Snake Eating its own Tail symbol. - "Doctor Who"

Woodsman

The Living Force
I've always been interested in media and the messages being used to manipulate and control, how they work, etc.

For the most part, I can do so dispassionately, but there are a couple of slowly gasping sacred cows which have been struggling over the past years. "Star Wars" was a big one; as a kid it played a big part in shaping my self-awareness. It's part of popular mythology; humans work well with stories. Heck, we use the 'Jedi' concept in this forum. It's just for fun, I realize of course, but it's also a quick way to reference common understandings. It's language. So when I see negative influences polluting today's myths, it bugs me.

"Doctor Who", (made in England), was another I grew up with. It presented another modern mythology which I found useful and encouraging. And lately it has seemed under attack. The writing staff recently invited Niel Gaiman aboard to pen an episode. My heart choked. There's something terribly off with that man. And worse, he's a very skilled scribe and spell-binder; people love him. I thought, "No! He's one of those nasty popular kids. He's not allowed to ruin something special like this! What were they thinking letting that rat in the house?" And sure enough, he just pulled off an episode which is quickly becoming a fan favorite. And yes, it's filled with strangeness and sickness.

First off. . ,

It contained numerous instances of the famous Ouroborus symbol. The snake eating its own tail. Tattooed on the arm of a "Great Light Worker"; a symbol which he had carried with him through many lives.

Okay. No biggie. It's just a picture and means only what people ascribe to it. But nonetheless, I was curious as to what the intent was behind it. What is the symbol all about? I don't actually know much about it.

So I did a search through the forum and didn't find much, and what I did find were passing references from people who already seemed to know about it. Perhaps it was mentioned in one of the many books written by Laura and others, but I can't recall seeing it discussed.

One forum member did comment in 2007, quoting Carl Jung http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=6250.msg43012#msg43012

The The alchemists, who in their own way knew more about the nature of the individuation process than we moderns do, expressed this paradox through the symbol of the uroboros, the snake that eats its own tail. ouroboros, has been said to have a meaning of infinity or wholeness. In the age-old image of the uroboros lies the thought of devouring oneself and turning oneself into a circulatory process, for it was clear to the more astute alchemists that the prima materia of the art was man himself. The uroboros is a dramatic symbol for the integration and assimilation of the opposite, i.e. of the shadow. This 'feed-back' process is at the same time a symbol of immortality, since it is said of the uroboros that he slays himself and brings himself to life, fertilises himself and gives birth to himself. He symbolises the One, who proceeds from the clash of opposites, and he therefore constitutes the secret of the prima materia which [...] unquestionably stems from man's unconscious.

I see our world is constantly eating itself; our bodies die, feed other life, and that energy is traded around endlessly so that consciousness has a place to exist and learn. In this manner, the Snake eating its own Tail symbol could be taken to represent the world we live in; Densities 1 through 3. A statement of being, as it were, neither positive nor negative.

But then I can also see it as an occult symbol of great negativity; a nihilist's celebration of the Black Hole, the psychopathic personality unaware that it is part of a greater whole, ruthlessly eating the world it is a part of without realizing that this will result in its own destruction.

So. . , what gives?

Does it mean both things? Is it something else?

What was the original intent behind the creation of this symbol?

Anyway, back to "Doctor Who". The Doctor explained that with great enthusiasm that the wearer of this Snake symbol was a great man of goodness and light, giving a powerful personal endorsement. That's something to be wary of in terms of media manipulation. It's not unlike like getting Santa Claus, Superman or Jesus to endorse Nike, Coca Cola or the Pope. This really put my warning flags up. The Doctor was essentially endorsing the concept of the Snake eating its own Tail which is why I want to know exactly what was intended by this symbol.

But worse, (and very likely connected) at the end of the episode, the Doctor actually commanded the death of another being. This was done without a fuss and it was not focused on as anything untoward or special; just the logical conclusion to that story, to be expected. But this was no small matter, as it ran absolutely counter to everything the Doctor has ever stood for. He's never deliberately killed before. Viewers were manipulated all through the episode to fear and despise this Enemy which had hurt and tormented the characters. But even the long-time nemesis, "The Master", even the hateful Daleks, the Doctor always managed to choose a path away from murdering or killing. But this time, he had no problem at all killing when any number of other solutions might have presented themselves. It was freaky. It was wrong.

And worse. . , it wasn't the killing of a body with a consciousness inside it. No, no, no. It was made very clear in the episode that it was the consciousness itself which was being destroyed. Forever.

Frankly, upon review, the whole story looked like a black trick to ensnare lots and lots of people in a giant soul-smashing maneuver.

Stories are powerful.
 
Hello Woodsman,
as i remember Dr Who was a British series from the 60's or 70's where he he used a public telephone to travel through space and time. Is it this series that it broadcasted again?
 
mkrnhr said:
Hello Woodsman,
as i remember Dr Who was a British series from the 60's or 70's where he he used a public telephone to travel through space and time. Is it this series that it broadcasted again?

That's the one. It was re-launched in 2005 and quickly became high-profile pop-culture in England.
 
Woodsman said:
But this was no small matter, as it ran absolutely counter to everything the Doctor has ever stood for. He's never deliberately killed before.
Not quite true, he wiped out the darleks and the timelords. The first episode of the new series to feature a darlek he is quite ready to shoot it and rose stops him.

Woodsman said:
Frankly, upon review, the whole story looked like a black trick to ensnare lots and lots of people in a giant soul-smashing maneuver.

Stories are powerful.

It might be worth your while taking a step back and asking why this TV episode has had such an impact on you that it drove you research and post these thoughts? After all we know that TV is pure mind programming. This story certainly had a powerful effect on you, and I think you have let your horses run away with you on this one.

I understand your emotional connection to it being a big 'doctor who fan' myself, but I try to keep in mind what the C's said in the last session.

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=22855.0
Q: (Burma Jones) What do they mean by “psychic hygiene”?

A: Being careful about what you allow into your ”field”.

Q: (L) In what sense?

A: All senses.

Q: (L) What do you mean “all senses”?

A: Seeing, hearing, speaking, and so on

Q: (Ark) So, uh, I will tell a story about this “using all your senses”. A few days ago, I went out and I almost had an accident. I was driving on the interior peripherique - on the lane that was closest to the middle. There are three lanes. There was a guy behind me who was very unhappy that I was driving only 90kmh. He was swaying from left to right, trying to get past me and I could see it in the rear-view mirror. I looked to the right and realized I cannot do anything, because there was a car. I could see it.

So, I stayed. After about two minutes, you know, the one behind me again starts to act impatient behind me. But then, I look in the mirror again and the car to the right is gone. So I figure he must have moved somewhere else. Then I started to do {Ark makes descriptive hand gestures showing his driving maneuver} – only the car was there exactly in the right angle [to be in the blind spot.] But, uh, he was a young guy and he was fast. He steps on the brakes – and nothing happened, you see? I usually do not do such things. I was thinking very fast and that he must be gone, but I was not 100% sure. So, I should have waited until I was 100% sure. So, of course nothing happened, he just got upset.

A: We have more in mind. Take care with interacting with negative energies.

Q: (L) Well that’s kinda like creating your own reality, isn’t it?

A: Not what we mean… Keep your guard up and do not allow negative energies to slip by… such as believing lies… listening to negative music while thinking it is positive…watching negative movies and thinking it is negligible. It is extremely important to not lie to the self. One can listen or watch many things as long as the truth of the orientation is known, acknowledged, and understood. Clear?

Q: (L) So, in other words: awareness. Calling a spade a spade and not allowing something negative to enter you and believing it is positive. You can see it, perceive it and acknowledge it but not allow it to influence you. Because obviously, you cannot shut off your perceptions of the world, but you can control how it affects you. So, don’t let it inside, thinking it’s something that it’s not.

(Belibaste) So, see it as it is. If it is negative, see it as negative.

(L) Yeah, and they’re saying to focus on truth in order for changes to manifest in you that are positive. That is, “positive” can mean acknowledging that something is negative because it is truth.

Q: (Galatea) Choose the seeds you wish to water.

(L) Is that basically what we’re talking about here?

A: Yes

Q: (Ark) But I would say that everybody needs a panoramic retro-mirror.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) because that stuff sneaks up behind you and it gets in your blind spot.

I think what you did was discover an emotional attachment to doctor who, and rather than call it what it is (a TV show like any other full of programming, that is just now becoming more overtly obvious) you have held onto the emotional connection and tried to justify doing so by putting the focus (out of all proportion) onto the show and its writer. You are letting negative energy in, and then trying desperately to flush it out whilst keeping its path in open. osit

fwiw I need to look at doing the same, as doctor who has been a big part of my (emotional) life....and as its been a 'big part' it means I'm emotionally attached/invested in it.
 
RedFox said:
...It might be worth your while taking a step back and asking why this TV episode has had such an impact on you that it drove you research and post these thoughts? After all we know that TV is pure mind programming. This story certainly had a powerful effect on you, and I think you have let your horses run away with you on this one...
I quite agree. I have watched the show for many years and I find it interesting to observe what the stories bring to mind, but after all it is just a TV series. And if it changes course for a direction that I don't want to go I will stop watching it.

Over the last few years I have been making an adjustment away from dissociating while reading books (fiction) or watching movies and TV (and there are very few TV shows that I will watch) and more toward self-observation. It is a different way of experiencing "entertainment," one that uses the time to learn as well. Some stories are especially hard not to be drawn into, and those can be very helpful.

I recently had a major struggle with the novel Safe Haven by Nicholas Sparks, about a battered wife escaping a pathological husband. It brought up all kinds of things (PTSD) that I thought I had pretty much put to rest, and things I didn't even know were there to see. I was exhausted by the end and I am taking a little break now from reading any more fiction, for a month or two. It's important, though, to be observing yourself and not be sucked into the fictional story itself, feelings of moral outrage (not observed), and so forth. I am not entirely sure how I manage to choose books like this, but this one was right on target.
 
RedFox said:
It might be worth your while taking a step back and asking why this TV episode has had such an impact on you that it drove you research and post these thoughts? After all we know that TV is pure mind programming. This story certainly had a powerful effect on you, and I think you have let your horses run away with you on this one.

It's interesting because there is a very similar flavor to your posts in this thread - a lot of identification and emotional investment seem evident. Why is that?
 
RedFox said:
Woodsman said:
But this was no small matter, as it ran absolutely counter to everything the Doctor has ever stood for. He's never deliberately killed before.
Not quite true, he wiped out the darleks and the timelords. The first episode of the new series to feature a darlek he is quite ready to shoot it and rose stops him.

And thus the point was illustrated very effectively. I really thought that episode was done responsibly, establishing the Doctor's purpose and character. Also, the Daleks and Timelords were not actually killed, but placed in a "time-lock". Jail, essentially. I'm not sure why history has recently changed to his having killed them. The tone and flavor of the whole mythology has changed with the new writing staff.

I think what you did was discover an emotional attachment to doctor who, and rather than call it what it is (a TV show like any other full of programming, that is just now becoming more overtly obvious) you have held onto the emotional connection and tried to justify doing so by putting the focus (out of all proportion) onto the show and its writer. You are letting negative energy in, and then trying desperately to flush it out whilst keeping its path in open. osit

That's an interesting way of putting it.

I think the thing which has been changing lately is that the more Work I do, the less I resonate with popular media. This appears to be a natural feature of the Work. Also, at this point in Human history, the media appears to be very much in the grips of increasingly desperate and negative hands and so are changing the resonant 'frequencies' as well. It's like we're each striding in opposite directions.

And yet I also think it is an error to believe that all messages are automatically bad. Stories, music and arts of all sorts can offer very positive influences. The C's mentioned that they'd inspired some works. That "army of Aryan Projectors" was described as being both STS and STO. The battle is fought through all of us, and thus people who are creative voices play a role.

I'd seen Doctor Who as work which was largely positive, but over the last two years, it has changed frequencies and I now think it is probably a lost cause. And that does hurt; like watching a kindergarten bully stomp on a creation.

It is painful when I think of what COULD have been; stories, music and art can all be very positive influences. When I think of the ways in which creative expression has been co-opted, it does hurt.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom