LOSE YOURSELF INTO EMINEM'S TRANCE

“The thing about hip-hop today is it's smart, it's insightful. The way they can communicate a complex message in a very short space is remarkable.”
Barack Obama

The thing about hip-hop today is it's smart, it's insightful. The way they can communicate a complex message in a very short space is remarkable.

Theatrical release poster

We are  accustomed to see battle rap where each one of the rapper opponents aggressively attacking one another, by means of bragging and boasting content combined with put-downs and insults. 

The live audience is critical to a battle as each MC must use skill and linguistic ability to not only 'break down' his or her opponent, but to convince the audience that they are the better rapper. 

How do you persuade the audience then? Since time is limited, as set by the background music, the fighters usually feel that the best way is to just rush into the fight and display all theirs skills. 

One of the best scenes in “8 Mile” is the final battle of Jimmy (Eminem) vs Papa Doc where Eminem displays an exquisite competence of communication skills.

Fist of all we have to say that an analysis of this battle can't be done without taking into account what happens before because that is what shapes Jimmy genius intervention.

Jimmy (Eminem) starts as an underdog: he is white, while all rappers, more or less famous, are black; one of the adversaries had sex with his girlfriend; he choked during the last battle, and his friend Cheddar Bob is so clumsy to shoot his own leg. Very difficult for him to face Papa Doc in the last battle.

8 Mile: the final battle

Just before his turn Jimmy is clearly restless and is still looking for some good ideas to kick Papa Doc down when Cheddar Bob asks him: “You worried about what he'll to say?”. Jimmy is kind of surprised and asks back: “What do you mean?”. Cheddar then tells him how Papa Doc will freestyle on Jimmy's sore spots and most probably win. Shocked by these words Jimmy has also a kind of wake up moment and probably an insight that will shape his performance. And this is the first sign of genius: rather than dismissing feedback use it to improve your performance.

What would you do in such situations? What do your friends usually suggest you to do? 

The battle starts, the music begins and Jimmy chooses to go for something completely new: a pattern interrupt (A pattern that Milton Erickson was famous for). Instead of attacking Papa Doc he uses his precious time to first calibrate and then pace the audience. Still staring into Papa Doc's eyes he listens to the crowd while they follow the rhythm with their voice and also notices with his peripheral vision that some of them have their hands already up. 

Then he starts moving with the music thus pacing kinestetically the audience with something that they both are hearing (the music), then he turns to them raising his hand again mirroring them kinestetically on something they both see (the raised hands). Then he tests the rapport by saying “Now everybody from the 313 put ya mothafuckin hands up and follow me”, the rest of the audience raises its hand thus confirming that people are now following him. It works!

He immediately uses this result to put the crowd against Papa Doc by making them notice (“Look, Look”) that he is not on the same wavelenght: “Now as he stands tough, notice that this man did not have his hands up” (anti-rapport).

He continues to address the audience by pacing and leading them at the same time when quoting (another Milton Model pattern) Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre first line of “Nuthin'But A G Thang”: “1, 2, 3 a to tha 4”,  the audience recognizes it and sings it with him thus confirming the bond that has been created before.

Tupac drawing by Makaveli

Jimmy uses then three or four linguistic ambiguities, another language pattern that Milton Erickson used to make the brain function in a different mode. After having counted the four beats he uses the number four to count the adversaries “1-pac 2-pac 3-pac 4”, “4-pac 3-pac 2-pac 1” thus introducing the ambiguity “2-pac = two-pack = Tupac” the famous rapper. You may also notice how he repeats the sequence in reverse order as in “pivoting grammar” used to cause trance (Looking now, now looking, deeper down, down deeper, into what, what into, you do not know, know you not ...). The third and fourth ambiguities are “you're Pac = your pack”, “he's Pac = his pack”: “you're pac, he's pac, no pac, none”. Put all together and you see hiw his the brain is led into a change in awareness and gets the embedded message without Jimmy actually saying it: you are no good as Tupac was, you are nothing.

Then he starts the inoculation against objections (see Objection, your honour!): telling before hand all objection or criticism somebody may have is a good way to dismantle it:

“I am white, I am a fuckin bum

I do live in a trailer with my mom

My boy Future is an Uncle Tom

I do have a dumb friend named Cheddar Bob

who shoots himself in his leg with his own gun,

And I did get jumped by all six of you chumps,

And Wink did fuck my girl”

Eminem al DJ Hero party del 2009

Notice how, contrary to expectations Jimmy invests his very limited time to pace and lead (and test) the audience, and when he has good rapport he inoculates his weaknesses.

In this  way what seemed to be a limitation is turned upside down to become a powerful weapon.

If you watch the movie you can clearly feel how now it seems that when Eminem is rapping all the energy of the audience is with him, it follows him and every word seems to be charged with the energy of the whole room. Now, somebody may cope with the force of one man, but what about facing the power of a whole audience yelling and dancing?

Only, and only now Jimmy is ready to attack and we all feel that by this preparation the attack will be devastating. Without even knowing what he will be saying we know that he has already won. Look at the movie again to feel it on your skin.

Now comes the real lead, the attack, the material that he has probably thought about to win against Papa Doc:

“You went to crambrook that's a private school
Whats the matter dog you embarrassed?
this guys a gangsta his real name is Clarance
And Clarence lives at home with both parents
And Clarence's parents have a real good marriage.
This guy don't wanna battle he's shook

cause ain't no such things as half way crooks”

"Shook Ones (Part II)" from 
Mobb Deep's The Infamous.

And when he sings “there's no such things as half way crooks” the audience raps with him him thus confirming the bond created. Here Eminem has another genius move by both quoting the famous rap song Mobb Deep - Shook Ones Pt. 2 - The Infamous - YouTube and pacing the song itself because it's exactly the instrumental on which they are battling that normally is just left unnoticed in the background considered just as a rhythm to rap on.

An additional element that strongly reinforces Jimmy effectiveness is moving up in the neurological level hierarchy. He started by mirroring behaviour and with facts but now he points to the different values of the group and papa Doc (went a private school, lives with their parent that have a good marriage are different from hip-hop values) and attacks Papa Doc identity (he's no gangsta, his name is Clarence).

Using neurological levels is a powerful process to help move a person towards a certain goal. And this is exactly what Eminem does. Now that he has the audience on his side (most powerful neurological levels), destroyed The adversary identity and and values notice him he paces and then installs into his adversary the states and behavior he wants:  embarrassed, shook, won't battle. And that's exactly what papa Doc will do.

Changing referential index (from “you” to “he”) causing disassociation is also important because it affects Papa Doc ability to see himself performing well.

Eminem demonstrates an ability to pace and mirror everything relevant that happens in the moment, everything that goes through the senses of everybody in the room. He uses linguistic ambiguities and hypnotic patterns, he dismantles objections by anticipating them, finally he sends his message sure that it will be heard, sends an embedded command pacing the future outcome he wishes and no effective reply will be possible.

I now ask myself: is it by chance that all great communicators, in whatever field, use the same techniques to get their message across? 

driadema@gmail.com


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT!

“The problem with quotes on blogs

is that it is hard to verify their authenticity.” 

(William Shakespeare)

Milton Erickson ends his preface to the book “Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D.” (Meta Publications, 1975), by Richard Bandler and John Grinder, with these words: 

“It has been a pleasure and privilege to write the Preface to this book. I say this, not because it centers around my hypnotic techniques, but because long overdue is the fulfillment of the need to recognize that meaningful communication should replace repetitious verbigerations, direct suggestions, and authoritarian commands.”

I also remember an excellent NLP trainer explaining that when you ask somebody to do something directly often the person may offer a certain resistance to the request, while Milton Erickson understood that by using indirect ways of communicating he was able to bypass this resistance. Quotes are one of these ways: you don't give a suggestion, you have somebody else giving it for you.

So, those who have learned this pattern of the Milton Model may start a sentence in this way: “the other day I met a friend that was going through a difficult time and when I asked him how he felt he answered: “You know, I understood that you can feel good inside every time you want, whatever is happening to you on the outside, it's only up to you”, and I'm often reminded how true this statement is, especially when I feel overwhelmed by too many problems.”
  
In this way we are able to suggest some possibilities to the other person (feel good inside) maintaining rapport with her thanks to the smoothness of indirect communication. 

Famous writers are using similar techniques. like ad example Vladimir Nabokov who in “Ada or Ardor: A Family Chronicle” (1969) starts with:

“All happy families are more or less dissimilar; all unhappy ones are more or less alike,” says a great Russian writer in the beginning of a famous novel (Anna Arkadievitch Karenina, transfigured into English by R.G. Stonelower, Mount Tabor Ltd., 1880).

Vera and Vladimir Nabokov playing chess.

In this way Nabokov can suggest to the reader to think about how unhappy families are, in such a way that the reader accepts more easily the statement since it comes from another book (Leo Tolstoy's  Anna Karenina) and it's not necessarily Nabokov's opinion.   

Another examples can be found in The Crossroads (Come Dio Comanda, Translation by Jonathan Hunt) - which received the Premio Strega in 2007) by Ammaniti - where at a certain point he writes:

The plan was quite simple
“Simplicity is the basis of every well-done thing,” his father used to tell him.

Nicolò Ammaniti

 Notice how the readers are induced to consider more easily the sentence in brackets (in this case a Belief), without opposing any resistance because Ammaniti doesn't shoot it at us directly but he has it said by a character, and moreover the character quotes his dad: 

Doubly in-directive, doubly effective. 
 
 

J. K. ROWLING in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, chooses none other than Dumbledore to say:

“There are all kinds of courage,” said Dumbledore, smiling. “It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends.”

Dumbledore

Another form of indirect communication very close to quotes and often used by writer is the literary device of the  “rediscovered manuscript”. 

Don Quixote by 

Honoré Daumier (1868)

For example Manuel Cervantes in Don Quixote conjures up the historian Cide Hamete Benengeli of whom Cervantes states to have found in the Toledo marketplace an Arabic manuscript where the episodes of don Quixote are told. By using this stratagem, the novelist assert not to be the author of the story, but to have found it in the text of another writer and so to just "quote" it, indeed.

Also Walter Scott uses the manuscript device in Ivanhoe, pretending that he stumbled upon an ancient Scottish documents and that he is merely retelling the story.

Manzoni's funeral procession in Milan

And the Italian Alessandro Manzoni resorted himself to the rediscovered manuscript writing in the introduction to “The Bethroted” that he found the story of the “promised couple” in a note book (“scartafaccio”, more of a scrap book actually) of a seventeenth century reporter. The novel is considered to be the most famous and widely read novel written in the Italian language.

In more recent times Umberto Eco starts in this way his most famous novel: “The Name of the Rose” (as translated from the Italian by William Weaver)

NATURALLY, A MANUSCRIPT

ON AUGUST 16, 1968, I WAS HANDED A BOOK WRITTEN by a certain Abbé Vallet, Le Manuscrit de Dom Adson de Melk, traduit en français d’après l’édition de Dom J. Mabillon (Aux Presses de l’Abbaye de la Source, Paris, 1842). Supplemented by historical information that was actually quite scant, the book claimed to reproduce faithfully a fourteenth-century manuscript that, in its turn, had been found in the monastery of Melk by the great eighteenth-century man of learning, to whom we owe so much information about the history of the Benedictine order.

The key of the examples above it's not the stratagem or the literary device. It's rather the effort of the writer to find a way to be able to communicate indirectly because indirect communication proves to be more effective. Quotes are just one example of this principle.

And in movies?

Close up on Heather, one of the lost students

The Blair Witch Project relates the story of three student who disappeared in a forest while filming a documentary about a legend: the Blair Witch. The viewers are told that although the three were never seen or heard from again, their video footage was discovered a year later by the police department and that this “recovered footage” is the film the viewer is watching. Pure fiction, but you can see for yourself how effectively it works. 

Or Cloverfield that, I'm quoting Wikipedia, was “presented as found footage from a personal video camera recovered by the United States Department of Defense. A disclaimer text states that the footage is of a case designated “Cloverfield” and was found in the area “formerly known as Central Park”. 

We are now willing to know more. 

In both cases the manuscript is substituted by a recovered footage thus reaffirming the same basic principle with a different mean.

We can also notice a further sophistication, the mean which the author chooses to quote, mirrors the mean used to communicate: if I'm talking to somebody I may quote what somebody else said, if I'm writing a book then I quote a manuscript, a letter or another book, if I'm filming a movie I can show the footage of a luckily found camera. Very interesting. Many example of cross-mirroring can be found as well.

The next step will be a blogger that will write about having discovered a fantastic blog where wonderful stories have being told about how effective indirect communication is. :-)

driadema@gmail.com


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.