talkmagic.co.uk

Oy!

Jean Eugene Roberts wrote:Why dont you start by looking through your deck putting one card into an envelope and into your wallet then you can either get out a second deck if you have one or have them choose the same colour and number (i.e a black seven).

I cannot do that because that is not how On The Mark works, and personally I think OTM is much better because it is entierly mental, theres no real playing cards involved except one, which makes it much less like "magic".

I performed this effect for the first time today, WITHOUT a second wallet and it worked perfectly. I think this may have been because of the fact that I mentioned that I keep "secret things" in my wallet, and I let the spectators glimpse that it was filled with money and credit cards, not envelopes.

I'm deffinetly going to have to work on the patter. But I think I have actually been perswaded that a second wallet is not neccicery! Hurrah!



P.S
Thank you Dale for reminding me about Between the Lines, I just dug that out of my box again and its safely in my purse.

Tom
xx






P.P.S
I am now very interesting in Mentalism Wallets, and am thinking of getting another one, with a place to put coins, atleast six outs, and a peek method or two... any suggestions? (note: the outs must be big enough to hold an envelope containing a playing card...)

Eshly wrote:

Lady of Mystery wrote:Well I quite like them so

Yeh, but to be fair Lady of Mystery you do believe in horoscopes.

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at there Eshly

Barnum statements are nothing like horoscopes. Just get tricks of the mind and read it already

And don't explain how it's done. If you do that, you've just spoilt a kicker ending. Would you explain any other trick on the back of a business card?

He thinks that because ladyofmystery's not a skeptic (I don't know if this is true ??) that barnum statements are more likley to impress her than a cynic.
Eshly, I have to respectfully disagree. Barnum statements are discredited if you know about them: in many brances of pop psychology there are fantastic and wonderful ways of being able to tell everything about a person- but when it all boils down what is left is a bunch of barnum statments. Psychic Skepticism has little to do with it I'm afraid: If you frame yourself as a psychological genius then you can get away with it. Luckily- you actually have an advantage. I am guessing you perform at your college: Remember that Barnum statements work by saying things which seem so individual and personal but which are in fact generic. Obviously at a college, you are performing with teenagers where there is still ego and self discovery which will enhance the barnum statements because it will further blind people to the fact that their supposedley unique qualities are in fact applicable to everyone. Also with teenagers, social facades are very prominent which means that it acts as a barrier to the more intimate levels of a person- and therefore I think this adds a depper dynamic to the barnum statements.
I do not like the idea that presentation is this magical cure for everything. An obvious trick done by a great performer is still not great. Howeber, Barnum statements are REALLY one of those things where it depends ENTIRLEY on the presentation- by that I mean, how it is done. Throwing out 'One minute you are introverted the next minute your are extroverted' will not do- you have to polish it up. If you don't believe you can polish a turd- I disagree- I mean, take a look at David Cameron.
Also, don't forget how specific you can be. In the aforementioned Derren Brown reading, it mentioned 'that a parent is no longer there'- which is spot on. But it covered it: 'at least emotionally'. Trust me, if I read that through the eyes of belief (which in your audience's case would be that you have psychologial aptitude- I think??) that would feel very intimate and personal and specific to me and my circumstances. But it's not- it could have meant that a parent left, went to prison, divorced, has disagreeing / arguing with you, doesn't connect with you e.t.c. Thinking about it- this applies to half of the people I know- so yes a healthy risk, but the payout is enourmous.
Finally- I will discredit what I have said- be very very careful with this stuff. It is quite potent and personal. I wouldn't reccomend using Barnum statements in this context- I do not like the idea of doing such an intimite reading with an audience- one to one perhaps or the less intimate 'readings', but in order for the more powerful Barnum statements to work they need to be quite personal and un-private. If you do not think doing Barnum statements will fullfill the vision you have- trust your OWN judegement- by all means listen to others, consider their points and occasionally concede, but most importantly TRUST YOURSELF.
'At the centre of your being you have the answer; you know who you are and what you want'
Lao Tzu

i actually think cold-reading should be pretty much banned - in the wrong hands, or rather, those that lack morals and a large dose of stupidity/greed...they will happily band the CR stuff around like they're handing out free sweeties...

whatever you utter, you have a moral responsibility for...

tiny rant over with...

back to Barnum - i dont think it trumps the first effect personally...somehow, you've predicted or influenced (depending on how you wanna present it) someone to make a set amount of choices...you then follow it up with some barnum statements?

a good chance other people watching will also say "hey, thats me!" to those comments...and would indirectly suggest that it really could have been any bu**er that came up on stage...

no...

you need to either personalise the effect as a "kicker", or come up with something else....well, thats my opinion anyway...no better or worse than a house-fly's...

what you could do, is learn someone's name before you perform, and write that name on the back of the card before you perform it all...

so you show that their card is the only one in the wallet, the only card in the envelope, and then ask them "by the way, what was your name again?"

"Sara..."

"Thank you Sara, i knew today would be a good day to do this..."

and then rotate the card around, and it has her name written on it...

IAIN wrote:whatever you utter, you have a moral responsibility for......

Something else which should be engraved on every Magician/Mentalist's heart.

I think Iain's idea is the way to go- the second card has some piece of personal information about them on it that you just throw out there.

If you use a nail writer to write that prediction, it would serve as a good contrast to the card prediction- the methods also cancel each other out. "He can't possibly have written that card, since you don't WRITE cards, but he also can't have had a million cards with different names on them in his wallet, since I told him my name AFTER he had the card in his hand!"

I know this may be completely useless now, but I wondered if perhaps you could have in the wallet a piece of paper with a psychological force on it? Then before doing the trick, you can ask the spectator to, for example, "Name a vegetable" saying something about how that shows that they are an intuitive person and then if they answer with the correct word then u can say at the end "Look, you remember I asked you at the start for a vegetable..." you get the point. It works well for me, I got a good reaction from it today in fact.

Thanks,
Jake x

Edantes wrote:I know this may be completely useless now, but I wondered if perhaps you could have in the wallet a piece of paper with a psychological force on it? Then before doing the trick, you can ask the spectator to, for example, "Name a vegetable" saying something about how that shows that they are an intuitive person and then if they answer with the correct word then u can say at the end "Look, you remember I asked you at the start for a vegetable..." you get the point. It works well for me, I got a good reaction from it today in fact.

Thanks,
Jake x

It is never too late as somebody may gain something from your answer even if it is not Eshly.

The problem that Eshly has, is that he is afraid to perform in any professional sense, so rather than just go out and perform and see what works and what doesn't he throws road blocks in his path. No matter what you suggest, no matter how basic, logical or reasonable he will always come up with some strange reason why it won't work for him. Don't believe me? go look through all his other posts, the common theme is always the same, and its always why something won't work for him, no matter how hard he tries to hide the theme.

Sorry Eshly it is the simple truth, but I am very glad you do post as I'm sure all the advice and help that is freely given to you will actually help others on this blog.

I'd be tempted to reverse this. Have three people stand up. Pull your wallet out and pull out one envelope and a piece of paper. Think for a moment, then put the envelope back, and zip it up, leaving it tabled. Have the three standing people name a number, whoever gets closest to the number on the piece of paper is the one to work with. Proceed as normal. You wouldn't even have to use an effect for this, just do it for real. You can claim that the person who gets closest is someone you can better influence for this particlular effect.

So long before you get to the reveal, at a stage where they don't know what is about to happen, you have already subconsciously sold them that the envelope contains one, and only one, envelope. Also, having dumped the envelope out, the wallet goes away immediately but not hurriedly, perhaps as the participant is opening the envelope. In a sense you want to make the envelope, and not the wallet, of importance to you, so that in recollecting the effect later, you offer people the possibility of forgetting there was even a wallet involved.

I'd say, too, the beauty of Mark's wallet is that it does not look capable of holding 52 cards. I think that will confound most people's attempts to figure it out to begin with.