Skip to main content

How UFOs Conquered the World: The History of a Modern Myth – David Clarke ****

Strictly speaking the term UFO refers to any ‘unidentified flying object’, but in the minds of almost everyone it means just one thing: an advanced spacecraft visiting the Earth from another planet. Despite the absence of unambiguous, objective evidence this notion has become a mainstay of popular culture, tabloid journalism and the internet. How did this extraordinary situation come about? That’s not a question for an astrobiologist or aerospace engineer, but for a social scientist like David Clarke – a senior lecturer in journalism at Sheffield Hallam University, with a Ph.D. in cultural tradition and folklore. In this well reasoned and carefully researched book, Dr Clarke focuses on what he calls the UFO syndrome: ‘the entire human phenomenon of seeing UFOs, believing in them and communicating ideas about what they might be’.

The phrase ‘I want to believe’ was popularised by the TV show The X-Files in the 1990s, and it encapsulates the very heart of the UFO phenomenon: people want to believe in it. Mysterious objects seen in the sky are just part of a complex belief system that has evolved over the last seventy years into a remarkably robust edifice. The psychological term ‘cognitive dissonance’ – whereby a firmly held belief may actually become stronger when the believer is confronted with conflicting evidence – was originally coined in the context of a UFO cult in the 1950s. The X-Files went on to provide one of the most powerful tools in the cognitive dissonance arsenal, by popularising the idea that ‘They’ (the government, NASA et al) are actively concealing the truth about UFOs. This hypothesis – which Clarke points out is unfalsifiable – allows any awkward counter-evidence to be dismissed as ‘disinformation’.

The X-Files was just one of many science fiction works that influenced the way people think about UFOs. When Britain’s Ministry of Defence began to release its own UFO-related correspondence under the Freedom of Information act, David Clarke took on the role of consultant to the National Archives on the subject. He discovered that the bulk of the material consisted of sightings reported by members of the public, and ‘realised there was no escaping the link between what people said they saw in the sky and the fantasies of pop culture. The yearly statistics the ministry had compiled since 1959 suggested there was a correlation between the popularity of science fiction movies and UFO flaps.’

The mainstream media, like science fiction, has been instrumental in shaping the UFO phenomenon. Before the term ‘UFO’ was coined, unidentified flying objects were commonly referred to as ‘flying saucers’. Sightings were invariably described as being exactly that – flying objects in the shape of saucers. Yet the term ‘flying saucer’ originated as a journalistic misunderstanding, before anyone ever reported seeing a flying disc-shaped craft. In June 1947, a pilot named Kenneth Arnold observed a strange formation of nine semicircular or crescent-shaped aircraft moving ‘like a saucer would if you skipped it across water’. The journalist who first wrote up the story used the term ‘flying saucer’ – and it was only after this that people began to see saucer-shaped craft.

The book’s ten chapters cover all the major themes of ufology, ranging from lights in the sky to crashed saucers, government cover-ups and alien abductions. David Clarke is a strong advocate of Occam’s Razor, arguing that in all the cases he has encountered there is a simpler, more mundane explanation than the (admittedly more appealing) extraterrestrial hypothesis. That may sound all very dull and negative, but actually the opposite is true – it’s a fascinating account of the way perfectly normal people can have their perceptions and preconceptions shaped by what has become, as the book’s subtitle says, a modern myth.

Most of the material in the book is drawn from the author’s own interviews and investigations, which inevitably gives it something of a British bias. That’s not a bad thing, though, because many of the incidents described will be new to readers more familiar with American ufology. A case in point took place as long ago as 1967, when six ‘crashed saucers’ were discovered spread out across a large swathe of southern England one morning. This was a hoax perpetrated by a group of engineering apprentices, but its significance lies in the consternation it caused to the British authorities. There was no hint of any attempt to ‘cover up’ the evidence, or of a high-level contingency plan to deal with alien invasion. To quote the exact words of the RAF Group Captain sent to investigate one of the saucers, the immediate response in Whitehall was 'Shit! What shall we do?'

This isn’t a book for UFO believers, who will see it as a systematic attempt to kick over all their carefully constructed sandcastles. The fact is, however, that Clarke doesn’t kick over any sandcastles at all – he simply looks at them with closer scrutiny than their builders would like. To continue the metaphor, it’s a book for people who are prepared to admire sandcastles without needing to make-believe they’re real castles. If you’re the sort of person who would never dream of buying a book with ‘UFO’ in the title – this is the one that ought to change your mind.


Hardback 

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Andrew May

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Philip Ball - How Life Works Interview

Philip Ball is one of the most versatile science writers operating today, covering topics from colour and music to modern myths and the new biology. He is also a broadcaster, and was an editor at Nature for more than twenty years. He writes regularly in the scientific and popular media and has written many books on the interactions of the sciences, the arts, and wider culture, including Bright Earth: The Invention of Colour, The Music Instinct, and Curiosity: How Science Became Interested in Everything. His book Critical Mass won the 2005 Aventis Prize for Science Books. Ball is also a presenter of Science Stories, the BBC Radio 4 series on the history of science. He trained as a chemist at the University of Oxford and as a physicist at the University of Bristol. He is also the author of The Modern Myths. He lives in London. His latest title is How Life Works . Your book is about the ’new biology’ - how new is ’new’? Great question – because there might be some dispute about that! Many

The Naked Sun (SF) - Isaac Asimov ****

In my read through of all six of Isaac Asimov's robot books, I'm on the fourth, from 1956 - the second novel featuring New York detective Elijah Baley. Again I'm struck by how much better his book writing is than that in the early robot stories. Here, Baley, who has spent his life in the confines of the walled-in city is sent to the Spacer planet of Solaria to deal with a murder, on a mission with political overtones. Asimov gives us a really interesting alternative future society where a whole planet is divided between just 20,000 people, living in vast palace-like structures, supported by hundreds of robots each.  The only in-person contact between them is with a spouse (and only to get the distasteful matter of children out of the way) or a doctor. Otherwise all contact is by remote viewing. This society is nicely thought through - while in practice it's hard to imagine humans getting to the stage of finding personal contact with others disgusting, it's an intere

The Blind Spot - Adam Frank, Marcelo Gleiser and Evan Thompson ****

This is a curate's egg - sections are gripping, others rather dull. Overall the writing could be better... but the central message is fascinating and the book gets four stars despite everything because of this. That central message is that, as the subtitle says, science can't ignore human experience. This is not a cry for 'my truth'. The concept comes from scientists and philosophers of science. Instead it refers to the way that it is very easy to make a handful of mistakes about what we are doing with science, as a result of which most people (including many scientists) totally misunderstand the process and the implications. At the heart of this is confusing mathematical models with reality. It's all too easy when a mathematical model matches observation well to think of that model and its related concepts as factual. What the authors describe as 'the blind spot' is a combination of a number of such errors. These include what the authors call 'the bifur