The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Frankenstein Book Test by Kaleb Wade (78 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
Kaleb Wade
View Profile
New user
27 Posts

Profile of Kaleb Wade
Thanks to everyone for your support, feedback, and suggestions on this thread. All Frankenstein orders have now been shipped and will be with you very shortly. We now only have 2 copies left in stock!

Thanks again,
Kaleb
FREE EBOOKS:

THREE: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/three

HUMAN CLUEDO: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/human-cluedo

https://www.kalebwade.co.uk
OCCULT. FRANKENSTEIN. CINEMATIC. AFTERGLOW
BeefyBill
View Profile
New user
33 Posts

Profile of BeefyBill
I can see why people love this. I’ve has this for about a week and it’s awesome, the instructions are a fun read too. Really like the extra handling provided, great addition. I will try to post a proper review when I’ve had chance to use it a bit more.
davfreeman
View Profile
New user
51 Posts

Profile of davfreeman
I love this too. I wish I had The Alchemist to go along with Frankenstein. Are there any other books titles coming out?
252life
View Profile
Inner circle
Ninth Circle, Hades
2994 Posts

Profile of 252life
Quote:
On Jun 13, 2022, davfreeman wrote:
I love this too. I wish I had The Alchemist to go along with Frankenstein. Are there any other books titles coming out?


Good question! And ditto Smile
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.

-Theodore Annemann
Kaleb Wade
View Profile
New user
27 Posts

Profile of Kaleb Wade
Quote:
On Jun 13, 2022, 252life wrote:
Quote:
On Jun 13, 2022, davfreeman wrote:
I love this too. I wish I had The Alchemist to go along with Frankenstein. Are there any other books titles coming out?


Good question! And ditto Smile


I can't say too much regarding future releases at the moment. But let's just say that Frankenstein won't be the last Smile

Cheers,
Kaleb
FREE EBOOKS:

THREE: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/three

HUMAN CLUEDO: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/human-cluedo

https://www.kalebwade.co.uk
OCCULT. FRANKENSTEIN. CINEMATIC. AFTERGLOW
davfreeman
View Profile
New user
51 Posts

Profile of davfreeman
I am excited to see what title will be next. The first two titles where great.
252life
View Profile
Inner circle
Ninth Circle, Hades
2994 Posts

Profile of 252life
1984 would be topical Smile
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.

-Theodore Annemann
AutarchicFlux
View Profile
Veteran user
397 Posts

Profile of AutarchicFlux
I generally quite like this booktest and plan to use it with my live audiences, however, in order to add to the information in the thread a bit, and provide some feedback to Kaleb, here are a few nitpicks:

1.) Some of the words in the long word list (I will not divulge them here in order not to engage in an undue amount of exposure) are technically words, and might not be spotted by 99% of spectators as a bit out of place for Shelley's writing style, but as someone who is literally a professor of English literature and philosophy (and has taught Frankenstein,) there were a few that seemed a bit out of place to me.

2.) The text of the book looks largely unsuspicious to most, but to anyone at all familiar with Shelley's novel, several major structural aspects are immediately off, such as the fact that the book does not contain the frame narrative about Sir Robert Walton.

3.) One of the words in the long word list, which I will divulge here just for the sake of clarity - "vegetations" - borders on not even being a word. You will find that it's not listed in some dictionaries, and certainly isn't a word any trained writer of English would ever use. "Vegetation" is already a collective noun. A lot of vegetation is just that - a lot of vegetation. Varied vegetation is varied vegetation. The only context in which one would *ever* say "vegetations" would be perhaps in talking about whole different ecosystems, but in that case, the word "ecosystems" would generally be used. While some of the other "out of place" words are a small quibble, this one does bother me a little. I feel like if I performed this for my academic colleagues, for instance, any of them would arch their brows at the appearance of this pretty-much-not-a-word in my reveal.

There you have it, my three small nitpicks. Am I overthinking it?
The Unmasked Magician
View Profile
Inner circle
If only I didn't have a wife and a kid I would have MUCH more than
2011 Posts

Profile of The Unmasked Magician
Thanks for discussing those details. I am
not sure either of their effect on the routine or if you are overthinking, but as a fellow language lover I agree that those are small but eyebrowraising points.
Please check regularly if you are becoming the type of magician Jerry Seinfeld jokes about. (This applies to mentalists as well.)
252life
View Profile
Inner circle
Ninth Circle, Hades
2994 Posts

Profile of 252life
Eye didant notace n uzually eye reeds gud
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.

-Theodore Annemann
BeefyBill
View Profile
New user
33 Posts

Profile of BeefyBill
“but as someone who is literally a professor of English literature and philosophy (and has taught Frankenstein,) there were a few that seemed a bit out of place to me.“

“ There you have it, my three small nitpicks. Am I overthinking it?”

Yes.

Also, search for vegetations as a medical term ;-) I’ve heard it used as a plural in this context often, is it perfect English? Maybe not but definitely not the problem you think it is in my experience having used the book a fair bit now.

I wouldn’t perform a lot of book tests to someone who teaches those titles but I also wouldn’t bet all my spectators with a questionnaire on their specialist knowledge either. You just can’t worry about these things.
The Unmasked Magician
View Profile
Inner circle
If only I didn't have a wife and a kid I would have MUCH more than
2011 Posts

Profile of The Unmasked Magician
Quote:
On Jun 16, 2022, 252life wrote:
Eye didant notace n uzually eye reeds gud


Aye edmeire yor skilz!
Please check regularly if you are becoming the type of magician Jerry Seinfeld jokes about. (This applies to mentalists as well.)
252life
View Profile
Inner circle
Ninth Circle, Hades
2994 Posts

Profile of 252life
Great myndz!
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.

-Theodore Annemann
JamJar
View Profile
New user
UK
97 Posts

Profile of JamJar
Quote:
On Jun 16, 2022, AutarchicFlux wrote:
I generally quite like this booktest and plan to use it with my live audiences, however, in order to add to the information in the thread a bit, and provide some feedback to Kaleb, here are a few nitpicks:

1.) Some of the words in the long word list (I will not divulge them here in order not to engage in an undue amount of exposure) are technically words, and might not be spotted by 99% of spectators as a bit out of place for Shelley's writing style, but as someone who is literally a professor of English literature and philosophy (and has taught Frankenstein,) there were a few that seemed a bit out of place to me.

2.) The text of the book looks largely unsuspicious to most, but to anyone at all familiar with Shelley's novel, several major structural aspects are immediately off, such as the fact that the book does not contain the frame narrative about Sir Robert Walton.

3.) One of the words in the long word list, which I will divulge here just for the sake of clarity - "vegetations" - borders on not even being a word. You will find that it's not listed in some dictionaries, and certainly isn't a word any trained writer of English would ever use. "Vegetation" is already a collective noun. A lot of vegetation is just that - a lot of vegetation. Varied vegetation is varied vegetation. The only context in which one would *ever* say "vegetations" would be perhaps in talking about whole different ecosystems, but in that case, the word "ecosystems" would generally be used. While some of the other "out of place" words are a small quibble, this one does bother me a little. I feel like if I performed this for my academic colleagues, for instance, any of them would arch their brows at the appearance of this pretty-much-not-a-word in my reveal.

There you have it, my three small nitpicks. Am I overthinking it?



You do know this is a gimmicked book right? rolleyes: With any "trick" there’s always going to be a compromise and Frankie is no exception, I’m pretty sure Kaleb does mention that the literature won’t pass the scrutiny of a professor of literature but it will most definitely fly by the average person.

If you’re apprehensive about performing this for your academic colleagues, then surely the same could be said for any book test? In which case maybe you shouldn’t perform book tests?
I wonder if card magicians don’t perform for gamblers or casino workers?

I personally think your concerns are unnecessary and with I shall bid you a good day

Regards

Ryan
Mid 40s guy probably having a mid life crisis, so I started a blog!
Www.mentalistblogger.com
AutarchicFlux
View Profile
Veteran user
397 Posts

Profile of AutarchicFlux
Quote:
On Jun 16, 2022, JamJar wrote:
Quote:
On Jun 16, 2022, AutarchicFlux wrote:
I generally quite like this booktest and plan to use it with my live audiences, however, in order to add to the information in the thread a bit, and provide some feedback to Kaleb, here are a few nitpicks:

1.) Some of the words in the long word list (I will not divulge them here in order not to engage in an undue amount of exposure) are technically words, and might not be spotted by 99% of spectators as a bit out of place for Shelley's writing style, but as someone who is literally a professor of English literature and philosophy (and has taught Frankenstein,) there were a few that seemed a bit out of place to me.

2.) The text of the book looks largely unsuspicious to most, but to anyone at all familiar with Shelley's novel, several major structural aspects are immediately off, such as the fact that the book does not contain the frame narrative about Sir Robert Walton.

3.) One of the words in the long word list, which I will divulge here just for the sake of clarity - "vegetations" - borders on not even being a word. You will find that it's not listed in some dictionaries, and certainly isn't a word any trained writer of English would ever use. "Vegetation" is already a collective noun. A lot of vegetation is just that - a lot of vegetation. Varied vegetation is varied vegetation. The only context in which one would *ever* say "vegetations" would be perhaps in talking about whole different ecosystems, but in that case, the word "ecosystems" would generally be used. While some of the other "out of place" words are a small quibble, this one does bother me a little. I feel like if I performed this for my academic colleagues, for instance, any of them would arch their brows at the appearance of this pretty-much-not-a-word in my reveal.

There you have it, my three small nitpicks. Am I overthinking it?



You do know this is a gimmicked book right? rolleyes: With any "trick" there’s always going to be a compromise and Frankie is no exception, I’m pretty sure Kaleb does mention that the literature won’t pass the scrutiny of a professor of literature but it will most definitely fly by the average person.

If you’re apprehensive about performing this for your academic colleagues, then surely the same could be said for any book test? In which case maybe you shouldn’t perform book tests?
I wonder if card magicians don’t perform for gamblers or casino workers?

I personally think your concerns are unnecessary and with I shall bid you a good day

Regards

Ryan


Ohh, it's a gimmicked book? Dang, sorry, I didn't realize! That explains so much!

Your rude, condescending reply is useless and doesn't meaningfully address anything I said. Your post is duly cast aside and ignored. "Good day," sir, "good day!"
NeilS
View Profile
Inner circle
2835 Posts

Profile of NeilS
My worst performing experience ever was when performing a book test using a known title and the assisting spectator said, ‘This isn’t (such and such a book)’ I hasten to add this was not Frankenstein but it has made me very careful about which books I do use and forcing words contained in the text. (I seem to remember one book test using a Victorian title had ‘sunglasses’ as a key word.)

I am sure Kaleb has done a great job with Frankenstein but, when using a known published title, there is always a risk as I found out to my cost.

Neil
Kaleb Wade
View Profile
New user
27 Posts

Profile of Kaleb Wade
Quote:
On Jun 15, 2022, AutarchicFlux wrote:
I generally quite like this booktest and plan to use it with my live audiences, however, in order to add to the information in the thread a bit, and provide some feedback to Kaleb, here are a few nitpicks:

1.) Some of the words in the long word list (I will not divulge them here in order not to engage in an undue amount of exposure) are technically words, and might not be spotted by 99% of spectators as a bit out of place for Shelley's writing style, but as someone who is literally a professor of English literature and philosophy (and has taught Frankenstein,) there were a few that seemed a bit out of place to me.

2.) The text of the book looks largely unsuspicious to most, but to anyone at all familiar with Shelley's novel, several major structural aspects are immediately off, such as the fact that the book does not contain the frame narrative about Sir Robert Walton.

3.) One of the words in the long word list, which I will divulge here just for the sake of clarity - "vegetations" - borders on not even being a word. You will find that it's not listed in some dictionaries, and certainly isn't a word any trained writer of English would ever use. "Vegetation" is already a collective noun. A lot of vegetation is just that - a lot of vegetation. Varied vegetation is varied vegetation. The only context in which one would *ever* say "vegetations" would be perhaps in talking about whole different ecosystems, but in that case, the word "ecosystems" would generally be used. While some of the other "out of place" words are a small quibble, this one does bother me a little. I feel like if I performed this for my academic colleagues, for instance, any of them would arch their brows at the appearance of this pretty-much-not-a-word in my reveal.

There you have it, my three small nitpicks. Am I overthinking it?


Thank you for taking the time to post on this thread. I will try my best to respond to some of your concerns the best I can. I hope this reply does not come across as defensive. However, I hope it will clear a few things up.

1) Although some of the long words may not appear in the original Mary Shelley novel, as I cover in the instruction booklet, all long words featured in Frankenstein are included for a specific reason. All 18 words fit into a system that grants you three to four direct hits of a long word with zero fishing.

2) The decision to omit the Robert Walton framework in this copy of Frankenstein was deliberate, as the flashback element of the book would be impossible to function in that section of the book if this had been included. I have constructed the book with the working performer in mind.

3) The inclusion of the word 'vegetations' has been used to fit in with the Alchemy system as all the words adopt particular characteristics. The word "vegetation" would not work in this system as it is only ten letters long. To my knowledge, "Vegetations" is a legitimate word, even if it does not appear in some dictionaries. I have taken the word "vegetations" directly from a dictionary website. And this is the case for the other 17 words. I understand where you are coming from with this as a professor of English literature, as it could be perceived not as perfect English. I cover this briefly in the instruction booklet:

"Obviously, this story has been SEVERELY edited to incorporate The 18 AlchEmy long words. I understand I will not win a Nobel prize for this story, but this book is for reading minds and not bedtime entertainment."

Are you overthinking? In my honest opinion, I believe this may be the case on this occasion. I can confidently say that you should never have a problem with the 'nitpicks' you've outlined. I perform in the trenches with this book test regularly in a close-up environment, and Frankenstein has endured hundreds upon hundreds of performances and inspection tests. Including inspections from people who have read and voiced they love the original.

Would I perform this for a bunch of English literature professors? Probably not! In the same way, I would not demonstrate a toxic force for a maths professor or an invisible deck effect for a magician. I sincerely hope this information makes you feel more at ease when using the book in the future.

Kind regards,
Kaleb
FREE EBOOKS:

THREE: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/three

HUMAN CLUEDO: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/human-cluedo

https://www.kalebwade.co.uk
OCCULT. FRANKENSTEIN. CINEMATIC. AFTERGLOW
JamJar
View Profile
New user
UK
97 Posts

Profile of JamJar
[/quote]

Ohh, it's a gimmicked book? Dang, sorry, I didn't realize! That explains so much!

Your rude, condescending reply is useless and doesn't meaningfully address anything I said. Your post is duly cast aside and ignored. "Good day," sir, "good day!" [/quote]


Rude & condescending wasn’t my intention but if that’s how you take it then who am I to say otherwise?

I was trying to point out that I think your concerns are a little silly. You compare this to the original novel, yet it’s a gimmicked book.

How can there even be a comparison?
I too shall duly ignore and cast your post aside.

Regards

Ryan
Mid 40s guy probably having a mid life crisis, so I started a blog!
Www.mentalistblogger.com
Kaleb Wade
View Profile
New user
27 Posts

Profile of Kaleb Wade
Quote:
On Jun 16, 2022, NeilS wrote:
My worst performing experience ever was when performing a book test using a known title and the assisting spectator said, ‘This isn’t (such and such a book)’ I hasten to add this was not Frankenstein but it has made me very careful about which books I do use and forcing words contained in the text. (I seem to remember one book test using a Victorian title that had ‘sunglasses’ as a key word.)

I am sure Kaleb has done a great job with Frankenstein but, when using a known published title, there is always a risk as I found out to my cost.

Neil


Hi Neil,

I have had similar experiences with other book tests myself at close-up gigs, but I honestly never have with Frankenstein or with The Alchemist book test that preceded it.

Other books I've used in the past have used fake titles, had repeated words throughout the entire book, or have been well-known titles but printed on white pages! Which is unusual for novels. And yes, some contain words like 'sunglasses' which wouldn't appear in a Victorian novel. I can confirm that there are no words of that nature in Frankenstein. The word 'vegetations' that has been referenced in this thread, I honestly don't think this raises suspicion at all.

To clarify for everyone, the first 5 pages of the book are ungimmicked.

Pages 5-99 contains the true Frankenstein story; it just won't read like it usually would due to the Flashback principle being applied.

Pages 100-181 contain the 18 long words that have been incorporated into the original story.

Utilising a long word bank in the latter half of the book is what essentially makes the book examinable as they never see words overly repeated when checking through. I find it's the perfect balance.

Visually Frankenstein has been printed on cream pages (like all other novels). Uses a genuine book cover design, and has a '3 for 2 Mix & Match' sticker on the front. It basically looks and feels like a genuine store-bought book.

I agree there is always a risk while performing a gimmicked book to laymen, and they are usually smarter than we give them credit for.

Kind regards,
Kaleb
FREE EBOOKS:

THREE: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/three

HUMAN CLUEDO: https://www.kalebwade.co.uk/human-cluedo

https://www.kalebwade.co.uk
OCCULT. FRANKENSTEIN. CINEMATIC. AFTERGLOW
George Hunter
View Profile
Inner circle
1851 Posts

Profile of George Hunter
This is, for the most part, a pretty useful thread. For the record, I have not perceived or experienced anyone as rude, or condescending, or overthinking.

George
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Frankenstein Book Test by Kaleb Wade (78 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL