points, and I think they are frequently doorways to our own shadows. Something like Byron Katie's "The Work" process, the "3-2-1 Shadow Work Process" and the "Hoffman Quadrinity Process" are really great practices to open up these areas of ourselves. For me it almost makes my spontaneous negative reactions appear like little presents wrapped in dogshit ... I know if I do the work and dig under the crud that I'll find a great resource that got buried somehow.

 

Second, I agree that gurus, teachers, masters, and coaches should all be held to high standards. And so should students. No one ever talks about how students abuse teachers and yet it's probably more common. This doesn't really apply to Castaneda so much (was he even a teacher?), but just speaking generally, no matter how enlightened a person is, I think it takes incredibly courage to put yourself out there, center stage to bring a message and try to help, and take on the reality that you will be criticized, you will be hated and loved and back again, you will have all of your students fantasies of what enlightenment is projected on to you, you will have to eat more psychic garbage in your life than two thousand humble monks, and in the end you will probably let down and disappoint people as much as you manage to ease their suffering. "The passions of delusion are inexhaustible. I vow to extinguish them all at once."

 

Sean

[cloud recluse]

We all have our trigger points, and I think they are frequently doorways to our own shadows. Something like Byron Katie's "The Work" process, the "3-2-1 Shadow Work Process" and the "Hoffman Quadrinity Process" are really great practices to open up these areas of ourselves. For me it almost makes my spontaneous negative reactions appear like little presents wrapped in dogshit ... I know if I do the work and dig under the crud that I'll find a great resource that got buried somehow.

 

Second, I agree that gurus, teachers, masters, and coaches should all be held to high standards. And so should students. No one ever talks about how students abuse teachers and yet it's probably more common. This doesn't really apply to Castaneda so much (was he even a teacher?), but just speaking generally, no matter how enlightened a person is, I think it takes incredibly courage to put yourself out there, center stage to bring a message and try to help, and take on the reality that you will be criticized, you will be hated and loved and back again, you will have all of your students fantasies of what enlightenment is projected on to you, you will have to eat more psychic garbage in your life than two thousand humble monks, and in the end you will probably let down and disappoint people as much as you manage to ease their suffering. "The passions of delusion are inexhaustible. I vow to extinguish them all at once."

 

Sean

All valid points...BUT ( drumroll as mighty revelation prepares to be unleashed ),I think Castaneda was a particularly 'good' example of a bad teacher,perhaps one of the hokiest.His life seems to expose the 'guru' syndrome with clarity.While he wasnt Jim Jones,he damaged a lot of people.I havent followed it up lately,but at the time of writing SORCERERS APPRENTICE,Amy wallace had good grounds for speculating that Castanedas death was followed by a suicide pact amongst his direct students !!If so,he DID NOT empower these people.Rather , he magnified their instability with his cruelty.He ends up looking like poison,pure & simple.

YES there are students who dehumanise their teachers by elevating them to godhood & then persecuting them for their inevitable human failings,despite the Teachers sincere efforts to awaken them.BUT ( another drumroll perhaps) there doesnt seem to be any sincerity in Castenedas final dealings with his own students! Just predation !He may have been sincere,albeit confused,earlier on in the mythology he invented,I dont know.But he was also running a scam on UCLA,allready setting a dubious precedent.So later on,when vulnerable people came to him for help,he more or less scammed them to death!

Oh God I seem to be getting worked up again.First the Happy Easter thread & now this.Sorry to everyone for banging on about this,but I do seriously think Castaneda is an important case study in the guru syndrome,PARTICULARLY because of his wide influence! Begging your Indulgence,Cloud.

Edited April 26, 2006 by cloud recluse

[sean]

No, you may well have very valid criticisms here cloud_recluse and it's good to bring things like this to the community. Outrage at inhumanity can be a natural, healthy response IMO and staying silent about evil that we perceive because we don't want to upset a delicate new age wonderland isn't noble. I know nothing about Castaneda's life. I read one of his books in my late teens and dug it, and then did some of the practices from a Victor Sanchez book that made practical excercise out of his work ... but besides that I have no knowledge of the man and I've learned a lot from your writings here.

[cloud recluse]

... I read one of his books in my late teens and dug it, and then did some of the practices from a Victor Sanchez book that made practical excercise out of his work ...

Likewise,I came across his stuff in my late teens.Didnt really grasp it then,but the image of the shaman/warrior/sorcerer in a central american setting pushed some buttons(Much more so than the pseudomasonic rites of the Golden Dawn,for example).But part of that appeal for me also was its validating of my own habits of emotional repression & avoidance of intimacy.Lots of"lone warrior,loving only the (impersonal)earth" bullshit.Fortunately ,real life,in the form of very patient freinds,succeded in smashing through my pseudo"stoic" act.Ive skimmed over Victor Sanchez' stuff,but not really taken it in.Does his approach allow for intimacy ?That would definetely be one up on Castaneda.

 

If I recall,Sanchez said hes validated a lot of Castanedas stuff as actual shamanism,and a lot of Castanedas stuff seems to have been culled from the genuine work of other UCLA anthropologists actually working in central america(as well as from the popoccultism of the 60s & 70s). Regards,Cloud.

Edited April 26, 2006 by cloud recluse

[Pietro]

Interesting topic.

 

I know much less on Castaneda life, but I did make up my mind.

 

The story is made up. No doubt about that. But I don't think he did it with ill intentin at the beginning. I do recall reading a site saying how the first book was mostly written as a tongue in cheek joke. But then it had success. And this brings on problems. Because it is not easy in this world to be satisfied with your job. So he might have found himself at different point in his life with no job or dream or guide or whatever. Essentially lost. And if anything like that have happened the memory of the success that his previous books had would have been a grear source pushing him toward continuing the trend. We all need to eat, although not all of us accept to lie to eat. Think about how often have you found someone having success with a book and then writing others, just at a very lower quality. I think the only book worth something is his third book, ... to ixland. And I still suggest it specifying that is the only one worth something and that the facts are actual fiction. If you take that book and you dissect it you have 3 type of experiences. Stories of power his interaction with Don Juan, description of energetic excercises, and pieces of philosophy. The first is probably made up to make the book more interesting and explain his point, the second is not learnable through a book, and it seem that it was mostly taken by his energetic teacher (H. L. Howard Lee?), but the third is really interesting. Where does that come from? Well, do you remember that C.C. was doing a PhD thesis in his first book, right? Well the professor was: Erving Goffman (according to a friend of mine who used Castaneda stuff for some time, before deciding it was pseudoculture and not culture). Now Goffman book titles are:

The presentation of self in everyday life;

Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience;

Strategic Interaction,

and others

 

Can you see how they might contain the philosophy that Castaneda was presenting. I have tried to look at those books, but they seem to be REALLY hard to understand. And it is not a matter that it is academic and I am not use to academic, because I work at the uni. It is that 'anthropological academy' is generally written in a very obscure way. Often to obfuscate the fact that some of the things said are quite obvious. And then the whole field followed the trend. So I am sure some (most?) of the meat is there. Just unavailable for most people. Well Castaneda has been able to make some parts of it available so much that other teachers do refer to it. I think this is good, and probably it was part of his ming.

 

But I would love to know more about the origins of his philosophy and where to get that.

[cloud recluse]

 

.... I would love to know more about the origins of his philosophy and where to get that.

 

I would say start with the two R.de Mille books I mentioned in post 1.Ive also had a quick glance at the links from Mandrake in post 2,& they look promising.It really depends on how much detective work you want to do.More recently,there is Victor Sanchez, who looks interesting.I dont know how much his claims of anthropological authenticity have been scrutinised yet,but he seems to give a clear cut presentation of some of the same concepts that CC was proposing.I vaguely recall a guy named Runyan Wilde analysing Castaneda from an esoteric standpoint in the magazine PSYCHEDELIC ILLUMINATIONS,but that was a question of effectivness,not origins.

 

I supppose for me my main interest is the integrity of these concepts that CC popularised.When is he being insightful (be it 'borrowed' insights or not ),& when is he perpetuating repackaged crap.Does anyone see a downside in his philosophy ? I will happily go into detail on my opinions on that,but I want to see if others have s

sensed a sour note in his tune.

 

Regards,Cloud.

[Pietro]

I would say start with the two R.de Mille books I mentioned in post 1.Ive also had a quick glance at the links from Mandrake in post 2,& they look promising.It really depends on how much detective work you want to do.More recently,there is Victor Sanchez, who looks interesting.I dont know how much his claims of anthropological authenticity have been scrutinised yet,but he seems to give a clear cut presentation of some of the same concepts that CC was proposing.I vaguely recall a guy named Runyan Wilde analysing Castaneda from an esoteric standpoint in the magazine PSYCHEDELIC ILLUMINATIONS,but that was a question of effectivness,not origins.

 

I supppose for me my main interest is the integrity of these concepts that CC popularised.When is he being insightful (be it 'borrowed' insights or not ),& when is he perpetuating repackaged crap.Does anyone see a downside in his philosophy ? I will happily go into detail on my opinions on that,but I want to see if others have s

sensed a sour note in his tune.

 

Regards,Cloud.

 

I read and practiced Sanchez stuff some years ago. But my understanding was that he was deriving it from Castaneda. So he was downstream from him. Now that I think of I remember reading a one page interview to someone who was pretending he was Castaneda, this in the period between his first 3 books and the others. And this guy saying something like: 'yeah, there is this other guy who goes around, saying he is me'.

 

All together I think I would more look to academic material or proper original anthropological material. No other Guru who learned from a 'secret teacher'.

[thelerner]

As I recall, Michael Winn was of the opinion that Castenedas stuff was setting students up as psychic 'fresh meat' for the spirit world.

 

Not my area of expertise, but a unique angle.

 

Michael

[Pietro]

As I recall, Michael Winn was of the opinion that Castenedas stuff was setting students up as psychic 'fresh meat' for the spirit world.

 

Not my area of expertise, but a unique angle.

 

Michael

Yes, I remember the post. But it was based upon Castaneda describing Don Juan as being trapped in some place beyond the world. Practically it was based upon the assumption that Don Juan was actually there, at least until he wasn't anymore

[cloud recluse]

I read and practiced Sanchez stuff some years ago. But my understanding was that he was deriving it from Castaneda. So he was downstream from him. Now that I think of I remember reading a one page interview to someone who was pretending he was Castaneda, this in the period between his first 3 books and the others. And this guy saying something like: 'yeah, there is this other guy who goes around, saying he is me'.

 

All together I think I would more look to academic material or proper original anthropological material. No other Guru who learned from a 'secret teacher'.

 

So does anybody know if Sanchez has been subjected to the same scrutiny theyve tried to apply to CC.I ask because Sanchez is much more accesible,much more high profile than CC.Has anyone taken a serious look at his feildwork ?That would be very interesting Regards,Cloud.

[affenbrot]

I havent followed it up lately,but at the time of writing SORCERERS APPRENTICE,Amy wallace had good grounds for speculating that Castanedas death was followed by a suicide pact amongst his direct students !!If so,he DID NOT empower these people.Rather , he magnified their instability with his cruelty.He ends up looking like poison,pure & simple.

 

i just received Amy Wallace's book yesterday. I had ordered it because it was mentioned

by you in this thread...

I was hooked on Castaneda books for quite some time. I think it influenced me quite a bit,

though I'm not sure at all wether to the good or not....

Now starting to read the story of amy wallace feels like a final shutting down of my private Castaneda case...

like " Castaneda 3 - the final solution " or such. Really very interesting to learn about the person behind it.

so thanks for that hint!

 

affenbrot

[neimad]

i thoroughly enjoyed castanedas books. they too were some of my first spiritual books i ever read, having read most of them a couple of times even.

 

 

i actually think the books were full of powerful knowledge. if one could look beyond all the strange stuff that appeared entirely fictional (ultimately though, who are we to decide what is fiction and what is not? have you got what you believe to be real and possible so grounded in this reality that you could never even conceive that such bizarre things could occur? well good luck to you trying to tear down the walls of the matrix and achieve enlightenment! cos that limiting belief is gonna ensure you never get there!) and looked to the central theme throughout which was the path of a warrior.

 

bombs of knowledge.

 

there might only have been one tiny little nugget of gold buried every 5-10 pages.... but it made it all the more fun because of it.

 

 

whether the books were fictional or not. whether he ripped it off, or not. whether he had no spiritual attainment, or not.... is of no concern to me.

 

i chase knowledge and knowledge only.... regardless of the source, there can be power hidden in words. i'm even beginning to find that humatons speak knowledge all the time even if they aren't aware of it.... it's just about learning to listen.

 

if the universe is a hologram, then truth must surely be contained within every single element of it...... discerning that truth from the most seperate seeming part of the whole, is where the magic lies.

 

 

 

besides... any of you meet carlos himself?

i'll bag mantak chia because i actually met the dude and didn't like his personal vibration one bit..... but hey, i'm open to the idea that he could have been wearing a 'jacket' that is an intentional personality to hide who one is.

[freeform]

i'm even beginning to find that humatons speak knowledge all the time even if they aren't aware of it.... it's just about learning to listen.

 

 

[cloud recluse]

i thoroughly enjoyed castanedas books. they too were some of my first spiritual books i ever read, having read most of them a couple of times even.

i actually think the books were full of powerful knowledge. if one could look beyond all the strange stuff that appeared entirely fictional (ultimately though, who are we to decide what is fiction and what is not? have you got what you believe to be real and possible so grounded in this reality that you could never even conceive that such bizarre things could occur? well good luck to you trying to tear down the walls of the matrix and achieve enlightenment! cos that limiting belief is gonna ensure you never get there!) and looked to the central theme throughout which was the path of a warrior.

 

bombs of knowledge.

 

there might only have been one tiny little nugget of gold buried every 5-10 pages.... but it made it all the more fun because of it.

whether the books were fictional or not. whether he ripped it off, or not. whether he had no spiritual attainment, or not.... is of no concern to me.

.....

 

Neimad,your timimng is spooky

I was just contemplating sending you this as a private message,but now Ill do it on this thread.

 

If you havent allready,I STRONGLY recommend you check out Victor Sanchez's THE TEACHINGS OF DON CARLOS,as well as his THE TOLTEC PATH OF RECAPITULATION.He really makes all that stuff useable & accesible.If CCs tales are inspiring to you,I think you would find this stuff really useful.As well as formulating specific exercises for the individual,he comes up with group practices as well.

 

Sanchez claims to have verified his stuff as authentic indegenous practice,though he also makes his own explicit modifications.Whatever its source,it doesnt seem to have Castanedas morbid fear of contact running through it,while still allowing you to work with the themes CC popularised in a real how-to practical way.

 

Sanchez also wrote the foreward to another practiacl peice called EARTHWALKS by James Endredy full if cool soundind ideas.Seriously,if you find yourself responding to CCs fiction,you really should at least have a go at the Sanchez stuff.

 

Regards,Cloud

[cloud recluse]

i just received Amy Wallace's book yesterday. I had ordered it because it was mentioned

by you in this thread...

I was hooked on Castaneda books for quite some time. I think it influenced me quite a bit,

though I'm not sure at all wether to the good or not....

Now starting to read the story of amy wallace feels like a final shutting down of my private Castaneda case...

like " Castaneda 3 - the final solution " or such. Really very interesting to learn about the person behind it.

so thanks for that hint!

 

affenbrot

 

Glad its useful.When I was much younger,I was initially impressed with the first few CC books.But in retrospect,as a total package (apart from any question of them misrepresenting indigenous traditions) I felt that they reinforced my adolescent fears of emotional vulnerability & heightened my capacities for neurotic isolation.Self-reliance is a necessity,but the Earth is not a sufficient lover,& the desire for contact is not a weakness!In fact,made conscious,its a strength!!!!!

 

Some aspects of his early work can be inspiring fiction,but so is Neitzches ZARATHUSTRA,& Freddy didnt seem to feel the need to present that as feildwork!!

 

Regards,Cloud

Edited June 24, 2006 by cloud recluse

[ramus]

Interesting topic.

 

I know much less on Castaneda life, but I did make up my mind.

 

The story is made up. No doubt about that. But I don't think he did it with ill intentin at the beginning. I do recall reading a site saying how the first book was mostly written as a tongue in cheek joke. But then it had success. And this brings on problems. Because it is not easy in this world to be satisfied with your job. So he might have found himself at different point in his life with no job or dream or guide or whatever. Essentially lost. And if anything like that have happened the memory of the success that his previous books had would have been a grear source pushing him toward continuing the trend. We all need to eat, although not all of us accept to lie to eat. Think about how often have you found someone having success with a book and then writing others, just at a very lower quality. I think the only book worth something is his third book, ... to ixland. And I still suggest it specifying that is the only one worth something and that the facts are actual fiction. If you take that book and you dissect it you have 3 type of experiences. Stories of power his interaction with Don Juan, description of energetic excercises, and pieces of philosophy. The first is probably made up to make the book more interesting and explain his point, the second is not learnable through a book, and it seem that it was mostly taken by his energetic teacher (H. L. Howard Lee?), but the third is really interesting. Where does that come from? Well, do you remember that C.C. was doing a PhD thesis in his first book, right? Well the professor was: Erving Goffman (according to a friend of mine who used Castaneda stuff for some time, before deciding it was pseudoculture and not culture). Now Goffman book titles are:

The presentation of self in everyday life;

Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience;

Strategic Interaction,

and others

 

Can you see how they might contain the philosophy that Castaneda was presenting. I have tried to look at those books, but they seem to be REALLY hard to understand. And it is not a matter that it is academic and I am not use to academic, because I work at the uni. It is that 'anthropological academy' is generally written in a very obscure way. Often to obfuscate the fact that some of the things said are quite obvious. And then the whole field followed the trend. So I am sure some (most?) of the meat is there. Just unavailable for most people. Well Castaneda has been able to make some parts of it available so much that other teachers do refer to it. I think this is good, and probably it was part of his ming.

 

But I would love to know more about the origins of his philosophy and where to get that.

 

I totally agree with you about the fact that Carlos brought the theories of her teacher. Goffman in his books and in the way of the warrior that he describes. When I read Goffman I was very clear the connection.

As for H Lee did not know, Lee is certainly exceptional, but he since he started doing seminars began acting in a very little empathy, raising to 12 times the price!

Now we are in 3000 euros !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!

He lives in Bologna in Italy with his wife.

But it is very likely that Castaneda has created something all his own take on his travels around the various techniques from different traditions and teachers, we consider that C was a truly remarkable player among other things!