Post by Catherine Fearnley on Aug 29, 2004 11:22:03 GMT -5
INTERNATIONAL VAMPIRE MAGAZINE ISSUE 18
COPYRIGHT ROB BRAUTIGAN AUGUST 1995
BEYOND THE HIGHGATE VAMPIRE - AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID FARRANT
In your book, you consider the possibility that the phenomena in Highgate Cemetery might have had something of a vampirical nature. Is there anything among the facts that you have found that seems to point in that direction?
David Farrant: Firstly, I think it is important to point out that my book BEYOND THE HIGHGATE VAMPIRE was initially written to clarify all the facts into an unexplained phenomenon at Highgate Cemetery (not necessarily a "vampire"); and perhaps equally important to stress at the onset, that this investigation at Highgate Cemetery was only one of many investigations by the British Psychic and Occult Society into cases of unexplained phenomena and such like all over the country; indeed, not only confined to this country. Unfortunately it transpired that this particular investigation into an alleged "vampire" at Highgate Cemetery (which began in 1969, or at least was officially instigated in that year) got "slightly out of hand". I was arrested during the course of this particular investigation and accused of being in the Cemetery with the intention of "hunting a vampire" - the latter label having already become well established by sensational Press speculation, provoked by the claims of other vampire enthusiasts who laid claim to the theory that the unexplained phenomenon - or "ghost" reported in and around the Cemeter at that time - was indeed ... a vampire. Why was I inclined to admit or suggest that this particular entity or phenomenon pointed towards being "vampirical"? ... Well, during the course of the investigation it came to light that at least two independent people had been physically attacked by some unknown person or entity whilst they were passing the Cemetery late at night. They were thrown to the ground with considerable force by a figure that literally disappeared into nowhere: despite the fact that where these attacks occurred - in a small lane running alongside the Cemetery - the area was boarded by 12 foot high walls.
Now - I'm always asking that question - how would you define a "vampire"?
David Farrant: I do not believe in "vampires" in the commercially accepted sense of the word ... i.e. physical figures or entities that go around draining victims of their blood in order to ensure "life everlasting". This concept probably derived from a much older psychic concept (some would argue a "psychic reality") of the incubus and succubus - male and female spirits or demons respectively, that have, since time immemorial, been reported as visiting sleeping people by night and "immobilising" their semi-conscious victims with erotic fantasies; even depleting them of mental energy and blood. Victims of these psychic attacks invariably report bouts of dizziness and anaemia - although no blood has been phsycially taken.
To you personally, which elements are the most essential parts of "vampirism"? I mean, the blood drinking, the parasitism, life beyond death, immortality etc., etc.)
David Farrant: Here we are dealing with two different elements ... i.e. the difference between pseudo vampirism - such as that on behalf of newly formed cults who imitate what they see in commercial vampire films, such as the literal drinking of blood, etc. - and actual vampire occurrences as and when they are reported to occur. I have already dealt with the latter, (albeit briefly) and can only add in relation to the former, that unfortunately, it sees that many are attracted to "vampirism" as such, because this possibly provides some easy answer to the problems of "life and death" - immortality, etc. - and some thus find an "easy escape" from the very real, and often tragic, problems of existence.
That gives us your views on pseudo-vampirism and takes care of fictional vampires and such. Nevertheless I'm still curious to hear your defination of REAL vampirism. Let me rephrase my question: WHAT, in YOUR opinion, is the essence of REAL vampirism?
David Farrant: I think I have already made it clear that I do not believe in "vampires" in the commercial sense of the word, i.e. "undead" beings or entities that literally rise from the grave at night to feast upon the blood of the living, and that the symptoms claimed by some people who have encountered such "psychic attacks" or nightly visitations (i.e. being hypnotised or rendered immombile by some unseen force that supposedly causes anaemia or has some kind of sexual intention), could easily be mistaken or confused with age-old accounts of the incubus or succubus - earthbound entities that are supposed to "attack" selected people by night. So much is fact - in fact these psychic entities together with all their malign intentions, have been recorded since the dawn of recorded history - but to confuse or invent a connection of these relatively common-place phenomena with "blood-sucking" vampires (themselves perhaps a glorified deviation of a legend already in existence), is a fact I must refute or deny. I am not atempting to evade your question. However, I felt this merited some clarification. I could have probably have put this far more precisely by simply saying that I do not believe in, or accept, any forms of "external evil"; the devil, "vampires" and such included. This is in no way a denial of my work into the existence of psychic phenomena. Perhaps I could put it this way ... Whilst having come to accept that many ghostly phenomena exist within their own right ( I am referring here to reports of many ghostly apparitions that I am called in to investigate all over the country), does not necessarily mean I believe in ghosts sthat reputedly go around "carrying their heads" and "clanking chains". The same is true of any reports I am asked to investigate that might involve so-called "vampiristic activity".
COPYRIGHT ROB BRAUTIGAN AUGUST 1995
BEYOND THE HIGHGATE VAMPIRE - AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID FARRANT
In your book, you consider the possibility that the phenomena in Highgate Cemetery might have had something of a vampirical nature. Is there anything among the facts that you have found that seems to point in that direction?
David Farrant: Firstly, I think it is important to point out that my book BEYOND THE HIGHGATE VAMPIRE was initially written to clarify all the facts into an unexplained phenomenon at Highgate Cemetery (not necessarily a "vampire"); and perhaps equally important to stress at the onset, that this investigation at Highgate Cemetery was only one of many investigations by the British Psychic and Occult Society into cases of unexplained phenomena and such like all over the country; indeed, not only confined to this country. Unfortunately it transpired that this particular investigation into an alleged "vampire" at Highgate Cemetery (which began in 1969, or at least was officially instigated in that year) got "slightly out of hand". I was arrested during the course of this particular investigation and accused of being in the Cemetery with the intention of "hunting a vampire" - the latter label having already become well established by sensational Press speculation, provoked by the claims of other vampire enthusiasts who laid claim to the theory that the unexplained phenomenon - or "ghost" reported in and around the Cemeter at that time - was indeed ... a vampire. Why was I inclined to admit or suggest that this particular entity or phenomenon pointed towards being "vampirical"? ... Well, during the course of the investigation it came to light that at least two independent people had been physically attacked by some unknown person or entity whilst they were passing the Cemetery late at night. They were thrown to the ground with considerable force by a figure that literally disappeared into nowhere: despite the fact that where these attacks occurred - in a small lane running alongside the Cemetery - the area was boarded by 12 foot high walls.
Now - I'm always asking that question - how would you define a "vampire"?
David Farrant: I do not believe in "vampires" in the commercially accepted sense of the word ... i.e. physical figures or entities that go around draining victims of their blood in order to ensure "life everlasting". This concept probably derived from a much older psychic concept (some would argue a "psychic reality") of the incubus and succubus - male and female spirits or demons respectively, that have, since time immemorial, been reported as visiting sleeping people by night and "immobilising" their semi-conscious victims with erotic fantasies; even depleting them of mental energy and blood. Victims of these psychic attacks invariably report bouts of dizziness and anaemia - although no blood has been phsycially taken.
To you personally, which elements are the most essential parts of "vampirism"? I mean, the blood drinking, the parasitism, life beyond death, immortality etc., etc.)
David Farrant: Here we are dealing with two different elements ... i.e. the difference between pseudo vampirism - such as that on behalf of newly formed cults who imitate what they see in commercial vampire films, such as the literal drinking of blood, etc. - and actual vampire occurrences as and when they are reported to occur. I have already dealt with the latter, (albeit briefly) and can only add in relation to the former, that unfortunately, it sees that many are attracted to "vampirism" as such, because this possibly provides some easy answer to the problems of "life and death" - immortality, etc. - and some thus find an "easy escape" from the very real, and often tragic, problems of existence.
That gives us your views on pseudo-vampirism and takes care of fictional vampires and such. Nevertheless I'm still curious to hear your defination of REAL vampirism. Let me rephrase my question: WHAT, in YOUR opinion, is the essence of REAL vampirism?
David Farrant: I think I have already made it clear that I do not believe in "vampires" in the commercial sense of the word, i.e. "undead" beings or entities that literally rise from the grave at night to feast upon the blood of the living, and that the symptoms claimed by some people who have encountered such "psychic attacks" or nightly visitations (i.e. being hypnotised or rendered immombile by some unseen force that supposedly causes anaemia or has some kind of sexual intention), could easily be mistaken or confused with age-old accounts of the incubus or succubus - earthbound entities that are supposed to "attack" selected people by night. So much is fact - in fact these psychic entities together with all their malign intentions, have been recorded since the dawn of recorded history - but to confuse or invent a connection of these relatively common-place phenomena with "blood-sucking" vampires (themselves perhaps a glorified deviation of a legend already in existence), is a fact I must refute or deny. I am not atempting to evade your question. However, I felt this merited some clarification. I could have probably have put this far more precisely by simply saying that I do not believe in, or accept, any forms of "external evil"; the devil, "vampires" and such included. This is in no way a denial of my work into the existence of psychic phenomena. Perhaps I could put it this way ... Whilst having come to accept that many ghostly phenomena exist within their own right ( I am referring here to reports of many ghostly apparitions that I am called in to investigate all over the country), does not necessarily mean I believe in ghosts sthat reputedly go around "carrying their heads" and "clanking chains". The same is true of any reports I am asked to investigate that might involve so-called "vampiristic activity".