Charles and his clan were in the City of London. At a certain location it was insisted that they were in the center of the Earth. Conceited, no? Londoners have a point.

Stand in the center of the City. Draw a circle about you at one meter. Draw another at two meters. Repeat twenty million times. You have constructed a 1:1 bulls-eye map of the world that contains the entire world in perfect circles with no missing space or extra terrain. Therefore you are in the center of the Earth. QED Of course this works for everyplace on the face of the Earth. If you look at latitude lines, every globe has already done this for the North Pole. If you are from New Zealand every globe has already done this for the South Pole. Just tilt the pole over your favorite location and you are done. Send two eagles in opposite directions at the antipodes and they will come to you at your omphalos.

Londoners have a point, but they’re wrong. The Omphalos is the Redwood in Palo Alto. The Omphalos is the Yogo Mine in Lewistown.


Thematic Apperception Tests

I made some bad mistakes. I listened to what some of the songs I love are supposed to mean. The Fool on the Hill is one of my favorite songs. The people consider the man on the hill crazy. They see the sun rise and set, but he sees the world spinning round. He is obviously a Copernican astronomer with a correct view of reality which can only bee seen in the minds eye. An archetypal wise fool. I love the image, and I love the notion of the archetype making it into a popular song.

Then I listened to Paul McCartney’s explanation. He mumbled through an incoherent explanation which had nothing to do with the truth I had so carefully built up. His other explanations of his songs also emptied my soul a trifle.

It was not fair of me. I had gone through a thematic apperception test. I had built a fantasy out of my own unconscious and had expected his ideas to fit me better than my own mind. No one could do that.


As I understand it, the Thematic Apperception Test was developed by a psychologist who observed the reactions of people to the art of Edward Hopper. These realistic paintings are so empty that people project themselves and their stories into the frame. One is shown, say, the nearly empty midnight diner of Nighthawks and asked to tell the psychologist what is happening in the painting. The themes have to come from the subject, because they are not in the painting to be perceived.


Edward Hopper’s Office in a Small City always reminds me of Bozeman, Montana when I lived there. More, I see South of Babcock Avenue and somewhere east of Tracy. Quite a fantasy for a painting which cannot depict anything nearer than a thousand miles from there. And one I see although I know I have reversed North and South. The apperception persists.

When I listened to an explanation of Coldplay’s When I Ruled the World I merely convinced myself that the reviewer was a dunderhead.

The song is so obviously about redemption. For what profits a man, if he gains the whole world, and loses his soul? The narrator gave up the world, which he used to rule as a god-emperor, to save his soul. The Roman Emperors thought of themselves as ruling the world. To the north they ruled to the dark forests which they did not desire. To the south they ruled to the impassable desert. To the west, the endless ocean sea. They knew the Parthians were to the east but beyond the desert. The Jerusalem bells were ringing in the holy land which the Emperors controlled. Roman Cavalry Choirs singing. Roman troops of course sang cadences and had horns and drums for battle commands. As humans, of course they sang. But there was one time when they sang which was important. When the troops sang out ‘Ave Imperator’ they declared one fit to command Romans. Whence ‘Emperor,’ for only such a man could be declared emperor.

Is my view of this song even remotely representative of the artists’ ideas? Possibly not. I don’t want to know. I know that to refuse to learn the truth is the path to delusion and insanity, but I don’t care. I have had too many songs wrecked for me already.

Robin Hood and The Redistribution of Wealth


It’s the interminable election season in America. Every four years we hear all the antique arguments. Maturity lends one a permanent Déjà vu. Or in my case a mental stutter. ‘But, but, but, that’s not true!’ Since I was ten years old I have heard it said that ‘Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor.’ And, therefore – somehow – it is the role of government to emulate this Thirteenth Century fellow. Well, OK. I guess that would make sense. If the role of the government were to emulate armed robbery.

But that’s not what Robin Hood did. Prince John, a legitimate regent before becoming a legitimate king, a pillar of the ruling class of his day, raised taxes. He primarily raised taxes on the wealthy because they were the ones with, well, wealth. The legitimate government raised taxed to the point where people were becoming poorer. The taxes were applied rigidly, without mercy, and at the point of the sword. Same as it ever was. Robin Hood stole from the government and returned the money to the people.

If lowering taxes and taking money and lands from to government and giving them back to the people resembles any group, well it does not resemble those who claim the mantle of Robin Hood. Those who demand greater government control of land, weapons, money, and people more accurately resemble Prince John.