Tell us about your background... have you always been a writer?
I started a career in journalism. Frankly, I did not want to limit myself to straight news writing, so I began writing opinion articles. In the world of professional journalism, it takes years to get paid for writing opinions, yet I had my first editorial published when I was only 22, in Newsday, a major New York daily. From there it just took off. I still write occasional news stories and I am adjunct professor of journalism at St. John's University in New York City. I've authored four books and have a contract for two more right now. I've also written articles on sports, entertainment and religion. And, of course, I've written many pieces on Dark Shadows over the years. The satisfaction comes not only from getting paid, but from having people tell me they've enjoyed my books and my writings in general.
How did you first come into contact with Dark Shadows?
Like many kids growing up in New York City, the true home of Dark Shadows, I was both fascinated and scared by the show. It was simply the show to watch after school. Frequently my sister and I would watch it at the homes of other kids on the block. And the half hour would go by so quickly. We couldn't wait for the next day's show, especially with each episode ending with a cliffhanger.
Today, perhaps, people don't realize what a truly scary and eerie show it was. It is manifestly unfair to judge Dark Shadows by the standards of today. Nowadays, the special effects of modern shows are unbelievable. In Dark Shadows' day, they were archaic, but were very effective for those times. It's customary for even some fans today to make fun of the show as silly and campy, but it was not perceived that way at all when it was on the air. And I think history has proven that point. Dark Shadows has endured through the decades because it was so magnificently and magically done.
What most attracted you to the show?
Initially, my mother wouldn't let us watch it, which made it an attraction by itself. What is she keeping from us? But as I got older, I always had an affinity for the horror genre. There simply had never been a character like Barnabas Collins before. I am too young to remember the early evil Barnabas. I only saw the conflicted reluctant vampire. So the supernatural elements, the time travel, the seances, the vampirism, and my all-time favorite witch, the stunningly gorgeous Angelique, all contributed to my love for the show. So between the supernatural elements, the great storylines, and all those beautiful girls, how could I not love Dark Shadows?
When did your interest in the science of the show begin, and how did
this evolve into a book?
Like most people, at first I simply took the science elements of the show for what they were - or what I thought they were - ideas woven by talented writers into a show about the supernatural. I never honestly thought about the scientific basis of any of the strange occurrences on Dark Shadows. Over the years, I developed a great interest in physics which was totally independent of my interest in Dark Shadows. Like any good journalist, I was born with two qualities that actually seem contradictory - an open mind and a healthy skepticism. While I am open to listening to any far-out notion, in the end I want some tangible evidence that can back up the notion. For example, many years ago I considered time travel, which takes up half of my book, to be merely a science fiction concept. It was only after delving into physics that I realized that time travel was very real; not just a theory, but backed up by the laws of physics and Einstein's equations. I then began assigning my journalism students to research the scientific reality of time travel. At first they think it's a joke. Then they realize that it is very real and are fascinated by what they find.
In retrospect, it was an obvious connection between my love of both physics and Dark Shadows. I began making presentations to my students on the physics of
time travel. Now I have attended every Dark Shadows Festival since 1999, I have become close friends with Lara Parker (Angelique), Kathryn Leigh Scott (Maggie) and Donna McKechnie (Amanda Harris), who is a fellow New Yorker - and I have had my students interview celebrities or public people for magazine-style profiles. These actresses have graciously allowed themselves to be interviewed by my students as a favor to me. So my students are therefore familiar with both the physics of time travel, and Dark Shadows. So there's how my connection for the book came to my mind. It actually started as a magazine piece I was writing. The article then grew into a book, my agent found a publisher, and now I'm enjoying promoting The Physics of Dark Shadows.
So, about about the book itself... what does it offer for fans of the show?
Who wouldn't want to travel back in time to see their grandparents when they were children? Who wouldn't want to give and receive messages telepathically, through the mind? Who wouldn't want to communicate with a departed loved one? What my book does is examine all of the incredible and unlikely occurrences on Dark Shadows, but through the prism of the science that backs those things up. Although all of the fantastic happenings on Dark Shadows occur through supernatural means, there is a very real and respectable scientific underpinning to all those paranormal events. Not only time travel, but I reveal the science behind telepathy, mediumship, possession, hypnotism, and hauntings. I talk about the reality of Quentin's staircase as a true wormhole through time. And many people don't realize that the concept of parallel time was actually put forth as a serious scientific theory only a few years before Eliot Stokes analyzed it on Dark Shadows.
I'm also thrilled that Kathryn Leigh Scott wrote to the foreword to my book, and another excellent writer, Amanda Trujillo, wrote the preface. In the book, I explain how to 'cure' those contradictions that time travel to the past creates. For example, if Quentin was never killed in 1897 because Barnabas traveled to the past and changed history, Quentin would not have been a ghost in the present. Yet young David recognized Quentin in 1970 as the ghost that haunted him. How do conundrums like these come to be explained? They're called 'temporal paradoxes' and are a favorite topic of debate and discussion of Dark Shadows fans. My book explains how these problems are resolved. Even with all the Dark Shadows books out there, they've probably never read anything quite like this before.
The original writers of the show didn't exactly aim for scientific plausibility. What were the pitfalls of applying real science to the world of Collinsport?
Well, I don't think you would have the Dark Shadows that we all know and love if things could be explained so easily. Anything is possible in Dark Shadows. A great part of its charm was taking the outlandish so seriously. I recall Louis Edmonds (Roger Collins) saying in an interview that it became harder and harder to keep a straight face while saying the lines, because the concepts became so ridiculous. But it's a credit to Louis and the other actors that they made us care so much about those characters who were constantly faced with supernatural troubles.
I've always wondered if, in fact, the writers ever knew of the scientific plausibility of the storylines they wrote. I'm inclined to think they didn't and were just writing a romantic gothic soap opera with supernatural elements. But Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." Dan Curtis could just as easily have said the same thing.
Dark Shadows enjoyed playing with the mad scientist genre... does explaining the madness detract from the enjoyment?
I don't think it detracts from the show at all. In fact, in the book I emphasize the importance of the character of Professor Eliot Stokes as a voice of scientific reason in a show that featured so many outlandish occurrences. I certainly don't think that by explaining the science behind Dark Shadows I'm spoiling the fun in the way that revealing a magician's tricks spoils the illusion. Quite the opposite. As Kathryn Leigh Scott writes in the foreword, realizing that there are scientific bases behind the events in Dark Shadows makes the show all the more fascinating. And as Amanda Trujillo writes in the preface, if Eliot Stokes had ever written a book, it would likely resemble The Physics of Dark Shadows.
I don't think the mad scientist personification in the show is done harm in the fans' imagination by discussing these things scientifically. I'm thinking of Timothy Stokes of parallel time, Dr. Eric Lang in 1968, Cyrus Longworth who became John Yeager, the Jekyll and Hyde character, and to a certain extent even Julia Hoffman. Maybe they weren't so crazy after all.
What do you think is the reason for the enduring appeal of Dark Shadows?
Dark Shadows had that special quality that transcends mere entertainment. First of all, Dark Shadows was of its time. That's not to say that new viewers cannot watch on DVD or in reruns and enjoy it. But Dark Shadows was so unusual for the time that it aired that, frankly, it reminds people of a special and simpler time in their lives. The combination of horror and romance, together with the outstanding writing made for a truly unique experience. And I cannot over-emphasize the character of Barnabas Collins and the magnificent portrayal by Jonathan Frid. Let's face it, without Barnabas there is no Dark Shadows.
So the credit goes to Dan Curtis, Jonathan, and all the actors and actresses who played the show with such sincerity and intensity. Edgar Allan Poe said that stories should exist in their own worlds, without reference to the outside world, and Dark Shadows accomplished that. There are practically no references in Dark Shadows to Vietnam, popular culture of the time, or the events of the outside world of the 1960s and 70s. Dark Shadows existed in its own world, and it's been a joy to have been a part of it for all these years.
To order The Physics of Dark Shadows from Amazon, click here.
Back
