Classifying
Yesterday I posted about the media’s notion that hypnosis is responsible for a new brand of thievery. Several hypnotists went to bat for the noble hypnotic profession and lobbied that the thefts were not done using hypnosis.
Well enter Derren Brown into the consciousness of this blog. Thanks to Breki Tomsason who passed along a video and his opinion, we can see how this type of thievery may work.
For those who do not read the comments, here is the Derren Brown video:
I understand the Derren can be a bit controversial, but let’s stay on topic. In the name of clearing the notion that such thievery is not hypnosis, what would you say this is? NLP? Distraction? Confusion? In other words, what would you tell others (when they ask, and ask they do) is the method of the crime? How would you say it is different from hypnosis? (Please note I am not saying it was hypnosis, I just want to know your thoughts).
March 27th, 2008 at 9:03 am
(The video isn’t coming up for me, by the way. Is it something that only works on a Windows machine?)
Fast-talking con artists have been around since the invention of language, I suspect. From the brief pieces of the security-cam video that I’ve seen, I’d tell a client that this is not hypnosis because:
There is no establishment of rapport between the robber and the cashier
The cashier, accounts say, is either unsure what happened or remembers nothing
I would explain to the client that hypnosis is a process that occurs between the two of us, or internally in the case of self-hypnosis. It starts with rapport, that sense of connectedness that we get as we talk, and is a clear, guided process of focus and concentration during which the client’s mind hears and accepts suggestion.
What I see on the video looks to me like someone getting confused and losing track of what they’re doing. That’s a loss of focus and concentration — the opposite of hypnosis. Con artists have been inducing that state in people to bilk them out of money for thousands of years. This example is nothing new.
<MR>
March 27th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Thanks Michael. I am not sure why the video is not coming up. I am using a Mac and have checked it on another machine (Safari and Firefox). It is just the standard embedding from Youtube. Anyone else having problems?
Great explanation.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Well, in the Derren Brown video, there is an obvious sense of rapport. Note how Derren takes a step back and the guy follows him to keep at a similar distance.
Then also listen to the words he’s using: “You’re happy to give that to me”, when asking if it’s okay to ask him these questions. The handshake after he’s asked the questions is a handshake interrupt, causing even more confusion.
There’s another youtube video up there, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybmOlQRuaYM - which describes the method better than I’ve done here. I don’t entirely agree with all of it, but most of it is a good analysis.
Oh, and the name is Tomasson - I misspelled it in my previous comments
March 28th, 2008 at 6:19 am
Breki,
Thanks for the analysis video. Interesting. So, a couple of questions - so would you say this is more NLP as opposed to hypnosis? Also, what do you not agree with in the analysis?
Ellie
March 28th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Yeah, this is definitely closer to NLP and “manipulation” than a typical hypnotic trance. Then again, it’s an area where the borders between the two blur, and really depends on your take on whether hypnosis is a state or non-state.
What I’m not sure about is whether the handing of the bottle is an anchor or not. I mean; it makes sense for it to be one, and it might very well work as one, but I think Derren is using it as a way of enhancing what’s already a very confusing situation. When somebody asks you to hold something for them, you’re automatically placed in a state of anticipating “he needs to do something that requires both hands”. Derren, however, interrupts this pattern before it’s even started by asking “Can I have your watch?” and reaching for it before he’s even let go of the bottle properly.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I see! The bottle had really seemed like an anchor, but I see your point. I think the word “cheers” is one, though.
March 29th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Also, the “could you” in the beginning of the “Could you hold this for me” puts the man in an expectant state, he’s already performed two services (guiding and holding a bottle), so he’s in a “giving” state of mind, so to speak.
… or at least; that’s how I interpret it.