On this page are excerpts and quotes from writers/authors who refer to the work of John Sabol and Mary Becker. John and Mary strongly encourage the reading of these books as well as these writers/authors other writings on their contribution towards ghost research. (The following are in no particular order.)
Metcalfe, David. Entering the Theatre of Manifestation – the Art of Possession. disinfo.com . June 17, 2013.
These methods bear some semblance to the theoretical archaeological techniques developed by John G. Sabol, Jr. and the C.A.S.P.E.R. group:
“Theatrical ghosting is the common thread and process that opens a link between one “living” ghost and another already physically dead. In this ghosting, the performance of past memories are recalled and shared. The behavior of the investigator (as participant in his/her internal ghost culture) and the ghost (as observer in her/her external ghost culture) resonate with one another, creating a “ghosting” (a mutual understanding) link from past to present that results in communicative behavior.”
– from Bodies of Substance, Fragments of Memories: An Archaeological Sensitivity to Ghostly Presence, John G. Sabol Jr
Sabol’s work uses these techniques to understand how we interact with history, place memory and what ways that becomes active in the present. FoolishPeople’s work activates this further through rituals that deeply embed the personal narratives of the participants into this invocation of past and future memories. Although both Sabol and the FoolishPeople are more careful than to provoke paranormal claims, the interplay that occurs between the performance narrative, place history, personal history and audience immersion provides an open ground for unexpected revelations and breakthroughs.
“We are the ghosts within these remembrances and memories as our experiences are recalled, and a symmetrical connection between past and present begins to percolate. We re-live our past cultural behavior through resonating moments that link us, through our contemporary performances, with those uncompleted (and still sensed) past events. This is a form of “theatrical ghosting” and a performance odyssey that takes us through the ghost culture of our life. There is nothing worse…or better…than this journey. Within these time and space travels we have already met the ghosts we seek out in our investigations, without even acknowledging their existence and continuing presence. An important consideration in these travels through space and time is whether we can tell the difference between internal ghosts, and those that are external and foreign to our own personal feelings and cultural values.”
– from Bodies of Substance, Fragments of Memories: An Archaeological Sensitivity to Ghostly Presence, John G. Sabol Jr.
Matsuo, Alex. The Haunted Actor. Bloomington: AuthorHouse, 2014. Chapter 13, Creating a Production out of Investigating, Reenactments. pp 164-165
“…For example, John Sabol Jr., also known as the Ghost Excavator and the founder of C.A.S.P.E.R (Center for the Archaeological Studies of Presences Through Ethnographic Resonance), has engaged with ghosts and spirits at Burnside’s [sic] Bridge at Antietam by taking on different roles with his team for the purposes of engaging with the deceased in their context. Sabol’s research shows remarkable results, as can be seen on his website. He has investigated and researched field for decades as well as published several books about his work and methodology. If you want to learn more about his work, it is strongly recommended!”
“Sabol and Becker strongly argue that an excavation is not a reenactment. On the C.A.S.P.E.R. website the difference is defined as this: “A re-enactment re-creates a historical event that is considered past. A “ghost excavation” is an immersion into particular past cultural acts as they would have been (and continue to be) experienced by particular individuals.” Through active engagement with the deceased, there is dialogue taking place for the purposes of learning about the past and learning new things that may or may not have been common knowledge before. This method strongly indicates that there is more interaction and results produced through this method of investigating, and according to Sabol and Becker, these results are subsequently validated.
Jones, Marie D. & Flaxman, Larry. The Resonance Key. Franklin Lakes: New Page Books/Career Press, 2009. pp 85-86
“John Sabol, founder and principal investigator for the Center for the Anthropological Studies of the Paranormal for the Eastern Region proposed a very intriguing theory. Sabol authored two articles about historical haunted locations and resonance. In these articles, titled “Natural Selection and the Involution of the Gettysburg Ghosts” and “Ritual, Resonance, and Ghost Research: The Play in the Fields,” he wrote for Ghostvillage.com about the idea of repetitive behavior create a resonance at a particular location, then later associated with ghosts.
Using the rich historical site at Gettysburg, Sabol postulated that ghostly phenomena occurs due to the existence of activity and/or event fields, “including rhythmic behavioral movements (such as walking, reading, and gazing) that are repeated over and over again in a given area.” The repetition would then form a pattern that, via resonance, would continue to manifest long after the initial pattern was created. …”
Parsons, Brian D. The “E4″ Method. Twinsburg: Lulu, 2013. (Mary Becker and John Sabol, in particular, are mentioned throughout Parsons’ book. Sabol’s Ghost Excavation methodology is the basis of his [Parsons] “E4” Method.)
“…I was amazed with everything that he [John Sabol] said and his words resonated with my thoughts and ideas…His “Ghost Excavation” methodology involved the approach of “digging” into the past instead or marching around as 21st century investigators, connecting the environment instead of demanding the attention of a ghost or haunting. His “participate, observe, perform” process of interaction also blew me away since this embraced some of the research I had done into belief about paranormal phenomenon…”
“…The first thing John’s method brings is structure. The preplanned scenarios are worked out well in advance and cultural references and even target objects are acquired for the excavation. Rarely are any preplanning conducted in ghost hunts let alone paranormal investigations (except maybe for the search for former owners and those who died there). This type of structure is something I personally operated on even when going to places such as abandoned prisons and hospitals. Interestingly, when John was approached by some groups to conduct excavations the groups backed out when they were told of the planning that would have to happen…”
Williams, Jonathan. Believe in the Unbelievable. Bedford: Numen Creations, Inc., 2014. …age of Ghost TV, Ghost Excavations with John Sabol. pp 174-176.
“In the middle of 2011 I was invited by John Sabol and Mary Becker to conduct a Ghost Excavation with them at Burnside Bridge in Antietam Battlefield. This was a great honor to actually for one, get into the battlefield at night, and two, to investigate with a fantastic colleague in the field.
John has written numerous books on the subject of “Ghost Excavations” and is one of the most knowledgeable individuals I have ever met in the field.
He is an archaeologist, anthropologist, actor, author, and overall a great person to work with and be around. A scholar in the field of Ghost Research that does not get the recognition he has earned in the 40 years of his study.
When we arrived at the battlefield we did a walkthrough of the property with the rest of the team consisting of other great people in the field. I had my PSB 7 box hardline to a voice recorder and earbuds simultaneously so that I could heard [sic] in real time and record the activity. I also had a separate recorder recording outside activity so I could sync them together forming an incredible consolidation of collaborating data and Q&A with a protective barrier leaving out all questions of contamination.
Along the walk through, I stumbled upon an injured soldier in the PSB7 box calling for help. I immediately followed up with this…”
Lipman, Caron. Co-habiting with Ghosts. Dorchester: Dorset Press, 2014. Conclusion: The Liminal Home/Self, pp 200-201, 227.
Investigating anomalous phenomena in the Brighton (UK) Book reviews; http://brightonparanormal.org.uk/2013/10/07/the-production-of-haunted-space/
The Production of Haunted Space
October 7, 2013 by Duncan in Book Review and tagged archaeology, ghost, ghost hunting, John G. Sabol, paranormal investigation
The Production of Haunted Space: Its Meaning and Excavation
John G. Sabol Jr. (Bedford, PA: Ghost Excavation Books, 2013).
Probably one of the oddest and most original books I have read. I saw the author give a talk at a paranormal investigation conference, where he went down like a lead balloon, because most of the audience misidentified what he is doing with the usual ‘paranormal reality-show’ schtick [sic]. It is more sophisticated than that. Yet whether it offers a valid approach to paranormal research is a separate question.
Sabol is an archaeologist by training. In mainstream scientific paranormal research it is not known what a ‘ghost’ is nor what ‘haunted’ means. Sabol’s approach, in contrast, is to use archaeological concepts to ‘produce’ ghosts and hauntings. He identifies a site, takes his team onto it, and re-enacts historical incidents that took place at the site, recording as he goes. His is a social science methodology that utilises fundamentally pragmatist and postmodern concepts in its approach. A ‘historical incident’ for Sabol is a set of culturally-conditioned codes whose traces persist through time in one form or another. If he can identify traces of those codes in his recordings – for example, sounds that resemble words that could have been spoken on the battlefield – then a trace of those codes has been retrieved and is re-presenting itself to us for interpretation in the present. This is a ‘haunting’, a ‘ghost’. There is nothing ‘paranormal’ for Sabol about haunted sites. A ‘haunting’ is the persistence and retrieval at a site of social codes, of signs. A ‘haunting’ is a semiotic process, rather than anything ‘spiritual’ or – indeed – exclusively material. What differentiates Sabol’s method from your run-of-the-mill ghost hunter is that the traces returned by it will have some kind of historical accuracy.
This is not science, because it re-creates hauntings according to a particular definition, rather than seeking to establish what a haunting is through material evidence. But it is not magick either, because no claim of truth or validity is being made for the phenomena that the method creates – the phenomena are regarded simply as signs, open to further interpretation.
Sadly, there are a lot of *typos in the text, which lets it down a little. It is such an uncompromisingly original book, however, I cannot help but admire it. On the question of whether it constitutes a substantial contribution to the understanding of paranormal phenomena in general, or offers instead only one angle on a particular spectrum of experiences – I am tending towards the latter. But it is a unique book and it certainly provoked a lot of thoughts.
*Mary’s response in reference to typos: many of the typos are direct quotes by other authors that were cited and perhaps an area or so of corrections for John Sabol. I certainly appreciate when a correction is brought to my attention regarding John’s writings as this is quite the “deer in the headlamp feeling” and a passionate “mea culpa” to be said to all! Ironically, and I certainly was not necessarily looking to call the kettle black but since the writer is being particular and people who live in glass houses, etc., etc., etc., there are a few grammatical and typo errors in the writer’s review. Oh dear me and gracious goodness!)
