Let the evidence shine!

by SIMON FORSYTH

Does light prevent fraud in séances? Why The Psychic Times will continue to publish reports of evidential physical phenomena séances from credible sources - even if they were held entirely in the dark.

     THERE HAS been some controversy within the Spiritualist Movement recently concerning the public demonstration of physical mediumship. Psychic News editor Tony Ortzen announced that he would not be publishing reports of materialisation séances held in the dark - or indeed - "séances of any kind of physical mediumship at which no form of illumination is present". This, understandably, has divided Spiritualists.

As can be seen in this first issue of The Psychic Times, there are two reports of physical mediumship demonstrations. One with illumination present during part of the sitting and one with non at all. Let me explain why this newspaper will publish accounts of physical mediumship demonstrations without the utilisation of lighting during the séance.

One of Tony's main concerns regarding physical mediumship is the opportunity for fraud in darkened conditions. All reasonable spiritualists will acknowledge that this is a legitimate worry. However, does the introduction of light into the proceedings necessarily prevent fraud from taking place? My contention is that it certainly does not. Magicians are able to perform the most astounding feats of illusion and deception with the simplest of props - often in broad daylight and by no other means than by using the dexterity of their hands.

To a determined and talented person, the introduction of a red light into a séance room is but a very slight inconvenience to producing convincing - but fraudulent - psychic phenomena. So, let's be perfectly clear about this: Light in the séance room is certainly no barrier to the possibility of fraudulent activities. It is not some 'magical' substance that instantly renders fraudulent phenomena redundant. To think otherwise plays right into the hands of the sceptics and does Spiritualism no favours whatsoever. Therefore, I cannot see the logic in firmly rejecting reports of darkened séances on the grounds of possible fraud, while accepting reports of séances with illumination. Fraud can be produced in either conditions.

Tony also asked "why cannot a measure of red light be introduced into the séance room as happened in the past?" But both David Thompson and Stewart Alexander have conducted séances where red light has been introduced. Sitters present have testified to clearly seeing what appeared to be ectoplasm. For example, Gabriella von Glasgow recounts this experience during a séance with Stewart Alexander:

"I placed my hand, with palm uppermost, on the glass tabletop which was illuminated from beneath by a red light. Soon a black mass appeared at the edge of the table, out of which fingers and then a hand slowly formed. A warm, soft and pleasant hand of a man grasped my hand... The hand then dissolved and again became a black mass."

In this issue of The Psychic Times, Montague Keen confirms that during his séance with David Thompson a red light was switched on and, "we could all see the medium draped with a white cloth-like substance." So, the fact that red light has been present at both medium's séances is indisputable. While they were not materialisation séances, the fact remains that observation of the phenomena was possible in lighted conditions - a criteria Tony was looking for. If the argument is that it should be present during every séance, then I fear such a request is misplaced. Every séance is an experiment. Nothing can be guaranteed when it comes to the mechanics of physical mediumship. What physical phenomena occur in the séance room is at the discretion of the spirit guides. It is they who call the tune; we who merely listen. And that, surely, is how it should be.

If they do not introduce a red light into a particular séance, then surely it is for a good reason. Or do we consider that we know better than they do? Whatever their motivations, if we start insisting that certain things transpire - such as the introduction of red light - then we are not only undermining the authority of the spirit guides but we are also imposing our own conditions upon the proceedings. This cannot be right. For they, not us, are in charge of the séance. They, not us, are the architects of the physical wonders we are fortunate to witness. To stipulate to the spirit guides that they must work under lighted conditions - conditions which are already difficult and problematic - in order to satisfy our concept of a 'legitimate' séance, is more akin to a demand from a sceptic than a Spiritualist. For it displays little sympathy for the complexities and difficulties associated with physical mediumship. Neither does it show much appreciation for the efforts of the spirit guides themselves; the very people who work so hard to make the phenomena occur in the first place.

The fact of whether a séance is held in the dark or not should have no bearing on the perceived credibility of the evidence forthcoming. In my view, to reject reports of séances based solely on the fact that they were held in the dark misses the crux of the matter. Surely, the aggregate of all the evidence provided during the sitting - not merely the physical phenomena - should be the only and true criterion as to the séance's authenticity or not? If the audible evidence given is impressive, do we still dismiss the séance as 'suspect' just because there was no light present? Do we also ignore the precautions against fraud that are undertaken? In his report, Montague Keen explains that the controls employed upon David Thompson "were superior even to those employed by Schrenck-Notzing on Eva C" and "on the physical medium Jack Webber, where less sophisticated tying methods and materials were used". So, do we now call into question the honesty of these two mediums as well?

In a letter to Psychic News in support of Tony's views, George Cranley - publicity officer of the Noah's Ark Society - opined:

"There is little point in claiming that mediums were bound and gagged as spirit guides have frequently demonstrated their ability to free their mediums in seconds and, if necessary, to tie them often with stronger binding than before."

Strange then, that Mr Cranley has spent the past few years officiating over Noah's Ark séances where both their medium's were 'claimed' to have been tied to their chairs! But even more curious is Mr Cranley's assertion that:

"The whole point of materialisation is that the spirit entities should be seen and for that some form of illumination is essential".

Oh really? Then why didn't Mr Cranley explain why he has presided over a society which has held innumerable séances in which materialised spirit forms were alleged to have roamed around the room with not a speck of light present whatsoever?

The question of introducing infrared cameras into the séance room has also been raised. It is an old chestnut, and has been discussed many times before. Here, I have to agree with Tony to some extent. If the spirit guides have expressed their willingness to introduce technology such as video recording equipment into the séance room - as they have done within one particular circle in the past - then I believe such an opportunity should be grasped with both hands. It is extremely disappointing that such an exciting prospect has never developed.

Of course, materialisation phenomena reaches its most evidentially productive zenith when it is viewed in red light. No one would argue with that. But there are various stages of development required before the mediumship is strong enough to withstand such conditions. The guides need time to perfect and mature the mediumship. Until such time, materialisation phenomena may only be achievable in the dark. Patience, surely, is therefore required. But in an age of the instant gratification culture, the want it NOW! philosophy is king. That may work for burgers and fries, but it certainly doesn't work for physical mediumship!

We may want materialisation séances in the light, but unless we accept the limitations of physical mediumship and respect whatever phenomena is produced, then we can never fully appreciate this wonderful form of mediumship. However, many people within the Spiritualist Movement do understand and cherish it. And that is why The Psychic Times will continue to publish reports of evidential physical phenomena séances from credible sources - even if they were held entirely in the dark.

Light or no light, let the evidence shine!