The Tao of Masonry

We listen to all sorts of music in my house, and the radio stations will often flip from “classic” rock, to 80s/90s alternative, to current pop, to NPR, and even AM talk radio. So, last year when Lady Gaga was the new, hot thing over the pop airwaves, I really got to enjoy listening to her witty lyrical takes on the New York club scene, and the music business.

Okay, let’s stop here. For those of you readers who have not heard of Lady Gaga, it’s time to unplug your AOL dial-up connection, order some broadband, and spend some time on Youtube.

Oh, and welcome to the 21st century.

Yes, the millennium finally ticked over a few years ago, and trust me: it’s perfectly okay to put away your Lynyrd Skynyrd 8-tracks, your colored vinyl 33s of Sha-Na-Na, your bootleg cassette tapes of Grateful Dead concerts, and that Led Zepplin Stairway EP, at least for a little bit, and listen to some of the new music that has been made since the Beatles. Nobody will judge you, and you might even find something interesting.

Anyhow, the other day I was idly skimming some humor website, when I ran across a post claiming that Lady Gaga was the latest example of how “they” (the Masonic-Illuminati-NWO konspiracy) was using the entertainment media in an attempt to control our minds. The post linked to an article on a particular blog which promises hours of entertaining reading.

Yeah, I know. Y’all think I’m kidding.

Back when I started this blog — going on four years, which makes it a teenager in blog years — I wrote a parody of the type of thinking that we typically encounter when Anti-Masons talk about the various flavors of Masonic conspiracies. And over the last few years I’ve written a few more articles based on the conversations that I’ve had with the Antis in real life and on various web boards. And yes, I get a few blog comments, and a few people catch me at a lodge meeting to chuckle over a recent post, but I know that most of you simply don’t take any of this seriously. I mean, it’s stupid — how could anybody take this stuff seriously, right?

Some of you would be surprised — nay, astounded — at how often Masons are implicated in plots ranging from Zionism to the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks to NASA (and the secret bases on the Moon) to UFO & alien technology, to fixing the parking tickets for local politicians. Whew, we’re really busy bees, aren’t we? But naturally, all of those conspiracy theories are completely ridiculous. I mean, alien technology? Moon bases? Hah, don’t be ridiculous.

No, the real Masonic conspiracy is how we control the electronic media and how we manipulate the entertainment industry in order to engage in our mind control experiments.

Yes, that’s right: the people who believe that Masons are using Hollywood to engage in mind control actually believe that they are smart ones.

And that brings me to my case in point: the meteoric rise to fame of Lady Gaga. Her videos are supposedly filled with Masonic/Illuminati symbols, which prove the efforts of the Masonic controlled entertainment media to warp the mind of our youth.

This is the contention of The Vigilant Citizen (“Symbols rule the world, not words nor laws”) in a series of articles that he has done over the last year. Here’s an example:

My first article on Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta called “Lady Gaga, the Illuminati Puppet“ generated a great deal of interest and controversy. It got featured on many websites and I was deemed either a “genius” or “batshit crazy” depending on the point of view. I can confirm that I’m neither of those two things and that I’m just a guy who knows his symbolism. Many news sites and blogs linked to my article by deforming its original intent (probably for more sensationalism) by adding sarcastic remarks like “Oh No Lady Gaga Wants to Control our Minds!” or “The Crazy Lady Gaga Conspiracy“. I guess those reactions were to be expected. To people who are not acquainted with obscure concepts such as Monarch programming and occult symbolism, the whole thing might sound totally far fetched and ridiculous. But to those who have background knowledge and who have researched these topics (a small minority), I was simply stating the obvious.

Since this article, Gaga has released more material re-using exactly the same themes as were discussed in the first article: mind control and secret society occultism. I have to hand it to Gaga, she knows how to generate buzz and controversy around her persona and keep people guessing. The great majority of people still have no idea what her symbolism refers to. So, at the risk of being called “batshit crazy” again here’s Lady Gaga’s latest occult pictures.

Most of Mr. Vigilant’s contentions are based on MK Ultra mind control conspiracies. In case you have any doubts about the breadth of these attempts, he points out:<
br />

During their reeducation, subjects are said to be exposed to numerous symbols such as trees, spider webs, masks, mazes, butterflies, etc. They are also shown movies which contain specific symbols (or “triggers”) such as The Wizard of Oz and many Disney Movies. The same way those subjects are brainwashed and reeducated, mass media conducts a large scale mind control project, which starts at birth with Disney movies and continues with Hollywood flicks and music videos.

Yeah, I know. Conjecture and assumptions. But Mr. Vigilant drives home the point in this article:

In my articles on Lady Gaga and the 2009 VMAs, I’ve identified the use and display of elements taken from Masonic symbolism. If my previous claims were considered inconclusive or “grasping at straws” by some, I wonder if they’ll remain skeptical of the presence of Masonic symbolism in pop culture after seeing this set of photos, taken INSIDE A MASONIC LODGE,

If you have minimal knowledge of Freemasonry, you already know the great importance of the twin pillars Jachim and Boaz. They are depicted in a great number of Masonic works of art, such as this one.

Gaga is standing between both pillars, wearing Hello Kitty shoes, occultly referring to mind control programming (innocence, childhood, re-education, etc). Her eyes are closed but she has wide-open eyes painted on her eyelids, which is very symbolic: her eyes seem open but they are still wide shut.

In the picture above, Gaga is sitting on a Masonic throne, complete with the twin pillars on each side of her.
Above her head is the compass of Freemasonry:

She is wearing a Hello Kitty dress and posing in a very mannequin-like stance. Her hands are positioned in way reminiscent of iconic art which displays the hermetic maxim “as above so below”.

In the picture above, Gaga is standing next to the bust of an important Mason (easily recognizable by the collar). The “one eye” symbolism discussed in the previous article is still an intricate part of Gaga’s imagery. She is however far from being the only artist doing this (see Rihanna’s R Rated album cover). Hello Kitty is covering Gaga’s…kitty in another odd juxtaposition of Masonic symbolism with mind control, often found in entertainment photo shoots.

Wow. Just… just, wow.

Over the last year, I’ve used Youtube to watch a few of her music videos (You know, it’s too bad that there’s not some TV channel that’s devoted solely to playing music videos, in the way that radio stations play tunes. Somebody would make a fortune if they could implement that idea.), and personally I’ve been struck by how detailed they are, and how she makes excellent use of imagery ranging from modern to classical. But is she streaming symbolic Illuminati messages to the masses, or is she just a clever mash-up artist?

In my opinion, since most people simply aren’t aware of the classical meanings behind most symbols (and since meaning often changes according to the contexts), then this is a particularly ineffective way of sending a signal. Personally, I just enjoy them for the effects.

If you have the time and inclination, you might be tempted to follow the links to his other articles which list examples of the symbolism and hidden/secret messages that she is sending on behalf of our Zeta-Reticulan overlords. I rather liked the assertion that her frequent use of her fingers framing her eyes are examples of the “eye in the pyramid”, which, as everyone knows, is a Masonic symbol (finding it on the back of our money and all that).

Yeah, I know. He’s just some guy with too much time on his hands writing a blog, right? I mean, they’ll let anybody have a blog nowadays — as witnessed by the very one that you’re reading.

But more instructive is not the blog itself, but the literally several hundred comments on these posts by people who are not just agreeing, but often augmenting them with links and information and theories of their own. I’m less worried about the one blog than I am about the hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people who take it so seriously.

Sometimes I read these conspiracy theories and I marvel at the amount of effort that people put into them; the connections and inferences drawn, the hunt for the data, and the time taken to make these mental leaps. But other times I simply shake my head and wonder why they bother.

Maybe, when our lives simply aren’t going the way we’d like them to be, it’s just easier to point to some larger conspiracy that keeps us from achieving our goals and dreams, instead of simply accepting that sometimes — perhaps most of the time — we can’t always get what we want.

I am so tired of the hype about the new Dan Brown book “The Lost Symbol,” that I have declared a “Brownout” at The Tao of Masonry this month. That’s right, I’m not going to be writing about Dan Brown or his new book for the rest of the month.

Admittedly, I didn’t write anything all summer long, but still — I’m upholding a principle.

The hype actually started back in 2006 when “The DaVinci Code” movie was released, and the rumors abounded that Brown would soon — perhaps as early as that fall — be publishing a follow-up book called “The Solomon Key.” Frankly, back then I was pretty excited. Freemasonry was getting some very public PR, and not from Freemasons themselves, nor because of some scandal. “National Treasure” was still talked about and it was looking like that dusty, old club that your grandfather used to visit a few times a month was getting a much-needed makeover. Most Freemasons waited for the next Brown book, hoping that it would continue to add to the mystique — and to draw in a few members.

Three years later, Brown is set to release the most long-awaited sequel since Thomas Harris’ “Hannibal Rising.” I’m going to avoid the temptation to compare the intriguing and complex character of Hannibal Lecter with the cardboard cutout of Robert Lang. You know why?

Because this is a No Dan Brown month at The Tao of Masonry, remember?

For weeks, Freemason bloggers and other members of the e-Mason community have been offering suggestions that our fraternity be ready for the huge tide of public interest. What are we going to tell people who ask us about Masonry? What kinds of responses will we have if Brown writes something unflattering? What will we have to offer if Brown writes something that sparks interest? Essentially, we are being told that we should turn on the porch light and bake a batch of cookies for the potential visitors — except for those who are saying that we should batten down the hatches for the potential storm.

Please.

How many movies in the last ten years had some slight reference to Freemasonry? Let’s see: Two National Treasure movies, The DaVinci Code, From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Magnolia. So, a film every couple of years, with the more recent ones are the most referential. In fact, National Treasure has more Masonic references, and arguably a much more favorable perspective than the other movies combined.

Our Grand Lodge website has been tracking the numbers of those interested enough in the Craft to ask to be contacted. If I recall correctly (and I’m sure somebody will correct me if I’m wrong), the numbers amounted to approximately one person per day.

I think that we can handle the influx of inquiries.

Look, it’s great that some groups are printing up material that brothers can use in case somebody decides to ask them about Freemasonry. But it occurred to me after last night’s Masonic Central podcast that we are expecting people to ask questions such as “What is Freemasonry” and “Why do you have those symbols?” and “Where can I get a petition?”

As if.

In my own experience as a student of human nature, I think that the questions are going to be more along the lines of “Do you really drink blood out of a human skull?” or “What’s with the goat? Do you really have some kind of demon worship?” or “Don’t you feel silly dressing in those old-fashioned costumes?” or “What’s with the secrecy? Do you guys really stick together to fix parking tickets and stuff?” or “What’s the deal with the Holy Grail, the lost Templar Treasure, and the Denver Airport?” and of course, “Why is it that when Masons turn up in books and movies, there’s always a secret plot, and people end up getting killed?”

I’m just saying that maybe some of us might be over-preparing for the wrong questions.

Driving to work this morning, I was thinking about the Masonic Central show, and about some of the questions that co-host Greg Stewart posed, which he believed would be important for Masons to think about in the face of the possible public relations stories that might come of this. He asked things like “What is Freemasonry? What do you get out of it? How does it make you a better person? What about the fraternity has kept your interest? What good things do you see it providing?”

Fellow guest Tim Bryce had a great explanation of our fraternity, almost elegant in its simplicity:

“Freemasonry is a Brotherhood of men who share common values, and who are interested in improving themselves, their community, and the world at large.”

After hearing this, it made me think that perhaps it’s more important for us, as Freemasons, to answer these questions for ourselves. Only when we know the answers to our own questions will we be able to answer — in the most positive light — the questions of the interested and curious.

Another blogger comes out of the closet this week. In real life, the mono-nymed Radcliffe happens to be one of my best friends, and has been writing The Metaphysical Freemason for the last year or so. For reasons as yet unexplained, he decided to cast off the cloak of anonymity with the anagrammatically titled post “Edman named.” As it turns out, Radcliffe is really WB Dave Edman, Past Master of Friendship Lodge (voted “Best Lodge in Conn” by 33% of Connecticut bloggers). WB Dave joins the surprisingly small number of blogging brothers who publish under their real names, and I welcome him to the club.

Being an inveterate attention seeker and egomaniac, I fail to understand the hesitation which many of my brothers seem to have over such public disclosure – at least, under normal circumstances. I do understand that some brothers feel the need to publish anonymously, though. In the UK and other parts of Europe, Freemasons have come under scrutiny because of accusations of nepotism and favoritism in government and business dealings; and let’s not forget that Freemasons were actively persecuted in WWII. In the US, some Masons in the Bible Belt might be hesitant to announce their memberships because their neighbors, co-workers, or employers might belong to a congregation that looks askance at the Order, which conceivably could impact one’s job security.Some brothers are just new to Masonry and are shy and unsure of what they can write, for rear of ridicule from less their expressive brethren. And, unfortunately, some Masons even fear reprisals from their own, as last year’s events in West Virginia have showcased.

But these are exceptions. To me, the surprising thing is that 2/3 of the 100+ bloggers that I’ve counted choose to do so under a nom-de-plume. Bro. Radcliffe Dave writes something that echoes sentiments that I’ve seen elsewhere:

“[...] does it matter what a persons name is, does it cause less credibility or more, when one is attempting to move ideas. I would generally suppose that while of potentially little harm it probably causes even less good.”

The essential question that Dave – and others – poses is this: “What difference does my name make? What does it matter who I am? Why can’t you just evaluate what I’m saying on its own merits?” And on some level this is a perfectly valid issue: The truth – or at least, what one believes is true – really should take priority over who is reporting it. The value of an opinion offered should not change depending upon who is opining.

At one time in our society, you might have seen advertisements like “Try Doc Johnson’s Vit-A-Tonic. It adds pep to your step!” in magazines and newspapers. Those were simpler times, though. Marketing experts have long since realized the importance of adding some amount of authority to the context of the message in order to create a degree of verisimilitude in order to increase the attractiveness of the product. My grandmother would buy almost anything endorsed by Robert Young, the actor who played Doctor Marcus Welby, MD on a show of the same name.

But now, in our post-modern, self-aware society, the discriminating among us demand more than the patina of realism; we want actual authority in order to give meaning within the context. And while the desire for meaning within context is a mark of critical thinking, do we sometimes discount the validity of facts or opinions when they are divorced from the context? I would say that we do, especially in the internet world – but that we do so not without reason. The speed in which various internet hoaxes are passed around by the unaware is amazing, and the tenacity of these hoaxes (or rather, the belief in them) rival the faith that some people have in religion.

Don’t believe me? How many times in the last decade (yes, it’s been at least that long) have you seen emails promising money, free meals, or prizes (from a merger of Microsoft, AOL, Outback, and Disney, apparently) based on your propensity to forward it to as many people as possible. And almost every such email contains the phrase “I don’t know if it’s true, but it’s worth a try, isn’t it?” Newer versions, ironically, even contain such “authority” phrases as “My sister in law is an attorney, and she says it’s legal” or “My accountant says that this is binding” or now, the ultimate in authority: “I saw this on Snopes.com, so it must be true.”

Yet, the messages which some people would claim have merit even without a context, have certainly been created with some context; context that enhances the impact of the message itself. If I wrote an article about my concerns over publishing something critical of my Grand Lodge (Connecticut, one of the more progressive and forward-thinking states), it would not have the same impact as (for example) an author from West Virginia, knowing that some members of the Craft have been expelled for speaking their mind, and that their Grand Lodge has been actively seeking the authors of an anonymously written blog chronicling the issues involving the Past Grand Master Haas. Indeed, the words of both articles may be the same, but the knowledge of the environment of the authors impacts the sense of meaning that the reader develops.

I’m not suggesting that my brothers in self-imposed anonymity suddenly announce their names; they obviously have their own reasons, and I would never suggest that their reasons are not valid – at least, to them. But I do encourage anyone who can, to write freely about Masonry; to write about their experiences, their beliefs, and their education. In our post-modern times we have opened up our lodges so that non-Masons can see what goes on, in hopes of encouraging some of them to join our ranks. Maybe, by being more open amongst ourselves, we can encourage those of us in the ranks to help mentor and educate each other, as well as those who have chosen to follow similar paths.