Skip to main content

UFO Drawings from the National Archives - David Clarke ***

This is a lovely little book that, sadly, not every reader will see the point of. If somebody’s anecdotal account of a presumed alien encounter is obviously a misperception of a mundane occurrence, or else too vague – or too far-fetched – to be taken seriously, then it’s all too easy to dismiss it as worthless. But that’s missing the point. The fact that so many incidents are reported in these terms makes the witnesses’ testimony worthy of serious study – to teach us, not about extraterrestrial civilisations, but about our own culture.

That was the core message of David Clarke’s excellent How UFOs Conquered the World published a couple of years ago. Now Clarke is back with another take on the same basic theme.  His day job is Reader and Principal Lecturer in Journalism at Sheffield Hallam University, but for the last ten years he’s also acted as consultant for the National Archives project to release all of Britain’s official Ministry of Defence (MoD) files on UFOs. Throughout the Cold War period, the MoD welcomed UFO reports from the public – not because they were seriously worried about extraterrestrial invasion, but because some of the sightings might be naïve misinterpretations of Soviet spyplanes overflying the United Kingdom.

In total, the National Archives material amounts to over 60,000 pages of UFO reports and related correspondence. What Clarke has done for this volume – the second in a series on the ‘visual history of modern British culture’ – is to search through those thousands of pages for the most eyecatching and interesting images. The result is visually stunning – surprisingly so, given that most of the pictures are ‘amateur’ in every sense of the word. I’m sure they look a lot better here than in the original files, thanks to the book’s impressive production standards – art-quality gloss paper, and a gorgeous printed, wraparound cloth cover.

The book is arranged chronologically, which highlights one of its most striking features – which is that (despite purporting to illustrate spacecraft from another planet) the pictures generally belong to their time. Drawings from the 1950s look 1950s; drawings from the 1980s look 1980s. As Clarke says at one point ‘Some artists’ impressions of UFOs betray the influence of popular culture. Drawings in the MoD archives resemble futuristic flying saucers, rockets and spaceships from TV shows, movies and comic books.’

I’ll just mention a couple of specific examples which struck me as particularly impressive. First there’s the lovely painting reproduced on the book’s wraparound cover. This was sent to MoD by a Mr Campbell, of Birmingham, in January 1975. Apart from its visual appeal, it’s interesting because the witness provided enough detail to allow MoD to identify the object as one of a pair of Soviet satellites. Perhaps surprisingly, Mr Campbell professed himself happy with this identification, saying he ‘could hardly imagine it to have been anything but what you say is likely’. If only all UFO enthusiasts were that open-minded!


Another interesting case occurred in October 1977, when ten children at a Cheshire primary school saw a ‘flying saucer’ hovering over a group of trees near their playground. Their teacher got them to draw what they’d seen, making sure they couldn’t copy each other. All 10 pictures are reproduced in the book, and despite variations from one to another they clearly all show the same thing. Of course it wasn’t an alien spacecraft – that’s just how the kids’ cultural conditioning interpreted it – but they certainly saw something out of the ordinary.

Overall verdict: For people who are really into this sort of thing, an easy five stars. For everyone else, let’s call it a three-star curiosity.

Hardback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Andrew May

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...