Baby boomer. Have been in accounting for 28+ years and am now reconnoitering to a new midlife career change in the challenging field of Adult marginal and early literacy which I consider related.To preview the details of my company go to http://www.manta.com/c/mm89pvd/g-e-enterprises-and-associates-llc
Blackfish tells the story of Tilikum, a performing killer whale that killed several people while in captivity. Along the way, director-producer Gabriela Cowperthwaite compiles shocking footage and emotional interviews to explore the creature’s extraordinary nature, the species’ cruel treatment in captivity, the lives and losses of the trainers and the pressures brought to bear by the multi-billion dollar sea-park i
This emotionally wrenching, tautly structured story challenges us to consider our relationship to nature and reveals how little we humans have learned from these highly intelligent and enormously sentient fellow mammals.
Tilikum was captured from the wild in 1983 when he was 2 years old. His captivity began at Sealand until they closed and he was bought by SeaWorld. He has remained at SeaWorld ever since, despite the captivity stress he is clearly under.
Sadly, we must now report that Tilikum is very sick and there are concerns for his life. SeaWorld veterinary and animal care teams are worried that his health is deteriorating due to a possible bacterial infection which is very strong and resisting treatment.
The news broke earlier this week when SeaWorld shared a video in which veterinarian Scott Gearhart reported on his health:
I wish I could say I was tremendously optimistic about Tilikum and his future, but he has a disease which is chronic and progressive and at some point might cause his death
A mesmerising psychological thriller with a killer whale at its centre, Blackfish is the first film since Grizzly Man to show how nature can get revenge on man when pushed to its limits. Blackfish tells the story of Tilikum, a performing killer whale that killed several people while in captivity. Along the way, director-producer Gabriela Cowperthwaite compiles shocking footage and emotional interviews to explore the creature’s extraordinary nature, the species’ cruel treatment in captivity, the lives and losses of the trainers and the pressures brought to bear by the mulit-billion dollar sea-park industry.
SeaWorld plans to phase out its controversial killer whale show at its San Diego location starting next year, amid ongoing criticism about its treatment of the animals, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune.
The Tribune reported that the company announced its plan in an online document, which since has been removed from the company's website. The paperalso reported that the new orca experience will debut in San Diego in 2017 to replace the "Shamu" show.
The company, which operates 11 theme parks, instead will focus on inspiring guests to focus on conservation, Joel Manby, chief executive of SeaWorld Entertainment Inc., said Monday in a webcast. The company will work with public schools to educate 50 million students on conservation in the next five years.
Manby didn't mention the end of the shows at the company's other locations.
The decision comes amid efforts at both the state and federal levels to ban live performances and captive breeding of killer whales.
The marine life park has been under fire since the 2013 documentaryBlackfish examined how the living conditions of whales might cause them to lash out violently against their trainers. The film attempted to find an explanation for three deaths caused by an aggressive killer whale. In the wake of the documentary, protesters called on SeaWorld to end the practice of using whales for entertainment.
The move also comes eight months after Feld Entertainment, the parent company of Ringling Brothers, announced that the circuswill be retiring all of its performing elephants by 2018.
Turns out most reports were not completely accurate as SeaWorld San Diego is only phasing out the current version of the show. The Orcas will remain at SeaWorld San Diego and a new killer whale experience will be introduced.
“I’m cautiously optimistic,” Cowperthwaite said in a phone interview from Spain, where she’s working on her latest documentary.
“My understanding is that SeaWorld may not be stopping the orca show at all. They may simply be repackaging it so that orcas will perform more natural-looking tricks in new choreographed acts,” she added.
The documentary concerns the captivity of Tilikum, an orca involved in the deaths of three individuals, and the consequences of keeping orcas in captivity.[4] The coverage of Tilikum includes his capture in 1983 off the coast of Iceland, and purported harassment by fellow captive orcas atSealand of the Pacific, incidents that Cowperthwaite argues contributed to the orca's aggression and includes testimonial from Lori Marino, Director of Science with the Nonhuman Rights Project. Cowperthwaite also focuses onSeaWorld's claims that lifespans of orcas in captivity are comparable to those in the wild,[5] typically 30 years for males and 50 years for females,[6] a claim the film argues is false.[7] Interview subjects also include former SeaWorld trainers, such as John Hargrove, who describe their experiences with Tilikum and other captive whales.
The documentary reports that the whales have experienced extreme stress when their offspring were captured in the wild or when separated after breeding at water parks. The film features footage of attacks on trainers by Tilikum and other captive whales, and interviews with witnesses.
SeaWorld Entertainment refused to take part in the production of Blackfish, and later claimed the film was inaccurate,[18] saying in a statement:
Blackfish ... is inaccurate and misleading and, regrettably, exploits a tragedy .... [T]he film paints a distorted picture that withholds ...key facts about SeaWorld—among them...that SeaWorld rescues, rehabilitates and returns to the wild hundreds of wild animals every year, and that SeaWorld commits millions of dollars annually to conservation and scientific research.[19]
SeaWorld responded further with an open letter rebutting the claims.[5] The Oceanic Preservation Society and The Orca Project, a non-profit focusing on orca in captivity, responded with open letters criticizing SeaWorld's claims.[20][21] Marine researcher Debbie Giles also offered rebuttals to SeaWorld, finding its assertions inaccurate.[22]
On December 31, 2013, the Orlando Business Journal posted a poll asking if Blackfish had changed readers' opinions on SeaWorld. The majority of votes stated that the film had not. It was later found that 180 out of 328 votes (55%) originated from a single SeaWorld-hosted IP address.[23] SeaWorld defended the voting, stating that "each of the votes that came from a SeaWorld domain were cast by team members who are passionate about the incredible work SeaWorld does and the experiences our parks provide."[24]
SeaWorld also created a section of its website titled "Truth About Blackfish," addressing the claims stated above and highlighting what it considered other problems with the film.[25][26]
On February 27, 2014, SeaWorld filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Labor, claiming the Occupational Safety and Health Administration investigator who investigated Brancheau's death had behaved unethically by aiding the filmmakers. Cowperthwaite denied claims of improper collaboration.[27]
In March 2014, Cowperthwaite rebutted a number of claims on SeaWorld's website and challenged SeaWorld officials to a public debate.[28]
SeaWorld announced afterward it had suffered a $15.9 million loss, which CEO James Atchison attributed in part to high ticket prices and poor weather.[33]
Overall attendance at SeaWorld parks and Busch Gardens declined by 5% in the first nine months of 2013, though it was unclear if the drop in attendance was due to the influence of the film.[27] SeaWorld claimed attendance figures for its three marine parks — Orlando, San Diego and San Antonio — in the last three months of 2013 were at record levels for that quarter.[34]
In response to the film, New York State SenatorGreg Ball proposed legislation in New York that bans keeping orcas in captivity.[35] In March 2014, California State AssemblymanRichard Bloom introduced the Orca Welfare and Safety Act, a bill in California that would ban entertainment-driven orca captivity and retire all current whales.[36] In June 2014, U.S.Congressmen Adam Schiff and Jared Huffman attached an amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations Act, requiring theUSDA to update the Animal Welfare Act in regards to cetacean captivity. It passed with "unanimous bipartisan support."[37]The bill allocates 1 million USD to studying the impacts of captivity on marine mammals. Schiff cited Blackfish as raising public concern.[38]
G. I Gurdjieff and P. D. Ouspensky are rightly famous for taking 20th century esotericism onto a new path. Together they introduced the western world to the concept of the ‘esoteric school’ as a place of not just learning but self-transformation. There had, of course, been many writers and teachers of esotericism before this — one thinks here of men like Ramon Lull, Dr John Dee, Robert Fludd and even ladies such as H. P. Blavatsky and Annie Besant. However Gurdjieff, ably assisted by his amanuensis Ouspensky, brought a new modernity to the idea of ‘the work’. Together they presented a set of ideas that while seemingly ancient in origin were wholly modern in exposition. For whereas teachers like Blavatsky were essentially revivalists of ideas and traditions (such as her esoteric ‘Budhism’ and Egyptian mysticism) most of what they wrote was out of kilter with the modern world and therefore antagonistic to contemporary science. By embracing science (or at least scientific terminology) G & O were able to bring about a true esoteric Renaissance and not just a re-hash of old concepts and ideas.
Ouspensky died in 1947 and Gurdjieff in 1950, leaving behind them a legacy that while rich in content, lacked the stability to go on as a genuine ‘school’ (at least in terms of the strict criteria that they themselves described in their own written works). Viewed from outside and with the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that their surviving pupils were faced with a central and insurmountable problem: none of them had been endorsed as ‘dauphin’ by either of their teachers while a number of them felt inside that this indeed was their destiny. The result was squabbling and the setting up of mutually exclusive cliques. Each of these successor ‘schools’ believed that their leader was the next teacher in the line set up by G and O and that their ‘sect’ preserved the true essence and purity of their teaching. What nearly all failed to realise or recognise is that real teachers do not ape their former master or derive their authority second-hand. To be a true master (and therefore worthy of wearing the mantle of the teacher) it is necessary to stop being a student and to yourself manifest the living work. For without this the leader of such a ‘school’ will be an impostor, even though he may be able to repeat parrot-fashion everything that he was taught by his own teacher.
One former student of G & O who seems to have genuinely understood this was John Godolphin Bennett. I had the great good fortune of meeting him on a number of occasions in the period from 1972 to shortly before his death in 1974. Bennett was by any standards a remarkable man. Of his early life he left no public record, beginning his autobiography ‘Witness’ with his own near-death experience when wounded in the trenches in 1918. He tells us that while recovering in hospital, (the ‘Great War’ nearing its end) he heard that a posting to Turkey as an intelligence officer was in the offing. Anxious to secure this, in a matter of a few months he learned enough Turkish to convince his superiors he was the man for the job. In Constantinople (the old name for Istanbul) and by now promoted to the staff rank of Lieutenant Colonel at the young age of 21, he became, by 1920, head of British Intelligence for the entire Near East! Over the course of the next fifty years he learnt numerous other languages and dialects including Greek, Armenian, Tibetan, Sanskrit and Indonesian. His period in Constantinople had other repercussion for it was whilst he was resident there that he met G & O for the first time, being instrumental in helping the former to get a visa to emigrate to England. During the Second World War Bennett was Director of the British Coal Utilization Research Association, which pioneered the development of more efficient fires and smokeless fuel. This work brought him into contact with such eminent scientists as Lord Rutherford. Already deeply interested in mathematics, Bennett’s interests in management theory progressed into the then new field of Computer Science and the development of ‘Systematics’. For most of us such busy-ness would be more than enough to occupy our time. However for Bennett these endeavours were only a distraction from his real work and passion which was ‘the work’.
I pass on this potted life-history not because I think we should idolise Bennett but rather to show that he was no fool. Following the death of first O and then G —both were his teachers at different times — he did not stay with the ‘Gurdjieff Society’ (a name which G himself would have mocked remorselessly) but struck out on his own. His journey took him into some strange by-ways and brought him into contact with quite a number of teachers and perhaps pseudo-teachers before he felt ready to start a school of his own: ‘The International Academy for Continuous Education’ at Sherborne House near Cheltenham. It was here that I met him for the first time, which is an event that I won’t describe here as I have written about it in detail in one of my own books: ‘Magi’.
It is unfortunate that Bennett died in December 1974 at a time when his experimental school was still in its infancy. However he did leave behind him a considerable legacy of written works, most (perhaps all) of which I have read. His books even more than his lectures do, I think, mark him out as the greatest British philosopher of the 20th century. He was, in my opinion, head and shoulders above charlatans like A. J. Ayer and Bertrand Russell who, for reasons more to do with their politics than the quality of their ideas, are still lionised by the British media. Bennett, by contrast, was not just an intellectual living in an ivory tower but someone who had achieved much both in the outer world (soldier, administrator, author, teacher) and in his inner world. His works, some of them very complicated in the language they use, reach out for a new paradigm. More to the point, he took the embryonic ideas of G & O (what the latter himself refers to as ‘Fragments of an Unknown Teaching’) and brought them to maturity. For this we should all be grateful.
Now I was never one of Bennett’s pupils — not in the normal, esoteric sense of guru and disciple — but I did attend a number of his public talks that he gave in London. During these, delivered almost in a whisper, he stated that his work was not intended for his own time but would be better understood by future generations. Well, 35 years on we are a different generation. Those of us who were young at the time he delivered his talks are now ourselves approaching retirement age. It now behoves us to take on the responsibility for progressing the work into the 21st century and this is the main reason that I have set up this Invisible College. I think (or at least I hope) that Bennett would approve of what we are doing. Himself a pioneer of the mathematical basis of computer systems, he would have been, I am sure, extremely interested in the way the internet has enabled us to break free from the censorship of the mainstream media to further ideas of self-development and transformation worldwide.
It is in this spirit that I want to talk now about what I believe to be in many ways his most important book. Called, simply, ‘Transformation’ it is one of his shorter works and actually very simple in language and construction. Unlike his Magnum Opus the four volume ‘Dramatic Universe’, it does not make use of long words and special constructs. Straight forward and to the point it is written with the general reader in mind and is therefore accessible to us all. The Transformation he speaks of in the title is the alchemy by which we humans can change ourselves, over the course of our lives, from the base-metal of ignorant savages to the gold of illumination. It is a hand-book of self-development that is quite unlike any other that I have read. He does not, for example, provide prescription remedies of ‘cook-book’ techniques for gaining power, wealth or love. What he does provide is an outline philosophy for us to fill out ourselves according to our own temperaments and needs. Now I am not going to go into the book in detail as it is still in print if you wish to read it. However, I am going to sketch out the general principles he presents for us as they are highly relevant to our own work in the Invisible College.
Bennett states that for Transformation to be successful, there are four ‘sources’ (I prefer to label these as ingredients) that need to be recognised and kept in balance. These are Knowledge, Struggle, Help and Sacrifice. If you want to be astrological about this, these correspond roughly with the elements of Air, Earth, Water and Fire. Because of our own make-up and personality we will each one of us be more attracted to one of these four aspects than the others. This, however, is a mistake. We cannot make much progress if we restrict ourselves in this way: we need all four cylinders to be firing for us or our engines won’t generate the power that we need. So let’s now take these in order.
Knowledge.
Well I think we can all agree that this is a fairly obvious ingredient. If you want to be successful in any endeavour, then you need knowledge. To this end we read books, watch documentaries and attend lectures. However we need also to exercise some discernment in what we take in. We may think we have knowledge but it can turn out that this knowledge is either wrong or has been superseded. This is actually one of the main problems we have. The word ‘science’ comes from the Latin scientia meaning knowledge. Yet science itself is always going out of date and constantly having to be re-appraised. So to be a true scientist we must be flexible and always willing to learn something new.
This may seem obvious and perhaps it is when we are talking about material science. However most people are much less flexible when it comes to ideas concerning religion. We tend to form our religious ideas in childhood or during the period of our early twenties and then stick with these for life. People will say they are a life-long Catholic, Muslim or even Atheist not realising that they have maybe not even considered any alternative for twenty, thirty or even fifty years.
Those of us on the path cannot afford to be stuck like this. We need to keep our minds open and alert, aware that the ideas and attitudes that served us well in one period of our lives may very well be inappropriate later. We cannot afford to take the religion of our infancy as an immutable fact when we are forty or we may easily find ourselves regressing rather than progressing.
Knowledge, therefore is important and I would go further: so is a flexible attitude to Faith. We should not confuse faith with dogmatism. We need to keep our faith flexible and adjustable so that it can change as we change.
Struggle
The second ingredient is just as important as the first. It is not enough to know a lot, in order to change we have to make ourselves different. This will inevitably produce friction within as our new intentions at self-improvement clash with established habits. One of the first aspects of the work is to become aware of who we are: that is to say our strengths and weaknesses. Gurdjieff writes that when dealing with new students he would look for where their bunions are and then stamp on these very hard to see how they behaved. This might seem cruel but what he is talking about is finding out what their areas of ‘soreness’ are: their points of friction. Thus at his famous banquets he would instruct the tea-totallers to drink alcohol and the alcoholics to abstain. For the individuals the struggle of doing this would produce in sharp relief their areas of weakness. The first group, the way they maybe shrink from contact with sociability, the second how they are dependent on a drug in order to ‘be themselves’.
Now we don’t have to do what he did to bring these things to our attention but we do need to struggle with our bad habits. Curiously enough, because these always stem for the nature of our patterning —partly through heredity, partly from the astrology of our birth but also maybe a legacy of past-lives — the major temptations in our lives never change. This is what we mean when we say that ‘people never change’. Actually they do (if they are developed that is) but what doesn’t change is the type of things that tempt them. Poor old George Best couldn’t resist a drink and others can’t resist sex, gambling, stealing, telling lies, laziness or vaunting arrogance. These are character traits and we have to struggle with them. It is a battle we will never entirely win on this side of the grave but in struggling with our habits we create heat and this enables us to crystallise our higher bodies. More on this subject in a later essay.
Help
In order to be successful we need help. We cannot, any of us, do it all for ourselves. We see this around us in daily life. It is because mankind learnt how to cooperate with one another and pool resources that we have been able to achieve more than subsistence living. We need to help each other but we also need help from other sources too. There are many of these available but mostly they are unseen. There are, for example, angels and other higher beings who can help us on our way. There are subtle energies: what is called by Christians ‘Grace’ and by Jews and Muslims ‘Baruch’ or ‘Baraka’. We need to avail ourselves of these energies, which can be contacted through prayer, mediation or also by visiting places of sanctity.
This, actually, was the purpose of pilgrimage in the old days. People used to visit the shrines of saints so that they would come into contact with both the spirit of the saint himself and the special energies in the atmosphere of his shrine. We can still do this now.
Later, as we progress with the work, we can learn how to access these energy sources directly and how to invoke atmospheres that can be of help to our work. The principle, however, is the same and so is the requirement. We must first overcome our pride and admit that we do indeed need help. That in itself can be a major hurdle for some people, especially if they associate a need for help with personal weakness. In order for our work to be successful we must get over such useless attitudes and admit the obvious: we are all of us weak in one way or another and we all need help from time to time. In this work help is essential.
Sacrifice
This is in some ways the hardest ingredient to understand. We are not here talking about sacrificing to imaginary gods or slaying animals in atonement for sins. Sacrifice is really about breaking our attachments, about letting go. Ouspensky tells a story in one of his books about how a lady student asked him what she should do to progress. He told her she must break one of her prized tea-cups that she had inherited from her mother. The set was very expensive and it had great sentimental value, so much so that she found she couldn’t break the cup. This, he said, was what was holding her back.
Now the lesson here was not that she should break something beautiful but that her attachment to her tea-set was perhaps symptomatic of other attachments. It is good to have things but if we are too attached to possessions, then they possess us. It is the same with our relationships with people. Real love is not the same as desire for possession of someone else’s body. We have to be ready to let go: for example to give our children space to grow and be themselves, our life-partners to express themselves in ways that may not even involve us. All this can cause pain but it also brings about release. Often the pain is felt prior to the release and then there is a transformation from bondage to freedom. This is a very necessary ingredient for one day we must each of us break all attachments we may have to everything we have ever owned on earth. We cannot bring our tea-sets with us into heaven and it is better that we learn this lesson now while we are still here on earth.
This, then is a very brief outline of Bennett’s book ‘Transformation’. I would recommend that you all read it, for such books are food sources for our minds and souls. We need to avail ourselves of such help while we still can.
Posts
_(Shamu).jpg)
