(Close Window)
Topic: Karuna by Ross Tayler
Message: Posted by: kevg (Oct 17, 2016 07:03AM)
I just heard about this new release from Ross, which sounds very intriguing. I'm a big fan of Ross's previously released work as they've been intelligently written and always find his thoughts insightful and thought provoking.

For £10 I'm sure I'm going to get something from this as well as an enjoyable read. Also I read that Ross is donating 50% of the profits to a charity supporting homeless people in Exeter, UK so hats off to him for that.



Here's the Ad copy:

In Karuna, Ross will explore a new way of relating to our audiences and participants which allows us to utilise the boldest of methods to achieve the most incredible of effects! You’re going to come away from Karuna able to give readings, reveal highly personal information with no process, get your spectator in touch with their own psychic gifts and even divine details about your participants loved ones without ever meeting them. Including contributions from Fraser Parker, Ben Cardall and Aaron Alexander.
Message: Posted by: kevg (Oct 17, 2016 09:01AM)
I forgot to mention... Available here:

http://www.rosstaylermysteries.com/karuna
Message: Posted by: Adam Hince (Oct 18, 2016 11:01AM)
How is it?
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Oct 18, 2016 11:21AM)
Ross is doing a genuinely good thing by donating 50% of the profits to charity. It seems it is something he really cares about.

The project itself is not for the faint of heart. It does indeed explore some methods which are quite bold and require some guts to perform.

Honestly, if you're getting this and wanting to use the material as a mind reader to show off your skills, this isn't the book for you.

This book is about creating an atmosphere of genuine psychic reading. If you give readings, I really think you will find something of interest here which makes it feel as if you really know so much about the sitter.

If you've ever wanted to give readings a go, read some classic cold reading material and then read this to learn how to incorporate it.

Any questions, I'll be glad to try to answer.
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 18, 2016 06:37PM)
"Reveal highly personal information with no process" is what the ad copy literally states. I argue this is false advertising.

Do you and Ross and others read things like RedDevil's Operation Gemini? It would be good for you to do so so you can compare your offering versus that of other notable contributions to our field.





[quote]On Oct 17, 2016, kevg wrote:
I just heard about this new release from Ross, which sounds very intriguing. I'm a big fan of Ross's previously released work as they've been intelligently written and always find his thoughts insightful and thought provoking.

For £10 I'm sure I'm going to get something from this as well as an enjoyable read. Also I read that Ross is donating 50% of the profits to a charity supporting homeless people in Exeter, UK so hats off to him for that.



Here's the Ad copy:

In Karuna, Ross will explore a new way of relating to our audiences and participants which allows us to utilise the boldest of methods to achieve the most incredible of effects! You’re going to come away from Karuna able to give readings, reveal highly personal information with no process, get your spectator in touch with their own psychic gifts and even divine details about your participants loved ones without ever meeting them. Including contributions from Fraser Parker, Ben Cardall and Aaron Alexander. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 18, 2016 08:07PM)
Did you pay for your copy, Maddy? And, "Reveal highly personal information with no process" is what the ad copy literally states. Do you agree that this is false advertising?



[quote]On Oct 18, 2016, MadisonH wrote:
Ross is doing a genuinely good thing by donating 50% of the profits to charity. It seems it is something he really cares about.

The project itself is not for the faint of heart. It does indeed explore some methods which are quite bold and require some guts to perform.

Honestly, if you're getting this and wanting to use the material as a mind reader to show off your skills, this isn't the book for you.

This book is about creating an atmosphere of genuine psychic reading. If you give readings, I really think you will find something of interest here which makes it feel as if you really know so much about the sitter.

If you've ever wanted to give readings a go, read some classic cold reading material and then read this to learn how to incorporate it.

Any questions, I'll be glad to try to answer. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Oct 18, 2016 08:22PM)
[quote]On Oct 18, 2016, magicowner wrote:
Did you pay for your copy, Maddy? And, "Reveal highly personal information with no process" is what the ad copy literally states. Do you agree that this is false advertising? [/quote]


Yes I did.

And if you're quoting, you should probably quote all of what is actually written, "By the time you’ve finished reading, you’ll be able to give highly accurate character readings interwoven with revelations of highly specific personal information such as private memories and childhood hobbies, as well as deductive techniques to identify what pets a person has and even how they take their tea, amongst other things."

He does indeed teach how to do the things listed above with no process.

But don't get this. You will hate it. It takes guts and it isn't meant to just show your friends. It's meant more for mystique performers who want to create the feeling that what they are doing is real.
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 02:39AM)
Here is a direct quote from 'Karuna", which will give you a taste of the sort of approach inside.

"It is generally accepted these days that knowledge of a first letter, the approximate length of a name, and the gender of the thought of individual is sufficient to guess a name."

The same assumption lies behind 'Rose'.

So Ross, you are a member of the Café. Let's put your statement to the test. I'm thinking of a male name starting with the letter 'J'. It is approximately five or six letters long. To help with the geography, I live in London and spend half the year in the US, mainly New York and LA. It is someone I know personally. Have a guess.
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 19, 2016 04:43AM)
I think Ross is able to do something that most performers can't, and he might not even realize how HARD it is for others. The mindset with which he performs and elicits from his audiences is very hard to accomplish. But when you can do it, something beautiful happens: you're not being challenged, you don't feel the need to impress them with your "abilities"... You're on a journey, together, exploring something strange and magical.

Sometimes I feel I can do it, sometimes I feel I'm just "doing tricks"... And, for ME, the real value of this book lies in the way Ross shares his view on performance, his internal dialog and how he wants to be perceived by the people he performs for (and probably the detail in which he explains all this might be an indication that he does know how hard it is). Besides, I really like the way he writes and he got me laughing and smiling a lot while I read the book.

The method for the name guess is great, for sure. I'm not sure I like it better than his other name guesses, but I haven't tried it yet, so I can't really comment. The one thing I can say is that it requires the same boldness as Ouija or Rose (and I have no problem with that :P).

A big plus for me was the little essay from Aaron Alexander, which is always effortlessly awesome :D

I really, really loved this. It inspired me and gave me a lot of food for thought. Thank you, Ross!
Message: Posted by: Dreda (Oct 19, 2016 05:41AM)
[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Martin Pulman wrote:
Here is a direct quote from 'Karuna", which will give you a taste of the sort of approach inside.

"It is generally accepted these days that knowledge of a first letter, the approximate length of a name, and the gender of the thought of individual is sufficient to guess a name."

The same assumption lies behind 'Rose'.

So Ross, you are a member of the Café. Let's put your statement to the test. I'm thinking of a male name starting with the letter 'J'. It is approximately five or six letters long. To help with the geography, I live in London and spend half the year in the US, mainly New York and LA. It is someone I know personally. Have a guess. [/quote]

I'll bet on Jacob or James. :D
Message: Posted by: a brown 1968 (Oct 19, 2016 07:02AM)
Exactly how my ebooks can be spun out using this one bold method ?
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 07:37AM)
[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Dreda wrote:
[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Martin Pulman wrote:
Here is a direct quote from 'Karuna", which will give you a taste of the sort of approach inside.

"It is generally accepted these days that knowledge of a first letter, the approximate length of a name, and the gender of the thought of individual is sufficient to guess a name."

The same assumption lies behind 'Rose'.

So Ross, you are a member of the Café. Let's put your statement to the test. I'm thinking of a male name starting with the letter 'J'. It is approximately five or six letters long. To help with the geography, I live in London and spend half the year in the US, mainly New York and LA. It is someone I know personally. Have a guess. [/quote]

I'll bet on Jacob or James. :D [/quote]

Sorry. No. Feel free to guess again. It's generally accepted you only need the first letter and the approximate length of the name. And you have now missed twice! You need help with your audience management skills, Dreda!
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 19, 2016 07:44AM)
Did you ever read the rest of the book or stopped at that point? I'd love to hear what you think of the book, besides that one sentence. Ironically, this might be the only book that explains a method that can give you more than the first and second letter of a thought of name :)

[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Martin Pulman wrote:
Sorry. No. Feel free to guess again. It's generally accepted you only need the first letter and the approximate length of the name. And you have now missed twice! You need help with your audience management skills, Dreda! [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 07:46AM)
I did read it. For the little my opinion is worth I will give a full review after I've read it a couple of times more and absorbed it and tested some of the material. Or would you rather I gave a full glowing review the second after speed reading it as soon as it arrived in my inbox -in full Café tradition?
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 19, 2016 07:57AM)
I have way too much respect for you to even try to comment on what you said :)

I'll just add that I am very lucky, because here in Portugal, I can almost (ALMOST) always guess the name with the first letter and *exact* number of letters.

[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Martin Pulman wrote:
I did read it. For the little my opinion is worth I will give a full review after I've read it a couple of times more and absorbed it and tested some of the material. Or would you rather I gave a full glowing review the second after speed reading it as soon as it arrived in my inbox -in full Café tradition? [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Ross Tayler (Oct 19, 2016 08:03AM)
Really interesting seeing the diversity of responses here, although not unexpected as I've always been open about my methods being quite idiosyncratic.

It's a pity that you can't identify anything in the 50 odd pages of content which you saw as being useful, Martin. Frankly this surprises me, and I thoroughly doubt the experience will be the same for other readers. I also think we can both agree that quote is to some degree taken out of context, given that it proceeded an explanation for a throw-away name guess which is intended for casual use in the midst of a reading rather than as a central method. We're both aware that the main name guess taught provides one with much more information. Equally you know that precise numbers of letters and second letters are also generally known in almost all of these methods, so I feel you're being slightly disingenuous. That said, given the information you provided I'd generally guess either Joshua or Joseph for 6, James or Jacob for 5. If I was wrong I'd take the hit and move on, because my intentions go beyond just showing off my talents and my audiences feel that. If I was interested in being the big clever magic man, I'd pull out a deck of cards and get on with it. Sometimes that's good fun, but it's not the point of Karuna.

I know you come from a positive place Martin, because judging from your posts your intent is simply to sort good material from bad and provide some criticism and quality control. This is all good stuff. But remember that not every performer shares your goals, your character etc, and their material will reflect that. If mine and Fraser's stuff doesn't suit you, that's all okay - just don't purchase it! But the trash talk serves no positive purpose.

magicowner, I'm not sure what to say to you. You accuse me of false advertising having (based on your comments), not read the book. What this adds to anyone's day I'm not sure. Certainly no one is better informed about the product for your comments.

It's a shame that people's first instance is to criticise a product which I've quite literally been working on for over a year to try and make it the best value possible for those that purchased it, and the sole purpose of which is to have a positive impact. But to those who are enjoying Karuna and have had positive things to say, I give my thanks. Your ongoing support is really appreciated.

Best wishes,

Ross.
Message: Posted by: Ross Tayler (Oct 19, 2016 08:09AM)
P.S. Martin as a side note I'd actually like to thank you for your purchase, given that I know you're sceptical of mine and Fraser's approach, so whatever you may have to say now I appreciate your being open minded enough to experiment with my material again. Hopefully after you've tried it a few times your scepticism will be diminished.
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 11:31AM)
"Equally you know that precise numbers of letters and second letters are also generally known in almost all of these methods, so I feel you're being slightly disingenuous. That said, given the information you provided I'd generally guess either Joshua or Joseph for 6, James or Jacob for 5. If I was wrong I'd take the hit and move on, because my intentions go beyond just showing off my talents and my audiences feel that. If I was interested in being the big clever magic man, I'd pull out a deck of cards and get on with it. Sometimes that's good fun, but it's not the point of Karuna."

You think getting the name right in a name divination is "showing off"? You must have an odd view of mentalism. You're the one who stated that only the first letter and approximate numbers of letters were needed for a name reveal, and so far all of your guesses are wrong. I don't think your statement is true. Is it contentious to say so?
And I'm not quite sure what you mean by "if I was interested in being the big clever magic man, I'd pull out a deck of cards and get on with it". What, you mean like Chan Canasta?

For someone who opens his e-books by talking about being "provocative" you seem incredibly touchy when anyone questions you.

Incidentally, your accusation that I am indulging in "trash talk" is very serious. Can you please point out to me where that has been the case.
Message: Posted by: Peter_turner (Oct 19, 2016 12:13PM)
Hey guys :)

Martin - Good to see you are active again here, long overdue a catch up. It's been a while since I posted so I thought I'd weigh in.

I personally like Ross' material - I wouldn't perform it myself (not because it's not good) but I have a range of things that are my go to items and I'm getting old and comfortable. Ross don't feel for a second disheartened about Martin's comments, from what I read he's playing Devil's advocate and I think you'll come out of the other side of it better for it. Martin you and I share a love for Canasta and I'm sure you know he was slated by magicians for his take a chance attitude (during his career).

I ask you, would you still love him the same if he wasn't boldly beautiful? Chancy and well... Canasta?

We should embrace and enable creativity - Not dampen it.

You know as well as I do that statistical practices play a part in this type of material and I personally think as long as you are well grounded in traditional methodology this can play amazingly in a live context. If you nail this and introduce a bi''et for something else as you have already guessed a name not utilising traditional methodology when you introduce the bi''et the method is cancelled long before the compromise comes into play.

Worst case scenario, if you feel you are at a point in the routine where it might not be going how you anticipated move into a p''k.

Why I'm telling you this I don't know as you are a smart guy and already know this and much more - so I suppose this is probably more aimed at some of the other people reading this that are less experienced with this type of material.

Ross - Don't take this next comment as offensive it's a compliment.

I was young when I started to create material along these lines, I didn't have as rounded a view as I do now and I understand about the end game now much more than I did. I have tightened a lot of things and learnt when and where to utilise this type of material and when not, Ross is more creative and knowledgable at his age than I ever were.

I predict very big things from Ross.

If you want another tool to add to your tool box of things to perform on the fly - Get this, if you are looking for something that is going to be a crutch as a replacement to the classic methodology you are already utilising this is not for you.

I've witnessed mediums being hailed as messiahs for operating with a lot less than what Ross is sharing.

Anyway, I'm going grey ( 28 and I'm f!*!?! Going grey)

Have a good en guys, I'm going to get back from London and have a nap.

Pete x
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 19, 2016 12:23PM)
I respect your opinion, Maddy. But, it looks like Ross agrees with me about the ad-copy. In fact, it appears he changed the language on his website to eliminate any reference to his previous claim that there is no process to reveal highly personal information.

The ad copy previously read:

In Karuna, Ross will explore a new way of relating to our audiences and participants which allows us to utilise the boldest of methods to achieve the most incredible of effects! You’re going to come away from Karuna able to give readings, reveal highly personal information with no process, get your spectator in touch with their own psychic gifts and even divine details about your participants loved ones without ever meeting them. Including contributions from Fraser Parker, Ben Cardall and Aaron Alexander.

Even the original poster of this thread confirmed that, and I read it too on the website. Now, it is no longer there. But, there is clearly a process to reveal highly personal information.

Plain and simple, Karuna DOES NOT allow you to reveal highly personal information with NO PROCESS...I repeat, there IS a process!






[quote]On Oct 18, 2016, MadisonH wrote:
[quote]On Oct 18, 2016, magicowner wrote:
Did you pay for your copy, Maddy? And, "Reveal highly personal information with no process" is what the ad copy literally states. Do you agree that this is false advertising? [/quote]


Yes I did.

And if you're quoting, you should probably quote all of what is actually written, "By the time you’ve finished reading, you’ll be able to give highly accurate character readings interwoven with revelations of highly specific personal information such as private memories and childhood hobbies, as well as deductive techniques to identify what pets a person has and even how they take their tea, amongst other things."

He does indeed teach how to do the things listed above with no process.

But don't get this. You will hate it. It takes guts and it isn't meant to just show your friends. It's meant more for mystique performers who want to create the feeling that what they are doing is real. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Ross Tayler (Oct 19, 2016 12:24PM)
I don't think anything about my response was particularly "touchy", Martin. I'm certainly not upset by your comments, just a little baffled. Be assured that I feel in no sense touched.

I'll try to clarify my approach for you, Martin. I think mentalism is about more than "getting hits". Whilst that forms an important part of the picture, in the way I want to perform it is only a part. I'm far more interested in having magical-feeling conversations with people. Sometimes that'll involve revelations of thoughts, sometimes just a reading, sometimes demonstrations of suggestion - sometimes an amalgamation of these. So when any particular aspect misses, it's not shattering the whole picture. Hopefully in reading the routine as laid out, you understood that the context of the routine was not: "And for my next trick, I shall attempt to pluck a thought from betwixt your ears and insert it into my third eye", but rather that (as I think is quite clearly explained) the name guess emerges naturally out of the flow of the performance, and is not necessarily even expected by the spectator. It hits big if successful and is brushed over if not. Unfortunately if this isn't something you can envisage in your performance you're not going to enjoy the work, but then given your comments elsewhere on the Café pertaining to mine and Fraser's prior releases, you'd have known this to be the case before purchasing.

As for the name, I don't think anyone is surprised that your "challenge name" has not been guessed. I could go through every permutation of Jerome and Jordan and Jagoda and still I doubt you'd lay claim to any in particular. The only claim I'm making (and forgive me if all these caveats were not present in the text, most of my readership are accustomed to the ideas) is that with the information you mentioned, in most cases you have a good chance of guessing the name, and even if you miss you'll generally be close. For the way in which I perform that is sufficient. Not everyone performs like me and that is fine. My final word on this point would be to reiterate that you're being disingenuous in this criticism, because as Adrien mentioned the primary name guess taught (as opposed to the throw away handling you're referencing) provides far more information than that which we're discussing.

When I refer to using a deck of cards in that way, I'm pointing out that I'm perfectly capable of performing magic which is all about how clever and skilful I am, with loads of big tada effects and no risk of anything ever going wrong. And sometimes that's fun. But it's not the subject of this book. What I was not saying is that cards cannot be used in mentalism. At no point have I said that, and in fact I know you saw me say this exactly in the Abyss thread recently. At this point I must ask if you're just looking for everything possible with which you can disagree, just because you love a tussle, and it is that attitude to which I'm referring when using the expression "trash talk".

It'd be really great if this didn't just turn into another day on the forums, where people talk smack at each other for the hell of it. I think you might have something useful to say for a particular section of performers who simply will not like it because it doesn't fit their style. I think that's a really valid point, and I recognise that the readership for this work is limited. But it has a readership, and that's because we each have unique approaches, which work for us. I sincerely hope I've helped clarify the things you didn't understand regarding my approach or my wording. I'm totally happy with people not getting involved in this project if it's not for them, but the furthest thing Karuna was ever intended to be was another source of negativity.

Best wishes,

Ross.
Message: Posted by: Ross Tayler (Oct 19, 2016 12:25PM)
Magicowner, I can assure you that nothing on my website has changed since the posting of this thread.
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 19, 2016 12:31PM)
I want to believe you. Where is the language that I had previously read on your website and that is referenced by the original poster of this thread? Specifically, you had claimed there is NO process to reveal highly personal information. That claim is no longer there.

[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Ross Tayler wrote:
Magicowner, I can assure you that nothing on my website has changed since the posting of this thread. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Ross Tayler (Oct 19, 2016 12:45PM)
Firstly, a quick thanks to Pete for his comments. I fully agree with what he says regarding for whom this material will be suitable, so use that as a guide if you're considering purchasing.

magicowner the ad copy to which you are referring is on the "Shop" page of my website. It is a truncated version of the ad copy from the main Karuna page, and this includes the comment pertaining to process. This is still there, and nothing has changed on the original page. I'm afraid you've been mistaken.

That said I stand by the statement that there's methods of revealing particular types of information which are devoid of process. That is to say that between the spectator thinking of the thing and us revealing it, there is no procedure the performer or participant must go through in order for us to divine the information. Why you make such outright claims having not read the book, contrary to the opinion of an objective and respectable third party who has read the book, I'm afraid I can't even guess at.

Glad to have cleared that up.

Best wishes,

Ross.
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 02:08PM)
Ross, I hope that you feel mentalism is an art form that is worth taking seriously? I don't think it is any less an art form than music or theatre of cinema or literature or the visual arts. I place it several rungs higher than plate spinning. As such, if you release a product and charge money for it you have invited comment and criticism. And no, that criticism does not have to be positive or even constructive. It would be absurd for George Lucas to start arguing with film critics and people btl on IMDB just because they thought Jar Jar Blinks was an insult to the original Star Wars.

I also think it is a mistake -though doubtless a comforting one - to assume that those who are critical of your material are more interested in sponge balls or are somehow so bereft of intelligence that they are not able to "understand' your work. It's hardly James Joyce we're talking about here.

I suspect those buying your work are interested in psychological mentalism. My heroes are Chan Canasta and Uri Geller. I have been pursuing the idea of informal psychological mentalism in my own cack-handed way for a relatively long time. I'm wide open to new ideas. I remember when Derren Brown performed his International lecture that many people at the event were openly hostile to what he was attempting. Personally it was then, and remains now, the greatest Mentalism experience I've ever had. I will never be able to describe to you the thrill of watching him perform Reminiscence and Lift to a somewhat truculent audience, most of whom had no idea what was coming next. Paradigms were certainly shifted that night. So I am personally not commenting on your work in comparison to classical mentalism stage techniques. I am commenting on it compared to the works of people who have released or performed material in the psychological genre: Berglas, Canasta, Shaw,Rowland, Jermay, Turner. So far I haven't found your material has reached anywhere near that level. (although I have enjoyed reading and listening to much of it and have enormous respect for your choice to donate your profits from this to homeless people.) I note, however, that Peter Turner believes your upcoming work is a masterpiece, and I truly consider him to be a genius, so I know if I was a mentalist selling material I'd rather have a quote from Peter than from random Magic Café members.

The Café should be a place to discuss mentalism openly and honestly. If products are released with huge price tags (your new book with Fraser is the same price I paid for the life's work of David Berglas) and earth-shattering hype about changing the paradigm and changing the way people perform forever, I see no problem in reviews meeting the product on the same terms. And if that means the reviews are harsh, well, maybe there truly is no such thing as bad publicity. I remember buying Albert Goldman's biography of John Lennon when it came out and the quote proudly displayed on the cover was "TRASH!" -Paul McCartney. Maybe you should wear your bad reviews as a badge of honour. It may indeed mean you are shifting the paradigm and your critics are simply too dumb to realise it.

PS. You've now had seven guesses at the name and they are all wrong. And I haven't changed it to suit. So we perhaps can at least agree that the idea you only need a first letter and an approximate amount of letters to divine a name is, at least, debatable, rather than "generally accepted"?
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 19, 2016 02:26PM)
I am utterly confused. What is your definition of process?

[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Ross Tayler wrote:
Firstly, a quick thanks to Pete for his comments. I fully agree with what he says regarding for whom this material will be suitable, so use that as a guide if you're considering purchasing.

magicowner the ad copy to which you are referring is on the "Shop" page of my website. It is a truncated version of the ad copy from the main Karuna page, and this includes the comment pertaining to process. This is still there, and nothing has changed on the original page. I'm afraid you've been mistaken.

That said I stand by the statement that there's methods of revealing particular types of information which are devoid of process. That is to say that between the spectator thinking of the thing and us revealing it, there is no procedure the performer or participant must go through in order for us to divine the information. Why you make such outright claims having not read the book, contrary to the opinion of an objective and respectable third party who has read the book, I'm afraid I can't even guess at.

Glad to have cleared that up.

Best wishes,

Ross. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 19, 2016 03:23PM)
Man, this is tiresome... wouldn't this be a nicer conversation if, instead of being clearly aggressive, someone simply wrote "I don't agree that with the first letter of a name and his approximate number of letter, one could guess a thought of name" and someone else said "does it really need NO PROCESS? I find that hard to believe" :P Both points would have been made and we would not go into this whole semantics battle that clearly takes us nowhere...

Yes, most times you need more than just a the first letter, gender and number of letter to guess the exact name. That point has been made and, I think, agreed on by everyone. Since the method in this book gives you more than that, can we move on?

As for the process question, which I think is perfectly valid, but could have been asked in a less agressive way... I will try to really answer... I would say that, everything you reveal BUT the name has the same "process" as a psy force would have... "think of a number from ONE to TEN. Are you thinking of 7? YES!" if this is a process to you, then yes, Karuna has a process :D

Now, Martin, hit me with all your might. I'm ready :D
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 19, 2016 03:36PM)
I'm not being remotely aggressive. I'm being critical of heavily hyped material. You seem to feel the name guess here is "great". I think it's extremely poor. We simply have wildly contrasting opinions. I hope others will give their honest opinions on this provocative work.
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 19, 2016 03:52PM)
Instead of simply voicing your opinion, you turned it into a challenge, and that seemed aggressive to me. I'm not a native english speaker, so I'm sorry to have misread your tone.

But now we're talking :) The name guess on this ebook... you think it's risible and I surely understand your point of view. I haven't tried it yet, so I can't really know how well it goes on performance. But what I TRIED to say in my first post was that I don't feel I would stand a chance with this method if I went "ok, so, I'm going to guess a name you're thinking". This, as many of Ross' and Fraser's works, in my opinion, works best in the context of a reading or, at least, with a "let's try something out of the ordinary" approach. For me, that's perfect. For many it will suck. Such is life :D

I think that if someone liked Ouija, Sync, Rose or False Messiah, they will like this method. If those works didn't do anything for you, I think this probably won't either. Do you agree?
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Oct 19, 2016 04:36PM)
...just to be clear, did James Joyce release some mentalism?...
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 19, 2016 04:40PM)
I apologize if my factual statement came across aggressively. That was not the intention; however, the fact still stands that you cannot reveal highly personal information with NO PROCESS.

I truly thank you for acknowledging this. Even a psy force has a process---you have to try to get the spectator to do something! It's not just..."think of any word in the English dictionary."...and then the next second, "The word is PROCESS".

No, it doesn't work that way! I encourage Ross to understand the true meaning of PROCESS, and I suggest him to change the deceptive ad-copy. Forget me, if his loyal customers like Adrien acknowledge the existence of a process, he should listen to them!

[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Adrien L. wrote:
Man, this is tiresome... wouldn't this be a nicer conversation if, instead of being clearly aggressive, someone simply wrote "I don't agree that with the first letter of a name and his approximate number of letter, one could guess a thought of name" and someone else said "does it really need NO PROCESS? I find that hard to believe" :P Both points would have been made and we would not go into this whole semantics battle that clearly takes us nowhere...

Yes, most times you need more than just a the first letter, gender and number of letter to guess the exact name. That point has been made and, I think, agreed on by everyone. Since the method in this book gives you more than that, can we move on?

As for the process question, which I think is perfectly valid, but could have been asked in a less agressive way... I will try to really answer... I would say that, everything you reveal BUT the name has the same "process" as a psy force would have... "think of a number from ONE to TEN. Are you thinking of 7? YES!" if this is a process to you, then yes, Karuna has a process :D

Now, Martin, hit me with all your might. I'm ready :D [/quote]
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Oct 19, 2016 04:54PM)
Magicowner:

You're doing a great job at trolling. Let me give you an example of the highly personal information that can be revealed with NO PROCESS.

The psychic is giving a reading. As they are giving this reading they say, "I'm getting the impression of an animal in your life. I'm fairly certain you have a pet, correct?" They say they do indeed have a pet. "And this is a dog isn't it?" They say yes.

Ross teaches you how to do exactly what I said above. There is literally no process of the spectator. The comparison to a psy force is bad because in Ross's work, you literally never ask them to do anything. You don't even ask them to think of something. You just know.

It's more like Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes looks for clues. Essentially, Ross provides you ways to look for clues to know information about people's personal life. So yes, you look for clues, but no, there is absolutely no process the spectator must go through.
Message: Posted by: magicowner (Oct 19, 2016 06:23PM)
Thank you, MagicMaddy. There is a process for the performer. Whether that process occurs before, during, or after the effect (and with or without the spectator in presence) is a separate point.

I am glad you are enjoying Karuna. Keep enjoying it and don't forget there is another ($150?) ebook coming out from Ross and Fraser in Jan 2017 :-) And then, likely another few after that :-)



[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, MadisonH wrote:
Magicowner:

You're doing a great job at trolling. Let me give you an example of the highly personal information that can be revealed with NO PROCESS.

The psychic is giving a reading. As they are giving this reading they say, "I'm getting the impression of an animal in your life. I'm fairly certain you have a pet, correct?" They say they do indeed have a pet. "And this is a dog isn't it?" They say yes.

Ross teaches you how to do exactly what I said above. There is literally no process of the spectator. The comparison to a psy force is bad because in Ross's work, you literally never ask them to do anything. You don't even ask them to think of something. You just know.

It's more like Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes looks for clues. Essentially, Ross provides you ways to look for clues to know information about people's personal life. So yes, you look for clues, but no, there is absolutely no process the spectator must go through. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Adrien L. (Oct 20, 2016 03:55AM)
Well, yeah... The participant needs to think of something... If he doesn't think of anything, it's kinda hard to read their thoughts :D

Anyway... I went out yesterday and tried some elements of Karuna. I got some lovely reactions and I can confirm that the name reveal went great and really got them by surprise. I should point out that it was presented in a very informal conversation, and I don't think this would be very effective in a strolling situation...

The fact that there are effects that work for some and not for others is, to me, one of the greatest things about magic and mentalism... And I think it should be embraced and not feared. The one effect I like above all others is Aaron Alexander's The Ant Queen. I know some very good performers who didn't like it... and some that didn't even understood it... and that's fine!

The conditions in which this particular effect will work have been clearly stated, so if they don't meet your criteria, don't spend your oney and your time on it... or you'll be very frustrated.

To me, this is a keeper! :D
Message: Posted by: Michael Zarek (Oct 20, 2016 07:10AM)
Just finished reading this, might write a longer review later when I test it out, but for now in short:

I liked it.

Though it is a very weird book, and I can easily see how it wouldn't be for everybody.

It's like going from "The expert at the card table", to a book on palm reading. I know many people claim that mentalism is a branch of magic, and yet this book is something completely different and if you just want some new impromptu effect to add to your strolling mentalism, then you probably will be disappointed.

If you like doing readings and performing informally then 10 pounds (half of which goes to charity) is a very reasonable price.

Few notes:

-Yes you can reveal personal information with no process
-The main name guess in the book gives you as many letters as you want + number of letters + the gender.
Message: Posted by: IMAGINACIAN (Oct 20, 2016 11:34AM)
An interesting digression. Just looked it up.

KARUNA means compassion and kindness in an eastern language ! Probably reflects the 50% donation to charity.

But the discussion on the thread so far seems far from kind and compassionate? :-)
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Oct 20, 2016 12:37PM)
[quote]On Oct 19, 2016, Martin Pulman wrote:
Here is a direct quote from 'Karuna", which will give you a taste of the sort of approach inside.

"It is generally accepted these days that knowledge of a first letter, the approximate length of a name, and the gender of the thought of individual is sufficient to guess a name."

The same assumption lies behind 'Rose'.

So Ross, you are a member of the Café. Let's put your statement to the test. I'm thinking of a male name starting with the letter 'J'. It is approximately five or six letters long. To help with the geography, I live in London and spend half the year in the US, mainly New York and LA. It is someone I know personally. Have a guess. [/quote]

There's 2-3 names I could guess with that which in face to face performance can be done so that it doesn't seem as if I'm fishing from a set of names. This however would only play as so live in person due to certain principles/techniques at play for that. With the disclaimer that you're also using probability to your advantage thus uncommon names would not work with such a method (that's when you resort to classic methods, now the difference between using classic methods and propless is that the propless leaves a stronger imprint in their memories of nothing being spoken or written down, a better illusion of mind reading if you will, of course use whichever approach is suitable for the situation as well since there's no one size fits all).
Message: Posted by: Aaron Smith (Oct 20, 2016 04:00PM)
Finished my first read of this tonight. I love the routine, can tell a lot of thought has went into it and every aspect of that is explained in detail. Might post again after I've re-read and tested it out. Particularly like the name reveal, its clever thinking. For £10 and helping those less fortunate, you really can't go wrong. Would love to see more of this in mentalism and magic.
Message: Posted by: Martin Pulman (Oct 20, 2016 04:16PM)
Ross is definitely to be applauded for helping the homeless in this way. A very worthy cause.
Message: Posted by: 252life (Oct 25, 2016 09:20PM)
Adrian,

Side note about Aaron Alexanders The Ant Queen;
I love it.
Now I'm waiting for, Reality as an Art, The Bridge, and Zodiac Killer.
I became an immediate fan of his work.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled slug fest :)

252RandomPlug
Message: Posted by: Jacob Smith (Nov 17, 2016 10:02AM)
Guess who's back?

Hope you're enjoying Karuna as much as I am!

I've watched this work come to fruition over the last two years and finally I found the time to deliver a compelling review of exactly what your 10p is going towards!

https://youtu.be/SEdxM-LP4AQ

XX,
Jacob
Message: Posted by: ProfessorJinksy (Dec 11, 2016 04:38PM)
I ordered this, based on this thread, and on the low price and charitable aspects.

Long story short, I am happy with the purchase, and I see some merit in the technique.

Now, I am thinking about Rose. I thought I was done with Tayler/Parker after Ouija, but maybe not.

Is the Karuna name guess the same as Rose, or close to it?

Thank you,
Jinksy
Message: Posted by: Second Sight (Dec 22, 2016 01:21PM)
I bought this and enjoyed it for the most part. The name guess is interesting. I can see it working in the right place at the right time. But in the wrong place at the wrong time, I wouldn't try this. Incidentally, I'm also trying to learn palm reading, and so I enjoyed that aspect of this little book.
Message: Posted by: 252life (Dec 22, 2016 01:53PM)
Bey Second Sight, you may want to look into Paul Voodini and Richard Webster for palm reading info.
I've found those two sources to be a big help.
Message: Posted by: 252life (Dec 22, 2016 01:55PM)
Erm...meant "hey"
Message: Posted by: Second Sight (Dec 22, 2016 02:11PM)
[quote]On Dec 22, 2016, 252life wrote:
Bey Second Sight, you may want to look into Paul Voodini and Richard Webster for palm reading info.
I've found those two sources to be a big help. [/quote]

Thanks 252life. I have Voodini's lecture and palm reading booklet. And also Julian Moore's booklet. Both are nice. I will look into Webster's. I haven't come across it.
Message: Posted by: ALEXANDRE (May 8, 2018 11:10PM)
I just purchased Karuna but haven't read it yet, though I've read other related manuscripts like ECROF, Abyss, and a lot of Fraser Parker stuff, like Rose, etc. I use some of the material straight up, some other stuff I've adapted to suit me better, and some I've mixed with other things. The material in general has proven useful to me.

These guys and others like them are a wonderful breath of fresh air in Mentalism and Psychic Entertainment as far as I'm concerned. They're not afraid to look as real as possible and in fact, as real as it gets, while giving their audiences (more often than not) a meaningful experience. To me this approach is a good part of the spirit of Mentalism. I predict they will be coming up with some extraordinarily powerful stuff in the coming years if not sooner. Keep it up, guys!

Regarding "hits" and accuracy ... surely I'm not going to miss all the time, I pepper in stuff that is surefire (like readings as an example) with stuff that I will occasionally miss, but to my style of performing it's a non issue. It's been said before and it's true, a miss will often make the entire experience even more believable and baffling as a whole, and more importantly, my performances are not hinged on 100% hits ... but on giving my audience an experience.

But, hey, in the end, liking or not liking boils down to whatever blows your hair back. And this thinking certainly does mine.
Message: Posted by: 252life (May 9, 2018 10:48AM)
Amen. Agreed.