 |
| Poster for The Enfield Haunting |
The President’s letter from Prof. John Poynton and
the article by John Fraser in the Summer 2015 issue of the Society for
Psychical Research’s (SPR) magazine Paranormal
Review together show many positive aspects to the SPR’s current
situation. Poynton notes that the
substantial Buckmaster legacy is allowing it to fund an online encyclopaedia
and improved website, and the financial situation is much sounder than it was a
decade ago. Research and publications in
the field are buoyant and the SPR’s image is generally good in an intellectual
climate which is increasingly receptive to the issues raised by psychical
research.
Fraser points specifically to the ‘Enfield Effect’,
the upsurge in membership applications and spontaneous case enquiries which
followed in the wake of the recent television dramatisation based on the
Enfield case, one linked to the SPR by the figures of Maurice Grosse and Guy
Lyon Playfair. Yet there is a fly in the
psychical ointment. Both Johns highlight
a largely uninterested media, Poynton as an example citing the vigorous
campaign to make the press aware of Dr Barrie Colvin’s 2010 paper on
poltergeist raps, an effort which was unsuccessful; Fraser to an overall lack
of impact by the SPR, at a time when local groups have proliferated and media
coverage of the paranormal has actually increased.
Fraser suggests two possibilities that may allow the
SPR to capitalise on the Enfield bounce in the longer term. One is to appoint a media officer, the other to
reinstate the long-dormant position of investigations officer. The latter would be paid, to avoid having to
rely on volunteers. These are both
useful ideas though personally I do not think they go far enough.
There used to be a media officer in the form of the
immensely energetic Monty Keen. One of
his initiatives was to draw up a list of publications across all relevant subjects,
and divide them among Council members who would keep an eye out for negative
comments that could be countered, and opportunities for generating
publicity. In the event neither of these
tactics proved effective. Media
indifference is not a new phenomenon.
The landscape has changed enormously since then and
media enquiries are occasionally received through the website, but while
welcome, their general impact seems fairly small. Coverage often focuses on the early days,
which simultaneously tells people the SPR has done noteworthy things while
suggesting that these days it is irrelevant.
That is the situation which has to be changed, to show that the SPR still
has something valuable to say.
An investigations officer would be beneficial,
especially someone with a broad range of skills that encompass both
experimental and spontaneous areas, who would be able to dedicate more time
than volunteers can and be able to work up the results that could then be
publicised. Again though the impact
might be limited, with no greater success with sophisticated material in
breaking down the barriers than was the case with Colvin’s raps paper.
In the absence of such a post it should still be
possible to conduct meaningful research with the resources available. Admittedly it is difficult for individuals
with other commitments to be able to undertake extended projects, but after all
the SPR’s Spontaneous Cases Committee has a large number of individuals on it
so there is no reason why it should not be effective in undertaking and promoting
research.
At one time John Stiles, as Honorary Liaison Officer
for Spontaneous Cases, kept a list of suitable SPR members to whom incoming
cases could be referred, depending on location, which he would then follow
up. But he complained that the numbers
of cases was getting smaller each year and the position lapsed when he retired
from Council in 2003. With numbers of
cases on the rise such a mechanism to draw on members’ expertise would augment
the SCC’s numbers and aid its efficiency.
These initiatives alone would probably still not be
enough to prevent the surge of interest identified by Messrs Poynton and Fraser
from receding. The core problem
underlying the SPR’s inability to overcome media inertia and reach a broader
swathe of the sympathetic public I believe is rooted in its approach to
research. The odd high-profile activity (Enfield,
the 1999 Scole Report) is not enough to gain the necessary momentum. The SPR needs a sustained programme of
research that is identified with the SPR rather than only the individuals
carrying it out.
In the early days of the Society’s existence the
undertaking of projects by senior figures in the Society was clearly defined,
but nowadays it is likely to award grants to researchers at other institutions
whose work is then associated with that institution rather than with the
SPR. It has mainly become a mechanism
for administering grants and publicising the work of others rather than
promoting work undertaken under its aegis.
Instead of this hands-off approach there is a case
for having the SPR’s name closely linked to research, while maintaining its
lack of corporate views. Fraser refers
to the Scole Report as achieving an unusually high profile outside the Society,
but it is notable in recent years for being closely associated with the
Society, rather than a project that was undertaken by a trio of investigators
who happened to be members of the Society but were not identified with it. The SPR needs to encourage researchers,
whether funded by it or not, to associate themselves with the organisation in the
same way.
Emphasising such linkages was part of the thinking
behind the formation of the Research Activities Committee in 1992. Prof. Bernard Carr outlined its remit in the
January 1999 issue of Paranormal Review. Of its various aims, he said that ‘the RAC's
main task is to commission and foster promising research projects, rather than
to undertake corporate research itself, although in some cases the Committee
has encouraged “in-house” research.’
Unfortunately over the years the committee became moribund until it was
wound up in early 2014. That it was
unlamented when it was put out of its misery is suggested by the lack of any reference
to its termination in the Society’s 2013-14 Annual Report.
That is a shame because a body like the RAC could
act as a focus to stimulate research while closely connecting those researchers
to the Society. It would nurture a
symbiotic relationship, with the Society providing the funding (and attention
should additionally be turned to increasing the relatively small amounts of
money available) while, and this is the key point, the researchers emphasise
that their primary affiliation is to the SPR.
That relationship would have a number of mutually
reinforcing outcomes. It would
demonstrate the Society’s continuing relevance to the public, the media and
other relevant organisations (not least the Parapsychological Association, the
parapsychologists’ professional body); it would strengthen the network of
researchers in the field and encourage them, whether SPR-funded or not, to
publish in its magazines; its Journal and annual conference would be
able to attract the best research in the field; it would encourage membership
growth; it would assist the SPR’s educational work, which is part of its
charitable obligation; it would encourage passive members to become active and even
conduct their own research; and the media might take notice of such a vigorous level
of activity.
So the answer to the question in John Fraser’s
subtitle – ‘Is the Recent Increased Interest in the Society for Psychical
Research a Temporary Blip, or an Unmissable Opportunity?’ – is that the Enfield
Effect has been a splendid opportunity which will ripple for a time but will
eventually fade into the background. A
single bounce is never going to be enough, however significant it is in
itself. There are initiatives that will
help to maintain the SPR’s profile in a sustainable way, notably the online encyclopaedia. Social media plays a positive role, and an
improved website will generate interest.
But more is needed, research that is relevant, done by SPR members who
are not afraid to be seen primarily as SPR members and who are happy to promote
that affiliation.
Perhaps this approach can be summed up by arguing
that the SPR needs to position itself as a research institute as opposed to a
learned society. Whether that is
possible will depend on its ability to project confidence in its potential
alongside pride in its past achievements.
Above all it needs to possess the self-belief that it can match the
heady days of its youth, rather than jog along in the lengthy shadow cast by
its founders. If it can do that it will
be said with justice that there is a tide in the affairs of the SPR which,
taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.
References
Carr, Bernard, ‘Research Activities in the SPR: New
Initiatives’, Paranormal Review, issue 9, January 1999, pp. 3-5.
Colvin, Barrie, ‘The Acoustic Properties of
Unexplained Rapping Sounds’, Journal of
the Society for Psychical Research, vol. 73, April 2010, pp. 65-93.
Fraser, John, ‘The Enfield Effect: Is the Recent
Increased Interest in the Society for Psychical Research a Temporary Blip, or
an Unmissable Opportunity?’, Paranormal
Review, issue 75, Summer 2015, p. 30.
Keen, Montague, Ellison, Arthur and Fontana, David, ‘The
Scole Report’, Proceedings of the Society
for Psychical Research, vol. 58, 1999.
Poynton, John, ‘President’s Letter: A Tide in the
Affairs of Men’, Paranormal Review,
issue 75, Summer 2015, pp. 4-5.
