talkmagic.co.uk

Hi Guys,

I have been working on this routine for a while now. Basically, before you start the show you get members of the audience to write down a memory on a piece of paper and place it into the memory box on the side. You explain that when you were younger you collected tickets for events and kept them in the memory box.

Later on in the show the perform is able to divine the memories written down.

I realize the box idea is in no way new but I feel this is a different approach to a Q and A because its not as heavy. The audience are also placing the paper into a box they can relate to instead of an old fashion box which looks like a prop.

I'm considering releasing a PDF with the routine for £5 which includes full patter, a detailed explanation on timing and a guide to making your own box. What do you guys think? Thank you.

Q&A is something I want to move more into. I considered using a box with a clever switching mechanism - but decided in the end to work along the propless way. However if you publish this I will buy. I like your idea. For some audiences it could be a very good approach.

It sound a great idea Ollie. And one that could be used in a Magic Act as well as in a Mental Act..

Does lighten the whole procedure.

Tony B Before you delve into the in depth books on Q & A have a look at 'The Q & A Answer Act', a 20 page book by Eddie Burke.

It will set you on the right road in an easy manner.

Allen Tipton

There are basically two approaches to Q&A:

The old-school approach is for the performer to answer unseen questions, which are usually meaningful and therefore very powerful. This has the advantage of being theatrically very strong, but perhaps too strong to include as anything less than a whole act. You also have the disadvantage that it's hard to pitch this as less than psychic, if that's not your ideal.

The newer approach is simply to be reading minds en masse - working out what people would have written on the piece of paper.

This is a lot easier to slip in, but you run into the problem that the act is a lot less meaningful - so why should anyone care?

I like the idea of using memories as a basic premise, since you're dealing with the personal information of the group - you're talking about them, so of course they're going to care.

Dominic Rougier wrote:There are basically two approaches to Q&A:

The old-school approach is for the performer to answer unseen questions, which are usually meaningful and therefore very powerful. This has the advantage of being theatrically very strong, but perhaps too strong to include as anything less than a whole act. You also have the disadvantage that it's hard to pitch this as less than psychic, if that's not your ideal.

The newer approach is simply to be reading minds en masse - working out what people would have written on the piece of paper.

This is a lot easier to slip in, but you run into the problem that the act is a lot less meaningful - so why should anyone care?

I like the idea of using memories as a basic premise, since you're dealing with the personal information of the group - you're talking about them, so of course they're going to care.

Thank you for your comment. I feel that Memory Box is the newer approach but has elements of the Old-school approach in it as you do interact with the audience on a very personally level as a Memory is an extremely personal experience.

Actually, if you go way back in time you will find that 99% of what was fed back to the audience as "answers" was pure canned quips based on gender, age, etc. Robert Nelson produced a three volume series on this very method, a collection of what some might call "Barnum Statements" now days.

The majority of the working pros out there use NO box or collection device outside a common basket or glass bowl. More and more are doing away with the slips and going on the John Edward route (especially if you have solid Reading skills). The reason is quite logical; the only people that are concerned with all the trickery, switches and gaffs are other magicians, the public just wants to hear you talk about them. If you watch real psychics they simply ask people what's on their mind or do the vague point to an area of the audience and say something akin to "I'm sensing someone in this area that's got a concern about their mother or some older woman that was like a mother. . . I'm seeing an S I think it is, there's an S sound in the first part of their name. . ."

This fishing technique will typically result in someone in the defined area standing up and forcing the general description into their situation and voila! The Readers is on their way to sainthood.


I can appreciate the concept of your bulk switching system but as you have stated, it's not something "new" and too, there are other methods available that are far cleaner. The biggest problem however, is getting folks to participate in the way you are envisioning things; I found long ago that the odds are quite low when it comes to this type of approach and you will see superior results by passing a bowl through the audience to collect the slips. . . Spiritualists ministers and Evangelists have been doing it over nearly 150 years with tremendous results

Craig Browning wrote:Actually, if you go way back in time you will find that 99% of what was fed back to the audience as "answers" was pure canned quips based on gender, age, etc. Robert Nelson produced a three volume series on this very method, a collection of what some might call "Barnum Statements" now days.

The majority of the working pros out there use NO box or collection device outside a common basket or glass bowl. More and more are doing away with the slips and going on the John Edward route (especially if you have solid Reading skills). The reason is quite logical; the only people that are concerned with all the trickery, switches and gaffs are other magicians, the public just wants to hear you talk about them. If you watch real psychics they simply ask people what's on their mind or do the vague point to an area of the audience and say something akin to "I'm sensing someone in this area that's got a concern about their mother or some older woman that was like a mother. . . I'm seeing an S I think it is, there's an S sound in the first part of their name. . ."

This fishing technique will typically result in someone in the defined area standing up and forcing the general description into their situation and voila! The Readers is on their way to sainthood.


I can appreciate the concept of your bulk switching system but as you have stated, it's not something "new" and too, there are other methods available that are far cleaner. The biggest problem however, is getting folks to participate in the way you are envisioning things; I found long ago that the odds are quite low when it comes to this type of approach and you will see superior results by passing a bowl through the audience to collect the slips. . . Spiritualists ministers and Evangelists have been doing it over nearly 150 years with tremendous results

Wow, thank you for the information Craig. I feel that the " I'm sensing an S" approach is something which can very dramatic and meaningful for spectators and Memory Box sort of takes a calmer approach.

I'm going to be releasing this tomorrow and I will send someone a free copy of it to review. I will choose someone tonight so send me a PM and tell me why I should choose you!

Just so I'm clear... Is it your particular box (the secret of, rather than a physical item) that you're selling? £5 seems alarmingly cheap for a new way of gimmicking a box rather than those ways that have stood an awfully long test of time.

I've constructed two OM boxes for Q&A - one modern and one aged, used dependant on the audience/performance type. I really can't think why I'd need another with a different 'working' - but perhaps at £5 it might be worth a punt!

That said, gimmick-free Q&A is the way forward don't ya know

Vanderbelt wrote:
That said, gimmick-free Q&A is the way forward don't ya know

Amen!

Vanderbelt wrote:Just so I'm clear... Is it your particular box (the secret of, rather than a physical item) that you're selling? £5 seems alarmingly cheap for a new way of gimmicking a box rather than those ways that have stood an awfully long test of time.

I've constructed two OM boxes for Q&A - one modern and one aged, used dependant on the audience/performance type. I really can't think why I'd need another with a different 'working' - but perhaps at £5 it might be worth a punt!

That said, gimmick-free Q&A is the way forward don't ya know

Yes, I'm teaching how to construct the box yourself in less than 30 minutes. My way of constructing the box is in no way revolutionary but its simple and it fits the routine well. The main selling point of this PDF is the routine as I feel that is it a different approach and style to normal Question and Answer routines and it justifies the box. I also include ways of hiding the information and a method of being able to perform the whole routine blindfolded without an assistant.

Am I allowed to plug a friend's work?

http://www.marketplaceofthemind.com/mannerisms.html

Sounds interesting.

In all honesty, I've never had a problem, or in fact a need to justify the box. Audiences are quite happy to accept that they're writing something down and it's being collected in something. That something is a box which means I can't do anything sneaky to look at the information written. Of course, none of this is verbalised. What justification is needed?

I do like the idea of this memory box though, I think it's a cute presentational angle. I don't think it's required though.

Vanderbelt wrote:Sounds interesting.

In all honesty, I've never had a problem, or in fact a need to justify the box. Audiences are quite happy to accept that they're writing something down and it's being collected in something. That something is a box which means I can't do anything sneaky to look at the information written. Of course, none of this is verbalised. What justification is needed?

I do like the idea of this memory box though, I think it's a cute presentational angle. I don't think it's required though.

I completely agree. I doesnt need to be justified but its good if it is just by using one sentence and saying that its from your childhood. You are right that it doesn't as with Derren who uses old fashioned wooden boxes for the billets. No one ever questions why he uses those boxes. The box links in with the whole presentation of the routine and allows you to incorporated the box into your patter.

The problem with even mentioning the box, especially in a novelty form such as this is that it brings attention to it. Once it's in people's mind they'll start thinking about it... you've made the box 'special' and so will they.

I'm really dead against bringing attention to unnecessary props if I don't have to. If I thought about the amount of time I use envelopes when I simply don't have to I'd get a headache. But the audience never questions them so why mention it?
"I've put these photos in an envelope... because I used to work in an office and really miss the stationery."

A dynamic performance misdirects an audience's thoughts.