Monday, 29 July 2013

Kong's Brontosaurus

The following matter takes an unexpected detour from our regular way of looking at things:

 
 
TITLE: Skull Island, Canada
PUB. DATE
March 2008
SOURCE
Skeptic;2008, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p12
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The author reflects on the legend about sea monster called Cadborosaurus in Victoria and the prehistoric dinosaurs appeared in the film "King Kong." He talks about the story of the two civil servants named Langley and Kemp who were told the newspapers in Victoria in 1933 that they have seen huge sea monsters. He shows that the dinosaurs appeared in the fictitious Skull Island in the film could have influenced or inspired the legend.
 
 
 
 
 above main image: a still from the film King Kong. above inset image: A sketch made from Kemp’s description many months after his sighting. © 1933 RKO Pictures Inc., © 2005 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
 

Skull Island, Canada

 
The 1933 and 2005 versions of King Kong share many rich details, and a moral. There are those who suggest that moral must be something about the power of love, but I suggest the moral is this:
“Never, ever go to Skull Island.”
Skull Island, the setting for the second act of King Kong, is an utterly nightmarish place. A steaming jungle packed with prehistoric beasts and crawling with unlikely monsters, it is a place where even the insects can drag you away for dinner.
It’s not surprising that this exotic, terrifying place awed Depression-era movie audiences. When Kong opened in 1933, no one had ever seen anything like it. The revolutionary special effects, the scope of imagination, the depth of immersion in another world — all these created a blockbuster experience that still echoes in the popular imagination today.
My story begins on another, sleepier island: Vancouver Island, off the western coast of British Columbia, Canada.
At the southern tip lies the provincial capital city of Victoria, a bustling tourist destination with a busy cruise ship port. Today it bills itself as “the City of Gardens,” but in 1933 it enjoyed worldwide fame for something altogether more mysterious — nothing less than an 80-foot sea monster, called Cadborosaurus.
According to legend, an awesome, primeval monster — a huge serpent with flippers, a mane, and a head something like that of a camel or horse — slides undetected through the frigid waters off British Columbia and Washington State. Could a living dinosaur, a monster out of time, lurk here beneath the waves?
That question hinges on a moment in history.
Imagine yourself in 1933 for a moment. The Great Depression was causing tremendous hardship at home, while daily newspaper headlines carried ever more bad news about Adolf Hitler. As tensions continued to mount between the new Nazi government of Germany and the rest of Europe, war seemed increasingly likely.
The news featured one bummer story after another, and people needed a pick-me-up. In Victoria, that came in the form of headlines proclaiming, “Yachtsmen Tell Of Huge Serpent Seen Off Victoria.”
Two civil servants, named Langley and Kemp, told the Victoria Daily Times that they’d each independently seen huge sea monsters. According to Langley, he and his wife were out sailing when they heard “a grunt and a snort accompanied by a huge hiss,” and then “saw a huge object about 90 to 100 feet off,” of which “[t]he only part of it that we saw was a huge dome of what was apparently a portion of its back.” It was, he said, only visible for a few seconds before diving.
What strikes me about Langley’s monster — and contemporary critics were quick to point this out — is that it swam like a whale, it sounded like a whale, and it looked a whale. Now, whales definitely live in the area: Humpbacks, grey whales, sperm whales, and others. Even today, boatloads of whale-watching tourists leave Victoria’s downtown Inner Harbour every few minutes. Given that we have no data here except a momentary, unsubstantiated, undeniably whale-like anecdote, the Langley sighting seems to me to be a completely trivial case.
But the Kemp case was more interesting. It was his sustained daylight sighting that fueled a Cadborosaurus media frenzy in Victoria and across the continent, inspiring a rash of copycat sightings — and launching an enduring legend.
According to Kemp’s 1933 story, he and his family were picnicking one afternoon in the previous year, on a group of tiny islands just off Victoria, when they saw something extraordinary. A huge creature swam up the channel between Chatham and Strongtide Islands leaving an impressive wake. Kemp recalled, “The channel at this point is about 500 yards wide. Swimming to the steep rocks of the island opposite, the creature shot its head out of the water on to the rock, and moving its head from side to side, appeared to be taking its bearings. Then fold after fold of its body came to the surface. Towards the tail it appeared serrated, like the cutting edge of a saw, with something moving flail-like at the extreme end. The movements were like those of a crocodile. Around the head appeared a sort of mane, which drifted round the body like kelp.”
Kemp estimated the animal was over 60 feet long. Although it was indistinct with distance — it was at least 1200 feet away, maybe 1500 — this was no fleeting sighting. According to Kemp, they watched the monster for several minutes before it slid off the rocks and swam away.
What was it? It sounds to me like a group of sea lions among the distant kelp, viewed at too great a distance and remembered with too great a dollop of imagination. But the interesting question is, “Whose imagination?”
Kemp’s description gives a clue. Despite copycat sightings describing literal “sea serpents,” and despite the serpentine image of Cadborosaurus now popular among cryptozoologists, it’s striking that neither of the original eyewitness reports described serpents at all!
Langley described something like a whale; Kemp described something like a dinosaur. His monster, he said, “gave the impression that it was much more like a reptile than a serpent….”
Responding to the Kemp sighting, one letter to the editor offered an opinion that Caddy might be a sauropod dinosaur called diplodocus. This writer noted Caddy’s long neck and long tail, and called it “probable that it has legs with webbed feet with which it propels itself.”
Kemp seized on this dinosaur idea with enthusiasm, and produced an eyewitness sketch consistent with a sauropod. He agreed, “Diplodocus describes better what we saw than anything else. My first feelings on viewing the creature were of being transferred to a prehistoric period when all sorts of hideous creatures abounded.” He said the creature’s movements “were not fishlike, but rather more like the movement of a huge lizard.”
This combination of elements — a swimming sauropod dinosaur, and the notion of being transported to a prehistoric world full of terrible monsters — sounded very familiar to me. I was reminded of another sauropod, filmed swimming in a primal environment teeming with hideous creatures: Skull Island, as depicted in the blockbuster film King Kong! Comparing Kemp’s description and sketch with stills from the film, the parallels are striking.

The most famous Loch Ness monster hoax photo (top) compared with a still from the film King Kong (bottom). Both images feature small models. © 1933 RKO Pictures Inc., © 2005 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
Could the film have inspired Kemp’s story? The timeline certainly works: Kong, it happens, opened in Victoria just six months before Kemp and Langley created the legend of Cadborosaurus. It blew movie-goers away, scared the socks off of people, and stuck in the memories of all who saw it. (Not coincidentally, the legend of the Loch Ness Monster was likewise created immediately after the release of King Kong, and the several key Nessie sightings seem almost lifted from the film. It’s especially notable that the infamous fake “Surgeon’s Photo” looks virtually identical to a shot from the movie.) [it is not, and it definitely has not been proven to be a small model-DD]
Is this similarity between Cadborosaurus and Kong suspicious? You bet.
Kemp’s original sighting was extremely uncertain, as he admitted, because of the tremendous distance involved (well over a thousand feet). He couldn’t make out the key details. For example, the creature’s head was just a blob. It’s likely he saw a distant group of marine mammals swimming and climbing the rocks (as is entirely typical in the area), but was unable to make out what they were at that distance. Perhaps he puzzled about it for a few months before King Kong planted a seed….
When he finally met Langley, heard his sea monster story, and compared notes, Kemp’s memories were a year old, and very probably contaminated by Hollywood.
That’s a recipe for a legend — but as scientific data, it’s a disaster.
Where does this leave Cadborosaurus? As so often in the paranormal world, it seems that the entire legendary edifice, all the sightings that followed, the books and TV programs and place in pop culture, all rests on a foundation of smoke.
Smoke, and the flickering screen of a cinema.

[According to the standard sources, the rumours of Cadborosaurus started to accumulate before the movie King Kong came out, around 1930. Loxton has overstated his case because the movie King Kong could not have been the initial motivation to report "Cadborosauruses" if the reports were already in circulation . However there is a complication as far as Loch Ness is concerned. 
Almost a full year earlier than this article, I posted an observation on the message board of the Cryptomundo site which was as follows:

"The Spicers were both groggy after a long drive and returning
home after seeing the new movie feature King Kong. They said they
saw the Brontosaurus out of that movie originally, and gave several
conflicting size estimates after the sighting. This is an
unconventional explanation, but I think they both projected the image
of the King Kong brontosaurus onto a real area–call it a
hallucination if you will."
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/otternonsense2/

Spicer Report, King Kong Brontosaurus
Rupert Gould incidentally drew the sketch, source
 for all such subsequent sketches, after the
witness' descriptions: this is NOT a witness' sketch.
 
 
 And a little while later I got this message in reply:
Good job with that identification. I think the photo comparison really
proves you right. The Spicer sighting was so strange that it seems
very unlikely that they saw a real creature. It seemed more like they
were describing something out of a monster movie than a real animal.

Thanks,
Dave F.
Posted By: Anon Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:37 am  |

 
Now whereas there were sea and lake monsters reported all around the world well before 1933, I will be the first to admit that something significant happened in 1933. Temporarily at least, the image of the Brontosaurus as the model for water monsters seized hold of the public imagination and it actually displaced the images of the traditional [string-of-buoys]sea serpent and the Plesiosaurian shaped Sea-serpent, the latter including Oudemans' model as well. I am afraid Oudemans may have paved the way for this because as Heuvelmans states, his model for the Sea-serpent does tend to resemble a Sauropod dinosaur because of the very long and whiplike tail.  But you do see the idea of the "Brontosaurus" as the shape the Lake Monster was in in Lake Okanogan and Lake Champlain at the same time, and as is noted in several sources, this is also a decade after the Patagonian Plesiosaur was in the news. This was undoubtedly part of the rise in popularity for Lake Monsters in general, but because of the temporary focus on the "Brontosaurus" as the model for water-monsters, the popular image was getting off on the wrong foot.-DD]

2 comments:

  1. Howdy, Dale,

    I'm interested to learn that we seem to have noticed the Spicer/Kong link independently (it's discussed in detail in my newly-released critical cryptozoology book Abominable Science, co-authored with Don Prothero) but of course it had been vaguely floating around in the literature (if never properly explored) for some time. Gould noted similarities in the 30s, and Shine has also mentioned in more recent years that he believes Kong inspired the Spicer sighting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh it's far worse than just that. If you read between the lines of Gould's footnotes concerning the connection between the Spicers' sighting and the Brontosaurus in King Kong it is very difficult to draw any other conclusion that the movie was the main source of inspiration for the sighting.

    ReplyDelete

This blog does NOT allow anonymous comments. All comments are moderated to filter out abusive and vulgar language and any posts indulging in abusive and insulting language shall be deleted without any further discussion.