Good article... thanks for the link, in keeping with the post of the upcoming (?) Wild Man of the Navidad movie.Don't you just love how so many rural American communities have their particular boogeyman with its own alleged idiosyncracies seemingly specific to the local culture? "Step back" (i.e., examine the cumulative phenomenon on a region- or continental-scale), however, to summarize general patterns, perhaps you get creedence for a more "biological" entity? Nick, do you see much of a parallel with such creatures in Europe (the Man-Monkey, for instance) or Asia? Or would these creatures largely retain their sinister (more anthropomorphic) or fantastic traits? Perhaps those aspects are even corroborated within the totality of the myths/folklore.Even though I am basically a "nuts-and-bolts" cryptoz-enthusiast, in my more philosophical moments, sometimes I wonder if we're not seeing-the forest-for-the trees (to use an admittedly cliche' yet seemingly apt metaphor).
AWT: The Man-Monkey is (at least as sure as I can be) something paranormal (however we define the paranormal), rather than a purely physical, flesh and blood animal.Others seem to straddle both realms - the real and the paranormal.Some, I'm sure are genuine unknown animals, or animals that have survived extinction (Gigantopithecus for the Yeti maybe?).However, I have to say that I think looking purely at the normal and purely at the paranormal is unlikely to resolve what cryptozoology is all about. I think it requires us to look in various areas.
Yeah... for the "man-monsters" in particular, I am beginning to resist the tendency to compartmentalize the "purely" cryptozoological (flesh-and-blood) apart from the purely paranormal (e.g., psychic phenomena), and for that matter, the cultural/folklore dimensions as well. Admittedly this approach goes against my training and indoctrination in the natural sciences. Am eager to see what else you have in store for us!
Post a Comment