Castaneda’s books insist otherwise. He is eloquent and convincing on how useless it is to explain or judge another culture entirely in terms of one’s own particular categories. “Suppose there was a Navajo anthropologist,” he says. “It would be very interesting to ask him to study us. He would ask extraordinary questions, like ‘How many in your kinship group have been bewitched?’ That’s a terribly important question in Navajo terms. And of course, you’d say ‘I don’t know,’ and think ‘What an idiotic question.’ Meanwhile the Navajo is thinking, ‘My God, what a creep! What a primitive creep!’ ”
I was reading an article about Carlos Castaneda published in TIME magazine in March 1973. I read his works a few years ago when, frankly, they had little impression on me. At the time I was reading into European Renaissance, so, I suppose, our good old European culture permeated me to the extent that I couldn’t let any multiverse culture enter the picture. Many years later this is different, especially as I have been studying the impact of our thoughts on our lives recently.
Yet the passage above needs not to be interpreted solely in terms of anthropology. “Culture”, I believe, should first and foremost be seen as a very personal category and therefore is pertinent to every person out there. We do not merely get subdued by a particular culture – either we form this culture by the majority of our individual cultures, or we share certain aspects of the ‘alien’ culture that allows for assimilation.
The conflict of the parents and children is, therefore, an entirely cultural conflict, akin to Castaneda’s conflict of a European and a Navajo, and it is understandable why it may be so difficult to counter or to resolve the conflict – because actions and verbalised thoughts are the expressions of a deeply hidden cultural condition. Unless an individual can access his/her own unconscious and change the ‘settings’, it is futile to try and change their culture. But more often than not the individual considers himself incapable of doing this – even if he knows, understands, and kind of believes in the possibility of controlling our thoughts and using our mind to deliver us the good.
I was struck by the TIME passage also because I have recently been discussing the role of sorcerers in alleviating one’s destiny. Foreseers and magi are popular in my native country, and I probably don’t doubt their skill or a necessity to use their skills to help yourself. What I do doubt is that they do it once and for all, and you don’t have to walk any extra mile afterwards.
And the reason why I doubt this is because everything starts in our mind and it can all be changed by it, too. That’s why a visit to a sorcerer is a waste of time unless you put your two cents in. The famous positive thinking requires a commitment to not thinking negatively; being compassionate, or honest, or using your own mind requires a commitment. The only thing a psychologist, a hypnotist or a sorcerer can do, is to strengthen your dedication. Yes, they may alter the energy flow, but it does not relieve you from your responsibility for your own life.
Having seen this working, I indeed have little compassion for those who say that it is impossible to alter your frame of mind. Unfortunately, if you do want to alter it, you need to have people around you who share the same view. It is damn too hard to change the course of the ship when everyone on board is hysterical and accuses you of having the boat out in the open sea, or else telling you that what you’re doing is nonsense and gets you nowhere. To make matters worse, they don’t even realise sometimes that the ship was built and thrown into the sea by them well before you seized the control…
