Harrington: It's what I call my psychic ability to make the lenses of television cameras that are broadcasting glow. The IdEAL ORDER part was left over from a collaborative grafitti art project I did with my spouse, Elsie Russell. I'm a big believer in not enhancing individual spiritual attributes with personality. By calling it something bizarre, like IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV it assumes a state unto itself. We named it that around the same time Genesis P-Orridge was getting his group together... synchronicity, I guess... When questioned, I've been clear about my non-affiliation, however, you're correct in assuming that Genesis' work has been beneficial to the goals of my project.I've contacted them a bit through email, answering questions and discussing about out mutual goals. My recent Scotland performance was curated by an associate of Genesis', Robert Frenais.
SPEED: What were the circumstances under which you discovered/developed this ability?
Harrington: I'd been having some very deep meditative experiences and my spouse, Elsie would tell me that my eyes would glow afterward. I was employed at the time at Liberty Audio/Video (the very first record store in the world, on Madison Ave). as the record department manager. There wasn't much business; I spent most of the day watching a bank of TV's. I started trying to make the people on live TV (newcasters, MTV VJ's, etc.) react to my ability to make my eyes glow. It wasn't until months later that I found out that the lens was actually glowing.
I began experimenting with ways to get the people on camera (usually newscasters) to demonstrate the effect. I developed a way to make them blink more often by changing the focus of my light from one eye to another. I knew that one thing a news caster did not want to do was to have a problem with blinking. Other than that, I had no idea that the effect was anything more than a neurotic delusion. I didn't even tell anyone about it, but I got confirmation months later from friends and strangers.
Elsie and I had become notorious in NYC for a grafitti art campaign. We'd been written up in the Village Voice, a play had been written about us (by Charles Ludlam, "The Avant-Garde Bourgousie", lampooning our "beauty-driven" grafitti art (but using one of our anti-art slogans: "Today's Avant-Garde IS the Bourgousie!"). We were real artist anti-heroes. The Voice had called us "Neo-conservative art vandals;" Keith Haring and his lackies were actively defacing our art.
I began zapping more and more programs; looking for people to focus on to try and get more of an effect. I began zapping the morning news programs and the CBS Evening News. As I did this, I became more aware from friends and people on the street that something really strange was happening . I beefed up our grafitti art in a more religious direction. We began using religious symbologies in bus and subway stations and we tryed to tie it all into an apocalyptic scenario. This was 1982-83 after all. Reagan was in power. Many of us really felt the world could end any day now. We started calling our street art "The Seven Seals."
Then there was a point around July-August 1983 when it was really scary for us to go out on the street because of this "apocalyptosis/art hysteria/personality cult" There were people who were beginning to believe I was Christ re-incarnate! Others just called me a saint. We'd always approached the artistic subject of religion from an absurdist point of view. Evidently we had created a feedback loop by combining the psychic phenomenon with an underground public relations campaign. It didn't help of course, when friends of mine from Juilliard would tell other stories about my psychic powers; a time when my eyes glowed uncontrollably at a party or the time I spoke directly to someone telepathically in the Juilliard cafeteria and the woman started screaming, "You spoke directly to my mind!" These were never that controllable by me to the point of being able to use them like a tool. It would just come and go at random. The TV effect was something that I could use to effect. I began entertaining the idea of using it to actively "jam" corporate and political messaging.
By this point, some Arab neighbors of ours had become upset because of my "spiritual" notoriety. We'd never paid that much attention to them, but more and more Arab men in black robes were hanging outside of our apartment building, praying. We just ignored them; finding it hard to believe that it was related to our art activism. But when mullahs, fresh off the plain from Iran, started dropping by our door when I was at work and visiting Elsie and leaving Khomeini literature, we became a little concerned. They began threatening us in the elevator when we were alone with them; we believe this probably started when they found we had put their literature in the trash. Maybe not.
Things on the street were heating up so hot, that we had photographers waiting for us outside our building. When we'd go out, people would chase after us to get a better glimpse of "that saint." We started getting worried; I had never had any interest in becoming a religious figure. I was a composer! Elsie had recently lost a couple of documentary filmmaker friends who were making a film about a voodoo cult; they had been found chopped up in little pieces in the back of their car. We knew how crazy people could get when it came to religion, art, mob behavior, and cults. And we could see now that it was not going to come out in the legitimate press. The whole scene was going to be ignored, big-time.
We left town after death threats became more believable. But even then, I was still unconvinced that the TV effect really was not a delusion. I decided that if things got weird in New Orleans, that it had to be true. After I started zapping TV programs in New Orleans, this time without any preliminary grafitti art; it was obvious from our friends and neighbors that something was happening.
SPEED: Is this something that "anyone" might already be aware of "intuitively" or is this something one must approach with a specific mind-set, or both, or neither?
Harrington: People have told me that they could never figure out why certain strange things kept happening around certain TV personalities until they heard about this phenomenon. The Dan Rather, "What's the frequency Kenneth?" phenomenon, Reagan's sudden inability to give a speech without blinking uncontrollably. (In retrospect that could have been Alzheimers' related!)
SPEED: Do you know more than the average person about the 'What's the Frequency, Kenneth?' episode?
Harrington: Sorry, I've just heard a few speculations.
Actually, I have called CBS Evening News news room several times. Once, I posed as an ABC correspondent and asked about whether they were going to do a story on the disturbance effect. The reporter paused for a few minutes and then came back to me with, "It's our policy not to discuss news stories in planning." I called the news room after the Panama Invasion, accusing them of under-reporting civilian casualties and pledging to zap every news show for the next few months. Our phone went dead within minutes. It took 3 weeks for us to get phone service back. The phone company couldn't explain what happened. It ended up, they told us that a computer error had blocked our line.
SPEED: How does the process of psychic disturbance work?
Harrington: I've got no idea. It's got to have something to do with issues at the sub-quantum level, non-locality, etc.
SPEED: Do you think it's something built into televisual technology itself?
Harrington: That's my guess. It's hard for me to tell if it's something personal or whether others can do it, also. The act of seeing, itself, is an invasive act. All of us can "tell" when we're being stared at, even without eyes in the backs of our head. Seeing, seen as a penetrative act, combined with our own obvious illuminative characteristics (as lifeforms we emit all kind of radiation) enhanced by manmade amplification combine into this effect. But this is more speculation.
SPEED: Can the person on the t.v. control the effect as well?
Harrington: I would doubt this. I have noticed, though, that when some news-casters that were well aware of the effect got angry, that my process was weakened. I suspect that this has more to do with me losing concentration, but who knows?
SPEED: I'd like to ask about the relationship between your grafitti art and the television zapping. The former is a kind of interference that is very public, a group thing; while the later is much more private, an individual thing (or is it?). I ask this in terms of a certain change: televisions are everywhere in our cities (in malls, airports, shops, building lobbies, everywhere) Have you attempted to utilize the zapping as a form of graffiti by using on one of these public televisions?
Harrington: Ha... that's exactly what I'm doing! It is a kind of writing, after all, especially when seen as a way of provoking reponses (i.e. blinking) out of a specific subset of society. Our methods during the street art project were designed as non-destructive provocations. Our agenda was always unclear. We essentially were doing things to see what would happen. To this day, I'm unclear about how or what I can accomplish through this process (outside of a kind of ridiculous celebrity). I'm reminded of a scene in Tarkovsky's "The Sacrifice" when the father is telling his son about monks watering a tree they know would never survive. "They did it because it was a meditation." Interesting things happen as a result of things done for no reason.
SPEED: You've just been to Scotland to participate in the "Forbidden Science" t.v. program and to zap the national lottery. How did this go? Did you end up on the BBC talk show after all?
Harrington: The Forbidden Science show was a curated art gathering with other performance artists that do related telepathic/technology work. I did a presentation/setup Friday, the 8th and the zap Saturday night, which was disappointing because the 20 minute show was mainly a bunch of shots of things people are doing with the zillions of dollars they win. The camera angles weren't in my favor, that is, the person on camera was done from the side and not looking into the camera. The studio audience was loud and distracting to the people on camera. It's a little bit like a short British "Sabado Gigante."
Because it wasn't a good demonstration (even though it worked pretty nicely as a piece with the round projection TV and me meditating on a tiny TV in front of the audience) I volunteered to zap a Sunday morning David Frost show, which two audience members agreed to tape. I got a good zap in with one of the gentleman on TV blinking himself practically senseless... and did a followup Q&A afterward. It was a pretty good demonstration.
BBC didn't come through with the talk show, something about the complexity of the setup I requested. I insisted that they have a separate in-screen shot of the camera on me looking at itself with a mirror. The show was going to use "ghosts and psychics" as a 5-10 minute diversion from a rock star interview.
They did send a crew and they taped the whole weekend. Some spots will probably end up on latenight BBC.
I think the one thing I got through with the Q&A's and the demo was my insistence on no special privelege for this kind of illumination. I attempted to hammer my ideas that achievement of the "miraculous" is nothing; possibly even a sin. That there is no merit in this; that merit is in the illuminative act for that instant, itself.
SPEED: In terms of the problem of public-space television. What kind of responses have you provoked?
Harrington: In terms of immediate physical responses, the usual, blinks and gaps in the goings-on of the show. In terms of long term response... this is more problematic. Because of our society's authority-driven nature, the usual response is not wonder at the idea that this is possible but instead, the desire to establish hierarchy-driven spiritual merit on me. That is, I'm a saint and you're not games.
SPEED: You said regarding the zapping of public space screens that "Interesting things happen as a result of things done for no reason," but can the responses reveal their own reasons, cause after effect?
Harrington: Yes, definitely. This is one of the dangers with having reduced the effect to a physical, intrusive act, that of promoting blinking or stammering in the person on camera. The illumination is the interesting part. Often, my use of relevant increases or decreases in illumination to promote a blink here or there end up as a commentary, even though this change might be the result of me burping or being momentarily distracted.
SPEED: Along the line of public-space screens, many of them do not broadcast images, people and such, but "raw data," numerical information of various sorts. Have you experimented with any manipulation of these contents?
Harrington: No. I'm still so surpised even after 14 years of glowing cameras that I haven't attempted to add new tricks to my collection. I'm not real comfortable with the whole idea of changing or manipulating things at my will. It's so ego-driven. After the Scotland presentation, I was reminded vividly of the dangers of the ego-driven performance of psychic processes. Several people each evening came that were obviously close to delusional and requested that I help them achieve greater mastery over their own powers. One fellow bragged about causing people to have headaches; another ranted about radio transmitters in their brains.
I ended up spending about 10 minutes of my presentation Saturday night preaching about the dangers of ego-driven magic. I'm very worried about the fact that I may not inspire people to think creatively about technology and the spiritual or about meditation, but instead to obsess about getting more power over other people. In Zen, one is told always to "hide your true face." People who have attained certain methods of inner knowledge/illumination should hide themselves. This is my continuing sin.
SPEED: It seems that your project has been lumped together will others with which it doesn't really have much in common. Why do you think this is? Are you emphatic in differentiating yourself?
Harrington: I'm not certain what you mean. If you mean that it's been lumped together with channelling, etc., that's certainly true. And given the media focus on this type of psychic phenomena, understandable, although you're correct in assuming I'd like to differentiate my project from other channelling efforts. By approaching the piece as performance art, I believe that I've lessened the danger of establishing a guru/student relationship with my audience.
SPEED: I'd like to ask you about the idea of ego-driven work. Cultural theory and practice of the last twenty to eighty years (depending on one's view) is characterized in the various terms of 'the death of the subject.' How do you see your work in light of this context?
Harrington: In as much as these theories are at times relevant to the destruction of the subject-object dichotomy, yes there is relevance. But my perspective generally has been more weighted towards the traditional mystical rather than the theoretical. It's been my hope, however, to be able to teach others to produce these effects. By establishing a community of people who could interfere with corporate television illuminatively as a collective, we'd truly produce a piece without boundaries. At last, the piece would transcend my own personal political and emotional interests. However much I'd like to be able to illuminate without political intent, the temptation is too great not to try and help the process.
SPEED: Does it have to do with producing new kinds of technological subjectivities, reasserting 'subjectivity' in the face of technology, or something entirely different?
Harrington: In the examination of the 'piece,' that is, the performance of the invasive act, yes, my goal is to create new inexplicable subjectivities. Especially when it comes to intruding upon the political/propagandive process of TV as political tool, my interest has been to create a context which was meaningless, yet potent. In the upcoming US presidential debates, I find myself once again forced to abandon my hope to be able to zap both parties with equal intent. So, I end up with a more traditional theoretical role, that of intruder/provacateur, rather than that of a producer of constantly changing and inexplicable illuminative commentary.
SPEED: Where does that leave the "ego" that needs to be cautioned, and its more general relationship to technology?
Harrington: By learning how to transcend one's ego, I believe we can achieve a more interesting relationship with technology which might include direct control of telepresence enhancements to our natural psychic abilities.
SPEED: What would be, in the best of all possible worlds, the ultimate medium of demonstration for your art?
Harrington: It would require at least one broadcasting television camera focussed on a mirror. The illumination would be visible in the mirror as the camera took its own picture of its lens. To have another camera on me watching and meditating on the broadcast with a split screen of the camera's recording of itself in the mirror of its lens. To have another camera on me watching and meditating on the broadcast with a split screen of the camera's recording of itself in the mirror would be ideal.
The initial works of IdEAL ORDER were displayed in the subways and streets of NY City in 1982 and 1983. First there were a series of heads of the Greek gods pasted on the streets of NY. The intent was to take graceful beauty out of the museum and back to the streets, hoping to provoke sudden bursts of deep aesthetic appreciation in the unsuspecting public. The second project was called "The Seven Seals." It was designed as a series of pseudo-religious confrontational rubber stamp image/text formations stamped on the street and in the white spaces of subway placards. Their largest installation to date was at the infamous School Book Depository in the lower west side docks of Manhattan. (Closed by a police action in July 1983).
During the same period while Jeffrey was employed at Liberty Audio/Video he had begun experimenting with a capability developed as an offshoot to his Zen meditative practices. He discovered that he could cause broadcasting television camera lenses to glow. He began using this luminescent effect as a tool to harass media and politicians. The process is called IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV. Unfortunately, instead of achieving an artistic notoriety and provoking discussion, a frenzy of celebrity/saint hysteria was created. This attracted the attention of right-wing Islamic fundamentalists which quickly became life-threatening. Because of Jeffrey's ability to produce luminescent effects and because of the imagery employed by IdEAL ORDER (they had begun using a stamp of an angel with a Saracen sword) they had come to see Jeffrey and Elsie as demons; as agents against Khomeini whom they considered "The Light of the World." After fleeing NY in 1983 because of death threats IdEAL ORDER regrouped in Montana and later New Orleans and continued the telepathic activism on a continual basis. In 1984 IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV began a nightly zapping of the CBS Evening News and the McNeil/Lehrer News Hour and constant telepathic harassment of the Reagan administration during televised news conferences and news show appearances. IdEAL ORDER also began networking their works through the European, American, and Japanese mail art network. Since 1989 IdEAL ORDER has operated primarily through the computer networks. Images are digitized, processed and then distributed over the InterNet computer networks, GEnie, CompuServe, and local BBS's. In November 1991 IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV began focusing on a once a week disruption of the CBS Evening News so that skeptical viewers might be able to compare the illuminated with the non-illuminated broadcasts.
In 1982 I was employed as a salesman at an audio/video store in New York City and I would sit and stare at a bank of television sets. I have been involved with Zen meditation for over 20 years and while in a state of no- mind (at work) I discovered that the people on television were responding to fluctuations in my mental state. I was later to learn that I was producing a spot of bright light in the lens of the broadcasting television camera.
Since 1983 I've been using this luminescent effect to wreak havoc in the incipient mind of the media/state. I have learned to control the effect so that I can induce more eye blinking, more stammering, etc. by changing the brightness and location of the spot of light which I cause to appear in the broadcasting TV camera.
In 1991 I decided to create an experiment which would be verifiable to the public at large, so that I might prove the existence of the phenomenon to the skeptical community. So, I came up with the Thursday test. Every Thursday I illuminate the cameras of the ABC Evening News. Watchers of the show can do various things to prove the veracity of my claims. They can count the number of times Peter Jennings blinks on Thursday as compared with Friday or Wednesday. They can measure the reflected luminosity of the spot of light on Peter's eyeballs or they can count the number of mis-speaks.
I've been zapping all presidential tv appearances since late 1983. If you watch the first 1984 Reagan debate you will notice my efforts. I zapped the presidential and vice-presidential debates in 1992 - in an attempt to prevent the re-election of Bush/Quayle.
Millions of people know about this phenomenon and harbor knowledge of it through a "cult of secrecy." There is no real conspiracy in the public, it is just that people do not tell others of this story unless provoked. There have been quite a few pop songs written in homage; these usually use innuendo to refer to the phenomenon.
My intent on the Internet is to inform the public of this process. My intent is infinite and immaculate in its beautifully chaotic illuminative interventions; wreaking havoc with light. Photonic agents of bliss infiltrating the minds of commerce and conspiracy.
Jeff Harrington
idealord@dorsai.dorsai.org
People have asked me why the media (in particular the network news programs) have censored news coverage of the IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV phenomenon. Not only have they neglected mention of the ongoing Thursday Night ABC Evening News zap - they have censored stories regarding the zapping of Saddam Hussein, Reagan, Bush and other infamous public figures.
All this in the light of numerous pop songs and movies with innuendoes regarding the phenomenon. (Interestingly, a friend of mine at MTV says that there's a new story about what the REM song - "Losing My Religion" really means. ;-). The process is in actuality a much discussed one in private and in public, leading the TV viewer to ponder why the media (even the tabloids!) have neglected to report on this worldwide phenomenon. (The Skeptical Enquirer has censored this story, too - leading one to believe that they have _no_ interest in anything but debunking - but we knew that already didn't we?)
In truth - I don't know. I have been told by various people at CBS and ABC that, "We don't discuss the stories we are presently working on." My theory is that the last thing the news wants is a story about the news. Regarding the tabloids and they're neglect of the story - hmmmm... this is a bit harder to explain. I have heard stories of people in the media losing their jobs from pushing too hard about this story (in New Orleans). And - I have had several print reporters interview me and prepare a story - only to have it dropped before it goes to press.
Consciously or unconsciously (if there's a difference in the news world) there is the perception that by covering the story a "genie" would be let out of the bottle. What is this "genie?"
The genie is Zen. Fear of Zen. Fear and loathing of anarchic Zen consciousness spreading to the masses. Ho hum. And ultimately there is the fear of Jeff. Fear that he will become a cult leader. Yawn...
The media should prepare itself. The story is getting out and now - they will have to justify their coverage and lack thereof.
Whatever...
Jeff Harrington
idealord@dorsai.dorsai.org
Here are some starter questions:
Are Khomeni's followers still after you, or do they have their hands full
tracking down Salman Rushdie at the present time?
Interestingly, we have received no mail or other contacts from the New York Islamic community since we left NYC in 1983. My impression is that the "apocalyptosis" which I became notorious for in the early 80's dissipated with the decline of the Soviet Union. The interest which the Islamic community showered on us back then was most likely fueled by the general messianic interpretation of events. Most of this messianic fervor was actually mis-interpreted rumor mongering by elements in the art community of New York - most of it jokes. The New York art community really went to town against us - Charles Ludlam (Ridiculous Theatre Company) even wrote a play - The Avant-Garde Bourgeoisie - which presented me and my spouse as maniacal art activists. Never got to see it - but it seemed pretty funny. Much of this fervor against us was because we were campaigning to destroy the world art market through our street and subway art.
One of the gentleman who was part of the Islamic group at the hotel did (coincidentally I assume) come into my workplace in 1991. I think it was probably just to see if I really was back in town if it was personal at all.
Given your bold interference with presidential debates and press conferences, I'd be surprised if the secret service hasn't taken an interest in your activities. How have you managed to stay out of trouble so far?
We haven't actually stayed out of trouble. Our general interpretation of the minor bits of harassment's has been that it was not in their interest to produce a "martyr." Our phones were definitely tapped between 84-92. Mail was mis-handled. We were quite active in the mail art circles between 84-89 and much of the European mail was opened and tampered. Suspicious characters hanging around your apartment before significant news conferences, SS types making themselves known; these are all possibly mis-interpreted and anecdotal. In 1984 a black unmarked helicopter hovered over our apartment house for several minutes. The neighbors (who knew about us) were very freaked out. Black helicopters also suspiciously hovered over the house we stayed in when we left NYC. This is not good evidence, obviously of Secret Service activity but is suspicious.
Family friends and supporters of Ronald Reagan contacted us in 1986 and attempted to befriend us (even though they knew of our leftist tendencies). Both of them told us they wanted to be spies; all they wanted to do was talk politics. The woman was an office assistant of mine. When we moved back to NY they called us to check in and when I refused to talk to her the phone went dead. The phone remained inoperative for 3 weeks. The phone company told us that someone at the main office had "mis-programmed" our account to be turned off. More anecdote, but that's all we have.
After the Panamanian invasion I called CBS news to demand they do a story on the civilian casualty mis-count. Within hours our phone went dead. Again, the problem was at the office and phone repairmen were hard pressed to explain their inability to fix our problem.
You mention Richard Gere as being against your work. To what extent does the American Buddhist community support or oppose IdEAL ORDER?
I don't think Mr. Gere has focused any attention on my work at all. I would guess that he's very skeptical about my "purposes." The few times that I've zapped him he's shown little humor at the process - this is my only information. My impression is that the American Buddhist community looks at me as a self-appointed prophet - the worse kind - egomaniacal and destined for hell.
Do you have any insight into the "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" incident?
I relate it completely to my psychic TV project. I have no other information.
Once the word gets out about the success of the Psychic TV phenomenon, what is the next step?
Ultimately, I would like the knowledge of this phenomenon to spur debate about "scientific" interpretations of reality. Although I am extremely interested in scientific discovery I feel that mystery must have a large place in any modeling of our universe. Science, as Feyerabend has demonstrated, is a mythology.
I would like this knowledge to encourage other people to meditate. People can learn to harness their minds and unleash their natural telepathic capabilities.
This phenomenon is in fact the first scientific proof of the spiritual. My displays are not just "jamming" but are illuminative and demonstrate the infinite capacity of our minds.
How do you distinguish changes in the behavior of a news anchor that are caused by the Psychic TV phenomena from those just caused by chance? Is it a statistical distinction, or is there a qualitative difference?
Probably the most striking distinction between a zapped and non-zapped broadcast is the number of blinks blinked by the news reader. This is a byproduct of the camera's luminescence, not an action induced by me. By focusing my spot of light on alternating eyes I produce a distraction to the news reader which can make them blink more. By counting the blinks on the ABC Evening News Thursday broadcast and comparing those numbers to the number of blinks on the other days a statistical anomaly can be produced. The most striking artifact of the process besides blinking is the extra bit of shininess on the news reader's eyes. This is the light itself reflecting off of the moisture of the eyes. The most striking proof of all though is when the people on camera began mis-speaking and stammering from the distraction. The CBS coverage of the Presidential Conventions was striking in this regard. Mr. Rather and his cohorts were practically unable to complete sentences.
Have the networks taken any steps to reduce the influence you have on their broadcasts?
Probably the most interesting effort the networks took to limit my impact was in the case of PrimeTime Live. When the show started there was a live audience. People were staring in the camera practically the whole show instead of looking at the guests. The audience could see the luminescence. The studio audience was eliminated after a few of those events.
Have you trained others in your meditative/telepathic technique, and if so what are they doing with their abilities today?
No.
How do you interpret Richard Gere's comments at the Academy Awards? Was this just the stammering of someone who was surprised at what he saw, or was there some deeper significance? Was he trying to say something /to/ you or /about/ you?
One of the reasons I zap awards ceremonies is to get this live response to the phenomenon. Many people during presentations have said relevant things. It's just so annoying to be up there and getting distracted in front of your peers that people often will say things as an excuse for their lack of professionalism. Richard Gere's comments were a comment on the phenomenon. Most of the zen and ch'an meditation that I'm familiar with does not train the meditator to do any sort of telepathic activity. Is telepathy a well-known skill in the zen community that is being hidden from the uninitiated, or is it more of a repressed heresy that is unwelcome outside of the more esoteric Buddhist traditions?
This phenomenon is in fact the first scientific proof of the spiritual. The Buddhist tradition of meditation is futile if there is any intention to achieve. Meditation itself must be the intention. The side-effects which can be achieved by accomplished practitioners are usually regarded as dangerous and a distraction to the perfection of the practice but they happen nonetheless. I'm concerned that people intentionally begin meditation to achieve this power and searching for power inside of one's minds can only lead to madness. Meditation is dangerous.
My attainment of psychic powers is a side effect to my achievement of no-mind. I've always had extraordinary psychic abilities and the meditation has allowed me to focus these capabilities. When I attempt to "zap" someone, that is, actually sit down in front of my TV set and focus my attention - the effects are very weak. It is only when I focus my mind on itself and lose my ego that the luminescence becomes striking.
The esoteric Buddhist traditions are filled with information on magical capabilities attainable by those who have harnassed their minds. Stories of flying monks, of being able to "swim" through matter, read other's thoughts, cause the appearance of luminescent phenomenon in the sky, and summoning celestial beings are rife in the Tibetan literature. In the Zen tradition these stories are looked at as evidence of heresy. There are many stories of monks using their powers and of the priests mocking them. The meaningless of activity itself is something realized through Zen meditation. Why would someone want to attain extra-physical attainment. What would this accomplish?
As I've taken no vows and am not interested in teaching Zen I consider my efforts to be in the realm of the Zen troublemaker or "crazy cloud." My actions are meant to disturb and enlighten in an absurd ego-less context.
[citing previous comment by Harrington] My displays are not just "jamming" but are illuminative and demonstrate the infinite capacity of our minds. The displays are certainly far outside of what most people in the scientific-paradigm world can accept as being part of their reality. So there is liable to be some resistance to believing that they even exist. Since I don't watch television, I haven't had an opportunity to see these displays first-hand, and have had to rely on your accounts. This presents some problems of course, since on the surface there is little that separates your accounts of the Psychic TV phenomenon from commonly discredited paranoid or schizophrenic hallucinations. What is being done to enhance the visibility and/or credibility of the phenomena among those in majority consensus reality?
The only way in which this story is being spread before the recent articles about it has been by word of mouth. I established the Thursday zap of ABC Evening News in order to establish a control - so that people who did not have friends in the broadcast television world could prove to themselves that the process was operative. The recent Mondo 2000 article happened only after I zapped rusirius on the Donahue show and then bragged about it on the alt.cyberpunk InterNet news group. Before this, the print and broadcast media have been ignoring the phenomenon. There have been a few articles which gave "homage" to it. These are loosely disguised as commentaries on the "weird." but without a verifiable connection to my phenomenon, My sense is that the story now has become so widely known - that is, a critical mass of people now know about it and it is so interesting that the media is being forced to cover the story. Especially in the segments of society interested in extra-mundane phenomenon, their media are being forced to do stories or admit a less than exhaustive approach or even "censorship" in the face of widespread, although underground knowledge.
The possibility that I suffer from paranoia or schizophrenia and that the story is a personal delusion is discounted by the liveliness of the rumor mill which has evolved around this phenomenon. Without continuous and active verification of the story it would have never grown to current proportions and would have remained another story of delusion.
Paranoid and schizophrenic delusions have always been something I've been very interested in because they evidence the structure of the mind. I find it extremely fascinating that this feeling of connectedness to the people on TV is a common drug user delusion. I believe that all people, all beings are telepathic and that it is possible that feelings of these psychic connections may be enhanced under artificial or real schizophrenic states.
Jeff Harrington