<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Great read for adolescents... not so good for adults...
Review: A childhood friend bought this book for me purely out of nostalgia and I grudgingly read it over the course of a weekend.
As a kid, I really enjoyed reading monster and UFO books. Tales of Bigfoot and Yeti fascinated me. As I got older these sorts of books fell out of style with me, mainly because by the time I entered High School I had gained a fairly good grasp on the scientific process and skepticism.
Looking back I realize that my youthful fascination with this type of literature had more to do with an over all fascination with Science Fiction and Fantasy. I consider these books to be ?reality fantasy? ? completely unverifiable, yet spooky stories best to be read for the fun of it and not to be taken seriously.
The book puts forth the tired Tupla theory, which is that strange creatures and UFOs are not physical but rather are thought projections. As the book tells it, there is a realm of immaterial sprits all around us who somehow feed off our emotions by visual manifesting themselves as Aliens, Werewolves and Wild Men. It?s very contrived to say the least and ultimately causes the book to fail. Not once throughout the book does the author mention mental illness, hallucinogenic drugs or other more down to earth causes for some of the phenomena he recounts, although he does mention that some eye witnesses may have been influenced by works of fiction and over obsessive imaginations. Still, the author cannot escape painting himself into a corner of discredit due to a simple lack of believability.
What I enjoyed most about this book were the exact things I enjoyed about other Fortean style literature as a child: the chilling second hand accounts of strange sightings and events. Sadly, this book is only partly about historical accounts of Wild Men and Unexplained Big Cats. The majority of the book is an amateurish attempt at recounting drunken (and possibly drug induced) misadventures of a trio of English misfits.
At times, the book is very bloated as the author meanders off subject to relate a nightmare or other experience he or someone he knew had. Overall, the book could probably be cut to half the size and made infinitely more readable. I?ve personally read better self published works before and I?m led to wonder if the editor was asleep at the wheel on this one, or perhaps thought the readership wouldn?t be expecting too much anyway.
I give the book two stars instead of one because I think that young readers ? perhaps middle school age ? would enjoy it. Over all, the book isn?t too poorly written, although the author?s habit of starting each chapter off with a lyric from a Ramones song grew old quickly and flags him as having poor style.
Rating: 
Summary: Fear and Loathing in Loch Ness
Review: Armed with alcohol and attitude, three intrepid monster-hunters in a borrowed camper go in search of various things that go bump and grrr in the night. Along the way, these gonzo ghoulbusters do much drinking, meet some ver-r-ry interesting characters and conjure up some bad mojo craziness. Their Three Stooges antics aside, this book does offer much food for thought for those with an interest in all things otherworldly. It seems the British are best at exploring these murky waters, and Redfern deserves to be placed among the best of them, whose ranks include Colin Wilson, Hilary Evans, and Jenny Randles.
Rating: 
Summary: An entertaining read!
Review: I enjoyed this book. It was different. I have a whole library of books on Fortean topics, and no, this book probably isn't one destined for classic-dom. But it doesn't pretend to be. I got a kick out of the fact that three open-minded men traveled around England in search of monsters and then one of them wrote a book about it. Why can't I meet a man like that? All the men I meet are only into sports or worse, Republicans, and dull, dull, DULL! But I digress..... these guys had some intriguing and some fairly scary experiences, and my only problem with the book was that their trip wasn't long enough! Thanks, guys!
Rating:
Summary: A Rollicking Good Time For All
Review: Mr. Redfern and his merrie band of British fortean eccentrics takes us on a journey the likes of which we have not seen since the days of Dr. Johnson sojourning to the north or the askew tales of Laurence Sterne. These blokes are the kind that you'd like to know for serious drinking and tale telling round a fireplace. Yet their historical research is sound, students of local fortean folklore will note. I find the tulpa theory neither "tired" nor overworked in throwing light on incidents of the unexplained. What Mr. Redfern & company do is synthesize the "passport to magonia' ideas of Jacque Vallee with the trickster/metamind theories of John Keel along with their own experiences while on this madcap road trip. The tulpa idea has merit and is worthy of further exploration. The cast of characters encountered in this work range from the frighteningly memorable to the freakish and pathetic. On the whole this is not a scholarly exploration of the paranormal, but if you're as weary as I am of anal retentive pontification or blind belief as with most paranormal books today, this is refreshing & fun.
Rating:
Summary: //full of adventure
Review: Nick Redfern has written a book that may be turned into an English television series....it is fast-paced but watch out to not get splashed by the ale the boys spill as they are laughing in the neighborhood pub, regaling locals about their latest creature hunt! It may not be your cup of tea, but it contains good insights into what actually happens on some of these UK-based excursions. Sort of a slide of life of the way of British "monster" hunters, an adventurer's tale more than a Fortean guide to what's out there....Strictly recommended for those with a sense of humor in cryptozoology.
Rating:
Summary: Is This Strange, Or what?
Review: One has to give Nick Redfern credit, this book is NOT your typical Fortean read. This is a wild and wilder excursion into the back country of High Strangeness. This is...well, gee....I don't quite know WHAT the heck this is!!!! But it's funny. And it is thought provoking. Three weirdos in a van dubbed the "Mystery Machine" (how utterly apropos ). John Belushi the pirate (conjurs up imagery of the end of "Animal House") "manifested" in the form of one Richard Freeman, who doubles as a conjuror of sorts; Sherlock
Sasquatch, jumbo Fortean phenomenon tracker (aka Jonathan Downes), and Nick Redfern, skinheaded punk intellectual with a penchant for enigmas and a seeming obessession with the noise machine known as the Ramones (Cat Stevens is declared to be something one must endure rather than enjoy). And what do they do? They spend six weeks tooling about the British countryside looking at reputedly strange locales (Rendlesham Forest, Dartmoor, Ben Macdhui in the Cairngorms, and others) and talking to people who seem MORE than "reputedly" strange. They also chase down monster stories, read "Fighting Girls Monthly" magazine, and hang out in pubs a lot. When one puts this stuff down , one asks oneself "What the HECK...or something similar...did I just READ"? It is well and truly weird, yet it IS entertaining. Amusingly so. And to the reviewer who suggested this would make an entertaining short-run t.v. series, I absolutely agree. There is a lot to quibble with here. Owlman pops up and without the least show of wariness on the part of the twisted trio. Owlman is, and was, one of a string of hoaxes (another being Morgawr, thew cornish serpent, who also is referenced uncritically in the book) executed by an infamous UK trickster named Tony "Doc" Shiels (who has been exposed extensively by
Mark Chorvinsky, editor of Strange Magazine and who..Shiels... has proved embarassing by his "creations" on more than one occasion to Bob Rickard, editor of "Fortean Times"magazine). Big uproars over Shiels began years ago when it was discovered that some of the "best" Nessie shots (stills, always stills) were produced by "Doc" using plasticine
plesiosaur models mounted on glass and shot on 35mm film (or whatever) THROUGH the glass, a Hollywood FX technique known as a ...what else?..."glass shot". Morgawr was created the same way. It was also discovered early on that "Doc" would try to cover his ever-suspicious tracks by arranging for many of his photos and/or narrative "witness signtings" to be submitted by PROXY. His whole family would draw in friends to 'report" weird sights for the fun of it, or else they would create "anonymous" witnesses to submit reports ("Mary F." or "Louise K." or some such). Always, though, diligent investigators could trace the true original sources of these "sightings" back to the estimable "Doc" Shiels himself. "Owlman" was one of "Doc's" projects and the "young girls" who were always "seeing' him were part of Shiel's extensive hoaxer network that operated through his own children's friends and acquaintances. And at least one of these has admitted complicity and declared that "Owlman" was Doc's re-located take on "Mothman". Another strange incident involved a "persecuted seeker of the portal grave of King Arthur", who is pursued by gargoyles and other monsters. This whacko, a fellow named Perks, says MI5 is onto the truth and has warned him about the dangers of meddling.
In a remarkable lapse (for Redfern, who contributes to "Eye Spy" magazine and SHOULD know better), Perks is described as going to seek out his "contact" at MI5, but, walking across a Thames bridge towards the "futuristic" HQ structure on the other side, he sees a manifested(?) water monster in the water and flees homeward. Well, whether he saw this monster or not, he WASN'T going to meet his "MI5" contact in that "futuristic" building. Because MI5 isn't located in such a locality. What is being described in the narrative here is the Secret Intelligence Service (MI-SIX) HQ at Vauxhall Cross, NOT MI5. He might meet Moneypenny there, but that's about it. Emma Peel is elsewhere.
Again, a curious lapse on Redfern's part. So, what have we here? A stupid, rambling, mush headed mishmash of alcohol-fueled idiocy? A worthless stream of balderdash? From what you have read thus far in this review, you might think so. But you'd be wrong. Aside from biting on too big a load of blarney from time to time, these boyos HAVE hit on some essential truths. They have perhaps come close on to the nature of true reality, and, in so doing, they have come to the point where John Keel,Colin Wilson, Jacques Vallee, F.W. Holliday, Alexandra David-Neel, Patrick Harpur,J. Allen Hynek (verging at the time of his death), Carl Jung,Max Planke Fred Allan Wolfe, , and many others have come before ; to the concept that"reality" likely isn't REAL. That this is a thought-form universe.A "Holagraphic" universe. The ancient Vedic concept of our "reality" as Maya, as Illusion, may be the truth after all. Quantum physics is beating on this door every day( And may well smash it down completely) and the "hard science" materialists hate that. It may represent the end of reigning materialist paradigms and the SCIENCE crowd doesn't like this a little bit. By Implication would be that since "reality" and the "laws" that "govern" it aren't real, then SCIENCE, in and of itself, can't be real either.Scientific laws and priciples are therefore just delusional aspects of the implicate mind-structure of true reality. So using "scientific" procedures and yardsticks for evaluating phenomenology may well be utterly wasted effort. Whoa. Bummer. Food for thought. Screwy book. Interesting conclusions. You can get a laugh out of this book, but it CAN point you towards some interesting new ways of viewing the world. Oh, and Nick. You can keep the Ramones. I'll stick with the Beatles, CCR, and Warren Zevon.
Rating:
Summary: More Like Three Men on a Pub Crawl
Review: This is a well-written but silly book. It could have been fun, but ultimately it takes itself way too seriously. Nick Redfern and his two mates go looking for monsters in Britain. Unfortunately, much of the book deals with them doing other things -- visiting weirdos who claim monster encounters, drinking too much in pubs, sight-seeing, etc. Had he kept it light-hearted, the book might have been just a fun and breezy read. Instead, Redfern insists on veering into his daft "theory" that these monsters are paranormal. They somehow live on negative human emotions, such as fear, and they appear simply to create these emotions and get a jolt when they need one. I put theory in quotation marks because, from a scientific standpoint, a theory can be tested. Redfern's idea is just wild sepculation that cannot be subject to testing, and in the end, that's why the book fails. There's always an out with these monster guys because they set up the ever-popular non-falsifiable hypothesis. Why can't we catch these monsters? Because they don't exist in the real world. Why do people see them, and then they disappear? Because they are mere "thought forms." Why are the pictures always blurry? The monsters have the ability to screw up cameras through mind control. Anyone can play this game. I can tell you my best friend is an invisible rabbit and challenge you to prove he doesn't exist. I can always devise another wild scenario for every objection you raise. Redfern is also quite guillible, if this book is meant to be taken seriously. He ridicules a guy who claims to have seen an apeman while parked with his girlfriend, because the guy seems like a loser. But a woman who claims to have seen fairies when she was little is taken seriously. Fairies? Come on, now. As I said, this could have been a fun book. Redfern writes well. I have to admit, I laughed out loud when Redfern recounted how his friend gave a witch the finger. That alone is worth two stars. But in the end, it's all just too ridiculous to take seriously. Next time, let's have less talk about eating fried bread and more discussion about the obvious: The monsters aren't real, but they play an important socio/psychologial role in the human psyche. There's a story there.
<< 1 >>
|
