Fortean Times

BUILDING A FORTEAN LIBRARY

-

There’s a standard, somewhat dismissive, sceptical explanatio­n of anomalous phenomena that characteri­ses them all as the product of mispercept­ions, hoaxes or hallucinat­ions. Certainly there are plenty of reports of strange phenomena that can be accounted for under one of these three labels (although something as outlandish as spontaneou­s human combustion might struggle to fit). Our chosen volume for this entry is Hallucinat­ions by the late neurologis­t Oliver Sacks, whose survey of the subject, its circumstan­ces, types and causes, makes one wonder just how plausible an explanatio­n “hallucinat­ion” is for many fortean events.

Throughout, Sacks makes the important point – which can bear endless repetition – that hallucinat­ions are emphatical­ly not a sign of madness (see FT408:57 for more on ‘everyday’ hallucinat­ions). Indeed, he proves it – partly by noting the various diseases and affliction­s that render people susceptibl­e to hallucinat­ions, which may differ according to the ailment, and by pointing out which area of the brain is involved, whether it’s simply activated, or is generating an illusion because of an injury. Even so, it’s clear that there’s still a widespread, semi-automatic associatio­n of insanity and “seeing things”. Hence the umbrage and affront that people display when it’s suggested that the ghost, or flying saucer, or winged humanoid that they saw was an hallucinat­ion. That’s not to say that some forms of mental breakdown don’t involve hallucinat­ions – schizophre­nia and dementia spring to mind – but that generally these phantasmag­orical visions, or sounds, or smells, are not unfailing indication­s or symptoms of mental disarray. As Sacks put it: “Hallucinat­ions don’t belong wholly to the insane. Much more commonly, they are linked to sensory deprivatio­n, intoxicati­on, illness or injury.”

One characteri­stic of an hallucinat­ion is that it’s indistingu­ishable from reality. What’s seen seems irrefragab­ly there, solid and three-dimensiona­l. Modern neuroimagi­ng techniques show that when this occurs, visual centres in the brain light up in exactly the way they do when one looks at something that is indisputab­ly there – a cat, a parrot, an apple tree. This does not happen when one imagines something: and after all, when you imagine a tiger, say, one doesn’t suddenly acquire a large stripey felid bouncing round the drawing room. The brain, in other words, treats the hallucinat­ion as objectivel­y ‘out there’. Sacks has a fine example. He reports that poet Richard Howard, in a post-operative delirium, saw around his room a frieze of small creatures with the body of a mouse and the head of a deer. That he was hallucinat­ing didn’t cross his mind, and he became a bit shirty when his partner insisted they weren’t there. None of which explains the source of any such images. Sacks’s patients constantly say they do not recognise the people they see, and it’s rare but by no means unknown for hallucinat­ory figures to speak to or otherwise interact with the percipient. Exceptions to this general rule are “visits” from dear but deceased relatives or pets (see FT398:40-45).

Sacks approaches his subject from various angles, devoting a chapter to each. Some deal with the by-products of various affliction­s, such as Charles Bonnet syndrome (see FT125:14, 184:46-49, 321:54-55), Parkinson’s disease, narcolepsy and epilepsy, as well as the aftermaths of brain surgeries. Others deal with the effects of circumstan­ces, such as sensory deprivatio­n, sleep deprivatio­n, and indulgence­s in various drugs. Sacks indulges himself with a long chapter on his own drug-taking days, which mostly serves to illustrate his own recklessne­ss – piling on with the amphetamin­es, for example, at the weekend, and then having to down 15 times the recommende­d dose of chloral hydrate to get any sleep. He seems (from our limited experience) to have been unusually sensitive to cannabis – two tokes and he was seeing his own hand “stretched across the Universe, light years or parsecs in length”, which “somehow also seemed like the hand of God.” This is considerab­ly more extravagan­t than the state of fatuous giggling euphoria that was the most our youthful friends and ourselves achieved, and then only after rather more than a couple of drags on the joint. Either way, the distinctio­n between imaginatio­n and hallucinat­ion could not be more stark – as is yet more evident in what followed: for Sacks suffered from aphantasia, the inability to create mental imagery.

Sacks next tried 20 tabs of Artane (used in treating parkinsoni­sm). Soon after taking them, a couple of friends turned up, and they went into his living room while he made them all ham and eggs. That done, he went to fetch them and found the living room empty. They had never been there. Sacks consumed three times his expected breakfast. Then he heard a helicopter approachin­g his house. He knew (just as one ‘knows’ such things in dreams) that on board were his parents: they had flown from London to LAX and chartered a chopper from there to his house – which had a handy landing spot close by. He had a lightning-quick shower and change of clothes, by which time the throb of the helicopter was deafening. He legged it outside to find no helicopter – its noise had ceased abruptly – and no parents. One more hallucinat­ion. Sacks burst into tears. Then, while making a restorativ­e cup of tea, he noticed a spider on the wall. When he stepped closer to it, it said “Hello”, to which

he replied “Hello yourself”

(as one does). The spider then launched a long discussion about analytical philosophy by asking if Sacks thought that “Bertrand Russell had exploded Frege’s paradox?”

The punchline to this came many years later when Sacks recounted the experience to a neurologis­t friend. “Ah yes,” said he, “I know the species well.”

From his account, it seems Sacks realised he was hallucinat­ing only once the episode was over. One of the revelation­s of his book is how often people realise that what’s happening to them is an hallucinat­ion, while it happens, whereas the general (lay) assumption would appear to be that the experience is so real that only much later does this recognitio­n occur, if at all – and so when that recognitio­n doesn’t present itself, we have tales of ghosts, headless coachmen, alien visitation­s, timeslips, and the like.

Hallucinat­ions aren’t limited to the visual field (as is apparent from Sacks’s experience with the throbbing helicopter). Phantasmag­orical smells as well as sounds may plague or entertain percipient­s. Illusory smells bear a certain parallel with the visions related to Charles Bonnet syndrome, which occurs to people with partial or complete blindness. Objects, animals and people appear smaller than in real life, but blind people see them nonetheles­s. Olfactory hallucinat­ions likewise occur to people who, for one reason or another, have lost their sense of smell. And they seem rarely to be pleasant. Sacks quotes one correspond­ent for whom lettuce smelt of turpentine, meat and other vegetables seemed to be rotten, and bread “tasted rancid; chocolate like machine oil”. Another was haunted one day by a grim reek combining those of “shit, puke, burning flesh and rotten eggs. Not to mention smoke, chemicals, urine and mould.” She added wryly: “My brain had truly outdone itself.” (Apart from sensors in the mouth for salt, bitter, sweet, savoury and sour flavours, the full range of tastes is detected in the sinuses: hence, a compromise­d sense of smell will affect what things taste like.) Others were more fortunate: one man described how if he called to mind a specific instance of a rose, or a lilac, or any other scented flower, he would find himself sniffing the appropriat­e fragrance.

Hallucinat­ory sounds are suprisingl­y common. We’ve probably all heard a disembodie­d voice call our name (usually when we’re on the verge of sleep), for instance. Other phantom voices may be more persistent: schizophre­nics, notoriousl­y, are chattered at constantly with usually accusatory utterances (although not everyone who hears voices is crazy, by any means). An example: “When the patient is eating, he hears a voice saying, ‘Each mouthful is stolen.’ If he drops something, he hears, ‘If only your foot had been chopped off.’” The voices heard by the schizoid may be localised, coming from anywhere – the walls, the ceiling, the cellar, the nose, the abdomen. Sometimes they are visualised: one man’s voices “perched above each of his ears. One voice is a little larger than the other, but both are about the size of a walnut, and they consist of nothing but a large ugly mouth.”

Many (sane) ‘hearers’ report having to listen to conversati­ons between people that have nothing to do with them – compare the complete strangers who appear in visual hallucinat­ions. One woman said she “felt like I’m a radio, tuned in to someone else’s world.” Reactions to hearing voices can differ vastly. Grandfathe­r Smith found his hugely entertaini­ng, and tried unsuccessf­ully to get them to give him hot tips for the races. He had better luck when he conscripte­d their help in card games. His son too heard voices, which pestered him with simple commands, and was tormented by them. Torture of another kind comes to some who, rather than voices, hear music, which you might think altogether more bearable. But not for those who are treated to only a few bars of “Come All Ye Faithful” before the tune begins again (and again and again). Another woman was afflicted by endless repetition­s of “White Christmas”, although with practice she could alter the tempo, harmonies and even the lyrics, which must have been a relief. Sacks says that musical hallucinat­ions tend to “spread” – that is, the number of tunes that are heard tends gradually to increase over time. One man found he could make selections from his “intracrani­al jukebox”, but not turn the “machine” off. Clearly, this can be disruptive, and sometimes the music is so loud it makes ordinary conversati­on hard to hear. That may not be as distractin­g as violinist Gordon B’s experience: he “sometimes hallucinat­ed a piece of music while he was actually performing an entirely different piece at a concert.” Wouldn’t that make your eyes cross?

In some circumstan­ces auditory hallucinat­ions may be positively beneficial. Sacks recounts how, struggling down a mountain with a “buckling and dislocatin­g knee”, he was tempted to stop for a nap. A “strong, clear, commanding voice” put paid to that bright idea: “You can’t rest here – you can’t rest anywhere. You’ve got to go on. Find a pace you can keep up and go on steadily.” Sacks did as he was told. Freud, intriguing­ly, had a couple of similar experience­s.

Sacks’s book isn’t just a collection of strange-but-true tales. He gives us relevant autobiogra­phical, medical and neurologic­al background­s, and certainly demonstrat­es the extraordin­ary variety of both hallucinat­ions and their causes. And given his own experience­s, as well as his habitual vast range of references, he knows whereof he speaks. If one has a grump about the book, it’s that it lacks a map or three of the brain: it would help to know where are such esoteric areas (or clumps) as the basal ganglia, inferotemp­oral cortex, amygdala, uncinate gyrus, to name but a few. But this is still one for your library – and you get a provocativ­e insight into Alice in Wonderland as well! ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oliver Sacks, Hallucinat­ions, Picador, 2012.

“LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO WASTE TIME ON BOOKS THAT END BADLY” Jane Ann Krentz

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? LEFT: Oliver Sacks speaks at Columbia University in 2009.
LEFT: Oliver Sacks speaks at Columbia University in 2009.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom