META-MASK META-MASK THEORY This technique entails the idea of Archetypes, first and foremost, and as time goes on, it appears an ever more viable approach to those 'obsessions', or 'godforms' which human kind had felt the need to embody within an anthropomorphic form or symbol throughout the ages. This would then situate itself with the "Information" model, out of the historical models of magick. It goes on that, instead of an ob!ective permanently e#isting$ out%world of spirits which had always been, what we are dealing with when we engage the use of spirits of any type is a set of, let's say, say, pockets of information which deal with specific interests, states states of mind and commonalities within the human spiritual condition, all of which are held within the subconscious or lower$ to some degree. These are so prominent and mirrored in the e#ternal world that they might be worked wo rked with to an alarming degree of manifestation. &ven though we had somewhat outgrown the idea that they e#ist "unto themselves", they continue to be real enough within the playing grounds of consciousness, and especially if the appropriate amount of belief is there to allow for their higher levels of manifestation. till, they are nodes of energetic information buried deep within the psyche, and all of them correspond to an easily recogni(ed e#ternal connection. co nnection. It is the magickal style of thinking wh ich causes these connections to become ever more workable, malleable and ultimately beneficial if such is the technique you wish to employ. employ. )e might then regard any collection co llection of these related types as "masks" set upon an archetype, with that archetype being given any number of masks by any number of cultures throughout time. If one wishes to work with the spirit of the sea, or waters, for e#ample, then a culture gives unto it a mask so that a semiotic bridge of language, image and symbol is had in order to approach it. *ne may regard any of these individual masks, though as they are all intrinsically connected to a specific culture, and with that culture, a specific system, one may encounter encou nter some difficulty with that particular mask if he does not "play nice" with those other cultural requisites in question. *n the other hand, to form a meta%mask is to create a modern console or outlet for which any of these might be approached % it is a combined form of the many and any number of related cultural masks might be connected to it. Take the +-'s meta%mask of "*le /alty", which appears as any sailor or seafaring type of figure. This meta%mask is then observed as being the sum combination of all such historical gods and goddesses which have been allocated to the ea, *cean, the waters, the traveling thereof, and all that they represent. It is a more compacted form of the singular archetype. *ne may still choose to allocate it towards any number of specific masks, though it alone is a singular which deals with the many. And so on through, given any set of commonalities which you might observe gods or goddesses of )ar, for e#ample, etc.$ This merely entails a different style of thinking for the 0haote, though as e#perimentation has said, this technique works !ust as well, if not, dare I say, better, better, being more inclusive and psychological in nature, than if one were to create an internal conflict between the 1od of )ar within one culture, and the 1od of )ar )ar in another a nother.. It is better and certainly more applicable in the digital age especially, we think, to take the 2erennial approach and deal with the underlying archetype directly, with any singular mask being an option, but with none of them being the "only true mask" for any given archetype.
