Kubrick vs. Larouche = Cube vs. Sphere

In regard to the great battle of Freemasonic Cubism vs. Gnostic Spherical Fullness, I am stuck in the middle.  This article does not endorse an affiliation with either school of thought.

French Kubrick researcher and friend Lucas Premier asked me if I could clarify details regarding Kubrick’s alleged subscription to the delightfully subversive Fidelio Magazine, published and edited by American political firebrand Lyndon Larouche, and from which it has been deduced is the origin of the password of Fidelio, from Eyes Wide Shut.  Lucas also called out the Lyndon from Barry Lyndon, a big pointer I missed somehow.

Well, the differing perspectives of Kubrick vs. Larouche are revealing, so as a response to Lucas Premier, I will give this riddle another kick at the can.

The main beacon of Fidelio Magazine is the essay called On the Subject of Metaphor.  The problem with this impossibly brilliant essay is the selfsame “problem” that appears to plague the artistic pretensions of Kubrick, namely: that the work is difficult.  However, and again as with the work of Kubrick, Larouche’s On the Subject Metaphor becomes quite easy to crack when one acquires a few keys to the language of the matter.  The prize is that when compared to the now well known keys to Kubrick’s film design, On the Subject of Metaphor proposes the scintillating possibility that there was some sort of Wizard War taking place between Kubrick and Larouche.  What is certain is that the critical ideas of these two renegades are a perfectly balanced and complete diameter, as clear as darkest and oily black vs. pure and crystal white.

For most readers here, the language of Kubrick is a cinch.  Optically, Kubrick is a cubist surrealist, obsessed with straight lines, corners, linear trump l’oeil, and a tricky “hidden-symmetry” that works like a kind of 4d origami.  Symbolically, the films of Stan are a testament to the Magickal Rituals of Old Free Masonry, Kaballah and a Modern Occult Movement that can be traced back to the pre-Nazi Thule Society, the cross-cultural madness of Crowley, and the Order of the Golden Dawn.

Larouche, for our purpose here, uses certain models of math to lay a foundation that illustrates the diametric opposite of Kubrick’s cybernetic chicanery.  The math itself is very simple, is based only upon general principle, and unfamiliar terms will be described as they are used, so even if you are not a math geek, you’ll get it.

On the other hand, there is Stanley Kubrick, who interprets the myth of Icarus not as the classical warning against arrogance, or even as a cryptic challenge to fling oneself into the abyss, but rather, in his own way, as a reminder that the human will to succeed and become like God must be constantly refined.  Will must be perfected by the man himself.  We must each of us learn to “build better wings”.

As a model of Promethean apostasy, Kubrick is a Satanist–the oxbow of creation, that insists on doing it his own way for the express purpose of showing that he is every bit as capable as his Creator.  Of course, like a good devil must, Kubrick invites all of us to try and follow his Path of Glory.

It is also interesting to note the two men’s names.  Kubrick implies Cube and Larouche, by way of the French La Roue, becomes the wheel and therefore the Circle and the Sphere.  I remind that this circle is not the squared circle of Freemasonic and Social Occult Mystery, which suggests the so-called Wheel of Fortune and the four compass directions, but rather the Supreme and Unmeasurable Hypershpere of Highest Manifold Infinity.