High Strangeness: UFO Dissonance

Thursday, July 26, 2018

UFO Dissonance

So, the other day I was mentioned in a tweet from a big UFO fan who had been at Comic-Con over the weekend and had seen the teaser for Blue Book, the new History Channel series about Dr. J. Allen Hynek's UFO investigations for the Air Force. In his tweet, this guy mentioned that the star of the series, Aiden Gillen, claimed in a Comic-Con panel discussion to have read my Hynek bio, The Close Encounters Man, to help prepare for the role...

My response was fairly negative, as I know for a fact that the TV show is going to be utter drek, but the guy who posted the tweet vigorously defended the show -- he seemed to basically accept that it was going to be wildly inaccurate, based on what he had seen in the trailer, but said he intended to watch it anyway when it premieres next winter. He then told me that the show's producers were justified in ignoring historical facts because if they were to show Dr. Hynek spending 1948 sitting at a desk reading UFO reports it would be rather dull. I responded that there were actually a lot of exciting and interesting things going on with Hynek's work in 1948, and that a good writer could dramatize anything (never mind that Hynek was working for Project Sign in 1948, and the Blue Book TV series actually starts its story in 1951).

Next thing I know, this guy is arguing with me over the actual number of UFO files Hynek investigated for Project Sign in 1948. He said one number. I corrected him. He insisted he was right. On it went for the rest of the evening, neither one of us backing down. He got his number from Hynek's book The Hynek UFO Report, I got my number from Hynek's archives, so who are you going to believe? Anyway, the point is, this guy was really, really concerned that we got the number of cases exactly right, because accuracy was really, really important to him. Okay, I can get behind that -- a lot of UFO fans are sticklers for accuracy, and they should be. Accuracy is a big deal in the field of UFOlogy. We need more accuracy.

But here's my issue with that: How does a guy who will argue for hours over the precise number of cases Hynek investigated in 1948 turn around and insist that a TV series that, based on its own trailer, gets virtually every aspect of Hynek's life and work wrong, will be worth watching? Why is a trivial fact treated like a life-or-death matter, but a big lie simply shrugged off?

Does this make sense to anyone?
Post a Comment