UFO Conjectures

Sunday, June 04, 2017

Roswell: Ufology’s idée fixe

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
No matter what UFO case or topic arises in the UFO stratosphere, some way or another, Roswell enters into the mix.

The Roswell incident is an obsession with UFO buffs (ufologists): an idée fixe.

Most commentary acknowledges that and calls Roswell “the Holy Grail” of UFOdom.

For some reason, Roswell is a psychological blight that has infected the psyches of UFO attuned people, but why?

The so-called incident has been trampled by opinion and speculation among ufologists for about 40 years now (since 1978).

Yes, it’s a curious tale but there are other UFO cases/reports with more enigmatic cachet.

Roswell is a myth (a mythos) aside from any reality that the episode contains within it.

But you have, all, noticed that a UFO subject brought up in UFO venues almost, invariably, gets set aside by Roswell commentary that takes control of colloquies.

Thus, ufology and the UFO genre have become stagnated by the usurpation of the quagmired Roswell patina.

Recent books by pals Jose Caravaca, Gilles Fernandez, Nick Redfern, and Kevin Randle, alongside books by UFO people I could care less about, all dig into the Roswell saga, and UFO buffs eat them up, eschewing other UFO tomes dealing with the phenomenon more relevantly.

Since the Roswell oeuvre is mostly (entirely?) fictive, I’ll be presenting, soon, why the “reality” that is Roswell is a “fictional truth” as delineated by French philosopher and polymath Jacques Derrida….

(if I understand Derrida correctly, which I may not, as my Facebook buddy Bryan Sentes, who teaches at Dawson College in Montreal, and has much Derridaian expertise, may see it.)

The formative matter is complex, admittedly, but the accretions to that Roswell original “event” are complex too, in their various incarnations.

My meager attempt(s) to defuse Roswell won’t do much, if anything at all, but if I can sway a few habitués here to abandon their wasteful preoccupation with the rotting corpse of Roswell, I shall have done my duty to the battered hobby of ufology.



  • Roswell continues to fascinate because it is the only UFO case where the Army/Air Force admits that they have captured a flying saucer. Roswell also fascinates because it is the only UFO case where the Army/Air Force says no, wait a dang moment, we did NOT capture a flying saucer. Finally, Roswell fascinates because the Air Force after having said yes we did, and then no we did not, then offers (over the years) three completely contradictory explanations of what happened that July in the New Mexico desert. Something strange happened, Rich, and that's why some of us stay fascinated enough to look past the endless garbage and hope, finally, for an explanation that makes reasonable sense.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, June 04, 2017  

  • Dominick:

    One can stay attuned to Roswell, in lieu of better, more interesting UFO cases, but to stay absorbed by the story, which is a mishmash of crap appended to it by liars and idiots is a fixed obsession to insanity.

    Keep it on a back burner perhaps but quit flogging the damn thing. It's a sour note in an otherwise intriguing mystery: UFOs.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 04, 2017  

  • Rich -

    The problem with Dominick's comment, " Roswell continues to fascinate because it is the only UFO case where the Army/Air Force admits that they have captured a flying saucer," fails, but only because, in 1947, flying saucer didn't necessarily mean alien spacecraft. If you read the newspapers from that time, you'll see lots of definitions, one of the most obscure was alien spaceship. Too often we all overlook that.

    By Blogger KRandle, at Sunday, June 04, 2017  

  • Exactly, Kevin...

    I think your blog (commentary too) has covered this a few times: "flying disc" was used, in the time frame, for anything unusual it seems.

    The problem for Dominick, a smart guy, and other Roswellian enthusiasts is that they don't go to the 1947 context, having come to Roswell after the 1978 mix of material by Friedman and others, when the 1947 context was ignored, perverted, or played down.

    Today, even news media places UFOs in an extraterrestrial scenario, pushing the idea of space visitors, then and now, without knowing they are offering a bias and imposing it on the phenomenon.

    Dominick and the ETH crowd have been "brain-washed" and don't know that they have been.

    To correct the ingrained bias they have absorbed is beyond anyone's ability to correct or remove apparently. Reading corrective texts, such as yours and a few others, is not something they wish to do; it would cause a rift in their obsession, their "idee fixe" and we all know, psychoanalysts particularly, that persons are not inclined to give up their delusional beliefs, even when confronted by insurmountable facts that show their delusion(s) to be just that: delusion(s).


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, June 05, 2017  

  • Hello,

    As expressed by Kevin, it is important to contextualize the terms Flying Saucer or Flying disk for the 1947 contemporaries. The direct semantic association was not the same or like as later or for us today (ETH, spacecraft) as I devoted long lines in my 2010 book. You must wait some months for it.

    It would be a "linguistic mistake" to think otherwise imho. There are many examples to underline it, for example the August 1947 Gallup poll (source in English: http://www.project1947.com/fig/gallup.htm). Without this contextualization, you (for me) will never understand what happened for the 1947 RAFB or Foester ranch protagonists: they acted not as if facing a "spacecraft", but FS or FD contextualized... In this "big picture", anything strange found in the ground and believed to come from the sky may be FS or FD materials (and radar-targets in particular - Circleville incident and others -). It helps to understand the press release too...

    With this in mind, Roswell contextualized allow us (only me?) to find nothing really strange or surprising: These 1947 protagonists legitimately acted. Post-1978 myth tellers (or witnesses) are in a retrospective falsification process (consciously or not).



    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Monday, June 05, 2017  

  • Why said the US Air Force before Roswell: "We dont know what Flying Disks are, its nothing from us!" and after Roswell they told: "Flying Disks dont exist!" ^^

    This is just the really strange Thing and very interessting!

    Why they told that? Maybe because they found a crashed Flying Disks and that what they saw, who are in the crashed Disk was so shocking that they thought "We cant that tell to the World!"

    By Blogger Michael Loengard, at Monday, June 05, 2017  

Post a Comment

<< Home