Center Tear
the thinking persons journal
Volume 3 Issue 3
June 2004
Sorry for the delay guys! Things have been pretty crazy in my life over the last month.
Anyway here’s another over-filled issue (34 pages).
Is it me or are we giving you way too much!?
Hope you enjoy…
Peter Arcane
DON’T BE A TWAT – DON’T TRADE CENTER TEAR.
IT’S WORTH MORE THAN THAT. HAVE RESPECT!
Chilling with Ford by Ford Kross
© 2004 Ford Kross
When we left off last month, we were discussing costumes. Not the
mental costume that constitute a performing persona, but an actual
physical costume. I often get requests to dress as a Swami or Gypsy. I
find both these images distasteful. Gypsies in particular have a less
than savoury image. In the UK, you have a group called Tinkers. I'm
not sure if this is another name for Gypsy or another group. Frankly I also feel silly in
costume. If they are persistent, I add a costume fee. No one has ever offered to pay it.
I do think your appearance is EXTREMELY important. You should be the best-
dressed person in the room. Custom made clothing, well pressed and fitting is worth the
expense. Good comfortable shoes, polished to a high gloss if you're a man. Clean well
manicured hands. Especially if you're doing palmistry. Ron Martin recommends a small
pillow to place their hand on. A magnifier definitely. A portable light source for dark rooms.
Disposable key chain flash lights work well for me.
If you're going to be working in a very noisy area, a mini-portable amplifier will certainly save
your voice from competing with music and cocktail chatter. An earbug or headset that the
client can put on to hear you clearly is wonderful. This speaker earphone idea was kicked
around on a forum; I think Banachek supplied the direct earphone line.
You can tell a good deal about "clients" from their appearance. Quality and fit of clothing;
calluses on hands; Insignia jewellery, birth stones; Name bracelets and Charm bracelets can
all aid in your getting to know the querent. A lot has been said about reading body
language. I personally don't put much stock in body language. Possibly more readings were
35
done by phone psychics than any other venues. And obviously, reading body language was
not a factor in the reading.
You should also decide at this point, what exactly your abilities are. Notice I said abilities,
not powers. Superman has powers, real folk have abilities. Personally, I emphasize over and
over, "I DON'T READ MINDS". If I read minds, all I could tell you is what you already
knew. And why would you pay for that? Are you a palmist, astrologer, tephromancer or
what ever who only interprets the omens, but are you a psychic who by being sensitive is able
to pick up names, dates and places. Do you only claim to do character readings? We all
know how successful the Character Reading phone lines are. Second in success only to
the NLP reading lines. These should be the sub-text of your readings. Decide in advance,
what your character can and cannot do.
Cold reading as I've defined it is the ability to do a reading with no preparation. It is not, I
repeat, not a string of lines that apply to every one. I call these boiler plate. Strung
together as a mini- reading, they constitute a stock reading. That's where we'll pick up next
time.
Cookie Cutter Mentalists by Paul Alberstat
© 2004 Paul Alberstat
M
agicians suffer from a very bad image with the lay public. Ask most lay people
about magicians and they will tell you they do card tricks, that magicians are for
children’s birthday parties and not much more. Now ask them about booking
one for a party and they will be just as likely to tell an agency they want “a magician” for their
event, without specifying a name. As far as they are concerned, a magician is a magician and
35
they all do the same things. Magicians themselves defend that by explaining that they do
not do the same things, they are all unique and some even explain that they are “entertainers”
first and foremost and that they don’t “fool their audiences”, they entertain them. I say
“Poppycock!”
First let’s examine why this is. Many magicians are hobbyists and as such are only seeking
things for their own amusement and interest. Even if they do some performance for pay,
their prime interest is a love of magic and their own enjoyment. As such, they see an effect
performed on television or by a popular performer and the next day they rush to the local
magic shop to purchase and quickly learn the secret and perhaps add the trick to their
repertoire. They are the “
trick of the week
”
magician. They ride trends. They also tend to
lift specific “lines” or bits of business from others. Take for example the Invisible Deck.
Most of the lines that are used, including the basic premise of this brilliant routine was
developed by the late and great magician Don Alan. He was never asked permission for his
routine, lines or bits of business and he died hating magicians for this. When told of this
theft, most magicians shrug and say “Well the lines work and I am going to continue to use
them” despite the fact that every other magician in their area has also lifted and uses these
same lines and routines.
The magician that states that “I am an entertainer first” and thus they do not set out to “fool
the audience” is merely making excuses for their own ineptitude. A magician by definition
FOOLS their audience and if they don’t, they are NOT doing their job. Entertaining
an audience is naturally the goal BUT a magician entertains within the context of fooling an
audience. His tricks are his tools for entertaining; his routine and personality are used as
their own personal touches in entertaining the audience by fooling them with their magic.
These are also the typical magic enthusiast that likes to ride the “trend train” which is
another factor on the “they are all the same” moniker.
35
Since the popularity and rise of David Blaine, magicians have seen the power of mentalism
and have been drawn towards trying this form of entertainment. There is usually a trend of
the year for magicians and many have tried their hands at card magic, children’s magic, dove
magic, etc…and lately they look at mentalism and see that technically it is relatively sleight
free and as such they feel that it must be easy to head into. What they fail to realize is that it
is NOT so easy to perform well. Mentalism requires the strongest possible personality
and entertainment prowess one could possibly have in order to be entertaining, something
that most magicians will never have. They try their hand at this art without realizing that
there are many factors in making a mentalism performance successful including having a
“premise”, a “strong personality” and NO props. Thankfully they are now looking towards
Hypnotism and are now moving slowly towards this genre which in my opinion is quite funny
as both of these genre are diametrically opposite of that of magic and conjuring. They have
an entirely different mindset and are of opposite philosophies too.
Now lately with this rise of interest in mentalism, we do have some fine mediocre performers
in this genre and as they mostly come from a background in magic are now making the very
mistakes that marked magicians. They are putting mentalism in the same peril of magicians
by doing the same things. They are in fact all becoming “cookie cutter mind readers”. Ask
yourself as a performing mentalist if you use a “blindfold” in your show. Do you use spoon
bending in your show, something that many magicians now do too due to the rise of
popularity of Banachek and the easily accessible information on all of these topics. Do you
use a Question and Answer piece in your show and if so, are you using some else’s method
and routine? Do you do a type of Russian roulette routine? Do you use someone else’s
style such as Derren Brown, Kreskin or Banachek?
When you talk to many mental enthusiasts you will find they all use similar techniques and
35
effects including: Kollosal Killer, Smash & Stab, P.K. Touches/P.K. Time, Spoon
Bending, and the list goes on and on. They see someone perform and immediately they
want to perform THAT effect. They are acting as hobbyist magicians and all want to do
the same effects, believing or justifying in their own heads that they are unique and as such
are bringing their own touches to these routines, oblivious to the fact that they look like
everyone else and in fact are usually doing a much poorer job and truly are deluding
themselves because they usually look the same. They think they are being themselves
oblivious to the fact that they have walls up everywhere, that lack sincerity in their
performances because they lack both a true belief in the possibility of these phenomenon
actually existing and that they also have no base premise to work from. A base premise
being what defines what powers they either do or apparently do posses as well as where
they developed these so called “powers” or skills.
Equally appalling is the rise in the interest in cold reading and the belief that once they know
a stock reading and have read Kenton Knepper’s “Completely Cold” that they can set out
to do readings. This is not only stupid BUT dangerous and can and will do serious
damage to some people. These performers do not realize that there is far more to a reading
than handing someone some stock lines and taking their money. A reading places the sitter
not the performer in the spot light. The reading is about an emotional and spiritual
connection between the sitter and reader. It is about facilitating some help for troubles
sitters and hopefully giving an edge to them in upcoming events. It is NOT about
entertaining them and fooling them. When a sitter sits down with you and says that “I am
having an affair with a married man for the last two years and I want to know where this is
going” OR that “I am living with a man that seems wonderful until he hits me but he
apologizes right after and so I know he loves me” is not there to hear that they are controlled
on the outside but insecure and worrisome on the inside. One must believe in what they are
doing and require some serious training in doing readings, not merely knowing some cold
35
reading techniques that really do not come into effect under real world conditions. And this
does not even address the fact that when someone pays you for a Tarot Reading, a Palm
Reading, a Tea Leaf reading or any other type of reading, that is what they deserve, an
authentic reading in that manner NOT a fraud, yes a fraud because if that is what you are
supposed to be doing, if that is what those people have paid for, that is what they deserve.
If you are a magician that has an interest in performing mental magic, if you are a mental
magician, if you are a hobbyist mentalist or a serious, hard core, full time mentalist, I urge you
to take a close look at what other are doing, take a full stock of what you are doing and then
sit long and hard looking at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself “Am I a Cookie Cutter
Mentalist?” and if so, how do I go about effecting change so I can be unique and different
from everyone else. Even if you have to redesign your act from the ground up, what can you
do to be different, unique and unlike everyone else. Do yourself a favour and do it sooner
than later.
Male-Female by The Grey Man
(aka Philip Escoffey)
© 2004 Philip Escoffey
Dear Reader,
I have never offered any of my material to the magic fraternity in
the past. This is my way of saying a genuine thank-you to the
compilers and contributors of Centre Tear, for their selfless
devotion to our art.
35
The effect that I am going to describe is in no way original. I have merely been a magpie to
brains and ideas far beyond my own. What I hope to have achieved is an interesting recipe
derived from established ingredients, renowned for their excellence. My main contribution is
in the garnish.
There are clearly a number of ways that this idea can be presented, with situation (as ever)
being the main determinant of which is best. I will outline a fairly simple presentation with
additional ideas and discussion at the end.
Effect
A stack of business cards is introduced and handed to the group. As individuals look
through them, the mind reader explains to the onlookers, that there are twenty cards in all, 10
with a blue male symbol (see fig. 1a) and 10 with a reddy/pink female symbol (see fig. 1b)
♂
♀
Fig 1a
Fig 1b
Someone is asked to ensure that no one knows what order the symbols are in. As this is
happening, the performer explains what they are about to attempt.
(Assuming heterosexuality), one female spectator and one male spectator are selected.
Success relies upon a genuine effort from the two chosen spectators to temporarily ignore
their more questioning sides and focus instead, on their intuitive and instinctive abilities.
35
Once the symbols have been mixed around, the mind reader places them face down in a pile,
in front of the woman. He explains that he would like her to try and remember the feelings
that she experienced the last time she was really attracted to someone. She is to generate
the memories of being intensely attracted to another person. The next stage is that she
tries to re-evoke that feeling of empathy and synchronicity as it became apparent that her
feelings were being reciprocated. She must try and re-live that moment of true expression
and unquestioning intuition.
You get the picture I hope. For the effect to remain credible, it goes without saying that this
dialogue is most important. There is scope to talk about the nature of attraction, the
altered state of the aroused individual, the uninhibited instinctive nature of courtship and so
on
The scene set, the woman is told that she is on the hunt for males. Females are of no
interest to her and should be discarded to one side. When she believes that there is a male
symbol face down in front of her, she is to hold onto it or put it into her pocket/bag (without
looking). Each card must be considered, with the mind reader urging her to truly go beyond
guesswork. The logic or nature of her instincts is unimportant as long she is conscious of the
feelings that she is experiencing.
After a few trials (10 cards to be precise), she is asked to pass the remaining pile to the man.
A similar process and dialogue is gone through, however this time the man is looking for
females. Males are placed on the discard pile and females are to be retained
(pocket/hand/wallet).
With all twenty cards assessed, the mind reader re-iterates what has been attempted.
35
“Can evolved, sceptical, intelligent human beings, tap back into their more primitive survival
instincts? Finding a mate is perhaps the most fundamental instinct and maybe explains the
success that is often seen with this trial”.
(Obviously these are my words and are included to convey the importance of framing and
not because they are particularly brilliant).
Each participant retrieves their cards to reveal that the woman has been successful in
finding only male symbols and the man has only female.
Method
I imagine that the solution is fairly obvious, but for the sake of completeness, I will briefly
outline the method.
Acknowledgements must go to the inventor of the Stripper principle (sorry...not a
clue...shameful I know. Call for Mr Hallas) and Mr Paul Curry for the “Out of this World”
principle.
The cards have been gently tapered from right (fat end) to left (thin end) looking at figs. 1a
and 1b above. I find it most effective to start 1mm in at the right and cut to the corner on the
left. This is done along both horizontal edges, rather than 2mm all off one side.
Once shuffled by one spectator, the performer strips them out as they are passed onto the
next, or during some suitable chat. By glimpsing the bottom card, you know whether to go to
the male or female first. If the bottom’s male, go to male and vice versa.
All that remains to be done is casually cut/mix the cards in the discard pile (for which your
35
outstretched hand serves well). This is in case someone reaches to look at them. Otherwise
no attention is drawn to them. The cards need to be cut or mixed depending on what
impression you want to give. If you cut them (at the point where the male and female symbols
meet), they will be left in such a way that implies not only did the spectator find ALL the
correct symbols, but also discarded ALL the incorrect symbols. If you mix them, it will imply
that although the spectator only kept correct symbols, they also discarded some correct
ones too. Your call.
Discussion
I hope that this has triggered some thought. For me it was bourn out of an absolute love of
the “out of this world” principle. However, I was after something more immediate and
relevant. There was an incongruity about using a prop as diverse as playing cards for a
simple 50/50 distinction.
Two other elements that I also wanted to eliminate were the length of the original (along with
its requirement for a working surface) and the sneaky switch at the end.
For me, as a mind reader I feel that the two statements that follow represent equal failure on
my behalf:
1. “I know how that was done.”
2. “How was that done?”
Whether a spectator knows how an effect is done, thinks that they know or genuinely does
know, means that their mind has defaulted to “trick/solution”.
If you have sold the intuitive side well and made the spectator truly reflect on each decision,
35
then I can assure you that they will be left with a genuine feeling of what on earth just
happened, rather than “how was that done”. There is a world of difference
Other presentations
This is an excellent situation to try your hand at something a little ballsier with a perfect
rationale for failure (I prefer the term unexpected results). First time around, attempt the
effect using Luke Jermay’s excellent “Out of t(his) world”. This can be found in Luke’s
book “Building Blocks”.
If it doesn’t go to plan, do something that will credibly explain the success that will now
ensue. This could be anything from apparently spraying male and female pheromones on the
respective cards to further discussion on achieving a truly instinctive state. I leave it to you
Adopting this approach serves two purposes; firstly, you giving yourself a safe opportunity
for a true miracle and secondly it takes all the heat of the discard pile the second time
around. Obviously the first time around will leave a genuine discard pile of mixed up male and
female cards.
One final option would be to “pre-strip” 20 blank business cards and then have the
spectators draw the symbols on themselves (or watch as you do it). This has the appeal of
something truly improvised although, for me, only works in certain situations.
A last thought is to have the symbols revealed one at a time at the end. At least perhaps get
them to hold back any that they seemed hesitant on and then come back to them at the end;
“Ok, female, female, female, wait you seemed hesitant on the fourth one, put it to one side.
Female, female and on the eighth one you seemed a little unsure etc. etc”.
35
I haven’t tried this myself. It could be disastrous but it might also really add drama.
2 weeks later.....
As I have incorporated the routine into my working repertoire, one thought has occurred to
me. If you have both spectators making their decisions together, they will both be putting
symbols into the discard pile simultaneously, removing any need for final “adjustments”.
Should you prefer to stick to the original version of OOTW, then as long as you have a
method for finding the half way point (where red ends and black begins), the above
adaptation is workable. Obviously this can be achieved with a stripper deck, short card,
crimp etc. Spectator A is instructed to find just red cards and spectator B is requested to
locate just the black cards.
PK Lipstick by Luke Jermay
© 2004 Luke Jermay
T
his is a routine that is seeing print for the very first time here. On the 26
th
of
January 2004, I filmed this effect along with four other performance pieces for
the BBC to appear in a landmark documentary series called “The History of
Magic”.
The final program is titled the worlds finest mind readers and features myself, Marc Paul,
Max Maven, Derren Brown, David Berglas and some unseen footage of some of the great
masters of the past from our rich art.
35
Effect
An attractive woman is asked if she has a tube of Lipstick that the performer may borrow for
a moment. She agrees and hands the performer her lipstick.
The performer places this on the table.
The spectator is then asked to hold her hand out at waist height. She is then asked to
close her eyes.
The performer is seen to “apply” a small amount of the lipstick onto his first finger.
He then reaches forward into the air and mimes two “taps”, gesturing with the other hand the
number two by extending two fingers. He then asks the spectator to open her eyes. She is
asked if she felt anything.
She replies “I felt you touch me twice.”
The audience is stunned. The performer clearly came nowhere near the spectator’s hand.
He continues:
“Now if I really had touched you, there would be evidence. I put some lipstick on my finger.
If I had touched you twice, there would be two spots of lipstick on your palm. Please turn
over your hand”
Sure enough on the spectator’s palm, staring them in the face is two proud red lipstick
marks.
35
Method
This is a wonderful effect to perform. I really enjoy it.
We are going to combine classic ideas within magic/mentalism to create a different outcome.
You will notice that the idea of “adding” the evidence marks in the form of the lipstick is
something I think is very new in this type of effect. For some it will be too “Magic-y” but for
me it is perfect. The lipstick is a borrowed item. Many women carry lipstick with them at all
times, allowing me a “prop less” effect, pool chalk is another alternative that is often around
in certain less formal settings that works equally as well, as does cigarette ash.
For the effect, we need to use invisible thread. I have this attached to an elastic armband
around my right arm, which hold the thread reels in place: this is an idea of Michael Close's. I
then attach the blob of wax from the reel to my suit sleeve just inside the opening of my
sleeve. I actually replace the wax with blue tack.
Let us first deal with the touches. We will attach the thread to the bottom of the lipstick
using the blue tack. This is done after it is borrowed - this is not a massively difficult thing to
do and any one whom has performed the floating bill or a haunted deck with a thread reel will
find this very easy. We will then attach this thread/lipstick to the tabletop. It will actually be
stuck to the table.
We now have the spectator hold their hand out at waist level. As long as they hold out their
hand with the lipstick at a 45-degree angle to the lipstick. When the thread is extended
coming from the sleeve, looping around the thumb, when we move our hands upward the
thread will actually touch the spectator’s hand. To make the first touch will simply mime
touching in the air, raising our hand, causing the thread to touch the spectators hand - to
35
apply the second touch we simply drop our hand, then raise the hand once again. We have
now applied two separate touches.
In order to attach the “proof” in form of the lipstick marks, we simply apply a liberal amount of
lipstick to our fingers before performing the effect. I apply lipstick to my first and second
fingers, from a lipstick in my pocket before the effect begins. Now we can load the mark by
simply moving their hand, much as in the old cigarette ashes on the palm effect.
Very simple, prop less and utterly perplexing. I think this is the only effect, which actually
provides “proof” of the spectator being touched.
Meeting of Minds by Randall K. Schostag
© 2004 Randall K. Schostag
I call this Meeting of Minds because I use it often with lawyers in
situations were we are engaged in “drafting sessions” for closings
where a business is being sold. In this context, meeting of minds refers
to contacts where the parties must reach an agreement. Because I
work and live in the United States, the “story” relates to a U.S.A.
context.
While seated at a conference table with one or two persons with whom you are engaged in
business matters, you direct the conversation into TV psychic John Edwards and psychic
phenomena. You note that you have recently been reading about these things, and that you
have been astonished at how much psychic ability we each have. You offer to demonstrate
how concentration alone can permit you to accomplish things that extend our abilities
35
beyond those generally thought achievable.
At this point the demonstrator should present a display of skill such as that provided by
Doug Dyment’s “Mindsights”, namely a rapid magic square on the back of you business
card, using a two-digit number of the participant’s choice. This is done in this intimate
setting to redirect the discussion from the other business that has dominated the conference
table talk and shift it to your psychic prowess.
Having “proved” how focus and concentration allows one to achieve performance that
others would not think possible, you then describe how you have now been able to attain an
even higher level of ability than the first simple (?) exercise illustrates. You have learned that
through concentration and belief, two people can accomplish a strong psychic union. Again
you offer to show the participant(s) what you mean.
Effect
You remove a business card case, remove several (say five) business cards, and lay them on
the table. On the other side of the table you lay the business card wallet.
You explain that in this demonstration the participant will see how the two of you can
achieve this psychic union, and that this exercise will involve a choice from among a limited
number of items. You stress that it in order to achieve this synchronization of minds and thus
gain this power that you select things with which you are both familiar but which others may
not be familiar. You suggest that given the circumstances, you would like to use terms closely
associated with the closing on which you are both working.
You now write one word each on five different business cards. The words are considered
one at a time and you write: price, escrow, commission, and covenants. Participant agrees
35
that each of these words is well understood by you both but that they are less likely to be
words others, “off the street”, would use. Since the words are common to you both, you say,
and not as common to others, you think that the words should permit you both to achieve
synchronicity in your thinking and boost your collective mind power.
With each word written on separate business cards, you now turn the cards over and mix
them on the conference table. After they appear hopelessly lost, ask the participant to
choose one of the words from the five on the table. Just name one of the words to you. Say,
“That word is an interesting choice. Now let’s see what happens if we both concentrate on
the word. Let’s do an exercise whereby we both engage in selecting one of these words on
the table – sight unseen – and see what happens.” The two of you now proceed to select
one word from the many by the process of elimination. After eliminating four of the five
words, you arrive at a final card. Upon turning over the card, it is seen that the word you
have selected together is the same as the word that the participant chose on his or her own.
But there is more…
You acknowledge that this is pretty strong stuff and seemingly sometime more than a
coincidence. But there is something else just as striking. You had, in fact, suspected that
this word would play an important role today. Yesterday you had a premonition that
participant would chose that very word. Upon saying so, you pick up the business card case
that has been on the conference table the entire time, open it, and remove a slip of paper.
You explain that you had written something on the paper the prior day while you were
preparing for the meeting. You had simply had a sudden impulse about this word. Hand the
slip of paper, unopened, to the participant, and ask him or her to read it. It says,
“Participant’s name will focus on the following aspect during our discussion of the deal
tomorrow – whatever word participant has chosen.”
35
Method
There is nothing new in the methods to achieve the effect. The presentation
format may look strange to some of you, since the environment is one in which I work. Let’s
consider first the preparation and then each step.
Before the presentation, you must determine the five words that you want to use for the
effect. In my work, I have used the foregoing five words effectively, but if I did this in a
subsequent conference and thought that the lawyers or other parties may talk to each other,
I would change the words.
Write each of the words on a separate small paper (billet) and put into a card index in your
side suit jacket pocket. You want to know the order of these billets, of course, for future
retrieval.
For the card case, you may elect several systems, but I use Mark Striving’s Sight Unseen
case. You will conclude by using this wallet to load in the billet from the index that the
participant has selected. On the business card side of the wallet, put in several of your
business cards. Code the face of the top five cards with your “favorite system” so that you
can identify each card is unique.
While some of you may prefer something elaborate like Larry Becker’s system, I prefer a
simple nail nick. I want the participant to keep the card or cards after the demonstration.
You must previously assign and memorize each marking, whatever system you use, to each
word that you will use. When writing the words “randomly” on business cards, you must write
each word on its proper business card, coded for recognition from the face.
35
Everything else should be clear. After writing the words and turning the cards down, the
participant is now permitted to select any word. No matter which is chosen, you should be
able to identify it from the markings on the face. You now use a PATEO or similar force to
obtain the desired card and word.
At this point, I sit back as if all is done and try to elicit the appropriate response from the
participant. He or she should be under the impression that all is done with the
demonstration. It provides more than adequate time to obtain the correct billet from the
index and palm it. After some brief discussion about how fascinating it is to be able to
achieve this power through sympathetic thinking, describe the additional unusual fact as to
an urge you had to write down something the day before as you were preparing for the
meeting. Ask if they would like to see it, and open the Sight Unseen case and remove the
paper that you put there the prior day (?). This is the paper you obtained from the index
and has been palmed. Hand the paper to participant.
I hope that you like this. There is nothing new in this, but I have gotten some totally
astonished reactions. Admittedly, it is sometimes difficult to get the participant back to the
real reason you are meeting (a drafting session or similar activity in my case), so I try to use
this very close to the end of the meeting. To date, this kind of thing helps to build on my
relationship with key “gate keepers” and produces additional referrals and business for my
non-psychic life.
35
Mobile Telepathy by Doug Segal
© 2004 Doug Segal
Effect
You ask a spectator to write down the name & phone
number of a friend
who they could phone `right now' and
keep it hidden.
Next you borrow their mobile & after suitable furrowing
of brows and
the odd necessary subtlety or two (more on those later) you call and
address
their friend by name, explaining who you are, that their
friend is helping you in an ESP
experiment and could they call back
to confirm it's really them.
You can then segue into a revelation of an `invisible card' chosen at
distance as suggested
by Derren Brown in Pure Effect.
Method
The effect relies on the fact that the majority of people these days
a) Store all of their
personal numbers in their mobile & b) few
people bother to remember any numbers these
days.
Ask the punter:
`Please can you write down the name & telephone number of a
close
friend we could reach
on the phone right now don't show it
to
anyone'
`Please write their name exactly as you think
of them, so if you
friend is Ben but you call him Baz please put that so there is no
barrier in
35
you mind between you and them'
This rather strange sentence is so that the name they write will be
the same as the name
listed in their Mobile Phone book.
With any luck they will produce their mobile at this point to check
the number (I've tried this
5 times today and they have done
every
time though maybe that's a London thing) this is
good! It means
that you KNOW the number is in the phone already.
Obtain the name (and if you are the paranoid type the last digit of
the telephone number)
using your favourite peek technique/ device.
It works especially well with Richard
Osterlinds Perfected Centre Tear
because you can extemporise information about the
person by cold reading as
a cover for the peek which means that you have some information
should they
not pick up (see 'Problems' later).
`Please can I borrow your phone?' you ask.
Here comes the clever bit:
`Please can you unlock it for me?' This suggests to
the spec that you don't know your way
round a phone why would you? We are
supposed to be telepaths after all!
Then you need to use a special handling of the phone (n.b. I've
only worked this out for
Nokia model phones but they are nearly
ubiquitous,
you can just scroll through the names
but it's not as
impressive).
Take the phone in your right hand with your right thumb hovering
above the bottom right
35
key (it has a up arrow and a # on it). Go into
their phone list and using your LEFT
THUMB find the name you have
glimpsed COUNTING HOW MANY
KEYSTROKES YOU NEED TO GET THERE. If you
now press the
bottom right key with your right thumb and hold it down
it will a) display the number for you &
b) allow you to mime tapping
in the remaining number of digits in the phone number after the
ones
you counted to get the number (maybe muttering the last few digits
for verisimilitude)
without anything registering on the phone.
Releasing the button will allow you to just press
send and go through
to the thought of number.
> From here on in it's just acting.
Potential Problems:
1) What if they are not available? If for any reason they don't pick up
when you call you have
the option to leave them a message revealing the
identity of the person who's name & number
you have divined along the lines
of 'Hi Jill, I'm a magician (or however you describe yourself)
demonstrating something with your cousin Paul - give him a call when you
get this and he'll tell
you how great it is' - I've actually got a booking
off the back of this
2) What if there are two 'Pete's'? That's why the paranoid looks at
the last digit! - Me, I'd
just blag it..
3) What if the names not in the phone? Well you've got the
name,
surely you're a big enough
and nasty enough Mentalist to get yourself out of a hole with that much info!? The way I
perform, an
occasional partial miss like this is ok just make sure the next
effect is a belter
35
Out Of My Mind by Graham North
© 2003 Graham North
I
magine the scene: The Master Mentalist is about to bring his act to a close. For the
past three-quarters of an hour he has read minds, predicted the future and performed
the seven psychic and psychological wonders of the universe!
He takes his bow and receives – not the standing ovation that is his due – but mere polite
applause. What has happened? Why does the audience not recognise his genius?
The answer could be that the performer is suffering from a rare problem known as
cleverclogs syndrome (also known in the US as smartass syndrome). This occurs when the
performer is so good that he loses his humility. The audience begin to feel inferior in the
company of the Master and may even begin to suspect that he is tricking them, or worse still,
fooling them. Not unnaturally, this makes them uncomfortable, and whilst they give credit to
the mental showman for his undoubted skill, they don’t actually
like
him.
What can be done to reduce the problem? Here is an alternative scenario.
Effect
The performer invites a young lady from the audience onto the stage and seats her on a
chair or stool.
Marvo:
Fiona, have you ever had your mind read?
Fiona:
(With a touch of apprehension)
No.
Marvo:
Well, you’re not going to have it read tonight, either. Because, tonight,
Fiona,
you
are going to read
my
mind.
35
Fiona:
Ooh!
From an A4 envelope Marvo produces five sheets of thin card, each card bearing a strange
symbol. The performer explains that the symbols were designed specifically for use in
ESP experiments, similar to the one about to take place.
“I am going to think of one of these symbols,” says Marvo, “and send it telepathically to you.
Here is a drawing pad and felt tip pen. When I’m ready to transmit my thoughts to you, I
want you to stare at the white paper, and as soon as you receive a symbol in your mind, draw
it boldly on the pad. I’m now going to choose one of the symbols to send to you.”
Marvo selects one of the symbol cards and places it, without showing it to Fiona or the
audience, back in the envelope. “Are you ready? Here goes”. Miracle man strikes a pose
and the room falls silent. In a few seconds Fiona starts to draw a shape on the pad.
“Don’t show it to the audience, yet”, says Marvo, standing behind her.
“I’m now going to show everyone, except you, the symbol in my mind.” He removes the card
from the envelope and displays, above Fiona’s head, the cross symbol.
“Fiona, please show the audience the symbol that you drew.”
She turns her pad to the audience, revealing an unmistakable large, black cross.
“Fiona, you did it!” exclaims Marvo. The audience go wild.
35
Method
You can either choose someone in the audience with whom you have perfect mental rapport,
or – and this is my preferred method – have all five symbols in the envelope, and simply take
out whichever one the spectator draws!
Yes, I know the method sounds simple to the point of being silly, but it works. It works
because all the attention is on the spectator, not you. She is the star and the audience is
willing her to succeed.
In order to make everything run smoothly, the envelope and cards are slightly gaffed.
There are two sets of symbol cards. The first set is normal; the second set has no star
symbol. In addition, the cards in the second set are trimmed on one of the short edges by
varying amounts in order to produce an index.
The envelope is card-backed, which means that it remains rigid however many cards are
inside, and it has a cutout at the open end to allow access to the index, which can’t be seen
when the flap is closed.
35
I’ve drawn mini symbols on the index end of the cards as an aid to quick location. When
displaying the card to the audience, my fingers cover the index symbol. The difference in
the card’s length is not noticed.
Working
At the start, all nine symbol cards are in the envelope. Remove the set of five together and
display each symbol. When it comes to choosing one, place the star in the envelope at the
rear of the other four, completing the indexed set. Place the remaining four cards face down
on a table or chair.
You can discover the symbol that the spectator has drawn either by listening to the sound or
watching the pen, but it really isn’t necessary. You can just look! There’s no reason why
you shouldn’t see what has been drawn. As far as the audience is concerned, you’ve made
your choice of symbol and you are transmitting it to the spectator, not the other way around.
As soon as you know which symbol it is, pull the indexed card as far as you can without it
showing. Then, when you “reveal your thoughts”, you can reach into the envelope without
looking, just as if there was only one card in it. Discard the “empty envelope”, so the
audience focuses on the symbol card only.
It is, of course, important that you reveal your symbol first – it’s not a prediction, so please
don’t be tempted to play it that way. The climax is the revelation of the spectator’s symbol,
not yours, and that’s what makes this effect so audience - friendly.
35
Review - Cool Readings by Gene Nielsen
Reviewed by Arcane
available from Gene Nielsen, genen@silcom.com
Y
ou know I love something that’s devious, and that just what ‘Cool Readings’ is –
devious!
When I first picked up a copy of "Dynamite Mentalism" by George Anderson, I didn’t have
a clue what to do with it. I’m sure many who have joined the ranks recently would also be in
the same position [IF they took the time to study this manuscript!].
Having now served a fair amount of my time reading anything and everything connected with
Mentalism and other arcane practices. I now know where and how it fits into the grand
scheme of things. What does this have to do with ‘Cool Readings’? One thing – I wish
Gene had released it way back then. It would have saved me so much heartache…
You see ‘Cool Readings’ is a system for Q&A. No wait a minute that under sells it….
‘Cool Readings’ is a system that can be used for almost any type of reading. Let me explain
why I say this. The ‘Cool Readings’ System relies on 4 things: A memorised stack
(Stebbins, Eight Kings, Wonky Duck), basic Numerology for a name and two other thing,
which I feel it would be unfair to disclose but they are very easily picked up. Once you have
an understanding of the system you can pretty much use it as you see fit. As and when you
feel like it.
I feel that many may have already decided that ‘Cool Readings’ is not for them; I believe
that’s a pity. You see the only thing Gene does not give you is a/the memorised stack.
Now I’m sorry but if you don’t know a decent stack by now, then why you shouldn’t be
35
reading Center Tear. I’d better make this clear before I go any further – ‘Cool Readings’
uses a memorised stack but it DOES NOT USE PLAYING CARDS! So
everything else is in there. Sure you can expand it, but to be honest there’s no real need.
Gene lays it all out in black & white on the page for you. You can tell ‘Cool Readings’ is
something that Gene is both proud of and something that he uses.
In the manuscript you get all the ‘basic’ goodies and 7 variations or ways to use the basic
system. The great thing about the system is that it's not rocket science, so it allows you to
do the important thing – the reading(s).
If you were to use ‘Cool Readings’ straight out of the box I’m not sure how it would sit with a
UK audience. But if you take the time to read over the 7 variations, you‘ll see that
different elements of the system can be used together or on their own – just like Lego! You
can use it how you see fit and that’s what I feel is the beauty of the ‘Cool Readings’ system.
It can be delivered how YOU want to deliver it and it can be put together how YOU want
to put it together. So I still feel it has a place in the UK performer's library.
All in all, if you’ve considered putting a Q&A section into your act, ‘Cool Readings' is
worth buying.
If you’re interested in Q&A, ‘Cool Readings is worth buying.
If you want a lovely set of mnemonics for the letters & numbers used in numerology, look no
further. For this alone is worth the price…no more charts!
Contact – Gene Nielsen, genen@silcom.com
35
Review - Fat Free Mentalism by John Riggs
Reviewed by Bruno M
Available at:
http://www.jonsaintgermain.com/books.htm
77 pages $35.00
M
any newcomers to Mentalism soon discover that a lot of the classic books
depend very heavily on props, and are outdated, both in presentation and
patter. These classics effects are of course worth learning as the foundations
one must build upon and improve in order to grow in the art.
“Fat Free Mentalism” can be defined as: “Mentalism using little or no props and no
obfuscating patter designed to overwhelm the audience”. One important clarification point
should be made: this book is not about impromptu mentalism. There are some effects that
can be done impromptu, but for the most part you will need small items that generally people
don’t carry. This doesn’t defy the purpose of the book.
In this book John Riggs wanted to demonstrate, it is not only possible to do strong
mentalism without the big and numerous props, and the boring lectures on ESP or psychic
phenomena but it is advisable, you as the performer spend more time on presentation. The
patter of his effects is written with one objective in mind: “fun and dramatic entertainment”.
His writing style is simple, concise and to the point; exactly the way it should be on all magic
books. The effects he shares with us are practical, tried and tested in the real world. No
pipe-dreams.
The book is divided in three parts:
35
1) “Ostin-Tatious Presentations!”
This part deals with effects using the Ostin-style bulldog clip. It describes three quite
clever effects using this clip. I wasn’t familiar with this device before reading this book but I
must say it’s quite a handy tool to have for predictions. In one effect in particular, you can
put the clip around the neck of a spectator with your prediction completely visible at all
times; then take the paper off the clip and the prediction is correct. It can be used more than
once since his reset time is only a few seconds. You can carry this device in a pocket and
can be built with two common items for less than 5 dollars. The only disadvantage is that
you have to take the paper off the clip yourself, but good presentation skills solve this
problem.
2) “That’s using your head!”
Part two provides you with an entire 30-minute act, which can be performed with no more
than a LePaul wallet, some index cards, envelopes and dollar bills.
Riggs also includes some more ‘Fat Free’ effects, such as: “The Last of the Spike Tricks”,
which is a Russian roulette using paper cups and a spike, and one of my personal favourites.
If you like “Desire” by Max Maven (in “The Red Book of Mentalism”), you’ll love “Cards
of Desire” which is adapted to the non-verbal communication theme; a thought from Ford
Kross allows you to perform it using the psychic ploy, should you need it.
This book is really not for beginners. And the proof of that is “Name and Sign Killer”. A
difficult routine but well worth the effort to master it. Two billets are written: an astrological
sign and the first person the spectator went out. The performer divines both without ever
opening the billets.
Riggs offers some advice for those of us who have trouble finding a way to present our metal
35
bending routine, along with some essays on the center tear, how to improve social skills and a
reading prop. All very informative and provides much need food for thought.
3) “The Art of the Read”
The third part of the book deals with a method for Q&A and a Cold Reading system. He
describes an excellent reading system without any props, cards or billets. You just look at
the person and describe his personality traits. It soon became my favourite reading system
for impromptu situations where I don’t have my tarot deck or runes.
I think that the method of Q&A presented here defies the purpose of the book. It uses a
somewhat large bag that doesn’t fit on the “Fat Free Mentalism.” There are methods for
Q&A that would fit in this book more nicely, as one with only envelopes and billets for
example.
Since the title of the book is “Fat Free Mentalism”, when I first bought it, I was expecting
more impromptu effects that the ones that are provided here. Nevertheless, I consider this
one of the best of John Riggs books and one of the best in my collection.
I’m sure nobody will regret buying it since it’s worth every penny; and for those of you who
still carry a “truckload full of props” to your show, this is essential!
35
Review - Explicit Content by Sean Fields
Reviewed by Sean Boon
Available most dealers priced £29.99
The tag line reads, “Sean Fields long awaited book on visual mentalism
is finally here!”
This is certainly true, this book contains nearly a dozen visual mental
effects, the first half of the book concentrating on psychokinetic
bending. Whether it is spoons, keys, rings or pens you wish to bend you will be sure to find
something in here.
Sean covers a few key-bending techniques and even describes a device you can make on a
tight budget for use with your bending routines. Some of the key bending methods seemed
to be nothing new as far as I was aware although there may be slight adjustments to handling.
The Callous bend seemed to be of particular interest to me as the method fascinated me
more than the effect, also because this is the only key bend in the book that can use a
borrowed key.
I’ll admit that I cringed when I read the routines involving bending someone’s ring because of
the value and sentiment attached to such items but was relieved when Sean commented in
the routines closing that you could do this with something like a bottle top instead which in
my opinion is a perfect substitute suitable for walk around performers.
The pen bending is an unusual idea but I have seen the method applied elsewhere, however
the second pen routine had potential in my mind as I can see this being a possible impromptu
35
demonstration of PK as it uses a natural property found in a lot of pens, funnily enough this
effect was apparently donated by Banachek.
The PK bending section draws to a close and we start moving into other visual mental
miracles, I’ll admit that while they read well in the sales blurb I found that they became a little
too mental-magic for my persona. The Tesla experiment reads well, a thought is felt, seen
and heard to leave the spectator.
This is all true in practice; unfortunately I was a bit disappointed upon reading it as I felt
that the amount of gimmicks used to achieve this effect where too bulky. I guess if I saw it
performed I could be converted, but it just seemed over the top.
There are two effects where water turns into ice, which is really nice, and I would love to see
them performed, unfortunately again because of the incredible miraculous nature I don’t
think an audience would buy into it unless you were a magician who performs mental effects.
It struck me as too much of an illusion than a mental feat.
The book closes with what I can only say is a blatant duplication of Derren Browns Blair
Witch effect, I can see this book being bought just for this simply because it is one of
Derrens ‘tricks’.
It sounds like I’m not happy with the book, this isn’t true. It just is not suited to me as what I
consider a ‘pure’ mentalist. There are some wonderful ideas in here, giving suggestion
methodology to bending, adding a visual element to the process of bending and even
descriptions of devices you can make. But I feel that the public isn't quite ready for the
unbelievable.
35
35
If PK is your thing then you probably should take a look at this book. If you are prepared to
perform the other routines and are not put off by preparation times then also for the money
it couldn’t hurt. There are some very strong miracles in here, just not for me.
Document Outline
- Chilling with Ford by Ford Kross
- Cookie Cutter Mentalists by Paul Alberstat
- Male-Female by The Grey Man
- PK Lipstick by Luke Jermay
- Meeting of Minds by Randall K. Schostag
- Mobile Telepathy by Doug Segal
- Out Of My Mind by Graham North
- Review - Cool Readings by Gene Nielsen
- Review - Fat Free Mentalism by John Riggs
- Review - Explicit Content by Sean Fields
Wyszukiwarka
Podobne podstrony:
Center Tear Magazine 2 4
Center Tear Magazine 1 5
Center Tear Magazine 1 2
Center Tear Magazine 1 3
Center Tear Magazine 3 0
Center Tear Magazine 1 2 (appendix)
Center Tear Magazine 2 6
Center Tear Magazine 3 1
Center Tear Magazine 2 5
Center Tear Magazine 1 4
Center Tear Magazine 2 1
Center Tear Magazine 2 3
Center Tear Magazine 1 1
Center Tear Magazine 2 2
Center Tear Magazine 2 7
Center Tear Magazine 3 2
Max Maven Center Tear Vol 1, No 6
John Carney Prediction Carneycopia (Center Tear)
John Carney Prediction Carneycopia (Center Tear)
więcej podobnych podstron