I won’t get too into this just yet, although I believe it could evolve (or devolve, I suppose) into a “Great Debate.”
Anyone read Whitley Strieber’s Communion? Fascinating stuff. I’m of the opinion that he believes what he says, and that the very fact that he refuses to embrace a specific explanation makes his story all the more intriguing and credible.
I think you’ve entered Krispy’s territory here. I never read fiction!
Hmmm…hopefully the responses get exponentially more intelligent.
And the posts too…
Huh? It makes his story MORE credible because he refuses to be decisive? How do you figure?
I’ve been a science-fiction fan since my early teens (the real stuff that you get in books, not Trek and Star Wars – although I like them too, no flames please). Furthermore, one of my hobbies is astronomy. I’ve spent many a night gazing up at the vastness of the universe with my telescope. So I do not, for a moment, find the IDEA of an extraterrestrial visitation unbelievable. I will go a step further and say that I even find it credible that the aliens might behave exactly as described in various “abduction scenarios”.
But this is not the same as believing that abductions are really happening. If they are, well, my heartfelt apologies to the folks being victimized by the little grey men: It must be hell going through that, and then having to endure the sceptisism and ridicule of your fellow humans. But I’m sorry folks – you gotta come up with more proof than you have so far.
I remember seeing John Mack on CNNs “Crossfire” discussing abduction, and whenever he was asked for hard evidence he started talking about “abandoning the strict confines of Western reasoning and embracing a new way of thinking” and right away a big red light went off in my head.
If abduction advocates would stop saying “alien” and say “angel”(or “devil”)instead, and stop saying “spacecraft” and say “firey chariot” then there wouldn’t be a problem. They would be promoting a new religion – no big deal. I’m not a left-wing bigot, so I don’t sneer at people of faith.
But “alien”,“extraterrestrial”,and "starship"are all terms that mean real things that (probably) exist in the real world. If you want to say they exist HERE AND NOW, well, you really gotta prove it.
“This day is called the Feast of Crispian,” --Henry V
Dearest Orangecakes: for a while I racked my brains searching for a witty comeback, to no avail…then I realized why I was falling short: I just don’t care.
Dearest Mr. Mandrake: A few things…
1.) I never used the word “alien,” “extraterrestrial,” or “greys” in my post, mind you. And for the record, while Strieber does toy with the notion that his “visitors” were of ET origin, he never entirely subscribes to the theory, or any other one, either. This leads me to my next point.
2.) The fact that he refuses to take a definate stance on the matter, that he appears to be just as mystified as his readers, makes his claim that he honestly experienced the nocturnal goings-on in Communion more credible, not the possibility of alien visitation more likely, and, by the way, not COMPLETELY credible, either. Just more credible. I mean, think about it. If you were attempting to dupe the general public, wouldn’t the key to successfully accomplishing that involve you having more information than said public?
I don’t have the time right now to explain that in detail, so hopefully you understand what I’m trying to say.
3.) It’s interesting your comments on the recent upswing in “abduction” experiences mention a new form of theology and that if the “abductee movement” were to simply admit their compliance in the creation of just such a religion, everything would be okay (respectable? tolerable?). I’d say that, in his nebulous hyptothesizing, Strieber actually DOES lean towards this concept, that these may be spiritual experiences involving archetypal entities which may or may not maintain a corporeal existance.
Have you read the book? See, that is what I originally asked. I was hoping to discuss it with people who had read the book, therefore instigating an informed discussion. I know the whole thing sounds silly, and keep in mind that I don’t believe in tangible aliens, but that at least something is going on. Even if people are not literally being absconded from their homes by actual extraterrestrials, the fact that an increasingly large group of people BELIEVE that they are remains fascinating, nonetheless.
I’ve read and reread the OP, and I’m stuck on the same point as Lionel. In what way does Streiber’s lack of science make his story credible? If I’d been abducted or had a visitation, or seen a youfo or been chased by black helicopters or seen an angel or whatever, I’d personally try as hard as possible to find some explanation.
It’s been a while (gosh, maybe ten years now, shortly after it came out, I guess?) since I read Communion*, but IIRC Streiber spent more time on the metaphysical ramifications of his “experience” than on investigation and explanation. His prerogative, certainly. But then, I accepted the book as pure fiction, and consider the “true story” aspect to be bunk and book-selling hype. It’s possible he believes it entirely, but I don’t think so.
And from the viewpoint of a science-fiction scholar and afficionado, it’s not particularly good fiction, either. But again, that’s my opinion, YMMV (and does, it seems).
-andros-
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. But, I guess we’ll also have to discount the testimonies of Strieber’s friends (who witnessed fragments of an encounter that occured during their stay at the Striebers’ New York cabin) along with those of his son and wife…either that or explain them (their testimonials given to officials, etc.) away as invented by Strieber as well.
Lack of science? What the hell is that? Do you mean by that the lack of “empircal evidence,” that is to say, a chunk of UFO, or a sliver of extraterrestrial skin beneath Whitney’s fingernails? Do you believe in God, Andro? You’ll never find empirical (but of course, let’s define empirical…a post in itself) evidence for God, but what you will find are scores of people who believe to have had ethereal encounters with God (or god), and that IS their evidence, unfortunately for everyone. Did they actually experience a higher entity? Don’t know. Do a large number of them honestly believe they’ve experienced God? Yes. That’s my point. And if they BELIEVE something occured and it betters their life, takes them to a higher spiritual plane, then the ultimate reality of the experience becomes moot, doesn’t it?
In other words, there really is no way to conclusively determine whether or not Strieber is being honest to the best of his knowledge, at least not in this situation (polygraphs are the closest thing, I suppose, of which he’s gone four for four, by the way). I just happen to believe he’s telling the truth, that is to say, I believe he believes he’s telling the truth.
Oh, and also, in subsequent books, didn’t Strieber concentrate on “evidence,” to the best of his ability: implants, photographs of UFOs, etc.?