The Comparative Uncertainty Principle 201 With the three words selected, you now reach into your pocket and bring out a billet/business card that matches the pre-written (duplicate) card up your sleeve. Upon this card you will write the longer of the verbalised words. However after writing this word, you will mimic writing the words “Please look inside the wallet”. From the spectator’s view they must assume that you have simply written a longer sentence upon this card. You will now force the spectator to think of the longer word as follows: “I would like you now to rotate those three words through your mind. As you do this I would like you to stop on the word that you would be most impressed with if I could just come out and name it now.” Psychologically speaking, the spectator will opt for the word that they haven’t yet verbalised. You will now further instruct them, snapping your fingers: “Please now jump to one of the other words.” Once the spectator has done this, you can now be confident that the spectator is thinking of one of the two words that they mentioned aloud. Using CUP’s we are now going to check to see if they are thinking of the longer of the two words (the word that you wrote down moments earlier), and if not we will subtly control them to do so. To do this we will employ the use of the “CUP’s Principle”. You will simply ask them to imagine the word that they have in mind written in the air in front of them. You will then ask them to think about the individual letters of the word, Figure 1
202 A Piece Of My Mind saying: “You know how many letters there are in this word.” Note: This is a statement rather than a question (there is a big difference in the connotation). Essentially you are asking them to acknowledge the answer rather than answer it. Their response to this will indicate which of the two verbalised words they are now thinking of. If the spectator ponders for a moment, then you will know that they are thinking of the larger of the two verbalised words (the one you just wrote). In this instance you will now state that this was a genuinely free choice and that there was no way you could have known which word this would be (which is perfectly true). A quicker acknowledgement of the fact that they know how many letters are in this word will indicate that they are thinking of the shorter word. The moment that you notice this you must quickly direct them to change their mind again. This will force them to think of the longer word. As this questioning process is taking place, you must use the Racquet Switch (see page 139) to secretly exchange the billet in your hand for the pre-written billet which is located up your sleeve. The other billet will now be concealed in the opposite hand. Note: Any billet switch would suffice for our needs. The moment the switch is complete, you can hand the switched-in billet to the spectator. With the spectator successfully forced to think of the longer verbalised word, you are now set to conclude the effect. You will now request that the spectator open up the folded billet. Upon doing so they will read the words “Let’s look inside the wallet”. You now take the wallet from them (this is natural since no one will want to invade your personal belongings). Taking the wallet from the spectator, you will secretly place this on top of the billet that you are holding out (Figure 2). You will now mime removing this billet from the wallet using the following technique.
The Comparative Uncertainty Principle 203 Open up the wallet with your right hand (Figure 3). The first finger of your right hand is placed inside the wallet as your middle finger extends below it (see Figure 4). Squeezing your first and middle fingers together, the right hand is removed taking the billet with it (see Figure 5). With the billet removed, you will now replace it back into the wallet so that it protrudes from the front. You can now gesture for the spectator to remove it themselves. In this fashion the spectator will later remember removing the card from the wallet themselves, planting a false memory in their mind. You will now recap the fairness of the procedure, as you say: “You took an imaginary book and from this you selected three words. Can you confirm for the first time what all three words are?” Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5
204 A Piece Of My Mind Note: Since they are now confirming the unmentioned word, they won’t challenge you later to reveal this. For people just turning up to watch this, it also sounds as though none of the words were ever mentioned. You can then continue, “Could there have been any way that I could have known that you would select those words?” The spectator will acknowledge the impossibility of this. You will now ask from the three possibilities which word they ended up choosing. Upon hearing the spectator’s reply you now ask them to remove the folded card from the wallet. As they do this you will suggest, “This card was placed inside this wallet before we even met, before you decided upon which words to choose from the book, and before you decided which word to settle upon. Please open it up and read aloud what word has been written upon it.” Long Initial Word: If the initial word is long, then you can either put more emphasis on the spectator choosing a shorter word for the second choice, or alternatively you can use the variant which is detailed below. Additional Thoughts: There is no reason why this can’t be done with a physical book, too. If you employ the use of a gimmicked book such as MOABT, then you can have the third non-spoken word chosen from the range of force words. This will afford you the opportunity to reveal this word at the conclusion of the effect. As an added subtlety you may like to do the following: Firstly you will pre-write “Let’s look inside the wallet” with a black pen. You will now take a second black Sharpie and replace its ink and nib with that of a red Sharpie. You will now use this seemingly black pen in performance to write the longer of the two words upon the card. In doing so the switched-in billet will be perfectly covered since it is written in black ink while the prediction in the wallet will now be seen to be written in a different colour. Thanks go to Stephen Young for influencing this idea with his amazing “
The Comparative Uncertainty Principle 205 one-ahead” Sharpies. Naturally some may also prefer to use a card to wallet or similar to load the prediction card. Whilst I have used this in the past, I now prefer the more straightforward approach. Should the spectator initially decide upon a longer word, you can either ask them to openly choose a more “basic” word as their second choice, or alternatively you can allow them a free selection of the second word (without restriction) and use the following fail-safe alternative. In this variant we allow the spectator to rotate the two words through their mind, allowing them to stop on any of the two words they like. You now emphasise that there is no way that you could know of what word they are thinking. Once they agree you will ask: “If you had of changed your mind once more, which word would you be thinking of?...” If the spectator replies with the word which is inside the wallet, then you suggest: “...and there is no way I could have known that (gesture for them to remove the card from the wallet).” If the spectator does not name the word in the wallet, you will suggest: “But for whatever reason you did not decide to do this. You decided to stick on the word... (pause, allowing them to answer).” You will then allow them to remove the card from the wallet. Either way you will now conclude by saying: “The interesting thing here is that this card has been sitting inside my wallet this entire time, before you had even decided which words to choose from your imaginary book. Can you please unfold the card and read aloud what has been written upon it?” Allow the spectators to react accordingly.
206 A Piece Of My Mind
UnReal
208 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: Having only recently (2013) been introduced to the thoughts and ideas of Atlas Brookings, I very quickly became a fan of his work. Atlas is one of the true gents in this field and his work, both published and unpublished, is a testament to his amazing thinking. Having recently met him in person, I can honestly say he is one of the funniest guys I have ever met, and his stories are legendary. One of his current titles, The Real Thing, details a beautiful psychological technique for knowing which of two spectators has read a certain piece of information. The method that Atlas uses for this is excellent, and as often happens when I read inspirational work, I try to think up my own approaches to the plot. What I offer here is not a replacement for Atlas’ effect (I highly recommend you purchase his work on this subject), but rather another technique with which to play. I would also like to credit Patrick Redford, whose Prevaricator routine shares a similar psychological theme. The Premise: You hand a spectator a business card, commenting that it has a simple statement written upon its back. You state that when your back is turned, they are either to look at the card and then to table it or to pass it over to their friend so that they can do so instead. You caution them that if this experiment is to work successfully, then only one of them should look at the card and that there must be no clear indication who this is. In our example we will assume that the card says “Please think about the name of your first girlfriend!” Once this is understood, you allow the spectators to complete this action. Turning to face the spectators, you openly ask, “Do you remember the name of your first girlfriend?” Upon hearing the spectators’ replies, you will know exactly who looked at the card. This information can then be used in a multitude of different ways.
209 The Method: At the time of reading The Real Thing, I was already in experimentation with my “CUP’s Principle”. It wasn’t long before I put the two together and the results of these efforts are detailed below. In short, you are going to write a statement upon a card that requires the reader to make/reach a decision in their mind. Examples of such statements are as follows: Think of the name of your first girlfriend. Think of the best gift that you have ever received. Think of the title of your favourite book. You may have noticed that in reading the above, your mind would have automatically searched out the relevant answer. Seeking the answer to these commands is a psychologically automated response, and as a result the answer to each of these will very likely now sit upon the tip of your tongue. In short, you have been primed to answer. Note: The one thing you may not have been consciously aware of is the duration it took for your brain to retrieve this information from within your memory bank. Due to the fact that the information required is of a “highly” memorable nature, it shouldn’t have taken longer than a second or two to recall. However, the important thing to remember is that there would be a delay of some sort as the cognitive process took place. Forearmed with this knowledge, you have a very reliable system for knowing whether an answer has been predetermined or not. The reason for this is that a predetermined answer will be immediate and without hesitation. Note: When performing this routine, it is very important to use highly memorable triggers. Failure to do so could render the method transparent. Having followed the instruction detailed in “The Premise”, one of your spectators will now be primed to answer and the other will be left clueless as to UnReal
210 A Piece Of My Mind what is on the card. Turning to face your spectators, you will now flip over the card as you ask, “Do you remember the name of your first girlfriend?” The first person to answer will be the person who read the card. It may also help to observe the facial reactions of your spectators as you do this (any thought process itself is often identifiable by watching the eye movements). What Now: Having determined who looked at the card, you can now move into a liar/truth-teller style routine, whereby you ask each person to adopt a role in their mind; i.e., they are to decide whether they wish to be a liar or a truth teller. You can now ask each of them whether they looked at the card, cautioning them to answer in character (as a liar or a truth-teller). You will now be able to determine not only the role each has adopted, but in conclusion, you can also identify the person who looked at the card. Another idea would be to follow up the routine to the point where you know who has looked at the card. You will then hand each of the spectators another business card. You must ensure that the card that is handed to the person who looked at the card is marked in some fashion. You will now ask that each of the spectators secretly writes the name of their first girlfriend upon the middle of the card. After doing this they are asked to fold the card into quarters with the name hidden. One spectator is now asked to collect and mix the cards before returning a single one to you. You will now destroy the card which is handed to you as per Bob Cassidy’s “Name/Place” routine, allowing you to get one-ahead (check out his Mental Miracles DVD). You can now openly read out the name on the remaining card. You suggest to the spectators that you will ask each of them if they know this person, to which they can either lie or tell the truth.
211 Since the cards were marked, you will easily be able to differentiate between any truths and any lies. You can also reveal who looked at the card initially (using the information that you garnered earlier), and as a kicker finish, you can also reveal the name of the girl from the card which was destroyed. Additional Thoughts: Although I have yet to try this, you may wish to forgo asking the question “Do you remember the name of your first girlfriend?” and instead opt to simply ask them to write the name of their first girlfriend upon the cards that were given to them. In this instance the first person to begin writing will be the one that read the card. I sincerely hope that you have fun exploring the potential of this premise. UnReal
212 A Piece Of My Mind
The Boomerang Force
214 A Piece Of My Mind Credits and Inspiration: As an attendee of Peter Turner’s master class (which was held at the 2013 South Tyneside Magic Convention), I saw him read the thoughts of a spectator who had been asked to change their mind twice in succession. Pete’s version of this was taught on his limited edition DVD set titled The Devil in Disguise. For the sake of completeness, I must also mention that Kennedy/Ken Dyne also has his own incredible method for achieving this. I sincerely hope that he decides to release it one day; it is a true piece of art. The fact that the spectator had been asked to change their mind twice, prior to the revelation, really helped to sell the fairness of the procedure. This really struck a chord with me and so the seed was planted. Some months later I sat up late tinkering with my “Springboard Principle” when it hit me. I had finally discovered a method for allowing the spectator to change their mind twice whilst deviously controlling their train of thought. Before I go into any routine suggestions, I will give you the opportunity to try this on yourself in its most basic form. D.I.Y: To get an idea of how this force works, please imagine that you have been asked to think of a random number between one and five (inclusive) and you just so happen to be thinking of the number four. I would now like you to imagine that I’m talking to you personally as you follow the instructions below (please bear in mind that the spectator will have no idea that we are already aware of their starting number): “Right now you are thinking of a random number between one and five. To keep things fair and above board I would like to do the following: If you are presently thinking of an even number, I’d like you to change your mind and to think of an odd number between one and five and vice versa. Have you done that?” The spectator will agree. “Be honest, is there any way I could know with 100% certainty exactly what you are thinking of right now?” The spectator will confirm that this would be
215 impossible. Note: If you have followed this procedure so far, you will realise yourself that there is absolutely no way that I could know what you are thinking of right now. So far so good. You will now continue with the following: “Let’s repeat that once more. So if you’re now thinking of an odd number, then I’d like you to change your mind and to think of an even number, but a different one and vice versa.” Providing that you have followed this yourself, you will now be thinking of the number two! In essence, the success of this technique boils down to the fact that there are only two even numbers between one and five. Since the spectator is forced to think of one of them from the very beginning (we will discuss how in a moment), when they are asked to change from an even to odd (or vice versa), we know that they will now be thinking of any of the odd numbers. This allows us to make the truthful statement that we have no idea what number they are thinking of. However, when we ask them to change from the odd number back to the even number (seeming vice versa) for the second time, we are bringing them back to a choice of even numbers; however since we now ask them to think of a different number, there is actually only one choice that they can make and that is the number two. The beauty of the “Boomerang Forcing Technique” is that the spectator verbalizes that there is no way you could know what they are thinking of. It is this commitment that sets them up for the trap when they make their second change. Forcing the Four: My method of forcing the number four is simplicity itself. I begin with five business cards numbered one to five, and prepare by putting a small nail nick in both the upper right and lower left corners of card number four. These are then handed to the spectator for mixing. When the cards are taken back I casually spread through them, locating the position of the nail-nicked card. If this is found to be either the top card or the The Boomerang Force
216 A Piece Of My Mind bottom card, I simply ask them to take it and to note the number which has been written upon it. Should this rest in any other position, I will casually cut this to the bottom and then flash the face of this card, requesting that the spectator remember the number which is written upon it. As soon as the number four has been successfully forced, I request that the spectator mix the cards a second time before dropping them into my pocket or onto the table. The logic behind the initial number selection is that they hold less of an emotional connection than the words themselves. Further Applications: Obviously this technique lends itself to far more than just a simple force of a number. My preferred approach is to combine this with some of my other principles, which further adds to the deceptiveness of this technique. For example, if you were to write one short word and one long word on the force card and any two random words on the remaining cards, you can follow up the Boomerang Force by asking the spectator to think of either word on the resulting card. Using my CUP’s technique (see page 191) you can easily distinguish which of the two words they are thinking of. By asking them to either reveal this choice, or change their mind once more, we can even control which of the two words they will eventually choose. If you wish to offer a greater choice of numbers, you could increase the number of cards to seven, and in forcing the number four you will only be presented with two possible end selections (two or six). To distinguish between these you could have something akin to the following written on these cards: 2 - Cat, Dinosaur 6 - Holiday, Sock If you now asked them to think of the first word that was written upon the card of their choice and used the “CUP’s Principle”, you would now know which card they have selected. Need I go further to suggest that the number of words written upon the cards could be expanded further?
217 Impromptu Boomerang Routine: Providing you pre-mark the back corners of two of your business cards (in differing ways), you will always be ready to perform an amazing demonstration of influence. To do this you will have several spectators each call out a number of random objects or words. As they do this you must remove five business cards from your pocket. Upon the face of the first marked card you will write two of the words which have been announced, making sure that one of them is short and the other is long. On the face of the remaining cards (including the second marked card) you will write several of the remaining words. Note: So long as the first marked card only has two words written upon it, you can write differing numbers of words upon the remaining ones. With the list of words complete you will now number each of these cards (1-5), making sure that the first marked card (with the two words) is listed as “2” and the other marked card is listed as “4”. Note: The numbers must be written upon the faces of the cards alongside the lists of words. You are now free to make your prediction (choose either of the words from card number two). You can now have the spectator mix the cards face down. Upon taking the cards back you will spread them slightly, noticing whether either of the marked cards are on the top or the bottom of the packet. Should card number two be resting in either of these positions, you will simply offer them this card as their random selection (the “Boomerang Force” is not required). You now have your spectator think of any of the words from their chosen card. Using CUP’s to (secretly) identify this choice, you can now: A) Have them reveal this word, showing that it matches your prediction, or B) Request that they change their mind and think of one of the other words from the card. Since the only other word on this card matches your prediction, this will allow you to bring this to a successful conclusion. Should card number four rest in either of these positions, you will once again The Boomerang Force
218 A Piece Of My Mind offer them this card. You can now use the “Boomerang Force” to force them back to card number two. You can now conclude the effect as above. Should neither card number 2 nor card number 4 rest in suitable positions after the shuffle, you can further suggest that the spectator cuts the cards. This will be guaranteed to bring one of the marked cards into play. Incidentally, when giving people a list of objects to choose from, you can bias their choice by getting them to choose from a selected category such as household items, foods, etc. In this fashion it is often possible to have your prediction written ahead of time, adding an extra layer to the effect. Boomerang Alternatives: The “Boomerang” technique may also be used to force a playing card suit, too. Let’s suggest that you have successfully forced or glimpsed your spectator’s card and it is a Spade. After doing this we will suggest that our spectator is to change their mind a couple of times in the following fashion. If our spectator is thinking of a black suit, they are now to think of a red suit and vice versa. They will now be thinking of one of the red suits. At this point you can question them on your ability to know exactly what they are thinking of at that moment. The spectators will be forced to agree that this would be impossible. You can now conclude by asking them to change the colour and suit for a second time to something “new”. This will successfully force them to think of a Club; i.e., the opposite suit of the original colour. I trust that you will enjoy exploring uses for this technique. As a hint, this could be worked effectively with Springboard to force the end suit for a guaranteed outcome.
Detritus...
220 A Piece Of My Mind
The Pandora Reading System
222 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: Over the past few years the UK has seen a huge rise in the popularity of charm bracelets. The “Pandora” charms appear to be the most popular (at the moment) and are available in a wide variety of colours, shapes and styles. As a collective group these can be used by the “Reader” to paint a highly accurate picture of the lives and loves of our spectators. For further help in generating a time line of noteworthy events, pay close attention to the positions of these charms in relation to each other. For example, should you notice the presence of two baby charms, one boy and one girl, the one which rests closest to the clasp will most likely indicate the youngest of the two (since it was the most recent to be added to the bracelet). The age of the wearer and the newness of the charm (in relation to the others) can also provide a rich resource of information. An older lady with a new charm in the shape of a baby’s dummy may indicate that she has recently become a grandmother. It is very important to use this information sparingly or, better still, indirectly. Rather than mentioning that you believe your sitter is a dog or a cat owner, you could use the generalized personality traits of each as the foundation for your reading. See below for a few examples on how to expand and embellish the information which has been unwittingly offered to us. A CROSS - Caring, Strong Relationships With Others, Forgiving, Generous, Conscientious A DOG - Sociable, Conscientious, Shows Self-Discipline, Planned Behaviour; i.e., Likes Routine A CAT - Likes Adventure, Curious, Unconventional Beliefs, Possibly Live Alone (Check for wedding ring), More Introverted/Less Sociable, Less Dominant/Confident, Trusting A SNOWMAN - Happy, Treasures Memories, Daydreamer, Sociable, Outgoing, Carefree You may wish to visit www.pandora.net to familiarize yourself with their range
223 of charms, and in doing so, you can build up a short list of things to say about each. A quick Google search can also provide you with useful insights into the symbology of each animal, object, and any other that you may encounter! Wearing your heart on your sleeve will never mean the same thing again. Additional Thoughts: Those of you who wish to explore this idea further may be interested in the following website, which was recently posted on The Magic Cafe by Sea: www.bittersweetridgejewelry.com/pages/JewelrySymbols.htm#.UvFbJHgg HCT The Pandora Reading System
224 A Piece Of My Mind
Animal Instincts
226 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: I honestly don’t expect anyone to even consider performing this effect, however I detail this to help illustrate one simple point. More often than not it is the journey that is more important than the destination itself. Those that simply force, peek and then reveal a piece of information are missing a golden opportunity to build up drama and suspense in the spectator’s mind. What’s more is that a straight revelation (one which does not hint at a plausible method) is often, at best, quickly forgotten and at worst attributed to nothing more than blatant trickery. Since I have begun to shift the focus onto the path rather than the destination, the number of people who believe in my pseudo methodology has increased tenfold. Dismiss this if you will, but by doing so you will be missing out on one of the most important lessons I can teach. Those that make it personal, offer reasoning and in the process offer their spectators an insight into the hows and whys will begin to reap substantial rewards. Whilst I do realise that I am not the first to employ this type of technique, I think that often some of the most important lessons are overlooked. For this reason I ask you to take some time to understand why I do this. You can then employ your own “reasoning” within the context of your own routines. The Effect/Premise: “I would like you to draw upon this card something that would represent you as a person, a symbol of your likes, loves and personality.” Once the spectator has done this, you will harvest this information in any of the usual methods open to us. When using this routine, I personally employed the use of the “Para Pad” by Paralabs. Once this has been done, you will now openly ask your spectator several questions. Which questions you ask are down to personal choice, however to help illustrate the “why” I will offer the following examples: Name the first animal that comes to mind (allow the spectator to answer).
227 Name any country in the world (allow the spectator to answer). Can you also name the first colour that comes to mind? You must now search your mind to find any relationship between the target drawing and the animal, country and colour that the spectator mentioned. The beauty of this moment is that any thought process that you employ in completing this task will be credited to the method for it. This process not only keeps you on your toes, but is also deeply gratifying as a result. Best of all, any stand-out parallels create undeniable proof that what you are doing is real. Take your time as you do this; there is no rush and your entire thought process is justified. Real World Example: Upon (secretly) discovering that my spectator had drawn a wine bottle, I asked them to name the first country, colour and animal that came to mind. Their replies were America, Red and Tiger. Being from the UK, I commented that this object is something that is available internationally. I suggested that the playful/aggressive nature of this animal presented an almost Jekyll and Hyde element to the mix. As such I suggested that this thing could possibly hold influence over its owner. I then suggested that the colour red would be the predominant colour that this object comes in. Essentially, I simply highlighted any connection between the spectator’s answers and the physical item they had drawn. In the end I drew a wine glass (close enough to their drawing without being exact). The reaction was amazing. Those who like to give readings will notice just how much information was available to me. In the example above it was very clear that my helper was a very sociable character, one with a large group of friends. He was also not afraid to reveal his true emotions and in relation to this was a constant source of comfort to those in need. He also enjoyed the finer things in life and never settled for second best. The beauty about this approach is that there is an almost partial truth to your method; it is this conviction that will send the right message to your audience. Animal Instincts
228 A Piece Of My Mind
Personal Identification Number
230 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: This is a quirky dual-reality effect, which could either be performed as part of a longer routine or as an optional extra at the end of “Dave’s PIN”. The important thing to remember is that the success of this idea relies on the careful selection of your assistant. Ideally you would like someone who gives an over-the-top reaction to the most basic of demonstrations (think L&L audience members). If in doubt, simply leave this out. I hasten to add that you should always follow this effect with something more solid so that your helper will walk away with a positive impression of your skills. This idea was inspired by “Subtle Telephone” from Banachek’s Psychological Subtleties book and was briefly touched upon in the introduction to the “ATM” routine. The Effect: At any moment within your act, you are seemingly able to discern the exact digits used to generate a spectator’s PIN code. The Preparation: You must prepare by writing the following upon a small note pad (Figure 1): Figure 1 Figure 2
231 The Dirty Truth: Removing a small pad of paper from your pocket, you request the assistance of a willing volunteer (remember to choose wisely). Staring intently into your helper’s eyes, you remove the note pad from your pocket. You will now open the note pad and clip it so that your thumb obscures the writing from view. In this position you can casually flash the pad to the remaining audience and it will appear to be blank (see Figure 2). Turning the pad towards yourself, you will now add the letters R, P, I and N to create something similar to Figure 3. You will now show this to your helper as you ask, “Does this make any sense to you?” The spectator should look slightly confused, and regardless of their answer you will smile at them as you continue, “Don’t lie to make me look good, but if we moved this number here (point at the word “NUMBER”) to here (point at the blank space after the word “PIN”), then be honest, would that generate your PIN number?” Providing you have chosen your spectator wisely, any physical response that accompanies their affirmation will be interpreted as though you have physically revealed their PIN number. Before moving on to your next routine, it is wise to point once again to the pad as you suggest, “Don’t worry, this will be our little secret.” Your helper will acknowledge this as a private bond of trust between the two of Personal Identification Number Figure 3
232 A Piece Of My Mind you and should keep the secret safe. You are then free to follow up with any other routine of your choice.
Consulting the News
234 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: A friend of mine asked for some help in creating a memorable mentalism piece for a bride and groom at an upcoming event. Her primary thought was to have a card prediction printed in the local newspaper for the day of the wedding. With this premise floating around at the back of my mind, I tuned in to the local radio station. During the broadcast they had a rather interesting phone in, where listeners were given two words that had a single (connecting) word in common; this word would fit after the first and before the second. Examples of these include: Basket/Room = Ball Sea/Bottle = Water Golf/House = Club Goal/Box = Post In combining these two thoughts I created the routine which follows. I also wish to credit Atlas Brookings for the inspiration behind this through his very own book test, which is detailed in his e-book The Real Thing. As with the majority of my recent work, the scripting for this effect was influenced by my good friend Mr. Turner. The Preparation: Firstly, you must decide upon which pairing you want to choose. You can either use one of the above suggestions or perhaps create your own. If you are creating your own this can be tailored to your event. In the case of a wedding you could choose something like Wedding & Ringer, where the linking word for these is Bell. Note: If you are coming up with your own pairings, I would suggest that you ask several people to guess the linking word to make sure that it is easy enough to guess. With your coupling words selected, you must now go online and download a copyright free book from the internet (there are scores of these to choose from). You will now edit a couple of the lines as follows.
235 Choosing a page roughly one-third into your book, you will edit the top line so that the last word on this line is the first word of your coupling pair. An example of this would be: the room. The maid began her usual chores, firstly she emptied the basket You will then select another page roughly two-thirds of the way through the book and edit another top line to contain the second word of your coupling pair (as the last word of the line). An example of this would be : a sense of uneasiness, who or what could be waiting for him in that room. If you now visit www.lulu.com you can upload your amended book and have it printed for a minimal fee. Note: For the forcing procedure used it is recommended that you edit odd-numbered pages rather than even. If you are overly concerned about how examinable the book is, you could go as far as editing the full surrounding paragraph. Another option is to search a regular book for naturally occurring coupling words. Remember, once again, to test these on family and friends. You must now trim the upper right corner of each of the pages which rest before your force page. This will allow you to riffle force the doctored pages upon your spectators. Note: Should you wish to repeat this effect at the same event, then you may wish to add additional “coupling pairs” within the book. This could be done by corner shorting the tops of one set of pages and the bottoms of another. As mentioned in the introduction, you may also wish to get the linking word printed as a prediction in your local newspaper. The Routine: Using a wedding to frame our example, you would begin by placing your prediction envelope onto the table (containing the newspaper clipping). Consulting the News
236 A Piece Of My Mind You will now introduce the book as follows: “You began your lives as two separate individuals who today have joined together in matrimony. Starting today you begin a new chapter of your lives together as one with many stories to tell and many memories to treasure along the way. Speaking of chapters and stories, I would like to try something special with you both.” Remove the book from your pocket and continue, “I would like you each to select a word at random from this book — ladies first.” You will now force the first page on the bride, asking her to remember the last word on the top line. You will now force the second coupling word upon the groom. “You now both have a word in mind. How amazing would it be if you were both thinking of the same word?” Allow the spectators to reply. You will now ask both of your helpers to call out the words of which they are thinking. In our example the bride will say “Wedding” and the groom will say “Ringer”. Note: If using the example above, I would design a fake cover for the book and give it a title fitting the event. Something like A Bridesmaid’s Wish would allow for the natural placing of the force words. You will now rationalise their choices in the following way: “Whilst your words don’t match exactly, I’m sure everyone will agree that they are very fitting of this occasion.” Pause as though you are thinking for a moment and then continue, “I would like you to think carefully about the words that you have chosen. Is there a suitable word that would link together the two choices?” Allow them time to answer. “Just as you have used words to cement your marriage, you have managed to work together as a couple to decide upon the word.” The couple will then reply with the word “Bell”. You will now conclude the effect by saying, “As you embark on your new life together, I would like to remind you of all of the choices that you have made in life so far. All of these choices have led you to this moment, a moment that I’m hoping you will treasure for the rest of your lives.”
237 You will now gesture for them to open the envelope, revealing the newspaper page from that day’s newspaper. This page must contain the date (include the full page), their names, the occasion, the word “Bell” and some inspirational words of your choosing. Additional Thoughts: You may wish to choose a coupling pair that has a couple of possible answers. In this way you can have two separate predictions printed in two different newspapers. A double envelope would house these, allowing them a greater degree of choice for the final word. What’s nice is that the resulting word from the pair does not exist in reality per se, but is instead generated in the minds of your spectators. Another option would be to genuinely allow the spectators to select random words from the beginning. Chances are high that they will struggle with a connecting word and you can then propose to try again. The second time you will force the choices upon them. Even if they don’t manage a link originally, you can simply suggest that now they know what they are to do and can try a second time. Consulting the News
238 A Piece Of My Mind
239 Bonus...
240 A Piece Of My Mind
Once Removed By Michael Murray and Stephen Shaw
242 A Piece Of My Mind Introduction: It is with deepest pride, and greatest pleasure, that we hereby present to you an effect that has stretched our creative thinking, filled us with joy and, possibly least importantly of all, fooled some of the greatest minds in magic. We simply cannot thank you enough for investing in our work and sincerely hope you enjoy performing “Once Removed’’. Whilst this was originally made available as a separate manuscript on my good friend Steve Shaw’s website, he has kindly given permission for me to include our idea within this book. I’m eternally grateful to Stephen for this. Since Steve is very creative with the English language, I will leave this routine and explanation unedited from the original. A Quick Note: Explaining an effect with two creators in a book with one author, I, Stephen Shaw, have taken the liberty of referring to myself throughout in the first-person singular, whilst referring to Michael, quite obviously, as Michael. Opening Words: In a perfect world you would be reading this book after having seen someone competently perform “Once Removed’’ for you in person. That is not to say any of the mechanics depend on having seen the effect performed, or are more suited to being taught through a visual medium, but rather that we hope it provides you with some appreciation as to just how deceptive this effect can be. If you are reading this without having seen the effect performed, then a quick description of the effect is in order. A deck of cards, being already removed from their case, is handed to a willing participant. The instruction has already been offered to this helpful soul to merely think of their favourite playing card. Upon taking the deck from you, they are further instructed to spread through until they can lock eyes upon their card. They are then asked to close the spread. Struggling to clearly intuit their thought, you suggest it may be because every card in the pack has an almost identical twin of the same colour, same value, but different suit, and
243 these twins are often hard to differentiate between. In order to offer you a little help, you request that they find the mate of their card in the pack, and again lock eyes upon it. The deck can now be boxed by the fantastically helpful spectator, pocketing it if they so wish. With a startling rapidity, their thought-of card and its twin are named. The deck is regular in every way, completely unmarked, and can be left with the spectator for total scrutiny. For those of you with an interest in the development of this effect, a brief explanation now follows; for those who don’t, feel free to jump ahead, and we will catch you up in a few moments. For several weeks a tremendously crude idea had been rattling around in my head. I had been inspired by the oft muttered words “I’m not sure if it’s a full pack mind!’’ when overhearing one magician request the use of another’s deck of cards. My original train of thought involved strategically removing cards from your pack whilst also positioning the mates of these removed cards in order to act as indicators. The spectator, in this case, would be asked to think of a card and to remove it from the pack. Their response, if it did not exist, helped narrow it down to a particular set. If it did not exist, then a casual request to remove its mate as an alternative, and noting from where in the deck the mate was removed, narrowed the set down further. For a whole multitude of reasons, I could not arrive at a solution with which I was completely happy. It wasn’t until I shared my idea with Michael that it eventually took form. Michael is a true genius, and I mean that with both honesty and sincerity. Anyone who has seen him when he has his mind set on solving a problem will be able to attest to this. He took this basic idea and cultivated it into something that was able to meet my original criteria, whilst retaining an air of simplicity and elegance to the underlying method. I have heard Michael talk at length about his creative process, and it is truly fascinating. Whilst the miner receives some credit for having excavated the diamond, it is the master craftsman who turns this into a beautiful piece of jewellery who deserves true recognition. There are several people with work of a similar ilk in areas you may wish to further explore. For reference, these have been included toward the end of this book. We sincerely hope you enjoy exploring the concept behind “Once Removed” as much as both Michael and I have. Once Removed
244 A Piece Of My Mind The Basic Concept: Whilst the fundamental method behind “Once Removed” is mathematical in nature, it is worth noting at the outset that this process, once fully understood, is no more difficult than basic arithmetic. Where better to start than at the beginning. Imagine a full deck of 52 cards laid before you on a table. For the time being we will ignore the four Kings, as they are the only unique exceptions involved in performing “Once Removed”. This imaginary deck could be fairly shuffled and split into three equal piles, each pile containing 16 cards. Let’s label these imaginary piles as pile A, pile B and pile C. If we were then to think of any card and subsequently look for both it and its mate amongst these three piles, there are only six possible permutations that could occur: • Both cards could reside in pile A • Both could reside in pile B • Both could reside in pile C • One could rest in pile A whilst one was in pile B • One could be found in pile A and the other in pile C • One could be found in pile B and the other in pile C What we have achieved with “Once Removed” is a strategic positioning of cards, distributed amongst three piles (albeit these piles have been stacked atop each other to form a deck of cards) in such a way as to allow us to calculate which card a spectator is thinking of merely by noting in which “pile” they see their card. My first exposure to the use of a matrix to calculate a thought-of card was with Paul Fox’s “Miracle Card Gimmick”. I hope that those familiar with Mr. Fox’s methodology can see how we have achieved the ability to supply the spectator with the matrix and have them look through it, as opposed to having the performer call out the cards. I realise this will be truly cryptic to anyone unfamiliar with the “Miracle Card Gimmick”, and to those, I urge you to track down a copy of this fantastic piece of magic.
245 Humble Beginnings: What follows are some suggestions as to how both Michael and I have decided to group cards to form our “Once Removed” stacks. I regularly use one version, whilst Michael favours another. Likewise, when it comes to handling the deck, we both have different preferences. Once you fully understand the concept, there is nothing stopping you from creating pairings that either make more sense to you, or are more comfortable for you to use. We offer these only as way of suggestion and truly look forward to hearing the creative ways in which you have sculpted your own groupings. The only thing necessary to create a “Once Removed” style stack, whereby the deck is split into three sections, is to decide on 12 specific pairings, using the Ace through Queen (disregarding the Kings for now). Let me clarify. As mentioned earlier, there are only six possible permutations as to where any given card can rest in the deck relative to its mate. For now, we will continue to refer to each of the three necessary sections in the deck as piles, as it will make it easier for you to construct a basic stack and to start to understand the principles in play. I strongly suggest that with the following example stack, whilst you may decide to actually make this up in order to better understand it, you do not actually try to commit it to memory. The stacks that follow allow the effect to be much less demanding on your mental faculties whilst performing. The following table illustrates a very basic grouping. For now, let us forget about how we will eventually discern the exact thought-of card. Once Removed Red Black Pile A Pile B Pile C Ace Queen XX Two Jack XX Three Ten XX Four Nine XX Five Eight XX Six Seven XX Seven Six X X Eight Five X X Nine Four X X Ten Three X X Jack Two X X Queen Ace X X
246 A Piece Of My Mind Rather, imagine that merely knowing which pair (i.e., the thought-of card and its mate) the spectator is thinking of is our only goal. If an imaginary spectator were asked to find a card and its mate amongst these three piles, and they were able to do this by only looking in pile A, then we could very safely say that they were either thinking of the two red Aces, two red Twos, the two black Queens or the two black Jacks. If you were to commit this full stack to memory, it would take very little further information to be able to calculate the exact pair the spectator had been thinking of. Initially, we both agreed that a suitable approach would be to have the spectator try and discern a card that you were mentally transmitting to them. In this situation, after narrowing down the card we are apparently transmitting to them to one of four pairs, we used a simple pumping sequence to ascertain the exact card. This went something as follows: “Now the card I was trying to send you was a red card. Did you manage to pick up on that?” If the answer is Yes, and following with our example of them having looked solely in pile A, then we know they must have looked at either the two red Aces, or the two red Twos. On the other hand, if the answer was No, we followed with something akin to: “You see, it really is a difficult process to read someone’s mind. Even a detail that should be very obvious, like the colour of a card, can be lost in transmission. Let me turn the tables. I’ll try to read your mind.” I’m sure you will be able to follow how, in this situation, we have turned what seems to be a negative response into a convincer for the spectator, hopefully convincing them of the true difficulty of what we are trying to achieve. With this simple ruse, we now know that the spectator is thinking of a black card, and following with the same example, it would either be a black Queen or a black Jack. In either of these scenarios we can use the fact that one card is odd and one even to finally arrive at the thought-of card. In the first scenario, where the spectator correctly received the colour, we could go on to ask if they were able to pick up on the fact that we were sending them an even-valued card. A positive answer would indicate they correctly received the red Twos. A negative answer could be dealt with using the aforementioned “Oh you failed, now I’ll try” ruse, or by simply stating something like:
247 “Oh, I bet you were so close. I was trying to send you the red Twos. Did you think of the red Aces by chance?” Remember, for the time being we are simply happy to work toward figuring out which pair of cards the spectator is thinking of. Patience will reward you as we explain ahead how the specific card will be calculated. The table on the previous page illustrates one of the earliest stacks that both Michael and I were able to use. Whilst this is a simple layout, you may have already guessed at a number of the problems this simplistic structure poses. The main issue was the amount of work required to commit the groupings to memory; there was no procedural calculation possible to fall back on as a crutch should your memory fail. Suggested Groupings: Now we are going to explore the two different groupings that Michael and I use in actual performance. The Murray Stack: The table above starts to detail the stack as preferred by Michael. From here on the individual sections will no longer be referred to as piles, as we will be bringing these three “piles” together to form a full deck. We will now refer to the three sections as either the top, middle or bottom. The spectator will be handed the deck, and instructed to look through in order to find their card, and subsequently its mate. It will transpire that the spectator will have to Once Removed RED BLACK TOP MIDDLE BOTTOM Ace Jack XX Two Queen XX Three Ace XX Four Two XX Five Three XX Six Four XX Seven Five X X Eight Six X X Nine Seven X X Ten Eight X X Jack Nine X X Queen Ten X X
248 A Piece Of My Mind spread through the face-up deck; the first 16 cards will be hereafter known as the top section, the next 16 as the middle section and the last 16 as the bottom section. Further ahead we will address several methods for determining in which section the spectator is looking, but for now, understanding the terminology alone will suffice. In the “Murray Stack”, the sections, whilst certainly not stacked up in this exact order, are made up as follows. Shuffle each section to create any random order: One of the primary benefits of this type of stack is the way in which you are able to calculate which group of cards the spectator could be thinking of, without having to rely on memory alone. This calculation has the benefit of being extremely simple. Firstly, we assign numerical values to the three separate sections; the top section has a value of 1, the middle a value of 2 and the bottom a value of 3. When we observe the spectator, we keep a running total of the values associated with the sections in which they see their card and its mate. If the two cards are in the same section (i.e., both in the top, middle or bottom), then we need simply double the (singular) section number. If the cards are in different sections, then we double our running total, and subsequently add two. The result of this calculation will give you the value of Top Section Ace of Hearts Ace of Diamonds Two of Hearts Two of Diamonds Jack of Clubs Jack of Spades Queen of Clubs Queen of Spades Seven of Diamonds Eight of Hearts Five of Clubs Six of Spades Nine of Diamonds Ten of Hearts Seven of Clubs Eight of Spades Middle Section Three of Hearts Three of Diamonds Four of Hearts Four of Diamonds Ace of Clubs Ace of Spades Two of Clubs Two of Spades Seven of Hearts Eight of Diamonds Five of Spades Six of Clubs Jack of Diamonds Queen of Hearts Nine of Clubs Ten of Spades Bottom Section Five of Hearts Five of Diamonds Six of Hearts Six of Diamonds Three of Clubs Three of Spades Four of Clubs Four of Spades Nine of Hearts Ten of Diamonds Seven of Spades Eight of Clubs Jack of Hearts Queen of Diamonds Nine of Spades Ten of Clubs
249 the highest red card in a particular group. With the “Murray Stack”, counting back 4 cards will give us the full group of possibilities. An example at this point might help clarify matters. Our imaginary spectator is thinking of the Seven of Spades. We instruct them to look through and to lock eyes upon their card. To do this, they must spread all the way into the bottom section. When we see that this is the case, we think “3”. They are then instructed to lock eyes upon the mate of their card. They spread into the top section, sighting their mate, and we add 1, the value for the top section, to our running count of 3. We now have a running total of 4, which we double, 8, and add 2 due to the fact that both cards were in different sections. Our final value of 10 gives us the highest red card in the group that contains the card of which our spectator is thinking. Starting from our key number, if we count back an additional 3 values, “10, 9, 8, 7”, we have calculated the full range of possibilities. The value preceding our key number will be the other red possibility, and the other two values will give us the two possible black cards. We will leave the “Murray Stack” behind for a little while, returning to it when we come to explain the particulars of how to separate the three sections, and how to specifically narrow down the selection. The “Murray Stack” and the “Shaw Stack” share enough similarities in these regards that they will be addressed together. The Shaw Stack: Red - Black - This is the stack as currently used by myself. This stack was developed as a means to allow me to memorise the pairings in a manner that better suited me. This particular stack requires the memorisation of six specific pairings. I Once Removed RED BLACK TOP MIDDLE BOTTOM Three Six X Four Jack X Five Queen X Seven Two X X Eight Ace X X Nine Ten X X Five Queen X Four Jack X Three Six X Nine Ten X X Seven Two X X Eight Ace X X
250 A Piece Of My Mind wanted to be in a position whereby, after discovering the colour of the thought-of card, I instantly had the two possibilities to mind. I use the following mental hooks to remember these pairings; feel free to modify these as you see fit: • Three is paired with Six. There are three letters in the word Six. • Four is paired with Jack. There are four letters in the word Jack. • Five is paired with Queen. There are five letters in the word Queen. • Seven is paired with Two. When I mentally think of Seven, I see it comprised of two distinct lines. • Eight is paired with Ace. When I mentally think of eight, I see the figure 8 rotated 90 degrees clockwise to form the symbol for infinity. I think of this infinity as a pairing with 1, the complete opposite end of the scale to infinity. The word eight also has similarities when spoken to the word ace. • Nine is paired with ten. I will leave you to come up with your own hook for this pairing, as mine is tremendously vulgar. The point of creating these mental links is such that they instantly “pop” into your mind, without the need for any conscious effort. This stack also allows you to remove the need to perform any calculations (albeit they are simple enough with the “Murray Stack”); you will only need to remember in which sections of the deck the spectator has looked. The crucial difference between these two stacks is that the “Shaw Stack” sees you attributing a numerical value to each of the three sections only after you know the colour of the thought-of card. If the spectator is discovered to be thinking of a red card, the top section is given the value of 3, the middle 4 and the bottom 5. If the spectator is thinking of a black card, however, the top section is given the value of 5, the middle 4 and the bottom 3. For example, when spreading through the deck, you see that the spectator first looks at a card in the top section, and then the bottom section. Depending on the presentation you are using (discussed ahead), you will ascertain the colour of their card. Let’s assume they are thinking of a red card. The values of the two groups are then added together. In this instance, as they were thinking of a red card, the top section has a value of 3 and the bottom a value of 5, giving us a total of 8. With proper memorisation of the aforementioned pairings, when you think of, in this example, an 8, an Ace should also pop into mind almost instantly. We now know that the spectator is thinking of either the red Eights or the red Aces.