• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Enfield Poltergeist

Steven said:
Good bleedin' grief... :rolleyes:

'The two sisters have sinister shades of the children in Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw. Ella Schrey-Yeats makes a particularly impressive stage debut as the apparently possessed Janet. Grace Molony is the more mischievous Margaret, while her little brother, Jimmy, played by Noah Leggott on opening night, brings stuttering lugubriousness.'

The Enfield Haunting review – Catherine Tate and David Threlfall deliver the shivers:

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2...te-david-threlfall-ambassadors-theatre-london
Click to expand...
Nice to see Return of the Jedi's Admiral Akbar's daughter writes for The Guardian.
 
It's a bit odd that the actress playing Janet is around 23 years-old.
 
Robbrent said:
As regards the lack of witnesses and things happening when people were not looking, that seems to be all in the rules of Fortean phenomena, it does not like being seen sure it will do things to alert you of it's presence it will sow ambiguous evidence all over the place, but does not want you to get too close to it, it's always been that way, it's no surprise that some investigators go insane trying to work it all out, it will relish all the debate about Enfield and other cases, any attention is good attention just as it loves the wild goose chases after someone spots a black panther in the wilds of Dorset
Click to expand...
I agree completely!
 
The review in the Daily Mail makes it sound awful - only worth watching to see the cast doing their best to make an awful play work/fulfil their contracts:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...e-West-End-HORROR-writes-PATRICK-MARMION.html

I don't fancy the play particularly. It is interesting to compare different reviews in different papers - The Daily Mail review of Alan Turing at the same link/below the Enfield Haunting review, contrasts with the Guardian one I read a few days ago.
 
Last edited:
Yeah. This seems to be damned with feint praise.

Like the original Poltergeist films, this feels clunky and kitsch. But the creepiness builds as the question of “Who's doing this?” is explored. Since previews, the show – whose press night was delayed – has been honed to 75 minutes and is performed straight through.
- Grauniad.
 
'One of the psychic investigators has an eerie link to the mystery and possibly too great an interest in girls.'

Is that fair, or as appallingly irresponsible as it seems to me? The show's writer appears to have combined the sexual ambiguity of The Turn of the Screw/The Innocents with recent revelations about the dread Seventies, and come up with a poor play that fails despite its interesting subject.
 
Seems to me that the idea the investigators were 'too interested' in the girls is putting a modern spin, a modern suspicion, on the situation. It's a modern interpretation on relationships or attitudes back then.
"There's something a bit weird - adults recording teenage girls sleeping in their nighties eh?"
 
Steven said:
'One of the psychic investigators has an eerie link to the mystery and possibly too great an interest in girls.'

Is that fair, or as appallingly irresponsible as it seems to me? The show's writer appears to have combined the sexual ambiguity of The Turn of the Screw/The Innocents with recent revelations about the dread Seventies, and come up with a poor play that fails despite its interesting subject.
Click to expand...
I picked up on that as well Steven. Maurice Grosse's own daughter had died prior to this investigation in 1976. She was coincidently also called Janet so he was emotionally invested (maybe slightly compromised?) in helping those Enfield kids. There were never any allegations of impropriety at the time of the investigation and there haven't been any since but some recent journalist has decided to sensationalise a sinister unfounded opinion since Maurice is now dead. No complaints were ever made about his behaviour. No rumours. We'd expect complaints to be made now now that the kids are adults but nope.

I agree with Stormkhan's above assessment: ' .... a modern suspicion, on the situation. It's a modern interpretation on relationships or attitudes back then.'

I admit I haven't watched this play so I can't speak about if this came from a spiteful reviewer of the play or how the Maurice character is portrayed in the play by the writer.

I'd need to see the play to decide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Grosse
 
Last edited:
I thought it was a pretty disgusting near-allegation - not to mention reckless and opportunistic - but wasn't well-read enough about the case to know if there had been rumours of the kind. Of course there are strong points to be made about those times - and these - and about the behaviour of authority figures good or bad; but it seems very unfair to blithely generalise, especially when no evidence of mistreatment has ever come to light.
 
Steven said:
I thought it was a pretty disgusting near-allegation - not to mention reckless and opportunistic - but wasn't well-read enough about the case to know if there had been rumours of the kind. Of course there are strong points to be made about those times - and these - and about the behaviour of authority figures good or bad; but it seems very unfair to blithely generalise, especially when no evidence of mistreatment has ever come to light.
Click to expand...
I strongly agree. Unless allegations have ever been made about Maurice Grosse, that's unfair cheap shot sensationalist writing. If they have, then people can start looking deeper into that.

This is the only suggestion of anything that could be described as slightly scandalous involving the name Maurice Grosse.

' In 1998 Grosse sued David Baddiel for £10,000 after Baddiel had described a psychic investigator called Maurice Grosse who lives in High Barnet, North London, and runs away with a married woman.'

' The high profile courted by Maurice Grosse as an investigator of the paranormal bought him fame and notoriety. He found himself parodied by comedian David Baddiel [19] in his novel Time for Bed: A Novel About Sleep, Sex and Skewed Clocks, as a psychic investigator who lives in High Barnet, North London, and runs away with a married woman. Grosse sued David Baddiel for £10,000. They settled out of court and Maurice Grosse gave his winnings to charity. [20] Following Grosse's death, in his film, The Infidel (2010) David Baddiel again introduced "Maurice Grosse, psychic investigator from High Barnet," only this time reversing the infidelity, making it the the wife of Lenny Goldberg who leaves her husband for the fictional character Maurice Grosse.'
 
Steven said:
:D

Even that suggests someone with a keen sense of personal morality.
Click to expand...
The comedian Sasha Baron Cohen interviewed Maurice Grosse but Sasha did the interview (set up) using his Alta ego characters Ali G. I won't link to it here because it's a puerile comedy skit that mostly involves 'Ali G' making sex jokes and wondering why he woke up with ectoplasm on himself after dreaming about an actress. You can find it on youtube but my point is that Maurice comes across as someone who quickly realise when someone's 'pulling his leg'.
 
I've found an article in the Daily Mirror from 1978. Sorry, if the print is a bit small, I can't seem to get it any bigger.

Enfield Poltergeist 1.png
Enfield Poltergeist 2.png
Enfield Poltergeist 3.png
 
Something that's bothered me. There were four children in that house when the activity was said to have happened but I don't remember reading any statements or reports from the 10 and 7 year old Johnny and Billy Hodgson. Were there any?.

 
Swifty said:
Something that's bothered me. There were four children in that house when the activity was said to have happened but I don't remember reading any statements or reports from the 10 and 7 year old Johnny and Billy Hodgson. Were there any?.

Click to expand...
Good shout, this has been flagged up on here before. All the focus was on the two girls yet in some of the photographs one of the brothers is tucked up next to his sister and there are at least three beds visible in the bedroom.

This immediately made think of the brothers being out of view and banging on a radiator or pipes in response to questions asked of the poltergeist, chucking things at visitors etc. However, there is testimony that demonstrates poltergeist activity took place whilst all four children were downstairs. That said, it does seem the investigators unduly focussed on the girls and perhaps this was because of their stated belief that poltergeists manifested through young girls who have started their periods?
 
Matt said:
I've found an article in the Daily Mirror from 1978. Sorry, if the print is a bit small, I can't seem to get it any bigger.

View attachment 73232View attachment 73233View attachment 73234
Click to expand...
Great find. The flying pillow is hardly evidence as one of the children could have thrown it, remember that it was a camera being operated from outside the room. Put another way, find me a child who has thrown their pillows around, had pillow fights etc.
 
Last edited:
titch said:
I will get back to you in a few months, or years depending on how low down in the book pile "this house is haunted" is.
Click to expand...
Johnny who was ten at that time died just four years later and thus this would suggest he had health and/or development issues from birth:

https://www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk/other/the-enfield-poltergeist/

That still leaves the the younger brother Billy to account for.

I found this interesting:

"On Monday 2nd October, they called in another medium, a Dutchman named Dono Gmelig-Meyling, who came to the house and travelled along the astral plane. He was certain that a 24-year-old woman was involved in the case. Maurice Grosse had had a daughter called Janet, who had died in a crash aged 24 and it was this that had led him to become a member of the SPR. After Dono identified the 24-year-old woman, the incidents tapered off and then stopped."

https://www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk/other/the-enfield-poltergeist/
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Johnny who was ten at that time died just four years later and thus this would suggest he had health and/or development issues from birth:

https://www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk/other/the-enfield-poltergeist/

That still leaves the the younger brother Billy to account for.

I found this interesting:

"On Monday 2nd October, they called in another medium, a Dutchman named Dono Gmelig-Meyling, who came to the house and travelled along the astral plane. He was certain that a 24-year-old woman was involved in the case. Maurice Grosse had had a daughter called Janet, who had died in a crash aged 24 and it was this that had led him to become a member of the SPR. After Dono identified the 24-year-old woman, the incidents tapered off and then stopped."

https://www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk/other/the-enfield-poltergeist/
Click to expand...
I think it would be almost impossible to quantify the effect of losing his daughter had on Maurice Grosse. Even HE may have stressed that he was completely impartial and his daughter's death had no bearing on the case - without being aware of any psychological implications.
 
catseye said:
I think it would be almost impossible to quantify the effect of losing his daughter had on Maurice Grosse. Even HE may have stressed that he was completely impartial and his daughter's death had no bearing on the case - without being aware of any psychological implications.
Click to expand...
Grosse became interested in the afterlife after his daughter's death so yup, it was all about her.
He could deny it till the cows come home. Nobody's fooled.

In a similar vein, the writer Ann Rice denied that the inspiration for her Vampire books was the sad death of her young daughter.
 
escargot said:
Grosse became interested in the afterlife after his daughter's death so yup, it was all about her.
He could deny it till the cows come home. Nobody's fooled.

In a similar vein, the writer Ann Rice denied that the inspiration for her Vampire books was the sad death of her young daughter.
Click to expand...
I think it's easy for people to think they can compartmentalise and that severe life events have no bearing on anything they go on to do. I also think they are fooling themselves, and that they genuinely can't see that they are trying to work out trauma.
 
Then again, there are those who can separate personal and professional life. One can always influence the other but it's a silly assumption.
A female police officer investigates a rape - "Of course, the investigation was influenced because of the officer being a woman." If there was evidence of undue influence then fair enough.

It boils down to so much assumption - "You would say that, wouldn't you?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top