wavePod

The Spiritualism Movement Was Utterly Ridiculous, Part Two: Con Artists, Skeptics, and Ghosts - Ridiculous History | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to Ridiculous History

The Spiritualism Movement Was Utterly Ridiculous, Part Two: Con Artists, Skeptics, and Ghosts

Ridiculous History

Tue Mar 10 2026

Summary

Ridiculous History — "The Spiritualism Movement Was Utterly Ridiculous, Part Two: Con Artists, Skeptics, and Ghosts"

iHeartPodcasts | March 10, 2026
Hosts: Ben Bowlin & Noel Brown
Guest: Jonathan Strickland (a.k.a. The Quister)
Super Producer: Dylan "the Fox Brother" Fagan

Episode Overview

In this rich and often hilarious deep dive, Ben and Noel—joined by guest Jonathan Strickland—continue their exploration of the Spiritualism movement that captivated the English-speaking world in the 19th and early 20th centuries. After setting the stage in Part One with the Fox sisters and spiritualism’s explosive growth, Part Two exposes the movement’s underbelly: grief-driven gullibility, rampant con artistry, escalating spectacle, righteous skeptics, and the eventual public downfall. Both tragic and ridiculous, the episode also explores spiritualism's surprising ties to progressive causes, landmark exposures of fraud, and the enduring tension between hope, belief, and evidence.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

The Power of Grief & Spiritualism’s Rise

Grief as a Gateway (06:00–08:50)
- Jonathan references the quote from WandaVision: “What is grief but love persevering?” and highlights how spiritualism exploited persistent love in times of intense loss, especially post-Civil War.
  
  "It is such an incredible opportunity if you are of the unethical or amoral sort." – Jonathan [06:50]
- Ben connects spiritualism’s boom to collective tragedy:
  
  “Families on both sides of that war encountered heartbreaking losses... So people want this explanation. We're desperately clinging to the idea that our loved ones are not really gone.” – Ben [08:33]

Spiritualism’s Sociopolitical Ties & Democratization

Tied to Progressive Causes (10:16–11:47)
- Spiritualism was unusually entwined with abolition and early suffrage, offering women a platform for public influence.
  
  “Spiritualism is inherently tied to progressive causes... giving female identifying people the right to vote.” – Ben [10:43]
From Salons to Stage Shows (11:47–16:27)
- Mediums multiplied and became celebrities, with competition breeding increasingly elaborate or sensational acts for legitimacy and financial gain.
- Cora Hatch/Scott’s story highlights sexism and incredulity-face:
  
  “They said, oh, well, the only explanation is... spirits are real and the smart guys are speaking through this beautiful dumb person.” – Ben [13:18]
- The spiritualism boom was compared (jokingly and insightfully) to the podcast boom during the pandemic.

Fraud, Criticism, and the Marketplace for Mediums

Flood of Mediums and Escalating Spectacle (19:26–21:59)
- The field became oversaturated, forcing mediums to invent new tricks (e.g., rapping, spirit writing, producing “ectoplasm”).
  
  “You are walking down the street... and you're saying, well, I've got $2. Why should I go see this one lady who just knocks on stuff and raps like her ghosts communicate through counting? Next Tuesday, there's another medium in town, and her ghost actually writes stuff down on little cards.” – Ben [19:58]
Unmasking Fraud (21:59–23:20)
- Investigators like the Sabert Commission (UPenn, 1884–87) found “provable evidence of fraud in every single case.”
  
  “They found evidence, provable evidence of fraud in every single case they examined.” – Ben [23:14]

Spectacular Skeptics and Bitter Fallout

The Houdini–Doyle Rift (27:31–32:45)
- Harry Houdini (staunch skeptic) and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (believer, Sherlock Holmes creator) suffered personal tragedy and turned to spiritualism for comfort—with opposite effects on their friendship.
  
  “Houdini read what was written, supposedly by his mother... His mother was not very fluent in English, but the message was written in perfect English.” – Jonathan [29:24]
- The friendship ended when Houdini publicly denounced mediums (and Doyle’s wife), and later even called for criminalizing fortune telling:
  
  “He said we should criminalize fortune telling for hire... they are either deluded or they are grifters.” – Ben [31:34]
Magicians as the Best Debunkers (33:17–34:56)
- Magicians like James Randi are especially effective at exposing fraud because “science... does not anticipate that what you’re studying is trying to fool you.” – Jonathan [33:44]

The Fox Sisters’ Confession: The Death Knell

A Public Unmasking (35:01–39:40)
- In 1888, the Fox sisters confessed on stage that their “spirit rapping” was performed by cracking their joints—then partially recanted due to pressure.
  
  “This leads to the public declaration that I would argue ultimately sinks the movement.” – Ben [36:00] “We find out that spiritualism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.” – Jonathan [37:28]
Why Recant?
- The sisters flip-flopped, pressured by both threats and their own financial hardships, showing the human complexities within large social movements.

The Aftermath and Legacy

Movement’s Collapse & Enduring Influence (39:52–42:15)
- After the confession, the organized spiritualist movement waned, though psychics and mediums persist, “never quite achieving their previous fame.”
- Ghost stories and the appeal of the supernatural endure, despite lack of empirical evidence.
Positive Legacy Amidst the Ridiculous (43:00–44:13)
- Many women leveraged spiritualism for social advocacy, using their “platform” to promote abolition and suffrage under a mystical pretext.
  
  “Some of the most notable figures... used their fame to advocate for genuine social [change]... So they had a path to power by saying, look, it's not me because you guys hate women. It's the spirits...” – Ben [43:38]
- The hosts reflect on the complicated legacy, acknowledging that despite wide fraud, spiritualism pushed some positive messages and opened a “path to power” for marginalized voices.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

“What is grief but love persisting?” – Jonathan citing WandaVision [06:13]
“Spectacle became an anticipated and expected element of a medium session. Right?” – Jonathan [21:26]
“They found evidence, provable evidence of fraud in every single case they examined.” – Ben [23:14]
“This is where we find out that spiritualism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.” – Jonathan [37:28, after Fox sisters’ confession]
“Aren't you already a ghost and your body is just a house you haunt?” – Ben [42:06]

Timeline of Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment / Topic | |------------|-----------------------------------| | 06:00–08:50| Grief as key to spiritualism’s rise & Civil War context | 10:16–11:47| Spiritualism's ties to progressive causes | 13:18–14:49| Cora Hatch exemplifies sexism in spiritualism | 19:26–21:59| Marketplace for mediums & theatrical competition | 21:59–23:20| Investigations unmasking fraud: Sabert Commission | 27:31–32:45| Houdini & Doyle’s friendship and bitter split | 33:17–34:56| Magicians as best investigators of spiritualist tricks | 35:01–39:40| The Fox sisters’ confession and recantation | 43:00–44:13| Reflecting on spiritualism’s positive sociopolitical impact

The Quister Segment (50:01–62:49)

Jonathan Strickland returns as "The Quister", delivering a four-part trivia challenge themed on skepticism and debunking. Ben and Noel debate, get tricked by a sly question about Jules Verne, and close the episode in fittingly ridiculous fashion.

Final Thoughts

The episode deftly balances comedy, skepticism, and empathy, exploring how a movement born of longing for connection became a hotbed for both progress and exploitation. Spiritualism’s story is a cautionary tale—about the dangers of unchecked belief, but also about the resilience of hope and the unexpected routes to social change.

Whether you’re a skeptic, a believer, or just a fan of bizarre history, this conversation brings both heart and humor, making the story of spiritualism as entertaining as it is thought-provoking.

Loading summary...

Transcript

A (0:00)

Ridiculous History is a production of iHeartradio. Welcome back to the show, fellow ridiculous historians. Thank you as always so much for tuning in. Knock, knock, knock. Let's hear it for our super producer, Dylan the Fox brother Fagan.

B (0:40)

Oh, yeah, love, love your barbecue.

C (0:43)

Big fan.

B (0:43)

Sorry, that's another very Atlanta centric reference.

D (0:46)

Narrow casting.

A (0:47)

We are, we are indeed. That's Noel Brown. They called me Ben Bullen. We're welcoming back returning guest brother Vows, friend, nemesis of the show, the one and only Jonathan Strickland, AKA Quizzer. And I gotta say, man, you were so well behaved in the first part of this journey.

B (1:10)

Utterly mellow.

D (1:11)

I mean, to be fair, you guys, every day I'm getting closer to being able to hold the other half of the conversation around spiritualism, you know, from the other side. So, like, it's just kind of put things into perspective.

A (1:25)

There we go.

B (1:25)

It'll do that depending on who's leading the the seance.

D (1:31)

Yeah, I think if you have ridiculous references to science fiction films I've never seen, then, you know, hey, this is probably legit.

A (1:41)

There we go. Yes. Previously on Ridiculous History. We explored the oft untold origin story of what is called the spiritualism movement, which became a huge deal in largely English speaking countries in the 19th and 20th century. So please check out part one where we left you. Spiritualism was skyrocketing in popularity. Three people named the Fox sisters became sort of harbingers and precedents for many other self described mediums to follow. Maybe we start here, guys.

B (2:27)

If you're a maintenance supervisor at a manufacturing facility, your job is a little like being a historian. You have to keep the past alive,

A (2:35)

including your older machines. So when you notice a set of drive belts is showing wear and tear, you call on Grainger.

B (2:43)

D (28:00)

Yeah, yeah. Harry Houdini and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. So to set the stage a bit, both men had suffered tragedy in their lives that drew them towards spiritualism. It's just that their journeys took very different paths. In Houdini's case, he never really got over the loss of his mother. When his mother passed away, it deeply affected him. In Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's case, his son Kingsley perished during the Great War, so what we would now call World War I. But back then they didn't call it that because they were still optimistic. And so they both had suffered great loss and they both turned towards spiritualism because it offered the possibility of comfort and closure. But Houdini began to come to the conclusion that in every instance that he saw, as far as spiritualism was concerned, it was a matter of fraud, and Doyle still saw the possibility. And the reason why this ultimately led to the dissolution of their friendship is that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's wife Jean was a medium and offered to do a session to contact Houdini's mother. Jean would do automatic writing, which is where you're just moving a pen around on paper and then occasionally it seems to scribble out words and you're kind of vibe coding. Yeah. And Houdini read what was written, supposedly by his mother through Jean, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's wife. And his conclusion was that his mother was not very fluent in English, but the message was written in perfect English. And so there came this confrontation of Houdini saying, this is balderdash, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle saying, that's my wife. And the friendship never recovered. And then years, a few years later, Houdini famously got punched to death and. And in the gut. Yeah. And they never. They never resolved their differences. And so this was like a friendship of two, like, greats in history. Like, I think kids today, even if they've never seen or read anything about Houdini, have heard the name, like, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, like, obviously, Sherlock continues to have a massive impact as, like every four or five years we get a new adaptation of Sherlock Holmes or some spin off or something.

D (51:34)

Nice. Yes. You will have three minutes to discuss amongst yourselves which of the four is the false one. If you need all three minutes, you may. You may sniff out the false one right away. I will admit this time it was because I was so interested in the topic, I didn't spend that much time crafting a really good one. So. So spoiler alert on that. And here we go. Scenario number one. Lucien of Samosata was an early, very early skeptic. He was born sometime around 125 in the common era in in Syria. He was known to be quite the smartass, with works that contained heaps of sarcasm. Lucian didn't shy away from calling out fraud and superstition, and his works include the Dialogues of the Gods, a collection of satirical pieces about the Greek pantheon. But my favourite target of his was Alexander, a Greek man who styled himself a mystic and oracle. Lucian described him as a fraud and thief. Moreover, he claims that Alexander would regularly rile up his followers to go put the hurt on anyone whom he identified as being trouble. Lucian's work exposed Alexander as a false prophet, a label I suspect Lucian would apply to all prophets. Scenario II in 1836, Edgar Allan Poe penned an essay titled titled Meltzer's Chess Player. This piece set out to debunk the famous mechanical Turk device, an automaton that appeared to play chess. It was originally built by Johann Wolfgang Ritter von Kimlin de Pasmand a century earlier. Johann, well done. Thank you. Johann Wolfi wasn't really that interested in presenting his invention as the genuine article. But after his death death, subsequent owners were not so scrupulous. Meltzer would present the device as an actual chess playing automaton capable of winning most chess games. Poe suspected that a person was inside the device doing all the playing, though his reasoning was a bit off. Poe believed that because the Turk would occasionally lose a game, there had to be a human controlling it, because machines would always play perfectly. Scenario three. Back in 1860, Jules Verne wrote a novel titled Paris in the 20th Century. It was set in gay Paris in 1960, one century in Verne's future. It would not see publication until 1994, having been initially suppressed and then sort of just set aside. In the novel Novel, Verne poses that technological advancements will strip away superstition in Paris, revealing beyond deniability that there is no supernatural element in the world. As a result of machines doing all the work and Parisians having a clear view of reality, people are free to pursue their passions, and Paris becomes the nexus of expression and creativity. Verne appears to argue that opportunists who depend upon naive and gullible followers are a major hurdle. Doyle for progress. Now, scenario number four. How about a tale of debunking the debunkers? In his collection of works titled the History of Spiritualism, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was quick to dismiss skeptics and critics of the spiritualist movement in his introduction. He went so far to say, and I'm paraphrasing here, that Frank Podmore cherry picked data points and facts to support a skeptical view of mediums and such, while he called Joseph McCabe's work that was titled A Popular History an absolute travesty because of McCabe's insistence that various practitioners were, in fact, fraudsters. Doyle thus makes his bias undeniably clear in the introduction of his work. It's a bit of a blow for those of us who thought of Doyle as a champion of rationality. Those are your four scenarios. You gentlemen, you may ask me a question if you wish. You have to preface your question with I didn't think this one through. Obviously. You'll need to preface your question with is that a knock I hear at the door? And then you can ask me. Start your time.