<ul><li><p>TELESEMINAR NOTES ( To be read in conjunction with the materials discussed in the live broadcast of the </p><p>teleseminar or the MP3 recording of the event.) </p><p>Copyright 2010 by Bob Cassidy All rights reserved </p><p>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. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 2 </p><p>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. </p><p>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!' </p><p>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.' </p><p>And here it is - a combination e book and teleseminar. </p><p>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.' </p><p>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. </p><p>Some Relevant Excerpts from Fundamentals: </p><p>Overview </p><p>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 peoples innermost thoughts. Unless he finds it amusing to read his own mind, the illusion is impossible without an audience. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 3 </p><p>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. </p><p>The Psychology of Mentalism </p><p>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. </p><p>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 viewers mind. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>But in mentalism, the illusion itself cannot be created without effective verbal communication and misdirection. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 4 </p><p>Plausibility </p><p>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 cant, 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. </p><p>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 mentalists appearance. Not only does this put an audience at ease, but it strikes down psychological barriers that individuals may have regarding authority figures. </p><p>The same applies to the mentalists 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 mentalists claims. </p><p>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 personas powers, how he got them, how they seem to work, and what his limitations are. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 5 </p><p>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. Its 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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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: </p><p>Scorpio Variations - Major effects used as openers </p><p>Major Effects (those involving, or potentially involving, the entire audience) are ideal openers. When I wrote the now out of print Scorpios Message I used the idea of casting out brief horoscope readings during a Q &amp; A routine, to create the impression that everyone in the audience received an answer to their question. </p><p>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). </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 6 </p><p>Achieving Thematic Unity </p><p>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. </p><p>Effect selection, then, must provide variety within the context of an overall premise. </p><p>Skeleton example of congruent opener: </p><p>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.) </p><p>Probe and Push </p><p>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. </p><p>A Day at the Movies </p><p> 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, its only logical that I have them imagine a movie now and then. </p><p> 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. Its something that can easily be carried in your wallet or pocket and can be performed almost anywhere. </p><p> 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. </p><p> My basic talk goes something like this: </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 7 </p><p> Have you ever noticed how many lists of movies there are today? Theres 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. </p><p> Did you see that one a while back called the The Best Cinematography of the 20th Century? Now that was a fascinating one because its a list of the best movies to watch even with the volume turned off - the most visual films of the century. Theyre 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 youve seen them. Thats what gave me the idea for an interesting visualization test. </p><p> [The performer exhibits a long list of movie titles] </p><p> 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. Theres 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. </p><p> 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. Lets try. </p><p> 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? </p><p> Thats good. Now take the list, but dont look at it just yet. Let me turn my back first so theres no way I can tell what films youre looking at. </p><p> 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. Heres what Im getting. </p><p> Im getting some strange characters here An animal like a man Hes evil? Someone is holding something up in his hand like this? Its a weapon of some kind, a knife. And blood. </p><p> Im exactly right arent I? Tell everyone the scene I've received from you. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 8 </p><p> The subject describes (in this example) the shower scene from Psycho. </p><p> 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, youll see in a moment how I make sure shes a good subject. </p><p> The test looks exactly as it is described above. Thats 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. </p><p> 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. </p><p> 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. </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 9 </p><p>FRONT OF SHEET BACK OF SHEET the top half of the list the bottom half of the list </p></li><li><p>Beyond Fundamentals - The Act </p><p> 10 </p><p> 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 Stokers Drac..</p></li></ul>