THE PC PAT ON THE BACK
This is a concept I use to honor a friend of mine named Peter Caddy. (Hence the "PC.") Peter, who just recently died, was one of the co-founders of the Findhorn Community in Scotland. We met when I visited that community for three months in 1978. We have been friends since. From all outward appearances, Peter always looked like the proper English gentleman. He generally wore a sport coat and turtleneck—or tie. And he abhorred the American custom of drinking coffee out of a mug. He liked a cup and saucer. Once, when he was visiting Perelandra, we put the half-gallon milk carton on the table as a creamer for coffee. He didn?t say a word, but I could tell he thought this was very crass.
    But Peter had another side, and this is where the pat on the back comes. Early on in life, he had a spiritual teacher who had a lot of drill-sergeant qualities about her. She taught him to act immediately on intuition and guidance. Never stop to question it. Just do it. Peter listened—and learned—well. As a result, he went through one crazy, totally insane adventure after another—all because of his intuition or someone else?s guidance. When he was on the move—and he travelled a lot—it was as if the whole world would reposition itself to accommodate whatever he needed to do. His adventures were nuts, and his stories were magical.
    As I have moved through the years since meeting Peter, I?ve been challenged to do some pretty outrageous things myself—as this book will attest to. Whenever I?ve hesitated moving forward into absurdity, I?ve thought of Peter. And I?d say to myself, "Peter wouldn?t even blink an eye at this." Then I?d go ahead, knowing that I?m not the only person who?d be crazy enough to do this thing. In this way, he?s given me terrific support. And that?s his "pat on the back."
    I suspect—and hope—that by the time you finish this book, you?ll look at my life and use it as your "MSW Pat on the Back" when you need a little encouragement to keep moving.

PISCEAN ERA
The Piscean era is that period of time, roughly 2000 years long, out of which the planet Earth and the universe are presently passing, and during which specific universal laws were grounded on the planet. In a broad and loose sense, one may say that the Piscean era explored, developed and worked with the dynamic of the parent/child, higher/lower, and masculine-energy-dominate relationship, and expressed this dynamic in both action and structure throughout all levels of form.

AQUARIAN ERA
The Aquarian era is the term used to describe the coming phase of evolution facing not only those on planet Earth, but all souls and all life forms within the universe as well. Although it is termed "Aquarian" because of its loose connection to the astronomical alignment of Aquarius, it is more importantly a term that connotes an emphasized pattern and rhythm in life behavior. The Age of Aquarius will see the coming to the fore of the concepts of balance, teamwork and partnership played out on all levels of life.

THE INFORMATION POLICY
I began operating with what I call "The Information Policy" shortly after my ring-pass-not expansion. To put it simply, those involved in the expansion suggested, and I agreed, that they would give me information about what I was experiencing only when I specifically asked for it. This meant I had to ask a direct question, and then I?d be given only the information that was needed to answer that question. We did this so that I would not be overwhelmed by the mammoth task of identifying and integrating everything that was involved in the expansion. It was—and still is—critical that I move through the post-expansion process at my rate and in my timing. (This happens to be true with anyone moving through post-expansion.) The only way we could assure that my timing was being fully adhered to was to address only what I could question.
    Actually, it was a little more complex than this. The issue centered around the information I was ready to integrate. This didn?t just hinge on my asking a direct question. We all can override our ability to integrate information by asking questions for purely intellectual curiosity. We are taught to do this in school. I had to also need the information.
    I had to learn the difference between an intellectual question and an integration question. When we ask a question just for the sake of asking the question, and have no intention of doing anything with the answer, this is an intellectual question. It springs from our curiosity about something. An integration question is one in which the answer is received in right timing, and we are able to integrate the information we receive from the answer into our life. It can change the way we think, how we perceive the reality around us, how we act, and how we move through our daily schedule. It is a question whose answer moves through a complete experiential grounding process. It is information we need.
    There is no general, hard-and-fast formula for discerning an intellectual question from an integration question. What is intellectual for one person is integration for another. But here is what I did to learn to distinguish between the two for myself:
    1. I stopped asking questions that did not apply to whatever I was experiencing at that moment. That automatically cut out a lot of questions.
    2. When I mistakenly asked an intellectual question, I paid attention to how the answer affected me. I noticed that when I couldn?t integrate the answer, it would bounce off me as a rubber ball off a brick wall. I could physically hear the words, but my body felt "hard," and the word energy was bouncing off it. As a result, I had difficulty comprehending the answer or retaining it. I wasn?t ready to absorb it. Whenever I felt an answer bounce, I would disregard my question and the answer. If I could discern the bounce fast enough, I would stop the person who was answering, tell him I wasn?t ready to ask that question, and apologize.
    3. After a while, I could anticipate the effect an answer would have on me by thinking out a question I had doubts about ahead of time and feeling whether the energy be absorbed or bounce off. Even if I didn?t know the answer, I could still feel an "answer energy." Once I felt the impact, I could decide whether or not to even open my mouth.
    Don?t forget. I went through this exercise because the expansion I took was so large that, had I not learned to discern intellectual questions from integration ones, I would have quickly become overloaded with information. This would have made it extremely difficult to function in the post-expansion stages. I still adhere to the Information Policy. I found that my life became so much more efficient when I didn?t weigh it down with useless information that I extended the policy into my mundane life, as well.

FREE WILL, OPTION, SYNCHRONICITY, ACCIDENTS
Our lives operate on free will. When a human soul individuates, it takes on free will. Without it, we could not experience individuation. When an individuated soul activates a soul ray, we take on the task of developing conscious free will. Conscious free will is the dynamic that allows us complete freedom of choice in all that we do and how we develop within a soul-ray lifetime. In order to fully participate in the larger universal picture, we must learn to function responsibly, intelligently and ethically in ways that are consistent with the universal dynamics of that larger picture—and we must choose to do this consciously and freely.
    Within each soul-ray experience, we intentionally choose (from our individuated soul level) to focus on specific areas of experience and learning. This is the extent of our "preplanning" prior to birth. As a result, we are born with a sense of direction and purpose.
    After birth we take on the challenge of how best to accomplish our direction and purpose. Some people like to think that we come into a lifetime not only with direction and purpose, but also with the exact game plan we need to execute to fulfill that direction and purpose. If you think about this for a minute, you?ll see that this preset game-plan idea eliminates conscious free will. Our participation in the larger universal picture is so important that we simply cannot sidestep our growth and development in the area of conscious free will. It seems like everyone in the universe and all the intelligences in nature know this—except us. Some of us work awfully hard to sidestep our responsibility in this matter. We must learn to consciously weigh situations and issues and to say "yes" and "no" and "maybe." In this way, we learn to deliberately choose options that are consistent with universal dynamics and law and to consciously participate in the larger picture. Full participation implies knowledgeable and free participation. The only way we can learn this is through conscious growth and development around free will.
    At any given point along the way, we are faced with many options for accomplishing direction and purpose. Some options are harmonious with our direction and purpose—and the universal larger picture. Some are not. We have to learn to discern and choose. We choose one option over the others for various reasons. It is the one that we find most attractive or exciting. It is the one that seems easiest. Perhaps it is the option that seems most efficient. Maybe it is the one we have the strongest gut reaction to. Or perhaps it?s the option that seems the most difficult out of all the others, and, for whatever reason, we feel it is the important one for us to take. As we choose each option along the way, we begin to weave a unique pattern based on who we are and our ability to use free will to make choices. And over time we learn the formula for choosing that works best for us.
    Three issues tend to come up whenever I have talked about this. The first is synchronicity. Usually people use synchronicity to describe an event where one?s need or desire is suddenly and unexpectantly met by the perfect opportunity. There is a sense that "someone has heard them" and magically met their need.
    In actuality, this kind of synchronicity is an illusion. They have simply chosen the option out of all the different ones available to them that allowed for their need to be met in this manner. They could have chosen another option that was equally available to them that would have also met their need, but in a different and less "magical" manner.
    At any given point along the way, we are surrounded with a number of options for meeting need and desire. Most of them are positive in nature and can meet need and desire well. If we choose one of these, we experience our lives moving easily and well—even magically. This causes some to think that they "received" the one and only option for fulfilling need and desire. In fact, they chose one of several options. And had they chosen one of the difficult options or one of the options that was not consistent with their direction and purpose, their tough experiences might have been labeled "bad luck."
    Both concepts—synchronicity and bad luck—distance us from our personal responsibility in life and complicate our growth and development in the area of conscious free will.
    The second issue that is raised has to do with victimization and/or terrible outside circumstances that seem to eliminate any possibility of choice. When a person is suffering from victimization, he has already relinquished free will to another person or social structure. For whatever reason, he has chosen to step back from his life?s responsibilities. When we look at these situations, we tend to focus on the difficult (and real) circumstances they now find themselves in as a result of victimization and say that this person?s situation is caused by these circumstances. In order to understand free will, we have to look at the choices (or lack of choices) the person made prior to the situation. What decisions led the person into the situation in the first place? The situation is the result of these decisions. And now they are faced with far more difficult decisions to make in order to extricate themselves from the situation—and reestablish control over their free will. If the circumstance itself was the sole reason a person experiences victimization, then all we would have to do is remove any person from their circumstance to eliminate their problems of victimization. Addressing these kinds of issues have shown us that the real answers come from within, and without those internal answers—without personal growth and change—the person will simply move into another victimization situation.
    There is no doubt that some of these situations are horrible—child or spouse abuse, institutional abuse, prison, genocide, mass starvation, the Holocaust.... Obviously, children are the most vulnerable to difficult and dangerous outside circumstances. They have the least-developed conscious free will and the fewest options. But children do have a strong survival instinct that pushes many of them to take control as best they can and reach out to options. Don?t misunderstand me. I?m not suggesting that it is okay for children to face survival situations. I feel deeply that it is not fair and it is wrong. What I am saying is that, when addressing difficult or dangerous outside circumstances, the survival instinct gives children options and opportunity that is relative to their age and ability. Children can survive, and many do.
    Adults are another matter. They have had the opportunity to develop free will and the ability to identify, consider and choose options. Some adults make decisions and choose options that enable them to avoid the difficult situation altogether. Others make choices that seem to "flirt" with fate. Still others position themselves in such a way that the situation becomes inevitable. But the fact that people who are faced with these horrible situations manage to have very different experiences (some disastrous, some breathtakingly heroic) illustrates that there are many different options available to each of them prior to the situation and during it. These situations may limit free will and choice, but they do not eliminate them.
    The last issue generally raised centers around accidents. Many feel that there are no accidents in life. All events and opportunities are in right timing or predestined. Although this concept can be comforting at times—especially when dealing with what we call "someone?s untimely death"—it eliminates free will. You simply cannot have over five billion people running around the planet exercising free will and not have accidents occur.
    One last thing about free will. You will see in this book that I did not consciously know that a major expansion was before me or what impact it would have on my life. This is not at all unusual about expansion. On the surface, it appears that I moved into the expansion blindly and had no opportunity to exercise my free will. But as you read along, you?ll see that at every critical juncture along the way, I had to consciously decide if I chose to go on. I didn?t know what I was heading into, but I had to say "let?s go" before the expansion continued. Had I decided to go no further (which would have been based on my gut instinct), I would not have continued beyond that point. I would have put the whole expansion experience on the back burner until I felt ready. Remember, ring-pass-not expansion is triggered by the soul and only occurs when we are able to enfold it into our perceived reality. However, this is all unconscious. Once we start to consciously move into the expansion we may feel unprepared, but we can still call a halt. Expansion overrides intellect, but not free will. And the growth and development of free will is so critical to our evolution that, during our soul-ray lifetime, we do not relinquish free will to our own soul.

FACTOR-X
Sometimes, something comes into our lives suddenly that we were not expecting, and we have no plans for how to deal with it. This is factor-x. It can be part of whatever we are dealing with that we simply didn?t know existed until it popped up. Or it can be the result of an accident. Something has happened that was not only unexpected, but was also never meant to be part of whatever we are trying to address. Wherever it originates, it is a factor-x, and we have to deal with it.
    No matter how well we plan, how hard we try to figure things out ahead of time, a factor-x will show up. In fact, we?re damn lucky if only one factor-x hits us! They like to travel in packs.
    The keys to dealing with a factor-x are flexibility and creativity.

CONINGS
A coning is a balanced vortex of conscious energy. The simplest way to explain a coning is to say that it is a conference call. With a coning, we are working with more than one intelligence simultaneously.
    The reason a coning is needed for multilevel processes is because of the greater stability, clarity and balance it offers. With multilevel processes, we are working with many different facets and levels of intelligences at one time. Consequently, it is far better to work in an organized team comprised of all those involved in the area we are focusing on.
    A coning, by nature, has a high degree of protection built into it. Because of the larger scope of the work, it is important to define exactly who and what are involved in that work. All others are excluded by the mere fact that they have not been activated in the coning. In essence, a coning creates not only the team but also the "room" in which the team is meeting. It is important, when activating a coning, to discern between those team members who are a part of the work to be done and those others who are not involved. The coning is created and activated by us—the human team member. Only those with whom we seek connection will be included. Members will not "slide" in and out of a coning on their own. This adds to the exceptional degree of protection contained within the coning.
    Any combination of team members can be activated for the purpose of simultaneous input. But this does not constitute a coning. A true coning has balance built into it. By this I mean a balance between nature and the human soul. In order for us to experience anything fully, we must perceive it in a balanced state; that is, it must have an equal reflection of the soul or spirit dynamics (evolution) combined with an equal reflection of the form/nature dynamics (involution. A coning contains both dynamics.

CONSCIOUSNESS: Defined by Nature
The concept of consciousness has been vastly misunderstood. To put it simply, consciousness is the working state of the soul. In human expression, as one sees it demonstrated on the planet Earth, the personality, character, emotional makeup, intellectual capacity, strong points and gifts of a human are all form. They are that which give order, organization and life vitality to consciousness.
    We say "working state of the soul" because there are levels of soul existence that are different than the working state and can best be described as a simple and complete state of being.
    Humans tend to think of the soul as being something that exists far away from them because they are in form. This is an illusion. The core of any life is the soul. It cannot exist apart from itself. Like the heart in the human body, it is an essential part of the life unit. A human in form is, by definition, a soul fused with nature. Personality and character are a part of the nature/form package that allows the soul to function and to express itself in form. Personality and character are not the soul; they are the order and organization of that soul.
    Consciousness physically fuses into the body system first through the electrical system and then through the central nervous system and the brain. This is another aspect of nature supplying order, organization and life vitality. Consciousness itself cannot be measured or monitored as a reality. But what can be measured and monitored is the order, organization and life vitality of consciousness. Consciousness is the working state of the soul and is not form. It is nature, not consciousness, that supplies form.
    We wish to add a thought here so that there will be no confusion about the relationship between nature and the soul. Nature does not, with its own power, superimpose its interpretation of form onto a soul. We have said that nature and soul are intimately and symbiotically related. This implies a give and take. No one consciousness group operates in isolation of the whole or of all other parts of the whole. When a soul chooses to move within the vast band of form, it communicates its intent and purpose to nature. It is from this that nature derives the specifics that will be needed for the soul to function in form. It is a perfect marriage of purpose with the order, organization and life vitality that is needed for the fulfillment of that purpose. Nature, therefore, does not define purpose and impose it on a soul. It orders, organizes and gives life vitality to purpose for expression in form.

SOUL: Defined by Nature
It is most difficult to define soul since—at its point of central essence—the soul is beyond form. Consequently, it is beyond words. However, it is not beyond any specific life form. As we have said, an individual is not separate or distant from his or her soul. Souls, as individuated life forces, were created and fused with form at the moment of the Big Bang. Beyond form, souls are also beyond the notion of creation. So we refer to the moment of the Big Bang regarding the soul, since this gives you a description of soul that will be most meaningful to you.
    The Big Bang was the nature-designed order, organization and life force used to differentiate soul into sparks of individuated light energy. The power of the Big Bang was created by intent. And that intent originated from the massive collective soul reality beyond form.
    It is reasonable to look at the Big Bang as the soul?s gateway to the immense band of form. To perceive the soul and how it functions exclusively from the perspective of human form on Earth is akin to seeing that planet from the perspective of one grain of sand. The soul?s options of function and expression in form are endless. What we see occurring more frequently now on Earth is the shift from the individual soul unknowingly functioning in an array of options, all chosen only because they are compatible with the immediate purpose of the soul, to the individual beginning to function with discrimination and intent in more expanded ways. Using the words in their more limited, parochial definitions, we can say that we see the beginning of a shift from soul function in which an individuated personality remains unaware of many of its options to soul function in which the personality begins to take on conscious awareness of all its options.

INTENT: Defined by Nature
Intent refers to the conscious dynamic within all life that links life vitality (action) with soul purpose and direction. When an individual uses free will to manipulate what he or she willfully desires instead of what is within the scope of higher soul purpose, then intent is combined with the manipulative power of free will and this combination is linked with life vitality. Life vitality adds action to order and organization. It both initiates and creates action. To maintain harmonious movement with soul purpose and direction, life vitality must be linked with the soul dynamic. This linkage occurs on two levels. One is unconscious, allowing for a natural patterning and rhythm of action through form that is consistent with soul purpose. As the body/soul fusion moves through its own evolutionary process as a functioning unit, it takes on a greater level of consciousness and an expanded level of awareness and knowing. As a result, the unconscious link between soul dynamic and life vitality takes on a new level of operation, thus shifting it into a state of consciousness. The shift is a gradual, step-by-step evolutionary process in itself. Intent is therefore defined as conscious awareness of soul purpose, what is required within the scope of form to achieve soul purpose, and how the two function as a unit. Consequently, when one wishes to express soul purpose, one need only consciously fuse this purpose with appropriate form and action. This act is what is referred to when one speaks of intent.
    Intent as a dynamic is an evolutionary process in itself and, as we have said, does not suddenly envelop one?s entire life fully and completely. Intent is only gradually incorporated into one?s everyday life. Therefore, one does not suddenly and immediately function within the full scope of the intent dynamic in those areas of life where intent is present. Intent as a dynamic is as broad a learning arena as life itself. And in the beginning, intent can often be confused with or intermingled with free will. However, as it is developed, it becomes the cutting edge of the body/soul unit and how it operates. Intent is the key to unlimited life within the scope of form.

INTUITION: Defined by Nature
Intuition, as it is popularly defined, relates to a sixth sense of operation. This is false. This is not a sixth sense. When individuals experience a phenomenon that they consider to be beyond their five senses, they tend to attribute this experience to another category, the sixth sense, and call it intuition. The fact is that the phenomenon is processed through their five senses in an expanded manner.
    Intuition, in fact, is related to and linked with intent. It is the bridge between an individual?s conscious body/soul fusion—that state which he knows and understands about the body/soul fusion and how it functions—and the individual?s unconscious body/soul fusion. Intuition bridges the unconscious and the conscious. This enables what is known on the level of the unconscious body/soul fusion to be incorporated with and become a part of the conscious body/soul fusion. Intuition is the communication bridge between the two that makes it possible for the conscious body/soul unit to benefit from those aspects of the unconscious body/soul unit. This benefit results when the conscious unit opens to and moves through the lessons surrounding intent. Where intent is functioning fully, these two levels, the unconscious and the conscious, are no longer separate but have become one—the expanded conscious level. Consequently, there is then no need for the bridge known as intuition.
    However, lest you think otherwise, intent is not considered greater than intuition; rather, they are two excellent tools utilized equally by the highest developed souls functioning within form. We say this to caution those who read this not to think intent is "greater" than intuition and to be aimed for at the exclusion of intuition. Evolution as seen from the highest perspective is endless. Therefore, discovery of all there is to know about both intuition and intent is endless. For all practical purposes, an individual can safely consider that there will never be a time in which the development of intuition will be unnecessary. As we have said, the highest souls who function to the fullest within the scope of form do so with an equal development and expansion of both intent and intuition.

GROUNDING: Defined by Nature
Quite simply, the word "grounded" is used to acknowledge full body/soul fusion or full matter/soul fusion. The word "grounding" refers to what must be accomplished or activated in order to both ensure and stabilize body or matter/soul fusion. To be grounded refers to the state of being a fused body (matter)-soul unit. To achieve this fusion and to function fully as a fused unit is the primary goal one accepts when choosing to experience life within form. Functioning as a grounded body (matter)-soul unit is a goal on all levels and dimensions of form, whether the form can or cannot be perceived by the five senses.
    Nature plays two key roles in grounding. First, it is through and with nature that the grounding occurs. Nature, which organizes, orders and adds life vitality to create form, is what creates and maintains grounding. Second, the levels of nature know what is required to fuse the soul dynamic within form. Nature provides the best examples of body (matter)-soul fusion. Humans have recognized the form or matter existence of nature on the planet, but have only recently begun to understand that within all form there are fully functioning soul dynamics. On the other hand, humans acknowledge or concentrate on their personal soul dynamics but have little understanding as to how they, in order to be functional within form, must allow the soul to fuse with and operate through their form body. Humans do not see the examples or learn the lessons of the master teachers of body (matter)/soul fusion that surround them in all the kingdoms of nature. Humans also deny the fusion within themselves. The relative extent of this denial interferes proportionately with the quality and stabilization of the fusion.

BALANCE: Defined by Nature
Balance is relative and measured, shall we say, by an individual?s ability to faithfully demonstrate the various elements that make up his larger reality through the specific frameworks of form in which one has chosen to develop. When what one is demonstrating is faithful in intent and clarity with these elements and the larger reality, one experiences balance. And those interacting with this individual will experience his balance. One experiences imbalance when there is distortion between what one demonstrates through the form framework and the intent and clarity of the elements that make up the larger reality as well as the larger reality itself.
    If you seriously consider what we are saying here, you will see that balance as a phenomenon is not an elusive state that only an exalted few can achieve. Balance is, in fact, inherent in all reality, in all life systems. Balance is defined by the many elements within any individual?s reality. And it is the dominant state of being within any reality and any form system. It is also the state of being that links individual life systems to one another and to the larger whole. When someone says that he is a child of the universe, what he is acknowledging is the relationship and link of his higher state of balance to the universe?s state of balance. Whether he feels linked to or distant from this relationship depends on the closeness or distance he creates within himself with respect to his larger personal state of balance—that dynamic that is part of his overall reality.

THE WHITE BROTHERHOOD
Much has been written about the White Brotherhood, but I think a lot of it was garbage. Some people have felt or said that they were the sole "channellers" of the White Brotherhood, and this simply isn?t true. The Brotherhood is a huge organization that is constantly connected to us in general and to many of us individually. It?s just that usually they are only able to work with us on an intuitive level, and our link with them is unconscious on our part.
    The White Brotherhood is a large group of highly evolved souls dedicated to assisting the evolutionary process of moving universal reality, principles, laws, and patterns through all planes and levels of form. They hold the major patterning and rhythms now being utilized for the shift we are all going through from the Piscean to the Aquarian era. When we link with them, they support and assist us by assuring that any work we do maintains its forward evolutionary motion and its connection to the new Aquarian dynamics.
    They exist beyond time and history. I first heard about them during my stay at the Findhorn community in Scotland in 1977. St. Germain, who had a close relationship with several Findhorn members, was referred to often and described as being a master teacher from the White Brotherhood. I was also told that the Order of the Melchizedek was a part of the Brotherhood, and it is from this group that all of the major religious leaders come who have been a part of our history. I ignored the Brotherhood and its existence for years, assuming that they knew how to do their job, whatever that was, very well without me and that my focus was primarily on nature, not on human-oriented evolution. After all, this is the age of specialization.
    My understanding of how the Brotherhood functions is, I?m sure, somewhat simplistic. I see them operating in a co-creative role with us on this planet. They design and infuse purpose and direction into the frameworks of social order through which we on Earth move in order to learn, experience, and evolve. In essence, they create the schools through which we move. We call these schools religions, governmental structures, educational movements, philosophy, science...all those massive social frameworks with which we associate and within which we function.
    Let me say something about the name "White Brotherhood." Several people have written me questioning—and sometimes complaining about—that name. They want to make sure this isn?t some white supremacist/sexist organization. Trust me, the White Brotherhood is neither. It includes males, females and souls beyond both persuasions, and some of them can outdo us any day when it comes to color.
    The name "White Brotherhood" has been used for this group for centuries. We did not coin the name here at Perelandra. It was coined by those folks on the Earth level who first began to consciously work with this group. It is not a name the group chose for itself. It is a name we chose for it. The words "white brotherhood" maintained the intent and integrity of the group, so it has always been acceptable to them. "White" is used to signify all the rays of the light spectrum. "Brotherhood" is used to signify not only the family of all people but also the family of all life.

THE STORY BEGINS: 1862
Somewhere near Jamestown, Virginia
    A schizophrenic plantation owner had many slaves who constantly tended to his land and enlarged its productivity. The opportunity in that lifetime for him to understand the law of karma was to see it outside of himself in the form of slavery. Simultaneously, he was being exposed to talk of revolution and the formation of a new order, a new country, giving equal vote and equal taxation to all. In that life, the three extremes—the high and mighty soul, the personality repressed unjustly and unfairly by the rule of the country, and the exposure to serfdom and slavery outside of self—rent the personality in two. At age forty, he had a complete nervous breakdown, manifesting that one must split in order to understand the reality that is Oneness. [comma]

THE STORY CONTINUES: 1969
Washington, D.C.
    In 1969, I was twenty-three years old. I had survived a childhood of abuse and abandonment. (I describe my childhood and early life in the book Behaving as if the God in All Life Mattered.) Today you would say that I was a "throwaway child." I had been on my own since age twelve. But back in the late 50s and early 60s, when I was a girl faced with the somewhat formidable task of surviving on my own, this term had not yet been coined. I had also survived two years in a Catholic boarding school for girls. I?m not sure which was tougher. By 1969, I had successfully come through the survival years and was now building my own life.
    I had been working at the National Gallery of Art for two years. I managed to land this job after my return in 1967 from a year traveling in Europe. Hiring me had been a major gamble on the Gallery?s part—not only did I not have a master?s degree in fine arts or art history (a Gallery requirement in those days), I had not even attended college. I convinced the head of the publications department that spending a year looking at the real paintings of the masters had more value than studying reproductions in an art history book. I further wowed her with stories about my three-month job with the Florence marble restoration team that had taken on cleaning all the marble art that had been damaged in the devastating 1967 Florence flood. When I told her about working on some of Michelangelo?s pieces, she was convinced I would be an asset to the Gallery, and overlooked all those college requirements.
    I wanted to work at the National Gallery of Art after my return to the States because I wanted to continue the "softer" lifestyle I had discovered (and appreciated) in Europe. I didn?t want to return to the fast-paced life I left behind when I departed on a freighter for England. I had worked in the classified advertising department at The Washington Post for three and a half years. Although it was an exciting job, and although I had been invited to rejoin The Post after I returned, I came back to the States knowing I needed to change my life. I might have functioned quite well under the daily pressures of a major newspaper, but it was no longer a lifestyle that made me comfortable. In Europe, I realized it was too hard-edged for me, and I was afraid I would not like the person I might become if I spent year after year in that environment.
    Just before I went to Europe, a friend hauled me to the National Gallery of Art for a two-hour crash course in art history. I had no interest in this kind of thing, but he was sure I?d be a better person for it. And it was "good preparation" for my Europe trip. After being dragged from room to room, I can honestly say that I left with a headache, nausea and an even stronger disinterest in art.
    I wasn?t sure what I was going to do in Europe. I only knew that it was important for me to go. I didn?t even have an itinerary. In fact, I left the States not knowing where the freighter was going to dock. It all depended on the weather. If we had good weather—which was doubtful for a January crossing—we would dock at Southampton. If we had questionable or bad weather, we would dock at Liverpool. Two days before we arrived, I found out I would be disembarking at Liverpool.
    And so, I arrived with no plans. I spent only a few days in Liverpool, then I headed to London. I was nearly paralyzed by the shock of realizing I was in a foreign country and I didn?t know one other person. I quickly became homesick for the States—actually I think I was just yearning for anything that was familiar. There I was—twenty-one, in England, and without a clue as to why I was there. But I couldn?t turn back. I had worked too hard to earn the money for the trip; I had quit my job, given up my apartment, stored my stuff and farmed out my cat. So I took a deep breath and slowly, slowly began to pull myself together. Sort of. I had a copy of Europe on $5 a Day, which listed inexpensive places to stay, inexpensive places to eat and equally inexpensive things to do. Museum-hopping is very inexpensive. It was also about the only thing listed that I felt comfortable doing. I wasn?t interested in the night life in bars and pubs. I had lived with an alcoholic mother before being thrown out on the streets, so I really was not drawn to people who sat, getting half looped and acting silly. Besides, I didn?t drink or smoke. I did not have enough money for fancy restaurants, and I was not that interested in food anyway. That left museums, art galleries and your basic historical points of interest.
    I wish I could say that I walked into my first museum in London and fell madly in love with what I saw. It?s not that I hated what I saw. I just didn?t understand what the big deal was. Oh sure, some of the objects were interesting and some of the paintings were actually quite pretty. I continued visiting museums because I wanted to figure out what was the point of it all. After about my fourth country and approximately the thirtieth museum, I began to gain an appreciation and respect. (Years later, when I was working at the Gallery, a boy about nine years old came up to me and asked, "What?s the big deal with all this stuff? All they had to do was follow the numbers." I said, "Oh no. These are the fellows who figured out what numbers to use." Well, this kid left with a whole new respect for what he was seeing.) By the time I got to Florence and joined the marble restoration team, I was actually beginning to feel a little knowledgeable about art.
    Now, if you?re beginning to think that culture was influencing me by the time I arrived in Florence, and that this is the reason I joined the marble restoration team, don?t. I arrived in March 1967. The Arno River overflowed in November 1966—just after everyone in the city had received their first delivery of heating oil for the winter. The flood waters burst all the storage tanks. The water alone, which reached a height of twenty feet in some streets, did a great deal of damage. But that thick heating oil did a great deal more damage, particularly to the artwork. Large numbers of international teams of art restoration experts rushed into Florence to take over the massive cleanup job. The English worked on the restoration of paintings. The Americans sent in teams to deal with the cleanup of old books. But no one came to work on the marble because there were no experts in this field of restoration. A small, ragged group of English and Americans banded together on their own and took on the challenge. Washing mud off the marble was the easy part. The oil was the main problem.
    Marble is porous and, although it has a smooth surface or patina, it acts very much like skin. When the oil hit the surface, it was absorbed through the pores, into the marble, leaving a dark, brown stain on the surface. This small group of people, armed with a few implements (dental tools, de-ionized water and toothpaste), set to work, but no amount of scrubbing affected the oil problem. Eventually, a scientist from England brought in a chemical solvent to draw the oil out without damaging the patina or breaking down the marble. A thin layer of solvent mixed with talcum powder was hand-packed on the marble. The solvent drew out the oil, which then absorbed in the talc. The talc dried, was brushed off, and the whole process was repeated. This procedure was done over and over until the surface of the marble was once again white.
    The whole city of Florence is a museum. There is marble art everywhere: statues, plaques, tombs, fountains, cathedral walls. And this group of about fifteen people was trying to hand-pack everything before the oil left a permanent stain on the marble. This is the situation I walked into. I appreciated their efforts; they were in need of help; and I volunteered because I became fascinated with the technical challenge of how to get oil out of marble. I did not have a deep love for marble art—at least not before I began cleaning it. It was just the thing to do.
    We worked long hours six days a week. The Italian government paid us $100 a month. For me that wasn?t bad. It paid for all my living expenses while I stayed in Florence. A few more people joined the group. We were making progress and began to feel we could get this job done. We ignored the fact that the solvent left chemical burns on our hands. (We couldn?t protect ourselves with rubber gloves because the solvent ate through the gloves too.) We packed the hell out of that city. Then, around mid-June, the intense summer heat rolled in. All the marble we had cleaned began to show new brown stains on the surface. The heat was drawing out the remaining oil from the very center of the marble that had not been drawn out with the solvent. All of Florence had to be repacked. That?s when I looked at my hands that were becoming more raw by the day, and handed over my tools to a new volunteer.
    I left Florence at the end of June and continued my travels. With each month, I became more comfortable with tackling new countries, new customs, new languages. My self-confidence steadily rose. I became a seasoned and intelligent traveler. I became less an American and more a European. Traveling alone gave me a lot of time by myself, and I became quiet and more at peace. I was healing from my tumultuous childhood.
    I returned to the States with a very different feeling about myself and how I wanted to live. That?s when I made the decision not to rejoin The Post and, instead, look for a completely different kind of job. The National Gallery of Art was not advertising for help when I showed up. I decided that I wanted to continue with what I had learned in Europe about art, and so I simply presented myself at their personnel office. I walked out with a job in the publications department.
    I then decided I wanted to live in an area of town that had a neighborhood feeling rather than renting another apartment in a high-rise. Not far from the National Gallery of Art is an area called Capitol Hill. I found an English basement apartment in a house owned by a couple with two small children. It was perfect. I was now living only thirteen blocks from work, so I bought a gold Robin Hood bicycle, which became my main mode of transportation.
    Now, that bicycle became quite the source of adventure for me. I rode it for several years, and in all those years I rarely passed another cyclist. It took a few more years before cycling came into vogue in Washington, D.C. I was determined not to get run over by a car and wore bright clothing so folks would see me. I had great rain gear; I bought a piece of oil cloth (white with black polka dots), a shiny black, broad-brimmed hat that tied under my chin, and shiny black plastic boots. I looked like a whacky witch from the west as I rode through town with my oilcloth poncho flapping in the breeze. It drew a lot of attention—which was the point. No one ran over me.
    I, on the other hand, ran over—or into—someone. Each day I cut through the grounds of the U.S. Capitol Building on the way to and from work. All the Capitol guards knew me, and I?d wave as I rode by. One summer evening, there was an amazingly beautiful sunset going on just behind the rotunda. I was pedaling slowly, watching the sunset along with just about everyone else—except Robert Kennedy. He was coming down the east steps of the Capitol Building with his head down—I assume he was thinking. As he stepped off the curb, I ran right into him. Actually, my front wheel lodged between his legs. (He had been mid-stride when we collided.) Our heads were about a foot apart. He didn?t say anything, but he sure had tears of pain in his eyes. I didn?t know what to do, so I said, "Tough day, huh." He said something like, "It?s an appropriate end to the day." Thank god the guards knew me and didn?t come flying over to wrestle me to the ground. Senator Kennedy and I "disconnected." I asked if he was okay, hoping he wouldn?t go into any kind of detail. He said, in a strained voice, that he?d be fine. I apologized (a lot), then said, "Bye." and pedaled on.
    I didn?t always attack people with this bike. (Although there were many times when I wanted to turn it into a Sherman tank so that I could rumble down the street taking off every car door that swung open in my face.) Once Golda Meir crossed the street right in front of me—apparently she hadn?t heard how dangerous I was. I dutifully stopped and said hi to her. (What else do you do when someone of her stature is looking right at you? You can?t just stare. Well, I guess I proved you could run into them, but just saying "hi" seems a lot easier.) She graciously said "hello," and continued on. I went on my way thinking she really looked like a short grandmother and not like the prime minister of Israel.
    One time I rode my bicycle through the hallways of the National Gallery of Art. I felt I had good reason. The Gallery was closed, and I was getting ready to go home. I was allowed to park my bike in the Gallery garage. When I arrived in the garage one evening, I realized I had left my wool gloves in the publications room, which was a good block away from the garage. It was the dead of winter and downright cold outside, and I was tired. So I hopped on the bike and pedaled down the hallway to publications. Unfortunately, John Walker, the director of the National Gallery, at the time an older, dignified man, picked that very moment to come down the hallway. You know how it is when someone sees something they can?t believe, so they refuse to believe they?re seeing it? That?s how John Walker looked. I have the feeling that the last thing he ever expected to see was someone riding a bicycle through the hallowed halls of the Gallery. He was walking with a couple of other equally dignified-looking men, and it was clear they didn?t know what to say. I decided to take advantage of the confusion, so I pedaled right passed them, said "Good night," and kept right on going to publications as if it were the most natural thing in the world. After I passed, I heard Mr. Walker saying, "Did you just see that?" I assume he never got it straight in his head because I didn?t see any memos about prohibiting bike-riding in the Gallery.
    I was probably an asset to the Gallery, as the head of publications predicted I might be, but I was also a challenge to them. I was just too different for them. I had never considered myself a "free spirit" because back then this was synonymous with "hippie." I certainly was not a hippie—at heart or lifestyle. I wanted a "normal" life. I wanted a real "home"—a place where I belonged. I had already had enough freedom, challenge and adventure, thank you. But I thought differently—and I especially thought differently than most people who worked at the Gallery. They took themselves very seriously, and they got upset about the smallest things. An accidental food stain on a silk tie could wreck a man?s day there. They didn?t like to think about practical things. They were the "gentrified folks" who were meticulously dressed, and I always looked like I just rolled in on a bicycle. Sure, I wore dresses, but they were ones that I had sewn and not bought from Bloomingdale?s. And I didn?t have a single piece of gold (real gold) jewelry to sport around.
    Actually, what I had to offer the Gallery was common sense. We really thought differently. When I began working in publications, no one knew which reproductions were in stock, which ones were out of stock, or which were on order from the printer. People would ask for maybe twenty reproductions, and at least half of them would be out of stock—and we never knew when they?d be available again. Some prints had been out of stock for years. After a while, I offered to do an inventory for these people. This involved crawling around storage areas, identifying stacks of stuff and counting. You wouldn?t believe the junk I found. Trudy would have been ecstatic. I set up the first, organized inventory/restocking/reprinting process for all publications at the Gallery. They were impressed.
    The people that I understood were the tourists. They drove me nuts, but I understood where they were coming from. They didn?t get what the big deal was either. But the National Gallery of Art was on the list of things to see in Washington, so in they trooped. A lot of people came through the doors in the summertime just for the air conditioning and the chance to walk around on the cool marble floors in bare feet. Many people never bothered looking at the real paintings—they?d just come into the publications room and look at the postcards and 11-x-14-inch reproductions of the paintings. It saved time.
    Lots of people bought those reproductions, and this is when it got interesting. When I worked at the Gallery, the publications area was not self-service, as it is today. Now you just walk around and pick up the postcards, 11-x-14 prints or poster-size reproductions you want, and then go pay for them. You don?t have to identify the pictures to the clerk. Back when I worked there, only the postcards were self-service. Everything else was displayed with stock numbers. You brought your list of stock numbers to a staff person, and we got your stack of "artwork." Consequently, I?m one of the generation of publications staff who knows most of the Gallery paintings not by artist and name, but by stock number. Renoir?s Girl with a Watering Can was forever known by us as "good ole 1870."
    You could tell that people really didn?t get the overall concept of what the Gallery was about based on what they said to us in publications. A fair number of people thought that this was where John Kennedy was buried. (He had lain in state in the Capitol Building under the rotunda, and since the Gallery had a big rotunda, visitors got confused.) Another person came to the Gallery for a special show and asked afterwards what the building was normally used for once "this show left." One woman asked for an 11-x-14 print of Picasso?s The Tragedy. This is a rather somber picture of a man, woman and child from his blue period. Hence, the entire picture is in shades of blue. I pulled the print out, but the woman looked at it a few seconds and said, "Oh, do you have this in green? It?ll go better with my bathroom if it?s in green." Another fellow, who had clearly been sent to the Gallery on a mission by his wife, asked if we had any pictures by "Genre." (This is like asking if there are any poems by "Anonymous.")
    By far, the biggest seller was the 11-x-14 reproduction of Salvador Dali?s Last Supper, which sold for a quarter. The traditional depiction of the Last Supper often features the torso of God with outstretched arms just above Jesus and the disciples. Dali did not include the head of God. In his depiction of the Last Supper, the painting stops at His neck. A number of people, when seeing the inexpensive reproductions of the painting, would ask if we had a more expensive copy that included God?s head. I guess they figured the cheap reproductions didn?t necessarily include the entire painting. One fellow argued that Dali could not have possibly painted that picture because there were no bent watches in it. (Ahhh...you?re not getting this one. Let me help. Dali painted a bunch of pictures that included watches with bent faces. They looked as if they were liquid rather than solid.) Another time, a woman proudly presented herself at the desk and asked for a copy of Dolly Madison?s "Last Dinner."
    I may not have had a master?s degree in art history like other staffpersons, but, compared to many of the people who visited the Gallery, I was an expert. But I can?t say I ever got comfortable at the Gallery. It just wasn?t my world.

Reprinted from the book Dancing in the Shadows of the Moon by Machaelle Small Wright.
© 1995 Machaelle Small Wright. All Rights Reserved.