The thesis explores the theory and praxis of Odianism in order to articulate the fundamentals of a possible philosophical framework underpinning the Odian paradigm of reality. It is argued that Odian magical praxis needs to be understood as a discrete category of experience offering a specific understanding of and a particular route to selfbecoming. Magic is a problematic category to define and shares fuzzy boundaries with a number of other concepts related to non-ordinary states of consciousness. The thesis seeks initially to clarify the specific nature of magic and to contextualise Odianism within the broader Western Mystery Tradition. The main body of the thesis considers the philosophical framework proposed by contemporary Odianism. This narrowing of focus is inevitably limiting, but necessary to allow a sufficiently detailed examination of a particular approach to magical praxis. The thesis explores Odian epistemological, ontological and ethical positions. Odian magical praxis is examined in the context of those philosophical perspectives. Particular attention is paid to the concept of Odian self-development or Self-becoming. It is argued that Odianism regards non-ordinary consciousness as essential to all forms of magical praxis. The thesis concludes by exploring the wider relevance and value of Odian perspectives and of magical praxis in general.

This thesis considers the interface between the theatre of the absurd and Lacanian cultural criticism. It conceptualises a ‘theoretical spectator’ produced by the play texts and examines its implications for a politics of spectatorship in a postmodern age. This methodology seeks to escape the trap of existentialist criticism that has dominated ideas on the theatre of the absurd since Martin Esslin’s coining of the term in 1961. I posit the modern-day relevance of absurd theatre, by putting the plays under examination into dialogue with Lacanian and current post-Lacanian cultural and political thought. The chapters theorise various ‘spectatorial positions’ produced by three prominent playwrights of the theatre of the absurd: Eugène Ionesco, Arthur Adamov and Fernando Arrabal. I seek to confirm and bolster my theoretical arguments by turning to contemporary empirical reaction to modern-day performances of two other absurdists playwrights, Samuel Beckett and Jean Genet. One of the key postulates is that the theatre of these playwrights chimes with Lacan’s notion of the split subject. Etymologically, the word ‘absurd’ refers to division; thematically and aesthetically, absurd theatre bears witness to the erosion of subjective stability. The conceptual parity between Lacanian theory and absurd theatre permits me to stake out a new critical pathway with regard to this body of theatre that paves the way for its re-politicisation in a postmodern world.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.