Review of Searching for Sasquatch: Crackpots, Eggheads, and Cryptozoology, By Brian Regal. British Journal of the History of Science 45 (2012): 699-700. (original) (raw)
AI-generated Abstract
This review of Brian Regal's "Searching for Sasquatch: Crackpots, Eggheads, and Cryptozoology" critically examines the intersection of academic rigor and cryptozoology, focusing on the life and work of Grover Krantz, a figure striving to validate the study of anomalous primates. The text illustrates the internal struggles within the cryptozoology community and highlights the lack of substantial scientific evidence backing claims of creatures like Bigfoot, ultimately portraying the field as a cautionary tale regarding the challenges of legitimizing pseudoscientific pursuits.
Related papers
Bigfoot is dead! Long live Bigfoot!
2020
'Bigfoot is dead! Long live Bigfoot!' is an experimental critical essay and manifesto, exploring alternative ways to address cryptozoology, instead of an empirical scientific definite approach. It is not a seek for Bigfoot. It is not a debunking piece. It is not a sceptic review. It focuses on the act of failure around hunting Bigfoot, from failing to be named, to failing to be seen on screen, to failing finding home, to Bigfoot hunter failing to capture Bigfoot. I identified two kinds of Bigfoot - the unhuntable and huntable. My piece is an investigation to the queerness of Bigfoot culture, and ultimately suggesting the Poor Image (Steyerl) is a perfect battleground where the unhuntable Bigfoot, the huntable Bigfoot, hunters, believers and sceptics can roam free altogether.
2019
Show me a Sasquatch body. (Michael Shermer, 2009, p. 35) Anthropology and anatomy professor Jeff Meldrum gave a lecture at the 2016 PA/SSE conference entitled “Sasquatch and Other Wildmen: The Search for Relict Hominoids” (Meldrum, 2016). As one of the few established academics interested in cryptozoological topics, he spoke about footprints of different provenance, their evaluation and anatomical classification. He mentioned the reactions of his colleagues to this field of research and the placement of his books in bookstores for economic reasons—booksellers put them on the esoteric shelves, where sales are expected to be higher for such topics. With reference to the skeptic Michael Shermer, he says the attitude of his colleagues toward the subject area of cryptozoology can be characterized by the sentence “The science starts once you have a body.”This aptly shows the problematic situation in which cryptozoology finds itself. The first sentence of the article “Cryptozoology” in the...
Sasquatch & Other Wildmen : The Search for Relict Hominoids
2016
Editor’s Note: This presentation was delivered on the occasion of the bestowing of the 2016 Tim Dinsdale Award at the Meeting of the Society for Scientific Exploration, Boulder, Colorado, on June 20, 2016. The Society has presented the Dinsdale Award every two years since 1992, for significant contributions to the expansion of human understanding through the study of unexplained phenomena. Winners have led their fields in uncovering noteworthy anomalies. The Awards Committee has recognized Dr. Meldrum’s significant contribution to our understanding of the possible presence of an as-yet unrecognized primate in our midst. In the course of more than two decades, while recognizing the risk to his professional reputation, he has created a corpus of credible work by conscientiously applying his knowledge of primate evolutionary anatomy and behavior to this most difficult and controversial subject.
Between the Species: An Online Journal for the Study of Philosophy and Animals, 2007
The world is filled with monsters. The Yeti, Sasquatch, Mono Grande, Big Foot. It is filled, at least, with accounts of such monsters; for although we have witnesses and photographs and documented accounts, few believe that such creatures are more than constructs of the imagination. This strong denial is interesting from a sociological perspective, but it also says much about our concepts of human and animal as well. If such creatures exist or are even imagined to exist, the boundary between the human and the animal is eroded. It is not important-at least not for the particular task of this investigation-whether or not they do exist. Like most, I imagine that there are better explanations for the reported sightings than maintaining the existence of reclusive monsters. I, too, am a slave to the scientific paradigm of the world. But I see no reason not to allow for the possibility of such creatures. Regardless, this is not the crucial matter, for it is merely our experience of the possibility of such Others that I want to investigate. How do we make sense of our given humanity in a world where such creatures might exist? How do we know what is human and what is animal if we admit the possibility of a creature described as neither or as both? How might the comfortable, constructed moral boundaries of our community be called into question? And what do the stories of encounters-stories that are reported as truth-say
The "Truth" about the Bigfoot Legend
Western Folklore, 1990
The ambiguity inherent in belief legends makes it all but impossible for the folklorist to presume to know the "truth" about Bigfoot. Such assertions are likely to be at the root subjective, and they draw folklorists into the legend debate, a process they would do better to observe than to participate in. Observations of the debate process within culture can reveal a great deal about the Bigfoot legend. One can better understand how emergent beliefs become legend in a contemporary context and how traditional beliefs withstand challenges even in a dynamic, information-filled setting. The debate within culture is occurring on two levels: in the published writings of Bigfoot researchers and in the memorates and conjectures of ordinary people who are especially interested in Bigfoot. The second part of this paper briefly describes the debate about Bigfoot's nature as reflected in the popular press. The third part examines the extent to which the published debate has influenced the thinking of active bearers of the legend in Central Ohio and the memorates they tell. In his article "Humanoids and Anomalous Lights: Taxonomic and Epistemological Problems," David Hufford argues that it is possible that some reports of Bigfoot may not be legend at all; rather, some might be reports based on what he terms an "objectively real referent" that sometimes becomes embedded in a traditional narrative and sometimes not. Hufford asserts that "large hair-covered bipeds" reported in different parts of the world under a variety of names might actually exist. Accounts of Bigfoot's size and appearance are quite similar across the United States and Canada, according to Hufford. My thanks to Bill Ellis for sharing his material on Bigfoot with me.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.