When the Lights Went Out – Revenge of the Black Monk

If a ghostly monk can bite a sandwich, what’s stopping you from giving it a damn good thrashing?

There’s a new ‘true life’ haunting movie coming out next month, and this one is British.

Interestingly in this case the director has a connection to the ‘real’ story (Wiki’s version here). Inexplicably, he’s advanced the period setting by nearly a decade, presumably to hook the story onto another real life event; the energy crisis of 1973/4 (hence the title). Ironically, this draws attention to one alternate explanation for the lights going out during the ‘real’ haunting – power cuts and electrical problems happened before said shortage, and they still happen today. Even this may be redundant when we consider another explanation; that somebody might simply have been turning switches off;

‘The lights would go out, and when they looked in the cupboard under the stairs the main switch would be turned off. On one occasion, Mrs. Pritchard carefully taped it in the “on” position with insulating tape; half an hour later, the lights were off  again, and tape had simply vanished.’
-‘Poltergeist!’, 1981, p.130

Wooooooo! Ahem. Anyway, Holden is the son of a one of the contributing figures in the story, Mrs Rene Holden:

‘Another neighbour, Rene Holden (who was a bit psychic), was in the Pritchards’ sitting room when the lights went out. In the faint glow of the streetlamp that came through the curtains she saw the lower half of a figure dressed in a long black garment.’
-‘Beyond the Occult’, 1988 p.237

‘A bit psychic’? Isn’t that like being ‘a bit pregnant’? The other major incidents involving Holden’s mother were the apparently spiritual theft of a fur coat, and the mysterious throwing of a plate of sandwiches around a room before a ghostly yet physical bite was taken out of one of them. All of this being under cover of another bout of another selective power failure. The latter is a rare instance of potential physical evidence of the paranormal that could have been tested, bearing as it did the impressions of apparently ‘enormous teeth’. Instead however, Holden kept the sandwich herself and somehow allowed it to deteriorate into ‘crumbs’ after only a few days. So we are told by author Colin Wilson, who has produced the closest thing we have to a written primary source for all this; his book ‘Poltergeist!’ (along with his other books like ‘Beyond the Occult’, referenced above). Though the director of the movie has drawn from family oral history for his version of the story, Wilson’s book was written closer to the time when the events in question happened, so might better reflect personal testimony. Then again, maybe not. In any case, his book was still published a good decade on from the ‘hauntings’, in 1981. Wilson himself was not involved or even present at the time, so far as I can determine. This, along with Holden’s film, is by its nature actually a secondary source and of limited usefulness in getting to the bottom of events. As Wilson relates, ‘no trained investigator came on the scene while the disturbances were at their height.’ So we don’t have any evidence from parapsychologists or even the pseudoscientific investigations of the average ‘ghost club’ to go on. Nor even any newspaper reports (that I could find). Just anecdote; although in this case it isn’t just family tradition, as visitors are also claimed to have experienced supposedly supernatural shenanigans (which of course doesn’t mean that they were). The film director claims that the police witnessed the ‘ghost’, and local MP Geoff Lofthouse writes of his personal experiences in his autobiography:

‘I suppose it would be about 1965, and I was in a Council meeting with Violet Pritchard, when I started ribbing her about the stories that were going around that her son’s house up on East Drive was haunted. Violet had great charm, but also great directness. She looked me in the eyes and said: “Well Geoff, if that’s what you think, you had better come up with me.” So after the Council meeting I picked up Sarah, and we went up to Joe Pritchard’s. Just as we entered, Violet said: “This will wipe the smile off your face.” The stories of the poltergeist had been going the rounds for a few months then. Sarah had heard them, but neither of us took them very seriously; after all, Chequerfield estate was not some haunted house in the South of London or a ruined tower up in the Yorkshire Dales, it was newly built council housing on what had been agricultural land. In we went and sat down. We had been there about twenty minutes when suddenly there was a banging on the wall, at this sound the dog, who was sitting right in front of me, stood up stock still and the hairs on his body rose up in the air. It only stood a second before darting through the door. Joe Pritchard said “It’s here again,” and to prove that it was, two candlesticks rose up and were thrown through the air. One second they were standing on a sideboard, or it may have been a shelf, and the next they had gone up into the air and broken the chandelier. This was enough for Sarah. Without any ado she dashed out of the house. I was just following her when politeness caused me to stop at the bottom of the stairs to say: “Excuse me but I have to go.” And I did, I went rapidly at the point when a number of blankets were thrown down at us.

In most things I am a bit sceptical, but when it comes to the stories of the Pontefract poltergeist I am a true believer. Taps were turning themselves on, and a whole range of activity was taking place, and this in a family of everyday Pontefract people. I decided that Violet Pritchard should be my Deputy Mayor because of all the people I have met in my life as a politician, I regard few politicians with such warmness as Violet Pritchard. When I say that she was a kind and simple soul, I do not mean to be disrespectful in any way.’
-’A Very Miner MP’, 1986, p.69

Very disconcerting at the time, no doubt, but so can fiction be. There are any number of explanations for what Lofthouse relates that don’t require the existence of ghosts – something that should require some pretty extraordinary evidence to accept. This lack of empirical evidence is a perennial problem with hauntings and similar experiences, in that all available evidence is anecdotal, mediated through a third party, and not recorded until years after the fact.

Wilson, too, is not a parapsychologist. is well-known in paranormalist and Fortean circles, having written a string of ‘factual’ books and bought into a wide range of ‘phenomena’ from illusionist Uri Geller (‘The Geller Phenomenon’) to the lost city of Atlantis. He’s also an author of true crime books and fiction.

Sightings like Holden’s led to the ghost being identified as that of a local historical figure, the ‘Black Monk’. Amusingly, this turned out to be a load of nonsense, and so Wilson, having himself debunked this hypothesis (p.146-7 of ‘Poltergeist!’), rationalised the whole thing away as the ghost choosing to look like the monk based upon overheard family conversations. Alternatively, the sightings were hallucinations, delusions, confabulation, or something else entirely. But it seems that it’s easier to just make the facts fit the story on the presupposition that what the family experienced was something paranormal.

So what really went on here? We’ll probably never know, but other cases from the Fox sisters to the Enfield poltergeist suggest that these ‘ghosts’ are linked to a very real phenomenon; that of growing up. The paranormalists express this in terms of supernatural manifestations fuelled by the available ‘energy’ of puberty, but a more realistic interpretation would be that they are the result of childish attention-seeking, acting out, and/or teenage angst. The title of the new film becomes highly relevant here. All of the major physical manifestations (sandwich hurling included) took place ‘When the Lights Went Out’, giving a great deal of room for real, live, human beings to get involved, just as in physical mediumship. Whatever the case, the film looks likely to provide an interesting dramatisation of a real life experience of a ‘haunting’ – but through no fault of the makers, it isn’t evidence of the paranormal. Doubtless the true life marketing will convince many that it is.

9 thoughts on “When the Lights Went Out – Revenge of the Black Monk

  1. A much more thoughtful exploration of the poltergeist phenomenon that Colin Wilson’s is by (of all people) Sacheverell Sitwell, who recognised in 1940 the connection with adolescence, and especially with pubertal girls (he book is called ‘Poltergeists’; he gave a detailed analysis of a particular ‘haunting’ which must have been the last interesting thing to happen in Worksop). I would tend to give the last word about this to that reliable well of good sense Dr Johnson, who debunked the Cock Lane Ghost, saying ‘It is, therefore, the opinion of the whole assembly, that the child has some art of making or counterfeiting a particular noise, and that there is no agency of any higher cause’.

  2. Dr Johnson? Good lord, I didn’t realise. He certainly nailed it, didn’t he? Thanks Facey, I really value your contributions, and I’m sure readers do too.

    I’m sure I read an article once on the very subject of poltergeists as expression of teenage angst, but damned if I can remember where.

    1. He seems to have subscribed to a psychic influence hypothesis – whatever I read/imagined was very much on the prank/hoax side of things. This is why I try to note everything these days – memory only gets worse!

  3. i am a sceptic but this is a poorly written article as it,s main argument is using the facts to fit the story. that in itself is this article. There is nothing in this article that is an educated argument. At the end of the day they were lying or they were not. I have never bought the idea that people who experience this kind of thing are all mad. For me to denounce everyone as nutters or liars without a cohesive argument is lazy.

    1. As I said, ‘we’ll probably never know’. That’s not a reason to assume that it was a ghost.

  4. In regards to the Enfield Poltergeist case. Yes some of it was dodgy, like the photos of Janet’s supposed levitation.

    But saying the girls had consistently faked most of the phenomena to me seems far fetched. I am aware that humans are fallible and prone to misperception. But in the Enfield case I fail to see how that could serve as the most sufficient explanation.

    Graham Morris the photographer for example along with a journalist saw objects flying around the room all at once and no one was throwing them as all the children and their mother were in the room visibly not doing anything, he even got hit with a Lego Brick above his eyebrow. A police officer wrote an official statement in which she stated that a a chair levitated off the ground and moved a few feet across the room before settling down again.

    Another neighbour was with a child alone in the room watching them stay asleep, when all of a sudden a chair next to him rose up and flung far across the room hitting the wall. I don’t see how these occurrences can be explained by fallibility. If someone claimed to have heard footsteps or felt someone touching their back or even thinking they saw a figure, then understandably such occurrences could be explained in psychological terms.

    But if a chair has been flung across the room and hitting a wall. Well it means just that, that a chair has been flung across a room. To get back to trickery, I simply just can’t see how a lot of the phenomena was faked (Besides on occasions where trickery could definitely be ruled out as one time Janet’s uncle was alone in the house and saw the door handle go down and fully open by itself) – If someone could do a reconstruction of the events with two young girls in a resembling house and could explain how they could make various objects fly around the room simultaneously or make a large chair appear to levitate off the ground and move across the floor whilst appearing physically inactive, then I’ll gladly remit but until then I will at least remain an agnostic on the Enfield case. I doubt anyone ever will though.

  5. There is no end to human credulity. Thats a fact. I recently heard that back in 2008 the director of the movie “When the lights went out” actually bought the so called haunted house from phil pritchard for plenty of cash. Hmmmm thats fishy in itself then shortly afterwards and just before the release of his film so called reports appeared in newspapers again stating that the black monk had apparantly started up his antics again. Now im not saying that there was no real haunting back in the 60’s surrounding the house but the recent events seem more inspired by hype and seeking money than anything else. It smacks of the BS that came out of the whole Amytiville rubbish. Its funny too that everyone involved made lots of doe from the books and movies. What does that say about human deception and manipulation to suit their own ends? I have to agree hearsay and third hand half cocked stories should be confined to childrens halloween stories. “Provide me with FACTS watson NOT fiction to fit the facts.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s