|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
SM41 Special user 831 Posts |
How someone can create a false explanation on subject minds, and also can you give me an example of it??
S |
|||||||||
LLL Inner circle 1574 Posts |
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.
|
|||||||||
SM41 Special user 831 Posts |
Thanks
|
|||||||||
SM41 Special user 831 Posts |
That link didn't have the thing I need, I need to create a false explanation of a DR effect
|
|||||||||
kriskraze Special user 620 Posts |
Just make up a believable one.
|
|||||||||
Waters Inner circle 2508 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-02-25 10:30, Santiago Michel wrote: Sure! Example: body language Just imply you are using body language, by overtly watching their physical actions or movements of their eyes. Your behavior will be observed, and the explanation will be assumed or inferred. You create the picture you want them to have by doing things yourself that would be consistent with the explanation you'd like them to assert. I hope that helps? Sean |
|||||||||
Ramsay Special user England 638 Posts |
The key to this in my mind is to pull in some 'universal' truth and base the explanation on something they have heard about and therefore expect with no question.
Also the art is to make it implicit and not to spell it out. Allow the audience to discover the apparent method themselves. They feel smart and also buy into it much stronger. I have written at length about this in my recent hardback 3510 which outlines my personal rules when creating material. False explanation forms a major bulk of those rules. There is nothing worse than someone using a generic and under developed false explanation in an effect - it just does play. Explaining your ability to tell a spectator their dead grandmothers name because 'they were standing in a specific way' just doesn't cut it (I use this example as I saw a performer use this about 2 nights ago.) Also do not use memory as an mode if you have a habit of forgetting spectators names onstage - that hurts to watch too. Seeing someone demonstrating their super memory power while having to ask someone their name for the third time is painful. L. |
|||||||||
Mindtrap Veteran user 316 Posts |
An example you probably will have seen, is Derren Brown asking them to shout an answer in their mind, turn up the volume, yell it, etc. but whilst minimally cueing them to also lift up their chin. The veiled suggestion is that he may really be somehow surreptitiously reading from the throat or lower face area (and he is doing exactly that, it's observable). Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, but it’s the wrong curtain.
|
|||||||||
Waters Inner circle 2508 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-02-25 17:23, Ramsay wrote: Especially agreed. There must always be a plausible reason (that relates to the subtext) or we have extended past the bounds of our premise. Thanks for sharing, Luke. Great point, Mindtrap! Sean |
|||||||||
Chris K Inner circle 2544 Posts |
I loved the section of your San Francisco lecture where you discussed false explanations, Luke. I picked up your notes then, and your book (even though you promised me part of it ahead of time, lol). I won't rehash any of the ideas in the book, only ones I have had since reading the notes. However, since getting the lecture notes, I have had a slight change of heart. The reason is spelled out by Darwin Ortiz in Strong Magic (I don't have it here right now, so this is not an exact quote):
A magician who figures out 90% of a trick counts himself as fooled whereas a spectator who figures out 10% of a trick counts himself as NOT fooled. (fooled meaning deceived, etc. as fooled is not being used as a pejorative) With this in mind, I've tried the idea on other performers and laypeople alike and "notice" a bigger response with magicians. This puzzled me for some time until I realized what I feel is the real objective. The objective isn't supposed to be providing explanations to the audience for what you do (at least for me), it is entertaining them but not making the effects a puzzle by throwing out little "clues", I mean, what if your spectator really believes you? Ortiz talks about this in Strong Magic too, if anybody can do it, then it isn't impressive. That is not to say, in any way, that false explanations are "bad" though. For me, Mentalism is like an onion (sort of like ogres that way, I suppose). You have to have layers. All the idea of false explanation is is an idea of layers. You do not TELL your audience that you PW the amount of change they have. The very first layer is found here. In fact, this already exists as a false explanation (psychic powers, powers of observation, etc.). Then, perhaps, you use language to make it appear that things happened in a different sequence (another layer of deception). This is a layer but is not a false explanation in this example (so false explanations are layers but layers are not always false explanations). And so on and so on. I don't want to get into a discussion of how many layers one should have. Once I realized that all false explanations were layers, I became more focused on the layers themselves. Sometimes false explanations are the way to go, but sometimes the focus should be on masking the possible explanations versus making up new ones (the example above about changing the sequence of remembered events is a prime example). However, by the end of the effect, all the false explanations I have provided have been provided with a specific agenda in mind: hiding the real methodology while using false explanations that, by the end, are shown to be completely impossible. This is in opposition to the idea of merely inserting random false explanations, which I have started to see more and more. And being used poorly more and more. This goes back to the ideas about being true to your theme/setting/premise. Again, these are just my thoughts and only those that are not included in Luke's work. Actually, I should slightly clarify. These are based on his lecture notes from October of 06 in San Francisco. The section in the book I, admittedly, skipped a lot of when it seemed to be a verbatim copy of the lecture notes (including typos? I totally have to ask what THAT was about). Any more thoughts from you guys and gals beyond what Luke wrote? L |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18807 Posts |
May I recommend very highly indeed Paul Brook's new one The Alchemical Tools for all your multitudinal needs...
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
Chris K Inner circle 2544 Posts |
Lol, I got something else you recently recommended and now must eat pasta and/or ramen for the next two weeks, thanks! Actually, your last recommendation is good and I have heard great things about this one, just a little steep for me right now, esp. with such a weak conversion rate for us Americans.
L |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18807 Posts |
What was it that you bought?
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
SM41 Special user 831 Posts |
Great advice Luke!
Thanks |
|||||||||
Chris K Inner circle 2544 Posts |
Pmed ya, abraxus.
|
|||||||||
Scott Cram Inner circle 2678 Posts |
Docc Hilford has the best advice for making false explanations that are believable:
1. It’s not what you do, it’s what they remember. 2. Tell the audience what you want them to recall. 3. Remind them of what you did, even if it is incorrect. 4. Don’t talk about what you want them to forget. 5. It’s important to keep time on your side by either using delays or switching the sequence of events. 6. Exaggerate the effect. 7. Substitute the trick as an illustration of the real magic. 8. Create the challenge. 9. Seem impromptu. 10. Be consistent. |
|||||||||
kriskraze Special user 620 Posts |
11. It's not what they buy, it's what they think they're buying.
|
|||||||||
magicians Inner circle Teacher and Legend 2898 Posts |
12. steal and plageurize from old manusvripts and pass it off as your own.
Illusionist, Illusionist consulting, product development, stage consultant, seasoned performer for over 35 years. Specializing in original effects. Highly opinionated, usually correct, and not afraid of jealous critics. I've been a puppet, a pirate, a pawn and a King. Free lance gynecologist.
|
|||||||||
mesmer Inner circle 1186 Posts |
13.Theatricality and Deception are our powerfull Agents
14.it is not who I am underneath, it is what I do that defines me 15.Don't make me Angry, you don't like me when I'm Angry |
|||||||||
RichardShure Veteran user 344 Posts |
16. Music can be used to enhance a state of mind.
17. Choose your words with great care. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Creating false explanations on subjects minds (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |