Ghost Hunting by Jason Hawes, Grant Wilson, and Michael Jan Friedman
Some of my readers might recognize references to TAPS (The Atlantic Paranormal Society), the paranormal research group at the heart of SFC’s “Ghost Hunters”. Jason Hawes is the founder of TAPS, and Grant Wilson has been his partner in that endeavor for several years. This is ostensibly the story of how TAPS came to be and Jason’s accounting of several dozen cases, reaching back to the early days of the organization to the end of the second season of “Ghost Hunters”.
Coming into the book, I was concerned. TAPS has been at the center of controversy ever since the beginning of “Ghost Hunters”. For every devoted fan and supporter, they seem to generate a skeptic and critic, and the two sides have been left to battle it out across the internet. Supporters swear by the integrity of Jason, Grant, and the rest of the team, while skeptics deconstruct the supposed “evidence”, pointing out the potential fraud taking place.
The nature of “Ghost Hunters” is such that the footage itself is heavily edited. As with any reality TV show, one can never be certain that the final presentation reflects the truth. Post-production can layer sound bites over footage that had nothing to do with a comment, and reaction shots can be spliced to make an innocuous event seem startling. The list goes on and on, and this has made it impossible to defend TAPS on the merits of the show footage alone. It always comes down to Jason and Grant’s word, which is worth little to skeptics.
TAPS also credits itself for originating the idea of applying scientific methodology to the paranormal research field. While it’s true that many groups are filled with thrill-seekers with little desire for real-world analysis of “evidence”, solid scientific research has been conducted in places like the Rhine Research Center at Duke University and the PEAR Laboratory at Princeton. The claim is made more troublesome when TAPS’ practices themselves are evaluated against the scientific method.
So this book, for me, was a chance for Jason and Grant to answer some difficult questions and defend both their practices and conclusions. On the scientific front, I wanted some clarification on the seeming discrepancy between the claimed technical expertise behind the scenes and the misuse and misinterpretation of instrumentation on “Ghost Hunters”. Beyond that, I wanted Jason to delve into the evidence evaluation, perhaps addressing many of the skeptics’ concerns.
Unfortunately, I was left disappointed. While the book does clarify the history of TAPS (including some honest information about his own experiences), the rest of the book is a thin accounting of selected cases, many of which were covered on “Ghost Hunters” in more detail. Discussion of the “evidence” itself is essentially a rundown of what was already on the show; there is no attempt to discuss any of the skeptics’ questions. In fact, Jason doesn’t ever bother to provide more detail into any of the “evidence” as an additional defense of TAPS’ conclusions.
This is one area where it would have been useful to bring in some additional analysis by the many technical specialists mentioned in the book, all of whom supposedly help TAPS with their research. At no time is this done; in fact, given the passages that betray a disturbing lack of technical understanding regarding equipment use, I’m forced to suggest that TAPS find new technical experts.
I could continue to outline the many areas left unexplored in Jason’s narrative, but it all comes back to one issue: a definitive lack of depth. Everything in this book is surface. Theories, assumptions, and folklore are tossed around, but supporting evidence, data, or documentation is never provided. The end result is a book that only adds to the never-ending debate. Supporters are expected to accept everything on faith, and skeptics are ignored if not outright dismissed.
I’m left to wonder if the lack of depth was designed into the book or the result of Friedman’s writing style. Friedman is better known for his media tie-in novels, most of which are the literary equivalent of light beer: functional, thin in nearly all aspects, and ultimately forgettable. I can’t help but think that Friedman was hired to take Jason’s dictated accounts and make them easily readable. Friedman wouldn’t have the necessary background to press for more detail. Ultimately this will become part of the debate: was the truth sanitized in the end product?
One could argue that this is not meant as a defense, but simply a collection of “true contemporary ghost stories”. If so, the lack of depth affects this potential goal as well. Few of the stories are told with enough storytelling finesse to be unnerving, let alone thrilling. Here again the problem is familiarity; so many of the cases were covered on “Ghost Hunters” that the information retread pales in comparison.
In the end, this book will take a few hours to read, and the reader is unlikely to feel differently about TAPS after the experience. Supporters will still be supporters, skeptics will still be skeptics, and those on the fence will just be more conflicted. This is unfortunate, because a book with more depth could have been so much more.
