MODERN HYPNOTIC METHODS
Modern methods of inducing complete hypnosis, or the suggestive
semi-trance, vary with the temperament and training (theoretical
convictions) of the hypnotist. Some employ the method of Braid, others
of Liébault, or, again, a combination of the two.
In certain cases, the ancient method of employing passes, at a slight
distance from the body, is used, especially when a deep hypnotic
trance is deemed desirable. The regular, monotonous stroking motions
have a potent tranquilizing effect, and aid also in concentrating the
patient’s attention. This was the method of Puységur, who sought to
induce the gentle sleep rather inaptly called by him “somnambulism.”
The Abbé Faria depended mostly upon emphatic pronouncing of the word
“sleep,” after the subject had been comfortably ensconced in an easy
chair. In obdurate cases he laid his hands upon the crown of the head,
on both brows, or elsewhere, as the occasion seemed to demand.
Disciples of Braid seek, before all else, to obtain results through
mental concentration and attention, holding a glittering object above
the level of the eyebrows, at a distance of a foot or more from the
subject’s eyes. The effort of the eyes to gaze fixedly at the brilliant
object, accompanied by banishment of all thoughts apart from the
object, usually induces the hypnotic state.
Not a few modern psycho-therapists employ Liébault’s method to induce
hypnosis, though certain modifications of his practice are often
introduced. The patient is usually placed in a comfortable chair and
requested to “think of nothing,” gazing meanwhile into the face, or
at the raised finger, of the operator. The patient is then told in a
soothing voice that his eyelids are heavy, that his limbs feel numb:
“You are getting more and more drowsy. You are falling asleep,” etc. If
this procedure is followed for a minute or two, the desired degree of
“somnambulism” is usually induced.
Patients vary considerably in their susceptibility to suggestion.
Freedom from fear and nervousness are prerequisites to satisfactory
results. This may be effected by frank and friendly preparatory talk,
the operator’s aim being to create a sympathetic atmosphere, while at
the same time conveying the impression that he has complete command
of the situation, and is fully able to give the help sought by the
subject. This is the procedure employed by Dr. A. M. Hutchison, the
very successful English psycho-therapist.
There is a tendency on the part of nervous patients to contract
the muscles, clench the jaw, assuming unconsciously an attitude of
rigidity. Just the opposite condition, says Hutchison, is required.
There must first be complete relaxation of all the muscles, as well as
of the mind. This may be accomplished by allowing the mind to dwell
upon pleasant memories or lovely scenes, followed by an effort to
make the mind as near a blank as possible. Gazing steadfastly at the
upraised finger of the operator is conducive to this condition. The
fixed gaze serves only as a preliminary to complete auto-suggestion,
without which a deeper condition of hypnosis cannot be produced. The
operator in the last analysis merely aids the subject in hypnotizing
himself, the hypnosis being merely a means to an end, which is the
reception of suggestions by the subconscious mind, suitable to the
disease, or bad habit, for which treatment is sought.
As said previously, it is now well established that the mind is dual in
character, one part being conscious and the other subconscious. Under
hypnosis the conscious mind is for the time being distracted, or in
a state of abeyance. In this condition the subconscious mind is open
to suggestions from the operator. The suggestions being intended for
the welfare of the subject, they are passively received, retained, and
automatically acted upon by the individual, unconsciously.
In cases where the patient is the victim of a bad habit, the operator
merely needs to suggest to the subconscious mind that the habit
is extremely detrimental to the health or worldly success of the
patient, and must be got rid of. The suggestions act directly upon
the subconscious mind, and when later the patient is tempted to
continue the objectionable habit, there comes into play a restraining
impulse--an inhibition from the subconscious part of the mind. In some
cases repulsion takes the place of the former desire.
Mental suggestion is successfully employed not only in the eradication
of bad habits, but also in the treatment of many diseases, among which
may be mentioned certain forms of insomnia, constipation, obsessions,
early melancholia, paralysis, St. Vitus’ dance. It is also effective
in such cases as stammering, writer’s cramp, stage-fright, and as a
substitute for gas in dentistry, or for chloroform, etc., in some other
instances where an anaesthetic would ordinarily be employed.
Professor Wetterstrand is speaking from long experience when he
declares that “the palliative effect of suggestion as a soporific and
anodyne remedy in serious and incurable diseases, such as tuberculosis,
cancer, etc., is far too little appreciated.” The great value of
suggestion in every day medical practice as “an aperient, an appetizer,
a soporific, and a means of regulating the digestion, the secretions
and the menstrual discharge” was pointed out by Professor Forel, and,
as he remarked, “is far too little realized.” The method has proved
of great value in the treatment of alcoholism, addiction to morphia,
neuralgia and hysteria.
Some persons are not hypnotizable. Just what the percentage is who
are obdurate to hypnosis is not definitely known. Much depends on the
skill and personality of the operator. Experienced psycho-therapists
have stated that only about one person in every ten reaches the state
of deep sleep. On the other hand, Dr. Liébault, who hypnotized a great
number of persons of all ages and occupations, and of both sexes, found
that of 1,000 persons subjected by him to hypnotic experiments, 460
fell into a deep trance, 223 into a very deep trance, 129 into a deep
hypnosis, 30 into a light hypnosis, 100 into a light trance, and 26
remained refractory. As a rule only a certain degree of drowsiness is
required for successful medical treatment.
Generally speaking, no one can be hypnotized against his will. And it
should be noted particularly here that no one can ever be made to do
anything under hypnosis that would be against his nature or his moral
convictions when he was awake. A teetotaller cannot be made to drink
alcoholic liquor, or even water that he is told is wine or whiskey;
an honest man cannot be made to steal; a peaceful man to fight. A
strong emotion--a deep-seated love or hatred--has more power over the
subconscious mind than has any hypnotic suggestion. So considered,
“Trilby,” for example, is based on a pure absurdity--no influence of
Svengali’s could ever have made Trilby give up her love for little
Billee.
Hutchison finds that “the best subject for hypnosis is the person
who has the intelligence to understand what is asked of him and the
ability to concentrate his mind upon it.” Intelligent co-operation is a
desideratum. It is all but impossible, in most cases, to hypnotize an
insane person or an imbecile.
Professor Wetterstrand, a famous psychiatrist and hypnotist of
Stockholm, utilizes a method of hypnosis which, it is claimed,
is effective in about 97 per cent of the cases that come before
him--numbering at the time 3,148 persons. He employs what may, perhaps,
justly be called _mass hypnosis_. Instead of the usual procedure of
handling one patient at a time, he “hypnotizes his patients wholesale.”
He uses two large rooms, heavily carpeted and curtained, to prevent
noise and resonance. Both rooms are furnished with sofas, reclining
chairs, and also with easy chairs for patients who do not wish to
recline.
Beginning his work with patients who have been hypnotized on previous
occasions, he goes from one patient to another, merely whispering
suggestions into each patient’s ear, quite inaudible to the other
patients. Those thus hypnotized at the beginning he soon awakes. By
thus showing that he has full control of the situation, a feeling
of confidence is produced in the waiting newcomers, who have never
before been under this treatment. The very sight of so many hypnotized
persons exercises an hypnotic influence on all present--a form of mass
suggestion. It is then an easy matter to induce the hypnotic sleep even
in those who have come for their first treatment.
In his recent work, “Suggestion and Auto-suggestion,” Prof. Charles
Baudouin has elucidated the new theory of suggestion offered by Emile
Coué, referred to previously.
Coué, as I have already said, seems to have established the fact that
we have considerable power over ourselves through _imagination_,
curative results being obtained without the aid of a second person to
make suggestions. In a sense, the cures are effected by hypnotism,
but the hypnotism is self-hypnotism, auto-suggestion. He holds
that hypnotic suggestion, and the ordinary waking suggestion made
by a second person, are merely different methods of applying
auto-suggestion. The cures are effected by “creative imagination.”
The will in these matters is negative, and must be as far as possible
eliminated. It is obstructive, not creative. If the will and the
imagination are in conflict, the powers of imagination are virtually
nullified. “In a conflict between will and imagination, the power of
imagination is in direct proportion to the square of the will-power,”
declares Coué.
It is very desirable that the patient should have faith in his
physician--faith in the efficacy of his treatment. But, as remarked by
that experienced psycho-therapist, Dr. Albert E. Davis, the patient
must take his share in combating the disease, and then he will
understand that his cure had come through no other source than his own
mind.
To one who has given the matter little or no study, Coué’s famous
formula, “Day by day, in every way, I’m getting better and better,” or
“My pain is passing away,” frequently repeated aloud, may appear to be
a fruitless, not to say foolish, procedure. But there are thousands of
persons who know by experience that the method is in many cases highly
efficient; not only helpful but actually curative. As Dr. Davis well
points out, the message which is uttered is being conveyed to a part
of the mind--the subconscious--“which is incapable of controversial
argument, and constant repetition will have its effect. That mind,
prior to this, has implicitly believed its possessor every time he
said ‘I am very ill.’ Why should it not be convinced, even more by
suggestions which are in conformity with the natural desire to be
strong and healthy?”[3]
[3] Albert E. Davis is Honorary Physician to the Liverpool
Psycho-Therapeutic Clinic, and the author of “Hypnotism and Treatment
by Suggestion”, Fourth Edition, New York, 1923.
Another very interesting development of “creative imagination” is
pointed out in “Sex Antagonism,” by Heape. It is generally believed
among scientists that stories of pre-natal “markings” are mere
superstition, and undoubtedly most of them are fancied resemblances
without connection with any previous experience on the part of
the mother. Nevertheless the instances given by Mr. Heape must be
considered unless they can be disproved. For example, a lizard
dropped from the ceiling upon the naked breast of a pregnant woman.
She declared (_imagined_) that her child would be born with a mark
of a lizard on its breast. It was. Again, a woman’s husband returned
from the war with his face slashed in the form of a cross. The woman
imagined that her expected child would be born with such a disfiguring
slash. The child was born with the marking on its face.
According to this school of thought, it was not _fear_ that the
markings would appear on the child (as is claimed by most persons
who believe in pre-natal markings) that produced the resulting
disfigurement; it was the result of _creative imagination_. For the
woman, the marking, in imagination, had already been made. Had she
taken an opposite attitude, and visualized the face and body of the
infant as perfectly normal, it is most likely that no “birth-mark”
would have been created,--created, as a matter of fact, by the mother
herself.
Wetterstrand, Forel, Krafft-Ebing and others have shown that in
certain individuals redness and swelling of the skin, and even
blistering or ulceration, may be induced by hypnotism. I have
myself witnessed the appearance of a white cross on a woman’s
forearm by auto-suggestion. There can be no doubt that the genuine
cases of “stigmatization”--supposed by the faithful to be the
result of a divine miracle rewarding holiness--are the effect
of auto-suggestion--_imagination_. In all, some 150 cases of
stigmatization have been recorded, the three I am about to mention
having all occurred within the last hundred years. No scientist today
regards the wounds--replicas of the injuries stated to have been
caused by the nails in Jesus’ hands and feet--which appeared in the
hands and feet of Maria von Morll, for example, as “faked.” The same
may be said of the stigmata of Katharine Emmerich and Louise Lateau.
The verdict of science is that these women were hysterical invalids,
not pious impostors. These wounds are, declared Professor Delboeuf, a
psychologist of Liège, “auto-suggestive phenomena resulting from the
intensive concentration of the attention upon the wounds of Christ.”
An equal concentration of the mind on the part of an expectant mother
might well produce, by suggestion, any form of birth-mark on the body
of an unborn infant. At least, there is no positive evidence to the
contrary; although, as remarked above, most of such cases reported are
the result of mere superstitious credulity.
Good health, normality, if _imagined_ to exist, may, within certain
limits (or under certain conditions) be _created_. This at least is
the doctrine of the New Nancy School. That Coué has to his credit many
cures effected by his new methods of auto-suggestion is conceded by
most, if not all, practising psycho-therapists who have investigated
the subject.
Auto-suggestion is founded on “the great law that the subconscious part
of mind governs the physical body, and in its turn is controlled by
reasoned suggestions from the conscious mind.” It is not even necessary
that the suggestions made in the first instance should be true: they
may be quite contrary to fact and apparently opposed to all reason. By
reiteration the desired effect is produced, and they become true. When
a person in pain persists in saying “I have no pain,” or an inveterate
smoker in saying “I have no desire to smoke,” the one is opposed to
sensation and the other to fact. The effect, however, is soon apparent;
the pain lessens, and the desire to smoke is diminished.”[4]
[4] Davis, _Op. cit._, Pages 50-51.
It should not be forgotten, in giving oneself auto-suggestive
treatment, that pain is a _signal_. To remove pain without finding
out what has caused it may be a very dangerous procedure. But as a
temporary measure, or as a means of alleviation of the pain arising
from an affliction already diagnosed and under treatment, it may be of
great value.
Most persons today are not averse to speaking casually of the power
of mind over matter, but when it comes to a practical application of
the principle they are inclined to “side-step.” Yet it is self-evident
that many persons increase their discomforts and ills by brooding over
them. It is equally self-evident that pain and even illness can in many
cases be allayed or eliminated by an opposite course--an affirmation of
well-being, of health and joy.
The basis of “Christian Science” and other mind-healing cults is faith,
and faith cures are not all legendary. None of them is “miraculous.”
Auto-suggestion, _imagination_, working on the subconscious mind,
can accomplish wonders. The task of the scientist is to find out
what are the _limitations_ of these psycho-therapeutic methods of
treatment. The Christian Scientist believes that there are no inherent
limitations--and dies.