As a psychical researcher and practical occultist of some
years experience, I was planning a discourse on why much of the
present 'psychic questing', brought into vogue by Andrew Collins,
is a questionable practice - plus the scrutiny of some highly
dubious aspects of his interactive novels, such as The Black
Alchemist. Such critical reviews must wait, as I have
recently come into possession of some information and a letter
which is quite interesting, perhaps acting as a precursor to any
proposed 'myth- smashing' of questing.
Our story begins on Saturday 22 August 1992 and a
'Cornference' held in Salisbury, attending this conference was
Andy Collins and his companion, Debbie Benstead. A casual
acquaintance of mine - we will call him Steve Watts, was staying
at my home, as he wanted to attend, and my location was fairly
convenient for trains to the venue. On the Saturday evening, upon
his return from the first days proceeds, he held out a letter to
me.
"Have a read of that", he crowed with a grin on his
face.
I shrugged, took the letter and casually perused it. Surprise
number one was when I realised that the writer was Trevor James
Constable, author of The Cosmic Pulse of Life. Surprise
number two was when I saw that it was addressed to Andy Collins.
I looked up at Steve and eyed him suspiciously - I asked him
where he had got it from. "Ah, read it first", he
teased.
I went back to the letter and began to read, a little more
attentively this time round. I prematurely assumed that this
letter would be an endorsement of Collins' latest release from
what seems to be a ceaseless flow from a printing press - on the
contrary, I found myself reading what seemed to be a scathing
rebuttal of The Circlemakers, from the man who Collins had
referred to at considerable length. In a nutshell, it appears
that Mr Constable doesn't like the idea of Collins using text and
photographs from Cosmic Pulse without permission. I wonder
why ?
I finished the quite lengthy text and turned to Steve,
"Right, where did this come from ?". He sat in silence
for a few moments, then between sips of coffee, told me that at
the conference, Andy had showed him the letter - he then says
that Debbie then let him photocopy it (which to me sounds a
rather roundabout way of doing things). When I asked Steve to
repeat how he got hold of it to my colleague, Clive Potter, he
did tend to fumble and mutter his words a bit, perhaps he was
exaggerating the circumstances slightly ? I have also been given
a copy of another letter, which is Collins' published response to
a review of his latest book by Clive Potter in The Cropwatcher
#13. In this letter Collins states, "If I had the chance
again, I would rewrite the book completely". That's the
least I'd do if I got such a letter from Mr Constable. If I'd
"Had the chance again", I'd take The Circlemakers
and bury it with shame in an unmarked grave (until someone dug it
up again using questing techniques and returned it !). As I said
goodbye to Steve on the Sunday evening, I decided that I would
look into the circumstances of this letter. The obvious first
step would be to verify it from the man himself, Trevor James
Constable. On the 8th October, my letter was winging its way to
his address - where did I get that from ? The top of Steve's
letter, of course.
Constable's immediate response was verification of the letter,
plus a statement to the effect that he would not have allowed
Collins to use his photographs in connection with The
Circlemakers - even if he had been asked ! Constable then goes on
to accuse Collins of plagiarism, taking passages out of Cosmic
Pulse and with a slight rewriting, presenting them as though they
were his own work.... Hang on a minute, Trevor, if you bother to
look at Andy's response to Clive's review in The Crop Watcher,
you will find that he clearly states.... "The
Circlemakers began as a diary entry in July 1991 and grew
steadily into a 350-page burst of inspiration...". Oh dear,
perhaps inspiration is not quite the right word. Constable
suggests that Rudolph Steiner's kind of clairvoyance is very
different to the 'rootless flummery' of Debbie Benstead's
psychism.
In his '350-page burst of inspiration', Collins applies his
years of UFO research to the subject and states that the idea of
intelligently-controlled UFOs are crap. This is one area where Mr
Constable takes the 'uncontrollable urgency in a young man' to
task. Constable states that his years of research points to TWO
distinct types of UFO which are MUTUALLY confused. He classes
them as 'Ether-ships' and 'bioforms' - the latter also
affectionately known as 'critters' - but haven't you heard,
Trevor, the idea of 'Ether-ships' are crap ? Collins' distortion
is found on page 15 of The Circlemakers, "Constable
had expounded his belief that UFOs are not alien spacecraft at
all, but amoeba- like life-forms existing in the upper
atmosphere".
We DO have a problematic situation here, the main part of
which is that Andy is so busy scratching away at his books that
precious little time is available for any really meaningful
research. Constable makes this abundantly clear when he says that
Andy has 'genned-up' on Steiner and Reich rather than actually
bothering to study their work - he advises Andy to start by
reading Function of the Orgasm by Wilhelm Reich (a book
which Andy now belatedly possesses) ..... he now requires a copy
of Contact with Space, by the same author.
I will be smug and state that at least, in his letter to me,
Constable did credit me with knowing my subject, but then as a
practical occultist, I am by definition a student.
Throughout his distorted books which are paraded as fact, he
has catered to a public who themselves do not know any different,
they are exposed only to his ignorance, and because they
themselves find a 'queer-shaped bit of flint', hail him as the
figurehead of 'questing'. It is on this foundation that they are
handed the mutated and twisted versions of Constable, Steiner and
Reich -versions which suit the world according to Andy Collins.
In Earthquest News (Winter 1992) Andrews concedes that
Constable suggested that there are two kinds of UFO - the
structured spacecraft and the bioform. He concludes the statement
by saying: "I only have faith in the second solution, which
can adequately explain the first solution". This edition of
Earthquest News has a piccy of a 'bioform', but Collins cannot,
unfortunately, compare it with one of Constable's due to
copyright restrictions - a bit like bolting the door afterwards,
isn't it ?
I have corresponded with Collins on these matters. I
introduced myself by way of submitting a true experience
involving a ball- of-light phenomenon. I let Andy think that The
Circlemakers had opened big, bright, new doorways of
understanding. Andy found my experience 'interesting', then he
waffles on about the Earth- light idea being correct. But this is
only half the story because the bioform concept embraces
Earth-lights and takes the whole thing to new heights. Apparently
Collins... Sorry Constable's ideas...Well, half of Constable's
ideas, only very slightly rewritten and mildly misinterpreted and
marginally out of context, backed up with 'plagiarised'
photographs and packaged as a 350-page burst of inspiration, can
explain nearly all UFO encounters - possibly all of them - but as
Collins tells me, he'll need another book to show how - of that I
don't doubt !
In my follow-up letter to Collins (dated 8th November 1992) I
asked the crucial question, "What I would be interested in
is any comments that Mr Constable himself may have made about The
Circlemakers. A reply was received 3 days later and Andy
first of all told me that he was glad to see that I agreed with
much of his words in the book - I never said that - then went on
to say that Constable doesn't like The Circlemakers
because it doesn't progress the understanding of orgone in a
proper scientific manner, (sorry Andy, and there was me thinking
that it had something to do with Constable's claims of you
'ripping him off'). Collins also suggests that Constable is
unhappy that he is commenting on a subject which the latter has
studied for many years - it is important to note that Collins
does not mention the original letter or its true contents, even
though there is no apparent secrecy. The reason for noting this
point will be understood shortly.
While only a side-issue, there is perhaps a relevance in the
dislike which Constable demonstrates, afterall, up to now we have
been up to our bookshelves in The Black Alchemist, The
Seventh Sword, plus tapes and various other merchandise. As
Andy states in his letter to The Crop Watcher, The
Circlemakers began as a diary entry in July 1991, the book
ends in February 1992 - less than a year from beginning to end
qualifies you to forward a 'revolutionary new vision of the
crop-circle enigma' ? Only now is Andy actually borrowing books
from the library to learn more about the pioneers to whom he does
little justice ! Readers of Collins' book will know that Andy's
research began when a paperback book became slightly dislodged
after Debbie thought she saw an adjacent book move. Actually I
find this part of his story quite humorous (I admit to having a
rather pathetic sense of humour). On this particular page (and
remember this is after Collins has crossed blades with rogue
magicians, received cursed death-threats, laid to rest negative
energies and confronted landscape guardians). Debbie actually
says to him, "I don't want to alarm you, and its probably
nothing, but I think I saw that book move on its own" (my
emphasis, RF). With the activity that Collins has been
involved in, why should she for one moment think that he would be
alarmed in the slightest about a mild case of possibly
over-excited imagination, or mild telekinesis ?
Its a strange and possibly uncanny parallel, but I think of The
Circlemakers as Collins thinks of alien spacecraft. In his
letter to The Crop Watcher, Collins asks where Clive
Potter has been for the last ten years, "I see no books or
ground-breaking work on crop circles or questing by him,
anywhere". Firstly, of course, there are more than these two
lines of research, and secondly Clive has been working with me on
my projects - February 1992 beginning with Shadow of Man,
a well received and thoughtful analysis of the UFO mystery in the
form of an audio tape - but not having the capital available to
produce even badly bound books I can't churn out my ideas (which
include the use and manipulation of orgone and so-called
'bioforms', the focusing of this energy to retain and even retard
Cancer, and so on).
Ultimately I informed Collins that whether he knew it or not,
there were copies of Constables's damning letter going around.
"No problem", came the reply, "I photographed
pages and handed them around to primary researchers to put them
in the picture". Collins then adds that plagiarism is a very
serious accusation to make against any author. He then assures me
that this has not been the case - but note, he made no mention of
this until I raised the issue directly.
In his letter to Constable dated 20th August, Collins
apologises for using photos without permission, but as he
couldn't make contact with Constable, it was a gamble that he
decided to take - he goes on to say that he does admit to
sometimes writing rather naively. Of further interest is that he
states that he doesn't consider himself a scientist, an
occultist, or even a UFOlogist or a psychic researcher. He
suggests, instead, that he's just 'a man off the street'. But on
the other hand, in his letter to The Crop Watcher, he reminds us
that between 1975 and 1981 he was an investigator with BUFORA and UFOIN,
and that since then he's worked extensively in the
earth-mysteries fields of research. He does sound a little
confused, doesn't he ?
The dissemination of Constable's letter in what is claimed as
such a casual manner is rather curious, because if this has been
handed round to 'prime researchers', that is certainly not how I
would describe Steve Watts, who co-authored a book many years ago
which was nothing to do with crop-circles or orgone, since then
he has produced nothing for public or private circulation - he is
even now, only on the fairly meaningless fringes of circles
research. So, as Clive suggests, for 'prime researchers' perhaps
we should read 'Collins' closest chums'. Afterall, even after
close enquiry, Collins would not have informed me of Constable's
letter or true accusations had I not stated the fact that I knew
of them.
So there we have it. I do believe this article succeeds in its
attempt to bring to public attention a situation which ought to
be known outside of the chosen few. It is the public who buy the
books so it is they who must be enlightened - do they think that
Collins has plagiarised Constable's work ? On the other hand, it
may not be fair to ask Collin's readers this question, as he does
seem to suggest that he writes for a popular and young audience
whom he could easily lose if he were to use big words or try to
explain something which requires the use of intelligence.
One final point is that this 'man off the street', who's not
an occultist, nor UFO researcher, etc, plans to co-ordinate the
crop circle community an attempt to communicate with non-human
intelligences thought to be involved with crop-circle
formation.... Blimey, now that could be worth writing a book
about !
RF
How do you even begin to reply to this [words deleted, PF]
by Robert France ? Not only has he picked and chosen sentences
and statements at random from correspondence between four
different sources, he quite clearly wants everyone to revel in
his and his group's co-ordinated campaign of hatred.
There are many accusations in Mr France's statements which
need rectifying, and for this I will have need to quote at length
from various letters and resume events stretching back over the
past two years.
In July 1991 I sampled the British phenomenon of crop
formations for the first time, having worked in the UFO, earth
mysteries and psychic fields of research as an investigator and
writer since 1975. By the way, despite what Mr France claims in
his introduction none of my books are 'interactive novels' but
thoroughly researched accounts of personal experiences backed-up
with sound historical verification.
Being let loose on the crop formations of Wiltshire for the
first time turned up various curious facts, witnesses accounts
and anecdotal stories, as well as a considerable amount of
psychic inspiration from my partner Debbie Benstead. It also
became apparent that many quite obvious links between crop
circles and the earth mysteries had never been stated before in
print.
Among the synchronicities (i.e. meaningful coincidences)
before this fateful journey to Wiltshire was the rediscovery of
my `lost' copy of SKY CREATURES, a 1978 abridged version
of Trevor James Constables' 1976 book THE COSMIC PULSE OF LIFE
(it simply slid out from above another, unconnected book; no
more, Mr France). Wondering whether it might contain any thoughts
on UFO nests I browsed through its pages for a few minutes but
found none. The book was then slotted back in its place and the
whole matter forgotten.
Statements made by Debbie during our weekend in Wiltshire
concerning orgone masses reminded me of Constable's living
entities, his so-called `critters' or bioforms, so on our return
to Essex I finally got down to reading Constables' book. When I
came to the chapter which showed that Constable had concluded
that the Tully reeds circles of 1966 onwards, as well as other
scorched circles in New Zealand, were probably the result of his
'critters' coming into contact with the earth, I knew we were on
to something, particularly when he referred to their attraction
to bodies of water as 'cold, contractive, water-hungry energy' (1).
His findings in connection with both Reich and his so-called
Bioforms were incorporated, with references and quotes, into
Chapter Seventeen of THE CIRCLEMAKERS. The rest of the
book previewed our own findings connecting orgone with crop
circles, UFOs and earth mysteries. I also looked at historical
circles, UFO nests, the ill-effects of orgone, and ended the book
with my own views on the relationship between pure intelligent
energy forms and the human mind, with particular reference to UFO
abductions, contactees, psychic communications. None of it had
any direct connection with Constable's own work.
THE CIRCLEMAKERS was finished in April 1992 and already
I was seeking permission to use certain photographs taken by
Trevor James Constable. Twice I wrote to two different American
publishers connected with Constable. Finally, in early June I
reached the Borderland Sciences group of Garberville, California,
who promote Constable's latter-day weather-engineering work. The
editor of their journal, Thomas Brown, rang me to say he was in
contact with Constable and that I should not worry as Borderland
held the copyright to `most' of Constable's pictures, which he
had given them. He also said there would be no problem about
copyright from either them or from Trevor (indeed, they gave me
permission to use an illustration from one of their own
publications). So I went ahead and published the book and in the
meantime wrote to Constable at his address in Hawaii.
The response from Constable was dated 15 August 1992, a month
or so after the book was published. In three pages of verbal
abuse he condemned the whole project as misinterpreting his and
Reich's work. He suggested that I had failed to comprehend the
contents of THE COSMIC PULSE OF LIFE and accused me of
ignoring his findings concerning two specific types of UFO - the
structured craft and the bioform. He also suggested that my
partner Debbie's 'spurious clairvoyance' was `rootless flummery'
(a stupid statement) and that if I wanted a real understanding of
psychism I should study the entire works of Rudolf Steiner. He
added: `If you keep on along this line, Mr Collins, you will
spoil your own future unfoldment, so this is a suggestion that
you eschew all that stuff (i.e. the `spurious clairvoyance')
without delay, and before you provoke attention from the astral
planes that may cause you to wish you had never been born.'
The subject of the photographs was not Constable's main
problem, although it didn't help ease Constables' view that I was
distorting his sacrosanct findings concerning UFOs; a case of
standing on someone's foot before you've introduced yourself.
His worst claim was `You have lifted many passages out of COSMIC
PULSE and presented them with minor re-writing as though they
were your own work. This kind of plagiarism will not go unnoticed
in the world, Mr Collins.'
Despite this Constable ends on the fatherly note of `Your
motives are good, Mr Collins, but this world is currently
incapable of understanding or accepting what stands behind the
crop circles. Constable, Steiner and Reich can perhaps lead you
to understand why this is so...' and earlier on he says : `I want
you to understand clearly that I do not impugn your motives. Your
good intention to try and vindicate me is quite apparent. Such
vindication can only come long after I am gone from the earth.
The lust for vindication does not burn in me.'
Putting the letter down, I could not believe what I was
reading. There's me writing a book that completely vindicates his
work, confirms his theories and shows that Constable was a man
years ahead of his time, and all he does is throw it all back in
my face with claims of `rootless flummery' and `plagiarism',
which was simply untrue.
What I had no idea of at the time was that no one in the
orgone business has anything good to say about anyone else.
Constable is hated by many people and has been accused of
distorting Reich's work by rivals such as James de Meo and the
late Jerome Eden, who worked extensively on the relationship
between orgone and UFOs (see below).
Instantly I responded to Constable in a letter dated 20 August
1992. Here I tried to answer each and every query. I apologised
for the use of his pictures, even though he said `what is done is
done'. On his accusation of 'plagiarism' I had this to say: 'When
people ask me the best source for Reich I suggest your books,
which is why my writing has drawn largely from your words. (In
Chapter Seventeen) I was not trying to plagiarise any of your
work; I was simply trying to tell the story from your own
perspective; your own course of discovery... Yet when re-working
factual information there is only so many new words you can find
before lapsing back into phraseology that matches the original
text'. I pointed out that it was clearly 'a review of your
work... giving the reader the chance to seek out your books to
enable them to gain a deeper understanding of their theories.'
No plagiarism took place, other than Constable seeking some
justification for seeing a resume of just one small part of his
own work in somebody else's book.
On his criticism of the book's flippant style, I said: `I
write enthusiastically and sometimes naively, this I admit. I am
not a scientist, an occultist, or even a ufologist or a psychical
researcher; in fact, I am just a man off the street with an eager
taste to dissect and speculate upon the mysteries of life.' which
is entirely true.
As to Constable's claim that I would end up `bitterly
regretting' the writing of THE CIRCLEMAKERS I said
`...should I ever get the chance to rewrite THE CIRCLEMAKERS,
it would turn out a wholly different book altogether.' And this
is true as well. Any writer would make such a statement. However,
one year later and I don't bitterly regret writing the book at
all; far from it.
On Constables' accusation that I had only cited him as
believing in the orgone bioform solution to UFOs, I pointed out
that on page 170 of my book I do state `that you retained your
firm belief in physical spacecraft, yet considered that even they
utilised some form of propulsion system involving orgone energy.
Constable's main concern was that I should have given equal
space to the physical flying saucers and cited his work relating
to UFO propulsion systems. He sometimes referred to these as
Ether Ships, whereas as early as 1946 Borderland founder Mead
Layne had talked about Ether Ships as 'thought constructs' -
intelligent entities that form bodies from etheric substances
(2). To me this is just another name for Constables' bioforms or
'critters'. In no way do I dismiss ether ships as Mr France has
claimed, I just don't see them as anything to do with 'nuts and
bolts' spacecraft (Chapter Seventeen is called 'Return of the
Ether Ships'. Never, and I mean never, have I ever 'stated' that
Constables' views of ether ships were 'crap' - a false accusation
you use as the basis of your malicious attack, Mr France.
Despite this the evidence in Constables' book, whether he
accepts it or not, clearly favours the orgone bioform solution to
UFOs. I therefore saw no good reason why I should spend page
after page going over theories on 'nuts and bolts' spacecraft I
do not even consider to have any basis in reality. I also saw no
point is going into the work of Rudolf Steiner as my brushes with
his extensive work have left me in no desire to continue in such
a direction, especially as his teachings heavily influenced the
rise in occult Nazism prior to and during the Second World War.
I apologised if I had caused Constable any offence and
promised to keep him informed of future developments.
The letter was sent out and two days later I attended the
Cornference at Salisbury. I felt other people in the subject
should be aware of the Constable correspondence and so openly
allowed it to be read by anyone who was interested. Robert
France's `Steve Watts', i.e. Geoff Gilbertson of Glastonbury (why
play name games?), asked if he could photocopy both letters. This
I freely permitted him to do, just as I would have done anyone
that day. Indeed, since then I have openly shown the letters to
anyone interested in my work and many people have copies [I do, PF].
I had nothing to hide so there was never any secrecy involved,
Mr France, and no sneaky permission was granted behind my back by
my partner Debbie, as you imply. Furthermore, Geoff Gilbertson
showed you the photocopies out of good faith as a researcher, and
not because he thought he had something to gloat over as in
"I'd have a read of that", he crowed with a grin on his
face' and "read it first" he teased.' I know this
because I have checked with him and found out what really
happened; this pastiche setting Mr France creates is 'pure
fiction'.
Robert France masqueraded his true motives in the three
letters he wrote to me between August and November 1992. I knew
he was a close colleague of Clive Potter who wrote a rather
disparaging review of THE CIRCLEMAKERS in CW13. I
also knew that he claimed to have experienced various UFO
encounters. Mr France finally came clean about his intent in a
letter dated 16 November 1992.
I smelt a big rat in the questions being posed by Mr France in
this particular letter. After the words `While not attempting to
stir-up trouble' he admitted having read a copy of Constable's
letter dated 15 August 1992. However, he did not say how he had
come to see it, but added that he had confirmed its authenticity
with Constable using the address supplied. There is no mention of
my response to Constable's letter which was given to Geoff
Gilbertson at the same time.
I got the distinct feeling that Mr France was planning to use
Constable's letter in an attack on me and my work, so made sure
that my return letter to him was lengthy, explanatory and
included copies not just of Constable's original letter by my
response as well. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt
and assume that if they have the full facts, they may re-assess
their intentions.
In the two-page reply to Mr France, I pointed out the
situation relating to the Constable photographs, and how I had
made every effort to obtain permission for their use before Tom
Brown of Borderland gave the final go ahead in June 1992. I also
answered each of Constable's earlier accusations. Mr France makes
no mention of any of this in his personal attack.
The same day Robert France's letter arrived, I received a
second letter from Constable dated 9 November 1992. Despite my
diplomatic response to his original letter, he made a series of
attacks on me and my work, all of which were grossly unfounded
and explained in my reply letter dated 19 November 1992.
I told him I valued criticism and comment on my work, as this
was the only way forward. However, Constable had suggested that
`I get right out of the public eye until you are well past forty
years of age' and that he had `... assured UK correspondents that
I will have no further commerce with you of any kind, and that I
regard you as a loose cannon. Please oblige me by not
communicating with me again. I wish you well, and I wish you good
luck, for you are surely going to need it.'
There the letter ended. In my reply to his words I pointed out
that many of the things he had said against THE CIRCLEMAKERS
had been said before in a review of his own book THE COSMIC
PULSE OF LIFE published in THE JOURNAL OF ORGONOMY
(Vol 11, No 1, pp. 121-131), the most respected publication in
the orgone field of research.
Written by Jerome Eden - himself a student of Dr Elsworth
Baker, Reich's direct successor - this 11-page, systematic
destruction of PULSE began by stating: `I intend to
demonstrate that Trevor James Constable has rendered a grave
disservice to orgonomy by publishing a book...' that: `Thoroughly
distorts Reich's work in a miasma of occult mystification' and
`Evades and distorts the serious realities of ufology in a
mystical maze of occult confusion.' The attack goes on to
highlight the `characteristic inaccuracy' of the book in quite
blatant terms.
In my second letter to Constable I compared these words with
almost exactly the same words he had used in respect to THE
CIRCLEMAKERS. For instance, he said of me: `This kind of
roughshod, unscholarly treatment you accord Dr Reich and his work
is really quite inexcusable.' While Jerome Eden said of PULSE
(p. 131): `It should be crystal clear to any rational student of
orgonomy that Trevor James Constable has performed a shameful
disservice to the work of Wilhelm Reich.'
I could go on. In other words, it would not have mattered what
I wrote, it would still have been wrong. Ultimately, I had
trodden on other people's domains and livelihoods and this was
the real crime; it seems that the cloudbusters are aimed more at
each other than they are at the sky these days.
It is also important to point out that although Constable may
have crystalised the orgone bioform solution, much of his work is
totally irrelevant to my work. What's more, his research into
orgone energy should not have given him the right to condemn
other people's views just because it dissects and revises his own
personal theories. My orgone research outside of Constable was
scant, due to a lack of available books, but I made sure that
what I did say was technically sound. I certainly did the
research, Mr France, hundreds of hours of it, just as I do with
every research project or book I take on. If any errors did creep
into the text of THE CIRCLEMAKERS Constable should have
pointed them out, not launched into a tirade of verbal abuse.
This I also put in my reply to Constable.
One of the things Constable accused me of plagiarising was
this pertinent statement made by him in 1976 (put in quotes, I
must add): `By the years 2000... hosts of young investigators in
exobiology will be in full pursuit of the critters of our
atmosphere.' Well, as I pointed out to Constable, 2000 is fast
approaching and his prediction looks like coming to pass. But, as
I put it to him: `do not expect that those who are taking this
subject forward will entirely agree with your own vision of the
future, for "exobiology" also spells the death knell
for the "nuts and bolts" UFO, I'm afraid.'
Despite his claims that only `more distortions' would come of
our ORGONE93 project, I assured Constable it would be successful;
successful in its purpose and aims. It would involve some of the
most knowledgeable and open-minded students of orgonomy in this
country today, none of whom had any problem at all with THE
CIRCLEMAKERS when they read it.
Mr France got his hands on what he thought was an
incriminating piece of evidence against Andy Collins and his
psychic questing work, so he thought he would use it in some
nefarious manner. This has really nothing to do with crop
circles, or the orgone hypothesis, it is about the misguided
thoughts of one man. I believe it is your 'ignorance', Mr France,
not mine, that has misguided you to plough your 'pathetic sense
of humour' into an attack on me which could be better described
as 'rootless flummery'. This is especially so with the
misrepresented 'Steve Watts' verifying the situation you place
him in as 'pure fiction'; so much for your 'myth-smashing'.
From my own point of view I shall think very carefully about
being so open concerning my personal correspondence in the
future. However, I must also accept that if you are going to put
forward new ideas, then there will always be those who will try
to knock you down; not your theories, but you, personally.
If, as Mr France says, he has some useful thoughts on `the use
and manipulation of orgone and so-called "bioforms",
the focusing of this energy to retain and even retard Cancer
(strange, I thought Reich was doing this in the 1940s - AC),' but
hasn't `the capital available to produce even badly bound books'
then perhaps he should start airing these views in journals
instead of launching vindictive attacks on those who are actually
doing the work. Perhaps then people will start taking notice of
him.
Note: 1. Constable, SKY CREATURES,
p. 202.
Readers will probably have found this all a little bit
distasteful. I have to admit that after eagerly accepting Robert
France's submission to The Crop Watcher I began to regret
accepting it so willingly. As Andy Collins states, a charge of
plagiarism against any author is very serious - and one which I
hardly think is warranted by the evidence presented here. In
Andy's defence I would like to state the following:
(1) I can vouch for the factual accuracy of all the
quotations taken from Andy Collin's letters to Trevor James
Constable. I can also vouch for the fact that Constable seems to
have a problem with anyone daring to discuss his work. His
letters to Collins were unnecessarily vitriolic and unpleasant,
so much so that I wonder whether Constable himself is not utterly
barmy ! It is a nonsense for any researcher - myself included -
to impose limits on who may discuss your work and what they can
say about it. Indeed I only wish a few more people would comment
on my work and quote it in their books and magazines ! By
contrast Andy Collins' letters to Constable were admirably
restrained and proper given the circumstances. If any apologies
are due then Constable certainly owes one to Collins.
(2) Andy Collins has explained the dilemma he faced
when he wished to use Constable's photos. I too have been faced
with similar problems chasing up people who, having published
books and articles, then just disappeared. It seems to me that
Andy did everything that could naturally be asked of him. Thomas
Brown's apparent approval and claim of copyright clears Andy
entirely.
(3) I too received copies of the correspondence between Collins and Constable during late 1992. To be honest I didn't have the time to read it when Andy Collins circulated these letters - they were voluminous and concerned matters which I didn't really know too much about. All they really de-monstrated to me was that Orgone research is just as much as battlefield as UFOlogy and "cerealogy", with everyone having a good go at each other rather than getting down to doing some proper research ! Andy's circulation of this material doesn't strike me as strange or unjustified. I certainly find it interesting ! But if Robert France is justified in his charge of plagiarism why should Collins have circulated this material so freely ? Surely if Collins was guilty of doing something wrong then this would have been playing right into the hands of his enemies ?
(4) On balance I can perhaps understand Constable's
annoyance that The Circlemakers blurs his belief that some
UFOs are atmospheric creatures [a concept that really appeals to
me] and that others are ET spaceships. I know how annoying it is
to see others misrepresent what you have said so perhaps Andy
should have been a little more careful in how he portrayed
Constable's work. Of course, as Andy says, the ET spaceship
interpretation was not really relevant to his own work and he
would only have been accused of plagiarism all the more for
discussing both of Constable's personal theories if he had dwelt
on this too. (5) Ultimately writers and researchers have
thin red lines they have to tread when presenting the work of
others. Even more so when dealing with so-called paranormal
phenomena, themselves controversial and likely to attract all
manner of eccentrics. I am happy to place on record my own
support for the way Andy has dealt with this unfortunate
situation and I hope this will be the end of it. As for Orgone,
well I have different views on that - let's see what happens this
summer.... PF.
Jenny Randles adds her own comments: I would just like
to add a brief statement. I have known Andy Collins a long time
(around 18 years now). During his time as a UFO investigator when
I co- ordinated UFOIN, and despite his then relative
youth, I was struck by his tenacity and depth of enquiry into a
case. I have no hesitation in saying that he is one of the best
UFOlogists I have ever worked with, that his case reports from
the heyday of his field studies (1976-81) still stand as of
lasting importance and that few since he sadly moved away from
UFO investigation have matched his productivity. Since then he
has been involved in areas with no doubt more contentious
pedigrees and I have to say I have some reservations about some
of them. However, everything I have seen of Andy's work endorses
my view of his skill and doggedness as a researcher. In areas
like 'questing' I always turn to his opinions first, because I
personally respect them highly. I know little of orgone energy,
do not know if Andy's ideas are right or wrong, but found his
book fascinating, thought-provoking and (as always) delightfully
written. As a writer I really admire his literary skills. I have
read all the correspondence and in my view Andy emerges with
respect, credibility and objectivity - which is not necessarily
true of all the players in this game. JR.
PF Notes: I am not prepared to accept any further
correspondence, either private or for publication, on these
matters. Readers should contact Andy Collins, ABC Books, PO Box
189, Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, SS9 1NF or Robert France, Flat 1, 151
Oxford Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7UY if they wish to
follow-up this debate.
