The greatest Old Chestnut of them all

The Human Bridge.

We see it here, we see it there, we see it everywhere, but what does it mean? In the context in which we see it, usually a stage hypnotists show, the implication is that it is some magnificent feat facilitated by "hypnosis".

Is this true? 

I have presented the trick many hundreds of times. It is useful for several reasons. Firstly because, as noted, it makes an impression. Secondly because, as I shall demonstrate in my next statement, it leverages critical insights into the nature of hypnotic behaviour. Thirdly, and leveraging that point: nobody to perform this stunt ever needs to be hypnotised!  In fact, for many years now I have generally reserved the routine only for lightly or non-hypnotised volunteers.

None of the models shown here, photographed in my studio, were hypnotised in any way, sense or form. Theres no ambiguity about that. No wriggle room for those of you who would say "...ah but you did hypnotise them accidentally..." (or other such lame rationalisations), they simply lay down, apply the trick (which I shall come to below) and I take out the middle chair. Moreover, to be boringly pedantic in covering the possible interpretations or excuses used by those who insist that this stunt "proves" anything, I should add that, although any digital photo of quality has to be processed these images are not "photo-shopped" in the sense of deceptive editing. What you see is what people can do, normally.

 

Legal Note.

One version of the routine culminates in someone standing on the volunteer. As I explain in my book "The Art and Secrets of Stage Hypnotism", this proves absolutely nothing about the "power of hypnosis" but does pose a physical hazard in the form of potential for internal injury. Consequently in terms of the UK Home Office guidelines on the presentation of stage hypnotism, which I helped draft, this practice is forbidden. Absolutely. It is not, as some people say, "illegal", it breaks no laws, but it does breach the terms of any authorization that may be issued by a local licensing authority for demonstrations under the 1952 Hypnotism Act. Which means that its prohibition is supported by that law in the context of any public presentation that consitiutes "hypnotism" as defined in section 6 of the act. I can state that, even before this came into effect, I never once nor would I present this form of the routine. Although that law does not apply to private presentations and most instances of that stunt we see today are in other countries where the laws may differ, I personally regard people performing such an action in any setting highly objectionable. 

Terminology.

The routine is often referred to as a demonstration of "catalepsy". This is a profound misuse of a misunderstood word. Profound because it indicates the profundity of the misusers ignorance in the midst of their trying to sound clever! Nothing could be a more elegant, simple, parsimonious indicator of a persons level of knowledge of the theory, history and practice of hypnotism than their misuse of the word "catalepsy".  There is no "catalepsy" involved in the Human Bridge routine. It is unfortunate that even the UK Home Offiice guidelines use the phrase, although in the sense of citing it as the expression used by many hypnotists, albeit incorrectly.

The word "catalepsy" originated in the wake of work by Jean Martin Charcot at the Saltpetrier in Paris. One of the features he, and others, noticed in hypnotised people was referred to as "cerea fluctibilitus", or "waxy flexibility". I emphasise that, "flexibility". The term "catalepsy" was subsequently borrowed from its prior use to refer to similar muscular effects exhibited by animals in a semi or unconscious states of shock in response to a startle reflex. Milton H. Erickson used "catalepsy" in this sense, a "waxy flexibility" or cerea fluctibilitus, which he also referred to as a "well balanced tonic state". A condition in which the muscles in a limb, particularly a hand or finger, are so poised in equivalent tension that they balance each other perfectly. Like the springs on a well-balanced cantilever lamp-stand. In this condition, a persons fingers, hands or arms even may be moved into various positions and will stay there automatically, hovering bizarrely. This can be induced in a number of ways. The antecedence is any process in which elective oversight and action within the limb to be affected is blocked or suspended. The person experiencing it does not need to be hypnotised. On the contrary, they may be invited to witness the effect and be amused by it themselves. Then when they want it to stop they simply make any voluntary action. But it can often develop in the process of hypnotising someone and hence its association.

So, "catalepsy" does not refer to an induced rigidity but a type of flexibility. It does not arise as a uniquely hypnotic effect and although hypnotised people often show it, it is by no means to be assumed that they will, nor any indication that they are necessarily hypnotised. Thirdly, whoever misuses the term to refer to a suggested rigidity has either a) never witnessed it or b) don't know the term for it. If it is "a" they are either inexperienced or unobservant. If it is "b" they are ignorant of the background to their topic.

Incidentally, to present the Human Bridge does not require suggested or induced or any form of rigidity. Moreover, the participant does not need to be especially athletic or strong and it does not depend upon tension in the back. Unless someone does that stupid thing of placing a weight (such as someone standing) on the participant their back need not be subjected to any unusual stress. Neither do you need to be slim. Put it this way, the measure, broadly, of whether you can perform the Human Bridge is whether you can walk unaided.

Legitimate Presentation Style.

When a magician or illusionist presents such a trick as seeming to make their volunteer disappear, that is recognised as an entertaining routine and a reflection of artifice or even skill. It is not intended to imply that the performer really can make someone disappear. The audience understands this. Anyone who pretends differently is an ass.

Exactly the same is true of the Human Bridge routine. To facilirare someone to do it who would perhaps never believe themselves able to, even though anyone of normal fitness can do it, does require a certain psychological skill. It does not mean they are in a special altered state or performing an extraordinary feat. Of course some hypnotists may believe this thimselves. But anyone who knows that it is not true and yet deliberately misleads people by claiming otherwise is an ass.

Audiences must be forgiven for falling for such an asinine line ... up to a point. So far as they are mislead by some  misleading ass or other. When its been pointed out to someone that its a simple trick, yet they denounce this and continue to profess conviction in some asses misleading guff, then that makes them an ass too. We see this in comments to videos of the Human Bridge on You Tube and elsewhere, all too often.  

The Secret.

It's very, very, very simple and like most illusionism depends on an elementary misdirection. No hidden wires, supports or gimmicks but an explanation to the volunteer as to how to do it. If they are hypnotised I convey this indirectly. If they are not hypnotised I make it clear to everyone that this is so, then, on condition they do not reveal it, whisper the secret into the volunteers ear. What do I tell them? Well that would be telling wouldn't it. It's a secret!

Want to read more about stage hypnotism?

 http://www.blurb.co.uk/b/2935986-the-art-and-secrets-of-stage-hypnotism

 

All images and text Copyright (C) 2014 by Alex Tsander, all rights reserved.


Heres a footnote: