Forum:The X-Files

< Index | RW Article discussion

Thinking of creating a page on The X-Files. It's a TV show that I'm really conflicted about — on one hand, it's a classic science fiction program that had some great characters and writing (at least until the last couple of seasons) and a huge impact on sci-fi television, but on the other hand, it likely created a lot of conspiracy theorists (especially ufologists) among those who grew up in the '90s, and a case could be made that it was promoting such material. The latter, I think, makes it a good fit for the site's mission, much like the various pages we have on shows like Ancient Aliens.

I've currently got a just-about-complete workspace version of the article here. I talk about how Richard Dawkins and Carl Sagan both disliked the show, while at the same time, one of its own stars was a member of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry in real life, and dismissed any notion that it was promoting woo. I also talk about the Lone Gunmen spinoff and how its pilot episode became unbelievable fodder for 9/11 Truthers. Anything else you think I should add on it? KevinR1990 (talk) 01:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it was promoting such material (it is, after all, science fiction), but you could certainly go into details and draw lines between the show and the conspiracy theorists who bought into it as fact. John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (talk) 08:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I think I could talk about that when I discuss what William B. Davis thought of the show. Overall, I describe it as something of a mixed bag on that front — on one hand, it was very much part of the conspiracy-theory zeitgeist of its time, but on the other, like you said, it's a fictional program that, outside its own universe, isn't trying to actually say that aliens are abducting people and cutting deals with shadowy conspiracies. KevinR1990 (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that an X-Files article could be useful and on-mission by pointing out where the series help codify and/or popularise particular versions of UFOlogy, such as grey aliens (as opposed to the "little green men" of yesteryear or Spielberg's E.T.) or a specific take on alien abduction or cattle mutilation lore and how X-Files tied it all into a greater story-arch of conspiracy and secret government stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if a comparison of pre- and post-X-Files UFOlogy yielded clear signs that the series' take on these issues became "UFOlogy orthodoxy". Btw, Dark Skies seems to be from a pretty similar mold, but not as influential as X-Files (though Dark Skies tied aliens more directly to the Kennedy assassination, than I think was the case in X-Files. DS also put a special emphasis on Majestic 12). ScepticWombat (talk) 16:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Go for it (if you'll pardon the eighties-ism). We have a Star Trek article, and TXF is as missional as that for the reasons cited above. Dark Skies is more problematic, though. While obviously tying itself to the conspiracy mast, it never took off in the same way the TXF did; it's a footnote, really. Bicycle^wheel 18:57, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't appealing for a Dark Skies article. It was more something that sprung to mind in the context of popular culture influence on conspiracy theories (and vice versa). I don't know how widespread the Majestic 12 and Kennedy assassination stuff is among UFOlogists anyway or whether Dark Skies made a difference (I doubt it). ScepticWombat (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

95% of UFOlogy is regurgitated pop culture

Alien abduction reports have increased substantially in the face of any popular movies that feature abduction scenes, and the experiences of the abductees tends to mirror the events in the movies. Close encounters of the third kind was particularly influential.

Singling out X-Files because The X-Files was based on the same conspiracies it fictionalized is kinda silly. Sleep paralysis used to be attributed to completely different myths a century ago. People have always been crazy. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 19:03, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Sure, it was based on them, but it also popularised them from the province of a tiny number of cranks to almost a mass movement, with newspaper articles and TV programmes about conspiracies and aliens. Also, saying "let's not write about people being wrong" would end RationalWiki, wouldn't it? Bicycle^wheel 19:17, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that the point of having an X-Files article is actually strengthened by highlighting such examples as the changing pop cultural attribution of sleep paralysis. It shows how a work of fiction can if not create then at least spread and popularise particular myths and conspiracy theories and do so inadvertently (I doubt the X-Files meant for or expected this to be taken seriously). It illustrates a kind of interdependent relationship between pop culture and conspiracy theory. ScepticWombat (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

That's pretty much my view right there. The X-Files certainly didn't invent the conspiracy theories it mined for story material — without them, there wouldn't have been a show. And like ikanreed said, the vast majority of ufology is, itself, taken from pop culture depictions of aliens, going back all the way back to how Betty and Barney Hill's "gray aliens" looked suspiciously like the alien from a then-recent episode of The Outer Limits. Nor do I even think that it was intended to popularize or otherwise promote those theories. Most likely, someone looked at that material and thought a cool, scary story could be made out of it. What it did do, however, was act as a "gateway drug" for a lot of credulous people who might not have heard of a lot of that stuff before the show premiered. To this day, it's pretty much the granddaddy of any TV show that's even remotely about aliens, conspiracies, or both (and which isn't set in the future), and if you look at, say, David Icke's stuff about shape-shifting aliens ruling the world (which he didn't really codify until 1999), some of its "mytharc" did in fact trickle back into the conspiracy subculture. KevinR1990 (talk) 00:32, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I think it's clear if one takes the time to seriously watch and analyze the show, the conspiracy theory surrounding aliens, the cover up, experiments, manipulating human genetics, aliens conquering earth with the help of a small human elite, etc.......It becomes clear if one looks at the show that what they're talking about is really the lack of trust in our leaders and politicians, an out of control shadow government/military industrial complex, a self-conscious elite who believes it is their right, nay, their duty to lie to the people and spread disinformation, the devastating consequences of war and genocide, an authoritarian militarized ruling class who believe in the corrective use of violence and silencing of potentially dangerous opinions.

These are all issues that matter to rationalwikians. Davis is quite right when he says that the show is not anti-science. Both agents use scientific methods to try and explain the origins for their unknown findings. It is the government which is anti-science as it attempts to suppress information of a scientific nature which would threaten their power and change the world. I can understand Dawkins going after Touched By An Angel, but X-files? And to campaign against it? Like the Pope and radical Islam? And as Davis rightly said, Dawkins presented absolutely no evidence that the show caused people to think uncritically. So basically, he behaved exactly as many religious apologists have behaved towards Harris, Dawkins, Dennett, etc. One would think that given Davis' commitment to skepticism, and the fact that the show does encourage critical thinking about the possibilities of science or to question unaccountable authority, Dawkins might revise his position. Burkean (talk) 03:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

William B. Davis had a number of interesting thoughts about the show. Including the not completely unfounded argument that the cancer man was actually the good guy; but at least we wouldn't be dead. Sure the human race would be turned into slaves, or whatever the hell the whole thing was about. (I lost track after around the second season). Also for whatever reason Alex Krycek is my sisters favorite character in all of fiction. Samstr (talk) 04:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't want to get into the entire story with you but suffice to say that all of life on this planet has been their experiment and the fusing of alien with "human" DNA (the replacement of the human race rather than enslavement) is the culmination of the project. The experiment, more or less, is coming to an end. Needless the say the activities of the US government, the whole cold war itself, is just a small piece of that puzzle. Needless to say, this slow and deliberate plan works better for them than just obliterating earth. I think the whole point of what you're talking about with cancer man is to show that it's the same old hoary line that we've heard from those who abuse power (I did it for the greater good). There is a certain element of truth to it. But needless to say, if it was about trying to placate the aliens or play for time, cancer man could've gone a different way by now. I think jeremiah smith would be a much better example of the true hero in the show. He too wants to keep things on the down low and maintain a low profile, but only to make sure that he might continue to help people and to undermine the syndicate's project. Burkean (talk) 19:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Pop-culture osmosis?

This topic actually stumbled onto a unique question. Why is it that people only start seeing, feeling, having some kind of evidence (like a chunk of metal in there leg that they don't remember or having unknown material),of getting abducted only AFTER seeing/reading/hearing something very similar form a media? For example they didn't talk about grey humanoids until after HG Wells "The Man of the Year Million"? It almost as if human sight alters what is actually happening.

It due, at least in part, to bias and hallucinations, but it doesn't explain everything, as in WHY & HOW otherwise normal humans would all of a sudden have hallucinations of what they saw in media.--Steampeng MK.1 (talk) 23:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

With a new season about to begin...

I still have the workspace version of the article saved, and given that they're about to relaunch the show in January, I was considering moving the article to main. It's definitely become more relevant and on-mission than it's been at any point in the last fifteen years. Any suggestions for last-minute changes? KevinR1990 (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Would it be too much to ask that the Cigarette Smoking Man redirect to all the things he did in the "Musings of a Cigarette Smoking Man?" (I kid, I kid.) I don't see anything wrong with the article. In fact, I think it summarizes everything without going into outrageous detail. The only other thing you could do is add a section that includes a list of everything mentioned in the series. Yeah, I know you mention it all in the body of the article, but a list would be nice just to show readers how much BS went into the series. jrussellwrites (talk) 06:00, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Yep, do it. Bicycle^wheel 11:16, 28 December 2015 (UTC)