Bigfoot, that mysterious hominid with the luxurious hair, has been sighted in nearly every U.S. state and around the world. Perhaps more interesting than Bigfoot itself are the enthusiastic believers who search for it. Witnesses come from all social classes and occupational backgrounds and form a loosely structured community of investigators. With a desire to know how Bigfoot researchers think and behave, longtime paranormal fan Joe Gisondi joined several dozen of them as they mounted expeditions in eight locations across the United States.
Gisondi begins his journalistic endeavor with a vivid personal anecdote describing a camping trip in which he experienced intense fear for no apparent reason, and felt that something was watching his tent at night. He grappled with the tension between being a “trained skeptic” and having a powerful emotional experience with no causal evidence. Gisondi draws a parallel to religious faith, stating several times throughout the book that he lacks strong faith but wants to believe—in both God and Bigfoot.
The witnesses he speaks with have a firm belief in what they have experienced. They have heard chattering and growls; seen eye-shine and unnaturally large footprints; and had pinecones thrown at them. Some have even had full visual sightings. A numinous experience like this can be terrifying; the witness may have flashbacks and nightmares and avoid the location. Alternately, the experience can be awe-inspiring and the witness may become a fervent seeker. Many witnesses reach out and develop relationships with other witnesses, through groups like the Bigfoot Research Organization (BFRO) and online communities. They catalog their experiences in sighting databases, share methods and evidence, and organize expeditions.
In Monster Trek, Gisondi invites the reader to get to know some of these witnesses and experience Bigfoot expeditions vicariously. Each chapter focuses on a particular location: Ouachita Mountains, Oklahoma; Uwharrie Mountains, North Carolina; Southern Illinois; Green Swamp, Florida; Northern Wisconsin; Eastern Kentucky; Salt Fork State Park, Ohio; and Wind River Mountains, Wyoming. Gisondi provides some history and environmental information about each geographic area, details a few historic and contemporary Bigfoot sightings, and then describes his informants and their shared experiences. Expedition descriptions are richly detailed and include both factual information and sensory and emotional experiences.
Gisondi is a journalist, and his writing is something between Gonzo and New Journalism, with punchy, conversational speech in the first person. His active participation in expeditions and emotional reflection throughout the text also position Monster Trek as autoethnographic, most clearly exemplified by the connection made between Gisondi’s personal struggle with faith and his observations on witness belief. Because of the inclusion of his own emotional and cognitive processes, the author makes no claims to neutrality and is candid about his purpose and bias both to the reader and to his research informants.
Sadly, Gisondi’s biases come across rather too strongly in many of his descriptions of informants. He seems particularly fixated on body size: one person carries “more weight than he should,” another is critiqued for his eating habits, and one woman is too thin and “needs a meal.” He also characterizes several witnesses as being crazy, using terms like “odd egg” and “madman.” One chapter has a long and confusing diatribe about poor dental hygiene. Moreover, indigenous beliefs and histories are mentioned throughout the text using the past tense as if these communities no longer exist. While the tone is lighthearted and conversational, I suspect this biased language may feel exclusionary to the targeted communities and frustrating for folklorists and other qualitative researchers seeking balanced informant description.
While the narratives are well-written, gripping, and vivid, Monster Trek has low relevance to the folklore discipline. There is little engagement with scholarship, with a reliance on observational data and primary sources (newspaper and news blog articles) rather than critical analysis. Entertainment seems to be the primary goal, and this is certainly achieved, making this text suitable for a popular audience.
--------
[Review length: 646 words • Review posted on September 27, 2016]