Paper Response

Hi Greg,

I’m giving you feedback on your paper in this email. I apologize for the length of it but I though a lot about how to approach your work and it lead to wordiness. I will include a much shorter and heavily edited version on the blog. I do not intend to insult so I hope I have not, but I decided its best to be as candid as possible in the hopes of making this class worthwhile to you.

Your personal interest in multidimensionality, human energy, a unified cosmology, and the developing the ability to harness and direct energy to ascend consciously to higher reality is commendable and interesting. I find myself wondering how your academic work is being accepted. I am just teaching at Texas Tech for this one class and have not long-term associations to any of the programs. Your future success is in no way dependent upon my position and you grade for this class is strictly tied to the requirements of this class so I am going to take a chance and give you the feedback I would like to receive if I were in your shoes.

I found myself approaching your essay about Keylontic Science the same way I approach student works that use the Bible or Qur’an as ‘evidence’ for their research. Ultimately, as you state Keylontic Science is ‘steeped in views of reality outside those of mainstream consensus.’ I find it much easier to think about it as a source of inspiration for your creative work than to feel I need to assess its validity as a belief system. (I have in my circle of friends and artists other people who have great interest in Keylontics).

Your paper states as its intent to share an overview of KS “along with a cultural perspective centered on the way that creative visual work and music are being created today, with a conscious focus on the application of principles of Keylontic science” which you hope can mitigate the negative influences on humanity you have described with a goals of helping to raise humanity to a new and better reality.

I did enjoy imagining visual and musical art works developed around such ideas such as cosmic resurrection cycles, light and energy bodies, out of body travel, levitation, and transmutation. This would seem to me to carry much possibility. Ultimately you want to make art that changed the world through ‘positive/transformational paradigm shifts in contemporary society.” (Interestingly enough, that’s what I want to do with my art too!)

I especially liked how you drew parallels between goals of KS and applications with accepted science such as using color to effect psychological change, the way that corporations use visual materials to reinforce positive responses, and the ways that sound can be used for healing purposes.

You describe the research and dissertation you are working on as structured to analyze elements that exhibit the presence of Keylontic principles in the plastic arts and music. I was curious how the specific frequencies you mentioned as being in music that are known as Krystic frequencies in Keylontic science are described and discussed in traditional music theory? I was also curious if you see ‘crystalline spirals’ represented in anywhere in current art and music. I know you are interested in how these principles can be combined with spiritual teachings and existing visual and musical codifications within KS, but how does this relate the established norms of your disciplines? You are going to have to make this connection or you are just going to be talking to yourself.

You include a painting that you describe as embodying ‘attempts to visualize forms of multi-dimensional structure beyond the domain of visible frequencies seen by humans in a very subjective way.’ You could have focused this whole paper on a deeper analysis of that one image as a microcosm of your larger effort and made it more concrete for your non KS readers.

Your thesis makes me think of the journey of the Constructivists . While the movement is generally identified by the use of constructed materials and geometric forms, it also had the goal to create art with social and political purpose. They, and Suprematists like Malevich, were interested in the fourth dimension and sought to create sublime non-representational compositions. Thanks to Einstein and non-Euclidean geometry they were grappling with the non-visible, intangible, and theoretical too, influenced by the idea that was that time was not the constant that was generally assumed. While many of the artists interpreted the fourth dimension as a metaphor for higher enlightenment and thought, their ideas were viewed by many lay folks as pure science fiction. This did not stop them from creating amazing art as they used their artmaking as a process of thinking and visualizing the concepts they sought to understand. In much of their work the goal was to reference and interpret ideas and concepts of mathematics and physics. Their goal was not often to create literal visualizations of these studies but to be inspired by them as the sought to visualize the abstract.

There are some concepts that are impossible to give material form. Just as you seek to explicate KS they attempted the task of visualizing the concepts of non-Euclidean geometry and the fourth dimension. They were most successful when they approached these studies in artistic and poetic manners.

Your essay does a good job of describing the beliefs and interests that motivate you and other KS followers. It is the foundation from which you are working and I’m sure it will be of great interest to the worldwide KS communities. It sounds like there is much to draw upon for inspiration and guidance that could put you in line with everything from Beuy’s shamanic performance to Malevich’s abstraction. I suspect, however, the success of your graduate work as a musician and an artist will ties to the power of the artistic and poetic in your art and music as interpreted by the non -KS world.

How has your work been received by your graduate program? I’m just curious if you are finding support and guidance or not. You are a good writer but I’m guessing you are being asked to ground your work in additional, more traditional art theory.

I did a series of paintings in which I tried to understand string and ribbon theory. I cannot imagine what I would have had to do to get my major professors to understand what I was doing had I been working on that in graduate school.

Paper specific, I appreciate you sharing the core of what you are working on. Ultimately this paper was too long for the first assignment, but your citations were appropriate. I would have better enjoyed having your images within the paper to further engagement me. This was useful background for me but I would also have liked you to have done a close analysis of your painting and how it exemplifies what you are trying to do in your art.

Do you think it would be possible for you to write about your art/music and what you are trying to do without citing Keylontic Science as evidence? If you break down what you are doing into the goals, specifics of how you seek to meet them, and an analysis of your success based on how you intend to measure your success (which could be aesthetically) you will be doing the same work without the danger of being dismissed. This is just a well-intentioned suggestion. If your art and music are the focus and they are wonderful your inspiration will be better received.


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: