Mitch Altman's revolutionary Trip Glasses ("a sound and light brain machine")

I was lucky enough to get a 14-minute test ride with this device a couple days ago, courtesy Mitch himself (and Scott Beibin), and can personally attest to its efficacy. Mitch says they should be available commercially soon, retailing for $40. Something like this is long overdue, especially given that Brion Gysin’s dream machine, which works on a similar principle, was developed decades ago. Experienced meditators and psychonauts will recognize the spaces in consciousness that your brain travels to with the aid of this device; others are in for a pleasant, overwhelming shock. It’s like a trailer for an actual psilocybin or LSD trip, or for what you may experience in deeper meditation. Wonderful, much needed—and totally subversive. Well done, Mitch!

Here’s some video with some other folks trying out the Trip Glasses..

soundandlightbrainmachine

Click here for Trip Glasses site

More info: Make magazine

Today's book recommendation: "LSD—Doorway to the Numinous" by Stanislav Grof

513Awekn3XL._SL160_

Joseph Campbell on Grof’s work: “I know of no work that so well incorporates the findings of Freud, Jung and Rank, adding fresh insights, which the methods of those psychotherapists could never have achieved. I do not doubt that many others working in this field would find Dr. Grof´s discoveries a basis for a whole new strategy of research.”

More: Stan Grof’s website

Todays Autonomedia Jubilee Saint – GORDON CHILDE

Gordon Childe
April 14 — GORDON CHILDE
Australian Marxist archeologist and prehistorian.

APRIL 14, 2009 HOLIDAYS AND FESTIVALS
*Dreams of Reason Feast Day, dedicated to discarded scientific theory and science fiction futures.
*Good Friday
*Pan American Day

ALSO ON APRIL 14 IN HISTORY…
1865 — U.S. President Abraham Lincoln shot by John Wilkes Booth.
1828 — Noah Webster copyrights his first Dictionary.
1874 — American communalist Josiah Warren dies, Boston, Massachusetts.
1892 — Radical anthropologist Gordon Childe born, North Sydnet, Australia.
1912 — The unsinkable mega-ship Titanic sinks, hitting an iceberg.
1956 — First videotape demonstrated, Chicago, Illionoise.
1964 — American ocology writer Rachel Carson dies, Silver Springs, Maryland
1966 — Swiss pharmaceutical firm Sandoz discontinues production of LSD.
1970 — Two students fatally shot in anti-war protest, Jackson State University, Mississippi.
1986 — French philosopher and feminist Simon de Beauvoir dies, Paris, France.

Excerpted from The 2009 Autonomedia Calendar of Jubilee Saints: Radical Heroes for the New Millennium by James Koehnline and the Autonomedia Collective

Owsley surfaces: "What I did was a community service."

For the unrepentant patriarch of LSD, long, strange trip winds back to Bay Area

Joel Selvin, Chronicle Senior Pop Music Critic

Thursday, July 12, 2007 San Francisco Chronicle

The small, barefoot man in black T-shirt and blue jeans barely rates a second glance from the other Starbucks patrons in downtown San Rafael, although he is one of the men who virtually made the ’60s. Because Augustus Owsley Stanley III has spent his life avoiding photographs, few people would know what he looks like.

The name Owsley became a noun that appears in the Oxford dictionary as English street slang for good acid. It is the most famous brand name in LSD history. Probably the first private individual to manufacture the psychedelic, “Owsley” is a folk hero of the counterculture, celebrated in songs by the Grateful Dead and Steely Dan.

For more than 20 years, Stanley — at 72, still known as the Bear — has been living with his wife, Sheila, off the grid, in the outback of Queensland, Australia, where he makes small gold and enamel sculptures and keeps in touch with the world through the Internet.

As a planned two-week visit to the Bay Area stretched to three, four and then five weeks, Bear agreed to give The Chronicle an interview because a friend asked him. He has rarely consented to speak to the press about his life, his work or his unconventional thinking on matters such as the coming ice age or his all-meat diet.

Sporting a buccaneer’s earring he got when he was in jail and a hearing aid on the same ear, he keeps a salty goatee, and the sides of his face look boiled clean from seven weeks of maximum radiation treatment for throat cancer. Having lost one of his vocal cords, he speaks only in a whispered croak these days. At one point, he was reduced to injecting his puree of steak and espresso directly into his stomach.

Continue reading

People need to know how important acid is.

California Dreaming: A True Story of Computers, Drugs and Rock ‘n’ Roll – New York Times
May 7, 2005
By ANDREW LEONARD

WHAT THE DORMOUSE SAID
How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer Industry.
By John Markoff
Illustrated. 310 pp. Viking. $25.95.

Engineers can be so cute. In the early 1960’s, Myron Stolaroff, an employee of the tape recorder manufacturer Ampex, decided to prove the value of consuming LSD. So he set up the International Foundation for Advanced Study and went about his project in classic methodical fashion.

Test subjects – almost all engineers – were given a series of doses under constant observation and expected to take careful notes on their own experience. A survey of the first 153 volunteers revealed that “83 percent of those who had taken LSD found that they had lasting benefits from the experience.” (Other results: increase in ability to love, 78 percent; increased self-esteem, 71 percent.) Such precision might seem antithetical to the fuzzy let-it-all-hang-outness of the psychedelic experience. But John Markoff, a senior writer for The New York Times who covers technology, makes a convincing case that for the swarming ubergeeks assembling in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1960’s, approaching drugs as they might any other potentially helpful tool or device – from a soldering iron to a computer chip – was only natural. The goals were broad in the 60’s: the world would be remade, the natural order of things reconfigured, human potential amplified to infinity. Anything that could help was to be cherished, studied and improved.

It is no accident, then, that the same patch of land on the peninsula south of San Francisco that gave birth to the Grateful Dead was also the site of groundbreaking research leading the way to the personal computer. That the two cultural impulses were linked – positively – is a provocative thesis.

Revisionist histories of the 60’s often make an attempt to separate the “excess” of the era from the politics. In this view, all those acid-gobbling, pot-smoking, tie-dyed renegades were a distraction from the real work of stopping the Vietnam War and achieving social justice. But Mr. Markoff makes a surprisingly sympathetic case that it was all of a piece: the drugs, the antiauthoritarianism, the messianic belief that computing power should be spread throughout the land.

“It is not a coincidence,” he writes, “that, during the 60’s and early 70’s, at the height of the protest against the war in Vietnam, the civil rights movement and widespread experimentation with psychedelic drugs, personal computing emerged from a handful of government- and corporate-funded laboratories, as well as from the work of a small group of hobbyists who were desperate to get their hands on computers they could personally control and decide to what uses they should be put.”

Judging by the record presented in “What the Dormouse Said,” it is indisputable that many of the engineers and programmers who contributed to the birth of personal computing were fans of LSD, draft resisters, commune sympathizers and, to put it bluntly, long-haired hippie freaks.

This makes entertaining reading. Many accounts of the birth of personal computing have been written, but this is the first close look at the drug habits of the earliest pioneers. “What the Dormouse Said” may not reach the level of the classics of computing history, Tracy Kidder’s “Soul of a New Machine” and Steven Levy’s “Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution.” But there is still plenty of fun between its covers.

A central character – and one of the early volunteers at Stolaroff’s foundation – is Douglas Engelbart, a man worthy of his own book. His team at the Augmented Human Intellect Research Center at the Stanford Research Institute was the first to demonstrate the potential of the computing future. The research demonstration that he conducted for a packed auditorium in San Francisco in 1968 is still talked about in Silicon Valley with the reverence of those who might have witnessed Jehovah handing Moses the Ten Commandments. The mouse, man! Engelbart gave us the mouse! But Mr. Engelbart’s story is not a happy one. He saw further ahead than most, but had a difficult time articulating his vision. He became heavily involved with Werner Erhard’s human potential movement, EST, and his laboratory ultimately ended up losing both its way and its government financing. Many of his researchers went on to the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, where the first personal computer, the famous Alto, was invented, while he lapsed into semi-obscurity. As a metaphor for the 60’s, which exploded with promise and ended in disarray, he’s just about perfect.

Looking back at the 60’s from the jaundiced perspective of the early 21st century, it’s easy to wonder what was really accomplished, outside of the enduring split of the nation into two irreconcilable ideological camps. Sure, there was the civil rights campaign, women’s liberation, environmentalism and a movement that eventually brought a war to heel, but the era is as likely to be ridiculed in modern memory as to be revered. But what happens if we add the birth of personal computing to the counterculture’s list of achievements? Does that change the equation?

The answer depends on how one rates the personal computer as consciousness-enhancing device. Remember, after all, what the dormouse did say, in the stentorian full-throttle voice of Jefferson Airplane’s Grace Slick: “Feed your head!”

By choosing that as his title, Mr. Markoff makes clear his belief that computers, like psychedelic drugs, are tools for mind expansion, for revelation and personal discovery. And to anyone who has experienced a drug-induced epiphany, there may indeed be a cosmic hyperlink there: fire up your laptop, connect wirelessly to the Internet, search for your dreams with Google: the power and the glory of the computing universe that exists now was a sci-fi fantasy not very long ago, and yes, it does pulsate with a destabilizing, revelatory psychic power. Cool!

But wasn’t the goal of those 60’s experimenters to make the world a better place? One has to wonder – and this is a question Mr. Markoff doesn’t really address – whether the personal computer achieved that goal. Or has it only allowed all of us, heroes and villains alike, to be more productive as the world stays exactly the same?

Andrew Leonard is a staff writer at Salon.

COURTESY DAVID REEVES!

Tripping With Mary Poppins.

From the Dec 24, 2004 New York Times:

Poppins on the Loose: Lock Up Your Children
By VIRGINIA HEFFERNAN

Mary Poppins, in memory, is the ideal nanny. With her cartoony eyelashes, slightly Carnaby style and jauntily splayed feet, she delivers that polemic about sugar, turns chores into pleasure and wins infatuated devotion from her charges. The mother is not threatened by her, the father is not attracted to her and – all in all – the Poppins stint with the Banks family is the most edifying nanny story in a genre that is currently characterized by tales of anxiety and woe.

That’s at least how I remember Walt Disney’s “Mary Poppins,” which had its premiere in 1964 and went on to win five Academy Awards. The reality is somewhat different. If it’s been awhile, see for yourself on the Disney Channel, which will televise the remastered version in convenient time for the movie’s 40th anniversary, the release of the DVD and a new musical that opened earlier this month in London.

In this trippy, effects-heavy, pro-pollution movie – soot is a source of great amusement – the nanny does indeed represent a blessing for Mr. and Mrs. Banks, but not because she’s good at her work (you even get the feeling it’s not a career with her), but because she whisks the kids out of their hair and then manipulates the parents into changing their ways.

She spends no time giving the kids lessons or overseeing their homework. After first cleaning their room, they do almost no chores, and even the room-cleaning is done mostly by magic. Mary Poppins (Julie Andrews) is rather like the nannies on “Nanny 911” and “Supernanny” in that she doesn’t patiently care for children year in and year out; rather, she bosses around an entire family according to modish philosophies of child rearing and then, with a flourish, she’s gone.

The movie is set in 1910, in part among chimney sweeps and the bankers in high, hard collars, but the 60’s come through in just about every scene. If those who most exemplified that decade were the activists and the sybarites, this movie is clearly on the side of the sybarites – the hippies.

Continue reading