The Liminalist # 229: The Aesthetics of Terror (with Ken Ammi)

Return conversation with Ken Ammi on horror movies, occultism, Stephen King’s IT & the perils of hyperstition.

Part One: Art & Propaganda (0 – 31 mins)

The Hollywood spell, watching with two brains, a Catch-22 of studying propaganda, submitting to narratives, sensory deprivation & sensory overload, multiverse theories & celebrity lifestyles, the origins of movie-enthrallment, storytelling & symbolism, art & propaganda, Top Gun vs The Godfather, art & personal meaning, discerning integrity, The Color Out of Space, Richard Stanley, a trifecta of occultism, Satan in the background, Madonna on the holy of holies, Hollywood Gnostic propaganda, the goal of traumatizing audiences.

Part Two: The Culture of Dehumanization (31 mins to 1 hr 7 mins)

Demonic love, the aesthetics of terror, horror film director’s on childhood terror, The Tingler, scream for your lives, video game addiction, being imprinted by strong emotions, William Friedkin’s inspiration, Eros & Thanatos, the video nasty, the IT phenomenon, Stephen King & childhood trauma, Dr Sleep, small town conspiracy, nostalgia for childhood in IT, Alien, the inescapability of trauma, body horror, cancer subtext, terror of the bathroom, the reality of death, the glamor of ultimate evil, confronting the other, night terrors, facing the incomprehensible, fear of clowns, the shape of IT, the battle of the wills.

Part Three: The Cosmology of IT (1 hr 7 mins – to 1 hr 33 mins)

The ritual gang-bang in IT, the unnameable, the smiley face, Aleister Crowley’s Book of Lies, universe as joke, the Joker, a walking shadow, the cosmology of IT, the deus absconditus, the turtle & the spider, Robert Gray, dead light, the turtle’s vomit, using the imagination against us, Gnostic theology, ontological corruption, MKULTRA & mind control with King & Strieber, possession, Twin Peaks’ Bob, cross-pollination of King stories, the Saturn cycle, the 27 club.

Part Four: The True Business of Show Business (1 hr 33 mins – end)

Whitley Strieber’s trajectory, a giant invisible fist, hyperstition, from horror fiction to nonfiction, a conduit for interdimensional forces, amnesia, triggered memories, the Faustian bargain, King’s haunted truck-attack, unleashing forces of the imagination, death as a way out in Gnosticism, deconstruction as salvation, IT as savior, King’s pragmatic theology, the true business of show business, King’s dedication, the magic exists, the child sex magic ritual as coming-of-age, the Jack the Ripper murders, an alien virus, where Satan resides.


Ken Ammi site

Songs: “Pirates” by Entertainment for the Braindead; “Things” by Emerald Park;  “Baby Bear” by Rabbit Island; “Shaw” by Reigning Sound; “Changes” by Short Hand.

12 thoughts on “The Liminalist # 229: The Aesthetics of Terror (with Ken Ammi)”

  1. I unironically believe this RE: Satanic Hollywood

    “There are forces that work in/through human beings. Some of them are indistinguishable (to me) from Rudolph Steiner’s Luciferic and Arahamic beings. These beings have strange (and different) goals that are “bad” for humans in the end. Hollywood is one their big clubs.”

    Great rapport here. Thanks.

    • Yeah, some of our thoughts, desires, urges, actions are not ours. They are otherworldly disembodied beings using our flesh to fulfill their desires and agendas, since they no longer have bodies aka spirits of the nephilim. IMO, they influence the works of King, artists, musicians, politicians, scientists, etc., etc., while they think they are having their own thoughts and inspirations. As well as the enraged person as he drives a truck through a crowd on the sidewalk. It’s forces working in/through human beings.

        • Hey Mike,

          Regarding “use it or lose it” I’m not sure I understand what you are implying.

          When it comes to losing the influence of luciferic forces, I say let them be lost. But then, some people out there don’t the difference between shit and shinola. Hollywood is propagating the shit.

          • I think he just means, use your life for good or it will be used for bad.

            I think Bob Dylan says the same thing when he says “You gotta serve somebody”

          • Hey Mike,

            I’ve thought about that Dylan tune over the years. I could be wrong, but what I think the song is about is that you have to serve either one side or the other. If you aren’t serving the Lord you are serving the devil and vise versa, because you have to serve somebody. The Bible says the same thing.

            Matthew 12:30 ““Anyone who isn’t with me opposes me, and anyone who isn’t working with me is actually working against me.”

            Because you have to serve somebody. Dylan did become a Christian. I’m not sure if it was at that point he wrote that tune. Thanks for the reminder.

            James 4:4
            “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”

            I know it’s a hard pill to swallow in our politically correct liberal environment shaped by mysticism and occultism.

          • >If you aren’t serving the Lord you are serving the devil

            36 year old me has quite literally no problem with this statement, but don’t mention it to the 26 year old me

          • Hey Mike, the same goes for me as well.

            “If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.”

            – quote falsely attributed to W. Churchill

  2. Hey, I just want to say have a great live Liminalista gathering tomorrow and I hope we can all Zoom about it sometime in the future.

  3. Very interesting, this installment of the Liminalist. I was particularly taken with the subject of Stephen King, “It”, and the possible background of organized trauma.
    For some time now, ever since I went back and re-read “It”, and also factored in your analysis of Strieber,I have considered the possibility that King may have been programmed as well. Not only do we have the ghost of such ideas flitting around in his novels, but there are some peculiarities in his views that seem to suggest it.
    I am not sure if you are aware of this, but he has always been one of the most vocal proponents of the lone assassin theory about JFK; and has been known to get kind of bent out of shape, emotionally, when people press him with points not explicable by the official narrative.
    Another curious thing about him, (and, this is an idea that he first expresses via the character of Bill in “It”), is that he asserts that the sub/unconscious doesn’t exist. In interviews given since the book, he has more or less confirmed this as his own perspective. While I am no kind of Freudian apologist, I find this assertion strange. Anyone who writes deeply can tell that these images, concepts, and ideas are originating from somewhere other than conscious reflection. So, the idea of a writer, famed for his gifts of imagination, saying he doesn’t believe there are other levels of the mind besides the conscious one, is bizarre.
    Personally, I think it’s a defense mechanism on his part. A way for him to minimize what might be in his own history.
    Also noteworthy is his often expressed contempt for conspiracy/crypto-history theories in general. All the while he writes novels like “Firestarter”, and the more recent “The Institute”.


Leave a Comment