#phallic symbol

[victusinveritas]

Anthropomorphic statuette with phallic head, Olmec Culture, Mexico, 900–600 BC. Ceramic, H. 13.5 cm, W. 18.2 cm. Part of the Barbier Mueller Collection (Geneva) until 2013, Inv. 501–22, auctioned at Sotheby’s in 2013.

[nosferatu-roberteggers]

How ‘Nosferatu’ Made Count Orlok’s Arthritic Fingers, Prosthetic Penis and ‘Red as Hell’ Blood Pools

Scriptnotes, Episode 674: The One vvith Robert Eggers, Transcript

[greenbellala]

⚠️ NSFW CONTENT ⚠️

[stone-cold-groove]

I’m almost embarrassed for Fabergé cosmetics circa 1976. Almost.

[wallacepolsom]

Wallace Polsom, Sometimes a Cigar (2021), paper collage, 22.5 x 32.2 cm.

[ordoacephaliorientis]

The kid praying to the Phallic symbol of the Shiva linga does not “know” what (s)he is doing, therefore being a pure Yogic incorporation of a symbol in the literal sense of the linga and the image itself, revealing the original meaning of religion as experience of immanence, intimacy, continuity, like a magical ritual, not of any transcendence. The religious prayer instead is an effectless negativity, since it is a sort of grown-up attitude towards a transcendence fostered by guilt facing the divine. Culturally you can for instance witness this by truly hearing the shift in the ingenious music from Mozart to Beethoven, Mozart’s genius being divine like a child even in the deepest moments of his don-juanesque father complex or religious emotion, and Beethoven’s genius striving to be godlike, meaning like god. There the fatal trench was already dug between god and man, and the christian culture could only bear the wound  once more by the mutilated, suffering man on the cross. This was the “romantic” spirit of the 19th century born, the actual perversion where a bourgeois spirit began to rule that was not any more that of noble people like the divine Marquis de Sade. Thus entailing the baneful root for all “mysticism” and (Hegelian) man of work and reconciliation with god that fatally reached deep into the two big world wars, a conflict obviously never really solved as the beginning of the 21st century proves all too well. The musical genius of romantisicm and maybe a promise of its surmounting would be Wagner, following Beethoven and being divine like Mozart. Indeed what connects Mozart and Wagner is the joyful positive superficiality of the true spirituality, in other words the immanence and intimacy of a bodacious offering and sacrifice. Wheras in Mozart’s music this superficiality takes wings, in Wagner it has shoals the unaware is at risk to drown in. Yet both are the composers favored by the oAo and therfore by a thelemic man of a new eon of realization of true will to power (”the Crowned and Conquering Child” in the words of Crowley). Incipit Wagner contra Nietzsche.         

[nemfrog]

Art from a silverware advertisement. Kunstwart und Kulturwart. 1923.

Heidelberg University

[oldshowbiz]

Sam Levenson: TV’s Fastest Rising Comedian