03 - About Trance

Remember when I said I was going to try to piss you off? Well, as promised, here we go. (Please bear with me, we’re going to mutilate this butterfly so we can rebuild it, stronger.)

Put brutally - trance is the Santa Claus of hypnosis. These imaginative concepts exist only because of their cultural context. Similar to the myth of a man wearing a red hat bestowing trinkets on us overnight, if we believe in trance, we attribute similar evidence of increased suggestibility and phenomena to its objective existence. Much in the same way, someone fixated on their lack of existence during a winter celebration is likely to ruin your fun without contributing anything useful.

William Kroger, a pioneer in the field of clinical hypnosis, puts it another way.

Most people refer to it as a ‘trance.’ It’s not a ‘trance.’ To me, that term is like fingernails scratching on a chalkboard. That’s the most ridiculous term for it. [Hypnosis] is a state of increased awareness. If you’re more aware, whatever you hear is going to sink in better. If it sinks in better, you get a better response, whether it’s hitting a golf ball or having an erection.

Yapko, Michael D; Yapko, Michael D.. Trancework: An Introduction to the Practice of Clinical Hypnosis (p. 121). (Function). Kindle Edition.

Here are a few things we know for sure about trance:

Definitions change by the context, year and researcher.
While there are neurological correlates, they aren’t required for a hypnotic response.
Individuals subjectively experience trance-like effects without said correlates.
If you really want to know if your subject is actually in trance, MRI machines start at a mere $225,000.

Trance isn’t important because of its (alleged and mostly disproven) requirement for response. Trance is important because it is fun, and a major draw of doing this in the first place. You’re probably not learning hypnosis for its clinical effects. Given that we’re in a recreational setting, we can mercilessly bend the rules. Most subjects expect some degree of trance before responding hypnotically, and there’s no reason to ruin their (or your) playful fascination.

Evidence of Trance

Wait - didn’t you just tell me trance was essentially bullshit?

I did.

But its only bullshit in its original form. We don’t see evidence of a discrete altered state of consciousness associated with increased hypnotic response. But we do see a bunch of other neat things happening during hypnosis on the neurological level that can’t be explained away as mere folklore or role play.

We see EEG activity that indicates hypnosis has an effect on the way memory is encoded, pain perception, as well as the ability to hallucinate.
There’s some evidence of a disruption of control processes, based on Hilgard’s dissociated control theory. (Original paper here, my notes here.) While Hilgard has passed, research continues.
While neuroscience continues to investigate, we can say without reasonable doubt that subjects aren’t simply ‘faking’ their response.
We can see activity changes in the mid dorsolateral prefrontal cortex associated with feelings of volition. Reducing activity here either through rTMS (vibrating the shit out of it with magnets) or a few drinks decreases reports of volition.

A lot of people equate the “trance isn’t real” argument to “hypnosis isn’t real.” This is largely misleading. There are certainly interesting mechanisms at play when we engage with hypnosis. Reducing it down to trance being a precursor to suggestibility is just far too simple.

A Recreational Understanding of Trance

With research and a modern understanding of hypnosis coming forth after the 1970s, it’s understandable that trance has fallen out of favor. Some street hypnotists prefer to work without it as its cultural expectations often get in the way of clear communication. Trance, even when subjectively measured, has almost no correlation with therapeutic benefit. Stage hypnosis, on the other hand, while it sometimes uses trance, the produced responses are from compliance and social pressure. (See Trancework, p24 for that last one.)

This leaves us with recreational hypnosis. Trance is not only a component of recreational hypnosis, but a major draw. It’s the essence of the sauce and mystery of hypnosis.

Unlike in research, definitions don’t need to be clear or measurable, and it’s entirely fine for them to be subjective. Take your pick:

Trance is a state of heightened suggestibility. (Did they respond? They were in trance.)
Trance is a state of absorption and reduced peripheral awareness. (Did they feel as if they were in flow? They were in trance.)
Trance is a feeling of entrancement and dissociation. (Did responses feel automatic, like they were watching them happen? They were in trance.)
You can attribute it to correlates and just assume they’re happening without the fMRI. (I realize that link provides information contrary to my views. Please hold both of them in the back of your mind.)
Trance is a flow state. (Did they feel like they were in flow, or experience time constriction or dilation? They were in trance.)

Trance as Hypnotic Response

While I’d like you to keep a recreational definition in mind for trance, as it focuses on the fun and experience, we can do better. We can look to the writing of Ernest Rossi, Sheila Rossi, and Milton Erickson in the book Hypnotic Realities.

…suggestions leading to the sort of behaviors exhibited by hypnotized individuals can also be effectively used in the absence of any induction of hypnosis… One interpretation of this observation, to which a small number of modern investigators have ascribed, is that hypnosis is not only unnecessary for the production of hypnotic behavior, but is also actually an unnecessary concept. This interpretation leads to the position there is no hypnosis as a state. However, one alternative to this position… is that all bonafide responses to suggestions are associated, ipso facto, with a hypnotic or trance state. From this standpoint there is no longer any distinction between “waking” and “hypnotic” suggestions… To respond adequately to a suggestion is to be hypnotized. To put it a little differently… one cannot respond adequately to a suggestion without first, or at the same time, developing a hypnotic trance.

- Ernest Rossi Et al. - Hypnotic Realities

Here’s a summary of signs of trance development:

Physical Signs: Muscle rigidity (catalepsy), minimal movement, slowed reflexes (blinking, swallowing), pupil changes, slower pulse, eye closure
Mental Changes: Objective and literal thought, feeling distant yet attentive, sounding zonked
Subjective Experience: Comfort, relaxation, feelin’ good after trance
Spontaneous Phenomena: Amnesia, anesthesia, time distortion

You can see the full table in the in the book, available on archive.org.

Strengthening trance, while optional, is as simple as highlighting these changes as you see them occur. When you’re done with this guide, if you want to start delving in to Ericksonian styles, I recommend The Induction Of Hypnosis: An Ericksonian Elicitation Approach. It’s more straightforward and forthcoming than Hypnotic Realities.

Trance Depth

The concept of hypnotic depth pervades through the history of research on hypnosis. Academically, this can be subjectively analyzed, is generally not correlated to any degree of response, and has mostly fallen out of favor. However, it would be wasteful to disregard its value in our context. Here’s a scale you can use if you plan on exploring trance-centric themes.

For erotic hypnosis and other recreational hypnosis, I suggest that you use the Wiseguy Scale. It has three levels:

Not Hypnotized Yet.

Deep Enough.

Too Deep.

Wiseman, Mark. Mind Play (p. 89). Kindle Edition.

If there’s anything I’d like you to take away from this document - it’s this. If your subject is having trouble responding to a suggestion, it’s not a problem with trance depth. Ask them what’s happening, break down what you’d like them to do in to components, and put the individual phenomena back together to approximate the experience you’re trying to create. Getting something to work 80% is a lot more fun than 0%.

Making Trance Real

In addition, here’s a few more things worth noting, so you don’t shoot yourself or your partner in the foot:

It’s normal for feelings of entrancement, as well as the amount of focus and absorption, to fluctuate through the session.
It’s unlikely your thoughts will come to a dead stop. Most subjects think all the way through their sessions, and that’s normal!
Dissociation generally helps things feel more trance-y. A great way to encourage this is through a technique called fractionation, which you can explore after you’ve had some practice.
Erickson would regularly suggest dreaming. You can use this if you need another way to let your partner know they’re doing fine if their mind wanders.
Don’t assume automatic compliance from someone when they’re in trance.
Don’t let trance definitions, or ambiguity as to whether or not they’re in trance, get in the way of you or your subject having fun.
It’s perfectly fine to work without trance.

Additional Resources

Hypnotic Realities - While it gets into the sauce and tends to avoid clear definitions, it’s an interesting read. You can supplement it with my book notes. As it’s out of print, it may be difficult to procure your own copy. Archive.org has one here.
The Induction Of Hypnosis: An Ericksonian Elicitation Approach - An approachable way to get started in Ericksonian hypnosis.
What The Hell is Trance - I’ve written more about trance in the subject’s guide. I’m just tired of redefining it as every hypnotist and their pet Tamagotchi seems to have their own unique way of explaining a primarily subjective experience.