Classified by Raghava Krishna

Classified Raghava Krishna

2

It is possible to read someone's mind. It is possible to know exactly what they are thinking of. It is possible that you don’t believe this. Many would attribute mind-reading to the mystical and the supernatural realm. The truth is quite the contrary. The fact is that when a person focuses on something, they unwittingly send out clues and useful information about that which they are thinking of. Successful mentalists have learned to decipher these signals and when combined with powerful techniques of misdirection, sleight of hand and showmanship, it makes them look nothing short of a sorcerer!

And now so can you… If you are an aspiring mentalist or a magician, in this book, you will find a powerful tool that you can add to your arsenal, to create a completely prop-less mindreading miracle!

Read on to learn the carefully crafted device I call ‘Classified’

3

CHAPTER 1 INCEPTION The first piece of mentalism I ever learned was with playing cards. It was Dai Vernon's 'Out of sight, out of mind' and I still remember how strong the reactions were when I performed this. There are tons of tricks where the performer reveals a selected card but here the difference is that the selection is made by merely thinking of one rather than physically touching or removing the card out of the deck. The method of 'Out of sight, out of mind' was as impressive as the effect itself. I couldn’t wait to take this playing cards concept onto other areas of mentalism. Like Book-tests for example, where the performer reveals a word thought of by a spectator. A couple of months of toying around and I eventually had an epiphany that words, each of which individually have different meanings, when combined together could psychologically force the spectator into thinking of a particular word. For instance, the words ‘Stripes’ and ‘Animal’ individually, have different interpretations, but when combined, can lead someone to think of either a Zebra or a Squirrel. I realized forcing the spectator to think of a word based on already given words would make the method seem too obvious and ineffective. So I reverse engineered it. I used the description-word as rather, a pumping device to figure out what the original word is. And thus ‘Classified’ was crafted. A heartfelt thank you to Atlas Brookings, who during a conversation introduced me to the concept of binaries. I wanted to perfect ‘Classified’. I wanted to make it pure and prop-less and I had finally found the right solution. The idea of 'free word association' combined with the concept of 'Binaries' gives us some massive advantages, which I’ll talk about, in the upcoming sections.

4

But first, a quick but sincere acknowledgement to the many whose books, conversations, videos and ideas that planted a seed in me and now I take the liberty to personalize and share the fruits with you… Dai Vernon - Out of sight, Out of mind; Leo Boudreau - Lie to me; Phil Goldstein – Thabbatical; Atlas Brookings – The Real Thing, Train tracking and for inspiring me! The idea of using homophones was a part of the presentation from one of his lectures; Mark Elsdon - Conversation as Mentalism; Derren Brown Presentational ideas ; Vincent Hedan – Some really valuable ideas in the last chapter and for his encouragement; Mark Chandaue - Presentation style and his really clever ideas on how to make the pumping process seem like a regular, fun conversation..

6

CLASSIFIED in dialog

Amidst a conversation and friendly banter, the performer gently introduces the concept of word association and steers the conversation to the understanding that different people have different associations. This will warm up the spectator to the realm of words.. PART A: Introducing free word association

“So we're going to play a game where I say a random word and you say a word that you associate with it. Okay?” “Okay.” “Apple...” “Orange.” “Sun...” “Moon” “Night...” “Day” “Great. Now you might have noticed that I snuck in a couple of homophones in there. For example, for Sun, some people say 'daughter' assuming it is 's-o-n', but you didn't. Other popular choices are ‘star’, ‘space’, ‘shine’ etc. For ‘night’, you said ‘day’ which is an example of association by contrast. You didn’t say 'armor' assuming it's not ‘knight’, but some people do. In the case of 'apple', you said

7

'orange' which is an example of association by similarity, but another common choice would be 'Fruit'. What is interesting is if I had started with ‘Orange’, you may not have gone with ‘Apple’ and gone with maybe ‘color’ instead. So I think you'll agree that different people have different ways of associating words. Right?” “Yes.” PART B: Locking in the root-word

“Now, I'm going to call out a list of random words. Some of them may be just objects lying around us and some may be completely irrelevant. I'd like you to just remember any one of the words I'm about to call out and lock it into your long term memory.” “Okay”. He then calls out the following words "Poker, Coffee, Pizza, Time, Scissors, Giraffe, Purple, Apology". “Have you got one in mind?” “Yes.” PART C: HOW DID YOU DO THAT?!!

“Now I have a bunch of words in mind that might fit with the word you're focusing on now. If I get at least one of them right, don't tell me which one, just say “yes” or “no” when I finally ask, okay?” “Okay.”

8

The performer stresses on the fact that the spectator has to be sincere, honest about the associations and try not to 'force' a connection between the root-word and the words he is about to call, if they really can't. He calls out these four words, “Espresso, Cut, Cheese, Game". ‘Did any of the words associate with your word?’ 'Yes'. "Great! Did I get all of them right?" “No.” “That would have been a miracle wouldn't it?” Spectator laughs, “Yes.” “Okay. So obviously, I can't possibly tell which one was the right one.” “Yeah.” “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right.” “Okay”

He then calls out the following words, "Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color" "Were you able to relate your word with any one of those?" "Yes, one of them".

9

"Okay, once again, I can't possibly tell which one it was as there were many of them. I'm going to try this again." He then calls out the following words, "Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck". "How about now?" "Yes." "Great. I think we had a good connection there as I was able to get at least one right each time. You see, since you've been sincere and honest throughout the entire process, it helped me understand your thinking pattern quite well. To sum up, you thought of a word… It was a completely free choice. You could have thought of any word and could have related your word with any other word, am I right?" "Yes." "So based on my analysis, I'm going to say you were thinking of ‘Coffee’. Yes?" “Yes! How did you do that?”

10

CHAPTER 3 HOW YOU DID IT The first list of words can be called out in any order. But there is a number value assigned to each word. 1 - Poker 2 - Purple 3 - Pizza 4 - Time 5 - Scissors 6 - Giraffe 7 - Coffee 8- Apology

After the spectator chooses the root-word in their minds, you call out the following sets of words (henceforth referred to as SET 1, 2 and 3). You ask the spectator to tell you if they can relate their word with any of these words below : SET 1 - Espresso / Cut / Cheese / Game SET 2 - Drink / Tasty / Tall / Color SET 3 - Caffeine / Sharp / Clock / Neck Given the spectator says 'Yes' to any one of the sets, you will assign points. SET 1 - 1 point, SET 2 - 2 points SET 3 - 4 points. The simple ‘No’ will be ‘0’. Your tally of points for each word will seem something like the following chart:

12

CHAPTER 4 WORD FOR WORD Let’s take a look at how you can handle their responses in different scenarios … 1. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘POKER’

After hearing out SET 1, their first answer would be a 'Yes.' So you can say “Great! Did I get all of them right?” “No.” “Well, that would have been a miracle wouldn't it?” Spectator laughs, “Yes.” “Okay, so I can't possibly tell which one of them it was. Right?” “Yeah.” Note how the last line is a strong thing to state, because firstly, it reiterates the fact that you have no way of knowing which one it was. Secondly, you are not only introducing more words, but also, you have used their response as an input to eliminate Time, Purple and Giraffe’. Now you call out SET 2. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if you can link your word with at least one of them. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?”

13

“No.” “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken credit anyway.” (Spectator laughs) “Sure you would have.” Prepare to call out SET 3. “I over thought it and gave you a different set of words instead of the ones I actually intended to give you initially. Caffeine, sharp, Clock and Neck. Was this one anywhere closer to yours or further away?” “Further away.” “Was it at least in the same language?” *laughs.* “Obviously, you think differently. It makes it a bit more difficult, but I think based on your personality, you were thinking of the word ‘Poker’, weren't you?” “Yes indeed!” The flow of the conversation and the added humor distracts them from the actual method. 2. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘PURPLE’

After hearing out SET 1, their first response would be a “No”. “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken credit anyway.” Spectator laughs

14

Now you, already and secretly know that it's not Poker/Pizza/Scissors/Coffee. Introduce SET 2.. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “Yes!” “I didn't get all of them right, did I?” “No.” “That would have been a miracle right?” “Yes.” “Okay, so I can't possibly tell which one it was. Right?” “Yeah.” But secretly, you now know it could either be Purple or Giraffe. Call out SET 3.. “Let's see if maybe you went with one from a more common list. Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck. Was this one anywhere closer to yours or further away?” “Further away.” “So obviously, you think more uniquely so it was a bit more difficult than I thought. But if I were to put myself in the shoes of someone who would think differently than I do, then I'll probably go with “Purple”. Was that it? Were you thinking of “Purple?”

15

“Yes I was!” 3. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘PIZZA’

After hearing out SET 1, their first response would be “Yes.” “Did I get all of them right?” “No.” “That would have been a miracle right?” “Yes.” “Okay, so I can't possibly tell which one it was. Right?” “Yeah.” Preparing for SET 2… “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “Yes, one of those.” Launching SET 3… "Okay, once again, I can't possibly tell which one it was as there were many of them. I'm going to try this again, with a list of common associations. Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck “No”.

16

“It's okay. It shows that you think quite uniquely. So it was a bit trickier than I thought. I think you were probably thinking of a “Pizza”, weren’t you?” “Yes!” 4. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘TIME’

The response to SET 1 would be a “No”. “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken credit anyway.” Spectator laughs… You introduce SET 2. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “No.” “Well, was it at least in the same language?” Spectator laughs… You call out SET 3. “Okay, I over thought it and gave you a different set of words instead of the ones I initially had in mind. Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck. Do any of these words fit with yours?” “Yes.”

17

“Did I get all of them right?” “No.” “That would have been a miracle wouldn't it?” Spectator laughs, “Of course”. “So now I can't tell which one of them was the right one.” Now, with the right tone of presentation, you make it seem like you knew it the whole time but just made a joke out of the misses for fun …and that it wasn't a big deal after all. “Now based on my analysis I'm going to say you were thinking of 'Time'. Am I right?” “Yes!” 5. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘SCISSORS’

Their first response to SET 1 will be a 'Yes'. “Did I get all of them right?” “No.” “That would have been a miracle right?” “Yes.” “Okay, so I can't possible tell which one it was. Right?”

18

“Yeah.” Launching SET 2…And…. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “No.” “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken credit anyway.” Spectator laughs, “Sure you would have.” SET 3… “I over thought it and gave you a different list instead of the one I actually intended to give you initially. Caffeine, sharp, Clock and Neck. Was this one anywhere closer to yours or further away?” “Yes.” “Alright. Then I think I'm on the right track. Were you thinking of 'scissors'? “Yes indeed!” 6. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘GIRAFFE’

Their first response will be a “No” to SET 1.. “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken the credit anyway.” Spectator laughs..

19

Proceed to calling out SET 2.. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “Yes.” “Great! Did I get all of them right?” “No.” “Now that would have been a miracle wouldn't it?” “Yes.” “Okay. So now I can't obviously tell which one it was.” “That's true.” But you now know that it's going to be either Purple or the Giraffe.. so call out that final SET 3.. “I think I'm getting closer. I'll give you a few more words and tell me if you can make a connection with one of those. Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck. Am I on a similar route?”. “Yes.” “Great. I think now we're in perfect sync. I know you probably weren't able to connect it with all of those. But I think Neck might have made a lot of sense. Were you thinking of the Giraffe?”

20

“Yes Indeed!” 7. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘COFFEE’

This would be the same as the example seen in the Chapter 2. You will get a “yes” thrice. The idea is to add a lot of humor and fun and making it seem as if you are being in the moment. Be careful to not let the vibe feel scripted. Feel free to experiment with the ideas here and do not miss the opportunities for jokes. 8. WHEN THE SPECTATOR THINKS OF ‘APOLOGY’ The response to SET 1 would be a “No”. “It's okay. Because in that case, I would have taken credit anyway.” Spectator laughs… Now you know that it's not Poker/Pizza/Coffee/Scissors. You introduce SET 2. “Okay, I'm going to try this again with a few more words. Tell me if I get at least one right. Drink, Tasty, Tall, Color. Were you able to link your word with any of these?” “No.” “Well, was it at least in the same language?” Spectator laughs…

21

You call out SET 3. “Okay, I overthought it and gave you a different set of words instead of the ones I initially had in mind. Caffeine, Sharp, Clock and Neck. Do any of these words fit with yours?” “No.” “Well, in that case I guess I owe you an apology. Wait a second, were you thinking of the word apology?” “Yes!” This would seem to them like the classic ‘magician messes up the trick intentionally but wins with a huge surprise’.

22

CHAPTER 5: THE FINAL TOUCHES A. The fact that this effect can be performed completely prop-less is one of its huge advantages and as Atlas Brookings pointed out, making it really difficult for the spectator to backtrack and figure out what you did. As there's really nothing written down, there’s no paper trail. However, if you would like to make it seem like the words are random, here are a few ideas that Vincent Hedan, gave me, which I think are really valuable…  You could introduce a magazine or a booklet from around you and 'mis-call' the words. This would also make it seem as if the description words were also random.  You could have multiple spectators write down some random words. To make it seem spontaneous, you can ask them to write down things they see around them. [This may make the words like coffee seem more plausible] …Then swap the written words to a prearranged set of words. There are lots of ways you could do this. For instance, using the Himber's wallet or a gimmicked folder comes to mind.  The chosen words do not necessarily have to be in English. If you are in a country where English is not the native language (as in my case), you could tell them that you have just started learning some new words and that you are adding more and more words to your vocabulary. So you can decide to play the game using the words you've just learned. B. If you have ever used the product 'Mozique: Decisions' you could make it seem as though you had already predicted, if the spectator would say 'yes' or 'no' and use their data in order to determine the actual word.

23

C.  You can create a screenshot on your cellphone which contains a list of words that looks as if it has been generated randomly from a website. Surprisingly, these websites really do exist on the Internet making it seem believable. While it might seem as if you are trying to find more words randomly, the words you will show them will be the ones you have already prepared. Once again, my sincere thanks to Mark Chandaue for this clever idea. Even though, the effect can be performed essentially prop-less, more often than not, you will have your cellphone with you, so you can use it to your advantage.  Intuition test – During the pumping procedure, you tell them that you’re going to test their intuition by having them state yes or no to whether the words you’ll subsequently name could be associated with their root-word. Before you call out SET1, SET2 and SET3, you tell them ‘This is going to be a test of your intuition. Now I’m about to call out a bunch of words. Do you think that I will call out at least one word that could be associated with your (root) word? What does your intuition say?’ Let’s assume they say yes. You then call out SET1. ‘Did any of the words associate with your word?’ Here, let’s assume they say yes. You then immediately say, ‘wow, it seems like your intuition is pretty strong. Let’s try this again.’ On the contrary, if they had said said no to SET1, you then say ‘It’s okay, let’s test it again. I’ll call out another group of words. What does your intuition say now? Will I call out at least one word that could be associated with your (root) word?’ Ultimately, this is a good demonstration of a test of intuition which is used as misdirection here and it cleverly masks the binary pumping procedure. This again, is a Mark Chandaue idea! Mentalism is truly one of the greatest ways to connect with people. Classified, with its prop-less nature allows you to perform anywhere at a moment’s notice. Just find the right time in your conversation to use it. The most important thing to

24

remember while performing is that it is more about the spectator than yourself. Make the performance as fun and light-hearted as possible. The irony of writing a book on a mentalist trick perhaps is the itch to share guarded secrets… With this book, I’m really happy to share the inner workings of the effect which I am sure you will appreciate and enjoy performing. I dedicate this book to my family, JUS and all of my dearest friends. I’d also like to thank Atlas Brookings, Vincent Hedan, Sreejit and Sasi Evani for helping me realize my vision for this work.