I just wanted to share a presentational idea for Split Reality…

Following a recent performance, one of the participants made a comment along the lines of…

“So what? Of course I will pick pictures that correspond to my personality. What does that prove?”

It was not made harshly or as a criticism, but only as an observation. Of course, this meant that he had taken it seriously, but it also got me thinking…

What if I selected participants whose self-image was OPPOSITE of the pictures they would end up selecting? In other words, invite a participant who considers him or herself as left-brained to end up with the right-brained images and vice versa for the other participant.

The effect is now very different. It is no longer an innocent psychological test either confirming the validity of our self-notions or the validity of left/right brained notions. It becomes a powerful proof that our naïve notions about ourselves are often erroneous, a theme that has potentially wider implications.

How well do we really know ourselves? Do others see us as we see ourselves? What other aspects of our character or of our mind have we misjudged?

From there it is only a small step to suggesting -- and perhaps demonstrating -- that among the misconceptions we harbor about ourselves are doubts concerning abilities of a psychic nature. And we all know where that can lead…

Neil

Congratulations Neil, it's Brilliant !!!

Great.

I too have faced this strange problem of not having an "effect" at the end of Split Reality. I made mine up for close up work. At the end, some groups just look at the photos, at me, at each other and then just kind of nod and shrug it off as "Looks like I'm really left brained..."

They take it to be something like some personality test you'd receive in an email, and that the results shouldn't be surprising at all. I like the theme of Split Reality, though for some reason red/blacks or surivved/died seemed to retain the magical factor a bit more.

Great idea Neil. Thanks for the suggestion!

Mark.

If you present it as a magic trick then your specs may feel there's no effect, yes. That's why it's best presented as a psychological experiment combined with a build up first. Maybe close up walk/around isn't the venue for this effect.

On stage in a corporate setting with a themed show has worked out great for me.

J

By having the participants choose the opposite of what they expect you can, as you say, play the effect as "a powerful proof that our naïve notions about ourselves are often erroneous."

This is just a thought... you could also suggest that something you have done previously has caused them to choose against their natural character. Maybe you did this using verbal manipulation. This may give the performer some more power and focus in the routine. The question then becomes, "do you believe that, without you knowing it, I can influence you to make choices that are against your nature?"

Might work?

Verbal manipulation is a very interesting point. I like about "do you believe that, without you knowing it, I can influence you to make choices that are against your nature?"

Thanks for sharing!!

Aaron
Aaronish Magic

Really like this idea Neil. Not had a problem myself but I do like this idea of people thinking they are one thing and ending up actually being another. It could lead in to so many different presenations.

SR

The most difficult part of presenting is deciding where to start. A joke perhaps, a story ... Well, I like to start at the beginning.

In the beginning there was single cell life, then multi celled life.

Then sea creatures dragged themselves up out of the ocean onto dry land. In order to survive their fins and tails evolved into arms and legs, their gills into lungs. They became mammals and then animals and soon, consciousness was developed.

As these mammals evolved very sharp teeth appeared. They were able to more efficiently chew their food. This allowed the absorption of more nutrition and thus the sophisticated brain was formed.

Just as a trickle of water following the same path for millions of years created the Grand Canyon so too by our thoughts traveling the same path over time created a groove separating our brain into a left side and a right side. Scientists in their infinite wisdom apply named these two parts of the brain: the left side and the right side. Later a very interesting discovery was made. The left side was found to be used for logical analysis or thinking and the right side for creative thought.

Clap your hands together and stop. Look at your thumbs. Either the left thumb or the right thumb will be on top. If the left thumb is on top you are right brain dominant, if the right thumb is on top you use your left brain more.

Sometimes I say this:

And then within a subset of man’s achievements would be things like fire, the wheel, the Sony guitar hero III you know that sort of thing.

Start the routine here.

j

Hi all -

What do you think of combining the original version of Split reality with the one that Neil has proposed above. You would end up with a more complex presentation that consists of two phases:

1. First you would have two members of the audience and you would correctly determine whether they are in fact right or left brained.

2. Second you would spread out all the cards face up and use the refinement of Luke Jermay to show the two members of the audience that you can actually influence their subconscious choices.

What do you think?

G.