Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Did the Original Houdini Seance have more luck contacting Harry?


While the "Official Houdini Seance" held last night in Holyoke didn't reach Houdini, the gang over at the "Original Houdini Seance" held at the Houdini Museum in Scranton, PA, report that they might have had better luck. This comes from the Sevier County News:

Did Houdini return? According to Dorothy Deitrich, director of the Houdini Museum, during the seance, the candelabra that was used, suddenly began to burn brightly. After the seance ended and the attendees left the museum, a hawk was sighted sitting on the chimney outside the museum. Coincidentally. Houdini used a hawk in his show shortly before he died. Was this a sign from Houdini?

Hmmm...Houdini used a hawk in his full evening roadshow? Of all of Houdini's many pets, I've never heard of him owning nor using a "hawk" in his act. Houdini did use a pet eagle during his Everything review at the Hippodrome. Perhaps this is what they are referencing here?

And if fire was the way Harry decided to mark his return this Halloween, certainly that happened in Hollywood.

Obviously, I love this stuff. :)

4 comments:

  1. Not sure if it was a hawk or an eagle. An eagle is much bigger than a hawk, by the way. The photos look like a hawk. Any experts out there? Would Houdini exagerate?

    Regardz

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, that thought occurred to me as well. Maybe Houdini called his hawk an eagle. That sound like something Harry might do. :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi John,
    I have been trying to find out if Houdini used an eagle or a hawk. Ive been told by several people that Houdini called it an eagle, but it was really a hawk.
    Regards,
    Dorothy

    ReplyDelete
  4. I always say that invoking memory is a powerful thing. You think of a group of people gathered in the same room, all focused on the same thing (particularly something with a long tradition behind it like the Houdini seance,) it's bound to have some sort of effect.

    Whether it's Houdini himself, however, I doubt.

    ReplyDelete