Pop Cryptid Spectator 13

Hello and welcome to the Pop Cryptid Spectator no. 13.

In this edition:

• The crypt-illogical slip into the irrational
• News people don’t know their animals
• AI cryptid articles – It’s how stuff works
• Cryptid merch: Squishables Mothman series
• The Hebridean Mermaid
• Ogopogo float may sink
• Cryptid Media: More podcasts

The crypt-illogical slip into the irrational

I focus very much on the present, popular, news and views of cryptozoology, but when I look at traditional cryptozoology, I find that the most cogent writing clearly points in the direction of today’s Pop Cryptids. For example, Adrian Shine appeared on the latest episode of Monster Talk to discuss his lifelong research into sea serpents, and lake monsters claims in Scotland in his new book A Natural History of Sea Serpents. In this interview, Shine shares his wisdom gained from synthesizing decades of careful observation, and this is enlightening.

Among the wise things he said so eloquently, he noted that cryptozoology was a way to rationalize monsters. At its time of inception, that made sense: cryptozoology attempted to remove the magical aspects about mystery creatures, and apply science to the process of discovering amazing new animals. But, as he also says, hidden animals require lost worlds. We have very few of these “lost worlds” left, and people aren’t exploring them due to our natural limits (such as the ability to spend time in the deep ocean). If there are animals, there, they aren’t cryptids, they are just new to us. Therefore, that negates the formation of lore about them that defines a cryptid.

We aren’t going to find a Yeti or Nessie because it is clear after all these centuries that the stories were not reflecting real animals as collectively described, but a monstrous interpretation fed by cultural factors and confirmation bias. Current monster hunters will disagree but I’m being logical, here. The scientific evidence for real cryptids has not improved.

Today’s shift back to seeing cryptids as less zoological is, in a way, rational – in a cultural sense. As people attempt to create an alternate world of magic and mystery, adding cryptids to the fantasy environment makes sense. The colorful world of pop cryptids is what we get from that reconstruction. The cryptids don’t make zoological sense, but they make cultural sense.

As I wrote in a review of Shine’s book in PCS 7, A Natural History of Sea Serpents is a fantastic book and I could listen to Adrian Shine talk all day long, he’s astute and articulate. I deeply appreciate his careful research that helps me see old cases in a new light, find the through-lines of this complex subject, and understand the wider view.

Meanwhile, I hate to admit, the cryptid content that mostly appears in media – made by amateur researchers, people seeking an alternative reality, or just jokers – is not high quality (with only a few rare exceptions). It’s not even very creative. But because cryptids are a mainstream thing now, anything goes. And anything, no matter how poorly done, how ridiculous, or how misleading, will get clicks. See the following two examples.

News people don’t know their animals

You can bet that the “mystery animal” videos that get shown on the local news reports are going to contain some cringeworthy comments by the reporters. TV news anchors read what’s been written for them and respond and ad lib based only on whatever background info them have. They usually don’t know anything about a natural subject. One sad side effect of Pop Cryptids is that many now know the names of local cryptids and throw them out there as “possibilities”. In the process, they reveal shallow knowledge of the lore and history of the creature, and ignorance of the local wildlife. These three news personnel from Pueblo, Colorado speculate on what this animal is from a dark and grainy video. At least they recognize the red eyes may be a camera artifact, but one suggests it’s a chupacabra. In a broadcast on another station, the pair of presenters also give ridiculous opinions (such as it’s a person dressed up). The Colorado wildlife officials said it might be a raccoon with mange.

My initial thought is that it’s a coati, an animal found as far north as Arizona and sometimes kept as a pet. It’s not unusual to see coati in unexpected places. It’s unclear what it’s doing in Colorado, but it’s only a “cryptid” is the loosest interpretation of the word. Meanwhile, mystery mongering sites like Coast to Coast AM promoted this story with a sensationalist headline. This kind of treatment is really disappointing and leads to the audience being misinformed or alarmed. There is no good excuse for such awful framing of an interesting animal story.

AI cryptid articles – It’s how stuff works

I have mentioned AI generated cryptids several times in this publication – videos, photos, and monsters that came from AI image-generation apps. But now I’m starting to notice that AI-written articles on cryptids are becoming a common thing. Several “infotainment” sites quickly generate pieces to capitalize on a trending news story or subject. Cryptids are one of those topics. The popular site How Stuff Works revealed just how their stuff works, by using AI to produce a recent article on the Loveland Frog. This article followsr news coverage for the frogman’s festival in March. The content is unoriginal, just more AI slop we have to wade through.

Squishables Mothman series

Squishables are sold in many toy and gift stores across the country. Their newest series of cuddly plushies is an array of fun Mothman critters. My favorite is the Rosy Maple mothman (genius!) – modeled after the stunning yellow and pink rosy maple moth (Dryocampa rubicunda). I remember the first time I saw a rosy maple moth and could not believe it was real! And now it’s a variety of mothman. Check out the other varieties.

The Hebridean Mermaid

A woman who pretends to be a mermaid landed a gig promoting a new BBC series about mermaid tales and folklore around the waters of northern Scotland. Looks like a cool topic for programming!

Many people “become” mermaids by donning tails and learning how to dance underwater. If you aren’t aware of how popular indulging in mermaid fantasy is these days is, you can check out a series on Netflix called MerPeople. It’s an eye-opener.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7hUc8HVSFk

Old-school cryptozoologist-types reject mermaids as cryptids, calling them “fantasy” creatures. But this take is proof of how the idea of ‘cryptids’ is selective and changes over time. There are undoubtedly cases in the centuries gone by, and even now in non-Western news reports, of people who say they have seen mermaids. It’s no joke. Although many faked videos attempt to capitalize on that belief, most are poorly done hoaxes.

Remember in 2012, there was a huge hubbub about Mermaids: A Body Found aired on the Discovery Network. There was NO doubt that more than a few people who knew nothing of nature accepted that Mermaids: A Body Found was a science show about real mermaids.

Are mermaids cryptids? Absolutely. They are legendary, culturally known, and we have plenty of documented claims asserting they really exist, and some that claim they had been captured. There is no line between cryptids and folklore/fantasy creatures now. It’s all the same concept.

Ogopogo float may sink

The City of Kelowna, B.C. has had a parade float for decades. The most popular design for the float has been that of the local Lake Okanagan monster, Ogopogo. According to The Kelowna Courier, for more than 50 years, the float has featured various representations of Ogopogo. Back in 2016, there was an idea to highlight other tourism opportunities of Kelowna with the float. That didn’t go over well, and after a public outcry, the town’s beloved cryptid was restored. Now the float requires repairs and the city council determined they just can’t afford the steep price tag. So, Canadian parades will be without Ogopogo for a time.

Cryptid Media: More podcasts

Here’s another podcast recommendation. Check out Squaring the Strange episode no 250 – Cryptids go Pop! where I was invited to discuss my interests, and this publication, with Ben and Celestia.

For some deep dives, check out the Bigfoot two-part episode and the Loch Ness Monster three-part treatment from the Mythillogical podcast – a well-researched tour through the folklore aspects of these two cryptids. If Charles and Crofty are reading, feel free to message me if you need help with North American pronunciations.

Thanks for reading! Send comments, questions, or suggestions to sharon(at)sharonahill.com. If you want to send some cryptid plushies or other merch, or books to review, email for my physical mailing address.

For more, click on Pop goes the Cryptid landing page. Make sure you subscribe to all the posts – it’s always free and I don’t send annoying spam. 

Pop Cryptid Spectator is also available on Substack. Please share this with cryptid fans you know!

Pop Cryptid Spectator 12

Pop Cryptid Spectator 11

Pop Cryptid Spectator 10

Pop Cryptid Spectator 9

Pop Cryptid Spectator 8

Pop Cryptid Spectator 7

Pop Cryptid Spectator 6

Pop Cryptid Spectator 5

Pop Cryptid Spectator 4

Pop Cryptid Spectator 3

Pop Cryptid Spectator 2

Pop Cryptid Spectator 1

#1 #chupacabra #cryptid #Cryptozoology #deathOfAUnicorn #popCryptid #reddit #rollerCoaster #scientific #seaSerpents #Skinwalker #Wendigo

https://sharonahill.com/?p=9144

Pop Cryptid Spectator 3

In this edition:

• Green Eyes and the explosion of cryptid festivals
• Appalachian folk horror
• Cryptid Media – Folk horror resurgence/British Cryptids
• Pop Cryptid – Jackalope or nope?

Hello and welcome to the 3rd edition of the Pop Cryptid Spectator – my chronicle of observing the changing appearance of and attitudes towards “cryptids” in popular culture. My interest is in exploring the expansion of cryptozoology into a mass cultural phenomenon – a cornucopia of strange entities that are labeled as “cryptids”. We can see a proliferation of popular cryptids in American culture and worldwide, largely in part to newer media and communication platforms, allowing their stories to spread (and evolve) like never before. Cryptid stories can be viewed through different lenses – a point that I make with several illustrative examples.

Green Eyes and the Explosion of Cryptid Festivals

Winter is the slow season for town festivals. Now is the time where organizers are planning their summer and fall events. A new event, the Green Eyes Festival in Chickamauga, Georgia, premiered in 2024 and was a great success for the small town mostly known for its Civil War battlefield. Old Green Eyes most certainly falls into the category of Pop Cryptid, since it has no significant provenance and is more like a ghost story. The creature’s form varies widely, being a ghost or ghoul prowling the fields of the dead, or can be more like a big cat or hairy monster. The commonality is the glowing green eyes. In a recent interview on the Monster Talk podcast, the founders of the festival revealed that they knew little of “cryptids” beforehand. The two young marketing professionals had heard the spooky stories, of course, but didn’t see it as an opportunity until they visited another well-known festival. As with most modern cryptid town events, inspiration inevitably traces back to the world-renowned Mothman Festival of Point Pleasant, West Virginia. It’s the OG event that launched a hundred imitators (and growing).

Green Eyes has no established canonical legend and, as such, its story evolves as others tell it. While some may argue it’s not a cryptid at all because of the lack of a zoological lens through which to view it, as part of the Pop Cryptid model I argue that any mystery creature that people say may exist (in whatever corporeal or incorporeal form), but can’t be pinned down, falls under the popular idea of a “cryptid” and will be labeled as such.

More: About Cryptid Festivals, and a Parade of Cryptids in Small town USA. Check the list of cryptid festivals in the US and see if one is near you.

Appalachian Folk horror

Possibly more than any other US location, small towns in Appalachia are embracing their local legends and sprucing up the image of their local creature. Appalachian folklore, often exaggerated, is packaged and sold on media platforms. The reasons for this surge in place legends is complex and somewhat disputed – likely in response to populism, a need for enchantment, and a fascination with magic and mystery in your own backyard. Some social commentators (i.e., podcasters and TikTokkers) are suggesting that the Appalachian mountains are so old that ancient eldritch beings still exist here. Ok, then…

It might just be my TikTok feed but cryptid content goes hand in hand with claims of uncanny animals and evil zooform entities that you will encounter if you venture off the trail in the eastern forests. Eh, whatev… People have totally lost touch with nature and, therefore, it’s fairly easy to freak them out. The Appalachians are culturally rich and diverse. Unfortunately, as with indigenous folklore, legends and tales from a previous time and place are being enhanced and monetized for podcasts and videos. You might consider it visual Creepypasta as creators are taking bits from old or new scary stories and manufacturing fakelore.

Cryptid Media

Folk horror resurgence – British Cryptids

It’s not just the Appalachians experiencing rising interest in the past several years with the likes of Mothman, goatman, “not deer“, and areas of high strangeness. The folk horror genre is seeing worldwide popularity. Folk horror focuses on a place, local behaviors, traditions, and history to create a sense of foreboding, particularly to the outsider who comes into the scene unaware. Aspect of folk horror include occult figures like witches, or threats from demons or Satan itself. Monstrous beings also play a big role.

In a blend of folk horror and satire (with the occasionally ancient nude), the YouTube channel British Cryptids manufactured several new cryptids under the guise of lost documentaries from 1974. The series provides a sense of nostalgia as well as unsettling confusion about what’s real and what’s imaginary. Check out their channel where the titles include ‘Yorkshire Yeti’, ‘The Hereford Twiggywitch’, ‘Stag Men’, ’The Souter Sea Wolf’, ‘The Cumbrian Dregpike’ and ‘The Woodwose of Cannock Chase’. It’s like a sophisticated version of Fearsome Creatures made famous as North American lumberjack tales – they sound plausible, if you are out alone in the dark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0-lAdhxX7U

Pop Cryptid: Jackalope

A major theme of the Pop Goes the Cryptid model is the never-ending dispute about calling something a “cryptid”. As an example, I’m going to jump right into the deep end and talk about the Jackalope, a creature that is well-associated with “cryptid” online but that almost everyone who knows some history of the topic will say is not a cryptid because it’s a mythical creature, a hoax. Not so fast…

The world was a different place centuries (or even decades) ago. Ideas and language change. If we go by the general cryptid definition of “an animal/entity that is believed to be real but not recognized by zoology” then the Jackalope has a chance to be an official cryptid. There certainly are some people who have seen so many Jackalope depictions, yet do not know their taxidermic history, that they may assume they were a real animal. And, in the early days of natural history, the “horned rabbit” was assumed to be a real, genuine, unique animal because witnesses said so.

My reference is On the Trail of the Jackalope (2022) by Michael Branch, a comprehensive book that mostly treats the creature as a cultural creation but also briefly explores the idea of its cryptidness.

“[T]he horned rabbit is unalloyed Americana—a genuine artifact of this country’s folk culture—the mythical beast has also made its way across the oceans and around the world.”

The true home of the American Jackalope is Douglas, Wyoming where, according to the locals, about half the visitors leave believing the animals are real. Do they believe, or are they just having fun believing? Hard to judge. The same might be said about most cryptids as people like to imagine that tall tales are true because it makes life seem magical. This remains a strong theme in the Jackalope biography.

One can argue that a “horned rabbit” is a real thing. Cottontail rabbits with horn-like protuberances over various parts of their bodies, particularly their heads, were found to be infected with a type of papillomavirus. There can be little doubt that such stricken rabbits would be viewed as mysterious, then and now. Branch notes that the prevalence of the horned rabbit across cultures suggests that they were at least somewhat based on these natural anomalies. Branch explains that precursors to the American Jackalope are numerous. The specific Jackalope may be a Wyoming invention, but it was not the first depiction of the horned rabbit.

Early naturalists such as Conrad Gessner, Joris Hoefnagel (16th century) and others depicted the horned hare as a real animal. Later, other natural historians weren’t so sure, but this uncertainty about its existence and speculation on the cause of horned hares undoubtedly sounds like the modern idea of a “cryptid”.

But this is the 21st century. We know better now, right?

There is ample evidence to show that most people are entirely ignorant of wildlife in their own backyard, let alone the zoological catalog of known animals. As with everything else in the modern world, we get our information from popular culture, not too much directly from qualified scientific experts. Branch quotes Loren Coleman who runs the International Cryptozoology Museum regarding his inclusion of the Jackalope in the museum: “I would read visitors’ online comments… and they would say things like ‘I didn’t know that the jackalope really existed.’ ” Coleman continues by explaining he reorganized the exhibit to depict the Jackalope along with other hoaxes. To me, there is a lot to unpack in that anecdote. Do we really know which cryptid is a manufactured hoax, which are imaginary creatures that people wish to be real, which are mistaken IDs influenced by lore and campfire tales, and which are real animals? The line is very blurry and all the information is not in. (P-G film, anyone?)

I’ve greatly expanded my idea regarding what a cryptid is in the past few years. I recognize that different people are viewing cryptids through various lenses (zoological, artistic, historical, cultural, etc.) If people wish to believe horned rabbits (jackalopes, wolpertingers, or other variations) are real animals hopping around in an alternative reality, that’s OK by me, as long as they aren’t declaring that in biology class. It’s important to recognize that horned rabbits have a history that can be legitimately viewed with a zoological lens, making them not dissimilar to the history of the “Kraken” that many assume equates to the giant squid (I don’t, but that’s another complicated story), or the merfolk, which are assumed to be misidentified aquatic mammals like dugongs and manatees. The history is muddy and fraught with flips, twists, and turns. The modern “expert cryptozoologist” statements discounting any creatures as “mythological” and not worthy of the label “cryptid” don’t hold much weight. People will believe whatever they want.

There was not a common word for creatures of dubious existence, until “cryptid”. Cryptids as general “mysterious animals” has come into its own as a useful label. We know this because that is how it’s widely employed in popular culture today. It’s your point of view about reality that may vary.

For more, click on Pop goes the Cryptid landing page. While you’re there, make sure you subscribe to all the posts – it’s always free and I don’t send annoying spam. 

You can email me with comments, suggestions or questions at Popcryptid(at)proton.me

Pop Cryptid Spectator 8

Pop Cryptid Spectator 7

Pop Cryptid Spectator Issue 6

Pop Cryptid Spectator 5

Pop Cryptid Spectator 4

Pop Cryptid Spectator 2

Pop Cryptid Spectator 1

#1 #chupacabra #cryptid #Cryptozoology #deathOfAUnicorn #popCryptid #reddit #rollerCoaster #scientific #seaSerpents #Skinwalker #Wendigo

https://sharonahill.com/?p=9144

Pop Goes the Cryptid: Explained

Here is an introduction to the world of Pop Cryptids, showing how cryptozoology, which was intended as a scientific discipline, has now lost that status and is instead a popular culture scene about any weird sentient thing of dubious existence. The scope of the definition of “cryptid” expanded very widely and people are using cryptid representations in all new social ways.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa7daq1cxSM

Transcript with images

This is Pop Goes the Cryptid
I’m Sharon A. Hill

In this presentation, I’ll argue that there has been an inevitable change in the cryptid landscape from its original intent as a scientific discipline to a modern general topic about any sentient thing of dubious existence. With that shift, we see the scope of the definition of “cryptid” expand very widely to include supernatural, fantastical, mythical or digitally generated creatures.

This shift in viewing cryptids is due to two main developments:
1. The collapse of the professional efforts of cryptozoology and
2. The impact of media of all kinds to bring about an explosion of content and commercialism related to mysterious creatures.

Together, these factors resulted in a proliferation of ideas about cryptids that strayed far from the original goal of identifying unknown creatures in a zoological framework. Instead we see the rapid diffusion and amplification of unnatural cryptids with fantastical characteristics as well as classic and new cryptids portrayed as supernatural, cute, social, or romantic, a very cultural framework.

Let’s start with an example of a modern media representation of popular cryptids. For Halloween 2023, the News media organization Axios conducted a tiered voting poll. It’s not clear how the authors chose the creatures to consider but the choices seemed… interesting.

There were obvious entries – Chupacabra, Jersey Devil, Mothman, Bigfoot, and Champ.
and then we have two admittedly spirit creatures – LaLlorona (a ghost legend) and the Wendigo. Two werewolf type creatures – the Rougarou and the Michigan Dogman. And the rest are a motley crew of legendary or pop cultural creatures. This voting poll by a general news site can be taken as a snapshot of what the general population thinks of as “cryptids” with only about a half of the 16 entries that might represent an arguably scientific zoological mystery, or a misinterpretation of a typical animal. The rest have decidedly non-zoological origins or characteristics.

The results were a bit of a confusing mix: Interestingly, traditional cryptids Champ and the Jersey Devil didn’t make it out of the first round! The final four were Bigfoot, Chupacabra, Mothman and (a bit of an outsider.. The Jackalope). In the finals, Chupacabra edged out Bigfoot 51 to 49%. Unfortunately, the poll wasn’t run again the following year. But all these entities are growing in cultural popularity.

To understand the evolution of cryptids and cryptozoology, we have to consider its original intent.
Solidified in the 1950s and 60s, the aim of cryptozoology was to be a sub-discipline of zoology where those specializing in cryptozoological methods could be the ones to bring to light some of the many large animals that remained to be discovered using the clues from local people. A key figure in the founding of this field, Bernard Heuvelmans, criticized established scientific institutions for not devoting attention to the stories of unidentified animals that may represent important new species.
He and others, intended it to be a serious endeavor led by zoologists and scholarly professionals. 

In the 1980s, cryptozoology reached the height of its scientific reputation, with participation of many prominent scientists in a professional society – the International Society of Cryptozoology – with its own journal.

From its inception, cultural stories of unusual creatures, some of which would become classic cryptids, had been imbued with unnatural or supernatural elements. A primary problem of scientific cryptozoology was how to manage those aspects.

The fantasy and fictional aspects inherent in many cryptid stories made them difficult for academic study. Selective filtering out of “weird” characteristics was encouraged. The scientific proponents deliberately diminished magical features of popular cryptids – depicting them instead as flesh, blood, pelts and paws. If the cryptid in question was associated with spirits, shamanistic magic, or witchcraft, or if it had supernatural abilities inherent in the local legends, these attributes were brushed aside in an effort to scientifically legitimize the being. This process was aptly termed “weird washing” – a term coined by modern author Tim Renner. If the stories were from indigenous lore, podcasters Trey the Explainer and Miles Greb called the process “whitetrofitting” to note the removal of important native meaning. Particularly unfortunate was that the critical social aspects and uses of folklore tales and legends were disregarded in order to try to legitimize the idea of a new zoological creature.

While the weird washing was intended to elevate the discourse on mysterious animals, it could not be effectively suppressed entirely and, coming up, we’ll see why.

By the early 1990s, cryptozoology as a scientific field was already in trouble. The scientific endeavors encouraged by the International Society of Cryptozoology hadn’t panned out. Several attempts to document Bigfoot the Yeti and Nessie, had not been successful.  Expeditions to seek out the Mokele-mbembe (which was suspected to be a living dinosaur in Central Africa, found nothing to support the legend but was a great example of the whitetrofitting habit previously mentioned.

Hoaxes were also rampant. What was successful, however, were the media products that emphasized mystery and exaggerated features of cryptids.

In 1999, Fortean writers Coleman and Clark said in their Cryptozoology A to Z that cryptozoology was an “integral part of our culture”. In terms of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and the Yeti, this was undeniably true.

It’s around the turn of the 21st century that we see the word “cryptid” begin to gain popular usage. First, just in the cryptozoology scene. But, with the growth of cable television and the realistic docu-drama genre, internet forums, and social media, cryptids leave the sphere of scientific speculation and grow in contemporary culture and lore in a huge way. One prominent example is Monster Quest in 2007 – a tv series that explored current thinking about cryptids. This program was influential in showcasing cryptids and that people were actively looking for them. Monster Quest inspired many to dive into the subject themselves.

Yet, such programming again tended to weird wash the history. According to Palaeozoological scientist Darren Naish, descriptions of cryptids always reflected the cultural (and scientific) beliefs of the era, changing over time. This was an aspect that was not explored in short tv episodes, but the ever-changing descriptions of cryptids with the times were a strong argument against that cryptid being a real biological animal. 

An argument for the decay of cryptozoology as a scientific term is supported by two examples that compare the usage of the words cryptozoology and cryptids. The concept of cryptozoology existed in the 1950s, but the term cryptid didn’t appear until 1983 as a suggestion in the Society’s newsletter.

Using the Google Books Ngram Viewer, the data shows how often the words cryptozoology and cryptid appear in a corpus of books over the selected years from 1960 to 2018. First, we notice the rise of cryptozoology in the 1980s, when the professional society and its standing rises. The concept of scientific study of unknown animals is becoming more culturally known. Around 2000, we see the start of the popularization of the word cryptid published. Note that the internet was well on its way to connecting the world by this time. The media boom lifted both terms. But in 2014, there was a sea change. The term cryptozoology stagnated as the term cryptid took off. This can be attributed to social media influence that encourage and spread content about strange creatures. Monster stories trended. People clicked on them and there was a proliferation of local monster tales and publications.

This trend was also evident in internet search habits.

This is a graph of Google queries for “Cryptozoology” and “Cryptid” in the US. Again, we see something about 2014 that signaled a shift in the popularity of cryptid that, unexpectedly seemed to reinforce the decline of cryptozoology search term, It was as if the “zoology” part was not longer deemed useful or interesting. Beginning around 2007, as with the Ngram data, we see cryptid start to rise.

What’s with that spike 2014? As far as I can tell, this was the mainly the result of the premier of the history channel show called Cryptid – The Swamp Beast. This was a fictional horror mockumentary dramatizing alleged encounters with mythical swamp creatures in the southern US. Perhaps we might argue that the title and premise of that show really cemented the idea of cryptids as exaggerated monsters in pop mainstream.

Starting around 2005, a wave of imaginative depictions of cryptids appeared. The term and the concept appeared on television, in fictional literature, games, all over the Internet and eventually in community festivals, on social media and as a part of personal identity. The mysterious and paranormal elements were emphasized because that proved to be enticing to audiences. So, the result was a fun but exaggerated depiction of cryptids in popular culture. Here are some examples of the early 21st century cryptid boom – from 2005 to 2013.

Roland Smith’s Cryptid Hunters young adult adventure series, the hugely popular Messin’ with sasquatch promotion for Jack Links jerky, the cryptid hunting cartoon family in the Secret Saturdays show, the discovery of and explosion of interest in the Montauk monster – a raccoon carcass discovered in New York, the 2009 fictional series Lost Tapes on Animal planet – which was at the time viewed as an educational channel, and the stunning childrens book on the Legend of the Jersey Devil in 2013 – one of many books that commercialized cryptids for young children. And in the center, symbolizing the importance of local cryptids tales to small communities, is the mothman statue of Point Pleasant west virginia.

The foundational characteristic of cryptids, their secretiveness, remained a key feature. But the answer to the mystery of what they really were became less important than the situations and tales that could be spun from them. The possibilities expanded far beyond the concept of an unknown animal. Now a cryptid could be any kind of entity, real or fantastical. The more important aspect was belief and the utility of that belief. Cryptid belief manifested in consumerism, tourism, personal and regional identity and even influenced people’s overall worldview.

There were few scientific voices now advocating for the zoological reality of cryptids.. Without a scientific society or official cryptid gatekeeper anymore, creation and manipulation of cryptids was an open process made easy by worldwide platforms for self-expression. The internet made existing ideas freshly available to a new generation. The options for sharing ideas was greatly expanded. New ideas sprung up, evolved and hybridized.

With no scientific documentation, cryptids are untethered to reality, existing outside the rules of biological evolution, and zoology. They can freely evolve culturally. And so they did. Popular culture rewarded the expansion and remixing of these ideas, the creation of new cryptids, and the repopularizing of past cryptids for present purposes.

Even though Cryptozoology failed as a scientific endeavor, there will always be a portion of cryptozoology proponents that consider it to be strictly zoological, who insist that unknown animals once called cryptids will still be found, and that occult and paranormal aspects should be excluded and disparaged. However, today, the zoological cryptid idea had left the barn, so to speak…

The fun in believing in the folklore aspects of cryptids, and as mysterious and magical creatures, is clearly winning out as shown in our modern popular culture. No more weird washing!

In the social media age, the word cryptid expanded to now incorporate all types of weird entities. This trend is often denigrated by those old school self-styled cryptozoologists who insist a cryptid is a potentially classifiable zoological animal. But the zoological aspect of cryptid is too narrow for today’s definition. Here are some modern examples of cryptid expanded.

Your cat can be a cryptid if he’s mysterious and rarely seen. LOAB, is a haunting creature in the form of a frightening woman said to have been created unexpectedly by an image algorithm, and called the first AI generated cryptid. The term cryptid is used to describe any weird sentient thing like an unexpected and surprising human form or, possibly in the oddest example, a machine that has unusual and bizarre features as well as a mysterious origin.

New in the 21st century are efforts people make to publicly construct a personal identity, sharing it with the world via social media. Known as “aesthetics”, these are a collection of core elements that form an overall theme and mood adopted by a person as part of their social identity. The Cryptidcore aesthetic focuses on interest in creatures from legends and folklore. Note how it does not strongly identify with scientific zoology. Cryptidcore is not highly focused on the biological reality of the animal, but the on the paranormal, mysterious, and quirky aspects of cryptids. Other core elements are interest in unexplained phenomena, conspiracy ideas, and attraction to mysterious or haunted places.

The origin of cryptidcore can be traced to 2014 on Tumblr, where it emerged from the fanbases of televisions shows of the 2010s. Once again, we see a clear outcome of how media content has been an indisputable heavy influence on the modern view of cryptids. Cryptidcore embraces the cute, funny, magical, romantic and spiritual characteristics of cryptids. And the merchandise flows from these favored themes.

Modern online efforts made in seeking and studying a cryptid are frequently less about solving a mystery and more about fashionably performing one’s values, beliefs, and identity. Today’s cryptid enthusiast readily admits to enjoying and enhancing the spooky, off-beat, and mysterious aspects of the subject. They embrace the unusual or paranormal aspects because it’s more popular than assuming the creature is just a regular animal.

This is the opposite of what I previously referred to as weird washing or whitetrofitting – instead of demythifying a cryptid with a purpose to catalogue it to fit into the biological tree of life, the unusual or supernatural aspects are EMPHASIZED. The cryptid enthusiast wants to take the legend trips, and cosplay, and enjoy the spooky tales. The cryptid scene is far more open to diversity and being the “other” or the outsider is a celebrated.

To wrap up this introduction to Pop Cryptids, we have to return to the initial intent of cryptozoology.

Can scientific cryptozoology return? And should it? The strict zoological approach was not successful; and there are many reasons why it failed. The modern world is simply not the same as that of 19th century colonialist explorers the influenced the ideas of the original International Society of Cryptozoology.

Considering the lack of any progress made in finding Bigfoot and other cryptids, there is no justification for a special scientific field of cryptozoology. But that does not mean that the field of study dies, just that it evolves to make sense in the present.

Modern cryptozoology still includes scientifical performing. That is, talking and acting like one imagines a scientist would in order to sound credible and convincing about cryptid. Interestingly, now the supernatural aspects are included right alongside the representation of authority.

We also have a resurgence in local folklore and town-specific cryptid festivals that are open to everyone.

We have ample evidence for the development of “paranormal” beliefs as a folk religion. A prime example of various ideas about the paranormal including cryptids all coming together is Skinwalker Ranch where it’s suggested that all the events occurring in one place possibly have a single hypothetical supernatural cause.

Will the paranormal trend collapse and the scientific view reemerge on top again? The current superstar of cryptids, the biologically impossible dogmen, would suggest not. It’s hard to predict what will trend in the coming decade. But, without the body of a genuine high profile cryptid being discovered and exposed for the world, we are in the age of post-cryptozoology cryptids.

Thanks for listening.
Find out more and follow the news about pop cryptids on my website sharonahill.com

#Bigfoot #cryptidcore #Cryptozoology #MonsterQuest #Mothman #Nessie #Paranormal #popCryptids #popCulture #PopGoesTheCryptid #popularCulture #Scientifical #supernatural #weirdWashing #whitrofitting

https://sharonahill.com/?p=9108