Recently I was pondering about all kinds of presentations for mentalism effects.
I would love to hear opinions from you guys.
Let's start with the presentation for book test.
1 Clairvoyant(the mentalist could just sense the chosen word somehow)
2 Telepathy (Let the spectator think of the word then send the word to mentalist)
3 Remote view(mentalist remote view the word without the spectator knowing the word or remote view the word via spectator's eyes)
4 Memory test(the mentalist memorized the whole book)
5 deduce ability(the spectator think of other word from free association of the chosen word,the mentaalist deduce the chosen word from final word)
6 use as preshow for drawing duplication
....
looking fowards to you guy's idea,thanks

Many people have many different versions of booktest.
I thought many mentalists will have intrest in presentations for booktest.
Still looking forward for you guy's thinking on this,thanks

A friend of mine who combines mentalism with his magic (horrors!) likes to begin his routines with, "This isn't magic and isn't aimed at fooling you, but I'd like to try an experiement with you......."

I think every effect we present,we should
think what ability are we trying to convey or imply to the audience.
Thus it's important with the premise of the effect.
Besides, I notice that make no claim or set any premise just let the audience decides themself is another way of presentation too,such as richard osterlind's mindset.

Sychou, Number 6 is a great idea.

Edh,is that a book?who is the aurther?
Thanks

I would caution on the memory test presentation. All it takes is "and what's the word five lines down?"

First off, check out any of the Outlaw book tests and you have a few more ways of presenting this type of effect...but more importantly...your question comes off as a bit of an "exercise", and I'm not sure how productive it ultimately is, at least for my way of thinking.

I don't mean to come off as condescending, I know you're just trying to brainstorm with everyone, and that can be productive, but I find it a confusing way to approach things. It's like saying "Okay guys, I have a hammer...what are all the different things I could do with it? I know I can...

1) Pound a nail into a board
2) Use it to break a glass
3) Pulverize some aspirin to make it easier to swallow
4) Drop it and break my toe

...etc.

I don't buy a hammer and then try to figure out all the ways I can use it (unless, I'm drunk, I guess).

I have something I want to make, and I realize I need a hammer (and a few other tools as well) to help me build it.

I'm trying to build a character, and an act, with a theme and purpose. I decided what needs to be built to create these things, then I figure out the tools I want to use to do the job.

Again, I want to emphasize that I think there is value in simply brainstorming possibilities, but I think it's important to make sure it goes beyond that in the long run.

I do it either as a telepathic phenomenon where the mentalist transmits the word to the spectator's mind, or as a premonition where the mentalist foresees the word that is going to be chosen by the spectator.

Giovanni.

Although rather specialized, I have for a while wanted to do apiece that reconstructs what happens when a "psychic" is called in to help find missing persons.
Using John Archers new Streets book test will enable this to be done in a very clean way
I will "locate" the missing person (actually a body)
I will "locate" the murderer and by tying in a few other methods I will also reveal how the person was killed and the murder weapon


Steve

Book tests can be presented in many contexts. Which is most appropriate depends entirely on the situation, the performer and the ability the performer is claiming to demonstrate. An equally -- some might say more -- important considertation is whether one should perform a book test at all. That depends not only on the aforementioned factors but the situation, the venue, the audience and the performer's experience and especially his competence at audience management.