leonardcohenforum.com

Karren B wrote:I love the chandelier and thin green candles but the background detracts from the picture.

Would love to see this in the darkest of nights with the thin green candles lighting up the filigree chandelier.
But that's just me!...

thank you, karren. this is on canvas, so it's no problem to turn it upside down and try again; was just a nonsense picture anyway. hope you are keeping well. i have just come home from a week together with my sister in landskrona. we watched 'species' (1995) together, and after that 'the hidden' (1987) - my all-time favourite! if you love 'carmen' but don't understand french i have put it on youtube. i digitised it myself, using a cable from an old VHS player. it's got english sub-titles, and is still better quality than the one already there. kezban and leonard are an unlikely couple, i agree, but so too were desdemona and othello, also esmeralda and quasimodo - not to mention beauty and the beast. i admit these are all just stories, of course. joseph merrick never found anyone to love him in real life - and he died at 27 anyway. "some are born to sweet delight, others unto endless night" said william blake. yes, he saw the world in a grain of sand, and heaven in a wild flower, held infinity in the palm of his hand, and eternity in an hour, but he was not as entertaining as william boyett. well, that's my quota for today, karren. thank you for sharing my company these couple of minutes

carmen:
https://youtu.be/6bgUgLsOjKQ

william boyett in 'the hidden' it can be watched on putlocker, but you have to click on it at least a couple of times, and click the adverts away every time you scroll, but i'm pretty sure you wouldn't like it anyway. nobody ever likes anything i like
http://putlocker.is/watch-the-hidden-on ... ocker.html

Geoffrey wrote:i have just come home from a week together with my sister in landskrona. we watched 'species' (1995) together, and after that 'the hidden' (1987) - my all-time favourite!

It is very funny (as in "What an odd coincidence!") that you mentioned this, because I was just looking at your painted version of the chandelier on the previous page, and I thought that it rather resembles an alien bug thingy from similar sorts of science fiction movies! ("Creature features" -- wasn't that what these films were called back in the 1950s and 60s?). I was going to mention it even before I saw your post about these movies! Perhaps you were unconsciously influenced by them, thus your light fixture took on alien characteristics. Give it a couple of eyes, and it could be the next big Hollywood hit!

LisaLCFan wrote:I thought that it rather resembles an alien bug thingy

really? i thought it resembled a beautiful christmas tree decoration, but we all perceive things differently, depending upon our personalities, of course.

with this in mind, i am attaching a link that tells how to pass the rorschach test with flying colours
http://psychwatch.blogspot.no/2009/07/h ... h-ink.html

Geoffrey wrote:with this in mind, i am attaching a link that tells how to pass the rorschach test with flying colours
http://psychwatch.blogspot.no/2009/07/h ... h-ink.html

Thanks for the link, but I have no intention of ever taking a Rorschach test! I don't buy into any that Freudian clap-trap.

LisaLCFan wrote:I have no intention of ever taking a Rorschach test! I don't buy into any that Freudian clap-trap.

well, that "clap-trap" earned him the title, by those in the trade, 'the father of psychoanalysis' - but i'm sure you're right and they're all wrong

Geoffrey wrote:

LisaLCFan wrote:I thought that it rather resembles an alien bug thingy

really? i thought it resembled a beautiful christmas tree decoration, but we all perceive things differently, depending upon our personalities, of course.

I reminds me of beautiful Christmas decoration too Geoffrey. Much like this one in London.



Looking forward to watching the Carmen video you uploaded, I had a quick peek and you are right about the quality, it's very good.
xx

Geoffrey wrote:

LisaLCFan wrote:I have no intention of ever taking a Rorschach test! I don't buy into any that Freudian clap-trap.

well, that "clap-trap" earned him the title, by those in the trade, 'the father of psychoanalysis' - but i'm sure you're right and they're all wrong

My goodness, there is no need to be so testy! The fact that Freud founded psychoanalysis (of which I am quite aware, and I am not disputing that in the least) has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not somebody agrees with its principles. A lot of people (including "those in the trade") are not adherents of Freudian analysis. I am certainly not alone in that.

LisaLCFan wrote:A lot of people (including "those in the trade") are not adherents of Freudian analysis.

well, a lot of psychologists are women, and many of them are frigid - so of course they would not 'adhere' to anything connected to sex. this is exactly why addyi is currently being marketed!

Geoffrey wrote:

LisaLCFan wrote:A lot of people (including "those in the trade") are not adherents of Freudian analysis.

well, a lot of psychologists are women, and many of them are frigid - so of course they would not 'adhere' to anything connected to sex. this is exactly why addyi is currently being marketed!

I'm a Clinical Psychologist in the UK and whereas it is certainly true that the majority of psychologists here are women , i'm not sure what evidence you have for the rest of that statement !
BTW i know for sure that insofar as projective tests are taught on current clinical psychology training courses , it is in the ' history of' section .

cohenadmirer wrote:
>I'm a Clinical Psychologist in the UK and whereas it is certainly true that the majority of psychologists here are women, i'm not sure what evidence you have for the rest of that statement!

dave, to an intuitive like myself, evidence is unnecessary. i am what people in the trade call a 'feeler', an ultra perceptive person born with the gift of a highly developed sensitivity - and astutely capable of instinctively knowing things that others can only become knowledgeable about through research.

>BTW i know for sure that insofar as projective tests are taught on current clinical psychology training courses, it is in the 'history of' section.

next to money, sex is well documented as having been the main motivation and driving force for virtually every action, especially aggression, throughout the history of mankind. the source of a person's behaviour often lies in the primitive urges hidden deep in their unconsciousness, territory to which they have no access - and that is why it is difficult for you, dave, to believe or understand this. my uncle drove all the way from eastbourne to manchester just to deposit a teaspoonful of seed into the rancid clam of a trollop; so powerful is lust. also, just because a majority of sheeple adhere to one set of rules, that does not convince an independent thinker like myself; but such is the price of super intelligence.

cohenadmirer wrote:I'm a Clinical Psychologist in the UK .

Considering your qualifications, perhaps you may be able to support a belief that I have! I believe that there are actually some men in this world who think with their brains, and not with another part of their anatomy located lower down on the body. What do you think, do you agree that such men actually exist?

Geoffrey does not appear to be a brain-thinker, and in fact, as of late, he has proven himself to be obsessed with the basic biological functions involved in reproduction, based on the contents of almost all of his recent postings on this forum. This has clearly rendered him incapable of higher intellectual thought.

And so, cohenadmirer, as a mental health professional, do you think that there is any hope for men like Geoffrey, is there a way to reconnect his brain so that he can engage in thoughtful, mature, and intelligent conversation again? Or, will we just have to write him off as a lost cause, no longer being able to enjoy his erudite commentary, and instead, having to endure the merely rude ramblings of a man now controlled by base animal instincts?

Karren B wrote:It reminds me of beautiful Christmas decoration too Geoffrey. Much like this one in London. [wonderful picture] Looking forward to watching the Carmen video you uploaded, I had a quick peek and you are right about the quality, it's very good.
xx

thanks for the great image, karren. the person who coloured it has used excellent combinations.

'carmen' is possibly my favourite opera. an inspired work, from 'habanera' and 'seguedilla', right up to the excruciatingly emotional 'c'est toi! c'est moi' - in which the voices of carmen and josé interweave and merge together in that final agonising duet. passion is a cruel dictator that often seems to encourage a person to hurt the only one they love.
xx

LisaLCFan wrote:

cohenadmirer wrote:I'm a Clinical Psychologist in the UK .

Considering your qualifications, perhaps you may be able to support a belief that I have! I believe that there are actually some men in this world who think with their brains, and not with another part of their anatomy located lower down on the body. What do you think, do you agree that such men actually exist?

Geoffrey does not appear to be a brain-thinker, and in fact, as of late, he has proven himself to be obsessed with the basic biological functions involved in reproduction, based on the contents of almost all of his recent postings on this forum. This has clearly rendered him incapable of higher intellectual thought.

And so, cohenadmirer, as a mental health professional, do you think that there is any hope for men like Geoffrey, is there a way to reconnect his brain so that he can engage in thoughtful, mature, and intelligent conversation again? Or, will we just have to write him off as a lost cause, no longer being able to enjoy his erudite commentary, and instead, having to endure the merely rude ramblings of a man now controlled by base animal instincts?

A lot human variables seem roughly to follow the 'inverted U curve' and i suspect the issue of how much men are influenced by sexual drives vs cerebral moderators of those drives also follows an inverted u so that most are affected by both , with very few mainly influenced by cerebral factors or sexual drives alone. Yet another current minor ' sex scandal' in uk politics shows a senior politician who is probably largely cerebral nonetheless getting into potential trouble because of sexual drives, and in the usa the husband of a current presidential candidate has some history of that .
As for Geoffrey, surely a talented , complex man who probably is self aware and knows what he's doing when he writes posts that provoke some of us. His posts are , in many ways sadly, usually the most interesting in a forum that may be slowly dying. Before looking at G's posts, and conversations surrounding them, i of course look for news of what Leonard might be doing- but it's been a while since anything interesting came up there.

cohenadmirer wrote:A lot human variables seem roughly to follow the 'inverted U curve'.

I hope you're not suggesting that Geoffrey is in any way "average""! He wouldn't like that at all!

cohenadmirer wrote:As for Geoffrey, surely a talented, complex man who probably is self aware and knows what he's doing when he writes posts that provoke some of us.

Do you think so? That never crossed my mind!

i see there has been some talk about me while my back was turned. you seem to be made for each other. i just wish i could be like you two, so normal and perfect - must be real nice