[granville1]

Sounds like you’re taking a sane, cautious approach!

[granville1]

Thanks, guys, for the soundtrack info.

[granville1]

Ditto. Nice use of musical score too – do you mind if I ask what it is from?

[granville1]

Haven’t used a ouija in years. I only have theories about it. I suppose, following C.G. Jung, that “the unconscious” can manipulate the participants’ finger pressure without the knowledge of the conscious ego-mind, and in extreme cases, perhaps a dissociated personality fragment could express itself thru the manipulations.

If there are spirits floating around, I suppose theoretically, they, too, could “speak” in the same way. According to Legion and Konstantin Raudive, spirits are “in the air” and can “speak” via tape recordings, so – again, theoretically – they could also communicate thru a ouija board.

As far as genuine demonic possession and genuine communication from spirit beings, I am agnostic, but open minded. In my admittedly limited reading, I’ve never come across a genuine case of possession, i.e., one that could not be explained by a combination of unconscious psychology and paranormal occurrences – i.e., I’ve never seen strong evidence for a truly nonmaterial, preternatural, discarnate, alien, non-human spiritual “invading” entity. Ditto ouija boards, seances, etc. To believe that external spirits are really at work, I’d need to see strong evidence of such.

(Also, as an aside, Christianity generally condemns any such occult practices. Recall in The Exorcist novel that the Catholic “seeress” Mary Jo Perrin forcefully warns Chris against Regan’s use of the ouija board because it could “open a door” to evil…)

[granville1]

Just now read your reply, Blizzi. Glad you liked my theory…

[granville1]

Thanks, Blizzi… sorry to reply so late. Again, I’m not _certain_ it’s meant to show Merrin walking down a cross, but the way it’s framed sure suggests it to me…

[granville1]

Thanks for the kind words, Captain. The film seems to yield more symbology the more one views it…

[granville1]

I am glad you included Carpenter’s remake of The Thing among the imaginative/minimalist horror films. Seems all to many people condemn the film for its explicit gore and brutality, while at the same time missing its _extremely_ successful suspensefulness. I, for one, was on the edge of my chair due simply to Carpenter’s skillful direction. He could have gone the easy, lazy route of letting sfx alone bear the story’s weight, but instead he constructed a terrifyingly suspenseful narrative.

Plus, I think the horror scenes were no more and no less than what was called for to tell the story, and in context were not “excessive”. (Also, I think the film does wonders with characterization, condensing authentically-toned personalities into the little material he had to work with, but that’s another issue…)

[granville1]

That would make a neat “Exorcist dream sequence” for a future film…

[granville1]

… if only…

[granville1]

Me, too. In all of the possession cases I’ve read about, there has not been evidence “of the kind the Church would accept” as being manifestations of a truly discarnate superhuman invading personality. That leave us with an odd form of mental illness combined with paranormal activity – namely, poltergeist phenomena. Seems that Jung had some experiences with poltergeists for which he supplied a psychological explanation, e.g., a constellation of archetypes or a maladjusted adolescent, or some psychic crisis, etc…

[granville1]

Thanks for the nice words, Pazrags. There are many Exorcist experts in this group, but I’m glad you enjoy my posts too. I concur with Ryan, though – how about you posting all your questions in a single thread where everybody can get a shot at addressing them? That would create a succinct arena for replies.

[granville1]

Nice idea, though I for one coudldn’t contribute much. My only exposure to poltergeist theory is:

1) The poltergeist is an actual discarnate spirit causing kinetic environmental effects.

2) The poltergeist is a discarnate soul of a deceased person.

3) The poltergeist is a split-off portion of a living personality which manifests in psychokinetic effects.

4) Ditto the above, with the personality being a stressed-out, traumatized person, usually an adolescent.

5) The poltergeist is purely imaginary, the manifestations being due, at the least, to over-active imaginations, at the most, trickery on the part of the person around whom the manifestations center.

That’s all I know about it, although others might have more to contribute.

[granville1]

Thanks for the wonderful interview. Miller was one fascinating, articulate person.

[granville1]

Yeah, without knowing him personally, still he makes a big impact. Also, since the interview was in the early 80s, doesn’t that make him approximately the age of Karras as in the book? He was in his 30s in the film in 73 so in 82, nine years later, he’d be in his 40s – the same age as Karras in the novel…

[Author]

Posts