Robin Usher, British Education Council (BEC), National Diploma (ND) in Business Studies, Hull College of Further Education, 1978, West Clayton High School, Graduation Diploma (GPA 2.66), Arlington, Texas, 1982, B.A. (Hons), Combined Studies (2: 1 English literature and Socio-History), Hull College of Higher Education, 1986, wrote `Jungian Archetypes: Robert A. Heinlein`, PhD by thesis (English), Hull University, England, 1992; Trinity College, London, TESOL Certificate, 1995. Has taught English language in more than 14 countries, and written many ELT articles, including for HLTmag, as well as science fiction and reviews.

The art of writing is fraught, as critics, holding the writer responsible, are almost entirely negative, blaming for substance, and content, if it mars their contentment. Viewers, similarly, are critical to the point of the speakers of the words in a movie being accursed; for what they say.

Fig. 1 'Pig glut.'

 Director of The Exorcist (1973), from William Peter Blatty's screenplay of his 1971 novel (see fig. 1), David Friedkin, wrote and directed Cruising (1980), based on Gerald Walker’s 1970 novel about the slaying of gay men, but inspired by real-life ‘bag murders’ of six homosexuals (1975-7), centering upon Greenwich Village, New York city, unprovenly associated with 1979's convicted murderer, Paul, 'Johnny Johnson', Bateson. Appearing as a radiologic technologist in The Exorcist, renowned for its bloodiness, after Friedkin watched him perform a genuine cerebral angiography at NYU Medical Center, as a preliminary to surgical invasion, Bateson is an instance of persona-behavior identification syndrome, where the actor’s persona, as a character, developed as an infectiousness affecting his behavior.

 In The Exorcist, 13 years Linda Blair, as demoniacally possessed Regan MacNeil, has her carotid artery punctured, as a part of the medical procedure to examine her brain, while Bateson reassures her, as blood spurts up into the air, before staining her surgical gown. Although signs of persona-behavior suppression are difficult to discern, Blair's subsequent career was determined, for example, in Hell Night (1981) her character, Marti Gaines, survives a mass murder. The killer(s) of NY's gay men, irrespective of whether Bateson was the murderer, dismembered the bodies, and as it was still their bag, threw them in bags into the Hudson river at the Villagers' western border.

 Modern critics are ‘carping criticism’; unwarranted and/or malicious. In the early days of Hollywood, Los Angeles, west coast California state, center of the US' mass media Empire, Louella Parsons, screenwriter, for example, with The Magic Wand (1912), had a ‘sweetness and light’ style, which made her an unrivalled ‘gossip columnist’, celebrative of others' idiosyncrasies, until former actress, famous for her portrayal of 'society women' (see fig. 2), Hedda Hopper, for example, in the silent film, Virtuous Wives (1918), became a proponent of the ‘blacklist’ for stars deemed by herself and others, ‘Un-American’, at The Los Angeles Times from 1937, with a style, defined by some as ‘crass’, making it difficult to separate art from life.

Fig. 2 Virtuous Wives (1918)

There resulted a schizophrenic ‘split’, between public face and private person, where criticism became a device to make the public persona identical with the private person’s behavior; ensuring stars were flattened by ‘TV critics’. Until they became blamable, one-dimensional characters, indistinguishable from what was written for, or about them. A direct consequence of Hopper's agenda, stars were 'outed' on the basis of her opinion, as homosexuals or communists, for example, until they were out of Hollywood; or, forced to adopt false persona-behavior patterns, commensurate with being alienated by spies, who wanted them to live blind to what they could have had and been.

While English verb tenses with pronouns can be difficult, semantically, for learners, especially second language acquirers, to comprehend, a large part of the curse, associated with the narrative relating of stories, is that eyes are associated with the ego, that is, the ‘I’ of the first person singular, while ‘the objective correlative’,1 to use a literary analytical term from American poet T. S. Eliot's essay, ‘Hamlet and His Problems’ (1919), is the second person singular, which bears the weight of being contextually understandable to English language learners, as the plural is also ‘you’, which so far as the Prince of Denmark (PoD) is concerned in the drama, Hamlet (1599-1601), written by the English playwright, William Shakespeare, is about how the multiple egos of the audience (eyes) use the accusative, declined; us, me, him, whom, and them, in its condemnation of a fratricidal coward: ‘Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, and thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, and enterprises of great pitch and moment with this regard their currents turn awry and lose the name of action.'2

Fig. 3 Butchered by the usual shower

Although the actor, evincing the anguish and madness of Hamlet on stage, or screen, for example, Ethan Hawke in Hamlet 2000 (2000), isn't guilty of fratricide, he's tainted by association. Anthony Perkins is always Norman Bates at the motel, where he kills Janet Leigh, in her role as Marion Crane (see fig. 3), in the Psycho (1960) shower scene, whereas it’s you, the audience, that’s responsible, as in ancient Greek dramatist, Sophocles, Oedipus Rex (c. 429 B.C.). Oedipus, who’s killed his father, and married his mother, is lame, and has blinded himself, signifying the ego's occlusion, as Jesus' was, because it’s what you (pl.) vicariously wanted. Although the actor on stage, or screen, isn’t actually lame or blind, it's the accusative amongst the audience's curse upon him. While the audience have only bought a ticket, the performer's defence is contractual, which can’t be axe murderer Patrick Bateman’s excuse in the movie, American Psycho (2000), based on Brett Easton Ellis’ 1991 novel, although the actor in the role, Christian Bale, stands accusingly by the box office.

The fate of Manhattan ‘bag murderer’, Bateson, is an indication that persona-behavior identification is a real issue for performers cursed by the accusative, as accusers progressively cripple and blind. As Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth, is a character, 'Out damned spot!' (V, i, l. 31) she isn't a person who can rid herself of the stain of murder, which is a written behavior pattern, rather than that the actress is accursed, whereas that’s how she’s perceived by the paying audience; receiving payment as a murderess: 'Here's the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand.'

As all Shakespeare’s characters were perforce acted by men, as women weren’t permitted to act, during the reign of queen Elizabeth I, persona-behavior psychopathology was established as an institution within English drama, which served as an accusative curse upon women, as the audience unconsciously agree that acting is how people actually are. If God’s to be appealed to, as a matter of curse, it's according to the crucifixion of Jesus ‘Christ’, ‘the chosen’, ‘This is my son in whom I am well pleased.’ (Matt: 3. 17) The accusative amongst the audience, that is, you (collectively) erred, in having Jesus taken to Calvary hill, outside Jerusalem, during the occupation of Jewish Palestine by the Romans, in the name of the Emperor Tiberius (14-37 C.E.), where, if only in front of Tib's eyes by proxy, Jesus, nailed to a cross of wood, died there.

Fig. 4 The lamb of God

 Jesus' Resurrection and Ascension to heaven broke the accusative audience’s curse, who wanted torture and extinction, whereas the actor wasn’t contractually obligated. Useful for English language learners, unsure of the differences, between second person singular, and second person plural, to comprehend. Jesus' disciple, Judas, gave Jesus to the Jewish religious police, the Pharisees, who tried and executed him through Roman judge, Pontius Pilate, as Judas had found Jesus with a woman, that is, a singular second person, ‘Leave her alone.’ (Mk: 14. 6) Jesus, second person singular, became plural in the minds of the accusative, acting according to developmental psychologist, Carl Jung (1875-1961), as a collective, projecting their shadow, while the individual, Jesus, appealed to the second person plural, ‘Love your neighbor as you love yourself.’ (Mk: 12. 31) Killed in the accusative, that is, by them, Jesus was their shadow.

As Dror Ben Ami observed, ‘… the blood sacrifice of Jesus was a more effective way to remove sins [than animals] ...'4 Ami errs in suggesting human sacrifice is good. For Jung, the personal shadow of the individual, requires integration to render it harmless, that is, the foundless perception of another person as inferior is, rather, an indication of the perceiver's inferiority. As the shadow is in large part instinct, Jesus was killed by a collective, operating at the level of animal consciousness, who believed that to have her as their slave, Jesus must be cut away from the woman, emphasized by Judas' kissing Jesus full on the mouth, in sterilizing treachery. From the point of view of the shadow projected, that is, the accusative, more animals like Jesus are needed. That such sacrifice removes sin is Ami's error. The killing of Jesus was the collective sin, which curse Jesus' Resurrection broke. He was escaping slavery. Elsewise, human sacrifice is a simpler evil.

Fig. 5 ‘Yaroo!’

 In the tetragrammaton, YHWH, comprised of Hebrew language vowels, Jehovah's pronounced, 'You.' The second person plural of the Old Testament, as the collective, deciding to kill the second person singular, is God, that is, YHWH (YOU), but Jesus' Resurrection signifies he isn't you (pl.) from the perspective of Christians. A collective that believed it was YHWH (God) erred, and the Jewish 'dissenter', Jesus, was made to fit the worship form category of animal sacrifice.

In Shakespeare's English, second person singular, that is, thou, thee, thy, and thine, etc., is distinct from second person plural, as ewes (youse) die, that is, in war the flocks of the congregations of the Christian churches are the sheep of animal sacrifice, directed by their dogs of war, collared or unfrocked, while the shepherds are made to see the efficacy in that, as a solution to the problem of the Old Testament collective, who in killing Jesus, that is, as the second person singular, didn't understand they were killing God, as the second person plural. In terms of Christian consciousness, they're ewe (pl.) led astray, rather than thou; individually distinct. God's acknowledgment of 'the lamb' (see fig. 4), Jesus, is that of consubstantiality, which is a unity of second person singular, and second person plural, that is, togetherness, which is the third person singular, 'one,' used as a 'friendship determiner' to confer consubstantiality; ostensibly upon those Christians who followed Jesus' teaching thereafter, 'You believe that there is one God. Good!' (James: 2. 19)

It's a speech form used in English fee-paying public schools, for example, at Harrow and Eton, sixth formers (lower and upper), during the period set for taking 'A' (Advanced) level exams, in contradistinction to 'O' (Ordinary) level, which students are prepared for from primary school level, traditionally call themselves 'gods', while the Os are 'fags', that is, they have to do things for them, like a Microsoft OS for PCs, which means they're short of breath and anxious,5 as if suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), or fear of AIDS.

As a god one has breathless fags, like children's writer Charles Hamilton's fictional creature, Billy Bunter of Greyfriars (see fig. 5), written in the nom de plume, Frank Richards, 1908-65, who weren't one, whereas one had friends, amongst the other gods, perhaps, who were, 'Would you?' Pagan slavery isn't characterized by belief in God as One, that is, the third person singular, as you isn’t, while such usage does determine Christian relationships, 'For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus.' (Tim: 2. 5)

 In Christianity, father, son, and Holy Spirit, are consubstantial; One. While human sacrifice is forbidden, as God, as the third, and second person, singular and plural, lives as One. In the book of Numbers, a man, caught collecting firewood on Saturday, set aside as the Jews' day of rest, was killed by God, ‘Give the man the death penalty. Yes, kill him, the whole community hurling stones at him outside the camp.’ (Num: 15. 35) As the second person singular, the man is killed by the first person singular, that is, God as YHWH (you), after the application of the accusative, that is, him, not me, as applied by the accusers, us, who in denying the man's second person singular consubstantiality with God, as understood by the Christians, sacrificed the firewood collector, as Jesus was similarly killed for teaching on Saturday.

It isn't a paradox, as Jesus' teaching supersedes the Old Testament of Judaism for Christians. God isn't the same curmudgeon, who wants to live a dictatorial existence, as Jesus' execution transformed God's first person singularity, as YHWH (you) into acceptance of second person plurality. Whereas people had been characters, that is, non persons, like Lady Macbeth, who couldn't rid herself of the stain of murder, the possibility of God's acceptance of 3-D people, as consubstantial, held the promise not only of Jesus' salvation, but also those who were persona-behavior cursed, like murderer Paul Bateson, infected by his role in The Exorcist; a movie about demoniacal possession.

For Christian English teachers, required to work on Sunday, which is their day of rest, it's relevant, as religious extremists might believe they're justified in killing one accusingly. Amongst Moslems of the nations of Islam, it's Friday, where Sharia law, applied to stone (see fig. 6) teenage girls, Hasna, 17, and Madiha, 16, in the city of Deir Ezzor,6 eastern Syria, for being with men, demands recognition of the illegal legitimacy that Moslems, Jews, Christians, Satanists, and soccer hooligans, etc., claim for killing each other over sacred cows.

Fig. 6 Woman being punished; forgetting: stoned

 The simple past tense of the verb, 'to be', as applied to both singular and plural second person, indicates a significant degeneration in the importance accorded to you, since Shakespeare. Simple extinguishment, as if animal(s), by the past simple form with the second person, is symptomatic of the practice of human sacrifice. From the slavers' point of view, Jesus was killed by his accusatives for being a too helpful animal. While Christians identified themselves as a plurality, that is, One with God, the abandonment by the English language of thou, thee, thy, and thine, as second person singular, in favor of the universal you, for second person plural also, invoked the simply past tense, were, which is death in paganism's accusatives. Unless the significance accorded to the second person singular is universal, that is, having consubstantiality with God, as the second person plural, and the third person singular, it’s dead; past simply. That modern English was constructed by Christians, as a means to communicate the fact that one isn’t permitted to kill one, is important for learners.

Fig. 7 Laurence Olivier; Henry V (1944)

 The ego can't comment on the demise of the ego, which is for ‘other’ eyes, individual or collective, to remark upon. However, as it’s always you that dies, that's the objective of the sacrificer. You, not I, is the first person singular principle of human sacrifice towards the simple second person singular, who’s an enslaved fag, for example, understood by the sacrificer to be an animal, before it's killed, which is the reason they call Christians sheep, given the more creatively rewarding ways of caring for oneself, rather than being a slave of husbandry. While priests wear sheep dog collars, responsible for shepherding flocks to slaughterhouse war zones, the fags are finally, as in Shakespeare's drama of the English king's battle at Agincourt (1415), northern France (see fig. 7), Henry V (c. 1599), breathlessly, smoked in the line of fire: 'Once more unto the breech, dear friends, once more; or close the wall up with our English dead.'7 The 'fag gods' (faggots) junior roast, as logs in front of fires, at public boarding school, inside private rooms, institutionalize, through panic attacks, the weakening of the human system, for enslavement in fears of the AIDS gods' of homosexuality's SARS related virus.

If God, as one, is third person singular, and plural, and you, second person singular, and plural, as a Christian in acceptance of the spirit of Jesus' teaching, like Valentine observes, preacher in sci-fi novelist, Robert Heinlein's (1907-88) Stranger In A Strange Land (1961), '... when a cat stalks a sparrow both of them are God, carrying out God's thoughts.'8 While the human sacrificer doesn't mind it's you, as his god wants your blood, for both teachers and students, life's spent in the pursuit of teaching others and learning; like Jesus'.

 

References

1 Eliot, T. S. ‘Hamlet and His Problems’ (1919), The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism, 1920, pp. 55-9.

2 Shakespeare, William, Hamlet, Act III, Scene i, l. 90-5, c. 1599-1601.

3 Shakespeare, William, Macbeth, Act V, Scene i, l. 31; 44-6, c. 1603/6.

4 Ami, Dror Ben ‘Metaphors in the Torah: The Roles of Blood and the Liver in Removing Sin’, The Jerusalem Post, https://www.jpost.com/Blogs/Torah-Commentaries/Metaphors-in-the-Torah-The-Role-of-the-Blood-and-the-Liver-in-Removing-Sin-390469 , February 10th, 2015, 18:57 pm.

5 Healy, Melissa ‘Did failure to adequately treat HIV patients give rise to the Omicron [SARS] variant?’, Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-12-02/did-omicron-coronavirus-variant-arise-in-patient-with-uncontrolled-hiv , December 2nd, 2021, 4 am Pacific Time (PT).

6 Logan, Russ 'Isis 'stones to death two teenage girls accused of adultery in Syria', https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-stones-to-death-two-teenage-girls-accused-of-adultery-in-syria-a6898256.html , February 26th, 2016, Friday, 17: 34 pm.

7 Shakespeare, William Henry V, Act III, Scene i, l. 1-2, c. 1599.

8 Heinlein, Robert A. Stranger In A Strange Land, Part Five, 'His Happy Destiny', Ch. XXXVI, Ace Books: New York, 1961, p. 564.