PARANORMALCY: mysterious messages, ouija, spirit communication
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php
Skeptics - Sites, Info, More
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100223-233746
But skepticism is a long-standing tradition and system of observation, rooted in science and empirical and rational thought, and includes such luminaries in the paranormal "field" as Ehrich "Harry Houdini" Weiss, the Amazing Randi, Phillip J. Klass, Carl Sagan, Penn and Teller... hmm... anyone notice professional illusionists make up a large chunk of people who are opposed to people being deceived if it isn't for entertainment?
But what IS skepticism, truly? And I'm not going by the normal dictionary definition here, but the connotation, that we know in today's world, in the popular culture, how it is viewed, both by skeptics themselves as well as the people whom they may be trying to demystify.
Let us take a look at some "skeptic" publications and websites, shall we?
Skeptic Friends Network to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.
Now, I don't know about anyone else, but would I want to teach my children critical thinking and deductive reasoning so he or she can make rational judgments and draw useful conclusions when confronted with things? Yes, I really think I would, so I have a hard time with any argument that skeptics are doing anyone a disservice or the long-favored "If you don't believe any of this, why are you on a paranormal forum?"
But here are some somewhat amusing skeptics' quotes, which... well, you'll see. Sciforums Skeptic Quotes
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction." - Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872
"This foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd lengths to which vicious specialisation will carry scientists." -A.W. Bickerton, physicist, NZ, 1926
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." -- Albert Einstein, 1932
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977
And now I'd like to tangentialize a little bit here, article also from Rom Houben and DBSkeptic. This is something I'd read about and think is a tragedy but this is the first full story I've found that highlights this "practice", of Facilitated Communication.
A facilitator holds the hand or arm of the impaired person or client, supposedly giving the strength and steadiness necessary for the client to type with a single finger, one letter at a time. A video of Houben, including his facilitated communication, can be seen here:
While it is possible that Houben’s facilitator is willfully perpetrating a heartless con, it is more likely in this case, and in all uses of facilitated communication, that the facilitator’s actions are attributable to the ideomotor effect. Familiar to anyone who’s seen a Ouija board in action, the ideomotor effect is defined as purposeful movement by a person not consciously aware of his movement. That is to say, when a person wishes a given outcome (a ‘yes’ answer on a Ouija board, for example), that person’s hand will move to produce that answer, without the person feeling any conscious movement.
Scientific testing of facilitated communication has disrobed the technique’s mystique and, unsurprisingly, double-blinded experiment has produced embarrassing failures among the facilitators. Information given to the client, with the facilitator blinded or absent, could not be later reproduced by the facilitator helping the client. Apologists to the technique claim that factors such as the duress imposed by doubters, who indirectly threaten to remove rights gained only by the impaired person’s communication, wreck the client’s performance and strain the special bond between facilitator and client. Skeptics reply that this is a common complaint of paranormalists who find they have failed under laboratory conditions and that, furthermore, impaired people who have attended college and given public speeches, all thanks to facilitated communication, should be already acclimatized to whatever stresses may be produced by testing.
To me, this really underlines the fact that dismissing the very real results produced by the ideomotor effect can have worse consequences than scaring teenagers, but instead put innocent people, families and friends of the "client" through needless anguish, all because they want to believe something so bad, they'll grasp for whatever answer that affirms their hope, ignoring reality.]]>Paranormal/"Ghost" Survey
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100222-012139
This was posted on Unexplained Mysteries by a member, and I replied and decided it was a good question and I felt my response was suitable for posting here.
1. Define "Paranormal" To the etymological meaning, anything beside, outside of "normal", something unusual or extraordinary, that doesn't happen everyday, and happens so rarely, even among large groups of people, that the occurrence is remarkable or unbelievable, as it usually also defies or is unrecognized and untestable by science.
2. Define "Ghost" Sensory phenomna in which one or more persons perceive, either through vision or any other senses, an unusual apparent willful entity, that has a level of strangeness about it that convinces them it is not "normal"; these may or may not be believed to be or recognized as spirits of someone the person knows.
What is a..
1.Apparition Any unusual visual phenomenon, usually of a figure, and commonly thought to be related to "ghosts" and spirits.
2.Haunting The chronic presence of various apparently unexplainable phenomena in a location or structure, usually a house - in a "full" haunting scenario, objects moving by themselves, disappearing, unusual noises, disembodied voices, apparitions/images of entities, music, aromas and physical sensations, from so-called "cold spots" to light or firm "contact" being noticed by the experiencer. Residual hauntings generally involve only perception of a figure seeming to be performing one or more tasks, usually unaware of the percipient, perhaps repeating a task that same figure has been seen doing before. According to popular lore, haunting durations are indefinite, potentially centuries.
3.Poltergeist German for "noisy ghost", and differentiated (usually) from hauntings in that most "diagnosed" poltergeist cases last six months at most, and may be over as quickly as a week. More "grounded" parapsychological thought suggests poltergeists are not actually willful entities or ghosts or spirits, but are referred to as Recurrent Spontaneous Psychokinesis, or RSPK, which comes about by a human agent unconsciously manifesting their natural, latent "psi" abilities, usually believed to be due to stress, trauma, extreme anxiety, emotionality, etc. Whatever they are, poltergeists also usually encompass the more dramatic haunting behavior, things moving or even seeming to be thrown, disappearing and reappearing at later times, knocking noises, voices, etc. It is when people start ascribing intelligence to poltergeist cases that things generally turn negative and begin to escalate to their nearly inevitable nearly-traumatic culmination.
Have you ever.. 1.Felt a ghost No.
2.Seen a ghost No.
3.Heard a ghost No.
Do you think.. 1.A ghost can actually harm a person Only via psychokinetic/RSPK effects, which I think are rare for true ghost encounters, and usually only incidentally, and not seriously, though the person may injure themselves if their reaction to witnessing the ghost is severe enough. 2.A ghost can pick up items If by "pick up", apportation to another location is included, and again, we're talking about more of a haunting or poltergeist situation, an unsure yes. Otherwise, I don't think things can be "grasped" as we understand it, assuming manual dexterity and finesse, but more seem to be affected by gross physical force of some kind, resulting in things moving dramatically, usually appearing to have been thrown or knocked off, which frightens witnesses and makes them assume "he's mad", which is actually not a logical assumption. 3.A ghost can be seen by the naked eye If not visibly, though there are reports, some effects.
Last question..
Do you belive in ghosts? I believe there is "ghost phenomena", though what that means, which could even be mundane, but I do not believe in "spirits", demons or any incorporeal entities. ]]>True Demoneating Knight's Fire Alchemy! Only $60.00!
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100217-043456
He'll clean all the negative energy off up to 5 of your loved ones, for the low, low price of $60.00 USD, and all one million of your pets for only $15.00! What a deal! Don't wait, get curses lifted off you and your loved ones TODAY!
Being a moderator on a paranormal forum has its perks, and removing crazy bullshit like this from people's signatures is one of them. God I love the intertubez.]]>The Valentine's Day is Out There
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100214-001131
Please note: This is not written as an actual X-Files “case”, just a “downtime” skit.
(<>..<>)
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE
FBI HEADQUARTERS, WASHINGTON, DC FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1998, 4:17 PM "Really though," says Fox Mulder as he disembarks from the elevator and jogs up behind his red-haired partner, Dana Scully, who looks back over her shoulder and continues down the hall. "What, Mulder?" she asks, a little disinterested in Mulder's opinion.
"Really, tell me about the case with the 'talking doll'. When you first called me, I thought you were just checking up on me, but I think there was really something going on." The unorthodox FBI agent catches up to Scully and matches her stride as they continue toward his little basement office. "Yes, and as I remember, the most helpful thing you did was to propose to me. Besides, don't you think I would have told you if there was an X-File?" She looks surreptitiously at Mulder, wondering how much of that she could put over on him. He sighs and rubs the back of his neck as they turn a corner. "I guess so, but the scenario I was getting when I finally started putting together what you were saying..."
Scully interrupts him with a derisive, nervous laugh. "The scenario you were getting probably involved evil spirits and ancient curses, Mulder. You usually manage to come up with those when you seclude yourself in your little office down here and don't have anything to do." Her partner looks at her, feigning shock. "Alright, you don't have to tell me; you WERE on your vacation after all, I just thought you might like to talk about it."
X-Files: The Muffin Man (PDF)]]>Children See Ghosts?
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100208-235518
I'd like to preface this by saying I'm not ridiculing anyone or trying to deny or disprove anyone's own claims, only give my own personal opinion of this subject, which I do not believe most people do intentionally, but is more an unconscious tendency that manifests subtly, creating the environment for this to take place.
I think the idea that children are sensitive or can see ghosts and such is imagination or misidentification and confusion on the part of the child (or adult), as well as the adults wanting to ascribe specialness to their child, and to also use their child as a conduit, to allow them to also believe in "magic" again, the paranormal.
They project this perception onto their child, until the child hears this enough and believes it or even starts to behave appropriately in a manner to be rewarded by the parent, by positive reinforcement and nurturing these "abilities", possibly even developing in the child a lifelong "gift" or idea that they can see and feel things, but which are actually not there at all, but is instead the wind, a draft, etc.
At the same time, regardless of their previous beliefs (though most were already inclined toward the mystical), the parents suddenly "rediscover" and "remember" old abilities they themselves "had", and could see and hear and feel spirits, and now can still do it "sometimes". Since the parent's genetics or psychic aura or something is allegedly transferred to offspring, that means not only is the child obviously a very special being, but that means the parent must be too!
In one example, a mother was carrying her 22 month old, which pointed at empty air and said "ghost", which the mom asked for her to repeat what she said, and the 22 month old said there was a ghost (according to the mother - though I'm skeptical on the clear and accurate speech of 22 month olds). We are not born knowing what ghosts are, or what significance they have or that they're unusual or break natural laws and established theories, or are a philosophical and religious hot button, so it is rather unlikely a child (especially ones so young) would "recognize" or understand a ghost if they saw one.
They most definitely couldn't know or use the correct traditional word, unless they have been raised, surrounded and influenced in an environment in which such things are talked about as factual or at least regularly, much the same way more religious Christian children might report "seeing angels", or earlier rural Europeans reported seeing fairies - it is part of the inherent condition and legend of the ambient culture, so it is incorporated into their belief system, expectations and personal symbolism. ]]>Ouija Boards Sold As Toys?
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100205-054413
Product Description Ouija Board has always been mysterious. It has always been mystifying. And now the OUIJA Board is glow in the dark! With 72 fun questions included, you'll never run out of things to ask. Who will call/text me next? Gather your friends around, draw a card, place your fingers on the planchette and ask your question. Concentrate very hard and watch as the answer is revealed in the message window. Make up your own questions, and let the OUIJA Board satisfy your curiosity in virtually endless ways. OUIJA Board will answer. It's just a game - or is it? Includes OUIJA Board, message indicator (planchette), card deck with 72 questions, carrying case with storage pockets and instructions.
Although they do seem to tend to cause hysterical reactions in people, especially children and teens, who apparently don't have the intellectual critical thinking skills or intent needed to approach it as an experiment for the mind and reasoning, it is still just an entertainment novelty (to be fair I can't say it is a game, as it has no real features of what we consider games) and functions on the almost never understood or accepted ideomotor principle. Saying they need to be removed because they cause problems is like saying the same for Trivial Pursuit, Monopoly or Risk, because those can lead to real life fights and bad feelings that can also last a long time and cause grudges.
When people get negative stuff and cursing and verbal abuse, which they are wont to do because that's the types of things that a lot of younger people or the very anxious manifest due to their immaturity, they become near basketcases, swear the Devil is trying to eat their soul, burn the board and never, ever touch it again and make it their mission in life to warn others away from the most dangerous game, relating their own bad first-hand "experience" as proof. None of these things has anything to do with the board itself but people's own tendencies and inclinations, and sometimes desires - they want to be scared, they want to scare, they feel guilty, they want to be mean to someone else, they want something out of this world to believe in - they get all these. They could just as easily print one out and use a CD to make one (my main sig has a page to do that), or build a radionics device out of an old TV knob, cereal box and copper wire, or even use a Scientology truthometer or whatever those ridiculous things are called.
I think the girls' version is a hilariously shrewd concept because those are where 90% of the base stories of horror come from, which only drum up yet more interest (even if it is seen by most as 'negative') and fascination with the Ouija as a forbidden "tool", because that's what kids do - what you tell them NOT to - and we don't necessarily outgrow that as adults.
I don't know who these people demanding the removal of boards, but I'd recommend they spend about fifteen minutes actually looking at the thing with a critical (not prejudiced from ignorance) eye and realize there's nothing "threatening" to it and if you blindfolded users, you'd get words about as coherent as most Youtube comments.]]>Peak 90's U.K. UFO sightings coincided with X-Files
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100131-151919
I know this is old and brief but I found it interesting nonetheless.
Recently released documents by the National Archives show that UFO sightings in the United Kingdom spiked in 1996: 609 that year, up from 117 the year before.
Source: http://scifiwire.com/2009/08/peak-uk-uf ... gs-coi.php]]>Fear of Masks, Clowns, Mascots and More
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100128-144951
There's a good example, namely toys, of what I feel is at work, at least partially, with coulrophobia (the fear of clowns), as well as other non-human figures; the lack of visible emotions, and emulation of but not apparent member of the human race. The little known fear, automatonophobia, is the fear of any lifelike figures, usually humanoid, which are not human (ie. artificial; dolls, puppets, CGI characters). This is also part of another less clinical term, the Uncanny Valley, which also refers to the disquieting feeling people get when viewing human-like figures which are artificial and not actually human.
I personally believe these terms potentially extend to any moving or still lifelike figures, not just humanoid, such as large realistic toy dogs, rubber snakes and even figures that are vaguely human-like but which are obviously not human-like, such as animatronic bears or rats (like some restaurants have) or other animal or creature with exaggerated and obviously non realistic features. I also believe there is at least a correlation between these and fear of mascots (like the San Diego Chicken) and mostly concealing costumes which are out of the ordinary and non-human looking, and whose intentions, emotions and body language are unreadable, even though there is a human in them, such as Darth Vader, etc., which I believe then also includes and leads back to clowns and mimes, which again, are unpredictable because we can't "read" them. It is also hypothesized to be related to maskophobia,
Furthermore, I just did some more searching on the internet and found three MORE terms that I think relate to all this. Maskophobia is the fear of masks, specifically, usually horror masks but sometimes any, and can involve seeing them on others or wearing one. A caveat here is that Google only came back with about 70 matches in total, and not one of them from a site with any sort of obvious credentials or particular reliability, so I feel if this is a real fear, it is called something else more commonly. Well, speaking of that, I see now that maskaphobia gets about 500 results, and is listed as the fear of masks also. Again, I think this relates to obscuring human features and intent, making us instinctively wary of possible danger - coulrophobia sounds very close to this, as the paint also obscures, and I came across some writing that indicates fear of clowns is indeed a sub-category of these. Masklophobia is specifically the fear of mascots and most likely animatronic figures, basically any costumed character, usually large, as I mentioned above. To complicate matters, prosopeiophobia seems to be an overlap between the previous two phobias, as it is variably described as a fear of masks or mascots, but yields only 8 Google results, and absolutely no credible site with any significant information on the disorder.
Lastly, a new study has concluded that humans are not alone in this fear of lifelike figures, as they have discovered that monkeys also exhibit this same aversive behavior when confronted with obviously artificial monkey figures and faces, though they are okay with real or photo-realistic faces. This is curious to me, as I recall an experiment where scientists placed an obviously non-living object, which bore only a vague resemblance to a monkey, with hair or carpet placed over a heavy monkey-sized object and only a rudimentary angular face and features and eyes, into a cage with the real monkey's babies. Eventually the babies became accustomed to the fake monkey mother and clung to it and slept near it, apparently accepting it as a mothering figure, even though it looked or really even felt nothing like one, and obviously wasn't alive. These two experiments seem to be at odds with each other, which I think is quite interesting.
From Science Daily:
In the experiments, the monkeys, which normally coo and smack their lips to engage each other, quickly avert their glances and are frightened when confronted by the close-to-real images. When asked to peer at the less close-to-real faces and real faces, however, they viewed them more often and for longer periods.
Obviously, with about five or six different terms for the fear of not-quite-human or normal creatures, this is, overall, a fairly widespread and encountered fear, though for the most part, finding these as true and severe phobias is not frequent, except for the fear of clowns, which is the most common specific phobia. No doubt about it, there are plenty of fears to choose from.
On masklophobia:
Mascots can inadvertently traumatize some children, and adults, too. Masklophobia, the fear of mascots, can result from children having a bad experience early on with a large, furry creature. Although it's not a text-book defined phobia, there are masklophobia discussion groups all over the Internet about the fear and loathing of these larger-than-life masked entertainers.
Maskaphobia, or fear of masks, is surprisingly common, especially among children. However, it is important to note that this fear is often a part of normal childhood development. Therefore, like most phobias, it is not diagnosed in children unless it persists for six months or longer.
This fear can manifest in many ways. Some people are afraid only of wax figures, others of dolls. Some are unable to visit theme parks or local attractions, which frequently use moving humanoid figures called "audio animatronics" in their displays.
The uncanny valley hypothesis was introduced by the Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori in 1970. The "valley" refers to a dip in a graph that charts a human's positive reaction in response to an image on one axis and a robot's human-likeness on another. People like to study other human faces, and they also can enjoy scrutinizing countenances that clearly are not human, such as a doll's or a cartoon figure's. But when an image falls in between -- close to human but clearly not -- it causes a feeling of revulsion.
Link: Science Daily]]>The Slender Man - History or Hoax P2
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100112-054522
Also, I facepalm in the general direction of these people who are pretty obviously attempting to proliferate this meme as real and established, but know full well it is neither. And as I've already plainly provided treatment of, there are no correlating "old" stories or myths, pre-2006, about Slender Man, anywhere in the world, under any name, unless you want to just start making mindlessly wide comparisons like "the ghost of Michael Jackson has been around for centuries, as evidenced by ghost sightings throughout history", because obviously, all ghost reports are about the ghost of Michael Jackson, even though he only recently died. Of course, it makes perfect sense...
While it really is a neat monster, and I can see why the guy won the contest, it is most definitely made up.
The Slender Man as an idea was made-up off the top of my head, although the concept is based on a number of things that scare me. The name I thought up on the fly when I wrote that first bit. The asset I used for a couple of the pictures was the creepy tall guy from Phantasm, which sadly I have not seen, and the others various guys in suits. All of the things that aren't the torso and legs, like the tentacles and Slender Man's face, were painted from scratch however.
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:03 pm
So yeah, this monster has a documented history alright, about seven whole months.
This cannot meet the criteria for inclusion. Gordonrox24 | Talk 05:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
* Delete. Web search brings up a few links, but nothing that could ever establish the notability needed for the article to stay. Frehley 05:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC) * Delete. I could be persuaded to change my vote if someone massively re-writes this and sources it. As it stands, it's incoherent. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC) * Delete as cannot identify what the subject is talking about. Would almost say it qualifies for speedy under A1, but it's probably too long for that. Quantpole (talk) 08:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC) * Delete Besides the above, the tone screams copyvio.Rhinoracer (talk) 09:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC) * Delete It smacks of copyvio, partly due to the quotation marks surrounding the text, as well as its sounding like the middle of some preexisting text. Google search for part of it showed matches at 4chan [1], [2] but the text no longer appears to be at 4chan, although it might be in some sort of zipped archive. Typos in the Wiki article impair easy search for earlier appearances on the web. Fails WP:verifiability and notability. Edison (talk) 20:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) * A far more coherent article, which clearly identifies the intended subject here, was speedily deleted at Slender Man. I would undelete it (and place it under the umbrella of this discussion) for Niteshift36, Quantpole, and anyone else who has been unable to fathom what the subject is here, were it not for the fact that my own searches for sources have led me to the conclusion that these two articles are an elaborate hoax. I'm finding it difficult to bring myself to undelete a hoax that I think should be deleted. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC) * The concept Slender Man exists, and what's the harm of keeping it? I wrote a simple summary on the subject, although I'm a beginner at writing. --Fat64 (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC) o Except that, of course, it doesn't exist at all. The fact that your best source so far is some silliness in a discussion forum should be setting off alarm bells, here. Uncle G (talk) 03:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC) * Delete per Uncle G. Thryduulf (talk) 22:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Seriously, people, I know it's all in good fun and maybe the thrill of knowing you helped create or establish a new myth or legend, but it's a terrible disservice to people who are trying to actually develop discernment and sorting wheat from chaff, which is already hard enough in the paranormal "field". You realize of course that everyone who responds to any of these, anywhere, for or against, are all basically promoting SomethingAwful, which is, I gotta say, extremely shrewd, and not that that's a bad thing, as I've been a SomethingAwful reader for years now and enjoy some of their craziness.
But Slender Man = fiction/hoax.]]>The Slender Man: History or Hoax?
http://paranormalcy.zanysite.com/index.php?entry=entry100109-080652
If you've not heard of this "entity" (as I hadn't), you may familiarize yourself with it here, at The Slender Man Chronicles. You might notice that this website is a repository for particularly bad fiction that dreams of one day being popular enough to wipe the Blair Witch script's ass (but it never will be).
There are various images, and Youtube video, because there is ALWAYS Youtube video of every brain-dead subject that anyone can postulate while high on paint thinner; but the point is that the Slender Man steals little kids, and yadda, yadda, as relayed here at Facepunch.com:
Slender Man safety procedures require this incident's physical photographic evidence to be disposed of by no later than 10/20.
There are woodcuts dated back to the 16th century in Germany featuring a tall, disfigured man with only white spheres where his eyes should be. They called him "Der Großmann"[Sic], the tall man. He was a fairy who lived in the Black Forest. Bad children who crept into the woods at night would be chased by the slender man, and he wouldn't leave them alone until he caught them, or the child told the parents what he or she had done. Even then, there is this chilling account from an old journal, dating around 1702: (Translated from German, some words may be innaccurate)
"My child, my Lars...He is gone. Taken, from his bed. The only thing that we found was a scrap of black clothing. It feels like cotton, but it is softer...thicker. Lars came into my bedroom yesterday, screaming at the top of his lungs that "The angel is outside!", I asked him what he was talking about, and he told me some nonsense fairy story about Der Großmann. He said he went into the groves by our village and found one of my cows dead, hanging from a tree. I thought nothing of it at first...But now, he is gone. We must find Lars, and my family must leave before we are killed. I am sorry my son...I should have listened. May God forgive me."
There is more evidence of the slender man, but this is one of the oldest translatable accounts.
This is, of course, complete and utter bullshit. I didn't even bother quoting much of the bits about the "2007 investigation" that found two impaled corpses and recovered their camera, etc.
Without even TRYING to look this up in books (which will not find you hide nor hair of this term), a simple Google search for "Slender Man" yields only ONE hit on a USEFUL site (ie, not one or two peoples' personal blogs) about mythological creatures, Mythical Creatures Guide, and one on TVTropes, of all things.
What is the Mythological Creatures Guide?
Welcome to the ultimate user-generated encyclopedia of mythical creatures and beasts. Know more about mythical sea serpents, magical mythical creatures and their mysteries. Learn more about mythical dragons and magical beings. Discover the power of folklores, mythical legends, cryptids and stories behind the beasts.
Even on this site, Slender Man is listed in the Fictional Creatures section.
What is TV Tropes?
What is this about? This wiki is a catalog of the tricks of the trade for writing fiction. We dip into the cauldron of story, whistle up a hearty spoonful and splosh it in front of you to devour to your heart's content.
Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations.
TVTropes is a detailed analysis of TV shows and other methods to help people write fiction. That is the site's entire purpose.
BOTH of these sites, the MOST relevant hits for the internet search, list Slender Man as a being dreamed up in a Photoshop contest on the SomethingAwful humor website. It has absolutely NO history before this, and is pure fiction.
In a paranormal chat, it was said that other names for The Slender Man were the German "Der Grobmann" and the Gaelic "An Fear Dubh". Now, this would be great if not for the fact that there is absolutely ZERO indication that this is correct. There is no corroborating or compelling evidence or even HINT that Slender Man is the "new name" for some old myth. There have been no correlations of any kind made by any actual historian or folklorist, or anyone else for that matter. This is complete confabulation by mischievous people wanting to invent their own legend.
"Der Grobmann" yielded a grand total of FIVE results in the entirety of Google, though to give credit where it is due, all the pages ARE in German. Essentially, Grob translates to gross, coarse, earthy or rough, so Der Grobmann is nothing more than "The Rough Man". The word "rough" is NOT a synonym of "slender", in any language, nor is it "black", or "the devil", as translated below for Gaelic. Nor is there anything tying this phrase to the newly created Slender Man fraud.
According to the history book, "Modernism and Empire", published in 2000 and written by Howard J. Booth and Nigel Rigby:
'An fear dubh' translates as 'the dark man', but 'an Fear Dubh' is the devil, and references to evil and the diabolic proliferate around him, ...
So we have either the "Dark (Black) Man" or "The Devil". While I'll give you that both could be made to sound ominous, there is also no correlation here with a particular entity besides either the Christian "Devil" himself or a normal human black person (or foreigner), as "fear dubh" is a common, generic, non-proper/non-name phrase, like saying "black guy".
What exactly is "Modernism and Empire" about?
This is the first book to explore the fascinating relationship between literary Modernism and Empire. The book seeks to begin the task of exploring, in a sustained way, the relations between the artistic movement and colonialism. The essays range over subjects and figures such as Ireland, Africa, Joyce, Pound, Townsend Warner, Lawrence and Forster, Kipling, Woolf, and Jean Rhys.
So this should pretty much annihilate any fanciful musings that this Slender Man concoction has any sort of historical validity, paranormal or otherwise, as it isn't even an old legend by a different name - it's just another monster created by somebody with a good imagination.]]>
;)
;)
;)
;)
There's a good example, namely toys, of what I feel is at work, at least partially, with coulrophobia (the fear of clowns), as well as other non-human figures; the lack of visible emotions, and emulation of but not apparent member of the human race. The little known fear, automatonophobia, is the fear of any lifelike figures, usually humanoid, which are not human (ie. artificial; dolls, puppets, CGI characters). This is also part of another less clinical term, the Uncanny Valley, which also refers to the disquieting feeling people get when viewing human-like figures which are artificial and not actually human.