Blog 10

This week’s reading and class discussions really got me thinking outside the box; in particular, I really thought about Darren Brown’s field of NLP (Neuro-linguistic programming). Therefore, I went to work and looked him up on Wikipedia. I found that NLP is comprised of tricks to misdirecting the audiences to get a response, which Darren wishes them to provide by the use of subliminal cues. I understood that aspect since this was something we had seen and discussed in class on Monday. However, I wanted to investigate these notions in art, books, and media and how it serves our society. I wanted to figure some of the underlying meaning or messages. This also gave me an idea for my next paper.

I further investigated NLP (Neuro-linguistic programming) in order to understand Hughes. I fell upon a PDF file by JP Mictchell the first author of a publication titled Directed remembering:Subliminal cues alter nonconscious memory strategies. The title could explain what he experimented with and how it relates to the class discussion.

I have attached his speculations below:

“We speculated that recognition performance in a standard item-based forgetting paradigm may be moderated by subliminal cues that trigger the automatic activation of different mnemonic strategies. We report the results of two experiments that supported this prediction. In each experiment, the basic item-based forgetting effect was replicated, but via the subliminal presentation of ‘‘remember’’ and ‘‘forget’’ cues. In addition, cue-dependent differences in memory performance were traced to the operation of a covert rehearsal mechanism during encoding. We consider the implications of these findings for the nonconscious operation of memory processes in everyday life.”

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~scanlab/papers/2002_unintentionalMemory_Memory.pdf

I really thought about this concept and how it connected with Hughes. I assume that Hughes was giving us subliminal cues as well throughout the book by using art and the artist, poet and the poetary and so on.
But somehow he has achieved his point about the whole notion of power being tied to everything whether it is used as a “nocebo or placebo.” He ties Disease and creativity as placebo effect to various artists and art forms. He states that the artists are abnormal not only in their personalities but also the way they are seen by society.(177) He discusses famous artist like Frida Kahlo and how her congenital spina bifida made her physically and mentally suffer and she used art as placebo to get a relief from her suffering. In a way, she took power over her physical disability and used it as a means to put her name forth in the society; yet, she left subliminal cues in her art to covey her difficult and tragic life, and her relationship with Diego Rivera, her husband. I have also attached a complete biography of Frida Kahlo to futher explain my point.

http://www.fridakahlofans.com/biocomplete.html

Furthermore, I think huges uses the nacebo effect in chapter 10 Sex and Creativity. His speculation and research findings point out that “men and women use sexuality as a means to power rather than sensual pleasure’ meaning that they use any give art form to portray aggressiveness or hostility towards one another rather than for the purpose that is intended in nature.
This made me wonder that in our society men and women use negativity to control each other in some sense. I think that Hughes in some way is pointing out that males or females both use creativity to figure out each other. We think we know one another but we really don’t and oodles of energy is put forth in taking control negatively rather than positively

For example, males use subliminal messaging in various art forms to show that females somehow are powerful. Hughes points out that Muse is a “matriarchal moon goddess… dominant… by male values of reason and logic.” (144) It made me think that men really do feel that women are dominant in some way and that could be the reason why our society use the women a mere object to degrade them in some sense whether it is through porn or adversting. If we take a closer look at the various poems, paintings, music and movies, we find that it might be true to some degree. In a similar sense, most women too believe that men are all about one thing and we all know what that is then couldn’t it be said that they too play the eroticism card to figure out the male “beast”like Picasso had made it appear in his Minotaur and Dead Mare in Front of a Cave (1936).

http://www.superstock.com/stock-photos-images/1158-1583

All of our energy and attention is devoted to figuring each other out that we really forget our purpose as humans sometimes. We too like our male or female icons distress and feel we need to empower over each other consciously or subconsciously by using the “nacebo or placebo” effects by using subliminal cues. Sometimes we forget that we are not mere objects but beings and we all possess both negative and positive aspects. I found a great blog on women rights and people had to say about sex and power and I think this helped me figure out Hughes in chapter 10.

http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/sex_is_power_-_or_is_it

I really liked this book because it really made me think outside the box. It also made me connect with myself on a deeper level and gave me an idea for my next paper.