sleepingirl
patreon
The Milton Model: Part Three
🕑 Added 2020-09-11 19:32:58 +0000 UTCIn parts one and two of this series of articles, we explored a foundation to where the Milton Model of NLP came from as well as some useful background knowledge to better understand the way it approaches hypnosis. NLP looks at its methods from a linguistic lens that can often be fairly convoluted, including grammar diagrams and obtuse discussions of language that may or may not hold up when studied with a critical eye. This can be fairly prohibitive of understanding its core methods, especially when it comes to attempting to learn about the patterns of language that it purports to have distilled from Milton Erickson’s practice. In this article, we will directly discuss how NLP looks at hypnosis as a practice, apply it to hypnokink, and explore the infamous language patterns it teaches.
Relation to the Meta Model
One of the easiest ways to conceptualize the Milton Model is something we’ve mentioned in previous parts of this series: it is at least in some part a reflection of the Meta Model. One way of thinking of the Meta Model’s thesis is, “People represent their world through language and can’t help but do so incompletely because of a) the way we view things and b) the way we talk. It’s helpful to clarify to improve communication and give people a more rich worldview.” The Milton Model might say, “Purposefully representing the world incompletely through language is conducive to achieving hypnotic trance, which can give people a more rich worldview.”
The difficulty here is that trying to boil down any singular part of NLP is complicated, perhaps characteristically so. Realistically, these core ideas are only partially descriptive of these models, and NLP literature will often beat around the bush in trying to fully define them. While it can be frustrating, it is helpful to conceptualize these parts of NLP -- and NLP as a whole -- as being complex frameworks that serve a variety of purposes. It is the purposes that give them any structure rather than the actual contents. The highest “chunk” of purpose of NLP is (or was originally) to help people make changes (it being repurposed for sales, pick-up art, or anything else notwithstanding). When we boil that down to the purpose of the Milton Model, and especially for use in hypnokink, we are effectively looking at how to analyze language in order to better use it to do what we want in hypnotic trance.
The therapeutic goals of both the Meta and Milton Models are the same: bring someone into deeper contact with parts of themselves that they are not aware of, whether that is resources, memories, or experiences. The Meta Model does this in a “top-down” way where it says to bring things more into focus to create clarity, while the Milton Model does this in a “bottom-up” way where it says to create fuzziness in order to connect someone to a productive trance. This all sounds rather arcane and obscure, so let’s try to parse what any of this actually means.
NLP’s view of trance
Bandler and Grinder assert in their early study of Erickson that Erickson’s method of trance involved three steps, taken verbatim from “Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D.” volume I:
- “Pacing and distraction of the dominant (language) hemisphere;
- Utilization of the dominant hemisphere, language processing which occurs below the level of awareness;
- Accessing of the non-dominant hemisphere.”
We can parse this sort of outdated technobabble as a different metaphor -- the metaphor for the conscious and unconscious mind (of which Bandler and Grinder note that it is borrowed from Erickson). In this context, they say to get the conscious mind thinking in the same direction as the hypnotist is speaking and distract it, and then utilize the resources of the unconscious mind.
What does that last part mean? Both Erickson and NLP assert that aspects of deep trance work happen within the unconscious mind. If we strip away the metaphor, we can frame this as things happening outside of conscious awareness. For example, when the subject feels as though they aren’t taking action and doing what is suggested of them, it’s merely happening to them, or when memories and experiences that the subject isn’t consciously thinking about influence trance. This isn’t strictly a rule; plenty happens inside of hypnosis that subjects can be aware of, and it’s important to impart that knowledge to our partners because this can be a difficult assumption to surpass if someone is expecting to be unaware in specific ways.
Another way that we can look at this is that we have different capabilities in different states of mind. On a very simple level, when we are in the zone with work or cooking or some other activity, we are able to focus in a different way on those tasks. Bandler’s view of hypnosis is that we have different “patterns” for all of the things we do, and they are all analogous to different kinds of trances. Even if you don’t want to entertain that sort of broad assumption, it’s helpful to consider that we go through different patterns of trance when we engage intimately in different ways. Not every trance is the same; we feel and respond distinctly in different situations. Because our “patterns” are different from how we are when we are “awake,” we think and behave differently and have access to different conscious or unconscious processes and skills. It’s not uncommon for subjects to feel like they visualize more vividly, have spontaneous flashbacks, feel focus more or less intently, or any number of other changes when they are in hypnosis (which can vary person-to-person and based on circumstances).
Generalizations, Deletions, Distortions
In our discussions about the Meta Model, we learned that NLP codifies certain aspects of the way we communicate. One way that it does this is by emphasizing how when we talk, we almost always represent information (and our map/worldview) in an incomplete way. It breaks this down into generalizing information, deleting information, and distorting information. To recap, generalizing something might sound like, “Sorry I’m always late” -- the person is making the experience so general that they don’t represent when that’s not true. Deleting something might sound like, “I’m nervous” -- where it’s unclear what the person is nervous about. Distorting something might sound like, “People are going to judge me” -- assumptions are being made about the person’s actions and what response a group of people in supposed agreement will think.
The Milton Model says that when using hypnotic language, the key is not to specify and clarify language as the Meta Model is intended to do, but to go the other direction and get more general, more deletive, more distorted. When NLP’s founders studied Erickson, what they claimed to see was that he used language in a more vague way. They inferred from this that the extra processing required to parse this language was conducive to trance. This is sometimes described as moving someone to a higher pattern or different frame of thought (having to think about the statement, consciously or unconsciously -- see also meta states of thought).
For an example, a hypnotist might say, “I learned that it’s easy to go into a deep trance if you want it in a certain way.” Let’s break this down.
- “I learned…” presupposes that the knowledge you are about to impart comes from a different source, with the implication that it was from an authority, giving it more weight
- “It’s easy to go into a deep trance if you…” implies there is a direct causality between the next thing you are going to say and going into trance
- “Go into a deep trance” is an embedded phrase that works as a hypnotic suggestion on its own, especially if given a subtle tone marker
- “Want it in a certain way” is an ambiguous descriptor; it is easy to parse this as “the way I’m feeling right now”
Generalizations, deletions, and distortions are a “chunk” of these models as a whole, and are often further chunked down into the specific language patterns that NLP says to look for. While we specified the exact verbiage of the Meta Model and will do so with the Milton Model as well, it is not strictly necessary to memorize these patterns in order to be an effective hypnotist. They should serve as examples and as a sort of guide, but it might be more helpful to stay at a sort of mid-range level and more broadly think in terms of, “How can I communicate in a way that causes my partner to process parts of my speech in different ways? How can I be ambiguous and cause them to make assumptions that I’m implying?” This is one area where the conscious/unconscious mind metaphor can be very helpful -- it is an easy framework to think in; “Which part of them would process what, and which parts might they be processing without thinking about it?”
Deep/Surface Structure
We talked briefly about NLP’s concept of deep structure and surface structure in discussion of the Meta Model; how when we talk, there is often a lot that is implied (deep structure) instead of directly said (surface structure). For example, in the statement, “They went to the store,” there is an implication that the person is going from somewhere, that it happened in the past, and possibly that they wanted to buy something. The Meta Model’s goal is to explicitly clarify the surface structure and discover the deep structure.
From the perspective of hypnotic language and the Milton Model, NLP says to look at your suggestions and think about the implications that you are or are not making in order to use them to your advantage. In order to effectively generalize, delete, and distort information for hypnotic interactions, the surface structure of the statement should be vague in a way that allows your subject to find their own meaning (deep structure) behind it.
Going back to the concept of ambiguity, Bandler and Grinder says that ambiguity happens when one surface structure has many different interpretations. Almost every sentence taken out of context has this quality -- “I am going to hypnotize you” could imply that this is going to happen now or later and through a variety of methods or taking a variety of forms. Context can serve to clarify -- perhaps the hypnotist is looking deeply into the subject’s eyes or is holding a pocketwatch, or they just finished negotiation in preparation for a scene. Additionally, during a normal conversation, it’s common to ask for context when it’s wanted, but within a hypnotic interaction, this is usually not the case, so sometimes that processing happens differently.
Transderivational Search
The term “transderivational search” used within the context of hypnosis comes from NLP -- while colloquially in the hypnokink community it often refers to the “surprise” moment during a pattern interrupt, it came from the Milton Model and means something a little bit different. In this context, it refers to the theoretical process that happens when a subject is attempting to find the meaning of a statement on a conscious or unconscious level. Essentially, NLP says it is the process of trying to discern the deep structure of a statement from its surface structure.
For example, if you say to your partner, “How deep do you want to go?”, they have to parse on some level that there is a presupposition that they will go into trance -- NLP says that that internal action is a transderivational search. They might consciously realize the implication, or they might simply make the assumption a part of their worldview for the interaction (“I’m going to go into trance”). In hypnokink, we often get a thrill when someone is intentionally and consensually using fun language and we notice it, so there is an added bonus there. And of course we can encourage that kind of reaction in our partners if they initially find recognition distracting.
Bandler and Grinder call this a transformation -- the initial surface structure of the utterance is transformed within the mind of the listener to glean meaning from it. We understand in hypnosis that the conscious process of looking internally is conducive to trance but it is equally interesting to consider the unconscious process as useful here. It is not just a transformation of the message, but within the model of NLP that sees language as a likeness of how we view the world, it is a transformation of perspective and “map.” A hypnotist suggesting something with generalization/deletion/distortion such as, “Good bimbos babble their thoughts” causes the subject to internally restructure in order to incorporate the meaning of the statement. “Bimbos” is a generalized statement that the subject will likely relate to mean themselves, and in order to be a “good” one (who made that classification?), they have to perform in a certain way.
Translating NLP-Speak to Hypnokink
All of this being said, let’s think about what this means for our hypnokink practice. We began this trilogy of articles by emphasizing that almost everything we read about how hypnosis works is theory, to some degree, and NLP is (extremely) no exception to that. Conscious and unconscious mind, the idea of looking internally or from different frames of reference, parsing the purported surface or depths of language in hypnotic ways. We are brains trying to analyze brains, and a lot of this we do via subjective practice and anecdotes. Our ability to do experiments in any scientific way is limited (so is NLP’s), and the kind of hypnosis we do as kinksters is rather distinct from the kind of hypnosis that researchers are interested in.
It is important to learn about how NLP presents its information -- even if it does so haughtily and claims to be objective when it isn’t -- because the hypnokink community is inundated with it, whether we are aware of it or not. Being able to identify what came from where is important when we are trying to think critically about what matters in hypnosis. As we strive to be “good hypnotists,” we should be able to stretch our worldview to be able to work within lots of different frameworks -- like NLP -- while at the same time understanding that these are all, effectively, metaphors.
When we break this down and think about having a good hypnosis scene with a partner, the most important thing is that we have an enjoyable, connective, intense experience. NLP wants to help people, or when it’s convoluted it wants to manipulate people. We have to reframe this: we aren’t looking to “unlock the unconscious” to solve problems, we are looking to discover the depths of our partners to fulfil desires.
It is not about taking what NLP says literally or copying the exact language patterns that it teaches. Even in “Patterns I,” Bandler and Grinder say not to replicate Erickson directly but moreso use its tools to become more in tune with the way that we naturally talk. Frankly, a lot of people who use “NLP” do so poorly because they sound like a caricature of Bandler or Erickson. Avoid this trap by thinking about what you want out of hypnokink and use your own voice; think about your intimate language with your partners and strive to communicate in a way that is both hypnotic and genuine. NLP of course affords us the ability to do this in a less direct way, but it is not necessarily about being covert. It is about finding what already exists in the way that you represent yourself, the way that you learn about your partner, and emphasizing that.
Language Patterns
What follows are the language patterns first identified by the Meta Model as generalizations/deletions/distortions but utilized for hypnotic suggestion as per the Milton Model. The list of Milton Model language patterns is more extensive than what the Meta Model puts forth initially, so we’ve broken this section into two parts: the inversion of the Meta Model and the additions of other linguistic artifacts and techniques that are added afterwards. Think of these as examples and ways to analyze your own speech -- many of these small definitions can be expanded upon extensively.
Generalizations
Universal Quantifiers
Using words like “always” or “every” in order to imply that there aren’t exceptions to the statement.
Examples:
- “You can always decide whether you’d like to share parts of your experience with me.”
- “Every time you notice yourself making the action to pay attention, it becomes less and less conscious.”
Modal Operators of Necessity of Probability
Words such as “must,” “can,” “should,” “will,” and their inverses, “mustn’t,” “can’t,” “shouldn’t,” or “won’t” create an assumption that something is needed or not needed.
Examples:
- “You don’t have to do anything special to feel controlled.”
- “I just need to think about it in the right way and you automatically respond.”
Deletions
Lack of Referential Index
Generalized groupings such as “they” or “people” don’t give clarity to who is the topic of the experience. This is often used to make the subject identify with the statement in an indirect way.
Examples:
- “A lot of people find that this is a really effective way to put someone into trance.”
- “Helpless toys tend to lose themselves in daydreams.”
Comparative Deletion
The quality of something is compared without identifying what it’s being compared to, therefore the evaluation happens relative to what the subject processes.
Examples:
- “Are you noticing yourself feeling weaker?”
- “That’s better now, isn’t it?”
Unspecified Verb
The process by which the thing or person makes an action is unclear -- a verb that doesn’t describe a solidly measurable action. This causes the subject to fill in the blanks for themselves.
Examples:
- “All you need is a slight shift to surrender, and your mind can make that change now.”
- “Can you imagine how it will feel when I finally turn you into a happy little puppy?”
Nominalization
This is a noun that doesn’t represent a physical “thing” and it can’t be, for example, put in a wheelbarrow. It is abstract; it can’t be physically touched, standardized, or qualified. Attempting to process it means the subject will have to produce qualities that come from their own internal assumptions or experiences.
Examples:
- “You can feel my control over you.”
- “It’s like a darkness over your mind, seeping in.”
Distortions
Mind Reading
Leading statements with, “I know” or otherwise implying you know what someone is thinking is an example of mind reading. Keeping this consistent with your knowledge of the subject and situation makes this so you don’t have to say how or why you know the information, but that is also an option.
Examples:
- “I know how badly you want to go deep for me.”
- “It’s obvious that you’re starting to feel it.”
Lost Performative
A statement about the value of something is made, but the source of that judgment is ambiguous. Oftentimes, this can sound authoritative.
Examples:
- “It’s good to obey.”
- “We know that it’s easier to enjoy an experience when we let ourselves.”
Cause and Effect
An implication is made that a particular action or process results in something specific. We do this via explanation using connection words like “if/then,” “because,” “makes,” or “causes.” This is a very important part of hypnotic language, and doesn’t have to be objectively true, but is more effective when they are believable.
Examples:
- “Don’t you feel that little thrill when you look into my eyes?”
- “You’re already starting to go into trance just because you’re letting my words into your head.”
Complex Equivalence
Words like “means,” “because,” and “equals” can signify equating two ideas that don’t necessarily relate to each other. It is distinct from cause and effect only in that that is about action or behavior and this is about concepts, but both are similarly useful hypnotic tools.
Examples:
- “I can see the muscle form around your eyes softening; you’re starting to give in.”
- “You’re just a horny pet because you want to please me so badly.”
Presupposition
One part of a suggestion (in its deep structure) must be assumed to be true in order to parse the statement as a whole. There are lots of different ways that things can be presupposed, which we will go into in a separate article.
Examples:
- “Maybe you aren’t excited because I haven’t conditioned you into wanting it yet.”
- “As you go a little bit deeper for me, can you figure out which part of your mind is going to relax first?”
Other Parts
Tag Question
A suggestive statement is turned into a question by “tagging on” a word or phrase such as, “right?” or “isn’t it?” This can signal that you’re looking for a response -- verbal or nonverbal -- and serve to further your yes set or get agreement. This is a very basic look at a complex and rich technique.
Examples:
- “Feeling all bubbly, aren’t you, bimbo?”
- “It’s so sweet to submit, right?”
Double Bind
Giving a choice where both options are desirable outcomes, usually in a “this or that” statement. Often this is combined with presuppositions so that there is an illusion of choice while the actual intent of the message is parsed as true. This is a simplification of the concept of double binds -- we go into much greater detail in the article dedicated to them.
Examples:
- “Do you want to go deep into trance right now, or would you rather I tease you a little more first?”
- “Maybe my voice makes you focus more deeply, or maybe it causes you to fuzz out and lose yourself.”
Embedded Commands
A suggestion within a suggestion; usually a phrase that serves a purpose on its own within another one, often marked by a subtle change in tone or body language, but not necessarily. To some degree, this can be thought of as either the true message of the statement or an additional one, all wrapped in packaging.
Examples:
- “I love the way you listen to me; it makes me feel like you’re eager to surrender to me.”
- “I’m so happy you realized you want to go deep into trance.”
Conversational Postulate
These are questions that on the surface appear to necessitate a response but in human interaction almost never do -- they function as instruction or suggestion instead.
Examples:
- “Can you do me a favor and watch this crystal as I twirl it in front of your eyes?”
- “Do you think you can listen a little differently so you can hear my words in a deeper part of you?”
Extended Quote
This is a technique similar to nested storytelling in which the hypnotist might talk about someone and narrate their quote while the person in the story does the same. It can be confusing and cause the subject to shift frames of reference in different ways.
Examples:
- “I was talking to a friend of mine about hypnosis, and they said, ‘I learned an interesting thing about trance when a hypnotist told me, “I always tell my subjects that they can find different kinds of depth when they shift focus on different parts of themselves,”’ and so I always remember that when I start doing hypnosis.”
Selectional Restriction
When an inanimate object is personified.
Examples:
- “Are your eyes getting more and more obsessed with that spiral?”
- “I bet your brain is crying out in ecstasy at my attention.”
Factive (Awareness) Predicates
A type of statement that uses the idea of becoming aware of something to presume that it is real or the truth.
Examples:
- “You must be noticing that your breathing has changed.”
- “Did you realize that I was going to make you feel so good?”
In Conclusion
Thus ends our overview of the core of the Milton Model. Since NLP is a study of the language we use, very much of our hypnotic patter already contains these elements, and it is important that we remember that this is simply one way that we can stretch our perspectives in terms of how we approach hypnosis with our partners. There are more specific methodologies involved in the Milton Model and especially ways to expand on some of its concepts and language patterns, which we will explore in depth in later articles. For now, try to see where you can identify these patterns -- both linguistic and conceptual -- in the hypnosis you do with your partners.
Bibliography
Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1975). Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. (Vol. I). Cupertino, CA: Meta Publications.
Bandler, R. (2008). Guide to Trance-formation: How to Harness the Power of Hypnosis to Ignite Effortless and Lasting Change. Deerfield Beach, FL: Health Communications, Inc.
Landsiedel, S. (n.d.). Milton Model. Retrieved September 11, 2020, from https://www.landsiedel.com/en/nlp-library/milton-model.html
