(Close Window)
Topic: Reason for your CT
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 8, 2018 04:25AM)
I always found this the one draw back on this method as opposed to say, a b#@@&t SW&£#h.

Anyone got a good reason they give for doing it? Why write it down to seconds later...you know what.

The "oh you hand wrote it? No I said print" seems not great to me
Message: Posted by: Michael Zarek (Sep 8, 2018 04:41AM)
I don't usually use it but this justification always worked for me:

(Roughy write up)
Hmm, it seems hard for you to focus on this as a written word, I'm not getting anything.

Here, write this down and stare at the writing for 3-4 seconds.

Now look at me... Perfect, it's much clearer now. We don't need this now
Message: Posted by: Last Laugh (Sep 8, 2018 04:46AM)
The original 'Name and Place' by Bruce Bernstein is among the best motivations I've heard.

Also, if it's done in the context of a ritual of some kind (we need to tear this up and burn it), it can definitely make sense, though that doesn't work for everyone's character obviously.

Another good one is to have the thought shown to another person - "Okay now that you've seen it also, let's destroy it so there's absolutely no way for me to see it".

Having said that. I very rarely use a CT in my work. Even if I need to tear something, I'd probably go for the classic or a sW1764 and delayed r3@6. As cool as the instant ones are in theory, I've had too many instances of terrible, or tiny, or not in the correct area writing.

I do think it's a good thing to have in your arsenal however. You can do it with nearly any kind of random paper.
Message: Posted by: Waters. (Sep 8, 2018 09:06AM)
Research the work of Iain Dunford and Dave Moses. They have the best motivation on the planet.
Message: Posted by: Stunninger (Sep 8, 2018 09:28AM)
There are some some excellent motivations for a CT and I agree you will find them in the sources suggested above, as well as others such as the work of Richard Osterlind and Bill Cushman.

That said, for several years I worked with a number of CTs. I would be initially enthusiastic about each, then stop using it for one reason or another and move on to another. The main problems for me were trying to decipher small or illegible handwriting with what usually amounts to a very brief time to read what's been written, and also getting called out a number of times when getting the read. Just my opinion, but I don't think CTs are as deceptive as some think.

Eventually I gave up CTs and started using full p@@ks instead.
Message: Posted by: Jamie D (Sep 8, 2018 09:47AM)
I too prefer p**ks over a tear as I find it to be more natural for me. When I did use a tear, my motivation was along the lines that when you write something down, it helps you visualize what your focusing on or something like thst. I can’t remember the exact patter. When I use a p**k, I usually don’t have any motivation I just have them do it and that’s it. The rest is all incorporated within the actual presentation and just makes sense. I also feel part of it is confidence. Whatever I’m getting them to write something down for any type of p**k, and extremely confident about it and never think anything of it. Where is with a CT, I feel like I would sometimes lack that confidence which is huge.
Message: Posted by: Philemon Vanderbeck (Sep 8, 2018 10:23AM)
Have an assistant instruct the participant to write down their thoughts. When you come into the room, say that you didn't need anything written down and tear the paper up.
Message: Posted by: innercirclewannabe (Sep 8, 2018 01:28PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Philemon Vanderbeck wrote:
Have an assistant instruct the participant to write down their thoughts. When you come into the room, say that you didn't need anything written down and tear the paper up. [/quote]

Nice ruse, taken directly from Dunninger, I believe. ☺

Richard Osterlind has written and spoken extensively about this - to summerise his sage advice, just tell your volunteer 'that's how it is.' As a footnote from me, if you don't feel comfortable saying this, then don't do a CT. Simple.
Message: Posted by: John C (Sep 8, 2018 01:57PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, innercirclewannabe wrote:
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Philemon Vanderbeck wrote:
Have an assistant instruct the participant to write down their thoughts. When you come into the room, say that you didn't need anything written down and tear the paper up. [/quote]

Nice ruse, taken directly from Dunninger, I believe. ☺

Richard Osterlind has written and spoken extensively about this - to summerise his sage advice, just tell your volunteer 'that's how it is.' As a footnote from me, if you don't feel comfortable saying this, then don't do a CT. Simple. [/quote]

so if you don't want to say that particular line don't do a CT?

sounds kinda limited.
Message: Posted by: innercirclewannabe (Sep 8, 2018 02:06PM)
What’s ‘limited’, IMO is looking for justification for any effect you perform. How about just performing and letting your persona carry you through? Nothing ‘limited’ about that.
Message: Posted by: Philemon Vanderbeck (Sep 8, 2018 03:53PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, innercirclewannabe wrote:
Nice ruse, taken directly from Dunninger, I believe. ☺
[/quote]

Thanks! I couldn't remember where it was from. (And I was too lazy to look it up.) :-)
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 8, 2018 06:12PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Waters. wrote:
Research the work of Iain Dunford and Dave Moses. They have the best motivation on the planet. [/quote]

Thanks waters! I'll do that! Sounds interesting
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 8, 2018 06:17PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Stunninger wrote:
There are some some excellent motivations for a CT and I agree you will find them in the sources suggested above, as well as others such as the work of Richard Osterlind and Bill Cushman.

That said, for several years I worked with a number of CTs. I would be initially enthusiastic about each, then stop using it for one reason or another and move on to another. The main problems for me were trying to decipher small or illegible handwriting with what usually amounts to a very brief time to read what's been written, and also getting called out a number of times when getting the read. Just my opinion, but I don't think CTs are as deceptive as some think.

Eventually I gave up CTs and started using full p@@ks instead. [/quote]


I lean towards p@@ks too. I guess we all do. It's good to know a few roads to the same destination to throw people off the scent. Thanks All for the feed back, I appreciate it and the bits that say don't justify it.

In many ways I ask for my performers self. I need to justify it to my self in a clear way so my performance of it is solid and clear to the people watching.
Message: Posted by: dmoses (Sep 8, 2018 10:11PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Waters. wrote:
Research the work of Iain Dunford and Dave Moses. They have the best motivation on the planet. [/quote]

Ahem.... why thank you Sean, but then again, you’ve always had great taste!

D
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 9, 2018 04:10AM)
Ah Dave! How cool. Is there a work in particular Sean is talking of?
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Sep 9, 2018 07:56AM)
2 Things and I'm not sure they matter much?

1. Is if your going to t**r it up you don't need to b**n it. It's kind of redundant.
2. If you t**r it up to put it into something baring you from "touching it" the procedure is logical.

I'm thinking Docc Hilford on his Psychic Pitch Act videos.
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Sep 9, 2018 10:38AM)
A pair of observations ...

1) There are few things more extensively discussed on the Café than motivations for CTs. At least one entire book exists on the subject. There are [b]many[/b], [b]many[/b] possible approaches, and it takes little effort to research same. For the record, I think that everything a mentalist does needs strong motivation, but I also think that, in the vast majority of instances, that motivation should be self-evident. That is, you shouldn't be explicitly explaining something ("I'm asking you to write this down because ..."). Ideally, it should be inherently obvious to participants why you are doing what you are doing.

Remember that a CT is simply a technique: it is not an effect. It is not even a plot. Generally, it's not a particularly good idea to be constructing a performance piece primarily on the basis of a technique that you find intriguing. It betrays a weak understanding of the [url=https://www.deceptionary.com/performance.html]art of performance[/url].

2) A CT is a particular technique for executing a p**k. Comments like "I prefer a peek to a CT" are misinformed (unless they have tried to use a CT without a p**k, in which case their preference is understandable). You can certainly do a p**k without a CT. Or a p**k without folding the billet, or a p**k without touching the billet, or even a p**k without anything being written down. A CT, however, is definitely a p**k technique.
Message: Posted by: Mindpro (Sep 9, 2018 11:57AM)
Very nice!
Message: Posted by: bevbevvybev (Sep 9, 2018 02:04PM)
I really hate this piece of paper. Before I tear it up in anger, write a really angry word on it.
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Sep 9, 2018 02:09PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, dmoses wrote:
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Waters. wrote:
Research the work of Iain Dunford and Dave Moses. They have the best motivation on the planet. [/quote]

Ahem.... why thank you Sean, but then again, you’ve always had great taste!

D [/quote]

I agree.

We have some very strong motivations and presentations. Logical and adaptable too.
Message: Posted by: Philemon Vanderbeck (Sep 9, 2018 03:11PM)
As a bizarrist, tearing up the paper and subsequently burning it is part of the ritual.
Message: Posted by: Ubernutz (Sep 9, 2018 03:47PM)
[quote]On Sep 8, 2018, Last Laugh wrote:
The original 'Name and Place' by Bruce Bernstein is among the best motivations I've heard.

Also, if it's done in the context of a ritual of some kind (we need to tear this up and burn it), it can definitely make sense, though that doesn't work for everyone's character obviously.

Another good one is to have the thought shown to another person - "Okay now that you've seen it also, let's destroy it so there's absolutely no way for me to see it".

Having said that. I very rarely use a CT in my work. Even if I need to tear something, I'd probably go for the classic or a sW1764 and delayed r3@6. As cool as the instant ones are in theory, I've had too many instances of terrible, or tiny, or not in the correct area writing.

I do think it's a good thing to have in your arsenal however. You can do it with nearly any kind of random paper. [/quote]



Any idea where this is published?
Message: Posted by: Waters. (Sep 9, 2018 03:56PM)
I believe it was originally in “Twenty Effects for Psychic Entertainers” by Bruce Bernstein
Message: Posted by: Ubernutz (Sep 9, 2018 04:00PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2018, Waters. wrote:
I believe it was originally in “Twenty Effects for Psychic Entertainers” by Bruce Bernstein [/quote]

Great, Thanks Sean
Message: Posted by: Matt Pulsar (Sep 9, 2018 09:18PM)
Mostly I just do it. Nobody questions it. If it is obviously part of the process through your actions it isn't necessary to justify it.
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 10, 2018 06:33AM)
I have tended to just do it too however I think I should have the "why " figured out for that one time in twenty someone asks.

One time I was some what burnt with the technique, I did osterlinds tip of putting the bits in the bottle. After the guy said," if I topped the bits out would I find my word?" He just walked off but gives you pause for thought. I think it's a good utility to have, it's a p@@k on the fly if your not set up for a p@@k you may have a preference for.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Woolery (Sep 10, 2018 06:01PM)
I’ve been thinking a lot about cause and effect lately. Much magic is performed as effects without causes. And snapping your fingers or casting a shadow would be such low-effort causes that they don’t really deserve an effect. In story magic, the tricks are illustrations for the tale. Different sort of thing. In bizarre, if there’s a ritual, that is the cause. In mentalism, unless you just want to say it is all tricks, there’s an inherent cause for the effect of reading minds.

So, all that said, if my effect is that under certain circumstances I can pick up on thoughts, the circumstances are my cause. With a CT, I think there ought to be a justifiable reason for both the writing and the ripping. They should be congruent to the cause.

I don’t think you need to explain it, but I think having a subtext about why it matters is valuable. Is it some form of psychometry? Do you destroy it to send it out into the ether so you now have access? I have my reason, but I only share it with people individually.

Patrick
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Sep 11, 2018 12:04AM)
The writing it down seems easy as we want to "solidify the thought in the mind" and writing it down accomplishes that. See Bob C's work on the subject.

Tearing or burning seems more ingenuous? IN PME is a piece called "The Secret" by Dunninger on page 47 the paper is torn and dropped in a glass of water. Moments latter the paper bursts into flames and the metalist revels the written thought. No patter suggestions are made int the text but it is obvious that as has already been stated a bizarre rational can be made for the occurrence. So to can a ritualistic reason be given for what happens. I have written a presentation centered around pyrokenisis that not only makes sense but adds another mental effect to the demonstration.

I don't know if all this matters as justifications seem like running when not being chased? However having a reason, would help me to make it more believable through motivating factors.
Message: Posted by: Peter Morrissey (Sep 11, 2018 05:05PM)
[quote]On Sep 10, 2018, Mr. Woolery wrote:
I’ve been thinking a lot about cause and effect lately. Much magic is performed as effects without causes. And snapping your fingers or casting a shadow would be such low-effort causes that they don’t really deserve an effect. In story magic, the tricks are illustrations for the tale. Different sort of thing. In bizarre, if there’s a ritual, that is the cause. In mentalism, unless you just want to say it is all tricks, there’s an inherent cause for the effect of reading minds.

So, all that said, if my effect is that under certain circumstances I can pick up on thoughts, the circumstances are my cause. With a CT, I think there ought to be a justifiable reason for both the writing and the ripping. They should be congruent to the cause.

I don’t think you need to explain it, but I think having a subtext about why it matters is valuable. Is it some form of psychometry? Do you destroy it to send it out into the ether so you now have access? I have my reason, but I only share it with people individually.

Patrick [/quote]

Echos a lot of my thoughts on the process and led to the post. Thanks, id love to hear your reason in pm by the way. For inspiration not plagerism!!
Message: Posted by: dmoses (Sep 11, 2018 05:40PM)
[quote]On Sep 9, 2018, Peter Morrissey wrote:
Ah Dave! How cool. Is there a work in particular Sean is talking of? [/quote]

Hey Peter...
It's in the mysterious link in my sig.

best
D