Discussion With Tessa Dick

Last night as part of the ongoing “Schrödinger’s Diary Archive” (see box to the right) myself and Miguel Conner recorded probably the most interesting interview that I have been involved in since writing ITLAD and embarking upon this “Garden of the Forking Paths” that describes my writing career.

I consider this the most important because it was the first one in which I was doing more than simply explaining the complexities of ITLAD/CTF to an audience (and, on occasions, interviewer) who has no pre-knowledge of what I am talking about. This one was different. It gave me the opportunity to glean new information regarding a crucial component of the whole hypothesis, the theophany of Philip K Dick.

Usually the episodes of “Schrödinger’s Diary” last about forty minutes. Last night’s recording went on for over an hour. And this was because none of those involved wished it to stop, that is Miguel, myself, and our special guest, Tessa Dick.

This interview was both delightful and fun! We spent a good deal laughing and going off on weird “Pythonesque” avenues of thought which certainly amused us anyway! But the underlying theme was both fascinating and, in my opinion, a possible turning point in the path that ITLAD/CTF will now take. (Hmmmm, why I am a so preoccupied with track analogies today; paths, avenues etc etc?) This is because for the first time I was not explaining my ideas but asking questions of somebody who was an actual witness to the events I describe in my second book, The Daemon. And what answers!!! I will in no way ruin this interview for those who wish to listen to it but if you ever had doubts about my itladian interpretation on the experiences of Tessa’s late husband, the great Philip K Dick, then these doubts will probably be removed. Tessa describes the events from the most important position possible, she was there!

Indeed Tessa also reinforces my analysis of events that took place earlier in Phil’s life when his Daemon manifested itself as both a guide and a form of mentor from his own future. This is astounding stuff.

A few years ago I asked author Brad Steiger what he thought Phil would have made of my “Cheating the Ferryman” hypothesis. Brad, who had known Phil for many years, stated that he would have been fascinated and intrigued. If anything can be taken from last night’s interview it is this, PKD would not only be fascinated, he would have understood because he personally experienced the immanence of his own “Higher Self”, his Daemon.

As a final point Tessa, in her opening comments regarding the moral negativity of the Eternal Recurrence, proved to me that readers must read both books to fully appreciate why it is that ITLAD/CTF is neither an updating of the Nietzscheian / Ouspenskian “Eternal Return” nor a re-presentation of Berkeleyan Idealism. I agree that there are certain similarities but my hypothesis is far more subtle and life-enhancing (and, in my opinion, based on empirical science rather than philosophical conjecture). Tessa, quite rightly as she has only read “The Daemon”, assumed that ILAD/CTF suggests that we all live the same life over and over again in an endless repetition of our mistakes and successes and that the lives of others that we perceive in our Phaneron is the only life that these people will lead. She cited the example of a still-born child and how morally distasteful the idea is that that child will repeat that short “life” over and over again. By applying the implications of Everett’s Many Worlds Interpretation (or the Many Minds Interpretation) such a sad situation is a “reality” only in this universe, the universe in which you are the observer (c.f. Copenhagen Interpretation …. And yes, I am aware that MWI is supposed to be an alternative to Copenhagen) but within the Macroverse there will be trillions of universes where the child was not stillborn and experienced all possible alternative lives resulting from each and every decision. But the subtlety doesn’t stop there. If we apply the implications of David Bohm’s “Implicate Order”, “Holomovement” and “Enfoldment” then we exist in a universe in which life itself is enfolded within itself (and yes, I am also aware that Bohm’s interpretation was suggested as a counter to both Everett’s MWI and Bohr’s CI). Tessa will find, by a careful reading of my first book, that things are not quite so depressing. We live a “Groundhog Life” rather than “The Life of Ivan Osokin”!

This amazing discussion will be available for listening (and downloading) in a few days time. If you have the time do give it a listen ……. oh, and do check out Tessa's book "Remembering Firebright"

PKD Day at Nottingham Trent University - 13th June 2009

Last Saturday I attended a fascinating day of discussion and lectures at Nottingham Trent University. With me was fellow BLOG member Mick (of "Cordoba" fame) and his girlfriend Jan.

The papers in the morning were highly academic in their approach. Indeed it took me back to my own university days in the mid 1970's. Clearly the approach was textual rather than personal in that the themes discussed Phil the writer not Phil the man. However this is what was to be expected as it was taking place in the English Department.

In the afternoon I presented a paper entitled "PKD-PRECOG?" It is difficult to evaluate how this went down with the assembled academics and enthusiasts but I think the lack of questions (except from Mick and the organisers) suggested to me that the audience were, at best, confused and at worst somewhat underwhelmed.

On reflection my presentation was somewhat different to those that had gone before. I was dealing with "facts" (as reported by Phil himself so I guess the word "fact" in this case consists of many "factors") whereas my predecessors had analysed Phil's writing in a sociological or textual way. I was fascinated to realise that a simple science-fiction story can be analysed and taken apart for meaning. I wonder what Phil would have made of it?

I was really expecting some challenging questions - particularly as I presented evidence from Phil's life that he had been precognitive. Indeed I even distributed copies of the fascinating letters that Phil wrote to Gloria Krenz, one of which actually described the circumstances of his own stroke that was to happen seven years later. I guess that because my analysis did not work within a Marxist, Derridian or Deleuzian approach it caused a degree of confusion.

Of course it could simply be that my lecture was the last of the day before Tessa Dick joined us on SKYPE and everybody was anticipating chatting with her.

Tessa was wonderful, being witty, funny and very open in her comments about Phil. However I found it again very strange that not many questions were asked of her. I can only assume it is because many attendees of the conference were more used to answering questions than asking them.

One question Tessa was asked was to seek out her opinions on the biographers of her husband, specifically Lawrence Sutin and Emmanuel Carrere. Her response was to say that parts of Sutin's book contained accurate information and some did not. She did not seem to be aware of the Carrere book. However she then said that she had been very impressed by a new book by an English writer by the name of Anthony Peake - she said that with the exception of his suggestion that Phil experienced TLE, she felt that this book, "The Daemon" was excellent!

This really made my day, no, far more than that, it made all my hard work worthwhile. Tessa was actually an external witness to most of Phil's 2-3-74 "experiences" so with the exception of Phil himself she is the only person qualified to really comment upon my "take" on Phil's theophany.

Indeed Tessa finished of her communication by categorically stating that she agreed fully with Phil that the reality that we perceive is an illusion and that we are all living within this illusion.

I would like to thank Tessa for these kind comments regarding my work and also Professor John Goodridge for organising a wonderful, and very enlightening day.

Tessa Dick - the latest Itladian?

I am delighted to announce that Tessa Dick, widow of the late and great Philip K Dick, and I have opened up email communication. I would like to thank archaeologist and member of the Graham Hancock "Phorum", David Campbell, for facilitating this.

Tessa (and David) are now active members of my own FORUM at www.anthonypeake.com/forum .

Tessa has already made a posting on the Anthony Peake Forum (discussing Julian Jaynes) and I am hoping that she will become a regular contributor.

Indeed Tessa has her own Blog site which is well worth checking out. Tessa discusses Phil, his writing and the events surrounding Phil's "Theophany" of March 1974 - an event so central to the issues discussed on this Blog and on my FORUM. Tessa's site can be found at http://pkdmemoir.blogspot.com/.

Tessa has also written a book about Phil entitled Philip K. Dick: Remembering Firebright. Signed copies of this book can be ordered direct from Tessa at her Blogsite. I have already ordered my copy and I am convinced that this book may prove to be of profound importance in the development of ITLAD/CTF and will also contain proof of the widening theory of BIGTOE and Karl's CtCw.

Tessa has already posted a comment about my work and I would like to thank her for this. she has already read the PKD chapter of "The Daemon" and a copy of this book will be winging its way across the Atlantic to her tomorrow.

Exciting times indeed!