In the latest issue:

Short Cuts

Jonathan Parry

Real Men Go to Tehran

Adam Shatz

What Trump doesn’t know about Iran

Patrick Cockburn

Kaiser Karl V

Thomas Penn

The Hostile Environment

Catherine Hall

Social Mobilities

Adam Swift

Short Cuts: So much for England

Tariq Ali

What the jihadis left behind

Nelly Lahoud

Ray Strachey

Francesca Wade

C.J. Sansom

Malcolm Gaskill

At the British Museum: ‘Troy: Myth and Reality’

James Davidson

Poem: ‘The Lion Tree’

Jamie McKendrick

SurrogacyTM

Jenny Turner

Boys in Motion

Nicholas Penny

Jia Tolentino

Lauren Oyler

Diary: What really happened in Yancheng?

Long Ling

Into Thin AirMarina Warner
Close

Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website (www.lrb.co.uk — hereafter ‘LRB Website’). These terms and conditions apply to all users of the LRB Website ("you"), including individual subscribers to the print edition of the LRB who wish to take advantage of our free 'subscriber only' access to archived material ("individual users") and users who are authorised to access the LRB Website by subscribing institutions ("institutional users").

Each time you use the LRB Website you signify your acceptance of these terms and conditions. If you do not agree, or are not comfortable with any part of this document, your only remedy is not to use the LRB Website.


  1. By registering for access to the LRB Website and/or entering the LRB Website by whatever route of access, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions currently prevailing.
  2. The London Review of Books ("LRB") reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time and you should check for any alterations regularly. Continued usage of the LRB Website subsequent to a change in the terms and conditions constitutes acceptance of the current terms and conditions.
  3. The terms and conditions of any subscription agreements which educational and other institutions have entered into with the LRB apply in addition to these terms and conditions.
  4. You undertake to indemnify the LRB fully for all losses damages and costs incurred as a result of your breaching these terms and conditions.
  5. The information you supply on registration to the LRB Website shall be accurate and complete. You will notify the LRB promptly of any changes of relevant details by emailing the registrar. You will not assist a non-registered person to gain access to the LRB Website by supplying them with your password. In the event that the LRB considers that you have breached the requirements governing registration, that you are in breach of these terms and conditions or that your or your institution's subscription to the LRB lapses, your registration to the LRB Website will be terminated.
  6. Each individual subscriber to the LRB (whether a person or organisation) is entitled to the registration of one person to use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site. This user is an 'individual user'.
  7. The London Review of Books operates a ‘no questions asked’ cancellation policy in accordance with UK legislation. Please contact us to cancel your subscription and receive a full refund for the cost of all unposted issues.
  8. Use of the 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is strictly for the personal use of each individual user who may read the content on the screen, download, store or print single copies for their own personal private non-commercial use only, and is not to be made available to or used by any other person for any purpose.
  9. Each institution which subscribes to the LRB is entitled to grant access to persons to register on and use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site under the terms and conditions of its subscription agreement with the LRB. These users are 'institutional users'.
  10. Each institutional user of the LRB may access and search the LRB database and view its entire contents, and may also reproduce insubstantial extracts from individual articles or other works in the database to which their institution's subscription provides access, including in academic assignments and theses, online and/or in print. All quotations must be credited to the author and the LRB. Institutional users are not permitted to reproduce any entire article or other work, or to make any commercial use of any LRB material (including sale, licensing or publication) without the LRB's prior written permission. Institutions may notify institutional users of any additional or different conditions of use which they have agreed with the LRB.
  11. Users may use any one computer to access the LRB web site 'subscriber only' content at any time, so long as that connection does not allow any other computer, networked or otherwise connected, to access 'subscriber only' content.
  12. The LRB Website and its contents are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright in the LRB Website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to the LRB or are otherwise used by the LRB as permitted by applicable law.
  13. All intellectual property rights in articles, reviews and essays originally published in the print edition of the LRB and subsequently included on the LRB Website belong to or have been licensed to the LRB. This material is made available to you for use as set out in paragraph 8 (if you are an individual user) or paragraph 10 (if you are an institutional user) only. Save for such permitted use, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt such material in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department.
  14. All intellectual property rights in images on the LRB Website are owned by the LRB except where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited. Save for such material taken for permitted use set out above, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt LRB’s images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department. Where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, reproduce or translate such images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The LRB will not undertake to supply contact details of any attributed or credited copyright holder.
  15. The LRB Website is provided on an 'as is' basis and the LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website will be accessible by any particular browser, operating system or device.
  16. The LRB makes no express or implied representation and gives no warranty of any kind in relation to any content available on the LRB Website including as to the accuracy or reliability of any information either in its articles, essays and reviews or in the letters printed in its letter page or material supplied by third parties. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) arising from the publication of any materials on the LRB Website or incurred as a consequence of using or relying on such materials.
  17. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) for any legal or other consequences (including infringement of third party rights) of any links made to the LRB Website.
  18. The LRB is not responsible for the content of any material you encounter after leaving the LRB Website site via a link in it or otherwise. The LRB gives no warranty as to the accuracy or reliability of any such material and to the fullest extent permitted by law excludes all liability that may arise in respect of or as a consequence of using or relying on such material.
  19. This site may be used only for lawful purposes and in a manner which does not infringe the rights of, or restrict the use and enjoyment of the site by, any third party. In the event of a chat room, message board, forum and/or news group being set up on the LRB Website, the LRB will not undertake to monitor any material supplied and will give no warranty as to its accuracy, reliability, originality or decency. By posting any material you agree that you are solely responsible for ensuring that it is accurate and not obscene, defamatory, plagiarised or in breach of copyright, confidentiality or any other right of any person, and you undertake to indemnify the LRB against all claims, losses, damages and costs incurred in consequence of your posting of such material. The LRB will reserve the right to remove any such material posted at any time and without notice or explanation. The LRB will reserve the right to disclose the provenance of such material, republish it in any form it deems fit or edit or censor it. The LRB will reserve the right to terminate the registration of any person it considers to abuse access to any chat room, message board, forum or news group provided by the LRB.
  20. Any e-mail services supplied via the LRB Website are subject to these terms and conditions.
  21. You will not knowingly transmit any virus, malware, trojan or other harmful matter to the LRB Website. The LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website is free from contaminating matter, viruses or other malicious software and to the fullest extent permitted by law disclaims all liability of any kind including liability for any damages, losses or costs resulting from damage to your computer or other property arising from access to the LRB Website, use of it or downloading material from it.
  22. The LRB does not warrant that the use of the LRB Website will be uninterrupted, and disclaims all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred as a result of access to the LRB Website being interrupted, modified or discontinued.
  23. The LRB Website contains advertisements and promotional links to websites and other resources operated by third parties. While we would never knowingly link to a site which we believed to be trading in bad faith, the LRB makes no express or implied representations or warranties of any kind in respect of any third party websites or resources or their contents, and we take no responsibility for the content, privacy practices, goods or services offered by these websites and resources. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability for any damages or losses arising from access to such websites and resources. Any transaction effected with such a third party contacted via the LRB Website are subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the third party involved and the LRB accepts no responsibility or liability resulting from such transactions.
  24. The LRB disclaims liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred for unauthorised access or alterations of transmissions or data by third parties as consequence of visit to the LRB Website.
  25. While 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is currently provided free to subscribers to the print edition of the LRB, the LRB reserves the right to impose a charge for access to some or all areas of the LRB Website without notice.
  26. These terms and conditions are governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with English law and any disputes relating to these terms and conditions will be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.
  27. The various provisions of these terms and conditions are severable and if any provision is held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction then such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining provisions.
  28. If these terms and conditions are not accepted in full, use of the LRB Website must be terminated immediately.
Close
The Invention of Telepathy 
by Roger Luckhurst.
Oxford, 334 pp., £35, June 2002, 0 19 924962 8
Show More
Show More

Eva C., one of the most sensational ‘materialising’ mediums of the early 20th century, was much photographed in the act of producing spirits in the form of ectoplasmic structures, or ‘pseudo-pods’. These long viscous skeins of white stuff, which sometimes passed as if miraculously through a gauzy gag tied over Eva C.’s face, were thought to be ‘ideoplasts’ – projections of the medium’s mind. The photographer and impresario of these séances was Mme Juliette Bisson, a rich widow, and the patron of a physician turned psychologist, Baron Albert von Schrenck-Notzing; Eva C.’s séances were staged in his native city, Munich. The Baron later published exhaustive minutes of the proceedings, in books with such titles as Phenomena of Materialisation (1913, translated into English in 1920), and his lurid commingling of female physical display, scientific language and forensic, evidentiary process brings to a prurient culmination the labours of psychical investigators during the last three decades of the 19th century, the period dealt with in Roger Luckhurst’s study.

Photography was of inestimable importance in disseminating the performance of the mediums, as well as offering a deep metaphor for the relation between external matter and immaterial thought. While the interplay between psychology and new technologies forms one of Luckhurst’s themes, another aspect of the case of Eva C. connects more resonantly to his telepathic plots. Her career as a medium had begun on ‘the imperial margin’, in the French colony of Algeria. Luckhurst’s densely worked argument picks up and knots the trailing threads in a carpet where figures of imperialist fantasy, technological terror and scientific speculation can be glimpsed side by side. Eva C. was the pseudonym of Marthe Béraud, who first came to attention when she contacted the other world in Algiers in 1905, to console her fiancé’s parents after the death of their son. The séances were so successful that her fiancé’s father, a French general, invited Charles Richet, a professor of physiology at the Sorbonne who was well known for his interest in psychic matters, to attend them; Richet soon declared himself fully persuaded that Béraud was genuine.

Not long afterwards, Marthe Béraud confessed to trickery. She had little option: a newspaper had found the servant who’d played the spirit she summoned – that of Bien Boa, a courtly and richly moustachioed 16th-century Brahmin. Not for the first time, Richet refused to admit that what he had witnessed was a trick, and the medium, once she had changed her name, continued to practise.

The support of scientists such as Richet and, earlier, the pioneering physicist and Fellow of the Royal Society William Crookes, who in the 1870s had speculated about a fourth, ‘radiant’, state of matter, lent authority to the cause of English psychic research. When Dr Richet held séances in his villa on the island of Roubaud in the South of France in the summer of 1895, he invited the eminent philosophers and scientists who, in 1882, had founded the Society for Psychical Research. They included the philosopher Frederic Myers; the progressive thinkers Henry Sidgwick, the founder of Newnham College, Cambridge, and his wife, Eleanor Balfour, sister of the future Prime Minister; and Oliver Lodge, a brilliant younger scientist who continued to defend ectoplasm well into the Einsteinian era. Richet had enlisted the Italian medium Eusapia Palladino, another adept at setting objects flying through the air, tumbling the furniture about, forming ectoplasm and making absent people very much present. After the Roubaud séances, she moved back to Britain with Myers and the Sidgwicks to continue the experiments in Cambridge.

There’s something ghastly and shameful, as well as inadvertently hilarious, about these high-minded and progressive luminaries taking part in such shenanigans; it’s also a source of profound embarrassment for those who believe in intellectual effort that thoughtful men and women should have colluded with such deceptions and, albeit unconsciously, brought about a spiral of duplicity with mediums who were for the most part female, and invariably of a lower social status than the psychic investigators. All this has meant that serious attention has only recently been paid to the extent and influence of the psychic enterprise, to the legitimate contexts in which it arose, the resonance of the questions it put, and the effect it had on ideas of the self in psychology and literature. Pamela Thurschwell’s fine study of Henry James, Oscar Wilde and George du Maurier1 showed how profoundly the developments in ‘magical thinking’ reverberated in fiction and its portrayal of character and perception; and Malcolm Gaskill recently tackled, with amused brio, the life and times of the last of the materialising mediums, Helen Duncan, who was imprisoned for her activities and died only in 1956.2

In this lucid and richly layered study, Luckhurst echoes Terry Castle’s ‘the invention of the uncanny’ (from The Female Thermometer), to tell the story of telepathy. Castle described the internalisation of spectres, hauntings, terrors and the rise of the phantasmal at the end of the 18th century, while Luckhurst tracks a contrary yearning a hundred years later for a stable, external explanation, moored in science. Developments in the natural sciences and psychology offered places for ghosts to rise up: in ‘radiant matter’, in vibrations of the ether, in the organic sparking of synapses – not in the turbulent, subjective and inexplicable fantasies of individual persons. Luckhurst is eager to counter the emphasis on decline and degeneration at the close of the Victorian era, wanting to redescribe the epoch as one invigorated by contact with new thinking from an ever increasing number of new disciplines.

Telepathy embraced phenomena such as spirit summonings, ectoplasmic manifestations, ghosts and hauntings, according to the Society for Psychical Research and its assiduous committees of investigation, because all of them constituted action at a distance produced by mind over matter. The word itself was invented by Frederic Myers in 1882 – the prefix tele- gave rise to a number of compounds during this period that reflect the fluctuating and excited climate of discovery: telegraph, telephone, telekinesis, teleportation (television, manifestly still of this world, followed later). Myers wanted to replace ‘thought transference’, the phrase then current, in part no doubt because he wanted to strike a lofty and learned tone; but also because he wanted a word that would mean not merely mind-reading but ‘the communication of impressions of any kind from one mind to another, independently of the recognised channels of sense’. The new word would be able to embrace materialisations at séances: these ranged from the filmy skin (paraffin wax) shed by spirit visitors, to ghost thumbprints, cool lifting breezes, various sound effects, and, of course, spirit apparitions and ectoplasm.

The Society for Psychical Research sought to exclude supernatural explanations, and their materialist scepticism caused a rift with the Spiritualists. It’s a forgotten paradox that, unlike witch-hunters, ghost-busters were fervent doubters, and tricksters and conjurors such as Houdini rationalists to their fingertips. However, several of the thinkers in the SPR wavered in their allegiance to scientific naturalism: for example, Myers, in his magnum opus, Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death, thought up the notion of ‘subliminal consciousness’, a model in which the mind is never entirely present to itself, but constantly impelled by inaccessible memory layers. This was a material conception, not an idea of the soul. But, at the same time, he made a pact with friends that after his death he would return to speak to them – if this were possible – in order to settle the question of bodily survival.

Myers died in 1901, after being treated at a clinic in Rome where William James was also a patient, and where Axel Munthe looked after them both. Munthe went on to write the dream-laden and spooked bestseller, The Story of San Michele. As for Myers, he did indeed return: he became a loquacious revenant, dictating many messages in languages ancient and modern to automatic writers far and wide; he had agreed a code before his death, secured by several double blinds, so that researchers would know his ghost. In returning to haunt the living, Myers undercut his own argument that telepathy involved effluvia or waves which communicated between the living, and that apparitions, ghosts of departed loved ones and other spectral experiences existed in the mind and nowhere else. In the late Victorian and Edwardian ages, the spectral was never properly assimilated to the telepathic, and, after the First World War, psychic studies had pretty much given way to spiritualism. Like the many bereaved who saw their loved ones again in spirit photographs, the vehicles of Myers’s communicating spirit preferred to think he had indeed come back from the dead to speak to them.

Luckhurst discusses the association of pathos and touch, and finds an oxymoron in the term ‘remote touch, distant contact’. But the dominant meaning of pathe is ‘sensation’, in the sense of emotion, suffering, or feeling with someone or something, as in sympathy, the ‘Pathetic Fallacy’ or, in the coinage of Vernon Lee which Luckhurst discusses, empathy. Myers saw love as the basis of all telepathy, and his own life-story, complicated by disavowed bisexuality, melancholia and even unacknowledged fraudulence (including plagiarism), constantly raises the matter of prohibited relations. Yet touch, handling – epaphe – became central to the activities of the psychic researchers, who in imitation of the laboratory, did not want to rely on the evidence of their eyes alone. They wanted telepathic effects to be evident in ways other than the visual: hence the darkness of séances, the inventive panoply of raps, notes and other noises, the floating trumpets that emitted disincarnate spirit voices, the teleported flowers and phantasmal slaps and pinches, the gooey, smelly, haptic qualities of ectoplasm. The psychic moment involved, on the one hand, an ideal of enhanced sensitivity of perception between people and, on the other, a commitment to impersonal evidence, unaffected by the subjectivity of witnesses.

Luckhurst vividly describes William Barrett, a doctor active in the Society for Psychical Research, assisting John Tyndall, a leading scientific naturalist, when Tyndall was demonstrating the effects of sound on light at the Royal Institution in the 1860s. Shaking a bunch of keys, or chirruping, or clapping loudly from a distance, Tyndall showed that he could quell the flame of a Bunsen burner or make it swell and roar. Extrapolating to telepathic effects, Barrett later said that the flames reacted like a ‘sensitive, nervous person uneasily starting and twitching at every little noise’. The connection of vibrating harmonies across space flowered easily into figures of interpersonal contact, and we now ordinarily speak of ‘being on the same wavelength’, ‘having a brain wave’, ‘tuning in’, ‘switching on’. Oliver Lodge invoked tuning forks reverberating to each other’s frequency and wrote that ‘the sensory consciousness of a person, though apparently located in the brain, may also be conceived of as also existing like a faint echo in space, or in other brains.’ Such finely calibrated sensors between sensitive souls, such tremulous, responsive, imponderably harmonised bodies, appear in the writings of Henry James, Virginia Woolf (The Waves) and even Rudyard Kipling, as well as those of others mentioned by Luckhurst, such as Arthur Machen, Vernon Lee and Grant Allen.

The concept of telepathy continually threatened to collapse distinctions between the literal and the figural, and the psychological and the metaphysical. As Luckhurst remarks, Henry James ‘always ensures the screw will bite with a further turn, the figural and the literal kept maddeningly proximate’. The status of ghostliness had preoccupied the Fathers of the Church for much the same reason: were apparitions illusions emanating from the devil? Or were they hooked up to a truth in the objective world, whose creator ensured their existence? Joan of Arc’s trial returned obsessively to this problem: were the voices in her mind, in which case they might have been conjured by the arch deceiver, Satan? Or were they ghosts of the sort who often appeared to warn sinners to reform – no diabolical tricks there.

Until Freud, dreams were in the main proleptic, prophetic; they also, as we know from Homer and from Julius Caesar, contained secret knowledge of what had transpired but was still hidden from view: they were not fantastic, nor were they subjective. Classical and medieval ghosts enflesh – so to speak – concealed knowledge; it is easy to see why ghosts later became metaphors for the Freudian unconscious. Playing Hamlet recently, Sam West delivered his soliloquies in the midst of company on stage, thus conveying clearly that these were his inner thoughts, which we in the audience were overhearing: in other words, we were in telepathic communication with his inner self. In Hamlet and Macbeth, the status of ghosts is full of tense ambiguities: the guards, as well as Horatio, seem to have seen the ghost on the battlements, but Gertrude later grieves that Hamlet is staring at thin air, and Macbeth alone sees Banquo shaking his hoary locks.

Discussing Freud’s captivation in the 1920s by the possibility of thought transference, Jacques Derrida remarks that it is ‘difficult to imagine a theory of what they still call the unconscious without a theory of telepathy’.3 Derrida also allows himself to wonder, as most of us have done, how it is that someone rings us at the very moment we’ve put our hand on the receiver to ring them. Modern media, he suggests, do not simply move the self in the form of the voice and image over distance, but give the eerie feeling of replicating the movement of thought itself. In his writing, telepathy keeps threatening to break its confines and become the condition of thought, of literature, of language.

The chainlink fence around telepathy has been patrolled, usually more vigilantly than by Derrida, because the occult poses such a threat to legitimacy: the eminent figures in the SPR were keen not to be thought cranks. Even worse, the occult has tended to leak into the fascist, and distemper its adherents (think of Pound, Yeats, Jung). Luckhurst tracks Freud’s struggle to keep psychoanalysis at a healthy distance from the psychic and the occult, and to define the unconscious against Myers’s telepathic, ‘subliminal’ model. In Freud’s conception, the unconscious belongs to an individual, differentiated and particular person: each to his or her own unconscious. Myers’s subliminal and irreducible – even immortal – subconscious disintegrates into the material world, deriving its being from the Pythagorean or Hindu concepts of vital energy and essences flowing through creation. Myers had absorbed doctrines of the world soul and of metempsychosis from his own background as a classicist and philosopher as well as from his wide-ranging and esoteric reading. (He wasn’t alone, of course: theosophy was forged through contact with Indian thought.) In other territories of empire – West Africa and the Caribbean especially – colonists, too, became acquainted with models of self that dethroned uniqueness, and offered up the individual to possession by external spirits: the self became a haunted house, or a house ever apt to become haunted. In its acceptance of the medium’s capacity to fall into trance and take on another’s thoughts, to become the habitation of a ‘spirit control’, to speak in another’s voice, to produce someone else’s ectoplasmic matter from inside her own body, telepathy profoundly undermines the integrated body-mind/ body-spirit/outside-inside model of the Judaeo-Christian self, and, indeed, the Freudian psyche. Luckhurst refers to the contrary idea of a ‘je anonyme’ – an ego which is not I.

The medium in trance, herself ghosting the presence of another, is haunted by the oracles of ancient Greece, and by the shamans and behiques of Africa and the Caribbean, whose magical powers over souls had been noted in the earliest ethnography to come out of these regions. Marthe Béraud’s Bien Boa belongs to a large congeries of exotic phantoms born of the encounter with different cultures. Telepathy became a way of absorbing strangeness, of neutralising its power through contact but also, in a metaphor of pharmacological magic, of revitalising the self through its energy. Hélène Smith, a young Genevan medium who starred in Dr Théodore Flournoy’s bestseller From India to the Planet Mars (1899),4 spoke in many tongues, including Martian. Her multiple selves included Marie Antoinette, a 15th-century Hindu princess called Simandini, and a reincarnation as the Martian overlord Astané. Flournoy’s account of their séances and Smith’s prodigious feats of channelling went through edition after edition – and it’s not improbable that Marthe Béraud had come across it. Astané travelled by means of a flying machine – a hand-held flame-thrower which looked like a combination between a loud hailer and a child’s toy girouette or windmill. This psychic Orientalism persisted: Yeats was able to break his block thanks to the mediumship of a succession of women, who between them established a spirit control for the poet in the shape of Leo Africanus, a Spanish-Arab scholar, traveller and poet celebrated in 16th-century Italy.

The far-flung fantastic spectres of the Fin-de-Siècle séance aren’t simply ornamental: there to produce a frisson of the unfamiliar. They embody, as Luckhurst points out, the collapse of the distant into the proximate brought about by empire. Imperial Gothic – the infusion of exotic spooks into the literature of hauntings – grew in step with modern communications: Luckhurst shows how submarine cables, carrying the telegraph between Britain’s colonial possessions, reproduced the spiritual web that put the past in touch with the present, bringing the unimaginably remote home to the parlour. The first transatlantic cable joined two British territories – Ireland and Newfoundland – in 1866; India was connected to Gibraltar four years later, allowing communication between Europe and the Subcontinent in five hours; the last link was laid in 1903 between Canada and New Zealand. These were ‘the nerves of empire’. The most important early theorist of psychic phenomena, William Crookes, was introduced to spiritualism after his brother died of a fever in Cuba, where he was laying a cable.

At the same time as Myers and his colleagues in the SPR were amassing evidence from all over the world of out-of-body experiences and ghostly apparitions, the anthropologist James Frazer was conducting an investigation, also by post, into customs and beliefs throughout the Empire. From 1887 onwards, Frazer sent his questionnaire throughout the world as he saw it, and this world coincided, pretty much, with the British Empire: he asked missionaries, colonial administrators, teachers, explorers and botanists to inquire of their native informants the ‘Manners, Customs, Religion, Superstitions, etc of Uncivilised or Semi-Civilised Peoples’. He was excited by other peoples’ ideas about spirits, about ways of summoning them or controlling them, about their migration into the body of animals, and the adventures of wandering souls – although he despised the researches of the SPR, he was willy-nilly wound into their telepathic plots. One of his informants was Mary Kingsley, who had explored the West Coast of Africa; according to Luckhurst, Mary Kingsley declared that she could ‘think black’, and he relates this novel and proud claim to the value accorded by psychic researchers to the sensitivity of empathetic or telepathic exchanges.

The Invention of Telepathy traces the way in which magical thinking about the mind unsettled notions of the unique, integrated self, yet simultaneously made subjectivity the only locus of experience. On the basis of this riven notion of person and personhood, writers have invented haunted plots, unreliable memoirs, ghost stories and gothic romances. The 19th-century concept of telepathy continues to animate alter egos, multiple personalities, ideas of possession and altered states in work by writers from Margaret Atwood to Joyce Carol Oates to Stephen King. The alliance of entertainment media with magic, telepathy and possession grows ever stronger, in writing for children, in television programmes – even the Teletubbies are psychic channellers – and, of course, in the X-Files, horror films and video nasties. The latest twist to the challenge posed by telepathy to the idea of the integrated self reconfigures in atomic terms the telepathic ‘Not-I’, who can take on the impression of others’ presence. The particles of an element are identical, and through this identicality, excite a hallucinatory sensation, to the non-scientific mind, of personal uniqueness vanishing into thin air: your DNA may be uniquely yours, but its carbon content, well, that’s another matter. The ‘I’ as an enigmatic atomic cluster, traversed by invisible waves and rays, so very like every other and yet not like any other, has become the new frontier of psychological inquiry.

Send Letters To:

The Editor
London Review of Books,
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

letters@lrb.co.uk

Please include name, address, and a telephone number.

Read anywhere with the London Review of Books app, available now from the App Store for Apple devices, Google Play for Android devices and Amazon for your Kindle Fire.

Sign up to our newsletter

For highlights from the latest issue, our archive and the blog, as well as news, events and exclusive promotions.