[Ibogaine] Daniel Pinchbeck's new book in NY Times

edward conn wardconn at hotmail.com
Sun Jun 25 21:25:46 EDT 2006

What is it about psychedelics and narcissism that go hand in hand...is it 
the living in ones own self created reality i.e fantasy...that becomes 'mind 
manifested' or 'turned inside out' ...after all is'nt that what breaking 
open the head is?...letting the contents out...only to find eventually 
through much knashing of teeth that they're delusion. Hey, this is a journey 
after all.

The fact of the matter is that taking such 'ritualistic' substances creates 
a circumstance that to complete can take easily 10 years plus, to work 
through, psychodynamic, unconscious and transpersonal or sublime levels of 
existence. In which time one is highly susceptible to any form of 
information especially 'conspiracy'...which is really saying 'I can't live 
in this world...it's unjust' , but how much of that is about perception and 
aspects of the victim/hero position. Do we need heros or do we need Selves?? 
One of the reasons. limited coverage is given to the psychedelic position is 
that, it often is significant for the writers inability to seperate self 
from experience and as a result it becomes a blur...like the persons mind. I 
think this is why indeed the accompanying recomendation with such work is to 
continue with a therapist...a person who one pays to contain and keep this 
material on the straight and narrow. The problem with delusion and the 
significant [problem it is for a person is that only on the outside is it 
recognised...thats why its deluded.

Therapy and life...is the proces of letting go, release. Why the need to 
relagate anyone to a higher status.

Reading about Daniel Pinchbecks review iof his new book, the contents are 
classical of whta someone goes through, a few short years after such 
experiences, and taken out of that context it comes across as at best banal. 
Thats why it gets poor reviews. As a text of a early stage post 'transition' 
...godd play, but as a radical ajenda...no way. Any one who's been there 
knows that.

Like in Michael Harners Book of his shamanistic initiations...the older 
shaman told him of his visions...'they're always saying that'...ie....its 
only a program...like when you boot up your computer...get past it...and get 

A spiritual emergence is something which goes on on many cases for over 
twelve years (grof and grof), interspersed within which are easily 
recognisable stages once you've been through them. This is what we should be 
supporting people with; a knowledge of the path, which of course will 
include its pitfalls, the ones we have to learn the hard way, by experience.

we seek to use psychedelics as a search to unlock the mind, the big mistake 
to make is to assume that your mind, or mind are different from anyone 
elses. Generally like any other organ they have certain criteria which allow 
for them to be classified under the same heading and therefore contain the 
same general form, although my bllod ain't yours , the veins it runs through 
are morphologically nearly identical. Which begs the question...what noise 
or story does a brain admit when its being squeezed hard...under that notion 
Daniels book might well be worth reading, and anyones elses for that.


>From: "Preston Peet" <ptpeet at nyc.rr.com>
>Reply-To: ibogaine at mindvox.com
>To: <ibogaine at mindvox.com>
>Subject: Re: Re: [Ibogaine] Daniel Pinchbeck's new book in NY Times
>Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:21:42 -0400
>>The one line in that review I personally agreed with, is 'Of the
>multiple difficulties encountered by the writer of
>drug-induced-mind-expansion narratives, none is more important to
>overcome than that of transferring the effect of the drug to his prose,
>a near impossibility attained by only a few - William S. Burroughs
>comes to mind, as well as Thomas De Quincey.' <
>Someday I hope someone thinks to add me to one of these lists.
>Peace, love and respect,
>"Madness is not enlightenment, but the search for enlightenment is often 
>mistaken for madness"
>Richard Davenport-Hines
>ptpeet at nyc.rr.com
>Editor "Underground- The Disinformation Guide to Ancient Civilizations, 
>Astonishing Archeology and Hidden History"
>Editor "Under the Influence- the Disinformation Guide to Drugs"
>Editor http://www.drugwar.com
>Cont. High Times mag/.com
>Cont. Editor http://www.disinfo.com
>Columnist New York Waste
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Vector Vector" 
><vector620022002 at yahoo.com>
>To: <ibogaine at mindvox.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 4:12 PM
>Subject: Re: Re: [Ibogaine] Daniel Pinchbeck's new book in NY Times
>>Wow ok, Pinchbeck hit a nerve with most of you, the wrong one I guess
>>To give my half a cent here, I haven't read 2012 and don't really plan
>>to, I did make it through maybe half of breaking open the head, it was
>>no worse then most books about psychedelics and better than a lot. He
>>isn't exactly the new messiah and he does lack a sense of humor, but I
>>guess he really must act like an ass in person to have so much hate
>>from people who are in theory his audience. Oh well. It's not like you
>>even don't like him much, you act like he ran over your dog.
>>The one line in that review I personally agreed with, is 'Of the
>>multiple difficulties encountered by the writer of
>>drug-induced-mind-expansion narratives, none is more important to
>>overcome than that of transferring the effect of the drug to his prose,
>>a near impossibility attained by only a few - William S. Burroughs
>>comes to mind, as well as Thomas De Quincey.'
>>Too true and nope Daniel doesn't do much for me, but then if you all
>>can do better, the world is waiting ;)
>>--- Krista Vaughan <krista.vaughan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>I don't think it's a reasonable or fair way to judge a person's work,
>>>based on how they live their life. Many if not most of the world's
>>>greatest artists, writers, thinkers, have been....... really horrible
>>>people. Sad but true.
>>>My problem with Daniel is mostly that he just isn't saying anything
>>>new, that hasn't been said better by Mckenna and he totally fails to
>>>engage my belief or interest in anything he writes about. I don't so
>>>much care what he does in his life or how big a dickhead he is, it's
>>>not like I need to put up with him personally, it sounds more like
>>>people from NY or burning man who know Daniel personally or at least
>>>have seen him talk, who are so turned off.
>>>Yes the Jarhead guy is a dickhead, who has totally opposite and
>>>different opinions, who was in the military before becoming a writer
>>>and no I don't agree with much of anything he thinks or believes, but
>>>you know something... he _is_ a good writer. Sad but true.
>>>The "drugs" rant was not appropriate or called for or even
>>>representative of anything, except for the fact the reviewer hates
>>>Daniel, but so it seems does nearly everyone else. To give it a turn,
>>>it would be his turn to get reviewed as writing yet another macho ego
>>>story of killing people for America, shut up and go kill someone or
>>>run for office and kill a lot of people.
>>>BTW I don't really see where any of this had much of anything to do
>>>with ibogaine itself, Daniel has very little to say about ibogaine
>>>it was only singled out as being exceptionally poorly written and
>>>conveyed. He talked about Daniel's writing, not ibogaine, that was
>>>On 6/20/06, Dave Brockman <davebroc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > True true, whatever anyone thinks doesn't matter, it only matters
>>> > you yourself get out of it. Personally I've got 2012 too, was
>>> > for something else, what I don't know, but here's another review.
>>> >
>>> > Pinchbeck sucks ass. No changes there.
>>> >
>>> > All the crap he has to say about other peeps, he could go say to
>>> > mirror. 'course the NYT seems to have lots of personal agendas with
>>> > half the peeps in the entire counter culture and duh, yeah i'm sure
>>> > was set up with the one reviewer who would hate him the most, but
>>> > that's his own fault for being such a utter tool. There's a major,
>>> > total lack of good psychedelics authors to take the places of the
>>> > generation. Pinchbeck wants to be Terrence but as somebody else
>>> > it's like a copy of Terrence with all humor and self awareness
>>> > removed. I think the prob is, he does a great job of turning
>>> > who isn't already a convert, totally off to anything he's saying.
>>> > sucks.
>>> >
>>> > It's not like that Albert guy he was on the panel with at the ibo
>>> > was all that either, but he was at least gracious, pinchbeck
>>> > was..........a tool. Fuck him and his unheated share in
>>> > (ohhhhh way trendy).
>>> >
>>> > Wonder how much I need to fry my brain to dump my rich girlfriend,
>>> > just had my baby and explain I need to try to get laid at burning
>>> > even though try is the operative word. Lot of love and great wisdom
>>> > obvious by looking at the way he lives and acts.
>>> >
>>> > Fuck the NY Times and their Jarhead reviewer and fuck Pinchbeck, he
>>> > sucks ass. I can say that too, because my karma is still good, I
>>> > contributed my $30 bucks hoping for something that didn't suck, so
>>> > danny boy can go buy himself a burger on my dime.
>>> >
>>> > Eye of the Bhogi
>>> >
>>> > >  It's this line that irked me the most: "Since when can a guy on
>>> > > land a punch? And no one likes a global morality bully who's
>>> > > Whatever happened to just taking
>>> > >  drugs?"
>>> >
>>> > As much as it may piss you off, he asked for that, he's asking for
>>> > that through the entire book, he climbs up on his moral high horse
>>> > rants about what's wrong with the whole world without ever taking a
>>> > look at himself. I don't dig the jarhead dude, but he did sum it up
>>> > right there. Pinchbeck does the same shit everyplace he goes, he
>>> > ranted about "drug tourism" without being able to see that it's
>>> > exactly what he spends most of his time doing.
>>> > >
>>> > >  IBOGA is not "drugs."
>>> >
>>> > Sorry again, but this is the same ibogaine party line that don't
>>> > I know it's not "drugs" it's a sacred healing mystical plant that
>>> > gives peeps liberation from drugs. That's nice, my medical cannabis
>>> > also meds, but someplace behind the bs, I happen to be aware that
>>> > are drugs and ranting about how they're not, won't get no play when
>>> > you're not preaching to the choir. Be real.
>>> >
>>> > -broc
>>> >
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>[%] Ibogaine List Commands: http://ibogaine.mindvox.com/IbogaineList.html 
>[%] Ibogaine List Commands: http://ibogaine.mindvox.com/IbogaineList.html 

More information about the Ibogaine mailing list