Hocus Pocus ended his review of the BBC programme 'The Psychic Tea Room' (B&IS May/June 1989) asking for readers' views on whether the demonstration of true belief in fortune telling and magic of various kinds is undesirable and therefore shouldn't be publicised and pushed.
My view of the programme and its message is entirely different from that of my friend Hocus. When I first saw the programme advertised in 'Radio Times' and read an abysmal 'Radio Times' interview with one of the psychics to be featured, hackles began to rise. "This is going to be the usual sort of anecdotal nonsense" I thought. I even considered giving the programme a miss, not being able to put up with too much drivel. But, like Hocus Pocus, duty called.
Yes, the programme was full of anecdotal evidence from a number of psychics, a channeller, several fortune tellers and Sylvester Stallone's mother, who is an astrologer. (The 'phone calls to Sly were to obtain his opinion (?) of his mother as an astrologer.) But none were made out to be wonderful. On the contrary. Zsa Zsa Gabor claimed to be so psychic. Yet not even her psychic powers helped her to recognize her favourite psychic and friend, Kabrina Kincade, who was standing NEXT TO HER.
The scenes with the channeller of Mafu were disturbing. In a long speech while under a so-called trance, she told a member of the audience that his future wasn't with the woman accompanying him whose face was on screen throughout. She (the channeller) played with the emotions of the woman whose eyes welled up with tears. Her whole future was being destroyed in front of her. The message of Mafu was certainly clear. I thought the message of the producer was equally clear, that this channeller was nasty, cold hearted and destructive.
The programme made the other psychics look foolish and I congratulate the producer, Philippa Walker, for showing them up so cleverly. The drawback to her method is that it could be easily be taken the wrong way. Perhaps I am wrong and Hocus right, but the 'The Psychic Tea Room' looked much like 'Spitting Image' and had some amusing moments. By contrast, the trio of programmes 'Donovan the Diviner' which were shown on BBC at about the same time were irresponsible propaganda for a magical way of thinking.
Donovan Wilkins makes his living by drilling for water and, of course, he decides just where to drill by waving his forked twig. In the first programme he was shown at work in his native Cornwall, 'finding' water for a farmer. Before the borehole was drilled he claimed that his rod told him that water was flowing at three specific depths and that the flow was 800 gallons per hour of which only 400 gallons per hour would be obtained by the farmer. At one stage of the drilling the farmer measured the rate as 240 gallons per hour. Donovan later claimed that they were getting the 400 gallons he had promised. But we were never told the depth.
During a 'phone conversation I had with Howerd Perks, producer of the programmes, he told me that Donovan wouldn't claim to be able to pass a controlled test in which water was on or just below the surface. He only finds deep flowing water. A proper test of Donovan would therefore be difficult, and expensive. Too bad.
In the second programme we saw Donovan demonstrating his wonderful ability to dowse a ley line which he claimed was emanating from a standing stone on the Isles of Scilly. Apparently, one of the people present was able to inhibit the ley line. When Donovan walked between this man and the stone, his dowsing rod moved. But when he walked on the other side of the man, his rod failed to move. Now 'that's' something which could be tested.
After the final programme, by which time I had done some brief research, I wrote a letter to 'Radio Times'. It outlines some of the things I learned:
'In a conversation I had with producer Howard Perks he told me that his recent trio of programmes 'Donovan The Diviner' were not intended to prove or disprove divining, but were simply to tell the story of an interesting man. Howard is keen to see his programmes start a discussion on divining and hopefully to encourage someone to take a serious look at the subject in an attempt to explain it. May I start this discussion by making a view points, and suggesting a suitable scientific test.
'Donovan's 'findings' were entirely subjective. His talk of underground water in general and force lines in particular were mainly unproven. Such chances as there were to include proof - either negative or positive - were not taken in the programme. This was in accordance with Howard Perks's intentions to avoid judgement on the issue. However, the 'finding' of water on Peter Kent's farm was perhaps not due to divining. What's the chance of finding water anywhere in Cornwall? The programme didn't tell us, but a hydrogeologist working in the West Country informs me that it is about 90% anywhere but the Lizard area.
'Donovan and his wife predicted a flow of about 400 gallons per hour. But this is roughly the amount which would normally be expected from such a bore hole. On Peter Kent's farm it was actually measured at about 370 gallons. But - again - the programme didn't tell us these things. The water engineer who measured the flow told me.
'Basically, dowsing has not one explanation, but three. That is, there are three things which collectively and severally explain the phenomenon. First there is the fact that water is mainly found in layers underground, not in streams as most people erroneously believe and which diviners encourage us to believe. The second is the movement of the rod or other divining device. This is clearly a movement created by the diviner - possibly subconsciously - based on what he 'believes' is the answer. Finally, there are the accumulated results obtained by diviners which, studies show, are no better than chance.
'Having spent the best part of ninety minutes promoting a belief in dowsing, if the BBC would now like to test Donovan there are two ways to do so. The first is by drilling about ten bore holes at locations divined by him. In this case, finding 'dry' spots would be the best test. About eight out of ten would be a good score. Unfortunately this is expensive, and would probably take a couple of weeks to achieve.
'The second, and cheaper way would be to test Donovan's ability to find ley-lines. If Donovan and the BBC will agree to participate I have designed a suitable test. It's cheap too. So, let's hear from Donovan and the BBC's Science Department and either prove divining or put it to rest'.
My letter wasn't printed but I am consoled by the fact that no other letters about this series were printed either. I was taking a chance writing a critical letter about Donovan who may have a royal coat of arms on his twig, for it was reported in the London Evening Standard (30th July 1988) that, sharing a rod with Wilkins, the Clown Prince found water 'at the exact spot where...(Wilkins)...already knew there was water'. My next address might be c/o The Tower of London.