Entertainer… or Researcher?
In ghost hunting — and the paranormal field, in general — there are two very different approaches… and a broad overlap between them.
Entertainers appear in the media, and/or they’re paid guests at events and at “investigations.” Their primary standard isn’t necessarily truth. They are there to entertain you.
If you enjoy their performances, they’ve succeeded and their careers grow. If they don’t, they fade away, reinvent themselves, or shift to another line of work.
Their primary job is to create an illusion so the audience suspends disbelief long enough to enjoy the performance, regardless of its foundation in truth.
David Blaine is one of many entertainers who appear to be working mystical feats. He correctly describes himself as an illusionist.
Researchers conduct studies and look for breakthroughs in paranormal studies. Their standard is integrity.
Most researchers don’t care if they entertain anyone.
They report their research in papers and reports, at websites and conferences, and in books.
Some researchers’ writing, or the tools and techniques that they develop, become far more famous than the developers’ names.
Bill Chappell is the inventor of the Ovilus and the Puck, but more people recognize the tools’ names than his.
I consider myself a researcher, not an entertainer. I say, “Fiona Broome” and people may look confused. I mention HollowHill.com and they suddenly recognize me. (Frankly, I like it that my work is better known than “Fiona Broome.”)
The grey area between entertainers and paranormal researchers is wide.
- An entertainer may have (or develop) a genuine interest or gifts in the field of paranormal research.
- An entertainer may discover that his (or her) audience expects the entertainer to be a genuine psychic or researcher.
- Researchers may appear at events or public “investigations” to lend credibility to them. (For the record: Sometimes we’re paid; more often, we’re not.)
- A researcher on a TV show or at an event may be pressured to produce (fake) results for the audience, as if he (or she) is an entertainer. Generally, researchers won’t fake anything.
John Zaffis is a good example of someone who works in both research and entertainment. He’s a respected researcher and demonologist, and has been for many years before ghost hunting became popular. He appears at events and talks about the reality of spirits and demons. His manner of speaking is entertaining… but he’s presenting the results of genuine research.
However, “his” character in the movie, The Haunting in Connecticut, bears little resemblance to John Zaffis or the role he played in the real investigation. (The movie represents John as a priest with an entirely different name.)
That’s an extreme example of how different entertainment and research can be.
If you want to know the true story of that incident, see A Haunting in Connecticut when it’s repeated on the Discovery Channel, or see it on DVD.
Before evaluating any event or “investigation’ that you attend, it’s important to adjust your expectations. For the past 15+ years, I’ve said in my Guidelines for ghost hunters, ”…if someone is charging you money as if they’re providing a show… perhaps they are.”
Keep in mind that there’s a difference between a con artist and an entertainer. In most cases, the entertainer separates his (or her) role, on stage, from what’s true in his personal life. The lines may blur, but there’s no fraud involved.
Con artists
A very wide gap separates most con artists from researchers and entertainers.
An entertainer receives money for the performance; a con artist obtains favors and money based on promises (rarely in writing) or suggested rewards that will follow. If the entertainer uses lies to obtain money or favors, that’s where the line blurs.
An entertainer may disappoint you with a poor performance, but that’s different from being a fraud or a con artist.
Likewise, a researcher’s results may be disproved by later studies. That’s not a con, it’s a normal part of trial-and-error research… there will be errors!
A researcher’s integrity is his or her most valued asset. However, if he (or she) begins to fake results for money, fame or power, he too has crossed the line into the realm of scams and cons.
The vast majority of entertainers and researchers are good, honest people. It’s important not to use inappropriate labels when their work is merely disappointing.
For more on each of these topics, see my other articles and essays:
Do you have a question or opinion on this subject? Let me know in the comments form, below.
No related posts. Use the Contact form (above) to ask Fiona for more info.
David Blaine has very good showmanship and his magic tricks are good too.:.-
i like the magic tricks of David Blaine but Chris Angel is much better.~-;