talkmagic.co.uk

Indeed there has been quite a bit of editing and even more subsequently. The choice is now quite clear, we can either carry on with the thread in the full spirit of the discussion whereby enquirers are helped or we can just lock the whole thing right now.

[lock][/lock]

cc100 wrote:Hi,

I was watching Dynamo recently and noticed that he was performing the sort of mindreading that Derren Brown does; that is, working out the place or object of which a spectator is thinking without billets, s**** w******, etc. If these spectators aren't stooges, then surely there must be a book or something which teaches these skills. I was hoping that it might be taught in 13 Steps to Mentalism, but it isn't. Could anybody give me any advice on this?

Thanks very much,

cc100

Remember its not live. What you see is not a true representation. On DB's stage shows, you see a true representation, its just that everything is orientated so 1)It is not a big deal 2)You forget the previous steps.

Its the A>B>C thing.

On the subject of "pure" mind reading, there's the ungimmicked version of "which hand is the coin in" (the best explanation for which I have seen is in Richard Osterlind's book Mind Over Matter, largely because he gives two different methods and performance techniques).

There's also Patrick G. Redford's Prevaricator, which is, in some respects, a similar trick (similar type of effect, but using two participants instead of two hands), but a totally different method.

The thing is, if it were possible to read someone's mind for a complicated thought, for real, why would we need tricks? Even those performers with genuine psychology skills and body language expertise use tricks.

Talking of Richard Osterlind, I think I now know how he felt over at the Magic Café...

Sorry Tomo and Duplicity, if my responses were based on edited posts, rather than what was originally written. It might be helpful if edited posts were marked as such by moderators, as they are on other forums.

Note from Mods: Very often we do and they're marked like this in blue and bold font. However in many other instances there either isn't enough time or there are underlying reasons why such a note doesn't appear. We do try to amend any subsequent posts where original wording has been quoted but where there are many nested quotes (Grrr!) it isn’t always an easy task. Apologies for any confusion, of course, if the original posts weren't causing trouble we wouldn’t have to edit at all .

Yeah you're right Ace of Kev, I misremembered the method behind the Derren Brown trick. The fact that I developed a false memory of the effect is a testament to Derren's presentation and use of misdirection.

That's a good point Part-Timer, if someone could divine another's thoughts purely by reading body language there wouldn't be any need to resort to conjuring techniques. However, perhaps methods involving props and legerdemain are simply more sure-fire than those relying on psychology and body reading. That's not to say that such skills do not exist (I hope). In Frost Around the World Derren Brown did a piece of mind-reading which seemingly didn't require props. Again, this might have been altered through editing. I'm hoping, though, that body reading and psychology can genuinely be applied in mentalism and not just as veils for billet switching, etc. I was hoping through this post to find out a bit more about them and whether I would be able to use them.

I am aware though, as many people have pointed out (and as my Enigma show example evidences), that spectators might forget the method behind the effect. I've performed Corinda's Centre Tear once, and the spectator forgot about the writing part. However, I was just wondering whether a similar thing could be done without any paper or writing involved.

It's not real. Sorry. Anything psychologically driven is prone to failing at some point or another. We use techniques to make it look like its real. It sounds like you have a lot of study ahead of you - enjoy it, rather than be dissapointed when you look behind the curtain.

Surely some of it is real? I know for a fact that some of the psychological techniques in The Devil's Picturebook genuinely use...well, psychology. I know that a lot of mentalism revolves around switches, writing, etc. masquerading as body reading and psychology. I was just hoping part of it was true. I'm not saying that they have to have a 100% success rate.

They do, however they don't always work. I'm just saying that to get over that dissapointment will be beneficial to you. Come back to it later. Start learning the real techniques that will give you the skills to present things to look like they are real. Then the psychology you genuinely need will grow along side it.

I will ask a question - if, during a paid performance and the use of real psychology goes wrong, what do you think happens?

Hypnotise the audience, get them to forget everything that just happened, then leg it off stage ;p

That's a fair point Duplicity, there's no 'out' if a performer gets it wrong.

Duplicity wrote:I will ask a question - if, during a paid performance and the use of real psychology goes wrong, what do you think happens?

If you're a magician, you'll look like a t***.
A big part of mentalism, for me anyway, is either turning a miss into a hit, or just making it a non-event and letting it slip past unnoticed...

Beards are the other big part of mentalism, by the way...

Duplicity wrote:I will ask a question - if, during a paid performance and the use of real psychology goes wrong, what do you think happens?

That's easy. You use one of the many carefully designed and integrated outs you've built into your rock solid act to turn a miss into a hit, of course.

As the SAS say, Perfect Preparation Prevents P*sspoor Performance.

Moderators wrote:Apologies for any confusion, of course, if the original posts weren't causing trouble we wouldn’t have to edit at all .

Of course!

cc100 wrote:However, perhaps methods involving props and legerdemain are simply more sure-fire than those relying on psychology and body reading. That's not to say that such skills do not exist (I hope).

They exist. I've given you two examples.

Many of these techniques are not reliable enough to use if you need a sure-fire 100% hit, especially when you go beyond two options. You can allow for a miss or you can arrange an out. Some outs are congruent, some are not.

These methods cannot tell you where someone went for last year's holiday, what their favourite birthday present was at their eighth birthday party or their sister's name.

Go and buy Tomo's Naked Mentalism books. They are the best resources on psychological forces. There is a lot of generally useful information in those books, and I think you will find them helpful. As Duplicity says, you need to start learning techniques.

Is that 'techniques' for methods of giving the impression that I can read minds (billets, envelope switches, etc.) or techniques for psychological forces? Or both? I have Corinda's 13 Steps to Mentalism, which covers the former in some detail.

Naked Mentalism is exactly what it says on the tin, props and gimmicks aren't involved.

cc100 wrote:Is that 'techniques' for methods of giving the impression that I can read minds (billets, envelope switches, etc.) or techniques for psychological forces? Or both? I have Corinda's 13 Steps to Mentalism, which covers the former in some detail.

If you're referring to Naked mentalism, take a look at the last post n the previous page for a description of exactly what's in the book.