Admittedly, when research began for this installment, one balked.

To slowly come to the realization that perhaps one of the most fascinating artists from the past may not have been who he claimed, an artist that truly appeared to have represented the last gasp of genuine rock and roll rebelliousness, felt as if a moribund shroud had begun to blot out whatever glimmers of hope still existed.

Then again – one began to reason the with the cold and objective observations of an investigator – why should the subject of this installment exceptionally differentiate from any other examined in the past? After all, despite the anti-establishment image this star born character came to the world cloaked in, the “late” Kurt Cobain was, after all, and like any other, merely another corporate product, created and marketed by the global commercial system.

Still – what a product he was!

But, as one shall soon observe, the influence, and deliberate guiding hand of a powerful, executive Hollywood figure featured before here at Newsspell, shall once again prove to have played a most prominent role.

The expertise with which the ruling elites routinely manipulate human consciousness and perception must never be underestimated. With virtually unlimited resources at their disposal, their mighty Wurlitzer, better known as the mainstream, corporate media, can be deployed to program the masses at the flick of a switch. The ultimate power of this systematic manipulation derives from the routine creation of charismatic, and even mythical images, images which formulate archetypical monuments in the minds of the masses.

Although the subject of popular music and its social and philosophical implications in the life of American popular culture has often been bandied about, the depth of overall analysis has seemed historically rather shallow, daring only to address superficial observations.

On the one hand, those prominent in the industry may insist that the essence of popular music is merely a vehicle for mass “entertainment”, while on the other hand, and often in the same breath, articulating the idea that music, as a social and political force multiplier, harbors great power.

One has always felt this represents an obvious contradiction in terms, a contradiction not often explored. In fact, it has often seemed that those in the industry, artists, as well popular music fans alike, shy away from any further philosophical analysis of such a contradiction, for fear of facing perhaps whatever psychological monstrosities may bubble up from the darkness of the subconscious and frighteningly materialize into the light of day. The truth of the matter, what one shall never hear anyone in the music or entertainment industry address, is that so-called “stars” are created for the ulterior purpose of forwarding the agendas of the ruling elite families. And, when it comes to the subject of the career of “Kurt Cobain,” his career and character were created and guided by one of Hollywood’s most prominent and powerful figures, someone related to royalty, and by extension, the thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families.

Never mind the bollocks, here’s the esoteric meaning of “Nirvana”

The heyday of the “MTV” era of the 1980’s, dominated by slews of so-called New Wave and “Hair” Metal acts was on the wane, and new genres of popular music were emerging into the public consciousness – Hip Hop, and “Grunge”, later remarketed as “Alternative” Rock. This opened vistas for Nirvana, a band of three musicians from working class Aberdeen, Washington that had previously suffered in complete obscurity. By way of predictive programming, the standard operating procedure of those in executive, decision-making positions within the music industry is to create and test market genre trends before they become mass produced and distributed.

In fact, it could be so argued, that the establishment of the so-called “independent” recording label Sub Pop – upon which the band’s first recording, entitled “Bleach,” was released and distributed and comparable to the Sun label established in the 1950’s as a star vehicle for Elvis Presley – may have been solely created to develop and promote the character and career of the Kurt Cobain character to legendary status.

Nearing the end of the MTV era, the executives in the music industry certainly foresaw the diminished appeal of the slick and overproduced brand of AOR and FM hard rock it had heavily marketed to the masses throughout the 1980’s. They were able to observe that the post-baby boomers, or generation X – those born after the year of 1965 and weened on the classic rock of the 1970s and 80’s – would eventually mature and develop decidedly more conservative social behaviors and listening habits.

Thus, they foresaw the need for a repackaged genre of rock music that could be mass marketed to those born just before the dawn or during the early years of the MTV era, one that would grow to become commercially profitable as the 1990’s advanced into the millennium. In order to perpetuate the platinum level profitability of those halcyon days of the MTV era, what was needed, they assuredly thought, was a newly packaged genre of classic rock featuring a centrifugal, charismatic figure comparable to Elvis Presley, or John Lennon to help shape yet another impressionable generation just coming of age to their desired sociological and cultural image.

This is why the concept of generational coding identified by genres of music and modes of popular fashion is so important to the ruling elites.

Utilizing repetitive psychological reinforcement through the print, television, and digital mediums, mass behavioral patterns are hence molded into the desired shape. Once the generational behavioral coding is observed to have taken effect, it is then the mass herds of the public, lead with the shepherd’s staff of the commercial advertising media, can be more easily moved towards the most profitably desired direction.

The mordant brooding of “grunge rock” helped to psychologically brand an entire generation, just as the solipsistic materialism of the MTV era had worked its psychological and sociological magic on the Generation Xer’s preceding them. The ruling elites are well aware of the power of mass produced images, for they know that when held up to the eyes of the public, the essence of the image will be reflected in the way of  promoting collective social and behavioral patterns conducive to the perpetual profitability of the global commercial system.

With complete control of the media and entertainment industries, it is a rather simple matter to recruit and contract host actors possessing multi-faceted talents to portray multiple characters that can be repeatedly hoisted before the public and placed into a position of renown and mass influence.

Still think this is bunk, folks?

Well, rather than taking the author up on his humble word, perhaps a quote from this music legend shall finally convince:

“Music is not just fun. It’s a powerful channel of communication that can be used to influence the conscious and subconscious minds of men…you can hypnotize people with music and when you get them at their weakest point, you can preach into their subconscious what you want to say.” Jimi Hendrix

Or, how about these words, straight from the source, the subject of this very installment while at the podium during 1992’s MTV Music Awards:

Krist Novoselic, member of Nirvana: “You can’t believe everything you see…now can you?”

Kurt Cobain: “You know it’s really hard to believe everything you read.”

Dave Grohl, member of Nirvana: “Remember Josef Goebbels!”

The latter comment was of course an allusion to world history, and the infamous propaganda minister of Germany’s Nazi regime. And of course, Cobain and his other fellow band mate, Novoselic,  were paraphrasing a quip once allegedly issued forth from the classic historical figure of American letters and author of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer, Samuel Clemens AKA Mark Twain. Collectively, these remarks are quite telling, in that while a great percentage of their assembled audience that evening may have been truly flummoxed to assimilate their significance, the implications are quite clear. Indeed, might they have been trying to inform the popular music public that the legend of Nirvana may have been artificially manufactured, or that the story of Kurt Cobain’s rise to prominence was derived solely from the minds of a Hollywood marketing team headquartered at Geffen Records?

Like the Beatles, and other stars of stage and screen, the biographies of Nirvana always seem to accentuate the shopworn theme of rags to riches, which is itself symptomatic and indicative of a psychological operation. This has the effect of emotionally galvanizing the public’s attentions to the character and the brand name, while simultaneously inuring them from noticing or observing, or worse yet, daring to ask any questions regarding what may appear to be anomalous details. Never – when it comes to the callow public, who in childlike fashion predictably become enamored with the worshipful celebrities, legends or Hollywood gods put before them – is there any thought to indications they may have in fact been bamboozled.

Collectively, the public  seems to never consider the emotional and psychological implications of that which perpetually manipulates them, never imagining that those they seem to inherently trust – whether priest, politician, or their favorite pop star –  would ever betray them with a grand ruse for the crass purpose of making a profit.

But, while the public’s ears are attuned to the sound of seductive music, the truly profound substance of the underlying message escapes them, and they never think to examine the biographies attached to the names of those they bestow with dutiful fanaticism.

Speaking of which, the name – or perhaps it is more accurate to say, pseudonym – of Geffen seems to keep coming up a great deal lately.

And – on that very subject of names, has one never wondered why the creators of the Cobain character may have chosen “Nirvana” as the moniker of his musical group?

Well, as one shall soon observe, the word possesses deep occult significance. Derived from Sanskrit, the literal meaning has to do with a “blowing out” or extinguishing the flame of an oil lamp. However, in the esoteric and classical sense, it is most synonymous with Buddhism, and represents its ultimate state of soteriological release and liberation from rebirths in samsara (the cycle of compulsory rebirth or ultimate enlightenment). In a citation from “The center of the sunlight sky, Madhyamaka in the Kagyu tradition” by Karl Brunnholzl, the meaning of the soteriological process of the Buddhist enlightenment is described:

“Thus, the fundamental reason that the precise identification of these two kinds of clinging to an identity – personal and phenomenal – is considered important is again soteriological. Through first uncovering our clinging and then working on it, we become able to finally let go of this sole cause for all our suffering.”

Indeed, as this installment progresses, this definition as it relates to the post-modern, actor based reality shall grow in significance, especially considering the life and “death” of Kurt Cobain, and the host actor’s rebirth into other well-known identities within the entertainment industry. Just as the moniker of the Beatles had occult significance, so did that of the musical group hailing from Aberdeen, Washington. Concerning the ruling elite’s methods of operation, there are never any coincidences.

First, however, one shall attempt to demonstrate, as one usually does, a visual aid in the form of a video clip from VH1’s Nirvana – Behind the Music. Please, if one can, pay close attention to the man identified as Cobain’s guitar instructor as a youth at approximately 1:24, a man by the name of Warren MASON:

Recognize him?

Well, assuredly, one has seen him before – award winning, Hollywood entertainment impresario, actor, singer, musician, David Geffen.

Loyal readers shall recall that Mr. Geffen has been featured before here at Newsspell (See: Should America buy what Elon is selling part III and Anthony Bourdain: Suicide by the numbers) . Certainly, Geffen is no stranger to the concept of the actor based reality, because the members of his family, or rather, his Hollywood royal family, have been active participants for decades. His father happens to be Hollywood kingpin, Barry Diller, and his mother is iconic television personality Barbara Walters. Ear biometric, facial recognition, voice analysis, and other forensic examinations prove beyond all shadow of doubt that Mr. Diller has portrayed American president and prominent American historical figure Dwight D. Eisenhower, while his wife, Walters, AKA European Princess Diane von Furstenberg, has, throughout her now infamous career, portrayed several Hollywood actresses, a bulimic pop singer from the 1970’s, a notorious Hollywood gossip columnist, and due to further examination, one can add one more character to the list, American television actress, Mary Tyler Moore:

And yes, folks, wherever the royal presence may appear, one can be well assured that her dutiful husband shall not be far behind, because in the pair of clips provided from Tyler’s hit 1970’s television show, Diller is portraying the actor known as Ted Knight (who also appeared in the 1980’s Hollywood comedy “Caddy Shack,” with none other than Chevy Chase, AKA Jay Rockefeller, and Mr. Mojo Risin’, AKA lead singer of 1960’s pop group the Doors, the “late” Jim Morrison). Sometimes, when Her Royal Highness, Diane von Furstenberg is performing her on- screen shenanigans, wearing another disguise from her seemingly inexhaustible gallery of Hollywood masks, she may also be found appearing with her son, David Geffen, the very man responsible for the rock and roll legend of Kurt Cobain:

In the video displayed above, if one listens closely enough, you can actually detect the familiar breathy wobble of a voice synonymous with the character of Barbara Walters through the thin veil of the faux French accent attempted by the character known as Catherine Deveuve. As for the interviewer, that is her son, David Geffen, heavily disguised with facial stippling and voice synthesis. Oh and another thing – towards the end of the interview, von Furstenburg, vamping as Deveuve, remarks, absent of any irony, that she regrets never having had the chance to star with Cary Grant, who was, in fact, yet another iconic Hollywood character portrayed by her husband, Hollywood titan, Barry Diller.

Loyal readers may by now be thinking the author has gone off the rails, but one promises, there is a method to one’s madness, for all of the aforementioned is merely for the purpose of laying a firm foundation for what shall soon follow in part II of this installment, a keen illustration proving that the words of the character known as Kurt Cobain were indeed true – one should never believe what one reads, an even less of what they see and hear.

And believe this folks, what shall follow is bound to shock, and perhaps even anger – so be it. Nevertheless, one must always follow the direction the RIVER inevitably winds.

STAY TUNED!