Just want to put in my two cents on something.
(Oh, right, that’s a regular occurrence.)
SciFi Channel (now SyFy [which I don’t yet understand fully, if at all]) has been playing a lot of episodes of the Ghost Hunters (International) back to back.
Now, I’m pretty open minded when it comes to the paranormal. I’ve had my share of ghostly experiences and collected even more stories of incidents. One day I shall weave them into a spectral horror novel, but not just yet.
What really gets my eyes rolling, however, (and not just on Ghost Hunters) is the Electronic Voice Phenomenon (EVP.) For those of you who don’t know what it is: Recording a session of asking questions in places of alleged ghostly activity and listening for answers. A little hokey, yes, but the eerie part comes in that the “voices” heard are (more often than not) on the recording, but had not been heard during the actual session.
I’m not saying I don’t believe it. No, I’m quite willing to believe it can and does happen. I just question the certainty used in regards to the “phenomenon.” Sometimes it’s questionable if it’s really a voice at all, for one thing. For another, they’re usually difficult to make out. Therein lies the issue. People (the Hunters, their clients and a whole array of internet posting) will tell you what it says, clear as day. To them. Must make that distinction. If I’m to admit hearing a voice and something intelligible, it’s a safe bet that I’m not hearing what they have no doubt it said. At least not at first. If I try, I can usually make it sound as they claim.
Let me draw your attention to misheard lyrics in songs for a moment. Whole websites are devoted to the plight of those who did not hear what’s sung correctly. Probably the most famous one is Jimi Hendrix saying, “Excuse me while I kiss this guy” which is really, of course, “Excuse me while I kiss the sky.”
Just last night I stood not two feet from Banky. I made a comment and he heard something completely different from what I said, with the exception of having a similar sounding syllables in all the right places.
Does anyone else see how this applies? Good.
Again, I’m not saying don’t believe. Just don’t be so quick to assure us of what's vocalized.
One last thing… most of the “evidence” on Ghost Hunters is fun, to say the least. Sometimes, yes, it’s a little freaky. When I do watch it (not very often) I take it all in stride, not NOT believing it, but not eating it up with a spoon, either. I’m always hoping for something other than the misshapen mysterious splotch that appears for one frame only. Something to really freak me out.
If you want that, too, then watch the “Ghost Child of Peru” episode of Ghost Hunters International.
If I can capture how that truly creepy evidence made me feel into the novel I’ll write, then woe to those who read it…
SciFi Channel (now SyFy [which I don’t yet understand fully, if at all]) has been playing a lot of episodes of the Ghost Hunters (International) back to back.
Now, I’m pretty open minded when it comes to the paranormal. I’ve had my share of ghostly experiences and collected even more stories of incidents. One day I shall weave them into a spectral horror novel, but not just yet.
What really gets my eyes rolling, however, (and not just on Ghost Hunters) is the Electronic Voice Phenomenon (EVP.) For those of you who don’t know what it is: Recording a session of asking questions in places of alleged ghostly activity and listening for answers. A little hokey, yes, but the eerie part comes in that the “voices” heard are (more often than not) on the recording, but had not been heard during the actual session.
I’m not saying I don’t believe it. No, I’m quite willing to believe it can and does happen. I just question the certainty used in regards to the “phenomenon.” Sometimes it’s questionable if it’s really a voice at all, for one thing. For another, they’re usually difficult to make out. Therein lies the issue. People (the Hunters, their clients and a whole array of internet posting) will tell you what it says, clear as day. To them. Must make that distinction. If I’m to admit hearing a voice and something intelligible, it’s a safe bet that I’m not hearing what they have no doubt it said. At least not at first. If I try, I can usually make it sound as they claim.
Let me draw your attention to misheard lyrics in songs for a moment. Whole websites are devoted to the plight of those who did not hear what’s sung correctly. Probably the most famous one is Jimi Hendrix saying, “Excuse me while I kiss this guy” which is really, of course, “Excuse me while I kiss the sky.”
Just last night I stood not two feet from Banky. I made a comment and he heard something completely different from what I said, with the exception of having a similar sounding syllables in all the right places.
Does anyone else see how this applies? Good.
Again, I’m not saying don’t believe. Just don’t be so quick to assure us of what's vocalized.
One last thing… most of the “evidence” on Ghost Hunters is fun, to say the least. Sometimes, yes, it’s a little freaky. When I do watch it (not very often) I take it all in stride, not NOT believing it, but not eating it up with a spoon, either. I’m always hoping for something other than the misshapen mysterious splotch that appears for one frame only. Something to really freak me out.
If you want that, too, then watch the “Ghost Child of Peru” episode of Ghost Hunters International.
If I can capture how that truly creepy evidence made me feel into the novel I’ll write, then woe to those who read it…
Posts
1 comment:
I hate that show. I felt so excited about it, and then when I watched? It actually went toward convincing me that ghosts do NOT exist. All I see is a bunch of grown adults running around, pretending to be frightened, and pointing at bits of dust or lens reflections. And I'm with you on the stupid voice things. They run subtitles like, "HELP ME" when to me it could just as easily be, "YUMMY!" or, say, nothing at all. Lame.
Sad, too. I want to believe!
(WOTD: sking)
Post a Comment