Most people think of Bigfoot as an elusive ape, but what if we've been looking at the legend all wrong? That's the core idea behind Alex Stevenson's deep dive into the subject. We recently sat down with Alex to chat about his dissertation, "The missing poetics of footprints in mid 20th century American cryptozoological writing," and the conversation completely changed how we think about Bigfoot.
Bigfoot: A Story of "Missingness"
Alex's academic work connects two seemingly different worlds: 1960s literary theory and Bigfoot research. He explains that thinkers like Jacques Derrida were fascinated by the "trace," or the idea that language is defined by what's not there—the missing thing that leaves a mark. At the same time, Bigfoot hunters were obsessed with a very physical trace: a massive footprint. For Alex, these footprints aren't just scientific evidence; they're the poetic heart of the mystery. Whether you believe in Bigfoot or not, the footprint itself is a story, a symbol of a wild world that still exists just beyond our reach.
Ivan T. Sanderson: The Flamboyant Pioneer
A key figure in Alex's research is Ivan T. Sanderson, a British explorer who became one of the "fathers of cryptozoology." While his colleague Bernard Heuvelmans took a more serious, scientific approach, Sanderson was all about the spectacle. He understood that to reach the masses, he had to write with a fire and a theatrical flair that made his work exciting to the public.
Sanderson's legacy, Alex argues, is not just in his theories but in his ability to inspire a grassroots movement. In places like Willow Creek, California, he encouraged people to cast the footprints they found. This created a culture where hundreds of people were actively involved, turning the search for Bigfoot into an entire community and, eventually, a new tourism-based economy for an area with a dying logging industry. It's a truly poetic idea: a new symbol of the wild growing where the old one, the giant redwood, once stood.
The Film That Changed Everything
We've all seen the Patterson-Gimlin film. For many, it's the defining evidence for Bigfoot. But Alex suggests it also did something else—it "scrambled the poetics." Before the film, Bigfoot was an image built by the imagination of a community, piecing together various footprints and stories. But once that single, definitive image was put on film, it narrowed the mystery. Instead of a fluid, ever-evolving legend, Bigfoot became tied to a specific visual, making the conversation about a simple binary: real or fake.
From Cryptids to the Human Psyche
So, where does Alex stand on the existence of these creatures? Annoyingly, he prefers not to answer with a simple "yes" or "no." His work is less about proving Bigfoot's existence and more about exploring why we're so drawn to the idea. He sees the legend as a reflection of our own primitive roots and our desire to believe that wild, untamed places still exist. Ultimately, the footprint of Bigfoot might not tell us much about the creature itself, but it can tell us a whole lot about ourselves.