Bob Cassidy - The Act Teleseminar First Notes

TELESEMINAR NOTES ( To be read in conjunction with the materials discussed in the live broadcast of the teleseminar or the MP3 recording of the event.)

Copyright ©2010 by Bob Cassidy All rights reserved This document may not be reproduced in whole or in part and may not be distributed, resold, uploaded, or transmitted either electronically or manually in any form without the explicit written permission of the copyright holder.

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

Of all the things I've written for mentalists, "Fundamentals - A Guidebook to Mentalism" is one of my personal favorites. In it, I tried to isolate and examine those factors that make for believable, powerful and entertaining performances. I made one big mistake, though- I should never have called the book "Fundamentals." Henry Hay made the same mistake with the title of "The Amateur Magicians Handbook." The problem is that both titles give the impression that the works are strictly aimed at beginners. Some people, who already found out about nailwriters and a center tears, were probably thinking, "Hey, I already know the fundamentals. I want to learn professional stuff!" After Chris Wasshuber at lybrary.com took over the distribution of the bulk of my electronic publications, the title was changed to "Fundamentals- A Guidebook to Professional Mentalism." I don't think that that really did the trick either - which is why I decided that the next time I wrote something like it I would call it "Beyond Fundamentals." And here it is - a combination e book and teleseminar. I've included a few relevant excerpts from "Fundamentals" that will get you up to speed if you aren't familiar with the book. They provide the foundational elements for the act that we will be constructing in "Beyond Fundamentals." You see - by "fundamentals" I am not referring to secrets, gimmicks and effects, for those things, despite what many think, are not what make a mentalist.

Some Relevant Excerpts from Fundamentals: Overview Mentalism may be the most interactive of the performing arts. Its primary illusion is that of mind reading. While the mentalist may claim to be using body language, superior powers of observation, advanced psychological techniques, or whatever “unusual power” he desires, the basic impression is that he is able to determine or control people’s innermost thoughts. Unless he finds it amusing to read his own mind, the illusion is impossible without an audience.

2

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act In addition to a solid understanding of the psychology of mentalism, the most important assets of an effective mentalist are acting and communication skills, and the ability to think on his feet in high pressure, and occasionally unpredictable, situations. My goal is to give you an approach to learning and presenting mentalism which develops all of these essential skills. The Psychology of Mentalism The word “mentalism” originally referred to a monist philosophy that held reality itself to be a mental phenomenon. For our purposes, though, it shall be defined as a performing art in which the mentalist entertainingly demonstrates mystifying “powers of the mind.” Unlike most magical effects, the illusion of mentalism is not primarily visual. (The exceptions, of course, are “mind over matter” effects such as bending or moving small objects by apparent psychokinesis, etc.) While visual aids are often employed - i.e. the performer exhibits a book from which a word is selected, or a spectator draws a picture which the mentalist attempts to duplicate – the actual illusion takes place in the viewer’s mind. Imagine, for example, that you are vacationing abroad and see a mentalist on television. Imagine that he is speaking a language completely unfamiliar to you. It is likely that you will have no idea what he is doing - he could be a game show host for all you know. If you were watching a magician, however, you would quickly recognize that he was performing magic and would probably understand what he was doing regardless of the language barrier. But in mentalism, the illusion itself cannot be created without effective verbal communication and misdirection.

3

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

Plausibility In successful fiction, as in magic and mentalism, the plot, actions and events must be consistent with the rules of the imaginary world set up by the author. You can’t, unless you have created a skewed parallel universe, have General Custer calling for reinforcements on his cell phone. Nor can a mentalist who claims to be an expert in interpreting body language, believably demonstrate the ability to bend metals with his mind or to see while blindfolded. The latter effects are simply not consistent with the ability claimed. There are many who feel that somber dress, a humorless approach and a mysterious demeanor are enough to establish believability. Actually, the opposite is true. There must be a modern naturalness in the mentalist’s appearance. Not only does this put an audience at ease, but it strikes down psychological barriers that individuals may have regarding authority figures. The same applies to the mentalist’s attitude. A superior attitude can cause an audience to react negatively and will inhibit their cooperation and willingness to participate in the program. A friendly and enthusiastic approach, on the other hand, puts an audience at ease and in a frame of mind that will be far less skeptical and analytical of the mentalist’s claims. Mentalism, to be effective, must appear to be an actual demonstration of some unusual ability, as discussed above. Its plausibility is inversely proportional to the number of abilities claimed. In other words, the more unusual abilities you claim and demonstrate, the less believable you will be. Before you can begin to select effects and develop a presentation you must first create a plausible subscript – a detailed description of your stage persona’s powers, how he got them, how they seem to work, and what his limitations are. 4

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act If you have never done so before, it would be a good idea to write an imaginary biography of the character you portray on stage. Many mentalists create a character very similar to themselves, but this is hardly a requirement. It’s easier, however, for those who have no training in acting to be internally consistent if the history of their fictional character closely corresponds to actual events in their own lives. Now ask yourself if you have the knowledge, physical characteristics, education and background to plausibly portray the character you have invented. It would be extremely difficult, for example, for an eighteen year old to convincingly portray a parapsychologist or a professor of metaphysics. Take a serious look at the “unusual ability” you select for your character. See how the actual claim, whether it is express or implied, controls the manner in which the following effects should be presented. The effects, by the way, illustrate some of the fundamental physical, psychological, and misdirective techniques of mentalism.

Following are the topics Michael and I will be discussing during the teleseminar. The post notes (which you will receive within 10 days or so following the event, will cover the various methodologies and presentation aspects discussed:

Scorpio Variations - Major effects used as openers “Major Effects” (those involving, or potentially involving, the entire audience) are ideal openers. When I wrote the now out of print “Scorpio’s Message” I used the idea of “casting out” brief horoscope readings during a Q & A routine, to create the impression that everyone in the audience received an answer to their question. This “complete involvement” is essential in an ideal mentalism act. One of the reasons that too many mentalism programs are perceived to be “boring” is because they are usually composed solely of “minor” effects (i.e. those that involve only one or a few participants, with the rest of the audience merely observing).

5

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

Achieving Thematic Unity As alluded to in the previous excerpts from “Fundamentals,” thematic unity is an essential ingredient in creating believability. By demonstrating too many types of special abilities the overall impression created is that the performer must be “doing tricks.” Effect selection, then, must provide variety within the context of an overall premise. Skeleton example of congruent opener: Use psychological choice script for opening ESP test with audience. End by picking a person who got all of them right. Remove envelope from pocket. Have selected person call out number from one to one hundred. She comes forward - her number is written on the envelope. She opens envelope - deck of cards inside. Go into “Five Star Miracle.” (Or go into movie list routine.)

Probe and Push This is a sure-fire technique I use to implant a specific thought in a spectator's mind while making it appear that they have freely come up with the thought on their own. (This is how I can, for example, get a person to confirm that he/she is thinking of the Taj Mahal – as in the Name/Place routine – when, in fact, all she wrote down was “India.” An excellent example involving movie scenes is provided in the following effect from “The Artful Mentalism of Bob Cassidy.” A Day at the Movies One of my favorite presentational approaches has always involved the movies. Since the basic premise of my show has members of the audience focusing thoughts on an imaginary movie screen, it’s only logical that I have them imagine a movie now and then. In Fundamentals, I described a version of the effect that works very well before a medium sized audience as part of a formal performance. This version uses very little in the way of props and evolved from an idea described by Tom Waters in his Man, Myth and Magic. It’s something that can easily be carried in your wallet or pocket and can be performed almost anywhere.

The premise of the effect evolves from the vast number of ways that movies have been classified and ranked over the years. The performer sets up the effect by referring to all of the different “One Hundred Best” and “All Time Favorites” lists that have been compiled. My basic talk goes something like this:

6

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

“Have you ever noticed how many lists of movies there are today? There’s probably at least a hundred different “Top One Hundred Lists’ alone. I mean there are lists of: the greatest films ever made; the worst films ever made; the best of the worst films ever made; the worst of the best films ever made that still made the most money; best fantasies; best westerns; best comedies, and so on. “Did you see that one a while back called the “The Best Cinematography of the 20 Century”? Now that was a fascinating one because it’s a list of the best movies to watch even with the volume turned off - the most visual films of the century. They’re all considered important, not just because of the stories, but because of excellent photography. All of them have great scenes that are easy to visualize even years after you’ve seen them. That’s what gave me the idea for an interesting visualization test. th

[The performer exhibits a long list of movie titles]

“So I decided to get a copy of the list and I found it right on the Amazon site, in the Internet Movie Archives. Listen to some of the different films on it. There’s Spartacus, Lawrence of Arabia, The Sting, High Noon, The Great Escape, and even Blazing Saddles. And those are only in the second half of the list! “ [As he reads from the list, the performer allows a few of the spectators a chance to look at the list, thus establishing that it is exactly what it appears to be. “The top of the list, of course, has some of the best remembered films of all time, containing scenes no one can ever forget. So many of them in fact, I wondered if it would be possible for me not to just reveal the name of a movie someone is thinking of, but to determine just one scene out of the thousands of scenes that are in these films. Let’s try. “I need someone who visualizes well. Yes, how about you. Would you stand please? Do you like movies? What kinds of movies do you like the best? “That’s good. Now take the list, but don’t look at it just yet. Let me turn my back first so there’s no way I can tell what films you’re looking at. “Now start to look down the list. Look over the list and let just one of the films start sending images into your mind… do you have a film that is sending images to you? Good. Now concentrate. Here’s what I’m getting.” “I’m getting some strange characters here… An animal like a man… He’s evil? Someone is holding something up in his hand like this? It’s a weapon of some kind, a knife. And blood. “I’m exactly right aren’t I? Tell everyone the scene I've received from you.”

7

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

The subject describes (in this example) the shower scene from “Psycho.” The test can be repeated with another subject or two, if necessary. The only times you may ever need to try again is in response to a good-natured challenge, or if you have completely misjudged your first subject and have managed to pick the only person within four hundred miles who only watches cartoons. But if you look carefully at the questions I asked about her preferences in movies, you’ll see in a moment how I make sure she’s a good subject. The test looks exactly as it is described above. That’s because there is nothing in view except the movie list. Even though the premise of the effect is visual -it involves the visualization of a scene taken from a highly visual film – the method is based on verbal deception, the principle of limited choice, and “The Backwards Rule.” The first deception lies in the list itself, which is completely fictitious. Since the presentation begins with a discussion of “top one hundred lists” there is a strong suggestion that the actual list contains a hundred films. But if you look back at the presentation you will see that the performer never says that. He only says that this is a “list of the most visual films of the century. “ Only forty titles appear on the list, twenty on the front of the column-like sheet and twenty on the back. There appear to be twice as many as that because both sides contain the same titles in a different order. On the next page you will see what the list looks like - the so-called “bottom half” is on the right.

8

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

FRONT OF SHEET “the top half of the list”

BACK OF SHEET “the bottom half of the list”

9

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

Note that the first twenty films on the left hand list are them same as the bottom twenty on the right hand list. Also note that all but six of the first twenty films on the left are completely fictitious. The only real films in that group are The Wizard of Oz, Psycho, Dracula, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Psycho 2 and Return to Oz These are the only films from which a volunteer will be able to visualize a scene – this is why it is important to emphasize that the spectator focus her attention on a film that she has actually seen. The list is folded in half horizontally across the center just above the title Ben Hur on the left hand list, which is on the outside of the folded sheet. In the presentation, the performer removes the folded sheet from his pocket or wallet and unfolded it. He opens it and reads his example titles from the inner side of the sheet- the side that starts with Ben Hur. As he selects his volunteer he casually refolds the sheet. The folded sheet is handed to the spectator. The suggestion is that she is looking at the top half of the list, when in fact she is only looking at the group that contains phony titles and the six force titles. When you have printed up the list, folded it and handled it, this will be very clear and you will see just how deceptive the handling actually is. When the spectator scans down the list of twenty titles visible to her, only one of the force titles will be recognizable to her. These are spread evenly through the list with The Wizard of Oz appearing first, Psycho second, and Dracula third. Since the effect only involves the revelation of a scene, and not a title, the other three force titles Return to Oz, Psycho 2, and Bram Stoker’s Dracula really act as duplicates and serve to spread just three scene forces evenly through the list. There are only three possible scenes the performer needs to work with- the Oz scene, the Psycho scene, and the Dracula scene. This is where the “Backward Principle” comes in. It is the strongest subtlety in the routine and has may be applied effectively in a great number of mental effects. Carefully reread the following part of the presentation and you will note that the performer has actually turned the entire effect around. The wording is designed so that the spectator is actually trying to guess which scene the mentalist is describing while the rest of the audience is given the impression that the mentalist is describing a scene selected by the spectator. (In another words, you are sending an image to her!) All the spectator really does is select a film that she has actually seen! Look at the highlighted words and you will see what is really happening. Up to this point you have been suggesting that the spectator will be selecting a single image, but here is what you actually say to her:

10

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act “Now start to look down the list. Look over the list and let just one of the films start sending images into your mind… do you have a film that is sending images to you? Good. Now concentrate. Here’s what I’m getting… “I’m see some strange characters here… There’s an animal like a man? He’s evil? Someone holding something up in his hand like this? It’s a weapon of some kind, a knife. And blood. “I’m exactly right aren’t I? Tell everyone the scene I've received from you.” There are just a few pumping questions, ranging from the general to the specific, that you will use to determine the scene you finally describe. The questions are phrased as statements and, done properly, there is no hint of pumping whatsoever. Here are the statements you make and how you proceed to describe a scene she will acknowledge: “I see some strange characters here…” This safely applies to all possibilities but suggests more than one “strange character.” Since The Wizard of Oz is the first recognizable title on the list, it is also the most probable selection as it will be the first title that a spectator will feel comfortable with. The preceding titles will likely make the spectator feel a bit uneasy. There is a good chance that her thinking is going something like this“I’ve never heard of any of these – what if I haven’t seen any of them – I don’t want to look dumb – Wait, The Wizard of Oz, yes, that one!” No one, of course, wants to look dumb, especially after saying that she enjoys good movies. So The Wizard of Oz, then, which has been seen by almost everyone over 12 in the English-speaking world, is her first chance to escape embarrassment. Not everyone panics that quickly, of course, but may stop at Oz for a number of other reasons ranging from convenience to the fact that it is really her favorite film of all time.

“There’s an animal like a man. He’s evil?” is the only statement/question to which you want a yes or no answer. Either way you won’t appear to be wrong. If she says “No,” she’s thinking about The Wizard of Oz and the performer continues with “No, not evil at all, but he wants to be a king…” Now start to describe the cowardly lion and a scene from The Wizard of Oz and you are home free. If you get a yes to “He’s evil,” just hold up your arm and say,

11

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act “He’s evil? Someone holding something up in his hand like this? It’s a weapon of some kind, a knife.” If you get a positive reaction proceed to describe the shower scene from Psycho. If you get a confused or negative response continue with: “And blood. But it’s not a knife. It’s made of wood. It’s a stake. And there’s a cross.” Now just continue to describe a seen from Dracula. This entire sequence should flow smoothly as if an image is slowly developing in your mind. Any negative responses should look like a misinterpretation because the image is a bit fuzzy. I indicated that the effect could be repeated, if necessary. Just give the same list to someone else and proceed exactly as before. Just say, “Think of a different film, though, so we don’t get confused.” This is a very powerful routine as written. It illustrates how physical and psychological principals can be effectively used in combination to create a seemingly impossible effect.

Recently, I have modernized the routine somewhat by printing the lists on fake pages inserted into the paperback version of Roger Ebert’s excellent “Movie Yearbook 2010," available at Amazon.com and almost every major bookstore. With just a little thought you should be able to work out various handlings and uses for this angle.

The Book Test Variations Book tests are almost ubiquitous effects in mentalism. Presentationally they must conform to the overall thematic unity of the act. For example, if I have spectators visualize a movie screen when they are thinking of a name, I will have them do the same thing when they are concentrating on a word in a book. Sequencing and presenting the book test - Flashback /Moab handling. (This incorporates the "Number of the Beast" Cover for my “Invisible Book Test” and uses a re-sizeable graphic that can be used for other books.) Years ago I described a standard dictionary test using a pocket-sized dictionary of American Slang. Other dictionary variants, such as thesauri, also offer interesting variants on standard tests such as Al Koran’s classic “A Word in Thousands.” In the teleseminar and later in the post notes I will discuss some interesting variations of the Koran idea.

12

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act

The "Sugar Bowl" utility device Lately, I am often asked about presentational variations for my Name/Place Routine. In the teleseminar I will discuss with Michael some ideas using a sugar bowl that I developed years ago for the “Mind Razor” effect described in my e book of the same name.

Beyond the "Almost Real Prediction" - A new approach to Jack London's classic routine and the "eliminate one" principle. Here we will discuss a way to apply the "eliminate one" principle to the original version of Jack London's "Almost Real" prediction, thus providing a logical disconnect to head off “reverse engineering” by analytical spectators One possibility is to use bills and switch for those that have the right properties. Michael Weber has offered the following excellent application of this idea: Switch three borrowed bills for one where the first four numbers of the serial numbers have the same total. Give each spectator a black felt tip. Have them cross out the last four numbers of the serial number. Then make selections from the first four, crossing them out as they go. (Use pencils, so they can still spend the bills. Can use "first four" numbers on bill if you use bills that have one number duplicated within each four (e.g. bill has 5464 as first four. Guy calls out any numbers and crosses out. He will call a four, if it is last, fine, if earlier, say "you already called a four, give us something different. As soon as other spectators hear this, they will NOT call out a duplicate number even though their bill has one. Can also include a 0 in one of the groups of four digits, if they call it out, you can say, NO, a real digit please, no place holders."

Psychic Warfare Psychic Warfare (or Treasure Hunting with a Map - Capitalizing on recent movie "Men Who stare at Goats". Find the submarine with a pendulum - spec marks grid ala "Battleship" to designate the area in which three submarines are hidden. (Large map of ocean has corresponding grid marks.) Locating water/oil on a map, or “Where was/will the evidence/body be found?” This premise can go in two different directions- performer finds what the spectator has selected OR Spectator finds what the performer is guiding him towards You can also use a clear clip board and do the thing blindfolded (watch through back of board while participant marks the coordinates.) Or use a standard clipboard, impression book or atlas, etc., gaffed to take impression of positions. (Or, ideally, a large folded map 13

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act that you will later use with the pendulum is gaffed as an impression device. Map should be printable from a computer in sections that are later hinged together with tape. Printing done on bristol board stock - impression peeked when map is unfolded to show to audience. It is laid on table for the divination. For stage use a video camera on a tripod can be aimed down at the table and the dousing seen on a large monitor or screen. Then grid is handed to audience. People call out the A BC coordinates that will go across the top of the grid and the numerical ones that will go down the left side. Since mentalist already knows positions of subs on a standard ABC 123 grid, all he has to do is remember which of the letters and numbers called out correspond to the submarines new positions. (You could alternatively use stacked and false shuffled or switched letter and number cards to create the grid.)

Openers, Middle Effects and Closers The teleseminar will include an in-depth discussion regarding effect selection and the special characteristics of openers, mid-show pieces, and closing effects. I’ll also touch on some sure fire ways of bringing an audience to its feet at the end of the show. The various techniques discussed will be incorporated into the Post-teleseminar notes.

Notes on these Notes - Tips, general observations and such (Subject to changes and additions, as my mood warrants, during the teleseminar) 1. It seems that everyone is starting to do the “tree and the car” psychological force. (The idea was originally Ted Karmilovich’s - we both got the same basic ideas from Kamman and Marks’ "The Psychology of the Psychic" But, just for fun, I've occasionally just "projected" random pictures. A smiley face works, as does a house, and airplane. You can refer to the Kamman and Marks book, Banachek’s excellent “Psychological Subtleties” or my e book “Universe” for various pictures that are often chosen by audiences. 2. You all already have all the material you will ever need to construct almost any sort of an act. All you have to do is "switch" them around. (In the sense that comics "switch" jokes.) 3. Effects with “plots” and mini playlets. (I’ll talk about why I generally hate them.) 4. You should keep up with the popular new effects so you'll know what NOT to do. (Is everyone doing a chair effect and an ACAAN yet?) 5. “White Pentel Oil Pastels” are excellent for impressions on clear clip boards and other glossy surfaces. Works well through index card stock and is almost invisible. It’s superior

14

Beyond Fundamentals - The Act to chalk and talcum powder and rubs off easily. It’s also easy to carry small stick in your pocket. 6. Notes on nail writers and swamis. Listo lead matches Sharpie ink for all intent and purpose. Five-string banjo and pedal steel players use metal fingerpicks. (This observation will make no sense at all unless you listen to the teleseminar!) 7. Rough and smooth post cards for remote viewing. (and interesting “eye popper” decks) 8. Moldavian switch from the pocket. A pen clip in the outer pocket acts as a billet or card holder. This is also useful for Protean Eye and much better than the idea of pinning a bulldog or paper clip to your lapel as suggested by Corinda. (You can also do a double ended pen switch out of shirt or jacket pocket – a variant handling of Hoy switcher from the bold and subtle miracles of Dr. Faustus.) 9. Using assistants with preshow.

15