• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

SUBJECT: (no response)

HURKOS: (confidently) Long time ago.

SUBJECT: (yielding) I cannot remember for certain. Maybe you are right. I'm not sure.

As Dr. Schwartz pointed out, Hurkos appears confident and "knowing"; the subject appears to be perverse and obstinate. Schwartz also noted a common gimmick Hurkos employs. He tries to establish how many are in the family. Numbers are always impressive:

HURKOS: One, two, three, four, five—I see five in the family.

SUBJECT: That's right. There are four of us and Uncle Raymond, who often stays with us.

This same tactic was used on one of Johnny Carson's "Tonight Show" programs that I recorded years back. But it went somewhat differently:

HURKOS: I see four people. Maybe five.

SUBJECT: No, there are only three of us in the house.

HURKOS: No, there are four I see....

SUBJECT: Oh, my brother. He hasn't been with us for a long time now. There are only three of us now.

HURKOS: But there is your brother. Yes, it is your brother. And what about the "dook"?

SUBJECT: The what?

HURKOS: The dook. The dook! I see a dook in the house.

SUBJECT: I don't know. Oh, you mean a dog? [laughter]

HURKOS: Yes, yes, a dook! What about the dook?

SUBJECT: We don't have a dog.

HURKOS: But you used to have a dook, didn't you?

SUBJECT: No, never. At least not while I've been there.

HURKOS: Not while you were there. Aha! I see! [applause]

In spite of a big loser, Hurkos comes out ahead anyway! Schwartz, too, noted the "dook" gimmick. In a telephone conversation Hurkos says, "I see a dook." Responds the listener, "Why, that's amazing! Our dog is right here in the room with me!" Consider, as Schwartz does, that "dook" can be interpreted as duke, dock, doc, duck, or dog, depending upon the listener's expectation. The listener is free to interpret the word however he or she wishes to—and certainly will.

Another Hurkos ruse is the name Anna or Ann. In an exchange recorded by Professor Benjamin Burack, Hurkos, speaking with dwarf actor Michael Dunn, revealed that Dunn had "suffered much" in his early life. Not an astonishing guess at all. Then the "psychic" astounded everyone by announcing that the name Mike meant something to the actor. Dunn sourly noted that it should—it was his first name. Hurriedly glossing over this dumb pronouncement, Hurkos tried another name: Anna. Dunn answered that he knew several Annas and added that one was his grandmother. A big hit! Says Hurkos, "This one is dead, right?" Considering Dunn's age, and the fact that his reference to his grandmother was in the past tense, it is hardly a surprise that Hurkos guessed right. Another Ann(a) shows up in Schwartz's article:

HURKOS: Who is Ann? (Note that there is no identification of Ann, just a question.)

SUBJECT: Ann? I have an aunt. My aunt's name is Ann.

HURKOS: Yes. She has trouble with her legs, too. Left leg.

SUBJECT: Could be!

The name Ann(a) is just different enough to be safe. The name Bill or Mary would be too obvious. Therefore Hurkos leans on finding an Ann(a) everywhere. Mind you, if the subject just quoted had failed to come up with one, Hurkos would have argued ad nauseum, throwing in Annie, Anastasia, and every variation possible, trying to bully an admission that somewhere there was a person who would fit, however badly. Failing that, he'd have brushed it off as unimportant and surged ahead.

I will not trouble my reader with much more—and there is much more—about the Smith-Hurkos guessing game, but I think I should make several other observations about the Hurkos saga before leaving it. Professor Burack, having followed the Hurkos story quite closely, notes that there are a few examples of rather serious discrepancies between what Hurkos would have us believe and the actual truth. Hurkos claims that he has "met twice" with Dr. J. B. Rhine (then associated with Duke University). But Rhine's Parapsychological Bulletin (1960) denies this, adding, "Television, radio