Liminalist # 2: All Bollixed Up, A Liminal Dialogue with George P. Hansen

Hansen at Twilight

Structure meets anti-structure as Jasun explores the limitless topic of liminality with Trickster & the Paranormal author George P. Hansen and winds up in over his head. The rambling leads from an overview of Hansen’s interest in the paranormal and the key overlooked element of deception, to the reasons for orthodoxy’s resistance to marginal subjects, the life of monks, tribal initiations, the difficulties of writing about liminality, institutionalizing inner lives, the invisible spirit-forces of social structures, whether change can come from the top, why binary-opposition increases in liminal periods, the lost novititate rite of passage in which social members get to “own the id” before being integrated into the community, liminal & liminoid, the need for structure when discussing liminality, to cohere or not to cohere, the three principals of charisma. And stuff.

With an interlude from Adam Gorightly taken from here, and Bill Cooper, take from here.

Music:  “El Mariachi” and “Monkey Said” by The Freak Fandango Orchestra; “The Grove is Hotter Than an Ocean’s Oven” and “Creeping Crazy Time,” by Big Blood


2 thoughts on “Liminalist # 2: All Bollixed Up, A Liminal Dialogue with George P. Hansen”

  1. Really enjoying this – especially after mr. kramer #2. You’re bringing up some aspects of George Hansen’s work i have not heard explored before, which makes me deliriously happy 🙂

    Tho i do not think buying/building a house is increasing your liminality 😉 have fun!

  2. Another liminal paradox! The necessity of structure to have a useful-to-the-listener discussion of liminality! –as Hansen opines. I suppose if one has been steadily studying the subject for years one acquires a gravitas and authoritativeness that may sound close-minded and dogmatic. But I’ll look up Hansen’s website and read Max Weber, the classic sociologist who coined the phrase “Protestant Work Ethic.”

    Interesting point that Hansen makes: most people don’t live in a permanently liminal state but he concedes that aside from artists, the homeless, prisoners(?), criminals, monastics, a rich family might contrive to do so. Why? Money allows them the freedom to structure their free time as they please, on a whim, and can grant them the invisibility to avoid criticism and envy.


Leave a Comment