Clean Language: Hypnosis Without Trance?
My good friend James Tripp is riding high at the moment: his latest Hypnosis Without Trance product sold out in minutes!
I knew James included lots of Clean Language ideas in his work. But I hadn’t spotted the references to “trance without induction” in David Grove’s only published book until I re-read on a flight it recently.
I wonder, is there a relationship?
Written with B I Panzer in 1989, David’s book Resolving Traumatic Memories has been out of print for years. But if you’re curious, you can easily get a copy on Amazon.
I’m not going to recommend the book as any kind of introduction to Clean Language. As ever, David was working on the extreme edge of the known, experimenting therapeutically, and discovering what worked in practice.
The book was created from transcripts – David would never have sat still for long enough for an “ordinary” writing project. And what theory there is feels like “intellectual backfill” (a phrase of John Grinder’s that seems to fit rather well here).
But Panzer, apparently an experienced hypnotherapist, makes some astute observations about David’s work in his preface.
“The use of Clean Language can elicit trance without induction…” he says.
“The therapist’s Clean Language facilitates a state of purposeful, focused, uncontaminated self-absorbtion.”
Is “trance without induction” the same or different to “hypnosis without trance”? Is a Clean Language client in “trance” or not?
Judge for yourself in one of my session videos here – and please comment below.
Comments from original on judyrees.co.uk
Peter Fallenius
1 July 2011
Judy, your comment to Anand’s post hits on many of the reason why I thought from my first contact with Clean Language that the idea it was ‘non-influential’ was a very ‘funny’ concept…
One of the main ‘beauties’ with the limitations, that following the Clean Language structure enforces, is that it stops people from doing what they normally would like to say, and by doing so often break rapport, by mismatching the client…
What Clean Language doesn’t teach ( and can’t since it claims to be ‘non-influential’), is what is going really on and how it could be used for influence. Robert Collier, among others, would have loved it…even though h did quite well without it 🙂
As far as, using it for manipulation…it is very easily doable, but would only be done out of stupidity, since the number of really upset enemies would accumulate very quickly, and that the opportunities from doing mutually positive things is so easy so that the positive intent of empowering is really the only one making sense.
Have a wonderful weekend!
Peter 🙂
Ps. …an ‘induction’ in a very basic form can be a ‘Listening Induction…’ 😉
Peter Fallenius
1 July 2011
Also, I agree with Judy that when someone is “…“trying” to influence…” it implies adding a ‘force’, and human nature is to fight a force, so by only using & leveraging the already existing energy, while removing blocks/brakes/etc can create massive momentum very quickly… (however, being aware of where it’s heading might be wise, before it is released… 🙂 )
trine
2 July 2011
wow amazing how as a conversation develops, so what appeared to be simple develops, as it develops to include complexities> Whether they are all equivalences, might be a matter of debate…. and interepretation,and perception too….
Its like watching tensioned language unwind. revealing itself,The selfsame occurs, with clients in body oriented psychotherapy, knots unwind. and then nots of resistence and dis association which separate states of awareness,become yes. and begin to cohere.
also,
re langauage and meaning, and distictions,….
force and power get used interchangeably, however theres distinct distinctions between force and power which are significant differences……
wound up clients end up power-less but forced full:-overloaded with tension. which distacts, from full attention. full attention is powerful and relaxed.
filled with awareness just present, and that it seems to me was what david was striving towards, a style of working which was most present and least interefering,field to field,being to being
Peter Fallenius
2 July 2011
Interesting thoughts, Trine. 🙂
Another thought…Power is most easily acquired by people who do not care if they have it, or not…
If we strive for power itself, it is often quickly lost…
A wise person said; ‘If you are truly OK with getting a ‘No’, then you can anyone for anything.’ 🙂
Anand
29 June 2011
I’m hearing a few different definitions being used here, so I think some clarifications would be useful. There seems to be different complex equivalences being used in this thread, so I offer a few definitions and then go into
Is ‘hypnosis without trance’ the same as ‘trance without induction’?
(I try to avoid throwing my own complex equivalences into the mix by separating out the key elects as best I can)
Firstly, to preface, Richard Bandler says with regard to altered states, altered compared to what? In this thread there is mention of normal waking state … I think his point is that there is not an altered or trance state and normal waking states, but an infinite number of mind body states, characterised by various observations (eye closed/open, muscle relaxation, movement/no movement etc.) and in each, different ranges of capabilities and manifestations characteristic of those states.
Eriksons definition of hypnosis (the state of hypnosis) is ‘the loss of the multiplicity of the foci of attention’ what James calls directionalising attention and facilitating experience (of new realties for the person)
So,
1. there’s the protocol or hypnotic induction, trance induction, or just induction, which I think can be used synonymously … ie the process of doings that lead to an altered (or different) mind body state
2. hypnotic phenomena, eg (james’s demo, arm catalepsy, dissociation (of the arm) and jury’s demo positive hallucination of the sphere)
3. And then theres mind body states, trance state, hypnotic state … The physiology and state that the person is actually in.
4. Then there’s suggestibility … Will the person follow/carry out the suggestions?
5. Then there are correlates of what is thought of as defining a classical trance state … Eg eyes closed, slow voice, body relaxation at rest, and still, not moving …
On James’ video with the girl, the point he makes is the no eye closed, she’s nodding, smiling, chatting as in the normal waking state and yet still exhibiting hypnotic phenomena
So that would suggest hypnosis without trance in this case means ‘hypnotic phenomena without a mind body (trance) state that is characterised by eyes closed, person not moving, sitting in a chair etc. … To me, it’s an extremely impressive demo of getting her to completely dissociate from her arm in a very short period of time … Nice work James!
I got slightly confused when i looked at James’ website where the strap line is hypnosis without trance … no ‘sleep’, no ‘eyes closed’, no ‘deeper and deeper’ which are often in a classical trance induction, and James uses none of these (see below in the demo you can hear on YouTube) … so based on the strap line on website, here (differently) to me James’ ‘hypnosis without trance’ I interpret as hypnotic phenomena without an old style trance/hypnotic induction protocol AND no eyes closed, slumping in chair etc.
There is however an induction from what I could see from the demo on YouTube where you can hear the words, there is a very skilfully executed induction (from 1.30 “now … have you ever experienced any kind of hypnosis before (recalling state) (yeah) ok, I’d just like you to Relax just long enough to pick a point on that that you can just look at, you can just focus on, focus on fully, focus on completely be aware of the sounds around you (pacing) becoming part of that experience as you focus on that point. And as you do that, you don’t need to pay attention to your breathing, you don’t need to Pay Attention to the sensation of your fingers gripping (pacing and leading) that packet. But as you do that you notice on your breathing you focus on that point, continue to focus on that point 2.03… The entire induction to a state that is characterised by ‘the loss of the multiplicity of the foci of attention’ takes just under 35 seconds … James is an extremely skilful hypnotist! … But is definitely an induction of sorts… And the guy goes into what I would call a ‘waking trance state’, eyes open…
James, I’d value your take on my pieced together definition of ‘hypnosis without trance’ which to me means hypnotic phenomena without a classical induction, and without the characteristics of classical hypnotic trance state i.e. eye closed, slump in chair etc. … I.e. There exist mind body states in which the characteristics of a normal waking state (nodding chatting smiling) can coexist with hypnotic phenomena … Arm dissociation and catalepsy (eg erikson, “you come out of trance, but leave THAT hand over there in in a perfectly nice trance, while you come out of trance and talk to me … What is that hand doing over there floating like that .. Isn’t that funny/aren’t you curious what that hand is doing etc etc.”)
Now, coming to Judy’s demo and clean language … And ‘trance without induction’
Here I’m inclined to agree … A trance state and hypnotic phenomena appears (positive hallucination) of a sphere without any induction or suggestion to do so …
However 0.29 there’s been a pace back of his words and then “and what kind of clarity is that clarity” is an odd question … Gilligan says ‘a trance state appears when a persons map fails’ when they go of the edge of their map … And I think this is where the trance state starts on this demo. Also wonder if fractionation plays a part … He’s going in and considering things he’s never considered before and coming out and answering many many times.
Then at 1.06 “people need to understand” (a verb) and Judy says “what kind of understanding” is a very weird question following his normal statement (also i think possibly he expects her to understand his statement as he nods slowly so i think its a doubly confusing question and also doesn’t follow on from his previous statement in any way he’s been used to in the past .., off the map,again.
(As an interesting aside she switches the verb understand to a noun understanding and … Then he says ‘respect’ as a noun and she switches it to a verb …”respect it, what kind of people need to respect it”) … Clean but not clean!
At 1.57 “it feels like it’s very close and if I don’t grab it, it’s going to disappear” and he puts his hand out…
Now the non verbal suggestions to positively hallucinate start
At 2.19 … “its everything you want and it’s very close” (in space) … She points to where it was and looks to where ‘it’ was and he puts his hand back there … She looks at it as if it’s a real object in space and the positive hallucination is accepted by him … Trance phenomena achieved … 2.23 “there” and he points to it with the other hand.
Then Judy starts with suggestions, mostly non verbal but also turning his statements into commands by selectively deleting certain words, and leaning on certainly words as she feeds them back … Also when she feeds the words back, they can have different meanings given the context even though they are his words. Also she keeps moving her head and looking at it like it’s real.
2.30 its there and it’s everything you want and it’s very close (in time?)
2.54 shes just fed his words back (pacing) and then he says “I need to put it where it’ll be safe” … She feeds back I need to Put it where it’ll be safe” she leans on the P in put, a command … Watch her hands they are turned over like in a grabbing rather then pointing
3.14 Also moving her head to make it more real .. “That it, that it’s like what?”
And here the master move … 3.18 “And it’s pushing you away and GRAB it! …” and at the same time she gestures with her hand for the third time to close his hand around it … “it’s there, close” 3.24 …” It’s like a circle, it’s like a ball” he grabs it, turns his hand over and he’s now holding it!!! … She told him to nonverbally … His words acting as pacing
But he puts it back …
3.56 Judy goes between the two gestures palm up grabbed palm forward … And he follows along perfectly … Masterful Judy!
“And you need to put it where it’s safe and she gestures very quickly” …but he doesn’t do it until “Whereabouts is where it’s safe?” and he complies, turns his hand over and puts it in his chest … Job done!!!
That ball, you need to put it there, there, at the core of you (while he’s still got his hand on his chest) reinforces it … Is there anything else about clarity when (you are) ‘there’ at the core of you … Another example of different meaning when fed back … And he says I know exactly what to do …
the language may be clean, but not much else Judy! … The rest is very very skilful verbal (his words) and nonverbal …suggestion outside of his awareness …
So,
Trance without induction … Yes, I’d say, by asking questions that take a person of their map, and then acting as if you can see something ‘there’ and they join you in the positive hallucination … And no linguistic trance induction whatsoever!
So that’s my take on
Hypnosis without trance and
Trance without induction
Plus two very skilled hypnotists Judy and James
Anand