UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, March 04, 2012

Ufology converted by John's Book of Revelation?


Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

A piece by Adam Gopnik in The New Yorker [March 5th, 2012, The Big Reveal, Page 78 ff.] about Elaine Pagel’s new book, Revelation: Visions, Prophecy, and Politics in the Book of Revelation [Viking], has some quotes that apply to ufology and the UFO community.

I’ve substituted words that pertain to religion and inserted words with a UFO patina to make my point, whatever that point may be. I’ll use [brackets] for the substituted words…

“Apparently, when you have made up your mind to believe that your [UFO] is [ET}, neither death nor disappearances will discourage you. [A UFO] presence is proof; [a UFO] non-presence is proof; and non-presence can be conjured into presence by wishing it to be so.” [Page 79]

“Allegorical pictures of [UFO events] have a way of weaving in and out between the symbolic and the semi-psychotic.” [ibid]

“But [UFO] people like the violent otherworldly stuff, and give it a lot of non-allegorical license to do its thing.” [ibid]

“Don’t squishy doctrines of transformation through personal illumination always get marginalized in mass movements?” [Page 80]

“…the open-minded, non-authoritarian side of [ufology]…quickly succumbed to the theocratic side, gasping under the weight of those heavy [early UFO tomes]. [ibid]

“The truth is that punitive, hysterical [ufology] thrives, while soft, mystical ones must hide their [conjectures] somewhere in the hot sand. [ibid]

That’s it.

The Gopnik piece is a must-read that applies to hermeneutics rather than ufological internecinity, but I see a direct correlation.

“Let them with eyes see, and those without wither.”

RR

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home