Done... with filming...:P

So, last night was one of the longest nights ever. I was in Wichita filming the WPRS until 4 am this morning, and didn't get back to St. Joe until about 6:30. I watched the sun set and the sun rise with no shut-eye inbetween. Tiredness aside, last night was VERY successful. I got some really awesome material and interviews, and the night shot on the camera worked great. The only thing was the camera battery decided to be a pain in my rear, but I was able to work it out. Perhaps I can attribute the unexplained and sudden battery drain to paranormal activity?

So, now the real work begins. This whole week is going to consist of me going over about four hours of footage, in an attempt to piece together something that isn't completely heinous. That's probably going to have to wait until tomorrow. I'll load the footage onto my computer, but other than that, my eyes can't stand to stare a computer screen for more that about ten minutes. And that's pushing it.

So, hopefully I've something tangible to show in class on Thursday. That's the game plan anyways.

Until then...

Video

So, I've rewritten my script, at least up until the WPRS interviews. I've also completed my intro, and plan on having most of the video done by the end of the night. I haven't reposted my script to the Google Doc yet, but hopefully I'll get that done. The video is really my priority right now.

Script is up...

Well, after several daunting minutes of trying to paste my script from Word to Google Docs, I finally managed to paste it over without completely mauling the format of the Google Doc. Only a few other scripts are up so far, and mine looks very short in compairison! I suppose my biggest difference is that I'm relying greatly on the footage I'll be (hopefully) getting on the 24th of April. I emailed Sherrie last night to double-check our meeting at Cowtown. I haven't heard from her yet, but I'll give it a few more days before I start to worry!

Also, the bulk of my film will be B-roll and interview material from the WPRS. I can't wait until the 24th! I've generated a list of questions that I think will provide some really interesting answers (at least I think so!). Anyways, just a brief update, hopefully I'll be hearing from Sherrie in the next day or so!

Even better news!

I've gotten three messages sent to my YouTube inbox about the video I posted. Two from believers, and one from a skeptic. All three seem to have very different and interesting opinions, and one has posted a response, while the other two said they would. This is so exciting! I can't wait to hear what they all have to say on the topic!

Good news!

So, one of the people I pestered with my video yesterday posted a response! I'm really excited about that, and hopefully I get more and more over the next few weeks. My video got around 70 views yesterday after just one day of posting, and is almost up to 100! I'm pretty fired up about that, since it's pretty much a video about nothing except me talking really fast. So, if anyone else wants to respond, you'd be my favorite person of the day!!!

Also, based on what Wesch was saying today in class, an answer I'd really like to get from people would be:

"If there was no question as to the existence of ghosts, what would that mean to you? Since an afterlife WOULD be inevitable would this change the way you think about your life and live it?"

Video-Plea

Okay, I've got my video-plea up and running. Feel free to respond to it yourselves (I'm sure our class has very interesting and varying opinions!) or coerce your friends into responding!

I was also thinking about dipping into Tom's project and getting on to Chatroullette and asking people what their opinions and beliefs are about the paranormal. It could either be awesome or awful, but I won't know until I try! What do you guys think about that idea?

Anyways, here's my video. Ugh, I hate seeing myself on camera!!!

So, what the heck is a ghost box?

I mentioned in a class a while ago about the "ghost box" one of the guys used while we were investigating. I found a link that seems to explain it fairly well. Obviously, it's not a scholarly website, considering this a pseudoscience. However, it does mention the legend of Thomas Edison that the guy using the ghost box did mention to me.

Maybe I should try to make one?

http://www.angelsghosts.com/ghost_box

Lit Review

Okay, so I’ve been slacking when it comes to updating my progress on my blog, and in doing so, have neglected to do/post my review of the literature. To me, this was the most daunting part of this entire project. There is so much out there to sort through, and it seems like most of what I’ve been finding is inapplicable. I have found several pieces that discuss the nature of paranormal beliefs, and this is definitely useful, but I’m more interested in the actual beliefs out there. What do people on the Internet believe? How are they using the Internet to further and explore those beliefs and assumptions? What is it about the paranormal that people find so interesting.

One article I found, cited a study that asked people to agree or disagree with certain statements taken either from ER or The X-Files (Whittle). The results indicated that it is possible for people to learn factual data from entertainment television. However, they also assumed truth in statements that were generated by the writers of The X-Files. Based on his research, Christopher Whittle constructed two diagrams explaining how paranormal beliefs come to be. The first shows “…the interrelationship between the natural environment, human culture, and the individual.” Whittle has also developed a linear model describing how paranormal beliefs come to be at an individual level.

I find both of these graphic models to be very descriptive and useful when it comes to understanding the how and why of the paranormal beliefs we have throughout society. One main point of Whittle's is the “Need for control, order, and meaning.” If an event has no immediate logical explanation, we must assign it one. As a society, we are unsatisfied with not knowing the answers. If no one can give us an answer, we create one to satisfy our needs.

Another aspect I'm interested in is how as the technology we use to communicate changes, the way “spirits” seem to communicate changes to use this technology as well. After its invention, the telegraph (an electromagnetic device) was soon being used by spirits to communicate with the living. The birth of the camera led to ghost photographs, cleverly created by using a double exposure. Ghost trains would roar past unsuspecting witnesses. Something I found to be interesting was that there were ghost-celebrities of sorts back in the nineteenth century. Maggie and Kate Fox used a system of tapping to "communicate" with spirits in their home. Their claims spurred a huge paranormal frenzy throughout the United States, and they accumulated a large number of spiritual followers (http://history1800s.about.com/od/entertainmentsport/ss/supernatural-19th-century_3.htm).

However, before all of that technology, when there was much less technology, people communicated with spirits in other manners. Two such ways are divining or dowsing rods and pendulums. Divining rods may have originated in Germany around the 16th century, and early on were considered to be sacrilegious and occult. Their intended purpose was to search for ground water or buried minerals or metals. Pendulums were also used in this way. Their accuracy has obviously been disputed, but people still use them today as a means to ask yes or no questions in hope of other-worldly answers.

Another device many people are somewhat familiar with is the Ouija board. Descriptions of the something resembling a Ouija board date back as far as 1500 B.C. in ancient China. I found the Google Timeline (http://www.google.com/search?q=history+of+ouija+board&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=FRKXS-yBI9OplAeez7GdDQ&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CDkQ5wIwCg) to be very interesting. However, other website and sources say the Ouija Board arose in the 1800's as a parlor game.

The biggest problem with all of these methods is they are prone to human error. Which is probably why modern day ghost hunters don't give them much thought. However, are the digital recorders, EMF detectors, infrared cameras, etc. that much more credible? Isn't the technology we use, no matter how advanced or primitive, only as good as the person using it? So why do we give so much credibility to these newer methods? With video and audio files, people feel as though they have tangible evidence. But with increasing technology comes increasing methods of manipulating technology. Despite it's questionable credibility, Part of this change is due to how the way we communicate with living people has changed. It only makes sense that we would change the way we communicate with dead people.

It's my goal to explore these changes in the way paranormal phenomenon have been investigated. In order to do this, I plan to continue to communicate with and shadow the Wichita Paranormal Research Society, figure out why they use the equipment they use, what motivates their explorations, how they fund them, etc. I have also been considering posting a video to ask people to contribute their thoughts, opinions, experiences, etc. concerning the supernatural and the methods used to investigate it. Now, after Danielle has had such success with this technique, I hope to get a video posted in the next day or so to see if I get any responses. I'll also continue to read the forums and view the videos and websites all over YouTube and the web in order to better understand the community that is so fascinated with supernatural culture. I also hope to learn more from the potential response I get from my proposed video plea.

I know my review of the literature isn't very literary; I'm finding most of my information from personal websites and forums. I hope that I can eventually stumble across some more scholarly information, but it seems that most opinions generated about the paranormal stem from mass media and folklore. Obviously I have a lot more room for additional research, so if someone is able to point me in any sort of direction, it would be greatly appreciated. I'll try to post more to blog about the things I stumble across, and hopefully I'll be able to add more to my "research" as time goes on.

So, my goal for the next few weeks is:

*Create a vlog (thanks, Danielle, for the inspiration!) in an attempt to get people to share their thoughts and ideas about the way supernatural phenomena are investigated. I want to know what "big" questions they have, and why they have them.

*Over spring break, I'd like to start working on a script of sorts, in order to lay out what I want my video to look like.

*I am without internet throughout the bulk of spring break, so when I return from that I hope to go through the video responses I'll hopefully be getting (feel free to respond yourselves, our class is fairly diverse and surely has various opinions!) and plan on sharing any new information I've gathered.

*Once I get back from spring break, I want to upload the video I do have from my first trip and sort through it to find what is usable, and what audio might be usable with other video I hope to gather from youtube. Hopefully I'll have enough to start working on at least the beginning of my video, and the history of paranormal research (I'd like to include the methods used before the advent of today's technology).

*While working on what video I can, I plan on continue gathering material and information from the web. Maybe connect with some more people who have dedicated a large portion of their lives to exploring the unexplored.

*On April 24th, I'll be going out with the WPRS again, hopefully to gather the final B-roll and information I need to pull my video together.

*After that, it's edit edit edit in a way that will hopefully capture what I feel my "big" idea is in the best way.

Update!

Sorry for not posting last night! I wasn't feeling well and had a test to study for! Anyways, not a lot has changed with my project. I emailed Sherrie (my main contact with WPRS), and the soonest I could meet with them again is April 24th. I know we're supposed to have our field work done by this time, but I figured since I've already met with them once, and this isn't too late, it'd be fine. They have a big event going on in Cowtown in Wichita, so it sounds pretty cool. I'm going to be really cramming some of my editing in, but I'm not too worried about it; it won't be the first time I've been crunched for time on a video project!

Something else that I thought was cool, was when Sherrie emailed me, she mentioned that they only had two EVP hits at the location we were at, and both times were when I was with her. Maybe I'm a ghost magnet?!?! LOL, just kidding. I should start my own ghosty show. It'd be way better than SyFy.

One last thing that's really awesome, is once school is out :( they are going to an old theatre back where I grew up! I'm really excited about it, b/c it's a place I've been many times, and have heard the rumors about. I'm going to try to twist their arms into letting me go with them "off the record." That would just be too cool!

Roughly 25 Pieces of Literature

1. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/field_guide_to_critical_thinking

2. http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/0262621924chap1.pdf

3. http://www.andreknoerig.de/portfolio/03/bin/resources/manovich-langofnewmedia.pdf

4. http://imoberg.com/files/World_of_Digital_Storytelling_The_Ohler_J._.pdf

5. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/oral_tradition/v018/18.1irwin.pdf

6. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pLaMDRZwYMYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=ghost+stories&ots=Tox_9QOmd8&sig=9F47pVk13chKVwvRpZ_EJ_Em9Zk#v=onepage&q=&f=false

7. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=QoBKzWjw2vYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=supernatural&ots=942oTcRl7d&sig=gBfbUOhonK_Ms10nsD1zHKGzKqg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

8. http://www.isu.edu/~holmrich/senior_symposium/seniors2007.pdf#page=7

9. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hSmW_I8nonkC&oi=fnd&pg=PP6&dq=paranormal+investigation&ots=TeE9eaJ28A&sig=n1ckwsAF5bud1CLyuvd5oWoaUTI#v=onepage&q=&f=false

10. http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=L1jfLmKDXQRKp0LF1n90bTZv0YzYQtkDj6FN1J6vx64T21nt7BwW!61581967!-797993493?docId=5000376449

11. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kWFosl5j3fIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=digital+storytelling&ots=AxhA8kuHvb&sig=uGFU2Kb7Xpbze6dwfMCmCyrdKMw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

12. http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/seminars/2003/digitalstorydec/paul-nora.pdf

13. http://www.inms.umn.edu/elements/index.php (WEBSITE)

14. http://eric.ed.gov:80/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2a/19/38.pdf

15. http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/TPAMI.2003.1233909

16. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=LbaHaN4BhEQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=ghosts&ots=P9d4MDUSfx&sig=ijhb77b9OfriwWKVjkFWIuGuqhI#v=onepage&q=ghosts&f=false

17. http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/jbem41&div=32&id=&page=

18. http://pgabor.com/p/s/2004fall/soc4_grq.pdf

19. http://www.csicop.org/SI/show/development_of_beliefs_in_paranormal_and_supernatural_phenomena/

20. http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/cultural_indicators_of_the_paranormal/

21. http://m0134.fmg.uva.nl/psi/PAPROCS/2007procs.pdf#page=223

22. http://www.ruc.dk/cbit/Arrangementer/Afholdte/hill/?print=1

23. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=3z9EpgisKOgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA87&dq=paranormal+in+the+media&ots=3SycnU3LPr&sig=Pj2gLwG6pk-9PJbhxBHtB4ctj-k#v=onepage&q=paranormal%20in%20the%20media&f=false

24. http://library.wcsu.edu/dspace/bitstream/0/457/1/vallee.pdf

25. http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_17_4_mousseau.pdf

Project Status

I've been in contact with the Wichita Paranormal Research Society, and am planning on meeting them in Augusta, KS saturday the 20th of February. They will be investigating the Kansas Museum of Military History. I'm pretty excited; things are moving right along!

Summary #3 - "A Field Guide to Critical Thinking" James Lett

I'm not sure how "scholarly" this piece of literature is, but I found it to be very interesting and applicable to my topic. In this article, which was published in the Skeptical Inquirer in 1990, James Lett lists and elaborates on the steps necessary to thinking critically. For this, he uses the acronym FiLCHeRS.

The first step is that a claim must be Falsifiable. By this, he means that it must be possible that evidence exists that could prove a claim to be false. He indicates that if no evidence exists that could possibly disprove a claim, then the evidence that does exists supporting its validity is unimportant.

The second rule is Logic. If a claim is illogical (All dogs have fleas; Xavier has fleas; therefore Xavier is a dog), then it is not valid or sound. On the contrary, a claim can be valid but unsound: All dogs have fleas; Xavier is a dog; therefore Xavier has fleas.

The third guideline is Comprehensiveness. This is a simple rule, in that one must not only consider evidence that is supportive of a claim and discard evidence that may stand to disprove it. This would be unfair and invalid.

Fourth is Honesty. By this, Lett means not deluding one's self if evidence does not support their particular opinion. If evidence points to a claim being true, then it must be believed as such. If evidence points to a claim being false, then it must be believed as such.

Fifth is Replicability. This rule is simple, in that the results of a hypothesis must be replicable, meaning they much occur more than once. If this is not the case, then the results point to the event in question as being due to coincidence.

Finally, is Sufficiency. For this, Lett offers three sub-guidelines:

1. the burden of proof for any claim rests on the claimant,

-This means that just because a claim cannot be disproved does not me that it has been proved (UFOs)

2. extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and

-If you make an extraordinary claim, you must have equally extraordinary evidence. Lett uses the example: "If I claim that it rained for ten minutes on my way to work last Tuesday, you would be justified in accepting that claim as true on the basis of my report. But if I claim that I was abducted by extraterrestrial aliens who whisked me to the far side of the moon and performed bizarre medical experiments on me, you would be justified in demanding more substantial evidence. "

3. evidence based upon authority and/or testimony is always inadequate for any paranormal claim

-this simply means that people can lie. Even experts.

Summary #2 - "Theory and Practice in New Media Studies" Jay David Bolter

The second piece of literature I found was a paper by Jay David Bolter titled "Theory and Practice in New Media Studies." I found this paper to very academic in nature, and, at times, difficult to follow. However, I was able to gather the following:

In his paper, Bolter discusses in great detail the different theoretical perspectives applied when it comes to studying New Media. First, he discusses the formal theories, particularly those of Walter Ong and Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan claimed that media were "extensions of man," and Ong suggested that "writing restructures conciousness." However, these two were regarded with "suspicion." He goes on to mention the poststructuralists. Bolter states that their goal was "...to examine the formal limits of language and writing, often through close reading of the text or through a careful analysis of the practice of reading." In the 1990's hypertext critics often applied the poststructuralist perspective.

The second form of theory Bolter discusses is the Ideological Critique. These theories are often applied to "magazines, newspapers, radio, film, and television..." and "...seek to expose and explore the ideological frameworks that control media..." They believe that mass media is controlled by those most in control of the economy, and it is their job to expose that control to the public.

He also goes on to discuss the teaching of these theories as well as their practice in American Universities. Finally, he discusses the correlation between New Media and Print.

Summary #1 - "The Language of New Media" Lev Manovich

The first piece of literature I found was "The Language of New Media" by Lev Manovich. At a length of nearly 300 pages, I only read selections I felt were probably the most relevant. I read the first section, "What is New Media?" This included descriptions as to the principles of new media, and what new media is not. The five principles Manovich lists are:

1. Numerical Representation - by this, he means that New Media can be described numerically, or by using a mathematical function. Also, New Media is subject to algorithmic manipulation. He uses the examples of removing "noise" from a photo, change the contrast, etc. "In short, media becomes programable."

2. Modularity - Manovich also calls this the "fractal structure of new media." By this, he means that new media is comprised of more discrete samples, like pixels or characters or scripts. These smaller pieces are independent but are brought together to form larger-scale objects.

3. Automation - According to Manovich, the previous two principles (numerics and modularity) all for some automation on new media. "The human can be removed from the creative process, at least in part." An example of this would be filters in Photoshop, or templates in Word.

4. Variability - This means that new media is unfixed. It can be published in various formats and templates, and those can in turn be independently manipulated. In other words, it is "mutable" or "liquid."

5. Transcoding - Manovich says that new media now consists of two layers, the "computer" layer and the "cultural" layer. Examples of the computer layer would be: sorting and matching, function and variable, etc. The cultural layer could consist of: story and plot, comedy and tragedy. The computer layer is the functional layer, whereas the culture layer is more of the meaning behind the function from a human perspective.

Big Idea

Okay, so I think I've got this figured out. At least for now. I think I'm going to take a look at the digital footprints of the paranormal. Now, I'm not saying I believe in it, but it does interest me. And, according to many people, preternatural beings have left many digital footprints of their own. Youtube is full of videos claiming to have captured definite proof, there are countless television shows about the subject, and tons of websites. Perhaps, I could compile these and see if I can recreate any of them. Also, maybe I could visit a few places that are "haunted," get the story, doing some filming, etc. There is an excellent book by Lisa Hefner Heitz about many local legends all around Kansas (yes, I've actually read it!). She traveled the state and collected stories from all over. I especially appreciated her objectivity.

Let me know how you think this sounds!

Here are some videos:

This one is a spoof. Pretty funny. :D

Okay, so I'm not sure what to pursue. I just wasn't finding the things I thought I would for my original idea. Ugh, any suggestions?

Here's what I'm doing (at least for now):

Okay, so I dropped the animal idea. A good one, but not for me (at least not now). Too warm and fuzzy for my taste. Which is why I decided to go with death. Yeah, yeah, it seems kind of morbid ('cause it is), but our world (Youtube world included) is SO saturated with death. Music, movies, serial killer followings, people can't get enough of it. Perhaps because media has desensitized us. Or maybe it's just human nature to be curious about things we can't fully comprehend. Well, Youtube and the Internet are full of death-junk. Music videos, movie clips, documentaries, tributes, suicide "notes", spoofs, the list goes on. My goal is to compile and look at this fascination and the hours of video and miles of blogs and forums dedicated to the enigma that is death and dying. It's been around forever, it's just the way people learn and express their thoughts and feelings about it that is changing. I'm interested and excited to see where this goes. Input appreciated :)

Well, here is what I was able to come up with. Unfortunately, my copy of Sony Vegas did not arrive in time for me to use it on this video. However, iMovie did a sufficient job for all intents and purposes.