Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] The Marman's take on Patti Simpson Rivinus

Expand Messages
  • etznab@aol.com
    I thought it gave the impression of leading up to something. That something turned out to be Paul Twitchell reportedly asking Patti Simpson to be the next
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 26, 2011
      I thought it gave the impression of leading up to something. That
      "something" turned out to be Paul Twitchell reportedly "asking" Patti
      Simpson to be the next Living Eck Master. That was a main focus in the
      whole piece, IMO.

      Btw, does anybody remember David Rivinus? I read that he was a higher
      initiate in Eckankar (on last page of Patti Simpson's book, Paulji a
      Memoir).

      Does anybody know whether David is still a member of Eckankar?

      I haven't determined exactly what year Patti Simpson became inactive,
      or not a member. Doug mentioned something about mid-80s, I think. Well,
      Patti's book was copyright 1985. In it (last page) the context appears
      to suggest that they were both HI's then.

      Etznab

      -----Original Message-----
      From: austinatma <austinatma@...>
      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
      <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tue, Jul 26, 2011 5:27 pm
      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] The Marman's take on Patti
      Simpson Rivinus

       

      I found myself a bit conflicted reading this Doug Marman piece. 
      There's a rhythm and a cadence to the way Doug writes about Eckankar
      that has driven me up the wall for years.  He's a decent writer and
      all, but there are a priori, as well as "casteneda-like"  cornerstones
      he uses that get on my liberated nerves.  
      I read about a person I respected and knew (not well), through that
      ever present lens of the true believer.  If Doug's typically mild
      writing bothers me you can imagine my allergic reaction to the party
      line rhetoric that seems to be the adhesive of the Eckankar religion!  
      I took a gradual weaning off approach, followed by simple decompression
      from more than 30 years of involvement with Eckankar.  I'm sure my
      sense of never quite being able to "swallow" the groupthink or
      doublespeak is not unusual with people who escape the subtle opiated
      state of a religion.   When I read something like Marman's piece it
      brings back a tone and an a state of consciousness that is central to
      why getting out of Eckankar was the best decision possible.  And yet it
      isn't easy to explain what that tone and state is that builds up like a
      fog till you can't even see the top of the bridge ;-).   There are a
      many reasons for people to doubt themself when they question why a
      semingly gentle, sweet, memorial of a good person stirs up cult
      repression vibes.  And even stranger that Patti was someone who, as
      Doug says in his piece specialized in encouraging people to be
      themselves.   Of course, what choice do we have ;-).   
      The closest I can come to describing the vibe or aura, is to say there
      is a rhythm of grandiosity with a backbeat of narcissism to the way
      Doug hints at grander, large scale plans that could only be known by
      certain select people who's role in life tended to be fed by the way
      people accepted or thought about grand scale plans -- with them at the
      center of those plans.  Or reporting on those events in a way that
      seems to explain things to people who might not otherwise understand. 
      This while writing about Patti's walking away from a lead role in a
      cage for the walk on role in Vermont.   She purportedly broke off
      contact with the Eckankar followers and started over again.  Nice,
      however to my way of thinking my view of Patti had to come down to
      earth (if Doug's account is accurate) because Patti may have been more
      involved with the 'afterglow' of Eckankar in the telling of Paul's
      story.   
      I liked Patti and her naturalness in speaking and writing about her
      experience.  She performed a wedding ceremony for me once upon a time. 
      I liked how later waves of Eckists couldn't really tell if she was a
      card carrying member or not and it kept them guessing.   
      The other day I watched an interview with Robert Jay Lifton , who must
      be in his 80's now.  An unassuming, lucid, and insightful man who
      didn't need to turn himself into a guru or man of power to share his
      insights and ideas with the world.  There are many others like him, and
      far less well know.  What a difference from listening to someone who
      appears to indirectly feed off of people feeling special because they
      have learned to speak of their experiences in a certain way, and are
      involved with a group or guru who has special knowledge of a grand
      plan. 
      Eh, maybe I was just in a bad mood when I read Doug's piece.  Second
      thought, no, that wasn't it.  
      What did any of you think?  
      AA  
    • prometheus_973
      Hello Austinatma, Thanks again for sharing your impressions and experiences. Please feel free to share more insights. Prometheus austinatma wrote: I found
      Message 2 of 8 , Jul 29, 2011
        Hello Austinatma,
        Thanks again for sharing
        your impressions and
        experiences. Please feel
        free to share more insights.

        Prometheus

        austinatma wrote:
        I found myself a bit conflicted reading this Doug Marman piece.

        There's a rhythm and a cadence to the way Doug writes about Eckankar that has driven me up the wall for years. He's a decent writer and all, but there are a priori, as well as "casteneda-like" cornerstones he uses that get on my liberated nerves.

        I read about a person I respected and knew (not well), through that ever present lens of the true believer. If Doug's typically mild writing bothers me you can imagine my allergic reaction to the party line rhetoric that seems to be the adhesive of the Eckankar religion!

        I took a gradual weaning off approach, followed by simple decompression from more than 30 years of involvement with Eckankar. I'm sure my sense of never quite being able to "swallow" the groupthink or doublespeak is not unusual with people who escape the subtle opiated state of a religion. When I read something like Marman's piece it brings back a tone and an a state of consciousness that is central to why getting out of Eckankar was the best decision possible. And yet it isn't easy to explain what that tone and state is that builds up like a fog till you can't even see the top of the bridge ;-). There are a many reasons for people to doubt themself when they question why a semingly gentle, sweet, memorial of a good person stirs up cult repression vibes. And even stranger that Patti was someone who, as Doug says in his piece specialized in encouraging people to be themselves. Of course, what choice do we have ;-).

        The closest I can come to describing the vibe or aura, is to say there is a rhythm of grandiosity with a backbeat of narcissism to the way Doug hints at grander, large scale plans that could only be known by certain select people who's role in life tended to be fed by the way people accepted or thought about grand scale plans -- with them at the center of those plans. Or reporting on those events in a way that seems to explain things to people who might not otherwise understand. This while writing about Patti's walking away from a lead role in a cage for the walk on role in Vermont. She purportedly broke off contact with the Eckankar followers and started over again. Nice, however to my way of thinking my view of Patti had to come down to earth (if Doug's account is accurate) because Patti may have been more involved with the 'afterglow' of Eckankar in the telling of Paul's story.

        I liked Patti and her naturalness in speaking and writing about her experience. She performed a wedding ceremony for me once upon a time. I liked how later waves of Eckists couldn't really tell if she was a card carrying member or not and it kept them guessing.

        The other day I watched an interview with Robert Jay Lifton , who must be in his 80's now. An unassuming, lucid, and insightful man who didn't need to turn himself into a guru or man of power to share his insights and ideas with the world. There are many others like him, and far less well know. What a difference from listening to someone who appears to indirectly feed off of people feeling special because they have learned to speak of their experiences in a certain way, and are involved with a group or guru who has special knowledge of a grand plan.

        Eh, maybe I was just in a bad mood when I read Doug's piece. Second thought, no, that wasn't it.

        What did any of you think?

        AA
      • dianastanley43
        Hi guys havn t talked in a while. I knew Patti since 1971. She was a good friend. when I knew patti she was a bit of an iconoclast. Her and milli more kept me
        Message 3 of 8 , Jul 31, 2011
          Hi guys havn't talked in a while. I knew Patti since 1971. She was a good friend. when I knew patti she was a bit of an iconoclast. Her and milli more kept me in stiches they would play tricks on Paul. He called milli his 16 year old. He could'nt get her to stop smoking, I was told she finally did,or not!
          I am always sad to see an old friend go. At my age that seems to be more frequent.
          Diana Stanley

          --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "prometheus_973" <prometheus_973@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hello Austinatma,
          > Thanks again for sharing
          > your impressions and
          > experiences. Please feel
          > free to share more insights.
          >
          > Prometheus
          >
          > austinatma wrote:
          > I found myself a bit conflicted reading this Doug Marman piece.
          >
          > There's a rhythm and a cadence to the way Doug writes about Eckankar that has driven me up the wall for years. He's a decent writer and all, but there are a priori, as well as "casteneda-like" cornerstones he uses that get on my liberated nerves.
          >
          > I read about a person I respected and knew (not well), through that ever present lens of the true believer. If Doug's typically mild writing bothers me you can imagine my allergic reaction to the party line rhetoric that seems to be the adhesive of the Eckankar religion!
          >
          > I took a gradual weaning off approach, followed by simple decompression from more than 30 years of involvement with Eckankar. I'm sure my sense of never quite being able to "swallow" the groupthink or doublespeak is not unusual with people who escape the subtle opiated state of a religion. When I read something like Marman's piece it brings back a tone and an a state of consciousness that is central to why getting out of Eckankar was the best decision possible. And yet it isn't easy to explain what that tone and state is that builds up like a fog till you can't even see the top of the bridge ;-). There are a many reasons for people to doubt themself when they question why a semingly gentle, sweet, memorial of a good person stirs up cult repression vibes. And even stranger that Patti was someone who, as Doug says in his piece specialized in encouraging people to be themselves. Of course, what choice do we have ;-).
          >
          > The closest I can come to describing the vibe or aura, is to say there is a rhythm of grandiosity with a backbeat of narcissism to the way Doug hints at grander, large scale plans that could only be known by certain select people who's role in life tended to be fed by the way people accepted or thought about grand scale plans -- with them at the center of those plans. Or reporting on those events in a way that seems to explain things to people who might not otherwise understand. This while writing about Patti's walking away from a lead role in a cage for the walk on role in Vermont. She purportedly broke off contact with the Eckankar followers and started over again. Nice, however to my way of thinking my view of Patti had to come down to earth (if Doug's account is accurate) because Patti may have been more involved with the 'afterglow' of Eckankar in the telling of Paul's story.
          >
          > I liked Patti and her naturalness in speaking and writing about her experience. She performed a wedding ceremony for me once upon a time. I liked how later waves of Eckists couldn't really tell if she was a card carrying member or not and it kept them guessing.
          >
          > The other day I watched an interview with Robert Jay Lifton , who must be in his 80's now. An unassuming, lucid, and insightful man who didn't need to turn himself into a guru or man of power to share his insights and ideas with the world. There are many others like him, and far less well know. What a difference from listening to someone who appears to indirectly feed off of people feeling special because they have learned to speak of their experiences in a certain way, and are involved with a group or guru who has special knowledge of a grand plan.
          >
          > Eh, maybe I was just in a bad mood when I read Doug's piece. Second thought, no, that wasn't it.
          >
          > What did any of you think?
          >
          > AA
          >
        • etznab@aol.com
          What do you mean kept you in stiches? ... From: dianastanley43 To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
          Message 4 of 8 , Jul 31, 2011
            What do you mean kept you in stiches?

            -----Original Message-----
            From: dianastanley43 <dianastanley43@...>
            To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
            <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sun, Jul 31, 2011 9:54 am
            Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Marman's take on Patti
            Simpson Rivinus

             
            Hi guys havn't talked in a while. I knew Patti since 1971. She was a
            good friend. when I knew patti she was a bit of an iconoclast. Her and
            milli more kept me in stiches they would play tricks on Paul. He called
            milli his 16 year old. He could'nt get her to stop smoking, I was told
            she finally did,or not!
            I am always sad to see an old friend go. At my age that seems to be
            more frequent.
            Diana Stanley

            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "prometheus_973"
            <prometheus_973@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hello Austinatma,
            > Thanks again for sharing
            > your impressions and
            > experiences. Please feel
            > free to share more insights.
            >
            > Prometheus
            >
            > austinatma wrote:
            > I found myself a bit conflicted reading this Doug Marman piece.
            >
            > There's a rhythm and a cadence to the way Doug writes about
            Eckankar that has driven me up the wall for years. He's a decent
            writer and all, but there are a priori, as well as "casteneda-like"
            cornerstones he uses that get on my liberated nerves.
            >
            > I read about a person I respected and knew (not well), through
            that ever present lens of the true believer. If Doug's typically mild
            writing bothers me you can imagine my allergic reaction to the party
            line rhetoric that seems to be the adhesive of the Eckankar religion!
            >
            > I took a gradual weaning off approach, followed by simple
            decompression from more than 30 years of involvement with Eckankar.
            I'm sure my sense of never quite being able to "swallow" the groupthink
            or doublespeak is not unusual with people who escape the subtle opiated
            state of a religion. When I read something like Marman's piece it
            brings back a tone and an a state of consciousness that is central to
            why getting out of Eckankar was the best decision possible. And yet it
            isn't easy to explain what that tone and state is that builds up like a
            fog till you can't even see the top of the bridge ;-). There are a
            many reasons for people to doubt themself when they question why a
            semingly gentle, sweet, memorial of a good person stirs up cult
            repression vibes. And even stranger that Patti was someone who, as
            Doug says in his piece specialized in encouraging people to be
            themselves. Of course, what choice do we have ;-).
            >
            > The closest I can come to describing the vibe or aura, is to say
            there is a rhythm of grandiosity with a backbeat of narcissism to the
            way Doug hints at grander, large scale plans that could only be known
            by certain select people who's role in life tended to be fed by the way
            people accepted or thought about grand scale plans -- with them at the
            center of those plans. Or reporting on those events in a way that
            seems to explain things to people who might not otherwise understand.
            This while writing about Patti's walking away from a lead role in a
            cage for the walk on role in Vermont. She purportedly broke off
            contact with the Eckankar followers and started over again. Nice,
            however to my way of thinking my view of Patti had to come down to
            earth (if Doug's account is accurate) because Patti may have been more
            involved with the 'afterglow' of Eckankar in the telling of Paul's
            story.
            >
            > I liked Patti and her naturalness in speaking and writing about
            her experience. She performed a wedding ceremony for me once upon a
            time. I liked how later waves of Eckists couldn't really tell if she
            was a card carrying member or not and it kept them guessing.
            >
            > The other day I watched an interview with Robert Jay Lifton , who
            must be in his 80's now. An unassuming, lucid, and insightful man who
            didn't need to turn himself into a guru or man of power to share his
            insights and ideas with the world. There are many others like him, and
            far less well know. What a difference from listening to someone who
            appears to indirectly feed off of people feeling special because they
            have learned to speak of their experiences in a certain way, and are
            involved with a group or guru who has special knowledge of a grand
            plan.
            >
            > Eh, maybe I was just in a bad mood when I read Doug's piece.
            Second thought, no, that wasn't it.
            >
            > What did any of you think?
            >
            > AA
            >
          • prometheus_973
            Hello Etznab, That would be interesting to know how Patti and Millie kept Diane laughing and in stitches over Paul. I remember that Patti and Gail would
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 31, 2011
              Hello Etznab,
              That would be interesting to know
              how Patti and Millie kept Diane
              laughing and "in stitches" over
              Paul.

              I remember that Patti and Gail
              would laugh when someone asked
              PT his date of birth. They thought
              it was funny that he made such
              a big deal of it. Actually, the joke
              was on them since they believed
              Paul was 19 years older than Gail
              versus 33!

              As far as that Navy story in
              "Difficulties of Becoming the
              Living ECK Master"... Paul was
              still exaggerating and joking in
              June of 1971 while recounting
              this story. I'm thinking he meant
              swimming so fast that it was
              "as if" he was running on water
              to escape a shark but changed
              the story to equal what Jesus
              did... except Jesus didn't "walk
              on water" because he feared
              getting eaten by a shark! LOL!

              Prometheus

              etznab@... wrote:

              What do you mean kept you in stiches?

              Paul wrote a story about himself walking
              (or was that running?) on water. It was
              during his Navy days, I believe. Apparently,
              there were even witnesses :)


              dianastanley wrote

              Hi guys havn't talked in a while.
              I knew Patti since 1971. She was a
              good friend. when I knew patti she
              was a bit of an iconoclast. Her and
              milli more kept me in stiches they
              would play tricks on Paul. He called
              milli his 16 year old. He could'nt get
              her to stop smoking, I was told
              she finally did,or not!

              I am always sad to see an old friend
              go. At my age that seems to be
              more frequent.

              Diana Stanley
            • dianastanley43
              Paul used to hang a large sausage outside his window in winter at seminars,to keep it cold. They cut the sausage off and tied one of his books to the string.
              Message 6 of 8 , Aug 1, 2011
                Paul used to hang a large sausage outside his window in winter at seminars,to keep it cold. They cut the sausage off and tied one of his books to the string. When he pulled it up you can imagin his suprise!! He new who did it of course. but they never admited it.
                They would do silly things like that. He never could get Millie to mind,she would just go on her way saying this and that. That was over 30 yrs ago so my memory is'nt as great as it used to be.
                Diana Stanley

                --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                >
                > What do you mean kept you in stiches?
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: dianastanley43 <dianastanley43@...>
                > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
                > <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
                > Sent: Sun, Jul 31, 2011 9:54 am
                > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Marman's take on Patti
                > Simpson Rivinus
                >
                >  
                > Hi guys havn't talked in a while. I knew Patti since 1971. She was a
                > good friend. when I knew patti she was a bit of an iconoclast. Her and
                > milli more kept me in stiches they would play tricks on Paul. He called
                > milli his 16 year old. He could'nt get her to stop smoking, I was told
                > she finally did,or not!
                > I am always sad to see an old friend go. At my age that seems to be
                > more frequent.
                > Diana Stanley
                >
                > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "prometheus_973"
                > prometheus_973@ wrote:
                > >
                > > Hello Austinatma,
                > > Thanks again for sharing
                > > your impressions and
                > > experiences. Please feel
                > > free to share more insights.
                > >
                > > Prometheus
                > >
                > > austinatma wrote:
                > > I found myself a bit conflicted reading this Doug Marman piece.
                > >
                > > There's a rhythm and a cadence to the way Doug writes about
                > Eckankar that has driven me up the wall for years. He's a decent
                > writer and all, but there are a priori, as well as "casteneda-like"
                > cornerstones he uses that get on my liberated nerves.
                > >
                > > I read about a person I respected and knew (not well), through
                > that ever present lens of the true believer. If Doug's typically mild
                > writing bothers me you can imagine my allergic reaction to the party
                > line rhetoric that seems to be the adhesive of the Eckankar religion!
                > >
                > > I took a gradual weaning off approach, followed by simple
                > decompression from more than 30 years of involvement with Eckankar.
                > I'm sure my sense of never quite being able to "swallow" the groupthink
                > or doublespeak is not unusual with people who escape the subtle opiated
                > state of a religion. When I read something like Marman's piece it
                > brings back a tone and an a state of consciousness that is central to
                > why getting out of Eckankar was the best decision possible. And yet it
                > isn't easy to explain what that tone and state is that builds up like a
                > fog till you can't even see the top of the bridge ;-). There are a
                > many reasons for people to doubt themself when they question why a
                > semingly gentle, sweet, memorial of a good person stirs up cult
                > repression vibes. And even stranger that Patti was someone who, as
                > Doug says in his piece specialized in encouraging people to be
                > themselves. Of course, what choice do we have ;-).
                > >
                > > The closest I can come to describing the vibe or aura, is to say
                > there is a rhythm of grandiosity with a backbeat of narcissism to the
                > way Doug hints at grander, large scale plans that could only be known
                > by certain select people who's role in life tended to be fed by the way
                > people accepted or thought about grand scale plans -- with them at the
                > center of those plans. Or reporting on those events in a way that
                > seems to explain things to people who might not otherwise understand.
                > This while writing about Patti's walking away from a lead role in a
                > cage for the walk on role in Vermont. She purportedly broke off
                > contact with the Eckankar followers and started over again. Nice,
                > however to my way of thinking my view of Patti had to come down to
                > earth (if Doug's account is accurate) because Patti may have been more
                > involved with the 'afterglow' of Eckankar in the telling of Paul's
                > story.
                > >
                > > I liked Patti and her naturalness in speaking and writing about
                > her experience. She performed a wedding ceremony for me once upon a
                > time. I liked how later waves of Eckists couldn't really tell if she
                > was a card carrying member or not and it kept them guessing.
                > >
                > > The other day I watched an interview with Robert Jay Lifton , who
                > must be in his 80's now. An unassuming, lucid, and insightful man who
                > didn't need to turn himself into a guru or man of power to share his
                > insights and ideas with the world. There are many others like him, and
                > far less well know. What a difference from listening to someone who
                > appears to indirectly feed off of people feeling special because they
                > have learned to speak of their experiences in a certain way, and are
                > involved with a group or guru who has special knowledge of a grand
                > plan.
                > >
                > > Eh, maybe I was just in a bad mood when I read Doug's piece.
                > Second thought, no, that wasn't it.
                > >
                > > What did any of you think?
                > >
                > > AA
                > >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.