Wow, you found a lot more depth in
Illusions than I did... well, than I do, I suppose: I thought it was the deepest thing in the world when I first read it as a wide-eyed teenager back in the '70's. But now, if you were to scrape away all that '70's pop-culture-mysticism/metaphysics in which Bach was embroiled, and from which he fed most successfully, you have what I think is an accidental book about the dreaming experience, with a focus on presence in a lucid dream... sort of like how The Wachowski Brothers completely stumbled into deeper meaning in the first Matrix while making a movie about cool slomo bullets and fists of fury action. I don't think Bach wanted to be deep, or to teach an important lesson as much as he wanted to
seem to be doing so, as much as he wanted to write another short book that would sate his followers (he still has those, BTW) and make him craploads of money. Cynical, I know, but it might imply that there is more to Bach than he understands -- like, maybe the actual cosmic consciousness slipped into his work and helped Bach create a vehicle to help dreamers understand the nature of their time in dreams, and not in waking-life like he thought.
So, basically, I see
Illusions now as almost a primer for the dreaming experience; reading it as dream rather than a lecture might open doors that Bach never expected to be there; doors opening on living in a lucid dream, where the messiah, often reluctantly, is always the self-aware dreamer.
Quote:
(To Sageous)
Wondering about what sets Illusions apart for you, and although the writer does not overtly discuss this, it made me think a bit between the lines. I wonder if you didn’t resonate with the idea that waking life is kind of like a shared dream, stabilized because there are so many people dreaming it and expecting things to be a certain way at once. Don said everyone chooses how things are for themselves, but everyone is making choices. A lot of choices. Choices and choices. Seemed like he was hinting at a network of choices and expectations, stabilizing the world. If everyone decides water is fluid rather than solid, then that illusion can be expected to be stronger and maintained. Later he asks Richard, who is living in the world? This question is never satisfyingly answered but Don thought Richard knew the answer when he said, “I do.” I think this is a hint to the fact that Richard lives in the world not because he happens to be physically in a physical world but because he chooses to participate in this big shared dream with others. Or maybe he meant he lives in his own personal world, but they belong in a broader world that is the shared world…? That’s not my worldview but I can appreciate the thought of it and the exploration of it enough. And these thoughts do make me think of Oneironauticus though where I am, Alex still doesn’t quite understand all the technicalities, haha, so I’m still conjecturing.
Yes to all that, except for me it isn't about a shared dream but an individual's dream. If you think of Don not as a separate being but as a unit of Richard's imagination and worldview,
during a dream, the book takes on new meaning. I never really thought about the shared-dreaming angle, though, it is intriguing. I guess I originally read
Illusions before I was consciously exploring shared dreaming so it never burned in that way; but it does make sense.
Since the creation of
Oneironauticus spanned way back to the '80's, I imagine that
Illusions might have had some influence in my fantasies about what could be. But, as you noted, I'm much more interested in portraying such stuff as hopefully enjoyable fiction in the magical magical realism mode than in hinting that it is real, or that there might be deeper meaning involved... of course, if you
find deeper meaning, let me know! ;)