talkmagic.co.uk

I've been messing around for a while now with a memory effect based very much on a Paul Brook presentation from Chrysalis of a Polymath, but employing my own method.

My take on it involves the free selection of one of a collection of tickets, each bearing a genuinely different number of a length of between 50 and 100 digits. This is rapidly memorised by the performer and then recited. The performance of this as something interesting and exciting is, it is fair to say, a test of showmanship, which is one of the things that draws me to it.

I've various ideas for giving it a bit of a zhoosh, (getting them to invest in the ability, giving the thing a bit of a twist), but am quite curious as to what people's "vanilla" feeling is as to how long the numbers should be. The length of the numbers can be fairly limitless; certainly limited more by the attention span of the audience than the memory of the performer, so I'm interested as to what kind of length of number people will widen their eyes at, and what length of number people will roll their eyes at.

The test for me is to sustain interest throughout the recitation, but my concern is that if you show that the number is too long before you get into the presentation of the recall of it, people will automatically be prejudiced against it. I'm hoping there is a goldilocks region where the number is long enough to be impressive, but not so long that people will fear (and then attain) boredom.

The thing about Paul's presentation is that it's done on stage or at least to a large sit-down audience who would be comfortable to sit down through him reciting a really long number. If you were to try it in a more intimate venue I would think that the number would have to be at least half the digits shorter or else peoples attention would wander or worse still, they'd get bored of you.

I would think that for a 'close up' presentation even about 30 digits would be pretty impressive although it would be hard to present it so you didn't look like you were just showing off. Maybe if it was part of a larger presentation of mental agility or possibly as the culmination of a piece where the numbers you memorised had some sort of personal significance to the sudience members. Maybe if you memorised several peoples phone numbers which they had also written down and put into envelopes, shuffled and then you divined which belonged to each person.

Just off the top of my head though.

could it be something you can do, and go back to throughout the rest of a performance? rather than a stand alone piece? you keep interrupting yourself and shouting out a few digits at a time...numerical tourettes as t'were...

if you involved book tests and things, could you force pages that'll then have a relevance to the big digits too?

I think listening to someone reel off a 100 digit number may be too much...as being maybe a little too 'perfect', as well as a bit dry to sit through..

thats my vanilla...all over your face

i reckon the key may be to get people to almost play along, maybe 33 digits long would be enough i reckon...i say that number specifically too..

Just a quick thought...

Maybe you could choose an enormous number but have the audience decide where you start. For example, use a number that is 4,000 digits long and a participant or committee decide(s) that you should recite ten sequential digits, starting at 3,128. Or, even better, the digits at positions 193, 648, 992, 1,004 and 3,879. That way you have just five reveals, but each is based on a bonkers-hard memorisation.

Thanks guys. I'm definitely thinking of this as a stage effect, verging on a talk about memory techniques.

I could do the 4,000 digit thing, with a bit of additional thought, though the method wouldn't cope with naming specific digits within the number. Definitely a nice way of presenting memorisation, though, so worth devising a method for! In fact something is already occuring to me on that front.

I think if I was looking at performing this as anything more than just a standalone bit, I'd definitely look into returning to the number. My only qualm would be verification. I foresee someone sat in the audience having to keep tabs, which seems a bit unfair, or someone verifying at the end, which seems tedious. These issues don't seem insurmountable though.