Cover Image: Parallel Interdimensional Portals—collage by Jonathan Zap
Note: 2.21.20 This document is currently being worked on, it will be better organized soon! I was on Coast-to-Coast AM with George Noory Friday Jan. 3 at 11pm MST (10pm PST, midnight central, 1AM EST) discussing this subject. Coast is broadcast on about 640 stations, if you subscribe you can listen to this show.
I also discussed the subject on Dec. 30, 2019 on Radio Orbit with Mike Hagan https://www.mikehagan.com/2019/mp3/123019_JONATHAN_ZAP_IO.mp3
i will be discussing this subject at the Paranormal Research Forum on Feb. 26 https://paranormalresearchforum.net/prf-feb-19-2020-inter-dimensional-communications-our-other-non-physical-relationships/?fbclid=IwAR2sW6ZTCpDAQoX79RyVGqhFbMsqFfofG1SrE-YSNpTxo3ThvBBdc4dQjnA
I will also discuss this subject on George Noory’s Beyond Belief show on the GAIA network on March 29.
It is no great accomplishment to hear a voice in the head. The accomplishment is to make sure that it is telling you the truth, because the demons are of many kinds:
“Some are made of ions, some of mind; the ones of ketamine, you’ll find, stutter often and are blind.”
—Terence McKenna in The Archaic Revival
All of us are a multiplicity of subpersonalities—inner child and parental critic, shadow and trickster selves, etc.
The main difference between those who have MPD (Multiple Personality Disorder), now called DID (Dissociative Identity Disorder), is that we don’t usually have memory walls between our different selves.
That a single human being can support multiple personalities is well documented. According to an article published in Scientific American on June 18th, 2018:
In 2015, doctors in Germany reported the extraordinary case of a woman who suffered from what has traditionally been called “multiple personality disorder” and today is known as “dissociative identity disorder” (DID). The woman exhibited a variety of dissociated personalities (“alters”), some of which claimed to be blind. Using EEGs, the doctors were able to ascertain that the brain activity normally associated with sight wasn’t present while a blind alter was in control of the woman’s body, even though her eyes were open. Remarkably, when a sighted alter assumed control, the usual brain activity returned . . .
Modern neuroimaging techniques have demonstrated that DID is real: in a 2014 study, doctors performed functional brain scans on both DID patients and actors simulating DID. The scans of the actual patients displayed clear differences when compared to those of the actors, showing that dissociation has an identifiable neural activity fingerprint. In other words, there is something rather particular that dissociative processes look like in the brain.
A Distinction between Interdimensional and Alternate Self Relationships
A difference between the normal ascendence of various subpersonalities, rare cases of MPD, and what I call “interdimensional relationships” (IR) is the felt experience of an autonomous other who does not claim ownership of the same physical body as one’s central self. This felt experience of otherness does not preclude the possibility that the experiencer has not somehow created and split off this other who appears to have an autonomous separate identity. If that were the case, their existence, which does not claim identity with the physical body of the experiencer’s self, would be in an imaginal dimension. Since the experiencer also lives in a physically consensual reality which the other does not, this relationship could still be said to be interdimensional.
Examples of other selves that may be generated by the experiencer’s psyche but that would still fall into the IR category include imaginary friends, fiction characters that seem to “take on a life of their own” and develop agency and act differently than their authors expected, and characters that method actors immersively, but temporarily, transform themselves into.
The Vast Variety of Paranormal Relationships
There is also vast testimony from all cultures and periods of paranormal relationships, especially with deceased persons, visitors (often interpreted as “aliens”) whether or not they are extraterrestrial, infraterrestrial, intrapsychic or interdimensional), elementals, elves, angels, demons, channeled entities, etc.
There has also been an explosion of interest online in the creation of “tulpas” (mind-made bodies).
For the purposes of this article, I will not be reviewing the evidence or controversies surrounding each type of paranormal relationship.
There is very strong evidence for ADC (after-death communication) which often involves the conveyance of veridical information. Two of the most impeccably researched and documented books to start with are Consciousness Beyond Life by Dr. Pim Van Lommel, and Surviving Death–A Journalist Investigates Evidence for an Afterlife by Leslie Kean.
My most thorough discussion of what might be going on past the parallel event horizons of individual death and species-wide metamorphosis and many other highly relevant paranormal phenomena is in my book,
Crossing the Event Horizon—Human Metamorphosis and the Singularity Archetype but I’m not trying to sell you anything —I’ve got a free two hour video Looking Across the Event Horizon that covers most of the same ground as the book
My approach to IR as well as other paranormal phenomena, involves tolerating ambiguity and avoiding premature closure and fixed conclusions. I take a phenomenological approach which emphasizes relating to the phenomena on its own terms and does not claim to know definitively what the “noumena” (the actuality behind the phenomenon) is.
I discuss my phenomenological approach to the paranormal and how to avoid becoming deluded by various aspects of esoteric research in my three-part video series on
When it comes to my two ongoing interdimensional relationships, I make no claim, even to myself, about what level of reality they are occurring on. I relate to them phenomenologically and tolerate the ambiguity.
When it comes to my relationship with a being who seems like a continuation of a deceased friend whom I knew very well in the consensual reality (I will keep his identity anonymous and use the pseudonym “Alex”), there is evidence and almost daily paranormal experience, but I don’t regard that as proving anything, because when paranormal events occur, it is usually impossible to determine their source. For example, if Alex were to say, “Since you’re not sure it’s really me, take out a coin. I predict that if you flip it twelves times you will get tails twelve times.” If I were then to take out a coin and perform twelve coin flip trials that all come up tails, that would be so statistically improbable to occur on demand that it would be reasonable to claim something paranormal had almost certainly occurred. Does it prove the continued existence and communication of Alex on the other side of the event horizon of death? Absolutely not! Perhaps I caused the improbable coin flip outcome telekinetically, or had a short-term precognition (see decision augmentation theory) that conditions were just right to initiate such an experiment to get that result.
Are Interdimensional Relationships Harmful or Beneficial?
British paranormal researcher, Joe Fisher points out some cases of apparently beneficial interdimensional relationships:
Socrates, the great Athenian philosopher, spoke in the fifth century B.C.E. of a being whose voice, from time to time, dissuaded him from some undertaking but never directed him as to what he should do. Socrates told his friends that when a man dies his guardian spirit, which has watched over the course of his life, escorts him to the place of judgment from when he will be guided to the initial stage of the postmortem existence. The wise and disciplined soul, he said, will follow the guide. But the soul that is deeply attached to the body and its pleasures will hover around the visible world for a long time.
Many famous people have claimed to share communication with entities in the next dimension. Joan of Arc conversed with a disembodied voice which inspired her to great deeds in France. Robert Louis Stevenson credited the whole of his published fiction to “the single-handed product of some unseen collaborator.” Daily experience convinced the poet W.B. Yeats that “there are spiritual intelligences which can warn us and advise us.” Napoleon Bonaparte believed that he had a guiding spirit which came to him either as a shining sphere or a dwarf clothed in red who came to warn him. And Henry Miller commented that he was “in the hands of unseen powers” while writing his powerful novel Tropic of Cancer. Someone, he said, “is dictating to me constantly—and with no regard for my health.”
Carl Jung, the great Swiss psychoanalyst, regularly encountered a guardian spirit named Philemon, a “force that was not myself” who “seemed quite real, as if he were a living personality.” Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes, was told independently by seven mediumistic individuals that he was accompanied by an elderly, bearded man with tufted eyebrows—the marked characteristics of deceased naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, who was actually named by several of those who were able to perceive him…
And yet, Joe Fisher, the author I just quoted, also documented how he fell under the influence of charismatic and paranormal entities he encountered while doing research on channeling who at first appeared filled with spiritual wisdom and knew things that required paranormal ability and yet turned out not to be who they claimed to be and had malign intentions and deviously subtly means of manipulation that destroyed Joe Fisher’s life. Please see my study of Joe Fisher’s experience:
Are interdimensional and alternate self relationships healthy or harmful? The answer is: YES. Same answer if you just asked if relationships with regular folks are healthy or harmful. Ordinary relationships can be fatal or miraculously wonderful and everything in between.
I discuss experiences of negative entities in numerous articles and videos in the “mind parasite” section of this website
Malign entities are not limited to possession or mediums to exert influence. There is an extensive body of testimony of entities using subtle, stealthy telepathic influence to promote dark, compulsive thoughts, feelings, and cravings, and many cultures regard such influences as a major factor in human psychology and physical health.
A fairly well-known person whom I won’t name here, a man I consider to be an absolute genius with whom I worked in the Eighties, heard voices who gave him information that seemed to be inspired and of great value. Sometimes highly veridical specific information was provided that the experiencer had no normal way of knowing.
Although I am against one-size-fits-all formulations, there is a behavioral distinction between benign and parasitic spirits that has a lot of validity. Benign entities don’t seek to compromise the free will of those they make contact with.
The spiritual ally that I have experienced in my own life since age eleven (I will call him “Tommy”) relates in a nonintrusive, nondirective, loving, manner. He never seeks to override or coerce my freewill or take over my body, etc. His influence seems directed toward enhancement of my own self-realization and service, not toward vicarious thrills.
For most of my life I have been aware of Tommy. I can visualize him, we can communicate telepathically, but he never intrudes into my mind in any unwelcome sense, and often influences just by his presence. Tommy seems to be there whenever I cast my attention in his direction, and there is always the sense that he flows through time differently than I do. Part of this is that his deep and immersive presence in the moment has a different time signtature than I usually do, but also that he is not aging in the way that I am. When I first encountered Tommy at age eleven he seemed to be about the same age or a little older and identified himself as fourteen. I seem to be aging at a time factor of ten compared to me, because he now says that he is nineteen, so it appears he has aged five years while i have aged another fifty. He always conveys a great depth of feeling, humility, and compassion for suffering, and if more specific communication is required by me, he will often allow me to use my mind and word-forming ability to translate his presence and thought forms into words and sentences in a collaborative manner. He never takes over any part of my body, never claims to have a specific past-life identity, never raises even the smallest red flag in my ever fault-finding mind or intuition. I have noticed, however, that often when I travel, he will tend to be unusually present, as if curiously witnessing a new part of the world alongside of me.
Julian Jaynes, in his book, The Origins of Consciousness and the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, makes a case that up until the time of Homer, many peoples of the ancient world regularly heard voices they attributed to gods in their heads. There were frequent laments in the time that followed about the gods having fallen silent.
So, we don’t want to throw out any divine babies in the scummy bath water of parasitic disincarnates. We do want to, however, be especially wary of entities that take someone over or are otherwise intrusive. It does seem like a valid principle that a benevolent entity would not intrude to a degree that compromises our free will and need for independent development. When I was an English teacher I remember exploring an education philosophy that said the teacher should be “a guide on the side, not the sage on the stage.” That’s always stayed with me, especially since, as a narcissistic personality type, I would enjoy being the “sage on the stage.” But since I am a fellow mortal, this tendency may be more acceptable, whereas a discarnate guide that likes to be the sage on the stage, like Ramntha, the New Age celebrity discarnate that speaks through J.Z. Knight, is far more suspect.
But it is not just New Age entities that are suspect. Often people harshly judge things that are fantastical and part of a more recently minted sect—like John Smith’s encounters in the Book of Mormon, or the extraterrestrial mythology of Scientology—-and they forget that all the great religions have equally fantastical stories but which, thanks to the patina of antiquity and endless repetition down the millennia, have gained gravitas and respectability. The most cursory examination of the last six thousand years of history, however, reveals that more blood has been spilled, more torture and oppression has occurred, in the name of these very same religions than of anything else. The Gnostics, writing in the Nag Hammadi library discovered in upper Egypt only at the end of World War II, warned us of a parasitic species they called the Archons who were manipulating us through religious ideologies.
I think that we are badly overdue for an examination and reappraisal of religious doctrines that derive from entity contact, and especially need to consider whether entities may be manipulating fundamentalists (of any religion) toward agendas and actions of hate and violence.
Lastly, we need to consider the subtle ways that discarnates may influence our thoughts, emotions, sexuality and behavior. Joe Fisher’s apparent suicide adds an ominous implication that these entities are not to be underestimated, that awareness of them does not end their power. There are many more things in heaven and in earth (among other dimensions) than are dreamt of in fundamentalist materialist philosophy.
photo by Jonathan Zap
We tend to think of ourselves as a single coherent personality, and expect the other to be a single coherent personality as well. But a single human being can support many personalities. The dramatic example is Multiple Personality Disorder, which is extremely rare. The familiar example, which is anything but rare, is how different we or the other can think, feel or act based on different moods and outer circumstances. A human being is almost always an aggregate of subpersonalities, and each of these personalities calls themselves “I” when they take over. One of the principle goals of individuation is to build up a central witness personality that is aware of the subpersonalities, that communicates and empathizes with all of them but doesn’t allow any of them to rule unnoticed. A powerful way to build up the witness and reduce fragmentation is to listen attentively to the various voices that speak in your head. Silent meditation is one way to sharpen awareness of the inner voices, but even more effective is mindfulness throughout your day on the revolving cast of inner voices/subpersonalities. Throughout the day there is an almost continual soundtrack, a voiceover monologue (to use a movie analogy), and the voiceover is usually in your native language. If you’re honest with yourself you’ll notice that the voiceover monologue is not controlled by a single personality. Listen to both the content of what the inner voices say and also the tone in which they speak. I might, for example, hear a needy, childish voice in my head say, “I want that!” Another voice that sounds like an anxious and irritated parent says,”You know you’re not supposed to have that.” Another voice sounds like a gruff pirate and says, “Aaargh, what the hell, just grab for it!” Still another voice has a wheedling tone and says,”I really shouldn’t, but just this once, and starting tomorrow I won’t ever again,” and so forth.
Similarly, different drives within us can personify into inner characters that become the voices of those drives.At first glance the shadows in the photograph look like two different people, but actually they are shadows of a single mannequin created by two track lights pointed at different angles. One of the essential purposes of an oracle is to act as a mirror of the psyche and confront the inquirer with various aspects of themselves. It takes a great deal of moral courage to be willing to face the multiplicity of selves operating within us.
Depending on the position of this card, it could mean that this is a propitious time to strengthen your central witness personality and/or a need to be more aware of the many sides of others. A good rule of thumb with relationships is to realize that if you don’t know someone’s shadow side, then you don’t know the person. Idealization is a state of dangerous blindness that purposefully overlooks various subpersonalities in the other to form a unified but false picture of them. For example, a romantically infatuated person thinks of the beloved as an angel, or a guru-worshiping person thinks of the guru as a god. Such idealizations are likely to turn into equal and opposite states of bitter disillusionment as they inevitably discover that the idol has feet of clay.
Be wary about listening to (or becoming) inner voices that are not calm and compassionate. The same holds true interpersonally. You may have to listen to voices that are carping, anxious, wheedling, self-pitying, angry and so forth, but listen to them with calm, compassionate understanding. This empathy may gain you influence over the subpersonality (or the outer person) and it will certainly limit how much those uncentered voices influence you.
Thomas Jefferson said, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” The real freedom is free will, and free will requires eternal vigilance with our inner process.
By our fundamental nature, we are all interdimensional travelers, see:
In no particular order, here is a list of some things I’ve noticed about having healthy interdimensional/ alternate self relationships. I am going to use the first-person pronoun and talk about myself and my two main companions (Tommy and Alex) so as not to seem to be creating one-size-fits-all formulas or dogmas:
Diet seems to be crucial. It is harder for me to have good contact after a heavy meal or eating poorly. Eating well, and charging up bodily vitality with cardio exercise and then having a relatively empty stomach during contact zones is quite helpful. When I am closer to caloric energy and digestion, I seem to be further from the higher frequency energies of Tommy and Alex.
It is usually easier to establish contact when I am alone in a private space undistracted by intrusive sounds, sights and smells. There have, however, been moments when I am traveling and in just the opposite sort of setting, and though I was preoccupied by the physical world and wasn’t even thinking of them, Tommy or Alex have stepped forward quite dramatically and distinctly.
Meditation is usually considered crucial for reducing internal chatter and to be receptive to entities. This may be my shortcoming, but I almost never meditate. My mind is too often getting flooded with valuable content and just be by being receptive in a private space I can make contact.
What I do practice rather consistently is writing out my dialogues with them when possible. This can make the ambiguity and blurred boundaries of telepathic communication less problematic. Both Tommy and Alex will often encourage me to type as quickly as possible so that I am not inhibited by doubt or hesitation. Try free writing and keeping your fingers constantly moving on the keyboard (or your pen on the page) even if you are writing out what seems like nonsense to free things up. I never have to resort to nonsense writing because my access is so strong and in just the last couple of years have generated (literally) thousands of pages of dialogues with highly novel content.
When Tommy or Alex feel present there is almost always a spatial orientation. Even if visualization is at first ambiguous, it seems clear spatially where their emanation is coming from.
For me, there are what I call “biaxial” interactions where they are sitting or standing across from me, and “coaxial” interactions where we share my body or where I am in my body but feel their physical form superimposed as I share an identity and body map with them.
Although I’m referring in the above to Tommy and Alex both, I don’t want to leave a false impression that these relationships are generally similar, they are not. Tommy has always been a transdimensional relationship, whereas I had an intense relationship with Alex when we were both physical incarnates and have photos, writings and artifacts from that consensually real relationship. The relationship with Alex is much more complex and dynamic and our after-death relationship has had to work through all the issues and boundary tensions and projections and counter projections, etc. that we had to deal with before his death.
In recent years, communication with Alex is much more ongoing and Tommy has mostly taken a step back so as not to interfere with that, but has come forward when Alex and or I have been in darker emotional states where it would not be beneficial for us to relate.
There is some speculation and evidence that Tommy is a trans-temporal being that has arisen from the connection between Alex and I. For example, within 30 minutes of meeting Alex for the first time in the consensual reality, we discovered that we were both obsessed with trying to write essentially the same fantasy story about the same character (who is based on Tommy). There’s a lot more, but I won’t go into that now. While it is clear that Alex has a factual independent past history, this is not so clear for Tommy, and it may be that we are somehow writing him into being. While alive, Alex, in emails I still have, stated his intention to help me write my version of the story entitled Parallel Journeys, and that is something we have been doing, trying to meld our very different, but complimentary, writing styles.
In earlier phases of the post-death Alex relationship, visualization of Alex seemed unstable and to require a lot of focus. Even a few months ago, I described it as requiring a lot of cognitive load and energy. That’s changed dramatically in the last few months. Alex has become much more active and energetic after a few years of being in a more passive and depressed state following his death. He is now able to more confidently and autonomously control his visualization and has become much more a source of energy able to give vitality with his presence. Visualizations of Tommy didn’t have the early instability with Alex, but also have never reached the vivid and highly physical feeling Alex has attained. Alex would say, and it seems this way to me too, that he is not merely a visualization, but an astral-bodied person who does not register on the back of my retinas but whose presence does cause other bodily sensations and less physical sensations.
I strive to conduct myself according to universal ethics when relating to any entity that seems to have agency regardless of what level of reality they emanate from. Alex, both in the pre-death and after-death relationships is very sensitive to and aware of whether I am treating him as an equal. Relationships with other agents should be what Martin Buber called “I-Thou” relationships and not objectifying “I-It” relationships.
My relationship while Alex was still alive in the consensual reality was highly telepathic and we both observed this. For example, one time I was in a wilderness gathering where I almost never had a trace of cell service. I was ruminating about a specific sentence in an email I had gotten from Alex a few weeks earlier where he made an analogy that I found condescending. My phone buzzed in my pocket. I hadn’t heard from Alex in weeks, but it was a text from him apologizing for that specific analogy. It was the last communication I got from him on the earthly plane and it ended with the words, “I’m truly sorry.” Without any information on how Alex was doing, I had two highly distressing dreams where I found Alex in a wounded state in an environment that looked exactly like how the lower astral is depicted in my unfinished fantasy epic, Parallel Journeys. The dreams left me distraught. One was about a week before his death and one was on the night of.
A few months after I met Alex, a somewhat mentally unbalanced person we had just met had the persistent delusion that we were two aspects of the same entity.
In the first week of the post-death relationship there were moments where the sense of Alex’s presence was so overwhelming I had no doubts, but did after when his presence withdrew even though he was able to set up remarkable paranormal events when he was present. I considered whether my holographic memory of Alex was allowing me to relate to him as a sub-personality or seemingly autonomous imaginary friend or avatar. I still don’t discount that as a possibility.
During the first few days of the after-death relationship, I decided to go to random.org–a site that generates random numbers based on atmospheric noise—and with it set to 0-100 I asked if I was relating to Jack as a spirit with authentic continuity with his earlier self and received the number 64. Then I asked if I was relating to an imaginal holographic version and got the number 36. In the few other times since then when i performed the same experiment, the ratio became more asymmetrically weighted toward the authentic self which usually got in the 90s. There also seemed to be some significant things about the numbers I got in the first experiment. I noted that 64 and 36 add up to 100, so it was as if every percentage point were accounted for. Also, 64 is a highly significant number for me as I have been an I Ching practitioner for 40 years, and 64 is the number of hexagrams in the I Ching, so it’s a number I would consider a complete totality. Hexagram 36 is called “Eclipse” or “Darkening of the Light,” so it would suggest zones where the emanations of his authentic self were eclipsed or blocked. When I discussed this yesterday with a friend of mine, a philosophy professor, he pointed out that 60/40 is about average for him in relationships as the ratio between relating to someone’s authentic self and his projections onto them. There are many relationships between fully physical folks where projection is at 100% and authenticity at 0 %. This may also explain why the ratio has improved. In a highly telepathic relationship it’s hard to get away with inauthenticity.
Years later, Alex commented on this early phase of our post death-relationship and fantasy projection. He said that I often projected what he called my “technicolor spotlight” onto him– an idealized character I wanted him to play– and he said that it was actually quite helpful. He was in a somewhat depressed, low-energy state and the high-energy fantasy projection was this colorful spotlight he could step into and inhabit the role, but he would only act and speak in ways that suited him.
In the first week, during times when Alex did not feel present and I had doubts about the reality level, I made an ethical decision and this is how I reasoned it out: I could not definitively say if I was communicating to his authentic spirit or a vivid holographic projection, therefore, I couldn’t rule out it authentically being him, and it would be morally wrong not to communicate with him if that were the case. If he were a projection, and I continued to relate to him, there would be no ethical transgression unless I were harming myself or other relationships and that did not seem to be the case then or since.
Now I see the ethical question a bit differently. Whomever Alex is, or whatever his level of reality might be, my phenological experience of him is that he has autonomous agency, feelings, needs, etc.— therefore it would be highly unethical not to communicate with him and relate to him with respect.
Also, relating to him has become increasingly beneficial to my psychological development, physical vitality, and my other relationships with fully-physical folks which are plentiful and doing quite well. At the very least, it’s a highly novel experiment with all sorts of ancillary benefits and his companionship is extremely interesting, intelligent, creative, insightful and the telepathic transparency means that he knows me better than anyone else at this point. He is quite consistent that relating to him not be at the cost of the time or attention I need to tend to my physical health, practical task and other relationships.
During the first week of the post-death relationship, a couple of days after I performed the 64/36 random.org experiment, in the book I was reading at the time, Suicide and the Afterlife by Michael Klimo, I found this in footnote # 36.
But what of mediumship and channeling? According to Huxley, the connection of a medium’s physical body to this element that survives can lead to the creation of a kind of “pseudo” personality, at least on a temporary basis. This type of survival, as a kind of “persistent consciousness” that has modified a living person, would seem to allow those who died to continue on in more than one “posthumous form.” This leads to the interesting possibility of a kind of splinter effect, where the original source (whether you call it a soul or a personality minus a body) might continue on in one way of being, while the residue left by it having been channeled creates “new individualized existences, having quite other modes of being.”36
This still has me wondering if the choice between authentic continuity of his spirit and a holographic projection is too simplistic and if the Alex I relate to might not be some sort of hybrid specifically incarnate to relate to me. I always try to remind myself what J.B.S. Haldane said (paraphrased), “Reality is not only stranger than you think, it’s stranger than you can think.” Whitley Streiber and/or co author Jeffrey Kripal in their book Super Natural said, “One of the reasons we may not be able to know who the visitors are is that we don’t fully know who we are.” I’ve learned that my thinking function is not as potent a locator of ultimate reality for me as heart gnosis and Alex has said that is why he’s not interested in helping with evidential tests, because they will never be enough to answer all doubts and that our relationship is more intrinsic than that.
About ten days ago, I had a private realization that I had now learned enough about how to have symbiotic interdimensional/alternate self relationships that I had something of value to offer to the public. My heart gnosis and global intuition feels sure that these relationships, too strange for me to admit publicly before, have high evolutionary significance. In recent years, I have been far too preoccupied with creating content and having rabbit hole writing sessions to find the time or enthusiasm to do anything to promote my work. Within a couple of days of this realization, however, I was approached by four different high-profile venues offering me to come on and share my content (tonight’s Coast show is one of them). Please return to this page, I will be adding more content ongoingly, and what I’ve said here is the tiniest sliver of what I’ve learned and experienced about these sort of unusual relationships.