I never thought I'd see the day when "paranormal" and "preservation" were stuck next to one another, but alas, the day has come. Searching for articles to use for our next summary packet in Museum Administration, I came across this unfortunate piece of news.
http://blog.preservationnation.org/2012/10/31/paranormal-preservation-looking-for-ghosts-at-historic-sites/#.UJ2xXYb4Igp
It's difficult to fathom any kind of situation where a historic site would want a "paranormal investigation" team to come into their site, especially when it is put on TV. Sure, there is publicity of sorts that comes with the televised visit, but is have so-called ghost hunters visiting a historic site really the kind of reputation a site director would want? It's already difficult enough for public historians to achieve legitimacy without bringing pseudo-science into the mix.
In any case, it is definitely an article worth taking a look, if not just for the entertainment.
I take it you don't believe in ghosts. I think it would be interesting to see why ghost hunters would be called in to a historic site. Personal I'd want to visit them to see what the story is and/or how this came about. People visit Gettysburg to go on ghost tours, it's fun and interesting. It can be good publicity but it can turn against the site if they present it wrong, as we have learned with other cases.
ReplyDeleteDon't call it "pseudo-science" when the investigators use the correct tools and are thorough with their investigation. I've seen cases where there have been other factors that made people think they have something supernatural in their home or site and a team of investigators proved it.
I think belief in ghosts is a very personal thing. Museums that want to publicize "hauntings" are within their right to do it -- like you said, it gets people through the doors. Although the entertainment factor is fun for families, I do think it takes away from the historical significance of the site.
ReplyDeleteExample. When my family and I visited Gettysburg, we took a ghost tour. The guy that led the tour was really creepy, and he played some disembodied voices that he had recorded, which was also creepy. I admit, it was entertaining, and we had a good time. However, I think I got more out of visiting the site itself than the ghost tour.
I know ghost investigators use science to prove or disprove hauntings, but I think in the public historians' realm, it's better to leave the ghosts alone.