I recently read that some states in the US have disclosure laws that force realtors to state whether they are selling a "stigmatized home." What's that mean? Well, they have to tell you whether they're selling you a potentially haunted house, essentially. If something happened in the house at some point that would creep people out -perhaps a murder or something similar- the government forces them to tell you about it. Now what's the rationale for this? The house is cleaned and sterilized, all new carpet and furnishings, it's a perfectly good house in all physical and tangible ways... only it maintains a "certain something else" and "essence" that we attribute to it. And this belief in an essence is obviously not confined to the sophomoric superstitious -there are state laws. The City Council of Glancester, England ordered the destruction of a home where a couple raped, and killed several young girls, burying them in the garden and under the basement floor. The council made a point of removing all the bricks, crushing them into dust, then scattering them in a landfill at a secret location. A similar intervention occurred at the apartment where Jeffery Dahmer lived; it is now a parking lot.
This idea of an "essence" is an idea associated with a person or object, and though it's recognizably irrational, it's something many of us can't bring ourselves to overcome. A certain psychologist once conducted studies during which he asked people to try on a sweater that once belonged to Adolf Hitler. Needless to say, the subjects were reluctant to do so. And why? Isn't this sweater just like every other sweater that was manufactured at that same factory? Yes, it is. Same color, same texture, same thickness -all identical. Yet we regard objects not only as a compilation of their tangible and perceivable characteristics, but also as individuals. It's not just a sweater, it's that sweater, it's Hitler's sweater. We attribute an intangible characteristic to objects that ultimately affect our attitudes toward them. And it's this arbitrary assignment that's often more powerful than the actual properties the item has if forming out attitudes toward it.
Talk about the power of the mind.
4 comments:
Before reading this post, I was not aware of the fact that certain US states have disclosure laws that force realtors to mention the existance of "haunted" houses. Now that you mention it, however, I find it very interesting that some states are required to do so. As a whole, I think that most would agree that Americans today are not a particularly superstitious people--not outwardly, at least. I believe, however, that times have not changed so much as to remove all traces of superstitiousness from our general thought process.
A few years ago, my family almost purchased a home close to the one in which the infamous Ryle High School student Clay Shrout murdered his family. While we did not make the decision not to purchase the house based solely upon what had occurred next door, I can say with certainity that I would have not been entirely comfortable living there. Although I don't believe in hauntings persay, I certainly agree with the concept of this post; I feel that a certain stigma is attached to evil and those who commit evil, and that being around such people or places is certainly eerie.
When you said this in your presenation today, I was intriqued. Although it does seem ludicrious in some ways, in others, it makes perfect sense. Humanity naturally ties events with presences and we really are a superstitous people, even though I do agree with Andrea, and it is not as outward.
Personally, I would not want to be a person who lived in such a stigmatized house. I have heard stories of people who only found these types of things out AFTER moving in from their neighbors. Thanks Mr. Realtor for selling me a tainted house! While it does seem kind of crazy to go to such lengths, it is better to do this kind of work and have someone liveo n the property than have an empty lot.
Plus, from an economical side, this type of house lowers the property value for everyone, not just the house the event occured in, but all nearby homes as well.
I also found this to be very interesting that there are actual laws, but I agree that it should be a legal obligation for a potential buyer to be made aware of any stigma's associated with the house. For example, my friend has a grandmother who truly lives in a haunted house. A schizophrenic man had murdered himself in the house and his spirit remains. Several people have described seeing the ghost same man lingering within the rooms of the house. The descriptions of the man always match. My friend said that she has felt the bed dip as if someone is sitting on her bed in the night.
These are things that a potential buyer of the house should be made aware of because for instances like these it is a person's right to know that another entity resides in the house. It is a person's right to know so that he can choose whether or not he wants to take on living in a home of that sort.
How long does it take for the "essence" to fade I wonder? For example, what if our classroom is built on the spot that was once occupied by a tree. That tree could have been used by indians to torture a man by nailing his entrails to the trunk and making him run a circle around it. All manner of horrific things may have occurred far in the past on many plots of land. Why does their essence not remain?
Post a Comment