Secret, Don't Tell: The Encyclopedia of Hypnotism

Rating:
Summary: A gripping narrative on the development of "hypno-robots"
Review: At first glance, this book seems to be a arid catalog of the history of hypnotism, exciting only to professionals. On the contrary, Carla Emery weaves exciting tales of hypnotic abuse and mind control through her,anything but dry,facts. She describes true cases of government mind control in chilling detail and also gives a first-hand account of the horrifying and dehumanizing process that results in a "hypno-robot." I encourage anyone who has ever been in, or who is contemplating, hypnosis first to read this book. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Rating:
Summary: Blatant alarmism, decently researched
Review: I've actually read some of her sources -- Estabrooks comes to mind. Saying, for instance, that he says you should establish a "stable" of hypnotic subjects is true. Of course, he's talking about learning hypnotism and doing basic, noninvasive, voluntary, harmless stuff, too. His advice isn't any worse than if a beginning masseusse was to establish a "stable of massage victims". Call it what you want, but it's really not that bad for the people involved -- and if you don't think being hypnotized can be enjoyable, you've never done it right.

One thing about becoming a decent hypnotist is that involves being hypnotized many, many times -- so her talk about hypnotists having utter contempt for good hypnotic subjects is pretty far off-base, too. Any good hypnotist *is* a good hypnotic subject. You *have* to be.

Another of her big examples is Svengali. For the record, he's fictitious. Entirely so. Saying that the hypnotist community has attempted to "suppress the facts" of Svengali and Trilby's case is a little like saying the British government has attempted to "suppress the facts" in the book "1984". They don't claim they're doing that because they're not. It sounds very ominous. Their denials may make it more so. But in fact it's just that the original source is fiction, and doesn't claim otherwise.

Still, if you can get past the fact that she intentionally misconstrues a lot of sources and sees goblins in the woodwork everywhere, it's pretty readable. Better yet, she quotes a lot of very obscure work by very good hypnotists. I had no idea that the government had Milton Erickson demonstrate hypnotic recall, for instance. Pretty cool!

Rating:
Summary: Blatant alarmism, decently researched
Review: I've actually read some of her sources -- Estabrooks comes to mind. Saying, for instance, that he says you should establish a "stable" of hypnotic subjects is true. Of course, he's talking about learning hypnotism and doing basic, noninvasive, voluntary, harmless stuff, too. His advice isn't any worse than if a beginning masseusse was to establish a "stable of massage victims". Call it what you want, but it's really not that bad for the people involved -- and if you don't think being hypnotized can be enjoyable, you've never done it right.

One thing about becoming a decent hypnotist is that involves being hypnotized many, many times -- so her talk about hypnotists having utter contempt for good hypnotic subjects is pretty far off-base, too. Any good hypnotist *is* a good hypnotic subject. You *have* to be.

Another of her big examples is Svengali. For the record, he's fictitious. Entirely so. Saying that the hypnotist community has attempted to "suppress the facts" of Svengali and Trilby's case is a little like saying the British government has attempted to "suppress the facts" in the book "1984". They don't claim they're doing that because they're not. It sounds very ominous. Their denials may make it more so. But in fact it's just that the original source is fiction, and doesn't claim otherwise.

Still, if you can get past the fact that she intentionally misconstrues a lot of sources and sees goblins in the woodwork everywhere, it's pretty readable. Better yet, she quotes a lot of very obscure work by very good hypnotists. I had no idea that the government had Milton Erickson demonstrate hypnotic recall, for instance. Pretty cool!

Rating:
Summary: I'm one of the people she talks about.
Review: It is true. It is happening to me. Do read the book and understand that this must be happening to more people than can be imagined. Doctors won't tell nor will the police. Talk about what's happening with everyone. Share information now.

Rating:
Summary: AMAZING.
Review: This is an excellent book by Carla Emery. I was drawn to this book by my need to understand how one can have so much control over another as it is something i have experienced and now understand.Read this book and let your eyes be opened.

Rating:
Summary: Secret don't tell
Review: While reading this book last year, I looked up the author's references and found that she either accidentally or deliberately misconstrued a number of her sources. As I recall, her source for there being a large number of studies of hypnotism by the military actually cited a large number of studies of psychological warfare, only one or two of which had to do with hypnotism. That kind of sloppy research is troubling. It is possible that some of Emery's claims are true, particularly her exposure of the fact that you can, indeed, be persuaded to do things under hypnosis that you would not do if you retained access to your rational mind. Her evidence for this appears to be a summary of the research of a mid-twentieth century Danish psychiatrist who argued this very proposition. When Emery relies on research like his, she is on sounder footing than when she goes off on the trail of electronic hypnotism and mind-reading devices being implanted in NSA agents who move among the general population looking for dissidents to brainwash back into the NWO fold. This is too fantastic. Emery is a true American eccentric, though, and God bless her for it. If you keep plenty of grains of salt handy, this book will keep you on your toes, trying to separate fact from fancy.