The New Victorians

 

by Jeffery Lewis

 

 

1. Back to Badger House--September 13, 2001

On this night, two days after the New York Trade Center attack I have the following dream which contains a very peculiar . . . ambience, feeling . . . smell:

I return with my daughter from The Towers, the big dorm in Madison, Wisconsin which figured in a premonitory dream about the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York which I just wrote about in a piece called, "The Sleep of the Towers," to Badger House, the three story rooming house I lived in when a student at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in the 1960s.

Mariah, my daughter, and I climb the stairs into the building up to the second floor where my room was located. I have been away for some time, at least overnight, but just how long is not clear in the dream. As we reach the top of the stairs I see a key with a tag tied to it outside the door of a room I take to be my own. There is a note with the key from the landlord explaining to the tenant of the room that he, the landlord, found the room unlocked during the evening and locked it for the tenant so that it would not remain open all night when the tenant was away. The note also explains there is a $15.00 fee for this service.

I then see another door down the hall with the same key and the same note. What is this I wonder, a deja vu, like in The Matrix, meaning The Matrix has changed something in the dream? No, I decide, this is actually the door to my room though it is not in the same place, rather over in the corner of the room . . . as if opening on the Blair Witch basement where if one looks into the room, instead of into the corner, one would see the identity of the murderer. So, something has been changed. The hallway is not the same, my room is not the same and the door is in a different place. Yes, obviously, The Matrix, the computer program in operation in dreaming? has changed things. But why?

And these superficial changes are not the only ones, the whole house has been remodeled. I don't notice this until upstairs in the hall. But the hall has a . . . Victorian feeling. There are ornate decorative wood work, heavy maroon rugs, dark drapes, elaborate lighting fixtures and . . . something else! What is it?

Neo was here, that's what it is! I can feel Neo, the Keanu Reeves character, hero of The Matrix, here in the hall somehow with us. Just how is not clear but I can sense him, feel him, like a presence, a smell, a kind of emanation in the house as if he was in the wall almost. I can see him, too, in my mind. He too, is in Victorian garb, a maroon smoking jacket with big lapels, some kind of soft, satiny pants, maybe slippers, like someone out of a Sherlock Holmes mystery.

Mariah and I go up to my door and sure enough, it's deja vu all over again. There's the same key in front of my door, with the same note from the landlord and the same request I pay the $15.00 fee. (number of The Devil Tarot card) The key with the tag on it, looks frankly, like a piece of evidence in some murder case from the police properties room.

My sense is I've only been gone "overnight" but if that is the case . . . how did all these changes take place? It would take months at the very least to remodel the entire house in this fashion. In actual fact, I am aware, I have been gone nearly 35 years from this house, ever since the year I had the single most terrifying nightmare of my life inside that locked up room.

A chilling thought occurs to me as I stand here outside the door remembering that nightmare, I have been gone that long, 35 years and am now just returning to the scene . . . of the crime. Maybe I'm dead? Maybe I was killed in there in that room so many years ago and am just now, like some kind of Rip Van Winkle ghost returning to the site to understand it for the first time? Maybe what happened in there was real? Maybe that nightmare was real?

And what about now, this Victorian now? Because that is my sense of it. This now, this 2001, is Victorian. This is not the past, this is the future I am visiting, and that future is Victorian, like the peculiar Victorian hotel room at the conclusion of Kubrick's 2001. The Matrix, despite all its special effects, its screamingly up-to-date computer theme, its sleek leather coats and black glasses is Victorian. So is 2001. They are Victorian and I think I know why because I remember what happened in the center of that locked room. I think I know why it has been locked all these years. And now I am going to open it and show you just why Neo is such a prude.

2. The Rape In 1966 or 1967

 

I had the following nightmare in this room which I find locked up like a murder site some 34-35 years later.

In this nightmare I am in bed in my room in Badger House. I am about to make love to a woman who was my girl friend in my senior year in high school, my freshman and sophomore years in college. Her name is Adrien. She is lying on the bed below me and I am between her legs about to enter her, "know her." Just as I am about to do so the door to my room slams open and Adrien's father bursts into the room. His head is on fire like a nuclear fireball. At the sight of him I freeze, turn to stone. I cannot move, breathe, scream. The last thing I know before I wake up is Adrien's father is about to rape me from behind and there is not one thing I can do about it.

This dream had a profound effect on me. It was of a different quality and intensity than any other dream I had ever had. I had never experienced terror this profound, nor had I ever "turned to stone" in a dream like this before.

Although I had dated Adrien for up to three years I never did sleep with her and was not seeing her at the time of this dream; and although her father did not like me he certainly did not hate me with an intensity quite this murderous! So why would I have such a profound nightmare about her and her father? It has taken me fully 35 or so years to find the keys to open this dream's door. I will attempt to do so here.

 

3. The Dark One

One of the "keys" to opening the meaning of this dream is the name "Adrien." It means "the dark one." It has a number of forms including Adria, Adrienne, Adrian, Adrien, etc. Adrian is the masculine version of the name. So, in attempting to "know Adrien" I was attempting to know, understand "the dark." The dark of what? "Sleeping with" Adrien suggests, of course, sleep and dreaming, so, very simply, the dream depicts me attempting to know, understand dreaming.

But if this is the case, that in having sex with or knowing Adrien I would be knowing the dark of dreams and sleep then why the extravagant response, the virulent hatred of her father? As I said, her father did not like me, but this? This murderous hatred? Why? Certainly the simple investigation of dreaming does not warrant this . . . ferocious response, does it?

 

4. The Father

Some years ago in dealing with this nightmare in a different writing it occurred to me that, because Adiren was a practicing Christian, her "father" might just . . . possibly be that Father! Meaning God, Jehovah. Now, if that was the case, my total terror, my turning to stone in my bed made some sense. But again, even if this was that father, that Father, with a capital "F" then did God hate me because I was trying to have sex with one of his "daughters?" Jeez, if that was the case than God, that Father, was one mean, over-protective son-of-a-bitch!

So, though that explanation, that Adrien's father was God, The Father, accounted for my terror, it still did not explain the extremity of his, His Anger. Plus, plus, I never had "slept with" his damn daughter in the first place, so whatever was my crime here, it couldn't be simple desire to have sex, it had to be something else, something about that name maybe. It had to be something about the dark, the dark side. It had to be something about Adrien's father, maybe Father, maybe God, not wanting me to know about "the dark," or the dark side. It had to be a something about the dark, a secret so terrible, that any attempt to know it was a "crime" punishable by this kind of nightmare in which I was literally frightened to death and ceased any serious attempt to "know dreaming."

 

5. Rosemary's Baby

The next "key" to this nightmare came when I re-watched the Roman Polanski film from 1968, Rosemary's Baby. I re-watched this film five or six years ago in the course of researching films like it, including The Exorcist. I had a theory that these films had some kind of profound and mysterious connection to the history of the times around them. After all, Rosemary's Baby, a film in which a woman played by Mia Farrow is raped and impregnated by Satan came out in 1968. If there was ever a year in which "Satan's child" was alive and screwing up the world it was 1968. The film depicts a group of Satanists led by one Roman Castavet as being responsible for this rape, impregnation of Rosemary. In exchange for this favor, this offering of Rosemary to carry Satan's child, all those involved in providing her will have various wishes fulfilled by the devil. Guy, Rosemary's husband, a struggling actor played by John Casavetes, suddenly receives parts he has craved for allowing Rosemary to be drugged and raped. The people already in these parts have, of course, to be removed by illness or death before Guy can succeed them.

I saw this film in 1968 in the midst of the "removals," assassinations of King and Kennedy, the terrific political turmoil resulting from Viet Nam and found it to be one of the scariest films I had ever seen, like a black hole on the brightest of summer days.

Now, on re-seeing it seemed even . . . scarier, but in ways I had not anticipated back in 1968. For instance, the film, and the Ira Levin book upon which it was based seemed to foresee, intuit a whole "cult of actors" making a deal with the dark side, to impregnate "Rosemary," or history, with these awful events of 1968 in order to . . . achieve success.

This implied people like Nixon had made this kind of "deal" with the dark side of Christianity to impregnate 1968 with these awful events including assassinations and terrible riots . . . in order to "get parts," get elected.

But certainly Nixon and his cohorts including the likes of Billy Graham did not perform Satanic rituals in the White House! Perhaps, Christianity, itself, had made, involved this kind of deal, a secret covenant with the dark side in order to achieve success, conquer the world for the Kingdom of God. What a scary thought! Then one reading could be the book and the movie foresaw this, depicted this sort of deal an entire religion, culture was making in the context of the genre of horror, the Faustian deal with the Devil. This implied there was a whole generation of "actors" on the political and other stages who had made such a "deal" albeit unconscious, with the dark side in order to defeat the youth movement of the 60's and remain in power. If this was the case then it was a very different way of looking at films, art; that an era would summon, as it were, the art to illuminate it. But then an even scarier thought struck me. In fact this one was so scary I recalled the paralysis I experienced in the Badger House dream while chills ran up and down my spine.

 

6. The Fathers of Monsters

 

Rosemary's Baby depicts a Satanic ritual which summons Satan to come rape and impregnate a woman, Rosemary, offered to him against her will. In exchange for this favor he, Satan, provides those involved in the summoning, the ceremony, the offering of the woman, with success. My thought was is there any difference between actors doing this in a film, and an actual Satanic cult doing it in reality? In other words these actors, film makers, producers, directors were playing with power, with magic spells, with "entities" they had no conception how to handle--they were "taking the dark side in vain," and were the actual engine pushing the train of 1968. If, as I now believed and had seen hundreds of examples in my dreams, the power of art was real, that artists were real creators, then certainly that power, if misunderstood, taken "in vain," might be misused in this fashion. Rosemary's Baby then, was the act of creation, the actual deal with Satan, success in exchange for a child, responsible for the "baby," the demonic events of 1968.

 

7. Questions

Moreover then, these "unreal," yet real summonings of evil, monsters, endless hellraisings in a thousand movies, ten thousand books, over and over like some kind of terrible repetition compulsion might be a real source of evil on the planet. Examining the repetition of such ceremonies, summonings of the dark might explain the reasons some are inexplicably blessed, others damned.

The success of Levin's book then, would be based upon such a deal with the dark side that is more or less permanently in place in the covenants of our religions. Same for Mia Farrow's sudden and fantastic rise to fame; it would in part, be based upon her willingness to summon this child . . . unknowingly into reality, all the while maintaining the illusion of the film, that nothing we are doing up here is real. The success of such books, movies and all associated with them would depend upon . . . the reality of the dark below the Satanic ceremony acted out in the film remaining in the dark. Meaning we--the viewers, the public--will all agree to a suspension of reality with them--the actors in the film up on the stage of the screen--that "we're just play acting up here pretending we're summoning Satan, pretending we're making deals with evil, pretending we're impregnating innocent people, but we're not actually doing anything real!" And we, the audience, pretend a variation on the same thing "they are not doing anything real up there, nothing we see in the real world comes as a consequence of this pretend ceremony in a mere movie."

 

 

8. This is not a Movie, This is Real!

Then there's someone like me who, oh so tentatively, connects a supposed "impotent" play act of creation like the making of Rosemary's Baby to a legion of Frankenstein's monster Adrians smashing about murderously through the late 60s and wonders . . . are the two connected? Wonders "is Rosemary's Baby the father of these children? Their Dr. Frankenstein? Did this film, and those who made it, father upon an unsuspecting year the 'Adrian' in the black crib at the end of the film?" Was I looking at a completely hidden, totally unexamined kind of causation hidden in the dark? If I was and this causation could only be seen, "known" down in the dark of the Pandora's box where reality is manifested then I had an answer to the question "why did Adrien's Father hate me?"

I made a run through of some of the major scale films I knew and historical events around them in examining this hypothesis. I discovered the near nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island happened the same year as the film China Syndrome, which features a similar nuclear event. The Exorcist spawned an hysteria of religious conversions based upon the sexual possession of children (the Youth Movement of the 60s) by demons and might well be behind the rise of that other Reagan, Ronald. Chernobyl, the meltdown explosion of an "alien," Russian nuclear plant occurred the same year Aliens with its thermonuclear explosion ending of the powerplant on the planet LV-426 came out. Cameron's, The Abyss, filmed in an abandoned nuclear reactor of the Cherokee Nuclear Plant in North Carolina premiered the same year Hurricane Hugo slammed into the coast of that state. The Id Monster firebombing of the White House in Independence Day occurred immediately prior to Clinton's sexual dalliance with Monica Lewinsky and nearly brought down his presidency. Might it be more accurate to see the giant disc of the alien ship hovering over the White house as being driven by the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? And now, sadly, the World Trade center bombing seems intimately connected by more than simple coincidence to a score or more films including Independence Day, True Lies and Pearl Harbor. It seemed these films, as much as any other terrorist source were the Godzilla tromping down in the dark of Adrien below the streets of New York to create a . . . fascist, Kingdom of God state. These were but a few of the connections that could be made between films and news events in immediate proximity in time.

Yeah, well here was a darkness so dark any "father" of these Adrians, these Rosemary's babies, would probably murder anyone attempting to explore the issue of patrimony let alone reveal it. This dark was the very "roots of evil" down in the dark of the "garden" of Adrien and the nightmare indicated Adrien's father did not want anyone exploring that dark. Yes, here in fact seemed to be a motive for the murderous hatred.

 

9. God, the Father

Then the ultimate chill of realization ran down my spine. "God," Adrien's Father, was merely a cover, a Wizard of Oz screen for these very real human creators, "fathers," unwilling to own up to their power, let alone the Frankenstein monsters they were making. The Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz God in our churches was a screen we use to hide behind in order to avoid responsibility for the monstrous progeny we raise unknowingly knowingly from the dark to bless us, raise God's Kingdom, destroy His-our enemies. God does these things, not me! Satan does these horrible, unspeakable things . . . not me! "I saw the face, the reality of evil in new York, but it was not me!"

When we speak of a tragedy as an "act of God we cannot understand" we are simply saying we are not willing to understand, not willing to face the deal with the dark side we have made in order to be blessed by "God." We are not even willing to look as the "seen" is transitory and human while the "unseen" is eternal, to use terms mentioned at the memorial for Trade Center victims at St. Patrick's Cathedral.. This is another way of saying you cannot look down in the dark. That is the "unseen" and it is the eternal secret of God who will kill you if you do look. Not God, we will kill you if you look and reveal the roots of evil in our garden. When we say these things, this history like 1968, is "beyond understanding" we mean we are unwilling to understand, unwilling to connect our own acts of creation to those children, those assassinations, those riots and wars which have blessed us, given us, like Rudy Guiliani, important parts, center stage to play them on.

 

10. Adrian Marcato

Another key thing I noticed re-viewing Rosemary's Baby was the name "Adrian" in it. Roman Castavet, the leader of the Satanic sect along with his wife Minnie, responsible for the abduction of Rosemary is the son of a black magician, Adrian Marcato. Marcato is infamous for his alleged involvement in a murder which occurred at the Dakota Apartments in the past where both Rosemary and her husband, Guy, are tenants right next door to the Castavets. Certainly it is a powerful "coincidence" that John Lennon was shot and killed outside these same Dakota Apartments where the film was shot, his real blood staining the same sidewalk as the unreal blood of the young woman who leaps to her death from the Castavet's apartment. Yes, Lennon's assassination is another of the "Adrian monsters" that could be connected to the child of Satan up in the black crib of the film.

"Hail Adrian!" crows old Roman Castavet, his own name an anagram of Adrian Marcato, to hide his own lineage, to the child in the crib. "Hail Adrian!" the assembled cult shouts in response celebrating this "unholy birth" of the dark force which will overcome the powers of light in the coming years. The hair curls up on the back of my neck and the chills run down my spine as I, for the first time, connect this name, Adrian, the dark one, to the woman I was attempting to sleep with in the old Badger House nightmare. I was trying to "know" Adrien. I, like Adam perhaps, was trying to "know" the garden including the dark side, the roots of evil down in the dark. My, god! does that make me . . . Satan? Was I attempting to father an "Adrian" down in the dark! Was I, am I that horrible raping snake eyed demon clawing red scratches across Rosemary's breasts? Did I father all those horrible things?

I must admit, for a few moments I sat in horror with my head in my hands like the poor damned fellow in the Hell of Michelangelo's Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel. But then I looked at myself in that dream again. Was I anything like that demon in the film? No. Was I a slobbering, lusting beast forcing myself on an unwilling woman? No. In fact I would say of myself in that dream prior to the appearance of Adrien's Father, that I was near delirious with joy at the prospect of making love to this willing and beautiful woman. There was no forcing her on my part. There were no screams, no objections--nothing that could be construed as anything but enthusiastic consent from her. Was I making love to her to make a child? Certainly not! I was in no way prepared to be a father at that time. If I wanted to "father" anything it was my joy at how beautiful, how utterly extraordinary sex was, is. If anything, the appearance of Adrien's Father, his possession of me . . .. forced me to be a "father."

But, but here I was in this compromising position like the one in the film when Rosemary is raped. I was "in the position" of Satan raping Rosemary. I was in the position of Satan but not anything even approximating how that film, or thousands of others depict him. I was not like him! Another thought crept into consciousness on little cat feet.

Could it be "Satan" is nothing like the figure of evil in the Christian Church? Could it be "Satan" is, say, more like Lucifer, which means "light?" Could it be that is what I am attempting to do here, bring simple light to the dark, to the dark of the womb, to the dark of the roots of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which is the "sin" for which Adam and Eve get tossed out of the Garden by God, the Father? Is that the "sin," the disobedience for which Lucifer, the light is tossed out of Heaven? That would mean . . . there is no light in Heaven where God is equated with the unseen.

And in case you haven't seen it, which I didn't until just recently, this is where 2001 begins to fit into the picture. 2001 also was a product of 1968--quite a year, 1968, for films! 2001, also involves a child, a "Star Child," who appears, is born miraculously and virgin, from the desiccated husk of astronaut Bowman in the glowing Victorian hotel room at the end of the film.

And, of course, this child, this mysterious Star Child, Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark's prophecy for 2001, was conceived without sex though the spacecraft is shaped like a sperm and the trip through the Star Gate is like an orgasm, yet there is no sex in it! No plain old human sex can do these miraculous things! Ah, but a black censoring square of a Monolith can cover it up!

Rosemary's baby, Adrian, in the black crib, and Bowman's Baby, the Star Child, are twins. They are two sides of the same coin. Rosemary's Baby, the film, and 2001, the film, are twins. They are two sides of the same creative act, or two sides of the same fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and evil.

Yes, and there is no light in Hollywood.

 

11. The Primal Scene

Let's run through this nightmare again with the aid of these keys, larger layers of meaning to see if we can get a complete picture of it and why I think it is responsible for a New Victorianism.

On one level this dream depicts the sin of Adam and Eve, or at least of Adam. Eve, or Adrien's role here is "passive." Unless, of course, her "father" may be seen as her projection, her alter ego, and her "box," like Pandora's, a weapon. She "offers me" the apple of carnal knowledge including "the dark," or the roots of creation down in the dark or, say, dreams. However, she probably does not know that she is, by offering me this "apple," this knowledge of the dark, of the roots of evil as well as good, breaking her Father's rule. "Thou shalt not know the knowledge of this tree" is that rule. Or am I being far too generous to our Adrien here? Is she tempting me to "know her apple" and then blaming me for the monstrous progeny that result?

Why shouldn't I eat of the fruit of this knowledge, know this dark? Very simply because knowledge of those roots would demonstrate that "God" fathers these children of evil down in the dark of the Garden, that he is, in fact, a black magician, uses the dark side to further his own Kingdom. But then is God, the Father, Adrien's, the church's projection, her Oedipal complex come down to kill any suitor, any threat to overcome it, reveal her dark? Is He, say, the cut off penis, creation power of Uranus? Is she, Adiren, Gaia, who has her husband, Uranus, castrated so that she make make any child she desires, without male consort, down in the dark to further her rule? Does she then 'rise" from this bed of castration and violent possession to become Aphrodite, the myth of female beauty, the beauty of the Virgin without a dark side?

Possibly. Probably. How does He-she do this?

He-she does this by the sexual possession of me, of "Adam" from behind. Genesis, this Garden where the evil that is planted cannot be known, is "planted in the past" from the future in order to produce The kingdom of God. He "enters" me, replaces me, a human father and creator, to sexually father these dark events that drive history in a certain direction. I am turned to, converted to stone. I am so frightened by this possession, this rape from behind I "turn to stone." Scripture is another word for stone. I turn to stories written in stone which manifest in reality through Adrien's womb, her "mysteries." I am turned to endless horror stories, where I, "Lucifer," the light, am the vile beast, "Satan." No other story is allowed. The garden, the womb of creation is cursed by this and bears progeny of monsters like 1968 or 1939 or any other year fathered by "Adrien's Father." Adrien's Father is Adrian Marcato, a black magician. Adrian Marcato is a projection of Adrien, she is the "dark one." Is their any other conclusion I can come to?

Ah, but this is a "twin tower" of creation here! Not only is this Adrian, this child of the dark fathered through me, us, but so is the Star Child, the Messiah, fathered through us while we are turned to stone. We are turned to stone so that we do not see how this conception of the Star Child occurs.

It does not occur out in "Jupiter Space!" It does not occur down a worm hole accompanied by orgasmic light show as is depicted in end of 2001! The "virgin birth" of the Star Child is not a mystery wrapped in an enigma of a Victorian hotel room the meaning of which has been debated down these 30 some years and still baffles us! No, the Star child is created virgin by the secret and unconsented to sex, by the terrible metaphysical rape like the rape of Leda or Europa in the small dark bedroom of my room in badger House! This rape produces twins, two children, as did the rape of Leda by the God, Zeus, in swan form in Greek myth.

The rape produces Adrian and it produces the Star Child as a consequence, a reaction to Adrian. The rape produces the assassinations of the 60s and the Kingdom of God governments of Nixon and Reagan. The rape produces Richard Berkowitz and the Star Child of law and order terror so well depicted in Spike Lee's Summer of Sam. The rape produces the Trade Tower bombing and the Star Child total security state that will result from Bush's World War on Terrorism. These reactions to the existence of Adrian conceived in us by rape are The Kingdom of God.

 

12. The Child of Columbine

 

Practically everyone who has seen The Matrix is aware of its terrifying creative . . . proximity to the school shooting at Columbine High which shortly followed the film. Much has been made of Columbine as a "copy cat" crime modeled on aspects of the shootout at the closing of the film when Neo, Reeve's character, and Trinity are liberating Morpheus from the clutches of The Matrix agents. Had Klebold and Harris seen the film? Did they model their appearance on the leather clad, shade wearing, gun toting characters in it? Is there a direct connection to, for instance, the music of Marilyn Manson? There is no smoking gun and certainly creators like Manson are right to point out the world of films, novels, music, creation in general would be a small, cramped, dollhouse with nothing but a precious glass menagerie in it if artists had to worry about every single possible consequence of an "act of creation." Is the creative act the problem or is it the unexamined covenant with the dark that produces these monstrous children no matter the intentions of the creators?

But, there is a different kind of "smoking gun" in the dream. In fact I can "smell" it in the Return to Badger House dream. Maybe not a smell, though I can smell the smoking jacket Neo, Keanu Reeves is wearing. I can smell the varnished wood in the hall with its Victorian decor. I can "smell" the deja vu here which, in terms of the film, means The Matrix was here to change the scene. Not "the Matrix" in the film's sense, some overarching computer which controls everything--that is the mask the creators of the film are wearing to cover up a truth they are unwilling to face; a truth much more terrible and frightening than the one Neo, Reeves experiences with the famous red pill that shows him the "truth."

No, sorry Neo, sorry Keanu, the truth is The Matrix, the-overarching scriptural program with its God, its one true creator controls us, creates its reality through us, in the most appalling of ways possible to imagine. It rapes us, our "Father in Heaven," our own cut off creation power rapes us, possesses us, replaces us so He-she can plant Her garden of both good and unspeakable evil in our matrix, our womb. This is the "primal scene" scene in the Garden of Eden which Adam and Eve are endlessly punished for trying to see. This is the dark side the film veils in hysterical computer script to deny the abuse in the dark.

The primal scene, the rape in the garden is a sexual trauma so frightening, so painful it results in the sexual hysteria of a film like The Matrix, in which the true problem, the rape in the garden of our sexual being is turned into possession by a computer! How chaste! In The Matrix there is no sex except the clumsy and violent penetrations by machines into the back or dream brains of the characters. They have made it sexless, without any connections to the reality around us, including those most powerful of institutions, our religions and our governments.

In The Matrix the "garden" of our sexual being where these possessions occur is turned into the vast special effect farm of the computer with its hydroponic plant "crop." The time when it occurred, the Genesis of the Bible where Adrian's Father "enters me from behind" at Badger House to alter the future becomes "the future" when computers have taken over. In fact, the worst has already happened and is happening now.

And what is the "price" for this chaste, sexless ark, supposedly about Morpheus, about dreaming, but which has nothing about actual dreaming in it? What price did the participants have to pay in order to ride on this castrated computer ship carrying Neo, The Chosen One, Morpheus and Trinity that does nothing to shed light on the actual dark where the Adrian children are created? Of course you know! Of course you can connect the dream dots of these Cyphers who would prefer the steak of computer generated success to the terrible truth of rape in the dream dark. The Frankenstein baby unintentionally-intentionally conceived down in Adrien's Pandora's box, lurching, following, trying to get its creators, its fathers to acknowledge it, even love it, is Columbine!

Badger House, this hall I find mysteriously changed "since I've been gone," where the walls look Victorian but are probably green computer code positively stinks of The Matrix! They have been here, they have changed it, made it Victorian to protect The Matrix, the Queen, to protect themselves, to keep from having to experience the rape. The Matrix is a hysterical reaction of denial by an entire culture to a sexual trauma its creators are unwilling to face. In that sense it is Victorian, a denial of the power and importance of human sexual being.

 

The Star Child, the Neo, the Chosen One it has produced is the fascist state of law and order in our schools where the tiniest fantasy of violence expressed in a story or a poem is cause to be reported to the principal, or worse yet sent to see the school shrink.

Only when Promethean creators break free from the chains binding them to stone, to the dark of the script of Scripture to face the hysteria and its root cause will this slavery of true creation by the Kingdom of God end.