Lead, Kindly Light

Last Wednesday, my world changed. A very dear friend died. The view outside remained colourful but in my heart that colour in an instant became muted. Outside, cars and pedestrians continued to pass by but in my heart, life suddenly became emptier.

My friend’s name was Christine McCrudden. We met at the start of 1996, outside St. Andrew’s Cathedral in Dundee – where I was studying English at the university. I had just told Canon Ken, the parish priest and university chaplain, that I would like to receive instruction with a view to being received into the Church that Easter. He said he knew just the person to help me. I followed him out of the cathedral (I can’t remember now but I presume we were speaking right after Mass), and he introduced me to Christine who happened to be still outside. Christine and I spoke. In the course of our conversation, she mentioned John Henry Newman. You should read him, she said, he would suit you. I took her advice and before long, I had a copy of Newman’s Apologia Pro Vita Sua in my hands. Thus began my interest in and love for the sons of St. Philip Neri.

St. Andrew’s Cathedral on Google Maps Street View. Christine and I met roughly where the ramp is now

Within a few days, I (and another person who Christine was instructing) began the course. I can no longer remember when exactly, but I feel certain that it was during these classes that I learnt about the (Discalced) Carmelites for Christine had a deep devotion to the way of St. Teresa of Ávila. As a result, I learnt about Teresa, John of the Cross, Thérèse of Lisieux, and Teresa Benedicta (Edith Stein). Unfortunately, I can’t remember when I received my first Carmelite scapular. I imagine it was, however, a gift from Christine. And what a gift to receive!

Well, Christine instructed me, and, on Holy Saturday, 1996, I was received into the Church. Afterwards, we stayed in touch, meeting every so often for a coffee and a chat. I remained in Dundee until 2000. After I returned to London, Christine and I fell out of touch. There was no particular reason for this. For me, it was one part being a lazy correspondent and another, life: work, etc. But I never forgot her, and she never forgot me. In the 10s we made contact again. And from then on, we exchanged occasional text messages and phone calls. She was a wonderful friend, wise counsellor, and spiritual guide. I received so, so much from her, and I fear gave very little back in return. 

I said at the end of the first paragraph that ‘a very dear friend died’. But Christine didn’t die last Wednesday. She actually died on 23rd January this year. How did I not find out until now? That answer is sadly simple: we didn’t really share any other close friends, and I didn’t know her family well. Our friendship was focused on the spiritual life and involved just the two of us. As a result, I would have been the last person for anyone to think about contacting in January. And as it happens, I have no anger, distress, or resentment about that. Rather, I am just grateful that upon seeing a text I wrote to her on Wednesday her husband made time to let me know what had happened. God ordained it thus, and that is enough for me.

But still, the world is now a little less colourful and somewhat more empty. It is also more confusing. One minute I accept that she is gone. The next, that fact seems too strange, too absurd, to be true. How can it possibly be so? Christine was in her 70s but the Christine that I knew was healthy. How gone she be gone?

“And the ship went out into the High Sea and passed into the West, until at last on a night of rain Frodo smelled a sweet fragrance on the air and heard the sound of singing that came over the water. And then it seemed to him that as in his dream in the house of Bombadil, the grey rain-curtain turned all to silver glass and was rolled back, and he beheld white shores and beyond them a far green country under a swift sunrise.” 

J.R.R. Tolkien The Lord of the Rings 

But, of course, she is not gone; at least, not wholly so. She now lives in the Lord, and so, lives more fully than you or I. She lives in the eternal far green country, in the land of the Risen Son, that one day – please God – I too will enter.

For now, even though her passing forth means that I will no longer hear her kind and ever-encouraging, and ever-loving voice, even though we will no longer be able to say Vespers over the phone together, or just exchange text messages I know that we are not completely separated. Her new life means that just as I pray for her soul, I may also pray to her: talk to her, ask for her prayers and intercessions just as I do the canonised saints. It isn’t the same as speaking to her directly, but the good Lord called her and as hard as it is to accept, He knows what He is about.

Christine and I in 2017: the last time that we met

As I conclude this post, I ask for your prayers: for Christine, for her husband, B., for her sons and their families, for her friends, and for me. You are assured of mine for you.

St. John Henry Newman – pray for us
St. Teresa of Ávila – pray for us
St. Thérèse of Lisieux – pray for us
St. Teresa Benedicta and John of the Cross – pray for us

A Day with Samuel Johnson

Recently, I visited Dr. Johnson’s home in a small courtyard just off London’s former centre of journalism, Fleet Street.

Samuel Johnson is a titan of English letters. Every Briton should know him, which means that – I highly suspect – that the only people who do are academics and the literary minded. His reputation, of course, rests on his famous Dictionary. It wasn’t the first of its kind to exist, but was the best.

However, there is much more to Johnson than the Dictionary. He was an erudite man, and a moral one; he was a kind friend and benefactor. He was also very self-critical, particularly in spiritual matters, and suffered a great deal in later years from ill health.

I learnt all these things from the book that brought me to the house: The World in Thirty-Eight Chapters or Dr. Johnson’s Guide to Life by Henry Hitchings. I saw this book favourably mentioned on social media c.2018 and bought a copy. Towards the end of last year, I finally started reading it. I’m glad I did. Samuel Johnson is very much a man worth knowing.

I will never read as much as him, or be as smart; I’ll never write anything as significant as him, or be as well known. All that, however, is fine. For what attracts me to Johnson is not his literary genius but the seriousness with which he took the moral life. How to live out my faith: this question is ever on my mind. Johnson is someone I can learn from, and find comfort in, because the path that I am on is one that he walked before me.

By-the-bye, I like the idea of walking in Dr. Johnson’s footsteps. It makes me think that after I die, perhaps I will wake up in heaven (God willing!), cross the stream ahead of me, and find a gentleman taking a rest on a fallen tree: Dr. Johnson. Our paths will finally cross, now the friendship of eternity can begin.

That is a very nice thought, though it seems too incredible that an obscure man from the twenty-first century will ever meet such a famous figure from the eighteenth. Surely, the latter will be ever surrounded by the many friends he made in his own time. That’s the beauty of heaven, though: however, we imagine it to be, it will be so much more, and so much better.

I mentioned above that Dr. Johnson’s reputation rests with his Dictionary. Boswell’s biography The Life of Johnson also has a lot to do with it. Did you know, however, for I didn’t, that Johnson was also a cat lover? In the courtyard outside Johnson’s house is a statue of one of them: Hodge. While in Johnson’s house, I was in awe. When I saw Hodge, however, the great man’s humanity came spilling out. He liked cats: just like me! Now, if we meet by that stream, I know we will have something to talk about: no need to feel inferior in his presence. In heaven, no one will feel or be inferior to anyone else, but I am delighted to have this point of feline connection with Johnson all the same.

Sehnsucht on a Sunday Morning

Following a four year break, I have started serving Mass again. I stopped at the start of the first Covid lockdown and closure of the churches. When the latter reopened, I was happy to sit in the pews. Prior to the pandemic I had been active in my parish for nearly twenty years so the break meant a lot (BTW: as I write this, I am sure I mentioned all this in another post, but can’t see where, so apologies if I did and am repeating myself).

I forget when (either late 2022 or late 2023), the parish priest asked if I would like to serve again. I umm’d and ahh’d and promised to get back to him. Which I never did. I am very good at putting off and not getting round to. Then, last month, the current sole server at the 8am Mass came up to me and said, Come and serve. I said, Okay, when shall I start? That, I guess, is how to make me do something: don’t ask, just tell me to do. Anyway, we are now taking it in turns every month to serve. I am Feb. he will be March, and so on.

I mention all this as background. After Mass yesterday, as we were clearing the Sanctuary and preparing the Sacred Vessels for the 10am Mass, I went into a side room to take off my surplice. As I came out, for the briefest of moments, memory, desire and imagination embraced.

It had been a wet morning walk to the church. Under the rain, the tree lined streets were quiet, and ahead of me, soaring above the walls of the railway line I could see a church spire. Anxious to avoid getting too wet, I hurried on. Then, at around 8:50am, as I came out of the side room, something in my heart took me back to a place I have never been but would love to be: my idyll. You see, my favourite place to live would be anywhere in the English countryside where trees surrounded me and church spires greeted me like old friends. And my favourite occupation in this place would be to serve Mass early every Sunday morning, rain or shine.

What reminded me of this exceedingly pleasant thought? I think it was the memory of my walk to Mass combined with seeing the outside through the corner of my eye. I was able to do this because door connecting the sacristy area to the church and the open doors at its back was open. For a split second, therefore, until I turned towards the sacristy itself, I was able to see the street outside. It reminded me of my walk, which reminded me of my idyll. Or something like that. Either way, it was an incredibly sweet moment! Like St. Peter on the mountain, I wish I could have held on to the thought. Like St. Peter on the mountain, it was probably for the best that I couldn’t, however, as things needed doing.

With that said, it is good to stop doing things from time to time and dwell upon that which is of God, which I trust and hope this is. I guess that is what I am doing now. I don’t know where it will take me, perhaps nowhere; maybe its value is in making the present moment happier, more God focused, than it was before. That would be enough.

image
nabbed from pinterest

Looking Back, And Ahead

We have a General Election coming in the UK later this year. Despite winning the last one fairly handsomely, the Conservative Party has squandered its mandate through a mixture of bad leadership, bad policies, and external events.

It can’t be blamed for the last of these three factors but the presence of the first two means that the party not only deserves to lose the election, but – and I say this as a Conservative voter – needs to lose it.

The reason the party needs to lose is in order to find its way again. And not only that but start communicating what it stands for to the voter. It is sad that despite being a brilliant communicator, Boris Johnson followed no path except his own. As a result, he brought himself, his government, and party into disrepute – from which it has not yet recovered.

This week, I listened to The Rest is History podcast’s four-part series on the political crises in Britain in 1974. What an awful time! The country really was up the spout. And the worst thing was, our leaders – Ted Heath for the Conservatives, and then, after winning the two General Elections that were held that year, Harold Wilson for Labour – were completely helpless to combat any of the problems. It’s one thing for your country to be in a bad spot but when you have a Prime Minister completely out of his depth, that’s a tough pill to take. Hope took a beating in 1974.

I learnt a lot from RiH’s series. What I most appreciate about the four episodes, though, is how in discussing 1974 they shed light on why Thatcherism happened in the 80s. Something had to; Britain couldn’t keep staggering along in the 80s as she had in the 70s. But why did Labour think that appointing Michael Foot leader was their answer to losing the election in 1979? I suppose the answer is the same as why the Republican and Democrat parties in the USA are putting their faith in their candidates who are in their 70s and 80s for this year’s Presidential election. It’s easier, it’s safer, the candidates are known.

Coming back to Britain, unless the shock of the century occurs, Keir Starmer will win the election. I wish he was as charismatic as Tony Blair in 1997: this country could do with some inspiration. At the moment, I would simply describe him as solid. Maybe that will be enough. Things aren’t as bad as 1974, after all. Please God, they won’t be.

image: Evening Standard

Waugh in Love

[Evelyn Waugh] was once very rude and his hostess remonstrated: “How can you behave so badly – and you a Catholic!” Waugh replied: “You have no idea how much nastier I would be if I was not a Catholic. Without supernatural aid I would hardly be a human being.”

This quotation may or may not be completely accurate. If you would like to know more about it, the Evelyn Waugh Society discusses the quote in more detail in this article.

As for me, I have for many years thought it a truthful statement, and one that applies to all of us. I still do. It makes perfect sense. God is love. No God, no love.

And yet, there are a great many people in the world who do not believe in God but are still people of love. They might be followers of other religions, or atheists, or something in between, but they love. Whether they love deeply or only with difficulty, whether it trickles or pours out of them, they love. Conversely, there are Catholics who appear to, or in actuality have, very little love in them.

What’s going on? I don’t think that it is a great mystery. To be a Catholic doesn’t mean to be good. Quite the opposite, in fact. It means to recognise that I am bad and need He who is Good. To be a Catholic is to admit to my failure, and His Success. Only when I do that can His love enter into and flow out of me. If I at any time withdraw my admission, I close myself to His love.

But what about non-Catholics? Or rather, non-Christians, as the above applies to all Christian believers. They do not know God so cannot be open to His love, and yet, they still have it. Well, it’s simple. They may not know Him. They may actively reject Him. But He knows them, and He does not reject them. As a result, He still works in them, and in the love they show to themselves and others, they demonstrate even without knowing it, the reality of God. This is why no Catholic, no Christian, should ever dismiss a non-believer. God is in them.

Depending on our spiritual state, He may be more in them, than He is in me. That is a sobering thought. It is also a very beautiful one.

One final question: if someone is not open to God, how can He work in them? Well, God is Love, and God is very cunning. He knows how to get past all our walls and barriers. A scary thought? Maybe but not, I think, if you believe in love.

Evelyn Waugh – Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May his soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

image: Britannica

Boromir at Holy Mass

“I would have followed you my brother. My captain. My king,”

If you are a fan of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings films, the above words will be instantly recognisable to you. They are spoken, of course, by Boromir, moments before his death, to Aragorn, his friend, band leader, and future king of Gondor. The words ‘my king’ are of particular strength as up until that moment Boromir has been dismissive of Aragorn’s royal lineage. Like, I am sure, all fans of the Jackson trilogy, I have never forgotten Boromir’s words – in my case, since I saw the film at the cinema in 2001. Indeed, for the last few years, I have carried them with me even to Mass. In 1997, when I was being instructed in the Catholic Faith, I was taught that when the priest raises the Host (following the consecration), we – the congregants – say, My Lord and my God. I have done this ever since. One day, I think in the mid 2010s, the words happened to remind me of Boromir’s last words to Aragorn. Just as he recognised Aragorn as family, war leader, and lord, we recognise Jesus in the Host as Lord and God. One thought led to another and it occurred to me that I might also recognise Him as my brother, so I added that to my words: My Lord and my God – and brother. I can’t vouch for the orthodoxy of this practice – and I have to admit that there did come a point a while back when it seemed to me that to say ‘and brother’ was in that moment out of place – but I have always appreciated the intimacy that the words ‘and brother’ brings.

image
Tolkien Gateway

A Gentle Collision of Worlds

Keep the Aspidistra Flying (1997)

Gordon Comstock is a brilliant copywriter, but he wants to be a poet; so, he quits his day job and sits down to write his second book of poetry: London Pleasures.

Except, even full time poets need to eat and pay their bills. Gordon has a generous sister but her help only goes so far. Luckily, he has a supportive patron in Ravelston who gets him a job at a second hand book shop.

So far, so good. Unfortunately for Gordon, his career is built on sand. Yes, he has already had a book of poetry published, and reviewed by The Times, if you please, but only because of Ravelston’s paternalistic help. Indeed, the review was written by Ravelston himself. Now, maybe Gordon is a decent poet, perhaps a good one – he does sell a poem to an American publication, after all – but the impression I got from the film is that his success mainly derives from Ravelston’s upper class socialist desire to help those lower down the social scale rather than from any intrinsic merit in Gordon’s work.

There is nothing wrong with that – quite the reverse – but it does give Gordon an unreasonable expectation about what he is capable of. Hence, he leaves his job. But nothing comes of it. And through the course of the film, as his money runs out, Gordon slides further and further into poverty. He starts off living at a nice, if irredeemably middle-class address in north London but ends up in a hovel in Lambeth, south of the river. He even stops writing.

Gordon’s problem is two fold. Firstly, he is too full of prejudice. Thus, when he is forced (due to an unfortunate run-in with the law) to leave his north London address, he doesn’t care because he hates middle-class existence and its worship of money. Secondly, he writes for the wrong reason. He doesn’t write poetry either for the love of it or to say anything important or needful, but simply to attack what he doesn’t like, and as a form of escapism. As a result, when he finally does ‘escape’ – or rather, is expelled from – middle-class life, he no longer has anything to say. Indeed, he no longer has anything he wants to say. He pretends, even to himself, that among the working classes he has found his people. Only, he is not one of them, not really, When he and his long suffering girlfriend Rosemary sleep together and she becomes pregnant, Gordon without hesitation offers to marry her. The film closes with him back at his copywriting job, with he and Rosemary in their new house, complete with the film’s symbol of middle-classness: the aspidistra. You could see this as an artistic sell out, but some things are more important than art; namely, family.

Keep The Aspidistra Flying is based on the George Orwell novel of the same name. It is a lightly written and acted film. Richard E. Grant plays Gordon Comstock and Helena Bonham-Carter, Rosemary. They are fabulous. I have to single out the screenwriter, Alan Plater, as well. So often films are let down by the writing (whether because the writer was no good or the director/producer messed it up) but here, it is pitch perfect in the way it balances comedy and drama. Plater wrote the famous A Very British Coup (1983) so knew his stuff. The same can be said of director Robert Bierman.

The film connects with me because I have to admit I see a bit of myself in Gordon Comstock. Like him, I would love to break free of the need to work, and devote myself to my art. Who wouldn’t? Having said that, I am very glad that I have never flounced out of any position without a back-up plan. I hope that if one day I do I am not as obstinate as Gordon is when those he loves come to help him!

So, for me, Keep the Aspidistra Flying is both a fine dramatic comedy, a warning against pride, a mirror to myself, a meditation upon middle-class values, and – most importantly – a film that shows love in action: fraternal, romantic, and familial (what C. S. Lewis would call storge). In this, it compliments Planes, Trains, and Automobiles really well.

images
Richard E. Grant + Helena Bonham-Carter: Screenbound
Keep the Aspidistra Flying DVD Cover: British Railway Movie Database

Journeys of the Heart

This weekend I watched Planes, Trains & Automobiles, starring Steve Martin and the late John Candy. The film was released in 1987 and is (another) John Hughes classic. In it, Neal Page (Martin), an advertising executive, leaves his New York office two days before Thanksgiving to begin his journey back home to Chicago where his family awaits him. Once Page leaves his office, however, everything that can go wrong, does. Everyone else in New York is also on their way home and so cabs are in short supply. An office worker (played by a young Kevin Bacon) beats him to one, a dishonest lawyer takes another, while a third is accidentally claimed by Del Griffiths (Candy), a travelling salesman. Page meets Del at the airport and a hate/hate relationship, at least on Page’s part, thereafter develops, for bad weather stops the aeroplane from reaching its destination, and despite Page’s best efforts to leave Del behind, they are constantly thrown back together as they use other means of transport – yes, trains and cars – to finally reach Chicago.

Del is by no means perfect but he is friendly, kind and generous. Unfortunately, it takes Neal until Chicago to realise this. When he does so, he recalls that Del has no family, either. To his credit, Neal immediately turns round and returns to the train station where they parted. There, he finds Del sitting in the waiting room. It turns out that not only does he not have a family, but neither does he have a home. The film ends with Neal taking Del to his. There, he introduces him to his family, and embraces his wife.

Planes, Trains & Automobiles is no character study. We are only given the most essential information about Neal and Del, just enough to bring them alive, so’s to speak. Thus, Neal is, as mentioned, an advertising exec, he is impatient and sarcastic, and does not react well to stress; on the positive side, he is a committed family man. As for Del, beyond what I mentioned above, we learn only that he is a very good salesman. He did have a wife, whom he adored, but she died eight years earlier. (By-the-bye, I said above the Del has no home. Given the quality of his salesmanship I imagine he could afford one if he wanted but has not been able to settle down since his wife’s death. Grief has stopped him.)

As I mentioned in my last post, love is on my mind these days. It still is. When I watched Planes, Trains & Automobiles, I did so wanting to remind myself how it treats the subject. It does so beautifully, showing not just Neal Page’s physical journey but how he moves from a state of anger and dislike towards Del Griffiths to that of deep friendship. As a bonus, we also see the deep affection between Neal and his wife: when they embrace, we see her tears of relief and joy at his return. As for Neal, well, the whole film is a testament of his love for his wife and children.

I suppose my only regret is that the film doesn’t delve deeply into Neal and Del’s character. I have to remember, though, that it is primarily a comedy; perhaps a deeper character study would only get in the way of the laughs. Anyway, my conclusion is that both Neal and Del are inspiring people and I hope I remember their journey together for as long as possible. Del shows me what a good man looks like, and Neal that the rest of us can become one.

image: Collider

Love and Joy

Christ of St. John of the Cross by Salvador Dali (via Pinterest)

this post first appeared on my British Catholic Blogs blog last Saturday. The nature of the BCB blog means that blog posts have to appear as ‘pages’ and so whenever I publish a new one, I have to delete the old. However, I would like at least some of them to remain online, so it occurred to me to re-publish them here.

Just before I started updating the blog for the week ahead, I got to thinking about which keywords I would use to sum up my Catholic faith. I very quickly settled upon two: love and joy.

Love has been on my mind for some time now: do I love enough? How can I love more? Isn’t it wonderful that our God is a God of love. He is Love! Because Catholicism is good at codifying what it believes, it would be easy – and over the years I think has been easy, for some or many – to reduce it to the level of mere rules and regulations. Of course, there are things that, as Catholic Christians, we must and must not do, but that isn’t the Faith. Or at least, not all of it. For if we did everything correctly but without love then it would all have been a waste of time. Love hallows the rules and regulations. It also takes us, not beyond them, but to a higher place within their confines. What do I mean by this? Actually, I’m finding it hard to explain, so I think I will ponder it and come back to the subject in my next post. 

In the meantime, I will just add that the man whose writings on love has most affected me is St. John of the Cross. He said, words to the effect, ‘at the end of our lives, we will be judged on love alone’. These came to mind a few months ago, and have been very consciously with me ever since. They are so liberating! Why? Well, it’s all about how love hallows and lifts us.

In contrast to love, I don’t often, consciously anyway, think about joy. I should, though, because Catholicism is a joyful religion. How could it not be? It’s the religion of Love, after all. If we have the view that it is not a joyful religion, that is simply because it has been spoiled for us by other people: judgemental laymen or women, bad priests, corruption in the Church, and so on. Of its nature, though, Catholicism is joyful.

Catholicism is joyful because God is Love, because of His love for us, because of Jesus’ teaching, and His sacrifice, because of the Mass, and the Sacraments. It’s all joy, and it is amazing to behold. 

And yet, even without the bad things mentioned above, Catholicism can be a tough religion. If we were perfect in our faith, the toughness would not matter to us a jot. The joy would shine straight through the hardness and soften it, but that is not how most of us are, or will be, this side of Heaven (or Purgatory). So, what to do? Well, I’m not sure. If I can form some thoughts on this, I will come back to this topic as well.

From Across and Beyond the World

This week, I watched the new Netflix four-part docu-series, Encounters. As you can tell from the image above, it is about UFOs and aliens. The series focuses on four mass sightings from across the world, but also includes people who say they saw alien beings, and one person who states that they were (medically?) examined by extra-terrestrials.

I’ve been interested by the idea of UFOs for as long as I can remember so the decision to watch Encounters was an easy one*. I have no idea whether extra-terrestrials exist or not and would not cry if it was conclusively proved that Mankind was the only intelligent (insert joke here) race in the universe but the idea that there might be other intelligent beings out there is an enchanting one that I hope is true.

The Land of the Hovering Lights
The four mass sightings featured in Encounters come from Pembrokeshire in Wales, a primary school in Zimbabwe, Texas, USA, and Japan. Of the four, only Japan didn’t convince me. In 2011, the Fukushima nuclear power plant was destroyed as a result of an earthquake and tidal wave (tsunami). Lights and strange balls of fire were seen in the sky overhead and even over the bodies of the dead. The lights were recorded on video but while they seemed to move in an intentional pattern, they were too out of focus to make much of.

Aliens in Africa
The Zimbabwe sighting was fascinating. It took place in 1994 during play time at a primary school. No fewer than 62 children stated that they saw a UFO just beyond their playground. Some of them allege that they even saw a single alien – dressed in black and with large eyes. He or she appeared before the children and spoke to them telepathically. He had a message: take care of the planet.

There is a fly in the ointment of the Zimbabwe sighting as the documentary featured A pupil who claims that there never was a sighting. Rather, he hoaxed everyone in order to get out of a class. According to him, the UFO was just a rock.

Whatever happened in Zimbabwe, I don’t think the answer lies with the self-confessed hoaxer. I know that mass hysteria is, as they say, a thing, but I find it very hard to believe that 62 children were persuaded that a rock was a UFO. Especially since the school appeared to be in a rural area. They would have known perfectly well what a rock looked like. In addition, the programme gave no indication that in the 29 years since the incident any of the other children have broken ranks and admitted that they were wrong. In a fascinating – and disturbing – twist, the headmistress of the school who in 1994 was sceptical of the children’s story, claimed on the doc. that aliens came again and physically examined her.

Why would the self-confessed hoaxer and headmistress lie? In respect of the former a possible, perhaps even probable, answer is simply that he is a troll or attention seeker. In respect of the latter, it is more difficult. It’s one thing to claim to have seen lights in the sky, but quite another to claim that a physical encounter took place. Especially since the headmistress won’t be getting any respect (from beyond the UFO research community) for that. Maybe she is mentally ill. Maybe the answer is simple: she says it happened because it did.

Alien Aftermath
The Pembrokeshire sightings were a series that took place in 1977. Schoolchildren saw UFOs, another saw a strange man in a metallic suit in the countryside, and a family saw an eight foot being outside their house. This BBC article talks about the Pembrokeshire sightings in more detail. Pembrokeshire really brought out how UFO sightings can adversely affect witnesses. For example, one boy who saw a UFO was bullied for years afterwards as a result. Just before appearing on TV to discuss what had happened, they gave him a black eye. You can see it in the archive footage.

Texas Drama
Finally, Texas. One witness, Ricky Sorrells, reacted to the UFO that he saw in a thoroughly American way: he shot it. Or at least, tried to. His bullet seemed to make no impact. If I recall correctly, what was strange about his sighting was that the UFO not only moved silently (although given how quiet electric engines are, we should not be surprised that a civilisation far in advance of us has managed to create a wholly silent engine) but when it moved away – Sorrells felt no push back from the thrust. Well, perhaps the UFO was real and their engine technology is so advanced that it doesn’t even disturb the air around it or maybe it was a natural phenomena. Whatever it was, the witness claimed afterwards that he was being harassed by unknown individuals, even finding a bullet in his car, as if someone was saying ‘Keep you mouth shut or else’.

MiB
By the way, if you know your UFO iconography, or tropes, you will know that witnesses are sometimes visited by sinister ‘men in black’ (the name that I guess inspired the film). They also turn up in Encounters.

Back to Texas
The Texan sightings were really interesting for what happened in the aftermath to not only Ricky Sorrells. One witness became obsessed with finding out where the UFOs came from. It cost him his marriage. A reporter was kicked off her newspaper for taking the sightings seriously. She’s dead now but her editor appeared on the programme and mentioned her regret over what happened. A UFO investigator filed a request with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to obtain radar records to see if the UFOs were caught by radar. They were. So whatever else they were, the UFOs in Texas, including Sorrells, were not natural phenomena. By amazing coincidence, the FAA would later exempt radar records from Freedom of Information requests.

Conclusion
Now, I’m trying to write shorter blog posts these days so that I don’t get bogged down and end up not finishing them. As you can see, though, I have failed miserably with this one. I’ve ended up explaining all four episodes of Encounters to you. Of course, I’ve missed out a lot and, as I’m writing from memory, may have got one or two things wrong. For these reasons, as well as because Encounters was a really fascinating series, I thoroughly recommend it to you.

If I have one takeaway from the series it is actually how thoroughly we seem to see UFOs/aliens through the lens of our own culture. America sees them as a threat to herself. A sad by-product, I suspect, of being the most powerful nation on Earth. Japan, having been through the trauma of the Second World War and its previous martial existence, sees UFOs/aliens as being reflections of their own love of peace. What does it all mean? I think we see a mirror when we see a UFO because we simply do not know anything at all about the objects or their masters. This leads us to impose our own meaning on them. The situation will only change if and once contact is made with the aliens.

* made easier by the fact that it was last week’s featured documentary for the podcast I work for

images
Encounters poster: Netflix Media Centre
Men in Black: Wikipedia