• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Science and Reason in Film and Television Recent entertainment media portrayals of science and pseudoscience imply that skepticism is no longer useful and may even be dangerous. WILLIAM EVANS ho has the most dangerous job on prime-time entertainment television? The police officer? The Wsoldier? The private investigator? The answer is "none of the above." On prime-time entertainment televi- sion, scientists are most at risk. Ten percent of scientists fea- tured in prime-time entertainment programming get killed, and five percent kill someone. No other occupational group is more likely to kill or be killed (Gerbner 1987). Popular entertainment media have long portrayed scien- tists as mad, bad, and dangerous to know, but in the past few decades entertainment media portrayals of science have changed significantly, and these changes seem to have acceler- ated in recent years. Science remains dangerous, but it is also increasingly portrayed as useless in solving problems. The skepticism about paranormal claims that is a part of scientific thinking is portrayed as a handicap. And in many newer SKEPTICAL INQUIRER January/February 1996 45 result, Carol Anne suffers repeated and terrifying encounters point, the real work of saving Carol Anne can begin, and with otherworldly entities. Dr. Seaton seems cruel, and his sure enough it is a combination of faith and benevolent psy- continued skepticism in the face of incontrovertible evidence chic power that in the end save Carol Anne and her loved seems almost pathological. ones from the malevolent spirits. Fortunately for Carol Anne, a psychic arrives to save her. While the portrayal of Dr. Seaton is perhaps unusually neg- The psychic, named Tangina, becomes aware of Carol Anne's ative, skeptics are frequently portrayed by Hollywood as being plight via telepathy and rushes to help her, only to be dogmatic, misanthropic, and just plain wrong. In films such as rebuked and ridiculed by Dr. Seaton. As the peril to Carol Poltergeist III, The Entity, and even Ghostbusters (where the Anne and others grows, and Dr. Seaton refuses to accept skeptic is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency official Tangina's warnings about the great power of supernatural who insists diat it is the ghostbusters rather than ghosts who forces, Tangina demands that Carol Anne's uncle and aunt are responsible for an epidemic of strange phenomena and (with whom Carol Anne is living) make a choice: They must whose order to shut down die ghostbusters' "containment sys- choose between Tangina's mysticism and Dr. Seaton's ratio- tem" brings predictable, dire consequences), skepticism is nalism. The uncle and aunt decide to follow Tangina's rec- shown to be foolish and inefficacious, while psychics and para- ommendations and to reject Dr. Seaton's counsel. When Dr. psychologists step in to eliminate die paranormal threats. Seaton objects, the previously restrained uncle treats him Hess (1993) and Tudor (1989) identify die transition from harshly, calling the psychologist's diagnoses "stupid and idi- skepticism to credulity as a major theme and distinguishing otic." The outcome of this confrontation is meant to be feature of recent horror and suspense movies. People who live pleasing to an audience that has witnessed Dr. Seaton's in haunted houses (e.g., as in The Amityville Horror), or find increasingly strained and, finally ludicrous, attempts to find dieir loved ones possessed or pursued by demons (e.g., The prosaic explanations for fantastic events. Shortly after this Exorcist, Poltergeist), or find themselves immersed in satanic confrontation. Dr. Seaton is killed, pushed down an elevator conspiracies (e.g., Rosemarys Baby, The Omen) typically are at shaft by a teenager who is possessed by evil spirits. At this first skeptical regarding the supernatural; but their safety and SKEPTICAL INQUIRER January/February 1996 47 even their survival require that they acknowledge the reality of Agent Scully plays "The X-Files'" token skeptic, but as the supernatural. In these films, to deny the reality of the Emery (1995) notes, Scully's skepticism is often a symptom of supernatural is to place oneself and one's loved ones at risk. As her closed-mindedness. Like Dr. Seaton in Poltergeist III, Scully audience members, we often find ourselves rooting for skepti- remains skeptical even after she has witnessed remarkable and cal characters to forsake skepticism. Sometimes a converted unequivocally paranormal events. Her skepticism is seldom skeptic must work to convert other skeptics, to make others shown to be useful or warranted, and in recent episodes she recognize the reality and danger of the supernatural. Here seems decidedly less skeptical (a change that should perhaps be again, audience members often find themselves rooting for expected given the many paranormal forces and extraterrestrial successful evangelization, since the survival of one or more lik- beings she has encountered in the show's first two seasons). able characters, and perhaps even the world, depends on it. "The X-Files" achieves a kind of realism that sets it apart from The power of diese narratives is such that even dedicated skep- previous television science fiction series such as "The Twilight tics often find themselves cheering when a skeptical character Zone" and "The Outer Limits." "The X-Files" adopts the quasi- comes to believe in the supernatural. documentary style of recent television police dramas, appropriates the authority and prestige of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, The Paranormal Becomes Normal and suggests that "The X-Files" cases are similar to real cases. "The X-Files" perhaps has more in common with shows such as While skeptics should be distressed by films t h a t portray the transi- "Unsolved Mysteries" and "Sightings"—shows in which allegedly tion from skepticism to credulity as a matter of life and death, at real paranormal events are often reenacted—than it does with least these films acknowledge that older shows such as "The Twilight skepticism is an understandable first Zone." In following the discussions response to fantastic claims and won- of "The X-Files" fans on the drous events. In these films, the major Internet, it becomes clear that, characters typically at first consider while most fans do not believe "The prosaic explanations, even though they X-Files" to be a documentary soon become convinced that supernat- (although a few fans seem to have ural forces are at work. These films trouble distinguishing fact from fic- reassure us that the major characters tion), many believe that "The X- are not eager to believe in the super- Files" cases are highly plausible and natural, that they are sensible, normal that the FBI and other government people. (In fact, very few mainstream agencies are actively, if secretly, entertainment media offerings portray investigating similar cases. the victims of the supernatural as hav- In popular entertainment prior ing had an interest in the supernatural before they became victims, even to "The X-Files," skepticism was though in the real world a previous necessary, if only to provide an interest in UFOs, demons, and other obstacle for the protagonists to paranormal phenomena is characteris- Actors Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny play FBI overcome. In "The X-Files," skep- tic of those who claim to have encoun- agents Dana Scully and Fox Mulder on "The X-Files." ticism is almost wholly unneces- tered such phenomena.) sary. Although it remains to be seen if future entertainment media offerings will follow the In contrast to entertainment media offerings in which skepti- lead of "The X-Files," the total immersion of " T h e X-Files" i n cism is portrayed as a normal, if untenable, response to fantastic the paranormal is worrisome. It suggests that paranormal claims, the television series "The X-Files" presents a new and events are common and that even likable, educated, and potentially pernicious portrayal of the paranormal as entirely nor- attractive people like agents Mulder and Scully can embrace mal. In "The X-Files," FBI agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully the supernatural. investigate paranormal events in the same routinized, "it's all in a day's work" manner in which "Dragnet's" Sergeant Friday and Skepticism and Hollywood Officer Gannon investigated armed robbery and petty theft. Paranormal events are mundane, "The X-Files" suggests, and even Skeptics have had some success in persuading journalists to an initial but quickly abandoned skepticism is no longer war- include a skeptical point of view in news stories about the ranted. Agent Mulder is always ready (and often eager) to con- paranormal, although, clearly, more needs to be done in this sider the possibility that paranormal forces account for the phe- regard. Unfortunately, Hollywood accords skeptics no stand- nomena he is investigating, and his hunches typically prove to be ing to address the portrayal (or the absence) of skepticism in correct. In conversation, Mulder and other characters are fond of film and television. Many film and television producers would offering offhand and even wholly gratuitous, credulous references no doubt claim that because their products are merely enter- to a wide variety of paranormal phenomena. Emery (1995) aptly characterizes these references as "extraneous poppycock." Science continued on 58 4 8 January/February 1996 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Science from page 48 abandon their reliance on skepticism as a References source of error and danger. Emery. C. Eugene, Jr. 1995. Paranormal and para- tainment, neither viewers nor Carl Sagan (1995) implores television noia intermingle on Fox TV's "X-Files." SKEP- researchers should take "The X-Files" producers to work with scientists and TICAL INQUIRER, 19 (March/April): 18-19. and similar offerings seriously. But this skeptics to develop a nonfiction series that Gerbner, George. 1987. Science on television: excuse is increasingly disingenuous as details how fantastic claims can be investi- How it affects public conceptions.

Load more

  4

Copy Link