Okay here’s a new thread.  I’ve read Bruces other books and am finishing up with the Guidebook where I’m working my way through the exercises.    However, I got stalled with the Perceiver/Interpreter Balancing.  The challenge this exercise addresses is how to bring content that is not conscious into our conscious awareness.  

Bruce discussed his “chatterbox” in one of his earlier books (wish my memory were better).  His solution is quite remarkable.  The chatterbox resides in sort of a mediating place between our conscious thinking and the unconscious.  The chatter comes into our conscious awareness but if we let it go on too much it leads us away from the unconscious impressions we’re trying to understand and remember.  With his exercise we can attain a balance between the content we’re trying to get and out waking mind that tends to filter it out.

My problem is that I don’t have a “chatterbox”.  When I do this exercise I don’t seem to get the verbal commentary and associations that Bruce mentions.  However, I have been getting some visual impressions.  Typically the visuals are out doors, involve trees or shrubs.  Sometimes they are landscapes and other times a house or garden but always with things growing.  These images are shadowy with a hint of color once in a while.  If my mind fixes on the images (like “oh wow there’s a tree”) then they disappear – that’s very similar to Bruce’s discussion of the chatterbox.

Here are some questions that I hope you kind folks can help me with.  Do some of you get visual instead of aural impressions when you do this exercise?  Should I keep trying to get the chatterbox effect?  If I’m sort of stuck with this one exercise, should I just skip it for now and go on with the others?  Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks – Rob

Hi Rob,

I think "Oh wow, there's a tree" is what Bruce is talking about.  It sounds like you don't have a problem with your thoughts carrying you away too much, so that's good.  You could practice the balance by trying to think through the visuals you get, just as you said you do, "Oh wow, there's a tree".  So practice doing things like that and notice if your thoughts make associations to other things and begin to carry you away.  Try to notice if you have blank spots in your memory of what you're doing or blank spots in your conscious awareness.  

Once the visual disappears, does another pop up right away?  If not, are you able to recall what you were just seeing and then try and bring it back up visually again?  

It sounds like you are very visual so that is a great commodity to have.  

I am very visual first and foremost, but I've had great experiences with hearing also.  

I don't think you are stuck with this exercise, so I suggest you move on.  And are you keeping a journal like Bruce suggests in the Guidebook?  

Hi Rob,
I'm with Vicky, sounds as if you're not having a problem from what you've told. You know if you would continue "yeah a tree...I have to buy a tree for my garden...like I saw in that park...near where I work...oh yes I have to fix this problem at work...have to call this customer..." You know this bananas in Brazil thing.
To have short word statements, like "aha, a tree", then stop, waiting what is developing, then again a short description of the scene in words for me is a great means to remember what happened to write it down in great detail later.
This interpretor-perceiver theory of course has also a fundamental philosophic dimension, the question of the relationship of our perceptions with reality- or what reality is, if it is a making sense term at all.

Spooky

as I recall one story in Bruce's books, a guy saw a visual, a fellow was doing his first retrieval exercise and he saw a clingon ship, then he nudged it outside, asked the perceiver to see something else, in the end another image was shown of an airplane and the retrieval was completed.
this is an example of focusing in on the visual to bring more clarity. I can't say why he saw a cling on ship at first, maybe it had something to do with expectations, but the associations were there, that this is a warship, and the airplane was a war airplane too, so he was very close.
I'd say Rob was way ahead if he doesn't have to listen or watch pink elephants dancing around..ahh...it happens. I'm very visual myself, but I once in awhile can get sentence structure and words, usually one word will have a lot of information in it.

also I learned to zero in. or focus..the guides said move closer to it. the object, or imagine moving closer. this always works like a camera lens focus.
one thing I was thinking the other day Rob, about belief systems are very strong things. from our personal belief system will spring forth our perception. from the perception will spring yet something else, an interpretation. so u have 3 things there to consider. thats why two people will never see it quite the same way, the same event, but thats ok. one good thing about the interpretor is never wrong, its just speaking its own language.
maybe I could call this artistic license... :)

Wow!  You’re all so helpful.  Thanks.  To my delightful surprise when Vicky said “Oh wow, it’s a tree”, it seemed so much more profound than when I wrote it in my post.  That is what Bruce was writing about.  It’s just that I wasn’t getting verbal words or thoughts – which I assumed I needed for the “chatterbox” effect.  As you suggest it is a thought – it just isn’t stretched out into a sentence or a voice in my mind.

In my 20s I started meditating and I constantly struggled with incessant chattering going on in my head.  With practice I learned to quiet my mind but when I read about Bruce’s “chatterbox” I felt that I should go back to that constant yapping that used to go on in my brain.  I’ve also become fluent in American Sign Language – a nonverbal method of communication.  My experiences being non-verbal shouldn’t surprise me.  What’s going on in my brain is sort of a latching on of my attention to the images that are forming.  That latching or quickening of attention somehow enfolds the fully formed or verbalized thought.  I don’t need the “chatter” but if I let the focusing of my attention get too strong or go on then it will shut off the original flow of (image) content that I’m trying to interpret and I’ll move on to those bananas in Brazil.

When I think about it (thanks to your suggestions), there have been a couple times when I’ve let the image attachement go and have returned to more images.  So there is a balancing to do here – it’s just not verbal in the way I expected.

This does relate to belief systems, doubt and expectation.  In my head I was expecting a particular effect that just wasn’t happening in the form I thought it should.  Naturally, I didn’t think I was getting anywhere because I had formed a belief about how I should get there.  I love the idea about nudging or moving in on the images.  I’ll work on strengthening the images (instead of waiting for verbal chatter) and then try nudging them.

There is a big philosophical aspect to this.  There is some kind of input – from the spiritual or the unconscious or wherever – and there is our perception of it and then, as it filters through, our interpretation of it.  It amazes me that we can do this and touch on those things that are beyond our normal physical lives.  While we perceive and interpret things somewhat differently, there is so much that we find in common as this conversation board demonstrates so well.

Thank you.  I’m going to move on with the exercises in Bruces’ book but I’ll keep working with this one as well.  And, uhh, now that you’ve shown me that visuals are okay, I’m going to do another post on this thread (is that the right terminology?) with my next question.

Same exercise: Perceiver/Interpreter.  Different question.

Bruce talks about looking into the blackness (with our eyes closed).  I seem to get a muted gray instead of blackness.  What do you get – blackness or is there some lightness to it?  In either case I think it’s the same effect.  

I don’t think it’s in the exercise itself but sometimes he’s mentioned the blackness becoming 3-D.  He also talks about looking for shapes, variations in shading, movement.  These things I think are precursors to images.  I think I get to the 3-D effect by letting these variations and movements play on my mind.  If I’m non-focused frame of mind (i.e. just let it go) then these impressions seem to take on more movement and shape and I start getting a 3-dimensional sense.  Out of this 3-D sense I’ll get images forming and changing.  I wonder if it works this way with you folks or, if it works differently, would you describe your experience.  I really find other peoples’ experiences and explanations help me a lot.

Thanks - Rob

hi Rob C. didn't see you over here for a week, sorry. have to remember to check the little box to get an email that a response is here.

I can describe my experience with images. I set off to do a retrieval and asked for guides to assist. what helped me in these kind of exercises is to do a little remote viewing exercise. in those exercises they would say to use all 5 senses..try to see, smell, hear, sense, touch, taste, feel the scene, by the time you get done doing all that something should occur to you. its gray or black at first.
in this retrieval I imagined being led somewhere by friendly caretakers who have my best interests at heart. CHARGE! I was going to help someone. but who? dunno. have to trust. having a feeling of anticipation is ok. I was led to like a small brick wall; I only saw one side of it during the retrieval, but later I figured out it was a pump house. so at first it fills u with doubt thoughts to see something partially. patience was called for. finally saw something small in the grayness. a bit of light..drifted closer..tall wheat grass against the wall. now at least you have a focus...a second goes by and it makes u nervous u don't see anything else..press on, must be a dead body here somewhere...wait..the grass and the kids hair are the same color, like wheat. the kid is so short, the grass is the same height. drift in guides seem to say. whats this kid doing here? god, shes bored stiff. so u get the point, u have to go for the smallest signal you see, in my case the black got gray, then I just focused on the wall and the whole thing popped into view in a sequence fashion.

I had the wrong interpretation at first on this one. thought I was retrieving someone else. it was me, I was that child. later I thought, hmm, I was tricked!

it was all good though.

Thanks.  I think a key for me is to push on and ask questions and wonder about what “this” means and “what’s” next.  Your description is very helpful.  I think I’m making my own mind too passive and just waiting for impressions to come to me without probing the ones I’m getting.  I’ll keep working on it.  Rob