Ashley B. (daredevilgirl013) reviewed Dark World: Into the Shadows with the Lead Investigator of The Ghost Adventures Crew on + 746 more book reviews
Helpful Score: 6
After being on several hunts with Zak myself (yes I can prove this for those of you who are already going she lies!), this book really does dig down deep into him and lets the reader see part of who he is and why he does what he does. I was hoping for a better ending of the book instead of letting other people finish it off for him. I also wish he would have let Nick and Aaron write some in there as well. This was still a very good read, especially for anyone interested in the paranormal at all. Zak throws out some very interesting reading for those who are skeptics.
T.E. W. (terez93) reviewed Dark World: Into the Shadows with the Lead Investigator of The Ghost Adventures Crew on + 323 more book reviews
On account of the season (it's late October now), I've been seeing some really interesting books on display at the local public library. They're not the kind of thing I would normally read, but I do like to browse and just pick up things that look interesting. I first came across and read Zak's other book, which I preferred, honestly, as it was more an autobiography that provided a lot more detail about his background and the origins of his interest in the paranormal. I think this one is more his view of the phenomena he encounters, but, as some other reviewers noticed, it's fairly thin and doesn't delve into the material with much depth. It's unfortunately, as I think it's a lost opportunity.
I would really like to see an in-depth analysis of some of the more profound investigations he has conducted, such as the terrifying Poveglia, or Bobby Mackey's or some of the prisons and asylums he's been in. I've seen the Ancient Ram Inn episode several times, and I would really like to see some detailed analysis of what happened with these investigations. Some of these locations are fascinating, and I think I was hoping to learn more about the history of many of these sites in the book, which is something I would really like to see featured more in depth on the program as well. I think the "things that go bump in the night" footage is the point, but I think it's a lost opportunity to treat the site itself in such a superficial manner, but that may be the historian in me talking.
Overall, the book was kind of a fun read, however. Its arrangement is somewhat disorganized, so it's sometimes difficult to get into the meat of it. I don't think it's "poorly written," as some other reviewers have stated, but it's arranged topically, grouping the content under rather dubious headings such as "Innocence," "Anger," "Evil," "Science," and the like. Since much of the material easily transgresses these rather broad categories, I think another method of organization would have been more effective.
The hype of these paranormal shows, most of which label themselves as "investigations," kind of fascinate me. I'm a pretty hard-core skeptic on a good day, but I try to have an open mind, as I definitely think there's something to learn from this and similar material, even if it's primarily concerned with how we humans conceive the afterlife in our culture, a surprisingly popular topic. I'm always curious, as a researcher and scholar (but not of the paranormal variety), about the historiography of this "field." Long-held beliefs and standards, many of which are cited in this book, such as the assertion that "ghosts are spirits of those with unfinished business" are really curious to me: how do we know?
Other assumptions, such as the belief that places where violent, tragic and unexpected deaths are more "active" than other places, because people had more time to come to terms with their own mortality as opposed to having their lives suddenly and unexpectedly ripped from them, are likewise perplexing: again, how do we know what we think we know about the afterlife, and existence beyond the physical realm that constitutes our lived reality? Some questions just don't have answers, I guess, but I do appreciate the efforts of those who at at least attempt to answer them, even if the methods, as here, are usually less than perfect.
I would really like to see an in-depth analysis of some of the more profound investigations he has conducted, such as the terrifying Poveglia, or Bobby Mackey's or some of the prisons and asylums he's been in. I've seen the Ancient Ram Inn episode several times, and I would really like to see some detailed analysis of what happened with these investigations. Some of these locations are fascinating, and I think I was hoping to learn more about the history of many of these sites in the book, which is something I would really like to see featured more in depth on the program as well. I think the "things that go bump in the night" footage is the point, but I think it's a lost opportunity to treat the site itself in such a superficial manner, but that may be the historian in me talking.
Overall, the book was kind of a fun read, however. Its arrangement is somewhat disorganized, so it's sometimes difficult to get into the meat of it. I don't think it's "poorly written," as some other reviewers have stated, but it's arranged topically, grouping the content under rather dubious headings such as "Innocence," "Anger," "Evil," "Science," and the like. Since much of the material easily transgresses these rather broad categories, I think another method of organization would have been more effective.
The hype of these paranormal shows, most of which label themselves as "investigations," kind of fascinate me. I'm a pretty hard-core skeptic on a good day, but I try to have an open mind, as I definitely think there's something to learn from this and similar material, even if it's primarily concerned with how we humans conceive the afterlife in our culture, a surprisingly popular topic. I'm always curious, as a researcher and scholar (but not of the paranormal variety), about the historiography of this "field." Long-held beliefs and standards, many of which are cited in this book, such as the assertion that "ghosts are spirits of those with unfinished business" are really curious to me: how do we know?
Other assumptions, such as the belief that places where violent, tragic and unexpected deaths are more "active" than other places, because people had more time to come to terms with their own mortality as opposed to having their lives suddenly and unexpectedly ripped from them, are likewise perplexing: again, how do we know what we think we know about the afterlife, and existence beyond the physical realm that constitutes our lived reality? Some questions just don't have answers, I guess, but I do appreciate the efforts of those who at at least attempt to answer them, even if the methods, as here, are usually less than perfect.
