When I posed, twice, a question about why “contactees” of
the 1950s used George Adamski’s iconic, but obviously hoaxed, flying saucer
(scout craft) images to supplement their own contrived tales and hoxes,
visitors here – some rather notable in the UFO community – went to
extraordinary lengths to offer analyses or comments to explain what the
etiology of such image-mimicry was:
“They almost certainly knew who their target market was –
people already predisposed to buy into Adamski-like tales. I’m sure they had no
illusions about expanding upon that market – indeed, they probably knew that
they wouldo nly get a fration of it. Therefore, go with something ready-made
and recognizable that would resonate with that core market.” [Paul Kimball]
“The contactee movement was linked by a metaphysical
component and operated like a proto-religion.” [Lance Moody]
“Further, a great deal of the back story of that time
relates to Indian mythology, specifically the Vinoma.( Sp?) which was often
cited that I suspect demanded an exotic rather than a contemporary simpler
object. More architectural... related to Hindu religious structures than a
aerodynamic "design" Then you have the Hidden Monarchical Kingdom in
this..Castles In The Sky. In other words an omniscient "place" rather
than a "vehicle". Again, back to architecture style versus an
aerodynamic vehicle.” [Bruce Duensing….he means “vimana” not Vinoma.]
“To be a "copycat" is probably less risked than to
be too much original and creative, mainly if you have more or less the same
desideratae and motivations/consequences to obtain and to reach than Adamski
have.” [French psychologist and skeptic Gilles Fernandez]
“It appears to be a simple approach of using a well known
visual prop. By using Adamski's then a well known photo/model, one gets
similarity and thus believably that it's from the same species of ETs.” [Tim
Hebert]
“In 1960, Menger appeared on a TV show with [Long John]
Nebel and basically recanted his entire story. He later said that he was
involved in some sort of Army test of public reaction to possible alien
contact. Fortean writer Ivan Sanderson arrived at the Menger residence in the
late 1950s and claimed that Menger got very angry with him when Sanderson
discovered some equipment and crates in a storage area with 'U. S. Army'
stenciled on them." [Nick Redfern – nothing to do with the image-mimicry ,
just an off-topic aside.]
As you can see, explanations all over the place.
But note Tim Hebert’s comment. He’s psychologically astute
and comes nearly to the proper interpretation of what was going on the minds of
the Adamski copycats.
And Paul Kimball keeps it simple and close to the prosaic interpretation of what it really was.
The contactees were a psycho-neurotic bunch, without
question. What they did or tried to do, en masse and separately, was this:
Hysterical imitation – The ability of a hysterical patient
to imitate all the symptoms that impress him when they occur in others. The
psychological mechanism at work … is identification: the patient
(unconsciously) identifies himself with a person who has the same unconscious
needs as he, who is “just like” him. As a result, the patient reproduces the
symptom shown by the person with whom he identifies. Through this hysterical
imitation, patients are enabled to express in their symptoms not merely their
own experiences, but the experiences of quite a number of other persons; they
can … fill all the parts of a drama with their own personalities.” [The Basic
Writings of Sigmund Freud, Modern Library, Random House, NY, 1938, as provided
by Psychiatric Dictionary, Fourth Edition, Leland E. Hinsie, M.D. and Robert J.
Campbell, M.D., Editors, Oxford University Press, London, 1970, Pages 381-382.]
Whats my point here?
That, in an attempt to appear erudite, intellectual, and/or
academically well-read, ufologists and fellow travelers will often resort to
elaborate “dissertations” fraught with language and hyperbole that, instead of
enlightening, confuses and makes something simple into something abstruse and
erroneously abstract.
This has been and continues to be the bane of the ufology;
it makes a simple thing – UFO rumination – into a dodgy art-form that isn’t
credible to intellectual cognoscenti, and it offends those who would like basic
ratiocination instead of bombastic self-glorifying attempts at, what turns out
to be errant and phony, erudition.
RR
Nick Redfern has a piece at Mysterious Universe about the creation of reality by one's imagination, something I think is obviously possible. Moreover, I think thoughts may be able to create realities. (Something I'd like to deal with here.)
