What's new

My past involvemen with Scn: Hindsight is 20/20

It would appear that in knowing Hubbard, Heinlein wasn't much in the way of being a friend. I have asked before (including the messengers from Hubbard's time) for some specific instances of friendship between the two.

Nuffink. ...

Here's a couple of notes the church has up on one of the hubbard booksites.

Church letters

Judging by the content of the notes and data about their relationship published elsewhere, the notes seem likely to be authentic enough. Note though that this exchange would have been around the time Hubbard was working on "Battlefield Earth", a book for which Heinlein provided a jacket blurb. My bet is that lrh was fishing for a favor.

For anyone sufficiently interested the Heinlein Archives on line appear to have several references to Hubbard in their database. It seems to be a fee'd service. I'm not a subscriber, so I don't know what is there. Anyone interested in researching it would likely find some interesting tidbits.


... It is sobering to realize that Hubbard had NO close friends.

Think about that - most people who come out of the military at least have a couple of buddies that they meet up regularly with, exchange cards etc etc. Here was "mankind's best friend" and, apparently, apart from worshippers, he had no friends at all.

I'd put it slightly differently. He seems to have a great facility for making friends. Quite a few people were friends of his over a very long time. Several remain loyal to him to this day. However, over time he betrayed anyone who stayed close or appeared as some sort of a threat. From afar it looks to have been the result of simple malice or other viciousness of character. However I strongly suspect that mental illness was a major factor in this clear discrepancy in his social behavior.

How any particular individual may choose to interpret those circumstances is up to them. I'm inclined to a somewhat compassionate view due to the probable mental illness. Of course, I never met the man and was never personally the target of his rage. It's also two different things entirely to have compassion for a mentally ill person versus being tolerant of the vicious or abusive conduct he may direct at others.


Mark A. Baker
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
Re: My past involvement with Scn: Hindsight is 20/20

Gottabrain,

I’m not trying to get rid of anyone on this board. I have and neither did have any grand conspiracy or agenda. Believe it or don’t, it’s off topic here.

If you want to discuss some other thread, do it there. As far as the title of this thread, the title and thread op are about “my past involvement with the cult…” etc and that’s obviously all it is.

If you want to discuss anything with me on this thread, then it should be about the thread op or the posts of others appearing on this thread.

Your opinion, then, is that as long as you like the comments, they belong on this thread, even if they have nothing to do with with the topic, as most of the comments by others don't. Mine did. You do not have control over what everyone writes just because you started a thread.

You know I wasn't referring to the title of THIS thread. But my comments were not just about your involvement, but your stated claims that you are against the abuses and concerned about others' rights. I don't see that and gave a strong example where you intentionally used what hurt others in Scn to hurt them again.

Now - back to Hubbard's sci-fi history, which you feel is more appropriate to this thread, as you certainly have not reported those comments as off topic --
 

DoneDeal

Patron Meritorious
I'd put it slightly differently. He seems to have a great facility for making friends. Quite a few people were friends of his over a very long time.
Mark A. Baker

who?

appears? great facility? Quite a few? and the words "seems"...forgot to include that one.

Talk in facts man.

oh,...where's that proof of the Heinlein/ron influence? You started this...I didn't...I'm just going to continue it till you say you are misled by the data,
It's worth getting kicked outta the forum.
 

SomeGuy

Patron Meritorious
I think I can prove for a fact that Heinlein was influenced by Hubbard. Hubbard wrote some of the worst dime store fiction ever, I don't think I've ever read anything that didn't sound like some one who never actually bothered to master the craft.

Heinlein must have read his trash and decided to hone his craft and write some excellent scifi.

Thus, I surmise that by observing what I consider a talentless hack (sorry my opinion of hubbards "art" as a writer) Heinlein was able to not repeat the same literary butchery that Hubbard was so adept at.

You can all thank me later for putting this to rest.
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
..

Another writer influenced by Scientology was William Burroughs.

This is remarkable. I've never read this before. Wow.

Thanks very much for the link - everyone should read this, esp any who believe the heavy regging, the ethics abuse, disconnection, etc. started with DM. What Burroughs wrote appears to have ignited the fallout of Hubbard's old scifi friends.
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
Speaking of hindsight 20/20 I probably should have at least thought that some of the things that critics were spreading around as entheta could possible be true instead of at first thinking "no way"

And claire I meant to say that I didnot want to change the subject of the thread. The transcriptionist messed it up and it is too late to edit it now.

Now what were talking about?

Oh yeah Hubbard and Heinlein being drinking buddies.

Oh wait, no that wasn't it.

The hindsight 20/20 thing.

One thing I never regret is reading ars and learning about why all the OT3s were always saying things like "if you are here on Earth you need OT3". That meant even if you believed in past lives and "knew" that you were not on Earth 75 million years ago you could not get out of doing OT3.

I do not regret sitting in my office at the org constantly reading tech and policy and learning a lot about this alien civilization and culture of Scientology.

Rd00
 

Lone Star

Crusader
who?

appears? great facility? Quite a few? and the words "seems"...forgot to include that one.

Talk in facts man.

oh,...where's that proof of the Heinlein/ron influence? You started this...I didn't...I'm just going to continue it till you say you are misled by the data,
It's worth getting kicked outta the forum.

Geezus DoneDeal give it a rest. You are being a bore with your constant bickering and jabs at Mark. What kind of proof would make you happy? A sworn affidavit by Heinlein that he was a friend of LRH for a time? It's just not important anyway. I had read years ago about the Heinlein/Hubbard relationship, so it wasn't a surprise to me. Mark is not insisting that Heinlein was a great writer because of LRH. He only said that the two did know each other and were for a time on friendly terms. Mark also said that there were some Scn. veiled references is some of his books. Again, what is the big deal? LRH was very much in the Sci-Fi community. Too bad he didn't just stay there.

Do you want Mark to name every man and woman LRH befriended over the years? As much as I don't admire LRH, I recognize that he had the type of personality that was effective in making lots of friends. But he didn't have the capability of keeping them. More likely he didn't care to, as Mark indicated.

Look, you make really good posts. I don't think you're a bad guy. I just think you're wasting time and energy nit-picking Mark over this periphery issue.

Keep on with this issue and it'll be No Soup For You....One Year!! :biggrin:
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
To Ms. Swazey:

I know that, as a Buddhist, "truth" is of tantmount importance to you. I, for one, appreciate your unwillingness to compromise your truth by blindly agreeing with the angry mob. I am happy for you that Scientology didn't ruin your life. It can't be any fun going through life angry about the past, and I hope everyone here will one day find peace as you have.

What type of Buddhism do you practice? I went to a few services years ago at the "Nichirin Daishonin" Buddhist temple. The friend who took me has a sister in Chicago who was very influential in the church. His last name is Laubel, but his sister may have a different name from marriage (they're from Pittsburgh PA originally).

Oh, I'm a rank n00b with that. I've read some books and I practice my own (fluffy Claire-ish) type of meditation. I'm sure I don't deserve to be called a practicing Buddhist. I have some other books, too, including one by Joko that I'm partly through that was recommended to me by another net friend- a very nice person who occasionally but rarely drops in here. The things I don't know about Buddhism could fill an ocean, I'm sure.

But what little I've done has made me feel a bit fulfilled. I don't want to just say "fulfilled" as that would imply that hey, man, I'm enlightened, I'm perfectly serenely happy, I'm done.

When I was a kid, I prayed. Got into Scn and didn't lose the habit though I think a lot of people did stop praying when they got into it. I never said much about it- except to my husband who has always been supportive even when he thinks I'm in Lucille Ball mode. But I started doing it a lot more once I decided to ditch the Indie Scn'ist label. Then I started feeling a presence and one day I got the message "When you do this, it's meditation and I would like you to do this every day." So I do. It's like going into a chatroom and you don't know if anyone's in there yet. So you go "yo" or "hi" and wait to see if you get an answer. That's what it feels like when I do it. Now, you see what a n00b and rank amateur I am, huh!!

I am sure I have some residual anger at some of the stuff I experienced in the cult, but I've mellowed out on that some. As mentioned previously, I do separate that from my experiences and opinions pertaining to doing courses, word clearing, TRs and auditing. If I go to Home Depot (that's a DIY chain in the US for those who don't live in the US) and have three completely different situations in, respectively, the Plumbing Dept, the Lighting Dept and the Lumber Dept, yes, they're all Home Depot but the encounters and purchases were all very different.

So yah, I felt the courses didn't do me any harm- even the boring ones. And I truly liked some of the auditing quite a bit.

One of the things that inspired me to write the thread op was Stacy Brooks. It's been a while since I read what she wrote, but I know that she said later something along the lines of her wins and thoughts about auditing that she had back as a Scn'ist being delusional. Also, very very recently, someone I know very well wrote me saying that their wins in Scn were delusional. So I thought, hey, I have my take on it. Others have such varying perspectives! There's "did it and it didn't hurt me but it didn't do anything at all and when I thought that it did, I was delusional". There's "it fucked me up" There's "hey, some of the lower level stuff was kind of neat" There's "no matter what (rare) positive experiences I had, it wasn't worth it, I don't care how fun other people think it is." There's "hell, I just don't know anymore. I just know I'm glad I'm out." There's "If I knew what I know now, I'd never have done ANYTHING" and, finally, there's "it saved my life" which I have heard people say. That last is mainly said (if said at all) by church members and by people in the FZ and/or Indie scene.

It all varies and everyone has a right to how they feel about it. That includes me, of course, but does not solely apply to me.

I think this is a pretty good and lively thread and people are really talking to each other. The latest segue/meander is actually kinda cool, too. Hubbard and Heinlein and god, who were those other writers who knew him? I should ask John. I mean, that's really interesting stuff!!!
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Re: My past involvement with Scn: Hindsight is 20/20

Toady! You're fine! You're aces with me, for sure. You know we don't always agree, but making the point about how it was for other people such as Lisa McPherson strikes me as germane. Even if I didn't think that was food for thought (as I do) I think it makes sense to say it here as it is how you feel and something you thought about when reading my thread op.

Rene, my friend, you always humor me. You're aces with me, as well.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Re: My past involvement with Scn: Hindsight is 20/20

John and I have seen and read a lot of books and movies where there seemed to be references to Scn that only someone who'd at least dabbled in Scn could know. After a while, I honestly lost count. I think there are a lot of writers and people who give seminars who dabbled in it and may not make reference to where they got the ideas, but definitely had some Scn rub off on 'em.

The cult doesn't want dabbling, god knows. But people are people. I bet a lot of people have dabbled, bought some books, maybe even got 'em used so that there were no ties to the cult, maybe did one course, left no address after leaving, and just stopped. But then some of the ideas stayed.

Some time back, I think I was on staff then, I knew a lady who took a course at the little tiny skrelky mission where I was. So she immediately exteriorized when doing TRs. The Missionholder, an OTV and Class VI, had to help her back into the body. Later, the lady left before finishing the course. She explained that she was very happy, didn't have any reservations or anything, but that she'd gotten what she came there for and, thus, didn't need to finish the course. Now, yes, of course, that's totally contra to how that's supposed to go, if you're in the cult. But that's what she did. Well, if one person did it, there could be others.
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
Re: My past involvement with Scn: Hindsight is 20/20

Toady! You're fine! You're aces with me, for sure. You know we don't always agree, but making the point about how it was for other people such as Lisa McPherson strikes me as germane. Even if I didn't think that was food for thought (as I do) I think it makes sense to say it here as it is how you feel and something you thought about when reading my thread op.

Rene, my friend, you always humor me. You're aces with me, as well.

brown_nose_tshirt-p235237666902091023zxhj8_400.jpg
 

Veda

Sponsor
This is remarkable. I've never read this before. Wow.

Thanks very much for the link - everyone should read this, esp any who believe the heavy regging, the ethics abuse, disconnection, etc. started with DM. What Burroughs wrote appears to have ignited the fallout of Hubbard's old scifi friends.

From a post on ESMB by DartSmohen:

I remember doing the review session on William Burroughs before he attested Clear in 1968. He was pleased to have reached that state.

The only person he would speak to at the AO was me, anyone else he would cut them dead.

After attesting, the Reg asked him if he was ready to sign up for his OT levels.

"I don't think so" was his waspish reply. The Div 6 lady asked him to write a success story on attesting clear.

He wrote "Adequate" and then flounced out of the building on his way back to NY.



burroughs_and_emeter.jpg



Books on Scientology of the early 1970s:

George Malko, 'The Now Religion', 1970. Cover: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_pDjNGLfSI...u0GjFiE/S210/Scientology_The_Now_Religion.gif
Text: http://www.lermanet.com/malko/malko.htm

Paulette Cooper, 'The Scandal of Scientology', 1971: http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/tsos/sos.html

Robert Kaufman, 'Inside Scientology', 1972: http://www.xenu.net/archive/books/isd/isd.htm

William Burroughs, 'Naked Scientology', 1972: http://www.apologeticsindex.org/Naked Scientology.pdf

After these books appeared, many publishers became reluctant to publish any more books about this litigious and non-turn-the-other-cheek "religion." Only after the revelations of the late 1970s and early 1980s, did a few publishers - most notably Lyle Stuart - dare once again, in the mid 1980s, to publish books concerning Scientology.

Then came the Internet, and well... here we are. :)
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
^^Thanks very much, Veda. I never saw DartSmohen's story about Burroughs before, either, though I've read the other news reports on Scn of that time period.

I'm very interested in the early (actual) history of L Ron, and as you and Mark pointed out, we see insight into his character through those he most closely associated with on a personal basis, those who knew him as a writer and knew his writer friends and what they thought of the whole thing.
 

Veda

Sponsor
^^Thanks very much, Veda. I never saw DartSmohen's story about Burroughs before, either, though I've read the other news reports on Scn of that time period.

I'm very interested in the early (actual) history of L Ron, and as you and Mark pointed out, we see insight into his character through those he most closely associated with on a personal basis, those who knew him as a writer and knew his writer friends and what they thought of the whole thing.

James Randi was attending a CULTinfo Conference in 1999 when he was approached by a Scientologist (00:00 - 1:48. This part is somewhat hard to hear.) Afterwards, the person, (a non-Scientologist) who had accidentally videoed the encounter, spoke with him about his impression of Hubbard, when they met at a gathering of writers, in the late 1940s. (1:48 - onward):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj-w09kpQcY
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
..

A close up look at the Amazing Randi . . .

[video=vimeo;36724471]http://vimeo.com/36724471">An Honest Liar - Work-in-Progress trailer[/video]
 

DoneDeal

Patron Meritorious
Geezus DoneDeal give it a rest. You are being a bore with your constant bickering and jabs at Mark. :

awesome....ahhh..what kind of soup am I risking here?

Hey...I think it is important. He did imply that one of the most famous modern writers was influenced by ron.

I asked him for proof. All I got was his, and their, attitude.

He could either provide the proof..or admit it's simply a story....one that's often implied amongst the people inside the church.

Why is it bad to ask him for proof? Isn't flushing out the lies a good thing? How come he won't simply provide proof or admit there isn't any?

Come on...we come from a world where intentions are measured. I've made my intention plain enough..
 

Lone Star

Crusader
awesome....ahhh..what kind of soup am I risking here?

Hey...I think it is important. He did imply that one of the most famous modern writers was influenced by ron.

I asked him for proof. All I got was his, and their, attitude.

He could either provide the proof..or admit it's simply a story....one that's often implied amongst the people inside the church.

Why is it bad to ask him for proof? Isn't flushing out the lies a good thing? How come he won't simply provide proof or admit there isn't any?

Come on...we come from a world where intentions are measured. I've made my intention plain enough..

Okay. I agree that it's not bad to ask for proof. Insinuating that he's lying is over the top though. If anything it's just a difference of opinion, nothing more.

In this case I just don't think it's possible for Mark to give you the proof you desire. I suspect that what you mean by "influenced" and what he means by the word are different enough to cause misunderstanding with regards to Heinlein/Hubbard.

If Mark is correct about Heinlein incorporating some Hubbardian references or imagery in a few of his books, then that would indicate a degree of influence. You'll just have to read them again if you're really interested in seeing if he's right or not. Other than that, and the links he provided, I just don't think there is any concrete proof.

I think some of you tend to believe that Mark is an LRH apologist. IMHO he's really not. If I'm wrong about that then I'll figure it out over time. I doubt it though.

"No Soup For You" is an homage to a Seinfeld episode that featured the Soup Nazi character. A classic episode.
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
You really do make the stupidest remarks, Toad. :melodramatic:

But then again, you spent a great deal longer as a loyal member of hubbard's cult then I ever even considered doing. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker

Who was that fella right here on ESMB in the last few days chiding another poster about insults reflecting on the one who made insults?

Who was that ?

Could it have been none other than our esteemed Mark A. Baker ?

Yep. It was.

( There is a name for that kind of behavior ).
 

Lone Star

Crusader
Who was that fella right here on ESMB in the last few days chiding another poster about insults reflecting on the one who made insults?

Who was that ?

Could it have been none other than our esteemed Mark A. Baker ?

Yep. It was.

( There is a name for that kind of behavior ).

Depends on what you mean by insult. Let's get out the clay and demo one poster insulting another poster after fully clearing the word insult with it's derivation. Also clear and demo chiding.:roflmao:


Disclaimer: The attempt at humor above is in no way intended to invalidate your point. :thumbsup:
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
Depends on what you mean by insult. Let's get out the clay and demo one poster insulting another poster after fully clearing the word insult with it's derivation. Also clear and demo chiding.:roflmao:


Disclaimer: The attempt at humor above is in no way intended to invalidate your point. :thumbsup:

Yeah there thats anotehr reason why I am glad my hindsight is 20/20

I hated clay demos.

It's like this.

I love sports. I play well or rather used to prior to the aging process having put me into a new "echelon". But I can still catch a ball and hit it a mile.

But the last thing I would want to do is clay demo these sports. I son't want to clay demo anything.

Clay demos do nto add mass. They give me mass

Rd00
 
Top