Intro
Anthropologists traditionally have taken pride in their willingness to study everything about humans and our primate next-of-kin. Yet, as in all other disciplines, anthropological research is subject to the preferences and biases of its practitioners, the pulls and blockages exercised by its institutions.
Among these biases and blockages is one discouraging research on unidentified flying objects (UFOs). Although the insight UFOs as a social phenomenon could shed on many different societies and their cultural and historical contexts, anthropological study of them is hampered by, on the one hand, the phenomenon's association with stigmatized fringe scientific or religious endeavors, and, on the other, the long-standing, conflicted attitude of the general public toward aerial anomalies (an attitude informed yet not determined by scientific and political "knowledge elites").
For More Info
Discussion
Despite institutional disincentives and widespread biases, a number of scholars including anthropologists have been pursuing the study of UFOs as a social phenomenon. I believe anthropology provides an especially appropriate approach in several respects:
- First, the evidence amenable to a physical-science analysis (e.g., chemical changes in soil and vegetation, electromagnetic disturbances, radar returns, photographs and videos) has proven frustratingly inconclusive. At the same time, ufologists have long lamented that, for the most part, "all" they have to go on are witness reports (cf. Keel 1989). Given how the raw data are generated predominantly by humans, a social-scientific and social-psychological research program can produce insights a physical-science approach has not.
- Second, the UFO phenomenon is not confined to any one society--though the exact manner in which UFOs relate to the modern global economic system and the cultural influence of a number of "culture-exporting" nations (including the US) has yet to be addressed thoroughly. Most ufological studies tend to be very limited in cultural and geographic scope. A cross-cultural investigation of the sort in which anthropology excels will be a great way to discern the extent, the patterns, and the variability of UFO reports.
- A third, related matter is how UFO reports vary between and within societies. Ufological and orthodox scientific investigations have tended to look for patterns in reports, casting off variations though - as more ufologists are realizing - those variations in experience are integral to the phenomenon. Once again, this is a place where cross-cultural, ethnographically based research can make significant contributions, not least by examining UFO reports and lore in light of the cultural and historical contexts within which they circulate, taking those heterogeneous contexts as fundamental and leaving open the question of what patterns in reports may indicate about the nature UFOs.
The social-scientific study of UFOs is anything but a fledgling approach. Academic studies have been done on the history of sightings (e.g. Jacobs 1976), on UFO beliefs (e.g. Jung 1991), and even on abduction experiences (e.g. Dean 1996). But I believe it can only help to encourage, through this site, social scientists (and anyone else who is interested) to investigate social and psychological phenomena under the UFO rubric in their proper cultural, political-economic, and historical context. I hope that in some way the resources contained here can be of some use, either as fuel for research projects already underway or as a means of drawing more attention to the investigation.
Works Cited
- Jodi Dean. 1996. Aliens in America: Conspiracy Cultures from Outerspace to Cyberspace. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
- David M. Jacobs. 1976. The UFO Controversy in America. Bloomington: Indiana University.
- C.G. Jung. 1991. Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies. Princeton: Bollingen.
- John A. Keel. 1989. The People Problem. in Phenomenon: Forty Years of Flying Saucers. John Spencer and Hilary Evans, eds. New York: Avon. pp. 186-198.
Bibliography
I offer below a few references I consider to be of great utility or significance in the field. And, in the hyper-linked spirit of the Internet, many of these works have their own, much more extensive bibliographies that interested readers can pursue ever outward. Some books listed are out of print, but they can be purchased through services like Advanced Book Exchange and Bibliofind, or specialty sellers like Gordon Speer.
General References
- David Ritchie. 1994. UFO: The Definitive Guide to Unidentified Flying Objects and Related Phenomena. New York: MJF.
- Carl Sagan and Thornton Page, eds. 1996 [1972]. UFOs: A Scientific Debate. New York: Barnes & Noble [Ithaca: Cornell University].
Historical References
- Thomas Eddie Bullard. 1982. Mysteries in the Eye of the Beholder: UFOs and Their Correlates as a Folkloric Theme Past and Present. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.
- David M. Jacobs. 1976. The UFO Controversy in America. Bloomington: Indiana University.
- Curtis Peebles. 1995. Watch the Skies! A History of the UFO Myth. Washington DC: Smithsonian.
Studies of Ufology
- Joseph Blake. 1979. Ufology: The Intellectual Development and Social Context of the Study of Unidentified Flying Objects. in On the Margins: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge. Roy Wallis, ed. Keele: University of Keele.
- Brenda Denzler. 2001. The Lure of the Edge: Scientific Passions, Religious Beliefs, and the Pursuit of UFOs. Berkeley: University of California.
- Linda Jean Milligan. 1988. The UFO Debate: A Study of a Contemporary Legend. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.
Social-Scientific References
Cultural Studies
- Debbora Battaglia, ed. 2005. ET Culture: Anthropology of Outer Spaces. Durham: Duke University.
- Michael Craft. 1996. Alien Impact. New York: St. Martin's.
- Benson Saler, Charles Ziegler, and Charles Moore. 1997. UFO Crash at Roswell: The Genesis of a Modern Myth. Washington DC: Smithsonian.
- Keith Thompson. 1993. Angels and Aliens: UFOs and the Mythic Imagination. New York: Fawcett.
Social-Psychological Studies
- C.G. Jung. 1991. Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Skies. Princeton: Bollingen.
- James R. Lewis, ed. 1995. The Gods Have Landed: New Religions From Other Worlds. Albany: State University of New York.
- Joost Meerloo. 1966. The Flying Saucer Syndrome and the Need for Miracles. Journal of the American Medical Association 203:70.
- Ted Peters. 1977. UFOs - God's Chariots? Flying Saucers in Politics, Science, and Religion. Atlanta: John Knox.
- Carl Raschke. 1989. UFOs: Ultraterrestrial Agents of Cultural Deconstruction. Archaeus 5: 21-32.
- John Rimmer. 1969. The UFO as an Anti-Scientific Symbol. Merseyside UFO Bulletin 2(4).
Folkloric Studies
- Linda Dégh. 1977. UFOs and How Folklorists Should Study Them. Fabula 18: 242-248.
- Bertrand Meheust. 1978. Science Fiction et Soucoupes Volantes. Paris: Mercure de France.
- Howard Peckham. 1950. Flying Saucers as Folklore. Hoosier Folklore 9: 103-107.
- Peter Rojcewicz. 1984. The Boundaries of Orthodoxy: A Folkloric Look at the UFO Phenomenon. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
cau 3.0 | © 2001-06 ryan j cook, phd | last modified: 2005.12.31