Reviewed by Nemo C. Mörck
Ouija: Conjuring American Popular Culture is a curious little anthology, “the first scholarly work devoted entirely to the unique place of Ouija in American culture” (p. i), edited by Prof. Katherine Schmidt, Chair of the Theology and Religious Studies Department at Molloy University, USA. The book also has an unusual dedication: “For all the kids at sleepovers” (p. 5), but many readers’ first interaction with an Ouija board may well have been during a sleepover.
The Editor briefly introduces each chapter and then allows Brandon Hodge to relate the history of the Ouija board. Hodge has contributed historical articles to the Paranormal Review, hence SPR members may recognise his name. He writes: “Manufactured by an unbroken succession of game companies since its inception, Ouija has nevertheless inherited an often-maligned reputation” (p. 4). It certainly got negative associations after its appearance in The Exorcist in 1973, but due to its association with Spiritualism it had negative associations from the start; Christians condemned its use.
From Hodge, I gather the modern Ouija board owes much to Charles Kennard, who partnered with Elijah Jefferson Bond. The latter registered the Ouija board as a “Toy or Game”, and the patent was approved in 1891. Later, “William Fuld, secured the exclusive right to produce Ouija” (p. 7). The William Fuld Manufacturing Company produced Ouija boards for decades, gradually causing the originators to be forgotten. Parker Brothers bought the manufacturing rights in 1966. Parker Brothers was later “acquired by Hasbro, which continues to produce Ouija to this day” (p. 8). Since then numerous misconceptions have been spread, and turned up in Lewis Spence’s (1920) An Encyclopedia of Occultism and in Nandor Fodor’s (1933) Encyclopedia of Psychic Science. It is hard not to sense Hodge’s frustration as he attempts to set the facts right. He has delved in the history and generously quotes from obscure sources.
The next chapter, by Joshua Gunn, Professor in Communication Studies at the University of Texas, is admittedly more difficult to understand. It begins with a childhood experience of playing with an Ouija board in 1972. He goes on to note that technological developments occurred at the same time as Spiritualism spread and offered analogies. However, Gunn then devotes space to Jacques Derrida and his perspective. He ends his essay by suggesting “the Ouija board, historically, figuratively, and literally, holds onto the promise of justice, even though many of the stories it has inspired also stage a habitual unwillingness to confront where our existential predicament tends to push our hands: grabbing for knives and money” (p. 19), and left me wondering what I had just read, but I may well be at fault.
The following chapter is by Sarah Evans, Associate Professor in Digital Humanities and New Media at Molloy University. She “employ a media archaeological approach paired with feminist methods” (p. 22). Evans notes that despite that Ouija boards being sold as games, they have “attracted accusations of demonic or evil associations” (p. 22). There is thus a conflict, something innocent mixed with something evil. She notes that “how the board works is never strictly addressed in the patent or any instruction manuals of any iteration of Ouija” (p. 27). Surely the inherent ambiguity is part of the Ouija board’s appeal – sceptics attribute movement to the ideomotor effect or fraud, and Spiritualists are more inclined to regard the dead as the cause.
I was admittedly not aware of the fact that “a special edition pink Ouija board set marketed specifically to girls … with a pink and purple board, extra-curvy heart-shaped planchette” (p. 29) was released in 2008. Evans writes that her “study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the Ouija board’s place in game studies and raises valuable questions about broader cultural and gendered dimensions of game classification” (p. 31).
Prof. Rhonda Brock-Servais, at Longwood University, USA, provides “a material culture analysis of Ouija board goods” (p. 34). She writes: “Material Culture examines the objects created by the people in a culture to aid in understanding that culture” (p. 34). Apparently, images of Ouija boards turn up on a variety of objects, including jewellery and lingerie. The variety of objects that Brock-Servais was able to find is fascinating. She suggests: “By putting the image of the board or planchette on our possessions we can acknowledge its importance and identify ourselves as someone who is not ...” (p. 39) provoked by the imagery. However, it is also about control. She compares this to cute versions of H.P. Lovecraft’s Cthulhu – suddenly it is not as scary as Lovecraft intended. There is also something rebellious about putting the image of an Ouija board on kitchen towels.
Prof. Jennifer Miskec, also at Longwood University, writes about the appearance of Ouija boards in young adult literature and their function.
Sometimes it’s a bad idea, but other times Ouija boards or spirit boards are a means to an end, a spooky but ultimately harmless idea that is introduced and moved past. At their least interesting, Ouija boards are evidence of careless teens messing with forces that they can’t possibly handle. At their best, the Ouija mythos provides a scheme for understanding complicated ideas (p. 47).
Prof. Chris McGee, at Longwood University, writes about the appearance of Ouija boards in movies. For example, it briefly appears in Paranormal Activity (2009): ”Footage later reveals that the planchette moves by some unseen hand until the board bursts into flames” (p. 49). They tend to serve as ”mechanisms to introduce possession plots or distracting games played for suspense” (p. 49). As many readers know, an Ouija board also briefly appears in The Exorcist (1973), a movie based on the book with the same name by William Peter Blatty. An Ouija board is more prominent in I Am ZoZo (2012), which ”... contains one of the longest single sessions of Ouija playing surely ever put to film, a middle section of nearly twenty-five minutes with no other action to distract the viewer” (p. 52). This is not mentioned, but some years later, Evans and Guiley (2016) wrote The Zozo Phenomenon, presumably the similar names are not due to a coincidence. McGee concludes that movie after movie ”... insists that Ouija is NOT just a game, and what we are seeing are the tales of those who did not take it seriously” (p. 55, emphasis in original).
Skylar Berlin, studying for a Master’s degree in American Religious History, writes about how ”conservative Protestants reacted to Ouija boards in the context of 1970s and 1980s American culture” (p. 57), and during the Satanic panic:
... a moral panic predicated on the idea that Satanic cults were ritually abusing children through sexual assault and sacrifice. The concept of Satanic ritual abuse, coined in a popular book called Michelle Remembers (1980), perpetuated the idea that Satanic groups regularly subjected children to perverted sexual and physical abuse (p. 59).
Apparently, researchers have focused more attention on how conservative Christians reacted to the board game Dungeons and Dragons than on the reactions to Ouija boards. They argued that the boards were not as innocent as they seemed and allowed Satan to influence the participants: ”In a world where conservative Christians were trying to keep their kids away from Satanists who allegedly roamed every street corner, the Ouija board could travel into any home and literally bring Satan with it” (p. 63).
The Editor, Prof. Katherine Schmidt, then provides an essay about American Catholics’ reaction to Ouija boards. The priest Herbert Thurston, whom parapsychologists may recognise is quoted. Schmidt also explains some aspects of Catholicism. Naturally, the Catholics also regard the Ouija boards as potentially dangerous. Schmidt notes: ”Despite their many disagreements and doctrinal differences, American Protestants and Catholics find common ground against the Ouija board ...” (p. 73). She then provides an Epilogue, and an index concludes the volume.
Admittedly, to me, this felt like a somewhat curious collection of essays. They are written from different perspectives with academics in mind. However, Brandon Hodge’s historical overview was easier to read. I sense that the contributors were hesitant to properly deal with the question of whether playing with an Ouija board has an effect on the participants (cf. Debies-Carl, 2025). At the time of writing the listed price for the hardback is €175.00, so I don’t expect this to be a bestseller. Interested readers will hopefully get the chance to consult the book in university libraries.
References
Debies-Carl, J. (2025, 5 August). Are you afraid of the Ouija board? Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202508/are-you-afraid-of-the-ouija-board
Evans, D., & Guiley, R. E. (2016). The Zozo phenomenon. Visionary Living.
Fodor, N. (1933). Encyclopedia of psychic science. Arthurs Press Limited.
Spence, L. (1920). An encyclopedia of occultism. George Routledge & Sons Limited