On Jul 18, 2023, elimagic wrote:
I'm a book test fanatic. I own most of the commercially available tests ranging from single book tests like all of the mother tests, many of those that are derivative of that general methodology with small tweaks, tests with multiple books that form a system to be used in many different ways, single page tests, and a few non public tests that are either created by myself or others and shared with very few. I love book tests and think they are an incredible canvas to paint on, either in a single routine or as a backbone to my corporate stage show. While I believe there is generally merit in most tests for one reason or another that warrants their release, there are definitely a few that rise to the top. I'm going ti exclude test that are not "traditional", like the aforementioned celebrity presage and many of the wonderful books Brett has released from the discussion here and want to focus on tests that are either directly replicating through the title/art a known book, such as Frankenstein, or are trying to replicate a "normal book with an unknown title" such as Mother. Very long story short, while the feature/system ideas in many test are good and useful in their own right, many of them are much better suited in stage and parlor environments where scrutiny is much less likely. This is because either the design is lacking, the methodology lends itself to be more overt, or the physical quality of the printing just doesn't quite seem like a "normal" book. Take a test like mother pocket. I think the production quality is very high and the printing, type of paper, etc, truly reflects a bargain paper back book. The flashback is disguised but it suffers in two categories for me, and that is the unknown title, and the fact that the long word principle, under scrutiny in a close up setting, can be discovered, and the physical dimensions of the book is just a bit more thick than I would like in the breast pocket of my suit. Of course, these can be mitigated by audience management and slightly less tight pocket, but they are all small annoyances that have built up over the years. With that said, though, after probably a decade or close of use with hundreds of shows on stage, close up and everything in between, I will always have a mother pocket in my case. As other tests have come and gone, usually the production of the physical book itself, the lack of key features, or combination there of has always led me back to mother pocket for close up situations. (i use mother on stage as well but have over the last 2 years adopted the omni test system which is hard to compare as it is a multi book system).This is until now....


Frankenstein has been the answer to what I have needed in a strolling, multi use, single book test. For me, in strolling especially but even on stage, I need/want a flashback as well as a long word reveal. I love the flexibility that it gives me when trolling. However, because of the natural scrutiny, the flashback must be disguised. Many tests do this in different ways, some leaving room(however small) for an "error in assumption/judgment" where the word I think the spectator is thinking of must be assumed. The other side of the coin is much closer to the original flashback books where no assumptions are needed and what you see is what you get. This is ideal, in my opinion, for stage use, not strolling. On stage, I don't want any room for error and I want to know exactly what the word is, even if that means sacrificing the ability the have it scrutinized (notice I'm not using the word inspected). In strolling, though, I want to feel comfortable that there is a level of disguise used. What I really love with the flashback used here is that it is the best of both worlds and truly is the best flashback on a strolling book test book I've seen. It strikes the perfect balance of disguise while allowing me to also know exactly that the spectator is thinking of. I won't go into more detail but I absolutely adore this for this use case.
Secondly the long words. Because of the nature of only part of the book being gimmicked with the long word bank(just less than half), this means that the book will stand up to far more scrutiny than the standard mother, as the first 55 % that feature is not in. This took. bit of getting used to and does mean there is a touch of audience management needed to engage this principle, but I think the trade off is worth it. I wouldn't want this in my stage tests, but that is why I seek different things and have different priorities in tests used for strolling and those used for stage. Can it be done, absolutely, but I think because of not just the features employed in Frankenstein, but the way they are employed truly makes this the king of strolling book tests for me. It also looks good and "feels" authentic in hand because of the paper used, quality of printing, etc.

It's a big yes from me. Yes, it is annoying to learn another word list. At this point, I have 6 different word lists in memory, but hey, it's simpler than real mind reading

Eli