Ghosts: A Half-Dozen Explanations

Copyright 2020 by Gary L. Pullman

Chillers and Thrillers has devoted space to several articles on Tzvetan Todorov's insightful analysis of the literary fantastic. At this point, despite the oversimplification that results, we can say, for Todorov, the fantastic usually resolves itself into the explained and the unexplained. The former he calls “uncanny”; the latter, “marvelous.” Only when there is no resolution, one way or another, does the fantastic remain fantastic.

Here are a few examples:

Uncanny stories: “The Damned Thing” by Ambrose Bierce; “The Red Room” by H. G. Wells; The Taking by Dean Koontz; Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson; The Island of Dr. Moreau by H. G. Wells

Marvelous stories: “The Monkey's Paw” by W. W. Jacobs; “1408” by Stephen King; The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty; “The Masque of the Red Death” by Edgar Allan Poe; The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde; “Dracula's Guest” by Bram Stoker.

Fantastic stories: The Turn of the Screw by Henry James, “The Signal-man” by Charles Dickens, The Possession of Emily Rose (Scott Derrickson, director)

To write such a story, an author must allow either of two understandings of the action: reason or science can explain the phenomena, bizarre though they may, as natural events or the strange phenomena are beyond explanation and, as such, may actually be of an otherworldly or supernatural origin. The tension between these two alternatives creates and maintains suspense. It is only when the story shows that the action is natural (explicable by reason or science) or supernatural (inexplicable by reason or science) that the story itself is no longer fantastic, but either uncanny or marvelous, respectively.

It helps, therefore, to know how scientists explain seemingly fantastic phenomena, such as (for example) ghosts, vampires, werewolves, and zombies.

Scientists offer six possible explanations for ghosts: low-frequency sound, mold, carbon monoxide, suggestion, drafts, and the enjoyment of fear.

Although people have trouble hearing low-frequency sound, it registers on some level, causing them to feel “uneasy”; some interpret this emotional queasiness as resulting from the presence of unseen ghosts.

Breathing mold is unhealthy for many reasons, not the least of which is that it can cause neurological symptoms like delirium [and] dementia” as well as “irrational fears”—just like ghosts!

Similarly, breathing carbon monoxide can cause not only hallucinations, chest pressure, “an unexplained feeling of dread.” Oh, yes: it can also kill.

Some folks are susceptible to suggestions by others, including suggestions that ordinary events have ghostly explanations.

The exchange of cold for warm hair that's caused by drafts resulting from the opening of doors or windows can create “cold spots” in a room, which, for some reason (or no reason) some people attribute to the presence of ghosts.

Some people like being scared. Like Fox Mulder of The X-Files, they may want, therefore, to believe. Unlike Mulder, they may give in to their desire and believe in ghosts simply because they want to believe in ghosts.

Knowing possible scientific explanations for ghosts allows writers to have a skeptical character explain them to another who's a rue believer. Whether the ghost is thus explained (uncanny) or proves inexplicable (marvelous) is up to the writer, of course. In rare cases, the ghost may even remain fantastic, defying categorization as either a natural or an unnatural phenomenon.

Knowing scientific explanations for ghosts can also help a writer to establish the story's setting. If the ghost is due to low-frequency sound effects, there has to be a device that emits such sounds; if mold or carbon monoxide is the culprit, there has to be a source for mold or carbon dioxide; a drafty place, such as a castle, perhaps, has to be part of the setting if there are to be drafts.

A knowledge of scientific explanations for ghosts can also help a writer to establish the story's characters. If it's “the power of suggestion” that causes a haunting, a character must be susceptible to such suggestion; he or she probably doesn't know much about science, is apt to be gullible, and is likely to be a follower, rather than a leader.

What kind of character wants to be scared badly enough to believe without any foundation but his or her own delight in fright? I picture a character who lives an uneventful life or who wants more glamour and attention than he or she usually receives. Often, if a person (or a fictional character) is involved in bizarre, seemingly inexplicable events, he or she will become either famous or notorious. Either way, such a character will not want for attention or excitement.

In our next post, we'll take a peek at what science says about vampires.