Tuesday 24 December 2013

M&M: Nightmare Before Christmas

Dear reader,

did you ever thought about the holidays we celebrate? Easter, Valentines Day, Halloween, Christmas? The animated film “Nightmare Before Christmas” by Tim Burton is just about that!

Jack Skellington is a skinny skeleton in a black-and-white striped suit and the head of Halloween Town, who's people are responsible for Halloween. Jack is sad. For a while now he didn't have fun scaring others and he wants something else. Only he doesn't know what that might be. During a walk he comes to another town: Christmas Town. Everything there is snowy and has a wonderful scent and everybody has fun and is happy. Also there's supposedly somebody huge and red and he brings presents. Jack finds out that this somebody is called “Sandy Claws”. Wonderful!

Jack wants this Christmas, too. He'll be preparing for the next one himself. Three kids, usually out to collect sweets are send by Jack to kidnap Sandy Claws so that Jack can do his job. Although Jack specifically tells the kids not to bring Sandy Claws to Oogie Boogie, that's exactly what they do. Oogie Boogie is the only really mean and scary person in Halloween Town and ready to kill somebody just to be entertained, that's especially true for this oh so great Sandy Claws.

Jack doesn't see any of that coming and everybody is excited. Only Sally is very worried. She's a bit like the Frankenstein monster stitched together and is held captive by her creator, Doctor Finkelstein in his castle. She likes Jack. Jack doesn't quite see that. In a vision she sees Christmas go completely and utterly wrong, so she does everything she can, to stop Jack's plan. Jack doesn't listen to her at all. Christmas goes totally wrong and ends in Jack being shot down with his flying sleigh. Only then does he realise how wrong he was, although he had meant well. Sandy Claws has to come back! Will Jack rescue him and with that Christmas in time? You've got to find out for yourself!

Like many animated films by Tim Burton, “Nightmare Before Christmas" has many songs and it's a kind of musical. The music was written by his permanent partner, the composer Danny Elfman. The latter also was the singing voice for Jack Skellington. Although Danny Elfman does the singing for demos of his songs, his voice is not heard in the films. That's what makes “Nightmare Before Christmas” something special for fans. When I saw the film for the first time, I didn't know Tim Burton as such, I have to admit. I knew his films – in hindsight – but the name got familiar for me only after “Nightmare Before Christmas”. I was lucky to see that film when a professor at uni offered to show it to those willing to come one afternoon before Christmas holidays. Being handicapped myself, I was fascinated with Sally and her body parts stitched together. One scene especially is just brilliant, when she runs away from the castle of the doctor to see Jack. She jumps out of the window. For a moment you almost believe she died from the jump. She's lying there motionless on the ground. But then she moves and stitches one of her arms tight to the rest again in a very resolute way. It's gone loose from the jump.

Jack was a very special character for Danny Elfman at the time the movie was made in 1993. His music career started in about 1972 when he started in the music group formed by his brother Richard Elfman. When Richard wanted to quit, Danny took over the group and it was cut from 20 to just 8 people and went on to be a New Wave/Ska/Punk/Rock Band: Oingo Boingo. They recorded their first album “Only A Lad” in 1980. According to Danny Elfman he still doesn't get it why the young director Tim Burton wanted him of all people to write the music for his first big film “Pee Wee's Big Adventure” in 1985. That's how Danny Elfman got into the film business. He got more and more famous as a film music composer and then it became obvious to him that he couldn't go on with Oingo Boing and composing for film at the same time. Both together were just taking too much time and energy. But how to choose? How should he go on? A very uncertain future for Jack Skellington in the movie as well as Danny Elfman in real life. It was this connection with Jack, not only through writing the lyrics and music, but also on a personal level, which made Danny Elfman want to sing the part of Jack Skellington himself – which he did in the end.

Until next blog,
sarah

Monday 23 December 2013

My Christmas Song "List" 2013

Dear reader,

the "usual" christmas songs are fine for a while for me. I prefer unusual. Here are a couple of songs, which I have and listen to, which are christmassy:

"Christmas Time Will Soon Be Over" by Jack White

I heard it for the first time in the film respectively soundtrack of "Cold Mountain". An upbeat, happy melody, something different from the more usual slow songs. The song tells the story of a group, who will join the band when christmas time will soon be over.

(The video link has the Royal Albatross. Sadly I couldn't find any other video or audio with Jack White, some youtube links are blocked for germany due to some copyright/rights regulations.... sorry about that):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPoJE92yvvM

"Christmas In Hollis" by Run DMC

I learned about this song watching the film "Die Hard". Bruce Willis is in a limousine and is driven from the airport to the building where his wife is having a christmas party with her company, to which he is also invited. He complains that this isn't a christmas song and it does sound more like rap, far away from what we'd associate with sounds and music for christmas. But as the driver points out to Bruce Willis, "This is christmas music!" The text tells the story of someone, who goes for a walk in a park on christmas and seems to see someone with a dog. The dog happens to be a reindeer and it's very sick and the man next to it isn't just somebody, but santa claus.

Here's the music video to the song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR07r0ZMFb8

"The Stowaway" by Murray Gold/performed by Yamit Mamo

"Doctor Who" fans may know this song from the 10th Doctor (David Tennant). You can find it on the soundtrack to the 3rd series. I like it, because it's a happy, dynamic melody. Although the song is a bit sad. The singer tells about a "stowaway" on his ship. Which applies quite well to the Doctor in the episode "Voyage of The Damned", in which this song is played. In this christmas episode he's on the Titanic. The stowaway of the song desperately wants to be with his love on christmas day.

You can listen to the song on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoXF6H_venI

"Christmas Hell" (variaton of "Jingle Bells") by Danny Elfman

Not really a song in a real sense, more a short promo by Danny Elfman, the composer of the music of "Nightmare Before Christmas" with his very own version of "Jingle Bells". More on "Nightmare Before Christmas" later (later as in "in a new blog post", linked to it, now that it's done)... I thought I'll add it here, even though it's not a proper song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcgtOkj9ubU

"White Wine In The Sun" by Tim Minchin

A christmas song? Or more a song for and to his little daughter? Or both? I like Tim Minchin, as you may have guessed from previous entries and I like this song. He's australian and in australia there's no snow on christmas, of course. White is only the wine for him.

In the video he's singing this as an encore, I think during his tour "Ready For This":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iwfLN4K1hA

Do you have christmas songs you like to listen to? If so which ones?

Until next blog,
sarah

Friday 20 December 2013

Postscript: Stop feeling sorry, but be compassionate!

Dear reader,

Susanne was so kind to point me to something very important about my last post: there's a difference between pity and compassion. I want to elaborate on that more now. Many thanks to Lisa as well for the stimulating chat!

For me pity is what I described in my last post. The professor has no arms. In my view, we need arms. She doesn't have arms, so I pity her. But as I already wrote, the professor at least seems to be happy, even without arms! So there is no reason to feel sorry or shocked or whatever for long. She's fine the way she is. It seems to me that pity has a lot to do with assumptions we make. Those assumptions should be tested and if possible lead to action of some kind or another afterwards. A bit like Sherlock Holmes. It would be bad to be stuck in an assumption and that was it.

Compassion is something different. With compassion someone might be shocked or startled at first. For example to learn that I'm missing my right foot. An important next step could be to ask, if or how I needed help. When I explain that I can walk, run and ride a bike fine, it's okay that I have got only one foot. I would need help swimming. Because I have to take off the prosthesis for that. That means that I have to get to the edge of the swimming pool or as close to the sea as possible with the prosthesis on, but then the prosthesis should be away from the water so it doesn't get wet all over. Then when I get out of the water I need the prosthesis back and someone either has to get it for me, or help me get to the prosthesis.

That's important and necessary. Generally speaking the professor and I are fine with our handicap. It's also fine to feel sorry for a moment that we lack arms respectively a foot. The important thing is how to react and deal with that in the longer term. That if we need help, we don't only have people around us who feel sorry for our situation and don't dare helping us or for whatever other reason don't act. When we need help some time, it's important for us to have people around, who understand and help us.

In the social field or among people working in communications there's a word often used: empathy. Recognise and understand what the other person is feeling. That may sometimes mean crying along with them. That's important and right. However it should happen for a limited time only. After that it's important to think it through together how things can go on from there. That's very important. Because if someone is really in a bad situation, that person needs help and not only someone to cry along with them. Even though the saying goes: A sorrow shared is a sorrow halved. It's even better if this sorrow has an end and one can get out of a bad situation easier and faster with others than alone.

Until next blog,
sarah

Stop feeling sorry!

Dear reader,

many people, especially those I meet on the internet, feel sorry when they learn that I was born handicapped. I'm missing my right foot from birth. But, as I keep telling those people all the time: I can walk normally, run, ride a bike with a prosthesis. Still the first reaction from many is, “I'm sorry.” Why anyway? Sometimes I say or write to them that probably they feel more sorry than I ever feel for myself. I was born this way. I don't know any other way. I don't miss my right foot. I never had it, but I always had a prosthesis.

Years ago, during my studies, I had some seminars with a professor with no arms. Although I never dared asking her directly, I assume she doesn't have arms because of Contergan. Once her son was in the seminar and she told us she's got a second son. In one discussion group in a seminar, she told us that she never had the need to put her arm around someone. The reaction of all of us at first certainly was shock. We're so used to hugging someone. Be it as a form of greeting or to comfort. And she has got two sons! Of course would I have the need to hug my sons, comfort them, put my arm around them, and cradle the little kid in my arm. Wouldn't I? And yet she seemed at the very least content with her life. She had said it herself, she never had had the need to put her arm around someone. Why then do I feel sorry for her, that she, especially with her two sons, could and can never put her arms around someone? I think, we're feeling sorry very quickly for others when we see or learn about something that's existing for us or possible for us, but not existing or not possible for them. But what good does it do to feel sorry then? Not at all.

My landlady and friends of my parents, consequently also mine, I guess, told me the other day that she was to give one of her sons money. That money was to come from another person, who didn't give it to her on time for her to give the money to her son on time. So when the son asked her about the money, she had to tell him she didn't have it... and said to him that she was sorry. Talking to me and thinking back about it, she questioned, why she had felt sorry about it. It hadn't been her fault that the other person didn't give the money on time!

Stop feeling sorry for yourself and especially stop feeling sorry for others! That's not helping anybody. When someone is in a bad situation, he or she needs help, not pity. If you want to help and the other person genuinely needs help, help them. That's all you can do. Everything else ends in you feeling sorry and then what? Then you feel bad yourself. That's not helping you or the other person.

Until next blog,
sarah

Saturday 7 December 2013

Efficient Language

Dear reader,

for a long time, I thought that written language should be "neat and tidy". Written to the best of one's knowledge and belief. Exceptions prove the rule and the exception is always the writer: that's me. My exception is, at least in english writing, my K-PAX way of writing. In chats I use full stop and comma as punctuation mark, but don't necessarily start a sentence with a capital letter. Although I do use capitalisation whenever it would be correct to do so in german spelling. In english chats it's easier to stay with use of small letters all the way through. What I hardly ever do in german or english chats is use abbreviations, except when I'm in a hurry and need to write fast, because I'm about to leave. But even then a written-out "bye" is still short enough.

A couple of years back there was an article in the newspapers and online about a student, who had written a whole essay in text shorthand (like "I C U" for "I see you"). The teacher was so shocked by this, that she wanted to remain anonymous. I still don't understand that even today. The teacher, in my opinion, had nothing to do with how the student had written her essay. (Here is an excerpt of the girl's essay for those interested.)

At first I was with many teachers and parents. This shorthand is unacceptable for an essay in school. What I think is really important is to know how to write the right way and adjust the writing to the situation.

Is short hand of that kind a degeneration, which especially in english is close to phonetic spelling, we know from first year students and which we would only accept from those? I'm no longer that sure about it as I had been when I first read of that essay.

I know Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character and therefore should not be a model for one's own, real behaviour or belief and yet:

When Watson gets more and more shorthand messages from Holmes in episode 5 of season 1 of "Elementary", she complains to him about that, "Your abbreviations are becoming borderline indecipherable. I don't know why, because you are obviously capable of being articulate."

Holmes explains to her that, "Language is evolving, Watson, becoming a more efficient version of itself. I love text shorthand. It allows you to convey content and tone without losing velocity."

Is he right, because he's Sherlock Holmes and I like Sherlock Holmes? Or is he right, because he's right? Is he right?

Until next blog,
sarah

Wednesday 4 December 2013

Why I'm not Sherlock Holmes

Dear reader,

I see things others overlook and think about things, others take for granted and think of as common. Some who know my interest in Sherlock Holmes, even start drawing parallels. I know that some admire that I know certain things others do not. On the other hand I'm very clueless about some day to day things others take to be given. Much like Sherlock doesn't even know how the sun, the moon and the earth are related to each other.

I'm currently reading Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes by Maria Konnikova. It was only yesterday that I read a bit on how we judge strangers on an unconscious level to be likable or not based on similarities of person we do know and like or not. Dr. John Watson falls for that unconscious trap in "The Sign of Four", where he meets Mary Morston, who he thinks is beautiful and he likes her instantly. Sherlock Holmes however is aware of those thought processes. Even though Mary Morstan is good looking, he doesn't conclude that she's a nice person, much less an innocent lamb. John thinks of Mary Morstan as a good person right away. Sherlock does notice her physically good looks, but doesn't judge her character in any way based on that for starters. John doesn't know that he has similar looking woman in his mind and projects the positive characteristics of those on to the for now strange Mary Morstan. Maria Konnikova writes that the magic will disappear as soon as you're aware of those processes.

I'm still far away from being like Sherlock Holmes. Although by now I rarely step on stairways that don't work these days. Everything else is too much John Watson still, I noticed. I was at a new orthopaedic technician for my prosthesis. In came an older man, thin, grey, curly hair. In other words: very much like Peter Capaldi, the 12th Doctor, who we'll see from next year on. Too much like him. I noticed how my face got warmer. Oh no! Only when I was out again, I was aware of what had happened. The connection to Peter Capaldi wasn't obvious to me right away. I will continue to like that man still. If he makes me a new good working prosthesis, even better.

Until next blog,
sarah

Saturday 30 November 2013

M&M: Skellig

Dear reader,

as today's M&M post, I want to introduce you to the movie “Skellig.” The film is based on the book by David Almond with the same title. Although it's a children's book, I enjoyed reading it as an adult a lot, too. It's one of the rare books, which are ageless. Like Harry Potter is read and loved by teenagers as well as adults.

The film (so far) is only available in English. It's got English subtitles, too. The book is available in English and German.

The story is about a boy, Michael (Bill Milner), who moves with his parents Dave (John Simm) and Louise (Kelly Macdonald) from a flat in the city to a rotten house further away and that house so needs renovation at least. Michael feels very alone without his friends. His dad is busy renovating and sees his life dream come true. Michael doesn't understand that at all. The baby is born then and has a heart problem. So the mother is away a lot to the hospital, dad sometimes as well. Michael feels even more alone than he felt already.

But he finds a new friend in the girl next door. Mina (Skye Bennett) is her name. She also knows a lot of things, especially considering she doesn't even go to school. Her mother teaches her at home.

Also there's this strange man (Tim Roth) in the garden shed. He seems to be ill and totally lost all his interest in life. All he wants is to be left alone. Michael and Mina however totally thwart those plans. Michael doesn't feel he gets any attention from his parents or that he's able to help them. But maybe he can help that man.

Michael doesn't only get help from Mina. There's also Grace (Edna Doré), an old lady he meets in the hospital. She's constantly walking up and down the hall to keep Arthur away, Arthur-itis. Michael tells her about his sad friend and Grace hands him some of her cod-liver oil pills. Maybe they can help him, too.

For a long time Michael and Mina don't know who this man in the shed is and it takes a while for him to tell them his name at least: Skellig. Once the two of them try to make it more comfortable for him, so they take the jacket off him. That's when they see he's got wings on his back. During their research for creatures with wings, they come across angels, too, of course. Maybe Skellig is an angel? Are human shoulder-blades the last bits or the starting points for wings of highly developed creatures?

One night the father is so desperate with the house and the situation with the baby in the hospital and everything in general, that he decides to just burn the shed. But Skellig is still in there and it takes all of Michael's effort and persuasion, to get him out at the very last second, without the father noticing. He hides Skellig in the forest near by. In doing all that however, Michael burns his hand. Thanks to Michael's and Mina's cockering, Skellig is soon on his way to get better. Then something strange happens: Skellig heals Michael's hand within only a few minutes completely! So when Michael's little baby sister is getting worse, he asks Skellig for help. Surely he can help with her heart problem, after healing Michael's hand. But Skellig is still grumpy.

Will Michael be able to persuade Skellig in time? That's for you to find out and read or watch or both.

And what kind of creature is Skellig? He tells the children that, “I'm something... like you. Something like a bird.” “Something like an angel?”, asks Michael. “Yeah”, says Skellig. “Something like that.” Tim Roth once said in an interview that for him Skellig is an “atheist angel”, an angel who's had enough of all of that, until he meets Michael.

Until next blog,
sarah


Friday 29 November 2013

Let there be Lightman

Dear reader,

part of doing hypnosis and especially hypnotherapy, is to observe the client. Something very important is to look for incongruence. That's when the body contradicts the spoken word. You may have experienced this in your daily life before. Usually, I guess, we get a strange feeling. "Something" isn't quite right. It's when I'm with a friend and ask him if he wants to come over to my flat. His mouth says "yes", but he's shaking his head "no". So which is it now?

A certain Albert Mehrabian did an experiment and found out that if someone is incongruent, we break down his non-verbals and what he says. According to Mehrabian, about 55% is body language as such, 38% is speech (how fast it's said and that kind of thing) and only 7% is what's actually said. This means that when we're in doubt and someone is incongruent, we tend to trust the non-verbals and body language more than the actual talk. Mehrabian found that out in 1971. People still like to quote that study. But they misquote it badly actually. They leave out that his study was for incongruence and say that we trust the words only 7% all the time. That's wrong! I guess this misquoting and misinterpretation happens when people take out of the study what they like and other people quote the people quoting that study. I believe that rather few people actually read the original story, but (mis)quote it all over the internet. That's so sad.

Another person worth mentioning when the talk is about body language, incongruence and lies is Paul Ekman. He's the lead expert on deception and lies. According to Ekman, there are 7 basic emotions, which are the same with every human around the globe. They are:


The pictures above show Tim Roth and the pictures have been made as part of the tv series "Lie To Me", where he plays the deception expert Dr. Cal Lightman. He's modelled after Paul Ekman, who also worked as consultant for the show. So "Lie To Me" isn't just any wanna-be-science show. Much of the science on that show is actually true and really works. FOX, which by now has cancelled LTM in the middle of season 3, has since taken away Paul Ekman's blog where he explains aspects of his science on almost all episodes. There are only a few exceptions, for episodes in which nothing special regarding his science came up. You can still read it here now: http://www.paulekman.com/lie-to-me/

Personally I have so far only read "Why Kids Lie" by Paul Ekman. It's a nice read. Especially I found it interesting that the book was a family project really. Paul started of, then his son took over to write from a child's point of view, including some advice for what parents should be doing or can do. And then his wife, who worked as an attorney, wrote the last chapters.

What fascinates me about body language and lie detection is the aspect of so called micro-expressions. That's very quick expressions you make showing your real emotion and then hide it with another expression. Paul Ekman is better at explaining this, so I'll let him talk here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXm6YbXxSYk
I think it's helpful to know the science of facial expression. Probably we don't need to bring it to perfection to see micro-expressions. Knowing the science of facial expressions as such, does help though. Lightman makes that point at the end of the second episode of season 1. In the pilot episode they get a new staff member, Ria Torres, who is a natural. She can see and correctly read facial expressions, including micro-expressions, without formal training. Lightman seems a bit annoyed by her and teases her quite a bit in that second episode. There are scenes when Torres says nothing, but Lightman reads her face and she shows negative emotions. She pays him back in the final scene when she reads his face. However he shrugs it off. When she calls him a liar, he simply tells her to get used to it. Seeing things is one thing. He tells her that without the science, she's unable to see the whole picture and people get hurt. I have to agree with him, that with the science of it in mind, we get a deeper understanding.

Paul Ekman also created programs to train yourself in recognising facial expressions as well as micro-expressions. If you're interested in those kind of things, check out his website.

One thing about detecting lies: It's a widely accepted myth that liars would break eye contact with you. The idea being that the liar can't stand looking you into the eye for a longer time. Probably for fear of you seeing he's lying. Actually eye contact says nothing about whether someone lies or tells the truth. As Lightman and his colleagues repeatedly state: The important thing is to have a base line. Some sort of reference point which tells you what the person is like in a fairly relaxed state. If you don't know what a person is like in a relatively relaxed state, you're unable to tell anything about him. If he has a twitching hand, even when you're talking small talk, it's likely to be a normal behaviour for him and has nothing to do with nervousness or impatience or anything like that. If that person has calm hands in a small talk situation and the hand twitches when the talk gets to more serious matters, it's likely that something is going on now. But a twitching hand as such means nothing. Similarly, if someone crosses his arms and legs, it doesn't necessarily mean disagreement. Notice what the person is like when you think he's fairly relaxed and telling the truth. Once the person does something else and breaks this behaviour in some general way, these may be signs of holding back informations and/or telling lies.

The british magician, or self-proclaimed "psychological illusionist" Derren Brown makes those points of how to tell a lie in his book "Tricks of the Mind" as well. He also explains a trick/experiment you can do with anybody willing to take part. If you go for the three main sensory systems we have visual, auditory and kinaesthetic. Ask a person five or so questions for each of those sensory systems. They should tell you the truth. It can be really simple questions. Notice how they move their eyes. If you think you know their pattern, you can ask them to tell you a number of things (say five again) and one should be a lie. The lie is when they don't keep their usual pattern of "truth telling", as you established before. Derren Brown makes it seemingly even more interesting and mysterious as he tells the person only to think of the answers and not say them aloud. Here's a video of Derren Brown doing this trick with car salesmen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi2cvop3vbM
Go with Derren and make your choice about which facts are lies. Again: don't just go for eye contact or breaking eye contact. Eye contact or not are no indicators for lies or truths!

The blog title today comes from... you guessed it, Cal Lightman. In episode 2, season 3, we see him having problems starting to write his new book. Instead he procrastinates big time with making beans on toast at 4 a.m. and even sets off the fire alarm when he burns the toast. He's distracted with a video he watched on his laptop. So his daughter Emily comes down to see what's going on. She suggests writing just any sentence. Lightman rejects her first line, so he types into the laptop: "Let there be Lightman." and presents it with his arms stretched in a "ta-da!" kind of fashion. Emily tells him to hire a ghost writer and decides to go to bed again. I love the scenes with the two of them. Sometimes Emily seems much more grown-up than her dad. He often does what he feels like doing, which isn't always appropriate and sometimes even dangerous. See for yourself.

Well, I think that's it for now. My take on body language, truth, lies and those kind of things.

I'll keep you posted! Stay tuned!
Sarah

Saturday 23 November 2013

The Noseless People

Dear reader,

I think there's a reason why the nose is above the mouth. Most of us might notice that especially when they've got a cold. Can't breathe through the nose and we're not really hungry. My guinea pigs, like probably most other animals too, decide whether they can or want to eat something at first by sniffing. If it smells good, they nib a bit, if it taste good, they eat it.

I wonder, whether a good sense of smell plays any part with eating and the body weight of a person. Even if it's relevant, it certainly doesn't come first. But maybe still a little bit somehow? Do bigger people maybe have a worse sense of smell?

Some people definitely seem to not have a good nose. It's better again now. Some years ago even, I had the assumption that especially female teenagers must have taken a bath in spray deodorants or perfume. I had their smell in my nose long after the distance between us was quite big. Awful!

I know that some people are really sensitive to too strong deodorants or perfumes. I don't have that problem myself. Not generally anyway. Some time this year I was shopping. I sensed the smell of a strong perfume of a woman already before I entered the shop. I entered the shop with her and I tried to get out of her way in the shop as much as I could. I have nothing against perfumes, but that was too much. Unfortunately she was right in front of me at the cash register. Unfortunatelier the cue was long and I had to wait accordingly. I'm really, really not sensitive. But this one time I got very sick from that strong smell, which I could not escape. I almost felt like coughing or doing something else that indirectly hinted that something wasn't quite right. But I was polite and didn't do or say anything. I couldn't have taken it a minute longer than I actually had to. I could even sense her smell when I got out of the shop. When I was out, I breathed a couple of times out through my nose. That was really terrible.

The other day I was at the bus station. Next to me was a teenager and she was smoking. Since it rained and there was wind, I ended up getting all the smoke. I don't smoke and with all of my immediate family not smoking either, I'm not used to that smoke. This reached a high point however when the bus came into view: she put out her cigarette, took her spray deodorant out of her pocket and sprayed it all over herself to cover the smell of the cigarette. I was close to tell her something like, “That will not make it any better. Just stop smoking.” But I was too shy and I said nothing. I'm too polite to the noseless people.

Until next blog,
sarah

Thursday 31 October 2013

M&M: Poltergeist

Dear reader,

welcome to another “Movie of the Month! Today: Poltergeist. The film cam out in 1982. Just now I am reminded of „The Exorcist“. But when I thought of horror films I know, the first that came to mind was “Poltergeist“. Apart from the films, there's also a so-called “Poltergeist curse“. More on that later on.

“Poltergeist” is about a family with 3 children. The bird of the youngest daughter, Carol Ann (Heather O’Rourke) dies and is buried in the garden. The brother, Robbie (Oliver Robins) and the older sister, Dana (Dominique Dunne) make a bit of fun about that. In the night Carol Ann sits in front of the gray, static transmitting tv and announces her famous line, “They're here!” There are other strange (for now) harmless things happening in the house. Chairs move by themselves and Carol Ann can slide on the kitchen floor, but fast as if moved by some force. One night a big tornado makes the family wake up and Carol Ann disappears. She's sucked into her wardrobe. But she's not entirely gone. The family can still hear her and talk to her over the tv.

Of course scientists have to come and help the family. The whole thing looks like “Ghost Busters” from the characters, but the atmosphere is scary and intense more like “The Exorcist”. Strange things happen, especially in Carol Ann's room, which the family doesn't dare to enter anymore. The scientists suspect a poltergeist more than a classic haunting for starters. They call upon the help of the medium Tangina Barrons (Zelda Rubinstein) as last resort. Her rescue mission almost goes wrong, they get Carol Ann to the right side just in time. But the strange phenomenon don't stop here. In a thunderstorm night the mother goes out to get help from the neighbours when she slides into the muddy swimming pool, from which dead corpses suddenly appear. The family planned to move anyway. This night was supposed to be the last in the house. But they move to a hotel that very night.

If you don't want to know, why the ghost problems happen, skip the following paragraph. I can't help, but write it, because it's one of my favourite scenes of the film!

In the final stormy night, the father suddenly remembers a remark from his boss, a real estate broker. They planned a new estate and for that they want to move the graveyard. But the company will do it the easy way: they'll only move the headstones. The phenomenons the poor family has to endure, are the revenge of the restless souls buried under their house. So the father goes to his boss and screams, “You moved the cemetery, but you left the bodies, didn't you? You son of a bitch! You left the bodies and you only moved the headstones! You only moved the headstones! Why?! Why?!”

The final scene of the film has the whole family moving into the hotel room. The father stands outside for a bit longer and then follows the others inside, closing the door behind him. Shortly after that he opens the door again, shifts the small tv, which is on wheels, outside the room and closes the door again. A tv truly is the last thing that family needs now.

And now the “Poltergeist curse”: Like so many successful films, there were sequels to “Poltergeist”. But Dominique Dunne, who played the older daughter, never lived for them. She got killed the same year “Poltergeist” came out, killed by her ex-boyfriend. Heather O’Rourke, who played Carol Ann, died in 1988, while shooting “Poltergeist 3”. She died from an acute bowel obstruction, which had also led to a septic shock after bacterial toxins invaded her bloodstream. Which makes Oliver Robins to be the last surviving child actor. William Sampson played in “Poltergeist 2”. He died after complications following a surgery. The actor Julian Beck played in “Poltergeist 2” and died in 1985, two years after being diagnosed with stomach cancer. Curse or not? You decide.

Until next blog,
sarah


Saturday 26 October 2013

Freedom Today

Dear reader,

in a time today where half of the world seems to be on facebook, I see my freedom exactly in not being on facebook. Although I do have a mobile phone (cell phone, for some of my readers) and even one with a land line number, it's the only way to contact me all the time, if you wanted. The only four exceptions are: 1) when I'm taking a shower, 2) I'm out to do some quick shopping or 3) I don't hear my phone, likely because I'm out and listening to too loud music on my ipod or 4) I can't reach it in time.

It's a bit strange that my mobile phone is the best way to contact me instantly of all possible ways. Because I generally don't like phoning that much and I prefer writing or talking to people directly.

Most people, with whom I have communicated or still am communicating using chat programs, have the decency to write me when they're leaving when they're on invisible status. Many people I know, who use that status, have their good reasons for it. I only feel sorry that they're always the one writing to me and I don't have the possibility to be the one to contact them first. I don't know if they're there or not. For all I know, judging by their status, they could just as well be gone or have turned off their computer all together, just as their status suggests they're “off”. Luckily that only happened to me on few occasions.

For me what tops off the invisible status is being online with (hooray!) smartphones all the time now. That way some people are (almost) constantly online with chat programs, but with away status. Considering their status to be true, I don't write to the very most people in that case. Either they're really not on their phone or computer or don't want to be disturbed. So I don't write to them. Which is fine with me. Honestly. It only makes me wonder, why they're online still.

The answer quite possibly is facebook. Half of the world (at least) is on facebook, so I have to be, too. Ever more people have a smartphone and with that a phone that connects them to the internet. So it's the possibility to be online, especially on facebook, where most people are online almost all the time. Or is it not? Panic, when the battery of the smartphone gives up unexpectedly and one is out somewhere without the possibility to recharge. I can't read anymore what others have written to me on facebook! Boohoo! On the wikipedia page on facebook, under the section Criticisms_and_controversies, you'll find a 2013 study on why people quit using facebook. 48% said it was privacy concerns. It is the main reason why I don't even want to register there. Followed by what can be read under reception, that companies fired employers after keeping an eye on employers facebook accounts and firing them for what they posted there. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't need that. 6% of the study on quitters of facebook said that facebook is addictive. Thanks, I'm happy with the internet as addiction already. Whoever wants to get in touch with me, can call me, write me an e-mail or chat with me with a chat program. I do not need to register on a website, to keep in touch with my friends. The real world is still out there, away from screens, where you can see the whole person and do stuff in the real world.

In the first episode of the 11th Doctor in “Doctor Who” (The Eleventh Hour), aliens darken the sun for the humans on earth and prepare to incinerate the earth. The Doctor stands outside and watches the people, who have nothing better to do than taking pictures of the sun or filming it on their cameraphones. The comment of the Doctor to all of that personally makes me very sad, “Oh and here they come. The human race. The end comes, as it was always going to... down a video phone.”
Call me egoistic, arrogant, old fashioned or whatever negative description you can think of. But I myself do not want to be part of a society, in which I have to be on call online always and all the time and even though I write this blog here online, I do not have to record every single tiny bit of my life online. In the episode “The Bells of Saint John” (season 7, episode 7) in a quiet moment, the Doctor describes the situation so far, the way he understands it as follows, “This whole world swimming in Wi-Fi. We're living in a Wi-Fi soup! Suppose something got inside it. Suppose there was something living in the Wi-Fi, harvesting human minds, extracting them. Imagine that. Human souls trapped like flies in the World Wide Web, stuck for ever, crying out for help.” Clara's comment on that, “Isn't that basically Twitter?”

Everybody vanish in the internet. Everyone, register yourself on facebook and twitter. I won't know what's going on for you then, because I'm not registered on either of that. But what the heck. If communication today gets reduced to facebook and twitter, then this here is my good-bye to you. Maybe we'll see each other again when the world stops existing or maybe already when the third world war broke out. I have a hunch neither of that might happen online exclusively.

Until next blog,
sarah

Thursday 24 October 2013

Better Be Many

Dear reader,

before the movie "The Silence of The Lambs" there was the same-titled book by Thomas Harris and before that book was the book "Red Dragon". (The latter being filmed twice, by the way, once in 1986 with the title "Manhunter" and William Petersen as the lead role of the investigator and Brian Cox as Dr. Hannibal Lecter. The movie from 2002 has Edward Norton as the investigator and Anthony Hopkins in his staring role as Dr. Hannibal Lecter.) "Red Dragon" is about the former FBI agent Will Graham. He became famous after helping identifying Lecter as the offender and then catching him.

The former supervisor visits Graham and seeks his help in the brutal murder of two families. He notices that during the intense conversation, Graham uses more and more of the rhythm and syntax of his dialogue partner. Graham doesn't do that intentionally to build a good connection between them, but unconsciously.

I noticed that and it happened to me, too. Once I was at my aunt's in Hamburg for about a week and after two or three days, I noticed, that I was talking in a different way. Back home I was talking my own usual way again.

Budding people of the social field, such as therapists, are told to notice the voice, rhythm, speed and use of words of their clients and adjust their own way of speaking accordingly. It creates sympathy on an unconscious level and a connection between the people talking to each other.

There's this saying that dogs often look like the owner. Which is no surprise, especially if they had been living together already for a long time. Adjusting doesn't only happen on a verbal level, but also with looks or gestures and body posture. Sometimes consciously, more often unconsciously.

Trends are set that way, too. We like a person and we like what he or she is wearing or how they are wearing it, so we start to do as they do. For many years I used to wear my wrist watch with the face on the inner side of my wrist. I had seen Bruce Willis wearing his wrist watch that way in many movies and also Matt Smith in his portrayal of the 11th Doctor in "Doctor Who" in at least two episodes, checks his wrist watch with the face on the inner side of his wrist. For some weeks, also analog to the 11th Doctor, I'm wearing a pocket watch. I don't wear my wrist watch anymore at this moment. No, it's not the owl wrist watch I have bought in april. It's a proper pocket watch with clipper to clip it to the brim of the pocket and a chain. I was especially thinking of Derren Brown and hypnotists generally, of whom you'd almost expect to waggle a pocket watch in front of your eyes to make you go into a trance. So my pocket watch has nothing to do with the Doctor!!!

Such things can work like little lucky charms or nervers. At least they do for me. Wearing a scarf the way Benedict Cumberbatch does as Sherlock Holmes for example. Maybe a purple scarf, purple being Milton Erickson's favourite colour...

David Calof was a student of Milton Erickson. In his audio set "Hypnotic Techniques", he starts by saying that "I'm one of those people, who believe that Ericksonianism died in 1980, when Erickson died and that we're actually in a post Erickson era." So he wouldn't stand here saying he was Ericksonian. Although he had the privileg of studying with him. He isn't Ericksonian. He is Calofian, he supposed. For starters, that's a funny thing to say and maybe a bit arrogant, too. One might argue whether or not Ericksonianism could have been done only by Erickson himself and indeed died with Erickson. The most "absolute" form of it certainly did. Erickson as a human and therapist was unbelievably complex and multilayered. Not one single person alone will completely "get" him and internalise it for themselves. To be like him for the sake of his genius and to act like he did, would only be a copy. Erickson was very creative and revolutionised the psyotherapy and hypnotherapy of his time. It's certainly worth checking out his way of working and how he did things. In the end however, everybody should find their own way of doing therapy. It would be sad, only to be a cheap copy of somebody else. Especially since there isn't just Erickson, who did good works with his approaches. Calof said it, too, that he learned the limitations of Erickson's model. (Sadly, for me anyway, he doesn't go on about what those limitations are. I would like to know, where he thinks the limitations are.)

Also, as much as you as a therapist might prefer one therapy over another or one method within a certain therapy over another, not every person responds to this one method the same positive way. That would be boring for therapists, too, because then they would all only learn this one kind of therapy and then treat everyone this same way and heal and help them that way. That would be boring, wouldn't it? As Betty Alice Erickson, one of Milton Erickson's daughters, put it in an interview with Paul Anwandter, " You can't have a rule of psychotherapy that applies to everyone."

Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "Insist on yourself; never imitate. Your own gift you can present every moment with the cumulative force of a whole life's cultivation; but of the adopted talent of another, you have only an extemporaneous, half possession." That same way we should respect the other person's individuality and not want to be like one single other person. At its worst, we'll be a "cheap copy" quite literally and at best people would still talk about as as some one like xy.

When I was a kid I had a blanket with all sorts of squared samples sewed together. One beautiful, colourful patch work blanket. That's what I wold wish for us all, that we become a colourful patch work person in the things we do, our way of thinking and the way we look. Taking individual aspects of many, different people and utilise them in a useful way. Everything else would be boring, cheap copies. Nobody needs those.

Until next blog,

sarah

Wednesday 2 October 2013

Sleeping fast... if you want it and remember...

Dear reader,

how about this: a night owl writes about how to fall asleep fast. Well, that's me right now, right here! I like the night, because it's quiet, calm and peaceful. The hectic of the day is gone. I get creative a lot of times at night.

Actually much like with my current way of dealing with pain, my fast sleep method is borrowed. It's an idea I heard from Richard Bandler. He says, the problem insomniacs have is that they give themselves bad suggestions. They talk to themselves in their head in a fast and hectic voice ("Talk to themselves in their head? I don't do that!" That's exactly the talking in your head I'm writing about.) and go on about "can't get to sleep" on and on. Of course you're never going to get to sleep that way! It comes close to the old "don't think of a pink elephant". Okay, you may also keep yourself awake thinking about the past or the future or both. Whatever it is, it's no good, because you're keeping yourself awake when you should sleep!

So Bandler's idea is to slow down your inner voice. I don't think I've talked about this to someone face to face yet. It was always online somehow. Lately what I think worked best as an explaination is to remind people of when one person starts yawning, you start yawning, too. So if you talk fast, you can't get to sleep. Slow down your inner voice, make it sleepy and you'll fall asleep with it.

If people say they have trouble falling asleep, I always ask them what's going on in their head. So I don't right away go into "slow down your dialogue". I had one person, who told me that she saw images in her head. Like a movie where she'd "replay" the day or see what would be happening the next day and stuff like that. I told her to slow down the movie. Make it slow motion, like they did with the Matrix movies in the fight scenes. Slow it all down. I don't know if Bandler ever suggested that. I only remember him talking about the dialogue. But it made sense to me to tell her to slow down the movie, if she had pictures in her head.

I sometimes lay in bed late at night and can't get to sleep, mind you. This technique is something that requires discipline. When I can't get to sleep, I don't look at the clock. I know it'll only make it worse. It'll start me going: "Oh my, it's x now. I really have to go to sleep now!" It's useless dialogue, so I don't even go there and don't check on the time. Instead I go: "There you are again. You know what to do." And even with the second sentence, I'll start slowing down. I may even go back to other thoughts I've been thinking, but it'll be slow and maybe a yawn or two as well...

Like with many other NLP techniques, it's all about hitting that point of "Stop it. I want something else." Sometimes it even takes me some time to get to that point. But when I do, I get to sleep quite fast from there on.

Until next blog,
sarah

Friday 27 September 2013

M&M: Takin' Over The Asylum

Dear reader,

something new today, which I hope I'll be able to do once a month: M&M: Movie of the Month. With that I want to introduce you to a movie, I know and like.

To start this of: the mini series „Takin' Over The Asylum“. This is a series of 6 episodes, each about 50 minutes long, which came on tv in 1994 and brought fame to the two main actors Ken Stott and David Tennant. I didn't know Ken Stott before and looking back I only watched a couple of movies he was in, which are listed on his imdb.com profile. Because I was and am watching lots of Doctor Who, I certainly knew David Tennant very well. Although it was quite amusing and strange seeing him that young: 23 years old.

The characters and story:

One of the most important persons is Eddie, played by Ken Stott. Eddie is salesman for double glazing windows and he's got an alcohol problem. His passion is being a radio D.J. Right at the beginning of the series, he gets fired from his job as a D.J. however. Although he is offered a new job at the St. Jude's hospital, which once had a radio station and they want to start it again. Eddie agrees to help and can tell his colleagues, who are standing with him after the termination notification that, “He didnae dump me. I've been promoted, if you must know.” The colleagues want to know where he will work. He tells them, St. Jude's. They start laughing. Eddie asks them why they are laughing. “St. Jude's is a loony bin!”

When Eddie goes to St. Jude's the first time, he meets Campbell (David Tennant). He shows Eddie the radio station, which looks more like a storeroom. Campbell tells Eddie that the station was working once. But rumour has it that the next day 122 patients went to their shrinks saying they were hearing voices. They prescribed about £ 6000 worth of major tranquillisers, before they realised it was the radio and the radio station was closed after that. Campbell doesn't believe it though. He can't believe 122 patients could not be watching television at the same time.

Campbell is a manic-depressive (bipolar). Although in the series we only see him manic and totally enthusiastic about the radio station. Eddie teaches him to be a D.J. and Campbell finds not only his job, but quite possibly his calling, too. One time Eddie asks Campbell, “Are you sure you're not manic?” Campbell: “I'm inspired, Eddie!” Eddie: “What's the difference?” Campbell: “Inspired is when you think you can do anything. Manic is when you know it.”

Rosalie (Ruth McCabe) is compulsive. She often makes lists and is cleaning all sorts of things. When Eddie arrives at the radio station the second time, Campbell and Rosalie have cleaned it all up and put things in order in just one day. “Much as I hate to take advantage of someone's illness, but she did insist”, says Campbell. Eddie asks, if they really did all of that in just one day. “Don't you wish, you were manic?”, asks Campbell. Eventually Eddie appoints Rosalie to be the station manager. One time there's a health day. Since the radio station needs a new mixer and that needs financing, the group decides to use that day to do some fund-raising. Who's organising the day? Rosalie, of course, who finally can use her lists for some good and pretty much assigns everyone at the station with tasks to do and hands them lists for what to do exactly.

Francine (Katy Murphy) is very depressed and also self harms. Eddie once sees her putting out a cigarette on her arm. “I couldnae find an ashtray”, she says about that. Later on she does use an ashtray Eddie hands her. Francine, too, gets training from Eddie to D.J. Francine and Eddie like each other and become friends.

Another important role for the radio station is with Fergus (Angus Macfadyen). He's a schizophrenic electrical engineer, who helps the group with everything electronical. Every now and then he'd run away from the station to come back some time later the same day. At first he just goes away, because he's bored. Over the course of the series however he runs away in more or less spectacular ways to get a new mixer for the radio station and other stuff.

Apart from the hospital there are some more people worth mentioning: Eddie's grandmother (Elizabeth Spriggs), with whom he's living together. She's from Lithuania and has her very own thoughts about Eddie's future. For example she's not that sad when he tells her that he got fired from his D.J. job. And at the age of 38, he should please marry soon! When Eddie tells her, he just didn't find the right one yet, his grandma replies with, “You think I find the right one? You think your mother find the right one? All blue eyes and itchy feet. We find misery. But God put us on this Earth to suffer. That's how He invent Stalin.”

And then there are also the colleagues and the boss of the sales company. All highly motivated. Eddie keeps that job with more luck than brains for that job and it's a real miracle that he becomes the “salesman of the month”. But sometimes one may wonder if Eddie's colleagues should be the ones in the mental hospital and the group from there should be the ones out.

In the series there are some quite serious psychiatric illnesses shown. Personally I think, they totally do not stultify it though, but do it with the appropriate seriousness for the illnesses and yet in a funny way. For me the group of the radio station is very likeable, especially with and because of their quirks, each of the illnesses brings with them.

Until next blog,
sarah


Thursday 29 August 2013

Stairway to observation: it's elementary

Dear reader,

Tuesday, a couple of weeks ago. I'm visiting a friend of mine at work. As I make my way up from the underground, I step on the first step of the escalator. It's broken. I have to walk up. Darn.

Wednesday that same week. I'm again visiting that friend of mine at work. As I make my way up from the underground, I step on the first step of the escalator. It's still broken. I have to walk up again. Stupid!

 Thursday that same week. I'm again visiting that friend of mine at work. I am finally remembering that maybe the escalator is still broken. I peek around the corner to check if the lights are green. They're red. I walk on it to take the stairs. I finally learned.

Months ago I spend many days watching both the series "Sherlock" and "Elementary". As Sherlock likes to say, "You see, but you don't observe." The first step to see and observe and deduce the way Sherlock Holmes does is to actively engage in seeing things.

 Last week on Thursday. I'm visiting that friend of mine at work. I peek around the corner to check the lights of the escalators. They're red. It's broken again. I wonder what all the old people at my friend's work are doing. The escalators are broken a lot of times at that underground station. As I walk alone to the stairs, I'm thinking about Sherlock Holmes, too. Thank you, Sherlock.

Until next blog,
sarah

Wednesday 7 August 2013

Ventriloquists good - non-ventriloquists evil

Dear reader,

granted, there are some strange ventriloquists out there. Edgar Bergen for example in his later years gave Charlie McCarthy his own room. Candice Bergen, the daughter of Edgar Bergen, was certainly frustrated when she was younger and Charlie McCarthy was called to be her big brother. Al Steven writes in his book „Ventriloquism: Art, Craft, Profession“, that Paul Winchell had massive problems with his mother. That went so far that he was admitted to a psychiatric hospital at one point. He ran away from there one night to go to the graveyard to hallucinate both his figures Jerry Mahoney and Knucklehead Smiff at his mother's grave. (Stevens takes that from Paul Winchell's autobiography „Winch“, which I haven't read though. So all I can do is repeat what Stevens wrote.)

Al Stevens also writes, rightly so, I think, that there is surely a certain percentage more or less crazy vents out there. But this percentage of crazy also exists in other professions. The thought that vents are crazy therefore is not more often or less than with other people. The media, especially films, however like to spread the image of this crazy vent or the murderous vent figure. It's similar to that image of hypnotists. Many people fear hypnotists, though for other reasons. The thing with hypnotists though is that people believe the hypnotists totally take away their own free will.

More common than the truly crazy vent you find them in films. Be it portrayed by Jay Johnson as “Chuck Campbell” in “Soap”, for whom Bob is as real as a real human. “Soap” isn't quite normal anyway. The series is about two sisters, Mary Campbell and Jessica Tate and their families. Both families are not normal. A vent truly seeing his figure as just that would not have fit in there. Billy Chrystal for example played another brother of the family and was gay. Today this is hardly a drama at all, but around 1980, when the series was shot, it was quite a big thing. One of my favourite scenes is the one with Chuck, Bob and the fridge.

Chuck and Bob's first meeting with both families is also something worth watching for sure. And the scene with Bob as mindreader shows in a very beautiful way that Chuck is not alone in accepting Bob as an independent person. I just love the look Mary gives her husband Burt.


There's no video of it online, but in “Night Court, the episode “The Next Voice You Hear” (season 4, episode 1) Ronn Lucas plays a vent, who talks all right, but without moving his lips and without a figure. He refuses to talk in his normal voice. A successful act, he says, depends on the personality of the figure and the rapport between he and the ventriloquist. He has honed his skills, but he hasn't yet found the perfect other character. Until he does, he refuses to speak as himself.

He's also in the „L.A. Law“ episode „Dummy Dearest“ (season 3, episode 6). As Kenny Petersen, who was kept in a trunk of a car for a couple of days when he was 3 years old, he doesn't speak himself. But he does have a figure, who speaks for him instead. It's not more patient with him than the rest of the people around Kenny, who think him crazy for walking around with a puppet all the time. Again there are no scenes of that episode on the internet to show you here.

I only mention this film here now, because even with the clichee of the crazy ventriloquist, I still think they're quite witty and not the typical “murderous insane”, like many others.

As a vent you're more than just an actor. You're audience, when the figure is active, and yet at the same time you're actor, because you're playing the figure. That's something other actors don't get to do. Either they're in the role or not. Only vents can be actor and audience at the same time.

I'm very fascinated with Ronn Lucas' role in „L.A. Law“ because of that. It goes a bit further than the „usual“ 2 roles of a vent, because on one hand (no pun intended) he has to play a depressed, intimidated vent and at the same time his figure is totally raging against almost everybody he comes across... including Kenny Petersen himself. One especially touching scene is at the end of that episode as Kenny is crouched with his figure in the corner of a room full of records and the figure is totally hitting on him how it makes no sense anymore to speak for him and that he's a lost case. The scene is even more beautiful (as much as such a scene can be beautiful that is) to watch, if you keep in mind that Ronn Lucas doesn't just have no text, but the very angry figure is speaking and that's without twitching lips on Lucas' part or otherwise showing that he's at the same time speaking for a very emotional figure. Scenes like that seem simple. Someone talks and someone else does not. In fact however they're much more complicated as they seem, similar to a magic trick. The art of ventriloquism is that the text of the figure are there right away. It's not something that's added later on by someone speaking the lines. That's the true art. I miss good ventriloquists. The films today are all animated and the actors just speak the lines. Or you help yourself with letting the actor speak the lines “off camera”, invisible for the camera.

As a ventriloquist you can be creative and you have a unbelievably complex task in being two persons at the same time. Also it gives the ventriloquist the possibility to say things which are impossible to say otherwise (because society doesn't like them) or things you don't dare saying (because you're shy). The figures give you the freedom to come out, really say anything and still be shy and withdrawn themselves. Ventriloquism is the safest way to let oneself go and “let out some steam”. Ventriloquists aren't crazy or evil. Crazy are only the people, who just take it all in all the time and don't let it out. Something like that makes people ill and crazy in the long run, I think.

Until next blog,
sarah

Monday 5 August 2013

Good morning!

Dear reader,

how many different meanings can the seemingly simple statement of "Good morning!" have?

When Bilbo Baggins wishes the wizard Gandalf that in "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey", instead of an expected greeting back, he gets a stream of interpretation possibilities.

"What do you mean? Do you wish me a good morning? Or do you mean that it is a good morning whether I want it or not? Or perhaps you mean to say that you feel good on this particular morning? Or are you simply stating that this is a morning to be good on?"

Confusion or surprise can be one way to induce a trance. Even moreso because Bilbo didn't expect those questions. Your fault, Bilbo. Precise wording and language is very important and sometimes defining.

Bilbo, smart as he is, answers to the many questions Gandalf has, with what I would think to be the only possible answer that makes sense, "All of them at once, I suppose."

Until next blog,
sarah

Sunday 4 August 2013

Hey, do you mind if I tell you a story?

Dear reader,

in the episode "The Rings of Akhaten" (Season 7, Episode 7) of Doctor Who, the Doctor wants to know more about Clara, whom he has met before in previous episodes and who seems somewhat odd. In this episode now they are on a planet where a girl, Merry Galel, is about to be sacrificed to an angry god. The Doctor doesn't give up on people easily, so he is desperate to find ways to help Merry Galel, too. They prepared her for the sacrifice from when she was very small and that's why she knows all the stories and songs of her people. But when she is about to be sacrificed, the Doctor comes and tells her something, which we all should be hearing more often, especially when we are desperate:

Hey, do you mind if I tell you a story? One you might not have heard. All the elements in your body were forged many many millions of years ago in the heart of a faraway star that exploded and died. That explosion scattered those elements across the desolations of deep space. After so, so many millions of years, these elements came together to form new stars and new planets. And on and on it went. The elements came together and burst apart, forming shoes and ships and sealing wax and cabbages and kings. Until, eventually, they came together to make you. You are unique in the universe. There is only one Merry Galel. And there will never be another. Getting rid of that existence isn't a sacrifice, it's a waste!

Until next blog,
sarah

Thursday 1 August 2013

Thinner too: with savvy - weight and see

Dear reader,

you wanted to be thin and cancelled your fitness studio membership, because you don't need it anyway. Now some food for thought to add to that.

I read once that hypnosis is the best way and one of the best possibilities to achieve that. I have no idea how much of what I did to be thin was in a sense “hypnosis” or not. Regardless of that I can see certain parallels between hypnosis and successfully being thin. Many people believe that hypnosis makes you lose your will. That's not correct. Apart from the conscious and the unconscious, there's also a third very important instance, which is often called “the critical factor”. It's the connection between the conscious and the unconscious. The unconscious holds beliefs. The critical factor checks incoming new information with the already existing beliefs. If they are identical, they go into the unconscious, if not they're blocked out and stay in the conscious mind only.

Hypnosis only works when the critical factor is levelled down. Only then are phenomenon like an immobile (cataleptic) hand possible. Of course the person can still move their hand. But at that moment the barriers of the critical factor are at least that much down so what the hypnotist is saying, that the hand is impossible to move and cataleptic, is accepted to be true. This is enhanced even further through a chain of autosuggestion (“I notice that I can't move my hand. So it must be true that I can't move it. Therefore I can't move it.”) and the hand is immobilised, although under normal circumstances, the hand would be possible to move fully and without difficulty.

The critical factor is the reason why (New Year's) resolutions are so difficult to do and to keep doing them. The critical factor finds many more confirmations for the old habits and beliefs. So they are kept in the end. So for being thin you have to use tricks like a hypnotist.

The most important of all is:

1. State goals in the positive!

State your goals in the positive towards what you want. Remember: if you state it in the negative with „not“, you'll have the negative still in your head. That's not helpful in the long run. I'm warning you, if you state in the negative, you'll have an elephant in your head and he's so big, he'll crush all the positive intentions.

Our brain works best with pictures. That's why they keep saying in order to remember a string of things, to connect them to a story. I find a whole story to be difficult and complicated. I find it better to work with other methods and build yourself a memory palace. Do you know the film “The Machinist”? In it Christian Bale is a man, who's tormented with problems he repressed, so he almost doesn't eat at all, has massive sleeping problems and looks just the way someone would in that situation. It certainly wasn't healthy for him as an actor to lose that much weight for that role. Here are two picture of it:




It really does not look healthy at all. But it gives your mind very clear images of what you want. Only watch out, please, please, not to go just that far really. It should only be images, with which to work on your own goal. To have such a physique is sick and very damaging for you in the long run! Nevertheless: overdo it with the images, which you use, be it in your head or those you pick to remind you. (The 10th Doctor in “Doctor Who”, David Tennant, is probably more of a role model for being thin, and very likeable, too. Although at least one of his companions described him as “just a long streak of nothing. You know, alien nothing.” Right she is.)

2. Find pictures (real or in the head), which are exaggerating, to be clear on what you want.

(Once someone wrote to me on the internet and wanted help with hypnosis so I would make her breasts bigger. I told her that when I wanted to be thinner, I was thinking about Christian Bale's role in The Machinist and advised to her to do the same. So she searched for a picture of a woman with breasts too big, printed it out and used that image then. A couple of weeks later she wrote to me and told me that her breasts actually had gotten bigger. I don't know if what she said was correct. It seemed so to me. In the end the most important thing is, that she was happy and she seemed to be to me.)

Sometimes I tricked myself and picked a bit wider cloths to wear, which wouldn't be so tight on my body. That gives a feeling of being thin. At least thinner for those cloths, which with more weight would have been tighter. Skinny jeans on the other hand sometimes are quite comfortable and make your thighs be a bit tighter than wider jeans would when you sit down.

Once again English seems to be even more extreme, once you start playing with words. To "lose weight" is, if you're saying it out loud, very close to "loose wait". (Not tight waiting, ey?) In English I like to ask then: Waiting for what? But even in German I don't think it's a good choice of words for the wish of “losing weight”. Nobody likes to lose something. You have to find the words that fit best for yourself. In the end all I can do is make you aware that different words also have diverse meanings that come with them.

Also don't underestimate the support from outside. If a child is big and should lose weight, it's best to make it a family project. It's not helping the child if the family keeps eating fastfood as the child is supposed to eat healthy food.
Two “tricks” I still use now and then are the following: often we mistake thirst for hunger and eat something. It can often help to instead first drink a good amount. In the evening it can also help, at a certain time of hour, to go and brush your teeth. As you know, after that you shouldn't eat anymore. So I only drink unsweetened tea or water then.

Until next blog,
sarah

Friday 26 July 2013

Thinner - the easy part: the body

Dear reader,

so now the post some have been waiting for for a long time and for which the last posts have been sort of to prepare for. Some thoughts on how I lost weight a couple of years ago.

Some time around 2002 I wanted to lose weight. At first I thought of going to the fitness center. But then I saw the well well-conditioned men in front of my minds eye and me, the short, untrained girl among all of them? Hardly. But I wasn't happy with my belly. I wanted definitely to have a thinner belly and that was the beginning of all.

1. The absolute and definite thought of change.

Some dream of changing "the world". This big planet as a whole. It's too big a project, I'm telling you. Just as bad as a blank "I want to be thin." So something else is important, too

2. The thought of only changing one definied part.

But more on thoughts and the mind in my next post. The way I see it, that's in fact the even more important and more powerful part of the whole thing.

So I wanted to lose weight without going to the fitness center. I decided on push-ups and something that seems generally to be called crunches. I started with 10 push-ups as you know them. Then do the crunches to relax the arms. That's lying on your back, legs bent, feet on the ground. Now for example lift the left leg a bit so that the left knee and the right ellbow can touch and vice versa. So it's touching crossed knees and ellbows. Just as a variation to the "normal" lifting your head. Do 10 of those each side. (I always did left ellbow right knee, then right ellbow left knee and again left ellbow right knee.) Then to relax the belly I did so called "woman push-ups". That means you're on your knees, feet bent in the air (and crossed at the ankles is the most comfortable, I think). These are easier and even untrained I can do at least 15 of them easily. Then again go on your back and do the "normal" crunches": legs bent, feet on the ground and lift your head and shoulders just up.

For the arms what I did "back then" when we still had birds and bird grit, I once filled up two small plastic bottles with the grit and used them as dumbbells. I don't do that anymore these days. It's easy to do exercises with that when you're just sitting in front of the tv. Apropos of nothing.

About the legs: a really easy exercise can be done sitting, too. Put both feet on the ground. Then lift one. Just a tiny bit and tense up the leg. Imagine you have weights on your ankle, which pull down the leg. Do 10 to 15 of those, just as you please and then switch to the other leg. That's something that can be done again apropos of nothing, like at work or when you're having a coffee with a friend or when you're at the bus stop waiting for the bus to arrive. But it's important to do all the exercises I mentioned here on a regular basis! Going through them once takes no time at all. So doing them once a day or at least every second day should be really easy.


There's always a lot of talk about doing lots of sports and being active. You don't necessarily have to do that as such. I didn't do that, apart from the exercises I mentioned here, which I don't do on a regular basis anymore these days. It starts with little things such as going the stairs instead of taking the escalator or elevator. With that alone you're already more active. Or just stand up and walk around while on the phone. Especially these days where practically all phones (mobile phones anyway) are wireless, that's no problem anymore.

Recently I found juggling for myself again, after I started it for a bit in 2011 and taught myself quite fast to juggle with 2 balls and then stopped doing it until a couple of months ago. My next long term goal would be to juggle 4 balls. Also I found so called contact juggling to do. That's juggling, but not throwing the ball, instead it's always in contact (hence the name) with the body. There are all sorts of quite impressive contact juggling videos on youtube both tutorials and simply to watch and enjoy. Some of them are very meditating and relaxing to watch. As is doing it. ;-)

A lot of people often suggest to go jogging. Jogging isn't my thing. Never interested me really. Althought there's this thing of combining jogging and juggling, which is called "joggling". There's even sort of marathons where you are allowed to drop a ball only so many times and you're running and juggling with others. Find your own sports to do. I am fascinated with juggling. Sitting on the bed or on the sofa it's easy to do apropos of nothing. It's good for coordination, a nice arm exercise and it's proved that activities that involve using both hands also help to (re)connect both of the brain hemispheres better (again). Which is also, by the way, why it helps with depression and increases the creativity! Which is not to say that I want you all to start learning to juggle now. Everybody should find their own activity they enjoy to be active. I for one like juggling at this moment with great fun and it's easy to carry 2 balls in your bag. That's my thing at the moment.

That's it for now. Being thinner the first, the easy part: the body. Next time will be the harder part: the brain and the mind!

Until next blog,
sarah

Sunday 2 June 2013

Try Not To Try

Dear reader,

there is one thing that I want to write about as a sort of preparation for the topic that I know, some are waiting to read about already.

Today I want to write about the word "try" or "trying". There is a scene in Star Wars, in which Master Yoda is with young Luke Skywalker. They're in this moorland or whatever you call it. Luke's spaceship has gone under there and Yoda told him to take it out with the help of the force only, through the power of the mind. Luke says he'll try. To which Yoda says the famous words of, "Do or do not. There is no try."

Many people know, how I think about "try". If someone doesn't know and uses the word "try" in my presence, I usually tell Master Yoda says hi. Some don't think this is a bad word. They say, "if you don't know if the thing will work or not, you can well say you're trying." Can you? Either it works or it doesn't. If you try and it works, you made it. If you try and fail, you failed. In both cases this is a clearer position than "trying". I think, Master Yoda is right. Either the thing will work out one way or another: positive or negative. To "try" however is an uncertain position in between those and in fact unnecessary. Say, there's a person, who's uncertain if something will work or not, for whatever reason. Even then this person doesn't need to try. It would be far better, especially because of that uncertainty, to get at it with "I'll do it." If something isn't quite right yet and it will fail because of that, then it will fail anyway. A bit more self-confidence, please! A positive attitude works much to make something to well.

To try something means resistance, that something is difficult. Yes, to dare something new can be difficult. I still stick to it: if you have a positive attitude to go with this thing, you have a better chance of succeeding. And something that is bound to fail, will also fail with the best of positive attitudes. So there is no reason to anticipate failure in any way. Lately I told people of the pink elephant and said to them, "If your thoughts are negative, you'll have the pink elephant in your mind, and you don't want that, do you?" (Tag question, by the way! See my last post.)

I practically deleted "try" of my vocabulary. There would be only one exception, in which I would use that word very consciously and where it would be highly effective. If you want that something doesn't work. I'd especially suggest that in hypnosis. For example if you aim for the arm to be stuck and can't be moved, catalepsy, I might say, "Try in vain to move your arm."

While we're on hypnosis, one more thing about the topic of failure in the context of therapy and generally difficult goals: a therapy means work and relapses. Sometimes it doesn't quite work as the therapist and especially the patient wish. Or good resolutions like being thinner or quitting smoking and similar things seem totally destroyed with the first bigger meal or the first cigarette after some time without one. I personally don't have the qualification to do therapy, so I can't give therapies. But I would urge each therapist to anticipate relapses and talk about that in therapy early on. A paradox? First I write about not using the word "try" and now I suggest explicitly talking about failure or rather relapses in therapy before they happen? Yes! Absolutely! Say, someone is depressed. There can be days on which the person feels bad. This happens to not depressed people, too. If the therapist doesn't talk about the possibility of bad days, the person could feel like a complete failure. It would be better to talk about the bad days explicitly and make them part of the therapy process, "You will feel bad on one or two days." What happens, if the person some day feels bad then? Well, it's okay then. The therapist said, I would feel bad one or two days. No problem. What if the therapy ends and the patient is not depressed anymore and didn't have bad days? Even better! The person can be proud, because s/he is better than even the therapist seemed to have thought, who said there will be one or two bad days. The simple anticipation of bad days gives the whole thing a different, a positive view!

By the way, the irish writer Samuel Beckett said the following about failure, "Try again. Fail again. Fail better."

Until next blog,

sarah