Ghost Attire

[uneek]

I have a silly question.

I have been curious about ghost sightings for as long as I can remember. While watching some random show on a haunting the other day. Something occurred to me. Whenever they are interviewing the home owner or resident that have seen a full body apparition. They always claim it was in some kind of Victorian-era garb. That seems to be the trend. I have never heard anyone say the ghost appeared to be wearing a leisure suit or a day-glo green t-shirt that said 'Don't Worry. Be Happy.' Is there a reason for this? I know it sounds silly. But it seems like to have a creditable ghost. It has to be dressed like its from 1890s.

[PPI Karl]

You raise a very valid point, in my opinion--one that shows just how subjective and unreliable many of these descriptions can be.  People use the most rudimentary complement of details to jump to big conclusions about what a person is wearing, and from just one piece of apparel they believe to be worn by an apparition, they often extrapolate an entire outfit.  Consider, for example, the Ghost Hunters episode featuring the infamous Locker 2, with the thermal image of what some have claimed to be a Civil War Confederate soldier--based solely on the sketchy outline of a cap the image seems to be wearing.  If one assumes the figure is a soldier, the next step is to find other evidence of that in the image, and matrixing does the rest to fulfill the mind's expectations:  gloves; sword; buttons; whatever else may convince the mind that the hunch was correct from the start.

If you want a more convincing example of this phenomenon, consider how easily devoutly religious people can convince themselves that a faceless form in the rusted shell of an oil tank is Jesus Christ, based solely on what looks like a robe and a beard, and no other details.  The mind and the heart fill in what's missing and build a case for a miracle.  I'm convinced that many so-called apparitions occur in the same manner.  People don't really know what ordinary, poor people wore in the Victorian era; all they know is the lavish costuming they've seen in the period films or plays they've watched.  (If their claims are of a 16th or 17th century American ghost, you can almost lay bets that muskets and Thanksgiving Day re-enactment costumes are involved.)

Now, if we are to take such claims at face value and trust the reports to be accurate, then I suppose an argument could be made for the dead to choose whatever self-image they want to manifest for themselves:  head and shoulders or full-body; young or old; rich or poor; lavishly dressed in a favorite outfit or stark naked.

However, I think you're absolutely right to be skeptical.

[uneek]

I like your theory on it.

Since, I have never seen a full body apparition. I was thinking more in an ethereal state they are kinda blurry and its hard to make out details like looking at smoke. So say a women in a random era dress would appear to be more dress in the leg area especially when her legs are moving and give the appearance of a fuller dress like that of a Victorian era full dress like those worn by ladies in the upper classes. That is just my little thought.

[PPI Karl]

Thanks for raising this topic.  Obviously, you've piqued my interest and got me thinking.

If full-body manifestations are real, then the act of manifesting must have some sort of physics behind it (obedient to the laws of physics in the dimension where dwell those hosts of ghosts ).  That means there must be some distribution of energy involved, and where there is control of energy there must also be economy of energy.  Orbs, though certainly not proof of a haunting, are said to be balls of energy because the sphere is the most economical shape for energy to take while it's at rest.  I wonder if complex apparitions also form using energy in the most economical way they can, and consequently most are never the fully detailed masterpieces of couture they would like themselves to be (like Glinda the Good Witch floating into view ) but rather wispy outlines, as you said, or blurry faces only, or shadows, or little children, or just sounds and not visual at all--whatever takes the least amount of energy to create the most noticeable impression of themselves.  In a way, energy is like a currency in the afterlife:  some have a lot of it (for whatever reason) so they use it how they like, while others don't have access to it often so they have to make it work when they do have it and stretch it like a dollar.

Of course, I'm talking about intelligent hauntings more than residual ones, given the seemingly conscious will involved in an apparition shaping its appearance.  However, if an apparition--say, a woman who passed in the nineteenth century--wanted to convey a sense of her identity and character without great effort, she might appear just as she might have drawn herself on paper in a few seconds:  not even a sketch, but rather a doodle, of triangle of a long skirt, maybe a bun of hair, and something representing a high collar and a brooch.  Maybe one of these details is more important to her, so she expends more energy giving it detail and taking away energy from the act of forming fingers or ears and, voil?, an apparition is born.  Witnesses take note of the most prominent feature, a beautiful brooch on a high collar, and the their mind does the rest to use inductive reasoning to fill in the likely context, and then deductive reasoning to conclude the origins of the spirit:

INDUCTIVE:

• brooch = high probability of wealth
• high collar = high probability of a pre-twentieth century woman.

DEDUCTIVE:

• IF the apparition were a pre-twentieth century woman, THEN she would have worn her hair up and her skirt to cover her ankles, AND . . .
• IF she were wealthy, THEN would likely be a woman of nobility, such as a Lady.
• IF she were a Lady, THEN she would have worn other accessories to distinguish her from the servants and lower classes.
• THEREFORE, she must have worn a beautiful Cameo brooch on a high collar topped with lace, had her hair up in an elegant plaited bun poised beneath a small stylish hat held in place by a hat pin, and a flowing skirt of embroidered silk and an Oriental sash.  "I'm not really sure what Victorian shoes were like on a Lady of means, so let's just say she was floating above the floor and had no feet.  Yeah, that's what I saw!"

And the rest, as they say, . . .