The Wonder Wizard Board APPLICATION:

IMPORTANT!: Application acceptance or rejection is based in part on this completed form. This decision is also based upon other factors by an unknown Approval Board which is kept secret. No single individual makes membership decisions for this group. A secret ballot system is used for approval, along with a completed application. The Board Owner and Company (wonderwizards.com) do not hold sway in ultimate final membership approval or rejection.

BRIEFLY Answer the following

1. Please name three coin sleights that you know/use: 2. Please name four card sleights that you know/use: 3. Please list four books on magic or mentalism that you own and enjoy: 4. Please list four tricks you perform: 5. Who are your two favorite magical performers: 6. What style of magic do you do: 7. Why do you like doing magic: 8. Name the mystical performer who uses masks in his act in Las Vegas: 9. Who wrote “Wonder Words”: 10. What was Phantini’s real name: 11. Who Created “Wonder Readings”: 12. Who made the spelling of “weerd” popular: 13. Name something written by S.H. Sharpe: 14. What was Annemann’s publication called: 15. Of which principle in Hermetics did Orville Meyer allude to in his writings: 16. Who created “Tippler”: 17. Who is incorrectly credited for “The Davenport Spirit Tie” in many magical books:

18. Name the popular magic book in which the phrase “Mazdaznans stressed the Triangle of Life-spiritual, mental and physical” was taken:

Do NOT share this form with anyone else. Answer the questions the best that YOU can. Try and not leave too many questions unanswered if you wish to be accepted. Finally... Will you agree to abide by the guidelines and rules for this group or else be removed from the group with or without warning (Yes/No): Thank You! Send your answers to: kenton@wonderwizards.com Be sure to include your REAL FULL NAME and proper e-mail if you wish to be confirmed. A Few Reminders... With all of the demand for people to be on this list, it is important that you know that many will not be able to make it on to this particular board. If you are not accepted, this should in no way be construed as being somehow “unworthy” or “unacceptable”. The list is very strict and has some very tough guidelines. Certain people will simply not find this particular list to their liking, depending upon their personality, temperament or background of knowledge. You MUST fill out your personality profile FULLY, especially your TRUE FULL NAME or you will not be accepted. Period. You MUST answer all of the questions, or nearly all, to be considered. Now here are a few hints towards filling out your application: Even many of the most seemingly obscure questions have OBVIOUS, COMMON answers. The answers are names and terms you HAVE heard and DO know. Read each question CAREFULLY. Sometimes the answer is so simple, you are looking far too deeply. If you have Kenton’s “Rants Into Raves” one question you can easily look up. You don’t HAVE to look this up however, if you THINK about a COMMON TERM we all know and use. Most references to books are likewise VERY EASY COMMON answers. You DO know this - though you might have to think about it. “Tippler” rhymes with “Timber” which rhymes with the name asked for, and who created this in the first place. Some other things can be easily “looked up”. The last (and some say toughest) question is SO common we can’t say anything else, or you’d know the answer! Okay, one more thing. The answer to the rhyme is the correct INITIALS, but you’ll have to use some zig-zag logic to get to the REAL name. #16 has a hint for #14, not that you should need it - it is EXTREMELY common. #16 is another allusion to inaccurate credit. That should actually be the HARDEST question! BUT seek to ANSWER THEM ALL. These are more than enough “hints” even if you are neo to magic and have SOME proper background for this group.

In fact, most anyone in magic or mentalism will easily know these names and terms, as most are quite, quite obvious. It would be like asking someone who wrote The TARBELL COURSE! But you must think, pause, consider carefully. Review our “hints” here. We’ve all but given you the answers. Remember if you do not make it on to this group, many people cannot. We wish it were otherwise, but there are limitations out of necessity. Neither Kenton, Rex, Tank or anyone else gets to “choose” who is in or out based on their own preferences. So if you are not accepted, don’t take it personally. Filling out the application is just an indication that you truly wish to join. You can always reach them at the website, and they’ll be glad to help all that they can as usual. This is just a little extra bonus from the guys if you CAN make it, and are willing to meet the basic requirements to apply. If not, we understand and everyone hopes to visit with you then at another place and time.

THANK YOU!

OUR GUIDLINES AND RULES We welcome you to the contact point for all those involved with the Wonder Wizards! Please observe some simple rules: 1. You MUST use your own real name when posting here. Failure to do so may cause

you to be taken off the list instantly, and without warning. This is a place for the up front sharing of ideas and inspirations.

2. Please share freely all POSITIVE concepts, thoughts and feelings. If you wish to “beat some one up”, please go somewhere else to do so - or be taken off the list.

3. We do NOT “teach tricks” here. That is what books, tapes and other materials are for after all. If we elude to an idea based on some of our effects, we will usually do so without explaining the marketed portion of the effect. Those who know our materials will be surprised at how much we DO “tip” on occasion - when you are in the “know” about the basics.

4. Respects ALL creator’s rights. Do NOT give out another person’s idea without permission here or... you’ll be removed from this list!

5. This shall be a SAFE environment in which to share. If you differ with someone’s opinion, then please express YOUR OWN, instead of tearing down someone else. It’s amazing what we can find out about ourselves when we must explain our OWN opinions, rather than being defensive about someone else’s thoughts.

6. What is seen in here STAYS here. If you are a member, you may use what you learn in here of course. You may NOT share what you get here with others outside this group without permission. Period. If you want to share something with people on the outside, then you MUST have permission of the person(s) who inspired you here, and give credit where credit is due. This keeps the open atmosphere of sharing SAFE. Disregard this and you will be taken off this list without warning.

7. Any slanderous or mean-spirited comments outside of this group about people you meet here, may also cause you to quickly be removed from this list.

8. By joining this select group, you agree you are willing to be placed on the Wonder Wizards e-mail list for special discounts and new releases.

9. We may terminate membership without warning or explanation. 10. You must agree to ENJOY, have FUN and maybe even become INSPIRED. 11. You may be eligible to join our secret “inner site” by your participation here, your

attitude and certain other requirements after some time. Certain people will simply not be eligible for this “invisible site” through no fault of their own, save opinions on the subject matter and intention of this secret site. Being a member here means you may well be invited later to joining us in the Inner Sanctum as well. Remember only certain individuals may be candidates. Don’t bother asking us how to get to become a member of this other site. If you are a possible candidate, you will eventually KNOW.

All aspects and material of, and, or on this site is copyright by Wonder Wizards. You MUST have permission from Wonder Wizards to take anything from this site except for your own, strictly personal, use. Please have a WONDERFUL time with us, and tell your friends! The more the merrier! They will need to apply for entrance of course, just as you have done. WELCOME AND CONGRATS TO MAKING IT TO OUR WONDER WIZARDS SITE!

Additions to David Eldridge: To me, anytime “equivoque” is mentioned, several things pop to mind. One is how to label objects, actions, and choices. A second aspect is the use of suggestion. As I am known for these sorts of things, that is what I will try to address. There is not space here to get into all the details, but the thinking student will contemplate these notions and be well rewarded for the effort. That has certainly been my experience at least, and those of my students and readers. I hope you THINK about these brief clues. Let’s begin with some simple applications. A client chooses an object, which is not the one you intend to force. You need another shot at the force. Labeling the first choice as something different gives you another chance. You may say “Yes, good – consciously. Now choose another object subconsciously. Just quickly, pick up another object without too much thought. Now!” The spectator is thrown off guard at this stage. They are told to do something they cannot do with conscious thought. Yet, they still have to “choose” which is, oddly, a conscious thought. As you are hurrying the spectator along, they must choose quickly and without much thought. That just means their defenses are down. Chances are high now that they will choose the force object.

If they do hit this second time, you can point out how you were attempting to influence the spectator “subliminally” – unconsciously. While people believe they make choices based on their conscious choices, while they are distracted, their subconscious mind can be easily influenced. Prove you have done just this as you show the object you had written down ahead of time. This doesn’t look like a trick – it looks real. If they still choose something other than the force object, that is fine too. “Good, you have now made two choices in the world of the mind as commonly considered. You have made both conscious and subconscious choices. Some claim there is a third type of consciousness. Let us put aside the common notions of the mind. Set those objects aside. Good. We shall now attempt to access the third type of mind as some claim. This is the mind that is said to be only One Mind – that holds us all within It and holds our every idea and thought. This is the ‘third aspect of the mind’ that some claim accounts for telepathy. Let us see. Two objects remain. Let’s imagine there is a third type of mind and that you can now be guided by it to make the right and most comfortable choice”. Of course, you are now home free in a most interesting way. If they choose the force object, it proves there is a “One Mind” that accounts for how you knew they would do this ahead of time. If they leave the force object, you may explain that you believe that all three states of mind lead to the creation of a fourth type. This is what you might call “fourth dimensional consciousness”. “It is the place in mind where all time is now. You may not believe that, but I can prove it. I went into my own fourth dimensional consciousness and saw what you would choose, and what you would ultimately leave behind in the fourth dimension. Read what I wrote down days ago… Welcome to the Twilight Zone”! The principle to be aware of behind all of this is simply one of labeling. Instead of labeling an incorrect choice as what it is, you label it as a success. In this example, each choice is labeled a success in an aspect or dimension of mind. This also makes for much conversation and fascination, far more than a clever trick. Another interesting set-up with which I have had much success is the notion of objects generating or absorbing energy. “Which object seems to be radiating more energy than others? Good! And which object seems to be colder than the rest? Yes”! Your written prediction may then display the “object I was placing my energy upon, which you yourself noticed” or “And this will also send a chill… down your spine… I wrote that very object down ahead of time”. I often combine such labels with suggestion. This can get a bit tricky, but I will attempt to at least give you a basic feel for it here. Much of my work has such elements involved in it. Let’s say we would like to force the suit of hearts from a deck of playing cards. We might begin saying, “Let’s try a little, gentle, experiment… nothing at all harsh or tricky.

This is just about radiating positive energy – energy you can FEEL. Gentle energy. Everything holds and releases energy, but some things are more obvious and work better. You may not think for instance that playing cards have their own energy, but they do. I have the deck separated into reds and blacks. Dear lady, which suit do you feel an affinity for? By that I mean which symbols seem to radiate energy outwards – that may actually be radiating energy that can be felt? The black cards or the red cards”? Naturally, most people say “red cards”, as black suits rarely seem to be thought of as “radiating” energy or anything else. The label “energy” seems to suggest bright and active notions. Red is a bright and active color, and black is generally not considered that way. If you read the opening few paragraphs, you will also notice how we are almost implanting the suit of hearts into the minds of the audience. I try and say “heart” in every way I can without using the exact word. So I make statements such as “gentle energy, kind, feel, positive energy,” and so on. I also choose a lady, as a woman is more symbolic of “hearts” in most cultures. What happens if the spectator says “Black cards”? Easy. I remark “Yes, consciously. But let’s see what your subconscious’ choice would be … Let’s turn the deck faces down so you cannot be consciously influenced at all. Now, you must go with your feelings…” Now they not only get the suit, they get the exact card I want. How? I do a simple card force! You may not think that very elegant, but given the words as outlined, it is very subtle and amazing indeed. The point again is to consider how the labels you assign to what happens, and the suggestions you make, play important roles in the forcing of choices. In fact, I often look at five objects or more and think to myself “Which of these would I say seems to radiate energy – just by the look of them ?” or feel of the items for that matter. Then I know the odds are already far in my favor. You can play the odds like this as long as you have the “outs” and that is what is in this book, so feel free to experiment. If you have a blue deck and a red deck and you need to force the red one, ask a spectator to pick up the deck that seems to be radiating the most energy. Ask them to place their palms hovering over the two and just quickly name the deck that obviously has more alive and awake energy than the other – not the deck they like best. They almost have to choose the red one, now don’t they? Often I like spectators to hover their hands over objects and then touch an object. They tend to choose the higher objects in such cases. But I also add in a verbal suggestion as follows. As the spectator moves their hand along slowly I say, “Touch any object that just feels right to you”. I time my words so I say, “…that just feels right…” over the intended force object. If I pause a half a beat before I say “that just feels right” in helps emphasis this even more, without making it too obvious. Try it a few times. I have taught people who could not do a classic force how to do it by adding in these words

alone. Just say the magic phrase at the proper point, and your odds increase outrageously. Your rate of speech and the inflection of your voice also play significant roles. Strange that so few people talk about that when they mention verbal influence and control. Speaking slightly slower places emphasis, and thereby attention, to that which is being addressed. So if I am speaking at one rate, then slow down a little, then pick my rate of speech back up again, the slower speech will draw attention to thing I was speaking about at that point. If I want spectators to ignore consciously certain things, I may speak of them a little faster, so they go by more quickly. Surely you have noticed others do this in sales and advertising. Even when you know other things were said, you still focus on what was said more slowly. Unless you are ridiculously obvious. Any form of influence and suggestion should be suggestion. A suggestion is a subtle command, not an obvious blow over the spectator’s head. Well, okay, not usually. Perhaps you have heard that if you smile when speaking to someone over the phone, the person on the other end senses that you are friendly in some way. That is a fine way to book a show and influence clients. The same principle of subtle vocal inflection may be used to influence the selection of objects. Never be too obvious of course. But if you smile slightly as you mention or touch the force object, it can make a difference. I have said at times, “Touch the object you like BEST” and smile as I say “best”. I also slightly emphasize the word “best” with my voice. This is a form of triggering, and somewhat similar to what NLP calls “anchoring”. It isn’t precisely that, but there are similarities. Try as you speak to make your voice sound just a little more pleasant as you or the spectator touch or speak about the force object. Remember not to be too obvious. I know some people who sound as if they are having an orgasm when they mean to subtly influence others to feel better. That may help them fool themselves, but mostly to listeners, it just sounds silly and obvious. Try to be subtle and use suggestion. All of these things help increase your odds at mentally hitting the force in the first place. If you fail, you go on with your planned on phase to force the object. But why not do everything you can to hit more? I also incorporate what I think of as restarts. It might be called the “do overs” ploy. One way I do this is to begin my opening remarks and touch all the objects except for the force object and one other. Then I ask the spectator to choose one. Chances are very high that they will not want to touch the same three objects I touched. Since I left them a “choice” – only two – of objects that I did not touch, they usually pick the middle force object. If they touch one that I touched, I say, “Yes – Obviously that would be it, as it is one of the objects I touched too. Don’t let me influence you THIS time – pick another object”.

Or perhaps I do not touch one at all. I still may use the ploy if they select anything but the force object. “Yes, that is the one I attempted to influence you to pick. Don’t let me do that! Don’t let me influence you this time – pick any one you LIKE…” My most blatant start over move is just that: A call to start over. In fact, I just used it again last night in a performance. I was doing a force that was purely psychological. Part of it she got, part of it she missed. While I had my intended optional ending, I felt like trying again. She had answered, and then was slightly distracted and began coughing a little after she answered in an undesired manner. I replied “You said circle, but you may have said that under duress… there were distractions and this may have influenced you in some way, which we do not want! Chose another symbol – I don’t want you to be distracted this time. Choose another symbol, one you like most of all”. She did and chose the force symbol. Please note I sneaked in the word “another” symbol a couple of times. That is a subtle way to make them pick something new. You can of course create your own distractions when needed. I might stub my toe, accidentally tip the table, or let my hand hit the table on “accident” noisily. One could do any number of things, and then say “ I am sorry. That may have distracted you and influenced you in some way. Let’s start over and pick another”. Don’t laugh out loud while you say, “ I don’t want to influence or distract you”, as you influence, and distract them. Other comments along these lines are “I distracted you – forget that one – let’s start again” and “I don’t want to influence you THIS time” suggest very indirectly that you influenced them the first time. The basic theory is one of breaking a rhythm or pattern, so that you can change the pace to where you wish to go. It is a form of stopping people in their tracks. When you throw people off guard, they are more likely to follow where you suggest. Here is another interruption I use, with some nice presentational angles built in: I do this for an invisible coin equivoque. But you could do it with anything “invisible”. I needed to make a close-up coin equivoque large enough to be interesting on a stage. My other desire was to have a reason for giving an audience member my stationary as a souvenir. You might think of this as a business card give-away only larger. I write the predicted coin (force coin) on the stationary and then roll this paper into a tube. I place a rubber band or ribbon around the tube to keep it rolled. Without explanation I keep hold if this tube during the effect. The spectator takes an invisible coin out of his pocket. I ask what it is. If it is not the force coin, I frown and tap the tube on my hand. This makes a sound and interrupts the flow of things. I hold the tube to my eye, look through it to the audience, then through it to the hand, and then back at the spectator. “Perhaps you need one of these…. Look at your hand again. What ELSE do you have”?

This gets a laugh, and creates an entertaining “do-over”, which looks to be only an intended piece of by-play. If the spectator names the correct coin now, we go with that coin. If not, then the only two left in the pocket are to be used for “the experiment of the x-ray glasses” – which is simply the rolled up tube. Another spectator looks through the tube and calls out a coin he sees in the pocket of the other spectator. This is now the obvious hit, or leaves one completely invisible, as needed. In the end, the spectator unrolls the tube and reads out loud the written prediction. The tube not only creates a funny distraction, but the by-play reminds the audience subtly that the prediction was in front of them the entire time. That may seem a minor benefit, but trust me, it is a major factor to the audience when performed in this more indirect fashion. This version allows the spectators to come up with the notion themselves that the prediction was in front of them the entire time. Such small points make for the miraculous. In my book “Weerd Enough” I use suggestion to force a charm. I am ready for equivoque of course. Without going into this entire effect, just consider the use of suggestion in forcing this way. I will apply this to another application entirely. For instance, let’s say we wish to force a locket. Few have considered something quite in this way before. Predict that which has a couple of parts or elements to it. A locket has naturally both a locket AND a key to open it – correct? If I have as my prediction a second locket, either the duplicate LOCKET or the KEY that fits it will work as the force objects! This allows for one single prediction, yet two objects that are “force” objects. Think about that. It will serve you very well indeed. I hedge my bets a great deal with the charms too. The spectator has the option of choosing one of the following: a skull, a fang, a heart locket, a key, and a rusty nail. The words I use allude to their choice as being indicative of their future and such, so spectators tend to leave the skull, fang and nail alone! I hope you consider the importance of the suggestion inherent in the objects themselves. This makes for amazing force possibilities. Try not to be too obvious of course. If everyone can consciously see why an object was chosen, then it amazes no one. But play with what I have suggested, and combine this with the multiple out/ single object concept, and you can do miracles. The use of these charms and the dual object can make for touching, wonder-filled stories and souvenirs. I have hinted on this more than enough I should hope by now. Speaking of the miraculous and touches that few will realize the value of, here is a very special thing. You can find this in its full form and more in the book “Kentonism”. It is also included here, for those who truly dare to do magic with a capital M.

Bonus: A Miracle for Those Who Dare I am going to give to you now one of the most magical and intimate things I have ever performed. This is more for the magician, I admit. But don’t let that stop you! You might turn this into a prediction instead if you choose. Before we get to the work of it, consider the effect as viewed by a spectator:

“I would like you to name a color quickly – any simple, basic color… NOW!” (Spectator says “Purple” for instance) “Very interesting. Now name another – but very basic – color” (Spectator this time says “Green”). “Yes, good. And think of one of these five symbols: A circle, a plus sign, a triangle, a square, and a star. Name one you like most quickly! A favorite one quickly NOW!” (Spectator says “Star”). The spectator has been keeping their hands palm up as a “symbol or suggestion of acceptance and inspiration”. At this point, the Wonder Worker (that’s you, I hope) strokes the spectator’s palms. Suddenly a very small blue package appears in the spectator’s hands. “Blue is the color of the subconscious mind moving like the tides of the ocean. But look inside the package and you will see more… Go ahead and open the package, as it is a magical one, just for you. I asked you to name a color, and the very first color you named was the color purple. As you peel away the wrapping paper, you will notice that inside the package is wrapped with a reddish-purple tint… the closest I could get to your mental choice. Open this purple wrapping up and you will see there is more magic still. You chose the color green as a second color, and the symbol of a star. As you can see, there inside is a blue-green stone in the shape of a star deep within the paper. Your colors of purple and green, and your choice of a star have indeed become reality. Please keep this turquoise star as a reminder. I suggest that you have great potential, and as long as you use it wisely, you will do well”. So how do you get the exact color and symbol the spectator named? Well, the truth is you don’t all of the time. That is why this is a little daring. But I say that to scare off the people who shouldn’t do this anyway. The rest of you keep reading. You have some rather marvelous ways to cover your misses, and turn these into successes most of the time too. I use small stars made of real turquoise that have a hole through them so they may be placed on bracelets or necklaces and such. This makes for a truly magical charm for which people remember their own potential as well as their experience with you. You don’t have to get that fancy. The reason I use turquoise, or something similar, is this: The color represents both blue and green. In other words, the stone is an “out” as well as a miracle. Turquoise having both blue and green as its color allows the stone to be interpreted as either blue or green depending on what the spectator calls out for a color. Please re-read the speech again to see these shifts in the talk made to fit the physical facts. How did I know the spectator was going to say “Purple” so I could have a purple colored wrapping paper inside? I didn’t. When asked to name a simple, basic color most spectators say either “Red” or “Blue”. I use a metallic or shiny wrap that makes a clearly defined color a little harder to see exactly. The shine makes for slight variations in color. The inside of the package is wrapped in a dark red metallic “paper”. This red is deep enough that it may also be viewed as a shade of “purple” when needed. The outside of the package is wrapped in blue, so that covers the most obvious choices. If we are using BASIC colors, that gives us not much more than red, blue, yellow or

maybe green. Few people ever choose yellow. In fact, as of this writing I have never had anyone choose yellow. If they did, I would turn this choice into a personality reading and speak of their bright outlook on life, their sunny disposition and so forth, and ignore the color of the paper entirely. But I’ve never needed to do that. Using the interpretation of the colors and shades of the stone and papers, we can hit most general colors named. But how did I know the spectator would choose a star as a shape or symbol? I didn’t. Chances are high though that this is the most appealing shape out of the choices between circle, plus sign, triangle, square, or star. Note please that the star is also the last shape mentioned. When you simply name these shapes and the spectator has to choose one by memory, the star force is even more likely. Trying to recall all the shapes named is much harder than merely choosing one favorite shape out of symbols drawn on a card or paper. By using the words “favorite symbol” many people say they “like stars” the most. Another great help is saying “a plus sign” instead of “a cross shape”. There are many reasons for people to like a cross shape. There are many reasons not to like a “plus sign” as it may bring back memories of having to learn numbers at school and such. Because of these influences, we say “plus sign” and not “cross” as one of the basic symbol shape choices. We truly are using suggestion to make things happen, as well as to interpret choices as needed. Keep in mind that you are actually using suggestion to influence these events, and you will do very well indeed. At least that has been my experience and the experience of countless others. But what if the spectator says “circle” or “triangle”? The spectator does not know what you are doing at this point. You are thumb palming or clipping this tiny little package in your hand, and they know nothing about it. Secretly ditch the little package in your pocket as you remove the following card. Have a card printed with a circle in red or blue ink on one side, a triangle in red or blue ink on the other side. Now you may show the proper symbol as needed. You might also do a symbol reading based on what was chosen if you do such things. The most astounding way to handle this in to do “Kentonism” on a business card, but that takes an entire manuscript alone practically. With that way you can never fail, and many, many times you will perform an impossible miracle to be cherished. Not to mention they will keep a souvenir of an amazing experience they had with you in either event. One is more along the magically “stunning awe” idea, and the other is an impressive expertise of fascination and mental influence. In either event, it isn’t bad at all! If you have not studied “Kentonism”, you may still dare to try this effect. Those who dare will be thrilled. It is impossible to explain the impact that this has on other people. Just recall that all you are doing is mentally suggesting or forcing a favorite basic color and a shape. You have outs and interpretations galore to assist you. The only thing left to do is to dare to do. Do that and you will be thanking me for years. But only you can decide to dare. If you cannot afford or find turquoise stars, find something else suitable. Once you understand the idea, use what items you can find and that suit you. Change the colors or the shapes. I have a blue stone with a triangle and circle etched into it, for instance. I

have also used silver paper on the outside of the package. In that case, the turquoise stone is called “blue” or “green” as needed. Keep your eyes open and you will be amazed at all of the possibilities. This is one of my truly favorite things. It is very intimate, miraculous, and charming. Try it if you dare. For in depth information and more on these principles, please refer to Kenton Knepper’s “Wonder Words Series”, “Kentonism”, “Weerd Enough”, “An Enchanted Evening”, “Killer Konceptions” and all of Kenton’s many works.

Tarot: A Peering Behind The Smoke and Mirrors It has been rare for me to write or at least publish “Tarot tricks”. This one was created for the final issue of Behind the Smoke and Mirrors magazine, to which a few of my friends and I contributed. I was so fond of the tone in the magazine that I just couldn’t resist adding one final piece. Since I created this while in the midst of writing the manuscript you hold in your hands, I include this piece as one more bonus. It’s off beat, full of suggestions and linguistic influence, metaphor, and such. Hope you enjoy it in the manner in which it was intended. Let’s begin with the words. “Is anyone here afraid of a deck of cards? No? I know that may sound silly, but it is a serious question. Is there anyone here afraid of ink and paper? My, what an enlightened group. You might have good cause to be concerned about paper and ink though. It transmits thoughts after all! You might call it ‘reading’ but still… Have you read a newspaper of late”? “Since no one is afraid of a deck of cards, do you mind if I use an older deck? I’m fresh out of new ones. Great. I have deck of cards known as Tarot that we shall use tonight, then. Oh, don’t change your minds now! Is there anyone afraid of numbers by any chance? Some people are worried, I can tell. Are you in the construction business? They don’t like buildings with thirteen floors, you know”. “Despite our fears, I believe there is something greater that is behind everything - something good. So, I am not afraid of numbers, paper, or even ink. Okay I’m still not so sure about newspapers. That depends. But I do not think these inherently evil either”. “To prove my point, I need the aid of another person who believes in the power of good. Anyone here tonight? Step on up then. Let us be fearless. Here is a Tarot deck. I am going to count thirteen cards from this deck of Tarot on to the table (do so). Are you afraid of the number thirteen? Boo! No”? If the person responds “No, I’m not afraid” then continue in this manner: “Well, no need for the thirteen cards then!” and place these cards back on top of the deck. In the process you have simply performed a reverse deal and set the top card thirteen cards from the top of the deck. If the spectator/helper says “Yes, I’m a little worried about that number” you

may respond kindly saying, “Then we shall not make you deal with these” and again put the cards back on top of the deck. You may either glimpse the top card from the shuffled Tarot pack, or preset a force card on top before starting. You then position this force card right in front of them as described - based apparently on their beliefs. Let’s imagine you placed the 13th Tarot card - Death - on top to begin. It is now 13th from the top of the deck. It also happens that you wrote ahead of time the prediction of “THE NUMBER 13 - DEATH” on a piece of paper. This is to be interpreted not at all as one might generally expect during the finale. Currently, you have a key card stacked in your Tarot deck. You may say, “Because you did not like/did like the number thirteen, pick up a few cards from the deck, LESS than thirteen! We want to be safe, just in case! Now place that unknown number of cards between both of your hands. Feel their energy. Are you a very, very afraid? No? Good! I like intelligent people”! Note how you use either spectator response to fit your needs. “I want to prove to you that I am not afraid/afraid too, so I will deal thirteen cards for myself to be fair” (do so, faces down in a pile again). Having finished this deal spread these card faces towards the spectator. Point out the different cards, while secretly counting the cards as you look for your key card - in this case, “Death”. Although you have thirteen cards, begin by counting the first face card silently as twelve, the next card from the face as eleven, and so on, backwards. Once you see your key card, the number at which it falls is the exact number of cards in the spectator’s hands. This should happen as you seem to casually be displaying some of the cards in a spread or fan - not openly counted of course. Spread or fan but do not reverse the cards again during this! Once you get the secret number, turn the thirteen cards face down on the table. Display the paper in which you wrote the previous prediction. If you wear a nailwriter, then jot in the spectator’s number on the paper as you show it. Otherwise, just be bold and pretend to read this from the paper. These days they call such a ruse a “miscall”. You don’t have to use the prediction here at all if you would rather not. I often continue with something such as, “Are you afraid of numerology? Well, based on your fear/fearlessness, your composure and willingness to help, I would guess you are a ___ type. ___s are the people who can both believe and be rational, can laugh and yet be quite serious - perhaps extreme in these ways at times. That is even what I wrote down ahead of time - the number ___. You may not think any of that, or believe in any of these things, but if it were true, then you would be holding ___ cards in your hands. Don’t ask me how people can choose their exact number in cards, but they do. Count the cards for all to see, please. Let’s find out for ourselves if this is real”! Naturally, they are surprised to find they hold the same number of cards as the “type” you claimed they are/would be. “I see you are indeed a ___! Since I have dealt my thirteen cards ahead of time, let’s see just how lucky you are, shall we? Count off the same number of cards - your number -

from the top of my thirteen cards, and place them aside. You do that with great confidence, excellent. There is one card now unknown after your number - a card that is about this very moment in time. Are you afraid? No? Then turn over that next card and let us see”… Of course in our example, the spectator would turn over the next card to reveal “Death” the thirteenth Tarot card. “With death staring you in the face you remain unafraid? Somewhat? You have not run out the door, so you must not be too afraid. This is good. You see, Death in Tarot does not mean what you think. See the sun in the background? It is not setting, as some imagine. The sun is rising, rising to make for a brave new day. This is the card of change. Are you very, very afraid of change? You must not be too afraid of change, you looked right at it, yet did not run”. “Many ask for things in their lives to improve and get better. Some of these people say that, and yet are afraid of change. Now I ask you, how are things going to get better if they are going to stay the same. So there is no need to fear change. We all need some changes. True we do not have complete control over what changes and when, but much of that is up to us. We must be willing to see change for what it is - a good and needed thing. You believe in the power of good, right”? “Some people go through changes just by being here and trying these things with me. There are big changes and small changes, but I have never had anyone leave the planet once and for all over ink, or a name or a number on paper. I have had people faint once or twice, that part is true. What I want you to take with you this evening is not that change is bad, or death is really death, or that Tarot is evil or any other such silly thing. I want you to remember that you have faced your fears, and will again when needed, with courage strength, humor, and insight. Know that you have no need for false superstition or worry, no desire for fearful notions that are obviously unwarranted, any cause for alarm, no death. You know that you will handle changes because everything changes, and that is for our good. You believe in good, I know. Will you promise me you will remember these things as best you can at all times? That is wonderful! I knew you were a very special person. I also knew this…” Now comes the moment of trick truth. You show your prediction to the spectator and audience saying, “I told you we had control over some change! Are you afraid of paper and ink NOW? Don’t go through too many changes over this - it is predictable after all! Keep the CHANGE if you want”! Let me say that I am careful not to do “death tricks”, implanting notions into a spectator’s mind to see if they can cause themselves to have an accident later. I know the mind is very powerful. I treat the implanting of thoughts into others as if it were near surgery. Some would say it essentially is surgery, and we would do well to wield our scalpel-tongue wisely. Read carefully all the suggestions and nuances of deeper meaning hidden here. It’s the only real reason for doing this effect, in my opinion. Find your own words too of course.

I have a bit of a dislike for those who do Tarot tricks and know nothing but the most inane explanations of these complex symbol patterns. One huge tip off is when a supposed expert pulls out a “Witch Tarot”, “Baseball Tarot”, or “Same Sex Tarot” saying it is TAROT. This bothers me only as such things may be in fact “divination decks” but that hardly makes them “Tarot”. Tarot is a specific system of symbols and the utter lack of these symbols and concepts in many “tarot” decks is absurd. Please if you use “Tarot”, learn all you can from those who know - which usually means not so-called experts from “mentalism”, but from actual Mystery Schools that study Tarot. Or read books from such places. Lest I be misunderstood, I am not suggesting you must join a Mystery School or subscribe to their beliefs. But if you are playing with Tarot, you are playing on their playground - pure and simple. Check magical history if you are unsure.

Cold reading strategies i Chris A. Roe

Psychology Division, University College Northampton

1. Introduction There can be little doubt that the relatively high levels of belief in paranormal phenomena among members of the general population are due in part to impressive experiences which they were unable, after consideration, to account for in terms of more mundane processes (cf. Schmeidler, 1985). Irwin (1985), for example, reports personal experience to be the primary factor loading on belief, irrespective of the breadth of the measure. One potentially important source of impressive experiences is through interactions with professional psychics such as palmists and Tarot readers (Schouten, 1993), and a number of sceptical commentators have claimed (without citing particular empirical evidence) that clients are typically impressed with the content of readings they have solicited (Dutton, 1988; French et al.. 1991; Hyman, 1989). Indeed there does seem to be some support for the claim that psychic readings are well-regarded by consumers (e.g. Haraldsson, 1985; Palmer, 1979). One recent survey (Roe, 1997) found that a surprisingly high proportion (29.5%) of the sampled population had attended a reading at some time. Although some of these clients had attended only for entertainment or other social reasons, their readings were nevertheless typically regarded as relatively accurate and specific, with 50% of attendees believing the experience to be of some value to them. This picture contrasts quite sharply with research investigating professional psychic readers, which provides little experimental evidence to support the view that they have paranormal access to information about their clients. In the most recent and most extensive review of quantitative studies evaluating material produced during ostensibly psychic readings, Schouten (1994) concluded that "there is little reason to expect mediums more often to make correct statements about matters unknown at the time than ... can be expected by chance" (p. 221)ii.

How can these findings be reconciled? Often, successes by psychics have been explained not as a consequence of psychic ability, but in terms of the exploitation of common (but subtle) channels of communication using what has been termed "cold reading" (e.g. Schwartz, 1978; Randi, 1981). The concept is not new; Whaley (1989) for example describes it as "Originally the argot of psychic mediums by 1924 ... from the fact that the customer walks in 'cold' - previously unknown to the fortune-teller" (p.173), and the stratagem was probably first hinted at in the writings of Conan Doyle through the instant face-to-face deductions of Sherlock Holmes, published from 1887. A more recent definition of cold reading, taken from Ray Hyman's classic account of the effect, describes it as "a procedure by which a 'reader' is able to persuade a client whom he has never met before that he knows all about the client's personality and problems" (Hyman, 1977: 20). Unfortunately, this does not give us much insight into the actual process of cold reading, and a perhaps more useful operational definition is given elsewhere by Hyman:

The cold reading employs the dynamics of the dyadic relationship between psychic and client to develop a sketch that is tailored to the client. The reader employs shrewd observation, nonverbal and verbal feedback from the client, and the client's active cooperation to create a description that the client is sure penetrates to the core of his or her psyche. (1981, p. 428)

In practice, the techniques identified as examples of cold reading can vary in form from case to case; from a simple reliance on using statements which are true of most people (Dutton, 1988) through to a broader definition which includes pre-session information gathering about a clientiii iv (Hyman, 1977; Couttie, 1988). Techniques such as 'fishing' (to be described later) are regarded as central to some accounts (e.g. Randi, 1981) but as separate, supplementary methods by others (Whaley, 1989). There is a real danger that overliberal and inconsistent application of the term will cause it to lose any explanatory power it has. There are also clear indications that the cold reading 'process' actually consists of a number of discrete and independent strategies. Hyman (1981) hints at this when he distinguishes between two 'types' of reading - static and dynamic - which exploit quite different psychological mechanisms. The former makes use of commonalities between clients to allow the reader to launch into a stock spiel which should apply equally well to all, whereas the latter depends upon interaction with the client to generate material which is more tailor-made to his or her specific circumstances. An initial attempt will be made here to identify and characterise the actual techniques brought to bear in cold reading, and to specify their interrelationships. The model which has been developed is informed by two sources: 1.1 Pseudopsychicv literature There exists a substantial specialist literature describing the techniques involved in setting up as a pseudopsychic, running under titles such as Money-making Cold Reading (Hobrin, 1990) and Cashing in on the Psychic (Ruthchild, 1978). This literature is

typically produced to allow the peudopsychic fraternity to share resources and expertise, and is not intended to be generally available. Books are privately published or produced by specialist publishers of magic literature, and tend to be advertised in private circulation magic society catalogues and magazines. Access to these suppliers was made possible with the assistance of Professor Robert Morris and Dr Richard Wiseman. The latter is a proficent close-up magician and member of a number of magic societies, who was at that time a member of the parapsychology unit at Edinburgh. Together, we were able to build a reasonable pseudopsychic library from which to develop a description of cold reading practices as articulated by pseudopsychics themselves (Cain, 1991; Corinda, 1984; Earle, 1990a, 1990b; Fuller, 1975, 1980; Hester & Hudson, 1977; Hobrin, 1990; Jones, 1989; Lewis, 1991; Martin, 1990; Ruthchild, 1978, 1981; Webster, 1990). 1.2 Interactions with a practicing pseudopsychic An exploratory study, conducted in cooperation with pseudopsychic Malcolm Davidson, allowed us to investigate the mechanics of cold reading in situ. Davidson had worked as a psychic reader in the Yorkshire region for over 15 years, but was at that time semi-retired and was happy to share some of his expertise with us. A one-day initial exploratory study was arranged in which he was filmed giving separate readings to three individuals in the morning, and gave a commentary on the techniques being used in the afternoon. Three sitters (all female) were selected to represent a broad age rangevi, and were invited to participate in 'a preliminary evaluation of a psychic reader'. Sittings took place in the University's television studio, and were filmed using three video cameras. The first of these gave a side-on long shot (full body) of the sitter and reader. Cameras two and three gave mid-shots (waist up) of the sittervii and reader respectively. Recordings from cameras two and three were edited together to give a vertical split-screen view of the interaction, with one half showing the reader and the other the sitter. Upon completion of the reading, each sitter gave immediate feedback, ostensibly to allow us to decide whether further testing would be fruitful. Ss gave three ratings, indicating how impressed they were with the reading's content, how relevant it was to worries or concerns they had, and how psychic they thought the reader was. Responses were given using a 7-point Likert scale, where 1 = not at all, and 7 = very much. Sitters' actual ratings are reproduced in Table 1:

sitter impressed relevance psychic? One 6 5 5 Two 6 6 7 Three 1 1 1

Table 1: Sitters' ratings of their reading Two of the readings were very well received, suggesting that the pseudopsychic techniques being used were successful in persuading these clients that the reader did have paranormal access to information about them. Subject three was an academic colleague who worked in the department. It seems likely that she did not conform to the stereotypes Davidson usually uses with women of her age. She is also most likely of the three to be

generally sceptical of claims of psychic ability. Immediately after supplying ratings, sitters were debriefed as to the true objective of the investigation. In the afternoon, we met with Davidson to review the video recordings. Davidson was video taped giving a commentary on the three readings, and answering questions about the actual methods used. Copies of all video material are lodged with the Koestler Chair, and are available for inspection. Video footage was studied to compare theoretical accounts of cold reading as given in the literature with actual examples of the process in practice. We had intended to conduct further work with Davidson, but sadly he died before this could be arranged.

2 An expanded model of cold reading The above sources of information about the pseudopsychic technique suggest a model in which cold reading actually encompasses a number of discrete operations which appear to represent a hierarchy (see Figure 1). All these processes involve the gathering of intelligence about the client, but are distinguishable on the basis of when and how transfer of information occurs, and of what form that information takes. Those at the base of the hierarchy require little, if any, interaction with the client, but the reading so-produced remains relatively vague or general. As the opportunity for interaction increases, so the reading can be made more specific to the client in attendance. Knowledge of all of the processes enables the reader to produce a reasonable sketch whatever situation he finds himself in, while being able to be increasingly impressive when circumstances allow. Strategies which appear higher in the pyramid are somewhat dependent upon the use of those lower down for success. For example, the use of information drawn by virtue of pigeon-holing the client may be needed to initiate the necessary conditions for cold reading by providing the source material for the client to react to. Similarly, Barnum statements may be used as distractor items before feeding back information unwittingly given up by the client in warm reading. However, it should be noted that although these strategies can have a particular temporal order, in that some stages tend to be passed through to generate information necessary for stages higher in the pyramid, the reading as a whole does not represent a steady progression through the hierarchy. Rather, the reading is more likely to involve a number of switches from technique to technique depending on the information that is available. For example, if the initial conditions are such that the client immediately offers up personal information, the reader may decide not to employ lower-order methods of generating material for the reading. The remainder of this chapter provides an overview of the strategies which together seem to make up cold reading.

3 Setting the stage An important aspect of the persuasion process is to set the stage for the reading; this includes careful consideration of how the reader advertises himself, how he presents himself, and how he manages the initial interactions. Its purpose is threefold: to persuade the client that the reader is genuine, to engage the active participation of the client in the

reading process, and to provide plausible 'outs' should the reading nevertheless not be a success. With regard to presentation, the reader should appear professional and in control of the situation. Earle (1990b), for example, urges magicians interested in specialising in pseudopsychic effects to dress smartly, and warns that "You will save about 80-90% of what you were spending on props, but you'll end up spending it on wardrobe". Dean et al. (1992) have described how graphologists can use polished presentation to triumph over lack of substance. They label this the Dr Fox Effect, after the first experimental demonstration of it in which a Dr Fox gave a well-received one hour talk on games theory to 55 psychiatrists and social workers (Naftulin et al., 1973). In fact Dr Fox was an actor, although

He looked distinguished, sounded authoritative, and lectured charismatically with much jargon, enthusiasm, jokes, and references to unrelated topics. His talk was highly entertaining but deliberately meaningless. Yet the audience found it to be clear and stimulating, and nobody realized it was nonsense. (Dean et al., 1992, p. 371).

Appearance may also be effective in inducing a Halo effect (Cooper, 1981; Kelly & Renihan, 1984). Here it is argued that if the reader possesses some positive characteristics (such as dressing well, appearing warm and friendly) we will readily attribute other characteristics (e.g. that he is sincere, genuine, trustworthy) to him. The reader works hard, both in terms of presentation and through verbal exchanges, to establish that they are in control of the situation; they emphasise that they have a track record of successful demonstrations so their expertise is not in question - any 'failures' must inevitably be placed firmly at the feet of the client. Thus it is already agreed that much of the burden for making the session a success falls on the client:

If something that the reader later says does not tally with the client's beliefs or does not make sense, the client has been prepared to treat the apparent confusion as due to the client's own failure to understand adequately rather than to the psychic's lack of knowledge. (Hyman 1981: p. 430).

The reader also emphasises the co-operative nature of the reading. Messages may come through them which are only meaningful to the client and which cannot be deciphered without their help. Earle (1990a), for example, notes

The best readers always include a statement like, 'I only see pieces, as in a jigsaw puzzle. It is up to you to put them together', or, 'I may speak of a person being crushed by a house as in The wizard of Oz, but you recognize it as a friend with overdue mortgage payments'. This attitude has the additional advantage of enlisting the active participation of the client. She is always searching for meanings to your statements and, when she makes the connections, will vividly remember them later. The better her mental images the longer she will recall, and try to validate, your statements. (p. 6)

The client's active co-operation can be further encouraged by establishing a rapport with them. Hobrin (1990) stresses that the primary attribute in a reader is to have a pleasing, charming, disarming personality. Martin (1990) further suggests that by involving the client physically in whatever divination process is being used (such as shuffling the Tarot cards or casting the I Ching) they become participants rather than just observers. Although the reader has asserted his expertise, he can use the process of setting the stage to also prepare an 'out' should the client not be able to understand elements of the reading, despite much effort. It should be stressed that this need not imply that the reader's psychic gift is fallible in some way (which would be contrary to the primary message conveyed during stage setting, outlined above). Rather, it can be understood as suggesting that the psychic ability is somewhat independent of the percipient him or herself; whereas the gift is infallible, the percipient and client are prone to misunderstand its 'true' meaning. Lewis (1991), for example, recommends saying of the reading

• This is like looking through frosted glass; I don't see everything, I only see little glimpses.

• Clairvoyance is not something you can just turn on and off like a tap, sometimes it comes and sometimes it doesn't.

• This is not the ten commandments. I don't know everything - if I knew everything I could win the pools.

Perhaps best of all, he draws a parallel with weather forecasting; just as weather forecasters get it badly wrong on occasion without our rejecting their predictive methods, so even gross errors of prediction here won't invalidate the method from which they were derived (i.e. the reader's claim to be psychic). Once the client has been sufficiently primed to work hard to understand the meaning of the reading, the pseudopsychic can move on to generate material for them.

4. The stock spiel A stock spiel reading, also known as a psychological reading (e.g. Hyman, 1981) is made up of prepared phrases, and can be delivered not only without feedback from the client during the reading, but also without the reader having any contact with her before the session begins. Such statements allow one to give a general description of the client, perhaps including some personal details but without focussing on any specific problems. They are of particular use with "sensation-seekers" who really have only come for a reading out of curiosity or for entertainment, or in situations where the lack of contact will make the reading seem impressive, for example if giving a reading over long distances or while screened from the client. The items which make up a stock spiel can be assigned to one of three broad categories of statements; specific generalisations, specific trivia, and Barnum-type statements. 4.1 Specific generalisations Couttie (1988) coined the term "specific generalisations" to describe items that ostensibly are very specific, but still are meaningful to most people. These items exploit the maxim

that we are essentially more alike than different but that we are generally not aware of our similarity (see, e.g., Snyder & Fromkin, 1980). Jones (1989) effectively characterises specific generalisations when he states

Each of us likes to think of ourselves as unique, with problems and needs and goals that sets us apart from all the others. We're not. Although we may mistrust generalities, whether we like it or not, there is a commonality about our fears, wants, and aspirations that make them predictable ... Psychic readers recognise this, and use it to their advantage. (p. 10).

Couttie (1988) even recommends that the reader give the client a general run-down on the reader's own life-story, hopes and fears, angled as though it was the client's, in order to illustrate just how impressively accurate this can be. Also included here is the traditional "cradle-to-the-grave" reading, which extends the principle of similarity to suggest that most of us go through the same stages in life, and at roughly the same ages. It has even been suggested (e.g. Ruthchild, 1981) that psychics make use of life-span development books for stimulus material. A popular lay account of life-span development by Gail Sheehy (Sheehy, 1976) is a common recommendation (e.g. Martin, 1990). As well as going through similar life events to one another, we can also relate to specific but relatively common events. Typical examples include; the death of an older male with a heart condition, the death of a very young (or unborn) child, a divorce affecting someone the client knows well, and so on. In a similar vein, Couttie (1988) suggests trying

not-too-rare names like Ann, Mary, Joan, John, Arthur, Joseph (remembering that the further North [in the United Kingdom] you go the more traditional the names are likely to be) ... keep away from Smith, but you could try Williams, Willcox, Robinson or Clark. (p. 137).

And the sources of this general knowledge can be quite surprising: I find that psychology and statistics provide a lot of these good general lines. Collect items from Psychology Today, Readers Digest, or a newspaper, statistics like '83% of American women over the age of 21 say that they ...' (Martin, 1990: 98)

Associating the generality with something that is unique to the client (such as the lines of the palm, or the particular arrangement of cards) serves to draw attention away from its general applicability. 4.2 Specific trivia Other statements, labelled here as "specific trivia" (although Webster [1990] refers to them as 'platitudes'), are so trivial that they only become memorable if they come true, and even then are impressive by virtue of being true rather than because of what they can say about the client. For example, Davidson often used the prediction that the client would see something in a shop which they would have an urge to impulse-buy, safe in the knowledge that if no such event occurs then the prediction will be forgotten. Martin (1990) suggests peppering the reading with examples of what he terms 'out of the blue'

items which touch on; a minor car problem, or some appliance breaking down; strained relationships with someone close; a recent minor hitch in finances; a relative who is wearing blue; a driver of a green car; and a recent sleepless night. 4.3 Barnum-type statements Barnum statements are general personality descriptions which apply to almost everyone, under most circumstances (see e.g. Tyson, 1982; Furnham and Schofield, 1987). Acceptance of such statements is referred to as the Barnum effect. Dickson & Kelly (1985: 367) have defined the effect as the tendency for "people to accept general personality interpretations as accurate descriptions of their own unique personalities". It is claimed that the descriptions are readily accepted because they are sufficiently vague as to allow the subject to read into them what they want. Indeed, the Barnum effect is so-called in reference to the American showman Phineas T. Barnum who is alleged to have attributed the popularity of his circus to there being "a little something for everybody" (cf. Meehl, 1956), a comment which may also apply to Barnum statements themselves. For example, Martin (1990) offers the line "You've come a long way psychologically from where you were even a few years ago" (p. 22), which could conceivably relate to any change the client has experienced. Less kindly, however, the choice of term may be a reference to Barnum's claim that "There's a sucker born every minute" (OUP, 1985; French et al., 1991 offer such an interpretation). Specific generalisations and specific trivia can be distinguished from Barnum statements in that they differ in the degree of apparent specificity of the descriptions being given; the former rely primarily on base rates for their success whereas the latter tends to rely more on inherent vagueness to encourage the client to read meaning into themviii. The phrases recommended by pseudopsychics vary little from those used in the psychological literature to investigate the Barnum Effect (see, e.g., Hester and Hudson, 1977), and indeed Earle (1990) actually recommends Forer's (1949) original 13 Barnum statements (reproduced as Figure 2) as crib material. It has been consistently found in experimental studies that subjects are willing to accept such statements as being uniquely true of them (see Furnham & Schofield, 1987), and appear unaware of the likelihood that they could apply equally well to others (e.g. Ziv & Nevenhaus, 1972). Where the phrases used by pseudopsychics do differ from Forer's thirteen, they still tend to share characteristics which have been isolated by Sundberg (1955) as being influential upon acceptance or rejection, namely the use of (i) vague statements such as items 3 and 7, (ii) 'double-headed statements' (which make two opposite and complementary predictions) such as items 6 and 11, and (iii) favourable statements such as 4 and 9. It has been argued (e.g. Layne and Ally, 1980; Tyson, 1982) that such sketches are effective because they allow the client to read into them what they want. Two mechanisms in particular are thought to be at work. Firstly that Ss will tend to remember only the correct statements. Hyman (1981), for example, notes of selective recall

Both lab research and what we know about actual psychic readings predict that the client will remember mainly those things the psychic said that were consistent with the overall script. (p. 433; a similar view is espoused by Hester & Hudson, 1977, p. 6).

1. You have a great need for people to like and admire you. 2. You have a tendency to be critical of yourself. 3. You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to

your advantage. 4. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to

compensate for them. 5. Your sexual adjustment has caused some problems for you. 6. Disciplined and self-controlled outside, you tend to be worrisome and

insecure inside. 7. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right

decision or done the right thing. 8. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety, and become

dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. 9. You pride yourself as an independent thinker, and don't accept others'

statements without satisfactory proof. 10. You have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. 11. At times you are extraverted, affable, sociable, while at other times you

are introverted, wary, reserved. 12. Some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. 13. Security is one of your major goals in life.

Figure 2: Forer's original 'Barnum Statements'

And Dutton (1988) has claimed

Even where there are negative or undesirable elements in a Barnum description, subjects have ... a strong tendency to notice and remember only a percentage of available items. This is selectivity of attention ... confirmations are remembered, often quite vividly, whereas less plausible aspects of the description are paid correspondingly less attention. (pp. 327-8).

There is indeed some empirical evidence to suggest that clients of psychic readings do tend to recall more of the reading elements which they rated as accurate than those items rated inaccurate (Roe, 1994). Secondly, subjects will impose their own meaningful interpretation on the statements, embellishing them with their own specific detailed experiences that will make the generalisations seem more accurate than they really were (e.g. Hyman, 1977; Corinda, 1984). This can be accounted for in terms of schema theory, which suggests that subjects are likely to unconsciously impose a particular structure on the communication which will invest it with a particular, relevant (to the percipient) meaning. The classic account

of this phenomenon has been given by Bartlett (1932), who found that his subjects misrecalled a Native American folk tale called 'The War of the Ghosts' in ways that were determined by their prevailing schema. For example, elements of the story that did not accord with expectation were omitted, and other material was distorted so as to make it fit better with subjects' Cambridge backgrounds (see also Bransford & Johnson, 1972; Pichert & Anderson, 1977). This process can be readily illustrated here via an example suggested by Marks & Kamman (1980, adopting a task originally used by Dooling & Lachman, 1971). In reading the following text, try to ignore the fact that the poem is about Christopher Columbus.

With hocked gems financing him

Our hero bravely defied all scornful laughter

That tried to prevent his scheme

Your eyes deceive he said

An egg not a table correctly typifies

This unexplored domain.

Now three sturdy sisters sought proof

Forging along sometimes through calm vastness

Yet more often over turbulent peaks and valleys

Days became weeks

As many doubters spread fearful rumours

About the edge

At last from nowhere winged creatures appeared

Signifying momentous success. Figure 3: "The voyage of Christopher Columbus"

The belief that the text is about Columbus directs our understanding of each part of the message, conjuring up particular images or interpretations for elements of the text in an effort to maintain the sense. Thus the reference to 'three sisters' is understood not to be taken literally, but to refer to the ships in which Columbus' party sailed. It could be argued that similar processes are at work in the case of a pseudopsychic reading. Here the overarching schema is that what is said is intended to concern the client and should be interpreted with reference to events and circumstances surrounding them. Marks & Kamman (1980) describe this 'effort after matches' in terms of

The micro-machinery of subjective validation. The rule is simply - keep searching for similarities until an overall match has been made (cherchez la

correspondance). Once the match is presented it will be hard to see how it could be any other way. (p. 182).

Randi (1981) gives a nice example of reading more into a reading than was actually said. As a guest with Paul Kurtz on a Canadian TV show he witnessed the psychic Geraldine Smith working the vibrations from an object belonging to the host. She gave the rather vague prediction "I'm seeing the month of January here - which is now - but there would have to be something strong with the person with January as well." (p. 107). Although sceptical of the reading as a whole, the host of the show noted on reflection that Smith had actually determined that his birthday was in January. In fact no mention had been made of what type of association with January was being referred to - the client was left to fill in the gaps. In a similar vein, Schwartz (1978) describes a performance by Peter Hurkos in which the efforts made by the client to make sense of a statement are quite explicit:

Hurkos: One two three four five - I see five in the family. Caller: That's right. There are four of us and Uncle Raymond, who often stays with us.

Dean et al. (1992) describe this tendency as the Procrustean effect, after the Greek mythical figure who would stretch his guests' limbs or sever them in order for them to fit his bed. Communications are similarly stretched or truncated to fit the client's circumstances. Schwartz (1978: 53) has argued that even talking complete nonsense need not be a bar to success :

Hurkos: When you want to break the marriage that time he did not have a chance. When you said 'If I don't, if I don't want him and I lose him - I like him, I am not listening to anybody - I want a want a want, or get the house! This is correct?

Woman: That is fantastic! Clients may even alter their perception of events to have them fit with the reader's predictions

For example, if a girl is told that her life will be influenced by an imaginative, sensitive man, she may start attributing artistic qualities to the basketball player she has been dating, even though she never previously thought of him as being a particularly imaginative or sensitive person. (Hester & Hudson, 1977, p. 6)

Delaney & Woodyard (1974) offer a nice experimental illustration of a situation in which subjects are motivated to actually alter their own self perception in the light of predictions made. In their study, Ss were given a personality sketch ostensibly based on their star sign but in fact descriptors were randomly allocated. Ss were also given a short questionnaire asking about their actual personality to be compared with the astrological predictions. Ss responses on this measure suggested that their self-description was influenced by the astrological sketch.

5 Pigeon-holing Stock spiel statements are necessarily general, even though interpretation by the client is claimed to make them seem more impressive. To provide more specific assertions, the reader must narrow down the number of topic areas which could possibly be relevant. To do this he assigns the client to a particular category, generating a stereotype for that sub-population which will inform him of the kinds of interest or concern to concentrate on. Such classification seems to occur along two main dimensions which are somewhat mutually dependent: what type of person the client is, and what type of problem they are concerned with. Pigeon-holing makes use of information leakage which occurs very early in the reading situation and requires little, if any, subsequent feedback. Instances in which this situation occurs include some types of radio reading, where psychics are invited to give readings on the air for listeners who telephone the station, and more recently with advertised telephone readings. Here there is an initial (verbal) contact with the client which can provide details about sex, age, and perhaps some regional and socio-economic information, but then involves what the client may perceive to be impressively little subsequent interaction. 5.1 The client The reader classifies the client prior to or very early in the reading, by scanning the environment for sources of intelligence about her. Davidson has stated that initial impressions of the client, as she enters the room, exchanges greetings, and seats herself, are particularly important. This is because the client is off her guard at this point, unaware that the 'reading' has begun, and so is prone to leak more information about herself than she would during the actual reading. Indeed, if Davidson found himself unable to allocate a client to a relatively narrow pigeon hole category by the time she sat down, it was unlikely that the reading would be a success. The main distinctions are made according to the sex and age of the client, and at one extreme may simply use a narrowed version of the cradle-to-grave reading, or other stock spiel, determined by information given up by the sitter. For example, Couttie (1988) describes how:

Up to the age of twenty or twenty-five the main concerns are sex and relationships of different sorts. From then to the mid-thirties the concerns are mainly about jobs, money and the home. For the next ten years there is a shift towards worries about children's futures, parental health, rethinking careers and so on. From about forty-five onwards there are worries about personal health, one's own marriage, a desperation about the direction of one's life, concern about grandchildren and so forth. (p. 137).

Webster (1990) similarly describes different scenarios depending on the age of the client. For younger sitters, he portrays a very positive, optimistic future (but still within the realms of possibility). From the age of 30-35, however, clients "start to realise that the dreams they had will never eventuate". So for an older person he offers the more realistic "Money hasn't always been easy. You've had to work pretty hard to get where you have." and he predicts more moderate achievements gained through effort rather than good

fortune. For much older sitters, the real concern is with loneliness as much as it is with poverty, so it is always worthwhile to describe how they won't be alone in their old age (see, e.g., Martin, 1990, p. 36). Further information can be gleaned from the client's clothing, physical features, carriage and manner of speech which can point more specifically to their past history and future aspirations. Hyman (1977) provides an illustration of the process in action, recounting a story told by the magician John Mulholland which occurred in the 1930s (and which may now appear to be somewhat dated):

A young lady in her late twenties or early thirties visited a character reader. She was wearing expensive jewelry, a wedding band, and a black dress of cheap material. The observant reader noted that she was wearing shoes that were currently being advertised for people with foot trouble... By means of just these observations the reader proceeded to amaze his client with his insights. He assumed that this client came to see him as did most of his female customers, because of a love or financial problem. The black dress and the wedding band led him to reason that her husband had died recently. The expensive jewelry suggested she had been financially comfortable during marriage, but the cheap dress indicated that her husband's death had left her penniless. The therapeutic shoes signified that she was working to support herself since her husband's death. The reader's shrewdness led him to the following conclusion - which turned out to be correct: The lady had met a man who had proposed to her. She wanted to marry the man to end her economic hardship. But she felt guilty about marrying so soon after her husband's death. The reader told her what she had come to hear - that it was all right to marry without further delay. (p. 408)

In the exploratory study, Davidson noticed that one of his clients heaved a sigh as she sat down. He correctly surmised that she spent much of her working time on her feet. She was very particular about her appearance, so he believed that she was used to being in the public eye. On the assumption that she worked in a shop or public house, he fed her a line about her being very open and friendly and would be well suited to working in a profession where she would be in contact with the public - if she didn't already. It transpired that she did indeed work in the service industry If the reading is held in the client's home, then themes found in collections of ornaments, pictures, or books will also indicate some hobbies, interests, and aspirations. These will help the reader to assign the client to a narrower and presumably more accurate category. When taken to an extreme, the classification can be quite specific, for example by exploiting the discovery of hobby stickers on cars which indicate membership of particular clubs or societies, or necklaces bearing initials (Hester and Hudson, 1977). The reader should not necessarily ignore very obvious sources of intelligence. As Hobrin (1990) notes, "You may be surprised to learn the number of people who forget that they are wearing their birth sign or name around their neck. They say familiarity breeds contempt; I'd say that it breeds forgetfulness ... never overlook the obvious" (p. 12).

At times, this process can be barely distinguishable from "hot reading", which involves gathering intelligence about the client in advance of the reading (and which will be described in more detail later in this chapter). However, hot reading can be distinguished from the other stratagems discussed here on the grounds that it is possible for a “shut-eye” (a reader who believes that they have psi) to unwittingly be exploiting processes such as pigeon holing, whereas it is not possible for them to be making use of hot reading, where the information gathering is much more contrived and vigorous (see, e.g., Fuller, 1975, 1980). The former may also be considered more 'fair' to the client, since it only makes use of sources of information which are equally available to them during the reading (and which thus can allow them to better evaluate the paranormality of the communication). Strictly speaking, however, hot reading should not be included under the banner of cold reading, as on occasion it has been (e.g. Hyman, 1977; Randi, 1981), since it does not entail the reader coming into the reading situation "cold" (i.e. knowing nothing about the client in advance). However, when used, the information gained in this way is not baldly given up but is interwoven with information derived from the other strategies to give a broader reading, and so arguably should be included in any model dealing with the interaction of different cold reading strategies. As well as providing an overarching category within which to set the client, simple observation can also provide the reader with titbits which can appear to be remarkably insightful. Selected examples (drawn from Martin, 1990) are given in figure 4 to give a flavour of the kind of information which can be gleaned.

• Ridges in a belt may indicate fluctuations in weight.

• A worn left heel (reversed in Britain) indicates a lot of time driving, perhaps with work.

• Tall women tend to dislike their feet (as too big) especially when they were younger.

• A mole or birthmark on the neck or shoulder is usually accompanied by one on the back, usually lower back.

• Men (in particular) who wear their watch on the right wrist tend to be left-handed. This can be alluded to by predicting: "When you were a child, adults around you tried to make you change your ways, but you chose a path not as populated as most. All your life, I see you marching to the beat of a different drummer".

• Women who sigh a lot and look somewhat depressed, tend to strongly agree with a description in terms of a 'tough life, hard uphill struggle' no matter what their financial or social position.

Figure 4: Simple observations providing insight into the client's circumstances

5.2 The problem By pigeon-holing the client, and padding out the reading with general statements drawn from the categories described previously, the reader is in a position to tell her some quite impressive facts about her personality and life history. However, as Jones (1989) notes, "A perception of accuracy is not sufficient to make a reading satisfactory in the minds of most clients" (p. 22). The primary function of a reader in most instances is to act as a counsellor (Lester, 1982; Richards, 1990). Clients come to him with a problem for which they seek comfort and advice. Even "sensation-seeking" clients will identify a specific problem or question which is uppermost in their minds and wait to see what the reader has to say about it. As with the cradle-to-grave technique, strategies developed to determine the client's problem rely on the assumption that we are more alike than different. The problems which occur in life belong to a finite (and small) number of categories, each of which has only a limited number of specific problems associated with it. The number of categories commonly used varies from psychic to psychic (see Table 2), although some of the items may represent sub-divisions of larger categories. Jones' (1989) grouping of human problems under six categories has been contrived in part to give the particularly apt acronym THE SCAM when the letters are rearranged.

Earle (1990) Hyman (1977)

Jones (1989) Ruthchild (1981) Hobrin (1990)

love

sex

sex love

children

love life marriage children

money

ambition

career money

social standing

ambitions / goals financial security

social life & recreation

work & professional prospects

financial prospects health health

expectation health

immortality health & possible

long life ________ (travel)

(psychic potential) (character

assessment) Table 2: Commonly used problem area categories

Utilising the population stereotypes noted above allows the reader to assess the probabilities of each problem area being applicable in this case. By ranking them in this way he can quickly deal with each of the most likely worries. By mentioning all of the possible problem categories, he can be sure to have covered the one most relevant, even if only in the most general of terms (Corinda, 1984). This will make the reading seem successful to the client because, according to Jones (1989), she "will assign immediate significance to any mention ... of her problem or worry, while she will pass over as unimportant other problems or worries ... [mentioned] ... in the same reading" (p. 23). Just as with describing the client, sources of actuarial data can provide accurate insights into the nature of problems that present. Martin (1990) for example claims that the average marriage lasts seven years;the average weight gain in the first year is five pounds for each partner; and the most common causes of marital breakdown include broken promises and money problems, especially in so far as money decisions involve power, security, dependency and goals

6 'True' cold reading: using non-verbal feedback The techniques described up to this point do not exploit information available through interaction with the client but depend instead on general truths and impression formation by the reader. When feedback is available during the reading, there is the opportunity to further refine these categories using what we have termed "true cold reading" (see Figure 5). This process has been likened by Hyman (1981) to the Clever Hans phenomenon (Sebeok & Rosenthal, 1981; see also Pfungst, 1911) because it exploits subtle behavioural cues emanating from the questioner during the course of the interaction to arrive at an appropriate reading. It is achieved by forming initial hypotheses about the client which are informed by population stereotypes and environmental cues (as in pigeon holing). Here, however, these hypotheses are tested by introducing each topic (personality characterisation or problem area) in a generalised form and noting the client's behavioural response to its introduction. If it is positive, then the sketch can be elaborated a little further until another choice has to be made and the client is asked to unwittingly provide more feedback which steers the course of the reading. If the response is negative, then the reading is either moderated or the reader may "opt out" back to general categories to try the next one in the listix. When successful, the true cold reading can follow a tree-like path, from broad trunk to branch to twig as the implicit choices made non-verbally by the client become more esoteric, resulting in end points which give very specific information indeed. And the client will tend to only remember this end point, not the stages which led to it. Earle (1990a) illustrates the process by using Barnum statements as his starting point, but goes on to provide alternative elaborations according to the feedback he receives. For example, the initial statement "You pride yourself on being an independent thinker and do not accept others' opinions without satisfactory proof..." is followed after a positive response by "...and the proof has to be on your terms, not just formula and hypothesis. The understanding must come from within", but after a negative response results in the moderator "...you have, however, proven to have an open minded attitude. You are willing to listen to what other people have to say before making your decision". In the study with Davidson, different feedback in two of the readings turned a "holiday" into "just a day out with friends" after negative feedback, but a trip "...outside Europe ... India or Egypt ... don't be surprised if you end up galloping around the pyramids on a camel" when the client expressed interest in the topic. The decision as to how to proceed depends on an ability to "read" the client's responses to what is being said, exploiting the social conventions that exist for managing a dyadic communication. In normal conversation, the speaker looks intermittently at the listener, especially toward the end of utterances, to determine whether the listener is still interested in what is being said, and to gauge whether the listener wishes to take a turn as speaker (Duncan & Fiske, 1977). The listener reacts to this cue by producing behaviours which indicate essentially whether they are happy for the speaker to continue, whether they wish the speaker to change the topic of conversation, or whether they wish to take a

turn as speaker. These behaviours, known as back-channel signals (Wiener et al., 1972), can be expressed through a number of modalities. For example, interest is typically indicated verbally through vocalisations including uh-huh's and similar grunts (Argyle, 1988), facially through smiles (Brunner, 1979), and posturally through head nods, forward or sideways lean and drawing the legs back (Bull, 1987). Negative reactions can be signalled through frowning (Argyle, 1988), lowing the head or turning the head away, as well as adopting characteristics of a closed posture, such as folded arms (Bull, 1987). Pseudopsychics can similarly use these (generally unconscious) responses to gauge the appropriateness of what they are saying. In the pseudopsychic literature, commonly recommended measures indicating acceptance include eye blinks, leaning forward, dilated pupils, slight head nod, blushing. There are fewer signs for negative reactions, possibly since absence of all of the above would be taken as a negative reaction, but the few to be noted in the literature (e.g. Ruthchild, 1981) include slight frowning, folding arms, and looking away. Many of the cues are quite subtle (e.g. some readers have suggested synchronising breathing patterns with the client so as to be sensitive to changes in that pattern) and their practical utility may be overstated. Jones (1989, pp. 50-74) does offer some interesting suggestions for ways to amplify these signals, including: dropping one's voice to force the client to lean forward, making nonverbal behaviour more apparent; having the client lightly rest the palm of her hand on the back of yours, to be able to utilize a form of muscle reading (also known as Hellstromism or Cumberlandism - see Whaley, 1989). Jones also suggests the use of some props to sensitively monitor clients' reactions: a glass-topped table will allow one to monitor foot movements and to see the client's hands in her lap; swivel chairs which have been treated with water to encourage slight rust will squeak as weight is redistributed; prohibiting audio recording of readings but allowing the client to jot down notes provides a ready-made feedback channel indicating where the hits were, even to the extent that one may be able to read what was written. There are likely to be considerable differences between individuals in the way they react to true or false statements. This can be overcome by taking measures of what constitutes a positive and/or negative response before the start of the reading-proper by using questions to which the answer is known or will be given without suspicion. Hobrin (1990) uses an introductory patter with questions like "Have you had a reading before?", "Did any of it come true?" etc, which are designed to provide such behavioural benchmarks.

7 Warm reading: using verbal feedback From the above we can see that the essence of cold reading is the use by the reader of nonverbal feedback from the client to help him decide between a number of already-known alternative routes for the conversation. While cold reading requires the client unwittingly to deliberate between implicit choices produced by the reader, in what might be termed 'closed questioning' (e.g. "do you have children?"), in warm reading the emphasis is on the client to provide answers to 'open questions' to which the reader need not know the range of possible answers (e.g. "what are your children's names?"). The process of warm reading is less constrained than that for cold reading (as for example

was outlined in Figure 5), in that it need not follow such a fixed path of information gathering. Rather, warm reading is opportunistic, with the reader remaining alert to any personal details given up by the sitter at any time during the session from when she enters the room to when she leaves it. Some of this information will be freely volunteered by the client if the reader has successfully developed a rapport with her, through mirroring her body language, appearing friendly and sincere, and expressing a wish to help with her problems. The client can be encouraged to speak - or to continue speaking - by reproducing the back-channel behaviours typically adopted by the listener in conventional conversational dyadsx. Martin (1990) emphasises the importance of being able to listen, and to use listening body language:

Nodding occasionally, in the sense of acknowledgement is a must. A slight sideways tilt of the head is also a listening signal you must learn to use ... Leaning slightly forward is standard; so is slowly ('thoughtfully') stroking the chin, almost as if you had a beard... This one action - attentive listening - is powerful magick [sic] by itself. For one thing, it is so rare for people to listen intently to them, that they want to talk on and on. It is a perfect way to get them to tell you their problem, and their tentative solution. (p. 78)

More 'aggressively', the reader can simply refrain from speaking. Earle (1990b) notes that "People abhor a silence the way Nature abhors a vacuum. The client will often fill the silence with material you can feed back later." 7.1 Fishingxi However, this haphazard method is unlikely to naturally produce all the information the reader wants to know. Other data will have to be teased out through 'fishing'. Hyman (1977) defines fishing as "a device for getting the subject to tell you about himself", but as well as being rather vague, this definition tends to overlook the important characteristic of fishing - that the client doesn't realise (or at least recall) that she is the supplier of the information. Corinda (1984), for example, describes it as

A process of verbal conjuring ... [in which] you have to make them tell you what they want to know - and yet they must not know they have told you. (p. 341).

Like cold reading generally, fishing is better defined operationally, and we will consider three versions here. In its crudest form, fishing involves simply asking the client for required information. Lewis (1991) for example, offers the following patter

Do you drive a red or a silver car? No? Well I see someone close to you who has a car like that. Also "Is there someone around you who wears a uniform? No? You know there are different types of uniform? I think I'm seeing a nurse's uniform. No? I sense someone bringing you news of some sort, the person bringing the news wears a uniform. You will get benefit from the news, and so will a family member."

Where the client answers in the affirmative, the reader will be credited with a perspicacious hit. Where unsuccessful, the reader is able to moderate the prediction, for example. by widening its applicability, or transforming its meaning altogether. Here, the acquaintance in uniform smoothly becomes only the uniformed postman delivering a message from the acquaintance! More subtly, fishing can involve using questions framed as if they were statements (Couttie, 1988). Here the client is encouraged to elaborate openly on a topic (which of course she has been privately doing for all elements of the reading) as the reader feigns difficulty in quite comprehending the meaning of his message, or is apparently looking for confirmation for a received message. Figure 6 reproduces a conversation contrived by Couttie (1988) to illustrate how this is likely to work.

psychic: I'm getting something about a car crash?

client: Yes ... my brother.

psychic: Because he keeps talking about his shoulder. He's saying "It doesn't half hurt."

client: He had head injuries

psychic: That's right, dear, his head and shoulder are hurting. It was your brother wasn't it?

client: Yes, that's right.

psychic: He's saying "I was a fool for not doing up my seat-belt." He didn't do up his seat-belt did he?

client: No he didn't, that's right.

psychic: No, we haven't met before have we? I couldn't know your brother was in a crash unless I was in contact with him, could I?

Figure 6: Fishing by using statements as questions (from Couttie, 1988)

The reader's initial statement is a fairly safe specific generalisation, which by the way it is presented stimulates the client to give up information which would be extremely difficult to guess at (i.e. that the sitter has a brother who died in a car crash). It is important that the reader gives the impression that whatever information the client volunteers is already known to him. In reality, the reading would be much more chaotic than presented here, as the reader switches between topics and leaves much longer delays between fishing and feeding back the fish. This would increase the likelihood of the client misrecalling that the reader brought up the topic of her brother without any prompting from her. Davidson, for example, typically has three stages to the reading; some palmistry, a Tarot card spread, and use of a crystal ball. Most fishing occurs during the palm reading, but is only fed back during the interpretation of cards (given the symbolic nature of the images, it is a straightforward matter to associate any gleaned information with one of them). The crystal ball allows Davidson to correct any errors by providing the opportunity to reinterpret any cards that he was 'unsure of'.

Another, equally useful form of fishing is the seeking of information about one topic while ostensibly giving information about another. For example, the statement "I get the impression that someone close to you, probably someone in the family, was quite ill recently, does that sound right?" apparently relates to health. In fact the client need only mention a spouse or partner, or son or daughter, for the reader to know that he can safely talk about relationship and family matters and events which only make sense in relation to them. Ideally suited to this purpose are the throwaway items like 'specific generalisations' and 'specific trivia' noted earlier. Once again, such information can be stored to be presented later in a modified form. To ensure that the client forgets where the details have come from, the reader employs some mis-direction, changing the topic of conversation, usually with the help of predictions derived from stock spiel statements (suggested, for example, by the next Tarot card in the spread). After a suitable delay the conversation can revert back to the original topic and this "new" information divulged, typically as an interpretation of a new card. 7.2 Hot reading Although most readers don't generally need to resort to it, information about the client can be gathered in advance of the reading using methods collectively termed "hot reading". Hyman (1977) describes one form of hot reading when he outlines how

If the reading is through appointment, the reader can use directories and other sources to gather information. When the client enters the consulting room, an assistant can examine the coat left behind (and often the purse as well) for papers, notes, labels, and other such cues about socioeconomic status, and so on. (p. 405).

Where the reading is held in the client's own home, this advance scouting for information can be very calculated.

At some point, get up and say that you want a .. glass of water. Go into the kitchen and fill the glass. You are alone in the kitchen and you can stay there only a few seconds. But while you are there, find the calendar or notepad that is usually pinned up near the phone, the refrigerator or the back door. On it you will find a wealth of information about appointments, scheduled events involving your host or his family, peoples' names, phone numbers, etc...if you can get to the medicine chest, look for prescription drugs. Pain killers, tranquilizers, sleeping pills, drugs used in geriatric cases, all tell you something about his life... Knowing the name on the drug label, you know whether the patient is the host or his wife.. Remember that any means is considered fair by the psychic hustler. You are trying to piece together a picture of your host's life and you are using every means to achieve the desired end. Everything is a clue, even the number of toothbrushes in the bathroom. You are doing nothing more than a detective does when trying to construct a picture of a victim's life, but of course your goal is entirely different. The detective is out to catch the culprit, but your aim is to set up the mark. (Fuller, 1980, pp. 13-14).

Keene (1976: 43-44) recounts a similar episode in his own past as a pseudopsychic. Lyons & Truzzi (1991, footnotes 60 & 61, p. 288) illustrate how organised this can be

when they list professional and 'underground' sources which are often intended for the private detective market but which can be exploited by pseudopsychics. These books run under titles such as How to get anything on anybody (Lapin, 1983), and outline methods for locating individuals and finding out about them. Keene (1976) also describes how the network of pseudopsychics themselves can be used as an information-sharing resource, by exchanging files containing personal details of regular sitters. Among themselves, mediums often refer to such files on sitters as their 'poems' or 'poetry', to be meditated upon immediately prior to a sitting. These poems often adopt a standard format:

A cross beside a name means the individual is dead; a circle, that he's alive. A heart next to the name indicates someone with whom the sitter was in love. "G.G." next to "Blue Star" would mean that a medium had assigned the sitter a girl spirit-guide named Blue Star. (Keene, 1976, p. 38).

Jones (1989) has devoted whole chapters to describing how information supplied by a prospective client in booking an appointment can give an insight into their circumstances. For example, he lists eleven pieces of information which may be found on a cheque, should the client pay in advance. These include: postdated cheques indicating the imminent receipt or deposit of money; outsize cheques indicating that the client runs her own business; cheques under a pseudonym often indicating employment in the entertainment world. When presented within the framework of the psychic reading, information derived from these sources can be accurate and specific enough to be very difficult for the client to account for except in terms of the reader's claimed psychic ability.

8 Why should such readings be successful? Although the cold reading may be capable of generating quite accurate information, due in part to the client's effort after meaning and their tendency to forget what wasn't true and to embellish what was, it can be argued that this only partly explains the success of the psychic reading. Hyman (1981) notes that although it is unlikely that the pseudopsychic reading will generate information which is truly new to the client, it may still have utility for them, as "He or she may have a new insight into the conflicts and problems that precipitated the consultation. And new alternatives for coping with the situation may have been opened up" (p. 179). Dean (1986/7) has commented that "For every Western astrologer who concentrates on prediction there are probably another two who concentrate on psychology and counselling. The popular view of Western astrology as consisting of prediction and nothing else is incorrect" (p. 168). And Jones (1989) reflects:

It is an entrancing experience, having one's life described by a stranger. It's an exercise as seductive as looking at a photograph of one's self. At the very least, what (you get for your money) [sic] is an attentive listener and guilt-free self-absorption ... Indeed there are some who maintain that today's practicing psychic is the poor man's analyst. (p. 5)

There may still be a stigma attached to visiting a mental health worker or counsellor, particularly among the working classes; according to Ruthchild (1981), visiting a psychic

may provide a socially acceptable alternative forum for talking though one's problems and concerns. Pseudopsychics are generally aware of their role as counsellors, and often echo the Hippocratic admonition to 'first do no harm', avoiding offering independent advice but preferring instead to provide non-judgemental support for the decision already reached by the client. Corinda (1984) for example, comments

One thing is vital knowledge to the reader and should never be forgotten; that is, nearly all clients ask a question which has already been considered by them and they have invariably formed their own opinions as to what to do ... make it a rule to find out what they have decided they should do - and you advise the same. (p. 351).

A common scenario is that of a client who has some important or unpalatable life-decision to make. Bascom Jones (1989) notes that such people "know what they ought to do but can't find the courage to do it. What these people need is self-confidence and belief in themselves ... [I just] give them a push in the right direction." (p. 6). In this way, the client can be relieved of some of the responsibility for their choices and actions, as any blame can later be laid at the door of the reader. There is some evidence to suggest that readers can be quite skilled in the art of counselling. Lester (1982) has considered parallels between the psychic reading and other more orthodox forms of therapy, and noted a number of commonalities, which left him impressed with the readers' competence at the counselling process. Sechrest & Bryan (1968) found the advice offered by astrologers to be realistic, and usually vigorous, personal and friendly, and concluded that such consultations were unlikely to be damaging and probably represented a great bargain because they were relatively cheap. Dean (1986/7) concludes that "In a society that denies ego support to most people, astrology [and presumably other forms of divination] provides it at a very low price." (p. 178). Thurstone & Reed (1984) surprisingly found that psychic readings, given at a distance by anonymous psychics were rated by paying clients as a more valuable source of counselling than more orthodox psychological techniques. This suggests that a reader may be able to provide a valuable service even if his claim to be psychic is untrue. There is great scope to further consider both the interpersonal expertise that the reader may possess, which may contribute to any therapeutic effects, and to determine what criteria the client applies when evaluating the reading. This promises to be a fruitful area for future research.

9 Summary This chapter began by describing how subjectively impressive psychic readings have been accounted for in terms of deceptive practices known as cold reading. Existing characterisations of cold reading were criticised as too vague and inconsistent to be useful. A new model of cold reading strategies was elaborated, informed by a review of magic literature concerned with pseudopsychic techniques, and by an exploratory study with a practicing pseudopsychic. These suggested that cold reading may be more usefully regarded as consisting of a number of discrete strategies which generate information about the client in different ways. These strategies were described and illustrated. The

methods were characterised as falling into a hierarchical arrangement. Those lower down the hierarchy are effective under conditions of impoverished feedback, but are capable of only relatively general information. Indeed, their primary purpose often is to act as a platform for more sophisticated methods, since the generation of more specific information by 'higher' strategies can be dependent upon the use of more basic methods to provide the material necessary to encourage reactions from the client or to misdirect them away from their own contributions. The information produced by the basic use of a stock spiel (made up of Barnum statements, specific generalisations and specific trivia) is qualitatively different from that produced by the more sophisticated methods. When used together with more interactive techniques, these strategies can provide a well balanced reading which deals equally well with the general picture as it does with specific details. Thus it is as likely to tell a client that she will live to a ripe old age as it is that she has three cats and a dog. Very little work has been done to find out what type of information or advice is most likely to convince the client of their paranormal origin, but it is not necessarily the most specific or improbable items. Richards (1990) illustrates this when he states

A reading might contain the evidential statement that, "You have a husband with a glass eye", but the value derived from the reading is assigned by the client to statements like, "You need to relax more at home and communicate more effectively with your husband." (p. 278).

This account of the pseudopsychic reading draws attention to the fact that all the information emanates from the client in one way or another, making it very unlikely that she will be presented with material that is particularly new or surprising to her. It is unlikely, then, that the primary reason for the success of many psychic readings is the psychic or predictive function, and it is suggested that the primary role may be as a therapeutic, quasi-counselling event.

References Argyle, M. (1988). Bodily communication. (2nd edition). London: Methuen

Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bransford, J.D. & Johnson, M.K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 11, 717-726.

Brunner, L.J. (1979). Smiles can be back channels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 728-734.

Bull, P. (1987). Posture and gesture. Oxford: pergamon.

Cain, R. (1991). The Secret to Reading Cards and Clients. Albuquerque: Flora & Company

Cooper, W.H. (1981). Ubiquitous halo. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 218-244.

Corinda, T. (1984). 13 Steps to Mentalism. (2nd edition). Bideford, Devon: The Supreme Magic Co. Ltd.

Couttie, (1988). Forbidden Knowledge: The Paranormal Paradox. Cambridge: Lutterworth Press.

Dean, G.A. (1986/7). Does astrology need to be true? Part 1: A look at the real thing.The Skeptical Inquirer, 11, 166-184.

Dean, G.A., Kelly, I.W., Saklofske, D.H. & Furnham, A. (1992). Graphology and human judgement. In B. Beyerstein & D, Beyerstein (Eds.) The write stuff. (pp. 349-395). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.

Delaney, J.G. & Woodyard, H.D. (1974). Effects of reading an astrological description on responding to a personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 24, 1214.

Dickson, D.H. & Kelly, I.E. (1985). The "Barnum Effect" in personality assessment: a review of the literature. Psychological Reports, 57, 367-382.

Dooling, J.D. & Lachman, R. (1971). Effects of comprehension on retention of prose. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 216-222.

Duncan, S. & Fiske, D.W. (1977). Face-to-face interaction: Research methods and theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dutton, D.L. (1988) The Cold Reading Technique. Experientia, 44 (4), 326-331.

Earle, L. (1990a). The Classic Cold Reading. USA: Binary Star Publications.

Earle, L. (1990b). The Classic Cold Reading (Companion audio tape). USA: Binary Star Publications.

Forer, B.R. (1949). The fallacy of personal validation: A classroom demonstration of gullibility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 118-123.

French, C.C., Fowler, M., McCarthy, K., & Peers, D. (1991). Belief in astrology: A test of the Barnum Effect. The Skeptical Inquirer, 15, 166-176.

Fuller, U. (1975). Confessions of a psychic: The secret notebooks of Uriah Fuller. Teaneck, NJ: Karl Fulves.

Fuller, U. (1980). Further confessions of a psychic: The secret notebooks of Uriah Fuller. Teaneck, NJ: Karl Fulves.

Furnham, A. & Schofield, S. (1987). Accepting personality test feedback: A review of the Barnum Effect. Current Psychological Research & Reviews, 6, 162-178.

Haraldsson, E. (1985). Representative national surveys of psychic phenomena: Iceland, Great Britain, Sweden, USA and Gallup's Multinational Survey. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 53, 145-158.

Hester, R & Hudson, W. (1977). Psychic Character Analysis: The Technique of Cold Reading. Baltimore, Maryland: Magic Media Ltd.

Hobrin (no initial) (1990). Money-Making Cold Reading. Sheffield, England: Magick Enterprises.

Hyman, R. (1977). Cold Reading: How to convince strangers that you know all about them. The Skeptical Enquirer, 1, 18-37. Also reprinted in R. Hyman (1989) op cit.

Hyman, R. (1981). The psychic reading. In T.A. Sebeok & R. Rosenthal (Eds.) The Clever Hans Phenomenon. (pp. 169-181). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

Hyman, R. (1989). The elusive quarry: A scientific appraisal of psychical research. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.

Irwin, H. J. (1985). A Study of the Measurement and Correlates of Paranormal Belief. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 79, 301-326.

Jones, B. (1989). King of the Cold Readers: Advanced professional pseudo-psychic techniques. Bakersfield, Calif.: Jeff Busby Magic Inc.

Keene, M.L. (with A. Spraggett) (1976). The psychic mafia. New York: Dell Publishing Co.

Kelly, I.W. & Renihan, P. (1984). Elementary credibility for executives and upward mobiles. The Canadian School Executive, 3(10), 16-18.

Lapin, D. (1983). How to get anything on anybody. San Francisco, CA: Wolfe Publishing.

Layne, C. & Ally, G. (1980). How and why people accept personality feedback. Journal of Personality assessment, 44, 541-546.

Lester, D. (1982). Astrologers and psychics as therapists. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 36, 56-66.

Lewis, M. (1991). Confessions of a cold reader (Audiotape). Martin Breese Magicassettes.

Lyons, A. & Truzzi, M. (1991). The blue sense: Psychic detectives and crime. New York: Mysterious Press.

Marks, D. & Kamman, R. (1980). The psychology of the psychic. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.

Martin, R. (1990). The Tarot Reader's Notebook. Albuquerque: Flora & Company

Meehl, P.E. (1956). Wanted - a good cookbook. American Psychologist, 11, 262-272.

Naftulin, D.H., Ware, J.E. & Donnelly, F.A. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635.

Pfungst, O. (1911). Clever Hans: A contribution to experimental, animal and human psychology. New York: Holt.

Pichert, J.W. & Anderson, R.C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 309-315.

Randi, J. (1981). Cold Reading Revisited. In K. Frazier (Ed.) Paranormal Borderlands of Science. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.

Richards, D.G. (1990). Exploring the dyadic counseling interaction. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association, pp.273-288.

Roe, C. A. (1991). Cold Reading Strategies. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Parapsychological Association Convention. 470-480

Roe, C. A. (1994). Subjects' Evaluations of a Tarot Reading. In D.J. Bierman (Ed) Proceedings of the 37th Annual Parapsychological Association Convention. 470-480

Roe, C.A. (1997). Belief in the paranormal and attendance at psychic readings. Proceedings of the 40th Annual Parapsychological Association Convention. in press.

Roll, W.G., Morris, R.L., Damgaard, J.A., Klein, J., & Roll, M. (1973). Free verbal response experiments with Lalsingh Harribance. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 67, 197-207.

Ruthchild, M. (1978). Cashing in on the psychic. Pomeroy, Ohio: Lee Jacobs Productions.

Ruthchild, M. (1981). Psychotechnics: A scientific approach to the psychic. Pomeroy, Ohio: Lee Jacobs Productions.

Schmeidler, G. R. (1985). Belief and Disbelief in Psi. Parapsychology Review, 16(1), 1-4.

Schouten, S. A. (1993). Applied Parapsychology Studies of Psychics and Healers. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 7, 375-401.

Schouten, S. A. (1994). An Overview of Quantitatively Evaluated Studies with Mediums and Paragnosts. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 88, 221-254.

Schwartz, R. A. (1978). Sleight of Tongue. The Skeptical Inquirer, 3(1), 47-55.

Sebeok, T.A. & Rosenthal, R. (Eds) (1981). The Clever Hans phenomenon. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

Sechrest, L. & Bryan, J. (1968). Astrolgers as useful marriage counsellors. Trans-Action, 6, 34-36.

Sheehy, G. (1976). Passages: Predictable Crises of Adult Life. NY: E.P. Dutton.

Snyder, C.R. & Fromkin, H.L. (1980). Uniqueness: The pursuit of human difference. New York: Plenum Press.

Sundberg, N.D. (1955). The acceptability of "fake" versus "bona fide" personality test interpretations. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50, 145-147.

Tyson, G. (1982). People who consult astrologers: A profile. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 119-126.

Webster, R. (1990). The Mail Order Psychic. Auckland, New Zealand: Brookfield Press.

Whaley, B. (1989). Encyclopedic dictionary of magic. Oakland, CA: Jeff Busby Magic Inc.

Wiener, M., DeVoe, S., Rubinow, S., & Geller, J. (1972). Nonverbal nehaviour and nonverbal communication. Psychological Review, 79, 185-214.

Ziv, A. & Nevenhaus, S. (1972). Acceptance of personality diagnoses and perceived uniqueness. Abstract Guide of XXth International Congress of Psychology, 605.

Getting Your Audience to Remember You Docc Hilford 9/28/02 What an audience remembers about my performance, is more important than what they thought about it. A couple of nights ago, I performed intimate magic for 250 people at a banquet. Working with me was two other magi. One of those was a very talented young man. Near the end of the evening, I had the privilege to watch him work for a few minutes. He did things with a deck of cards I would have never dreamed possible. During one effect, a card was selected and returned to the deck. The cards were shuffled, not only in dovetail fashion, but by splitting the deck in half and doing one-handed shuffles with both hands simultaneously. He commented to the audience that it was the result of ten years without a date! I laughed, perhaps a bit too loudly, and he added that I laughed because I knew he wasn’t joking.

When he turned half the deck face-up and shuffled the cards together – dovetail without a table – I knew where he was going. Obviously, it was a Triumph effect. But, the young performer never strip-cut the cards. He simply showed a few cards face-up and a few face-down, never reorienting the cards. Instantly, they were all face-down again, save the selected card. It was very impressive. When he turned the ribbon spread cards face-up, they were all in order king through ace. All the cuts and shuffles had been false ones! After the gig, we three had a bite to eat at a local diner and talked. The talented finger flinger told me a bit of his magical philosophy. He was interested in adopting the position of a young friend of his, that of being a specialist. The friend decided to work with only a deck of cards, nothing more. The philosophy was to be seen as a “master” of one thing rather than very good at many. The card wizard wanted my thoughts on this stance. I explained that what I witnessed was, indeed, terrific sleight of hand. The audience loved all the tricks – at the time. My concern was with how much they remembered the next day. I have witnessed unbelievable card tricks before, and even though I was trying to mentally take notes to the wonderful effects performed, hours later I couldn’t recall most of them. If a trained observer can’t remember the effects, how can one expect a lay audience to do so? Memory and realtime perception often work in opposition to each other. Let’s examine what is known as the Artist / Model concept. Imagine an artist has hired a model to do a sitting for him for five hours. During this period, the model sits on a stool without moving. For her, time moves extremely slowly. Each second drags by because there is little to no change in her personal stimuli. For the artist, however, time speeds by. He is sketching vigorously with new ideas stimulating his mind every moment. After the five hour session, he wants to pay her for a couple more hours to complete new sketches. She, of course, refuses as she is close to death by boredom. So we see how the perception of time differs greatly for each participant. The truly interesting thing happens when they return to their homes and recall the afternoon. The model is asked by her roommate about the session. She replies with a simple answer, “nothing much happened.” For her, this is quite true. The five hours were mentally compressed in her memory as a single event, because there were no variations to mark the passing of time. When the artist’s wife asks him about the afternoon, he may well need six hours to explain everything that happened for him. His memory is marked by hundreds of variances. His mind cannot compress the event because it is highlighted with spikes of interest. When an audience witnesses a series of closely related events, their memory compresses them into a single package for storage. This takes place because the audience has no real point of reference, other than “card tricks”, and there are no spikes of distinction. I remembered much more than the audience because my mind marked certain tricks with something special, i.e., duel one-handed false shuffles.

Although the simple tricks I performed that night could not compare to his more complicated deceptions in technical skill required, I believe my unforgettable character of Dr. Cocktail is still clearly in the minds of the audience. They didn’t know that my tricks were technically easier, nor did they care. As the third magician pointed out during the conversation, an educated audience is the young man’s best audience. Someone who knows the basics of card work will appreciate the dexterity required much more than someone who has no reference point. The Artist / Model concept applies easily to the audience and performers of that night. For the performers, the evening went by slowly. We repeated the same tricks for hundreds of people. The following night, I could recall on a few of the audience members and a couple distinct events. The audience had the artist’s viewpoint. The evening went by quickly. The spikes of interest were the separate events that took place for them. They, most likely, remember doing a funny dance bit with the DJ, having their characature drawn, and seeing tricks by three different magicians. They may be able to recall something distinctive about each of the magicians, but they won’t remember much about the tricks themselves. The memories of Dr. Cocktail opposed to the memories of the young card worker differ inasmuch as they probably recall a guy named Dr. Cocktail who was very cool and a nice young man who did wonderful card tricks. This is not to say I did a better job at entertaining the guests. But I did do a better job at being remembered for my character and not my tricks. It all comes down to goals. I had two separate goals that evening. The first was to entertain the guests at the time I was paid to be there. This is often the only goal performers have for their shows. My second goal was to be remembered as someone with which they enjoyed partying. All three of us achieved the first goal. The audience, the booker and performers were all pleased. But, the second goal was successfully reached by me, somewhat by the young man, and perhaps very slightly by the third worker. Not because of technical skill, but because of a clearly defined goal. I wanted to be remembered as a cool cat and a swingin’ sophisticate. My character is Dean Martin meets the Beat Generation. Dr. Cocktail is a walking cocktail party in a penthouse. I provide the audience with planned spikes of interest so when my seven minute visit is mentally compressed, they recall the character. He wears a retro style tuxedo. He speaks with beatnik jargon. He tells a few bar jokes. And he does a few cool tricks. He is not a magician. I don’t know what goal the young performer had. If he wanted to be remembered as a “master’ of sleight of hand, I believe he failed. Because, even if the audience remembers they witnessed masterful manipulation, they probably don’t remember him as THE master. There have been specialists who are still remembered as THE masters in their field. They used perfectly placed patter about how they fooled Einstein or performed for the Price of Whales. They brought their character into the performances. Audiences recall how they were entertained by “the best” and not “a really talented guy”.

You may wished to be remembered as a real wizard, a mindreader, or a master juggler. To understand your own goal as to the memories of your audience requires you to understand your character. You must know the difference between your character and your persona. You must know how you will be perceived. You must understand your audiences. All of these points and many more are covered in detail in The Secrets to Perfect Paid Performances. For a FREE report on how to energize your performance, send $5.00 U.S. funds for shipping and handling in the U.S. to: Docc Hilford – 10275 Collins Avenue – Suite 824 – Bal Harbour, FL – 33154 (Overseas please send $10.00 to cover the cost of Air Mail.) There is no obligation to buy the complete course, and I’m certain the report will change the way you approach your next performance. DOUG HENNING’S VERSION OF KENTON’S “KOLOSSAL KILLER” A month or two before legendary magician Doug Henning passed away, he was secretly working on his own stand-up/stage version of “Killer”. Doug was very excited about “Killer”, but as usual Doug wanted to add his own secret touches. Ultimately Doug wished to hand the wallet to the spectator, and have the spectator remove the card from the wallet. The spectator was able to take the correct card out of the wallet, as there really was only one card in the entire wallet! Ah, but how? Here is Doug Henning’s solution. We are grateful to be able to pass it along, as only Kenton and one other magician we know of was aware of Doug’s secret workings. It seemed a shame to let this method remain hidden from all other magicians. So in a final tribute from Kenton to Doug Henning’s brilliance, here is Mr. Henning’s work on “Kolossal Killer”. You will need the usual 16 cards, but without the “prediction” written on the back. Instead write the message on a “Post-It” note - one of those self-stick notes - and place this on the back of each card. You will then have essentially the same set-up with the cards, but the writing is now removable. Several people have written us about this idea before Doug created this option for his own work. The problem however is that the cards become quite “thick” to be put into a wallet this way. In Doug’s version, this issue is solved. The next step in the Henning set-up is a small 16 card index that hangs inside your inner jacket pocket. This makes for a very simple index as it only needs to hold 16 cards! Two rows of eight cards or four rows of four cards is all there is to it. The third adjustment in the Henning version is either a “Card To Wallet” wallet or a regular wallet that can be otherwise easily loaded. This can be in your inner jacket

pocket, right above the secret 16 card index. By now, you will probably understand the Henning workings: Once the card is named, you reach into your jacket as you mention the wallet. As you reach in, you secretly pull the correct card from the index, load it into the wallet, and then bring the wallet into view. If the written message isn’t needed, you simply let your fingers pull the note free either as you take the card from the index, or as you load the card into the wallet. The note then stays either in your inner jacket pocket or in the index itself. Now the wallet is handed to the spectator. She can only remove one card, as only one card is in the wallet. If the written part is needed then she will be removing a card with a note attached to it’s back - a change in the prediction made apparently at the “last moment” before going on stage. Notice how innocent and sensible this writing now becomes! It is a wonderful psychological ploy that can easily be placed into the routine using Henning’s situation. No doubt you will also see the value of having the spectator on occasion remove the correct card from the wallet and be able to take this home as a souvenir... While it does take a bit more set-up and practice to do Henning’s version, it has some clear advantages. While this version may not be for everyone, it will surely work for a great many. Kenton mentions that a performer may wish to make only one note, and stick it somewhere else inside the jacket - either a bit above the index or even perhaps on the outside of the wallet. This way you will have less bulk in your index. You may also find it easier to “pick-up” the note when needed, rather than trying to “pull it off”. Kenton suggests you play with the placement of a single note, and arrange things to make your movements even smoother. Kenton also toyed with another single note concept as follows: On one side of the note make the usual written adjustment. On the other side write a few items down such as grocery items, a “reminder” to call someone, phone numbers, etc. Place this single note into your wallet. Now you no longer need to worry about adding or taking off the note at all. Once you load the card, the wallet contains both the note and the card. The spectator opens the wallet and sees a playing card and a note. Ask the spectator to say out loud what they see in the wallet they are holding. If the note is not needed, frown when the spectator mentions the note. “Take that out first - let me see that!” you say to the spectator. “Oh sorry... As you can see it is my grocery list (what have you)...” CASUALLY flash this towards the spectator as you say “It is MINE, not yours - it isn’t is it”? This will often get a laugh, especially if you point out you didn’t mean to be predicting THAT. (Students of “Wonder Words” will note than this can be said to SUGGEST that perhaps you DID predict the spectator’s list. Stop and think about it. The phrase “It IS isn’t it?” is a key phrase, and the spectator may well answer “Yes” to which your response “I didn’t mean to be predicting THAT” takes on another meaning... We’ll say no more about THIS aspect. We’ve hinted too much as it is!)

Now have the spectator name their chosen card again. Ask the spectator if there is anything else in the wallet besides a playing card. Point out there is nothing in the wallet but a playing card, and that there is only one of those... Then have the spectator remove the card and finish as usual. Of course if the writing is needed, it will have stuck onto the back of the card when the card was loaded into the wallet. If the spectator ever looks at the back of the note, it just makes the handwritten prediction that much more convincing - you apparently really did just spontaneously scribble something down on a note you had nearby at the very last minute! Kenton was never able to mention these twists to Mr. Henning as he passed quickly after Mr. Henning talked about his own handling. We suggest that you play with Doug’s original twists first, and then see if Kenton’s further adaptations work for you. Perhaps Doug will inspire you to further adjustments of your OWN. We’re sure he would have loved such a thing... Kenton wishes to thank Doug Henning for creating this wonderful version of “Killer” and also Chris Smith who first called Kenton about Doug’s excitement over Kenton’s original routine. If it were not for Chris Smith and his confidence, this version of Henning’s may never have seen the light of day. To both we are deeply thankful. Kenton Knepper 2000

KENTON’S “KILLER” READINGS It may seem odd at first that “Killer” has made its way into the area of impromptu “readings”. But psychologically this makes perfectly decent sense. Playing cards are symbols after all, and as such these symbols may tell us much about a person. I mentioned this in the Wonder Words Series and used the line “Playing cards that people pick tell us a lot about their personality”. The “readings” version of Killer takes advantage of this same language and thought, and carries it to a powerful extreme. For those who think playing cards ought never have anything to do with “readings” then skip this idea. Many of us would be most grateful if you did. For those with more willing minds, and for those magicians who desire to add a touch of readings (or who are constantly asked if they CAN) in their close-up - this is for YOU. Mention to the spectator that playing cards are intensely symbolic and have their roots in attributes that are lodged within the deepest levels of the subconscious mind (or something like that)! Then say “When people are asked to merely THINK of a playing card, they generally go through two stages. The first stage is to choose an ACE - based upon social reasoning and influence. But the SECOND stage is the important one. For this is when the person chooses to think of a card that is personal to THEM. It is THIS

card that is thought about that can tell us a great deal about that person’s personality... Shall we see if this is true? Just think of a card then - a personal one”. Now comes the “reading” part. If you already do some sort of readings this will be obvious, but if you are new to this, don’t let that throw you. It’s easy to tell is someone is either outgoing or quiet, an “extrovert” or an “introvert” as some would say. Base your first bit of reading simply on this, remembering always to be complimentary and to not put down your spectator. There are many other words that mean “outgoing” or “quiet”. A person may be “thoughtful” or “active”, “reserved” or “adventuresome”, “playful” or “self-examined”, “ambitious” or “into more subtle areas of life”. Essentially you can say the same thing over and over using different words and you will appear to be very accurate and knowledgeable. Practice with a thesaurus and you’ll get the idea of this really quickly. Just begin speaking in GENERAL ways based on these two basic types. Look at the spectator and decide which one type they are likely to be, and then begin by saying “For instance in your case - you’re the kind of person that ...” and add in your various words for this basic type. Now comes your “out” as well as what will later become a “convincer” to your readings. “Of course I could be wrong. Of which color of card - red or black - are you thinking”? you say as if to verify your reading so far. When the spectator tells you the color of their thought about card, remark “So far, so good”. This sounds like you already know something about the spectator and their card, but in fact all you know is what they themselves have just told you! Now ask the spectator to “concentrate” their mind on the suit of their playing card. The spectator should only THINK about this, and not say anything out loud yet. At this point you already know that the card will be one of two suits. You can think of the RED cards as being more “FEELING” or “FRIENDLY” cards, and the BLACK cards as being more “PRACTICAL” or “BOTTOM LINE” cards. You can also generally tell if a spectator appears to be more of a “friendly” or more “intellectual/bottom line” type of person. If you cannot tell, just use the colors as your guide to likely personality traits. We all tend to have a bit of each of these in our personalities anyway, so you cannot completely fail. Besides, you WILL be correct in the end. Always keep that in mind. Hey, that’s what “Killer” is all about after all! Begin speaking in a manner such as “Ah.... This suit has to do with getting the job done and seeing through the garbage to get to the bottom line - the POINT. I promise I’ll get even more to the point in just a moment. So you may be the type of person that gets frustrated by others when they beat around the bush, and might want to CLUB the bush to see what’s really in there. Such types can be bothered by people who they feel get overly emotional. They may say they can see the importance of being rational in most

situations”. That’ll do for black cards and “bottom line” folks. You should get the basic idea, it’s all that you need. If they have thought of a red card or appear to be friendly and more emotional you could say “This suit has to do with being friendly and relating to others - some would say even socially oriented. Culture and art may matter to them, but they might be a DIAMOND still being ever more highly polished. Thinking matters to this type of person, but feelings sometimes override mere rational thought. Such people may even be sensitive and aware of criticism more than others, but they have the best intentions at HEART”. Now you follow this up with our little “out”: “Of course I could be wrong, but what suit DID you think about”? Once they answer, restate the part of your reading that seemed to mention this very suit. For instance for a person thinking of a Spade you might say “Yes, that’s why I knew it mattered to you to get to the POINT, and to DIG for the facts... just like most SPADE types”! Since you have mentioned either suit or an obvious attribute of that suit, reemphasizing your remarks appears as if you have told THEM ahead of time what their suit was... when once again they have simply told you. At this point, spectators are likely to be getting either a tad nervous or enthralled. “Now think of the NUMBER on your card... See that NUMBER... Focus in on that DIGIT” you say and pause for a moment. Look at the spectator and frown. “Okay, if it’s a COURT CARD think of THAT”! If a spectator is thinking of a Jack, Queen or King, your pausing after telling them to think of their NUMBER will often cause the spectator to feel inclined to ask you what they should do if theirs isn’t a number. At the very least they generally get a very odd expression on their face. When you frown and look at them some more, if they are thinking of a court card and haven’t said anything, this is when they are probably going to spill the beans. After this second pause, if they still have not said anything and are “holding out” on you, your direct instruction about court cards is likely to get them laughing wildly. If they don’t react at all, then they are probably thinking of a number. Don’t worry if you happen to be wrong though. In the end you KNOW you will prove to be right! Once they are thinking of the number remark “Hmmm... Let’s focus in more. Think of whether your card is ODD or EVEN”. This is also a last ditch ploy for those thinking of a court card to tell you this is what they have in mind. If at any point you KNOW for a FACT that it is a court card the spectator is thinking about, you can go right to the closing “kill”. We’ll assume however in this case they are still thinking of a number. Continue speaking “Well, that’s ODD...” and then pause. At this point the spectator may scream or laugh or in some other way TELL you that you are right. They may also CORRECT you. If they say “No, it’s EVEN” respond with “Please! That’s what I MEAN. Let me finish. I’m afraid I confused you! What I was saying was that people who think of EVEN numbered cards tend to be rather shy and do not speak up for themselves, and that just didn’t strike me as YOU. I guess you have proved my point”! This gets a laugh generally - just be cautious not to be overly harsh with these comments. Even taken as a joke, it still SEEMS as if you had some sort of clue about their number.

If the spectator does NOT confirm their odd/even status either way, just continue doing your “reading” as follows: “People who choose odd cards tend to be unusual, have unique perspectives and such. Even number people tend to be happy and successful in their own way. You seem to be an odd numbered person as you have that special quality of mystery and secrecy about you, but of course I could be wrong - is your number odd or even”? If they say “EVEN! Got you that time” you may remark “Yes that’s why with your secrecy and mystery about your number I thought... well, I finally missed ONE. It happens on rare occasions. Shall we try one last time”? Notice though that you STILL seem to be CORRECT about the spectator’s personality! And that’s the WORST case. You have apparently only “missed” ONCE on the card itself. At this point you know for a FACT what suit the spectator’s card is, whether it is a court or number card, and if it’s a number - whether it is an odd or even numbered card. Another very subtle thing has just occurred. You have shifted from not guessing out loud what their card is at all, to blatantly stating what you think it might be. This subtle shift tends to cause the spectators to recall that you have been guessing out loud all of the previous times. In truth, you have never risked a thing up until this point. But the spectators BELIEVE that you have done this over and over again. Words such as “I missed ONE” tends to secretly reinforce this notion. With such a powerful and covert set-up you can go in for the “kill”. State flat out “So far I’ve been doing rather well I think. But there is something more I should tell you. I placed a playing card in my wallet tonight. I just had the feeling that SOMEONE was going to ask me to read them later this evening. When you asked me, I knew that this card was meant for YOU. Having chosen this card myself, you see I already had a fairly good idea about what type of person I was going to meet. The symbols of the playing card revealed a great deal ahead of time. What I was not so certain about was the exact number of the card. I felt I was very close, but moments before we met, I had second thoughts. I still feel after meeting you I am incredibly close. Of course I might be wrong...” Now for the big secret. Look deep into the spectator’s eyes, and GUESS. That’s right - take a stab at it. What happens if you are really far off? When the spectator says “No” remark simply “Thank Goodness! You had me rather frightened for a second”. If you hit and you can show the card as a direct hit, do so and go home. If not, keep reading. “I don’t read people for a living. You can tell, because there’s not much in here (as you pick up the wallet per original instructions)... But I DID have a feeling about YOU. For the first time ever, will you please tell everyone the EXACT number only YOU were thinking about”! Once the spectator lets everyone in on their number, shake your head and smile. “I was SO close... So VERY close...” you say as you begin to remove the correct card from the

wallet. “You were not merely thinking of just a number, but rather an ENTIRE CARD. I have told you what I have thought, and now I will SHOW you...” Either show the written portion or not as needed and finish by saying “Is THAT close enough for you ?!!! I had a feeling...” This can never read as powerfully as it is in real-life performance. The entire routine happens very quickly and the impact is often well beyond words. I will leave it to you to discover the gold here - or not. I am well aware that one could scramble this whole thing up a bit, and add in a high/low card portion, leaving the transition “guess" until that point. You could do a whole LOT of things with this. I know that, and I hope that you do. This is simply what I am doing right now. It may not be for those readers who are “purists”, but I know many will pack quite a memorable punch with this routine. At the very least I hope I have inspired some of you to consider approaching “Killer” from a readings point of view, as well as magic and mentalism. The set-up is the same as in my original or you may use another variation if you choose. The easiest version of this is to merely use “Truly Invisible” from the original manuscript or as read in the Wonder Words Series. Ask the spectator to toss one of the invisible halves of the deck away. Once they do, and you have a notion if it is red or black invisible cards they have kept, you can continue with the routine. In this case, you would give a brief reading and then remark “But I could be wrong... Did you think of tossing away the RED cards?” and continue as outlined above. I would suggest you look up playing card readings in Wonder Readings if you can find it, and also you may want to consult Wonder Words about the phrasing used in this routine. There are a great deal of language deceptions going on in here that I cannot dare spend the time or space pointing out in detail. Students of Wonder Words though should probably be laughing their heads off by now... Subj: No Subject Date: 00-06-19 20:14:35 EDT From: SMICK2000@aol.com To: kenton@wonderwizards.com Dear Kenton, Its been months since I ordered your video, and I am embarrassed to say that I have only finally been able to find the time to see it. Well, your comments on the tape's production quality were certainly not verbal

deceptions. I have to say, though, I loved the effects, and after a few moments, the production qualities fell to the backround, and your routines assumed their proper location... the center stage. My son, Eric, now 12, is doing the torn and restored card routines. I loved the balloon thing, and even I, the person who claims not to know a single card trick , was even spotted working on your color changing deck routine last weekend. Four weeks ago I was JFK Airport in New York on business. I had time to kill, so I visited a store, where the employee was so bored, he was playing solitaire. I purchased a model plane for my son Eric, and the employee saw my Magic Castle Membership card. He said in the most beautiful Indian accent "Are you really a magician? Please do a trick for me" (notice the double bind he used on me?) and handed me his cards. I really don't do card tricks! But I had a box of cards in my hands, and had to do something (can't we EVER just say NO?) Thanks to you I had Kolossal Killer in my wallet (my four card version). I opened his box of cards, and "accidentally" dropped all the cards from the box onto the floor. The people in the store freaked .... at first they laughed, then they were embarrassed for me, and then didn't know what to think when I told them I didn’t need the cards (or “I just need the box” - Ed.), and dropped the cards on purpose. I noticed that about 5 more people had entered the store then, and were watching me. I threw him the box, told him to take out the imaginary deck, and the rest you know better than I. By the revelation, there were at least ten people in the store to see it, and I was not allowed to leave until after I did a version of "For one to end, one must first begin" on the back of a business card, and present a business card to all in attendance. I told them that if they thought that was magic, they should see what kind of magic I can do with their investments... I got a client if you can believe that! OK, the real reasons for this letter. I am performing a routine at the Magic Castle early next month, and I am considering doing an eight card version of Kolossal Killer as an opener. There will be some magicians in the audience, but mostly lay people. I would never do KK if you had any objection to me doing it at this venue. To my knowledge it has NEVER been performed at the Magic Castle. Of course, I still have to think up a way to use the fallen cards, otherwise at the end, I am going to be stuck playing 52 card pick up, and I hate tricks that leave cards all over the room. Please let me know if you wish me to deleate KK, because if so, I'll open with Bob Cassidy's "Chronologue" which is good, but not as fun as yours. I

usually save "Chronologue" for people who have seen KK, it has a similar out, but with an entirely different method. In any event, keep up all of the good work, I'm still waiting for Wonder Words IV... while I do very few of the actual routines that I have learned from you (with the exception of those listed above, and "Southwest") you, more than anyone, has shaped my need for every routine that I do have meaning, and I thank you for that. Sincerely, Sid Mickell Subj: Thank you for a Killer Koncept! Date: 00-05-27 18:04:02 EDT From: ram@on-ramp.ior.com (Rob) To: kenton@wonderwizards.com Just wanted to drop you a note to say THANK YOU for the Kolossal Killer concept! The idea sprouted many new premises in my head on how to make the effect even better. One that I have figured out is to have a person think of a card (I like the presentation where you have people think of a color red or black, the the suit, etc...; bypasses the "why do you want to know the name of the card?" question). Then be sure he wants the card and not some other. Then, instead of using a wallet I use my pocket. Why pocket? You don't usually suspect a pocket like you do a wallet. Wallets are so suspect of being gaffed, even to non-magicians, I wouldn't use one. There is too big a chance someone is going to look at it closer. Same for the pocket you say? Not really, plus, my idea has me take their guess card out of my pocket (this includes aces and joker!) and the ability to take the pocket that I had pulled the card out of and turn it inside out to show there are no other cards(!) Besides, who is going to inspect a pocket you are wearing? Not too many - and if you do and they are of the opposite sex, you can always quip... sure you can check out my pants pocket privately after the show if you'd like. :) There is a bit more of a setup than the wallet version -- but I feel it is worth it. Anyway, I would never had been able to figure it out without your original concept. Thank You! Magic,

Rob Milliken ram@ior.com Subj: Re: Question Date: 00-06-08 09:50:30 EDT From: azingg@ix.netcom.com (it's a zingg thing!) Reply-to: azingg@ix.netcom.com To: KentonWiz@aol.com Kenton, Thanks. It came through just fine. I really like the post-it idea, and think that the Henning approach sure has some merits. I may or may not try it, however, depending on whether or not I want to go to the trouble of indexing. Loading a wallet is not a problem for me. I just like the idea of a complete "set-up" ready to go when you pop your wallet in your pocket. However, I will give this variation some thought(s)... Here's a couple for starters. If you keep your trousers and coat pockets clear of other items, you could break the index up with four cards in each pocket. Reds on the right side of the body and blacks on the left, 3's and 6's in your trousers and 9's and Q's in your coat pockets. As you go through the elimination, your mental focus similarly goes to the correct pocket, and if you use my variation of giving them a final chance to change to ANY card, just be prepared to change. There's lots going on and the focus is on the audience, not you, in any case. I would probably opt for either having a post-it on every card so there is no fumbling. Or, you could put only one post-it in your wallet and depending on whether you had a direct hit or were "off by one" can load the card to either the side that will have it stick to the back of the card, or not stick and be on the front of the card disguised as a grocery list. You might also consider a Mullica or Himber wallet that you can have a spectator hold from the beginning and do an almost "no-palm" load. I say almost no palm because you will need to cop and hold the card to put it under the wallet, or rather to lay the wallet on top of it. Frankly, I think you get almost the same effect as having them remove the card in the original if you have them hold the wallet from the beginning of the effect which I have always done since I got the routine.

Back to the variation. There is a wallet that I have only had described to me by Ton Osaka which is a combination Himber and loading wallet. The card loads into a glassine partition like an id window. I'r really love this wallet if I could get it as you can load it and take it out and use the Himber principle to show the id pocket empty, have the spec hold it and then after the magic open to the other side and the card has appeared in the window. Anyhow, that is not necessary for this routine as I believe that there may be on the market just a regular loading wallet where the card ends up in the id window. If I am correct in this assumption, then you have a note with only the off by one message written in the wallet and load the card face out on top of this note. If it is a direct hit, then just have them open the wallet and the card is staring them in the face and you are done. If you are "off by one", then go through the language about knowing that you would be off and have them remove the card to see the proof of the note below. Anyhow, thanks for sharing Henning's variation with me, and feel free to include this email or edited portions of it with the variation if you so choose. Best Regards, Allen

Never Break The Chain

Effect and Presentation The magical performer has a small LED flashlight on his keychain. He claims that, at times, people with a lot of personal power or special energy have caused the light to flicker on and off. The magical one suggests that the spectator may have such intensity, and asks her to hold out her hand. The magical type steadies the LED light over the spectator’s palm up hand – as if it were a pendulum. “Sometimes the light will begin to move, sometimes not. Sometimes it will feel warm, or suddenly cool above your hand. In fact, some people say that it dulls pain and that they feel better – if not right away – then later. I don’t know why that happens, when it does, but I do know that I feel a lot of energy coming from you now, I feel your hand warming up too… Maybe you can even feel it yourself? Yes? Maybe enough energy the light will flicker”? Nothing happens. No light flashes at all. “Is your arm feeling slight tingles in any way, or is it becoming more like stone? What does your hand and arm feel like to you? Really. That is not usual at all…”

Suddenly, the light falls off the keyring and into the spectator’s palm up hand. The chain apparently has broken off. “Whoa. That’s a lot of energy. Never had that happen before. Hold on to both pieces and close your hand. Feel the warmth in your hand, the energy, going into the light. Let’s see if you can make it light even when it is broken. Open your hand. Nothing. Close your hand. Keep trying. I am sorry if I am so insistent, but I am rarely wrong about a person’s personal energy. I feel these sorts of things, and I bet you do at times too. Have you ever walked down a street at night, and had a streetlight suddenly go out? Have you had that happen more than once? Some people do – because of their personal energy. They knock lights out, or start them up suddenly. Feel the energy and warmth in your hand. Once you feel it raise or cooling off, open your hand and look. Nothing. Wait! What on earth? Did you burn yourself? Feel the chain. Feel the connection. Pick it up. See? It’s as if you soldered it back together. Are you sure your hands are okay? They are not too hot? Holy… Well. I don’t know what to say. I’m stunned. You’re okay? May I keep this? I never had anyone do that before. Do you teach classes or anything? No? But you do use your personal energy to achieve good things, do you not? You should, you know. It would be a shame to waste that. I’ll show you what I mean, what I do. May I have your spoon there”? The wonder worker goes into his favorite metal bending routine – as long as it doesn’t look like a magic trick.

Method There are of course two real methods here. One is the physical work, the other the mental work. The words create a great deal of the wonder, in effect, in meaning and in memory. If you know Wonder Words, then you’ll understand how the script helps spectator’s feel things, and even if they do not, how that seems to be part of the effect too. Carefully study the words as an example. Then say things that are like that, but natural to you. The main idea is that the effect is not about the keychain, the light, or the performer. In fact, it doesn’t really look like the performer is performing. The effect is all about the spectator and what the spectator causes to happen. That’s a big deal. The focus on the spectator as the actual magical person is an interesting shift, and a memorable one. Physically, you’ll need two matching keychains with little lights on the end. These are very common now – an LED light to help you see your keys and keyhole at night. Break one keychain about in half. You can do this by prying open a link in the chain or cutting the flimsy chains carefully with a wire cutter. Keep the bottom half of the chain with the LED light attached. Toss away the top half of this same chain, as it is not used. Get some “metal putty” at a hardware store. This plastic putty looks like metal once it is cured. Near the top third of the full keychain, mold a small amount of the putty. You want to make the putty look like it is a small glob of melted chain. This putty should be distinct when it is pointed out, but not big and obvious otherwise. This glob will be

partially hidden between the thumb and first finger. Besides, all eyes naturally focus on the light as you mention the light. Fingerpalm the half chain (and light) in the left hand. The right hand holds the full keychain up, between thumb and first finger to show it. Palm is turned out to the spectators as you begin to show the keychain. The glob hides partially behind the first finger and thumb. Talk about the spectator’s personal energy and your keychain light. Move the light over to the spectator’s palm up hand. As you do so, appear to steady the keychain and the light at the bottom of the chain with your left hand. The big motion of moving forward towards the spectator hides the small move you will do. Turn your right hand palm in towards you. As you do, allow the right second finger to catch the chain. Simply curling the fingers inward naturally brings the keychain and light into the right palm, as the palm turns towards you. It would be obvious that the light has disappeared, except for what you have in your left hand. As the right hand pulls the real light and chain in, the thumb and first finger also grasp the top of the half-chain in the left hand. This sounds complicated, but in truth it is not even really a move at all. In the action of apparently steadying the light at the bottom of the keychain, the switch has taken place. Move the left hand away entirely. You may even want to talk about pendulums and how they react over people’s hands. When enough real suspense and near-boredom has kicked in, let the bottom part of the chain drop into the spectator’s palm up hand. It will look as if you are holding the top half of the chain only in your right hand. Do not make any sort of move when you drop the chain. Merely allow the bottom, broken, chain to slip through your thumb and finger by slightly releasing pressure. It’s important that you be as shocked and surprised as the spectators. BE shocked and surprised, not “over act” shock and surprise. After a brief pause as if you are still recovering from the wonder, with your left hand pick up the light and chain in your spectator’s hand. Your right hand still holds the supposed top half of the chain. As per the effect, have the spectator apparently hold the two pieces. As you move forward, naturally bring your hands together. Don’t make a move out of this either. Drop the entire light and chain from your right hand into the spectator’s palm. Your left hand fingerpalms it’s half-chain and light secretly. It should appear that you have dropped both halves from each hand into the spectator’s hand. Instruct the spectator to close their hand and “see if they can still make it light up anyway”. Note that the focus is placed on the spectator lighting the keychain – not fixing it! This focus also gives you ample time to drop your left hand to your side casually, and ditch the half-chain whenever you comfortable can.

Use the language as described and you may have the spectator say they feel things happening: Their hand gets warmer (or cooler), their arm is tingling (or feels like a solid iron bar) and such. If they say they feel nothing, make that part of the effect too. Finally, have them open their hand. It is best if the spectator is the one who notices the chain is “welded” back together. Telling the spectator to open her hand to see if anything has happened yet is devious. The first time she opens her hand, you say, “Nothing yet. Close your hand”. Of course, the chain is already fixed, but when you say nothing has happened, she will close her hand and think nothing has happened. She is looking for the light to go on, remember. When she opens her hand and sees the light is not on yet, she’ll think nothing has happened anyway. Later, when you have her open her hand again and pick up the chain – only then does the effect happen. This is the indirection I use to suggest that the effect took place in her hand and that I never touched anything at all. I could not have done anything – as she had checked in her own hands, and nothing had happened. No one had touched the chain but her since that time. This is a very strong principle. Many will take this whole affair as real. What if they don’t? At worst, it is a very strong magical effect as a metaphor and symbol of the spectator’s talents, power, and ability. How can they not like the idea that they are powerful, talented and have strong abilities? You really cannot lose with this approach. If you perform this like a coin switch trick, it will be taken in that light. Presented as a weerd thing you have observed from time to time, this can be very intense and memorable. Spectators often tell their own stories about streetlights or lights at home blinking on or off. Has it ever happened to you? Have you not had any unusual occurrence at all in your life ever? Sure, I thought you did. Either that, or it upset you so much, you decided to forget it. See? You can’t really be wrong. More often than not, spectators will tell you all sorts of wild stories about themselves. That’s fine rapport to get from one silly trick. Using this as an introduction into “metal bending” or other such mentalistic effects helps insure this effect, and vice versa. There are too many details to go into about the patter lines as they are written. Trust us – Those who know Wonder Words can tell you all about what these lines do for you. Performing them will teach you a great deal too. Finally, the basic move developed out of an impromptu necklace trick I have done for decades. When I see a person wearing a charm on a chain, I ask permission to look at it and touch it. Once I get permission, I hold the chain up between my thumb and first finger of my left hand, letting the pendant hang down at the bottom of the loop of chain. I secretly slide the charm or pendant up the chain with my right hand’s thumb and fingers as my left hand comes down to grasp the bottom loop of the chain. I pretend to pull on

the chain (never actually do that!) and the charm seems to come off. It’s all mime at this point – holding the hand as if it has the charm at the fingertips – like a standard vanish move. Then I pretend to put the charm back on the chain by allowing the charm to secretly slide down the chain as my left hand hides it doing so. I pretend to tug on the bottom of the chain and the charm is back on the chain again. Sometimes I have back clipped the pendant or charm – having it stick out the back of my right hand towards the spectator’s body. I found that they couldn’t look down at their own chest very well and see behind my hand, if I held it up near neck level. The head cannot bend down far enough to let the eyes see behind my hand, so the secret is safe. I always felt that if the spectator did happen to notice, everyone else was amazed, so who cared. Besides, by the time she could try to describe anything, the pendant or charm was back on the chain again. You could think of this as doing the old finger ring on string moves – but I use a spectator’s chain and pendant instead – and do the moves while she is wearing it all. It’s much more impressive this way. Besides, you help make a big deal out of her fine jewelry for her. That my friends, is priceless.

Subconscious Book Test A spectator selects a book. The performer says he will riffle the pages by quickly past the spectator’s eyes. This, claims the performer, will cue the spectator’s subconscious mind to pay attention and read what is flying by. To be certain a page sinks deeply into the spectator’s mind, he is to call out “There!” at any moment, as the pages riffle past his eyes. The spectator calls out, and the performer pauses at this place, so the spectator can note the page subconsciously, and the page number consciously as well. More pages fly past the spectator’s eyes, and then the book is set aside, as the book is not needed. The performer cautions the spectator not to say a thing until the very end – to give him no clue whatsoever. With that said, the performer begins speaking about all the things on the page – impressions received by the subconscious mind of the spectator. He names characters, acts out a brief scene, gets to a climatic point and then cannot finish, as he is at the bottom of the page. The spectator could not view the opposite page at all. What a disappointment to not know the dramatic ending. But the performer claims, he does see the page number clearly. “Page 53 is what I see – as plain in your mind as black and white! Page 53 – was that the page number YOU were focused upon – did I get that right? Page 53? Yes! Good! Thank you very much… And now we can see how this ends”. The performer quickly turns to the page and reads out loud the next sentence or two of the facing page, to finish the story. There are many pieces to this puzzle, all of them inferring or using suggestion. The actual mechanics are the simplest of things. The book is unprepared, and should be numbered at the top corner of the pages. You, as the performer, turn your head away as the pages begin to be riffled. The front of the book faces the spectator. The spine of the book is to your right, as your left fingers riffle the pages from front to back towards you.

The spectator calls out wherever he likes. When he does, you open the book a bit so that the spectator may see this page. “Let it sink deeply into the subconscious - quick! You MUST be sure to remember the page number! Remember it!” you admonish. As this is said, for the first time, you turn your head just enough to glance at the page number of the opposite page. This is done as though you are turning to be sure the spectator is understanding and doing what you say. This needs to be done casually and very briefly. Just a second is all that is needed to get the glimpse. But do not hurry this either, as this would suggest reason for suspicion. This is a common procedure in mentalism, and I need not say more here. If you are reading this, you should have a clue about the basics in mentalism anyway – or you will educate yourself soon. You want to suggest that the spectator is to look at the page, but this comment is immediately followed with the urgency of his remembering the page NUMBER. This comment is repeated. Later, the audience will recall that you did say to the spectator to look at the PAGE and the page number too. This is not what really happens, as the spectator is told this, but he is not given the time to follow through. Instead, you force his attention to be focused upon the page NUMBER. Once the peek happens and the spectator has the page number in his mind, allow the rest of the pages to riffle by, as you secretly remember the spectator’s page. The spectator’s page is of course one page after the one you saw, making his number one more than the number you peeked. So knowing the page number is easy. But how do you know or remember all of the details on the page? You don’t, and the truth is neither does the spectator. He stopped you and you told him to look at the page and remember the page number, to be sure to recall the page number, as you will need this confirmation later. All that you say and do are suggestions that these other things were on the page. If you know the book and a few main characters, then that is wonderful. But you don’t have to know. You tell the spectator: “Not to say a single thing – not one little hint right or wrong, until I ask at the very end, understand” This suggests that the spectator must SHUT UP and KEEP QUIET – period. The spectator now must be given a mental reason why what you are doing has to be correct. The answer begins with pure suggestion. You say directly that the spectator has observed the entire page – probably not consciously true, but subconsciously. “Since telepathy is a process of the subconscious mind, I will access this to determine your page”

Please note the subtle focus here on “the page” suggesting “page number” although this is not what is actually said. The spectator usually thinks silently, “I was supposed to remember everything on that page? Oh, do I feel stupid! I don’t know! I hope this performer doesn’t make me look foolish or ask me too many questions”! This is happening inside the spectator as you smile, look at him, and say “Oh! Your subconscious knows it ALL” If the spectator has been silently concerned, this will already appear to be telepathy – and he will be shocked that you responded to his silent thought. If he was not thinking anything of the sort, it appears that you are merely explaining the process about to occur. Now launch into a rapid succession of names, events, a few details, mention a slight imperfection on the page – just don’t be specific, and so on. The suggestion is that all of what you are saying must be on the page the spectator peeked. It must be, or you are a crazy person having a public fit. You need to have a planned on story – a dramatic line or two is all – near the end. You may make this a humorous few lines instead if you so choose. You will need this so you can rant and then stop suddenly mid-sentence. This is when you say that you would love to finish but that is the end of page number (and name whatever page you glimpsed that he stopped upon). All of the previous outbursts and dramatic storytelling has been performed primarily towards the audience at large. At this point, you turn to the spectator and say “Page 53, yes or no, was that indeed the page you had in mind – page 53?” When the spectator confirms this is the correct page, grab the book back from where you tossed it down and say “Good! Thank you… Oh, thank you for applauding his fine mind, yes. But I meant that now we can read the ending of that cut-off sentence! I hate not to finish a thought, you know” ! You open to the spectator’s page, and pretend to read the next line of the facing page. In truth, all you do is finish your rehearsed line or two. Close the book, and thank the spectator for his amazing mind – both conscious and subconscious! As you make a point to thank the spectator and his “fine mind – both parts!” he is not likely to sweat the details. You did indeed get the page number correct, which is all you asked him to confirm. He could honestly do that, and did. He is also likely to be pleased to be off the hook. He didn’t realize until it was too late that he was supposed to remember the whole page when he looked at it! But even a flash memory expert would admit you were correct in page number, and that your conclusion was correct. The rest appears to be the journey you take to arrive at a proper solution.

NOTES: The physical work here is an insanely silly book peek. All the rest is the work of implication and suggestion. Little is said directly. The magic happens in those indirect actions and words. For those who can act or pretend even a little, and for those willing to focus on presentation, you are bound to find real value in this unusual “book test”. If you have other ways to peek a page that you like better, do that. This effect is not one to be performed near a few people only, as someone may want to grab the book later and check. But in a comedy club, stand-up or on stage, it is a blessed miracle. Even if the spectator should happen to catch on to the whole thing, the rest of the audience believes in what was suggested. That is the worst that could happen – though it hasn’t to me. Be flamboyant, act out the “page” dramatically, and the spectator doesn’t have a chance to say anything until the end. Besides, it is all quite entertaining, and who wants to dare put a stop to that? After the peek, the book should be tossed aside on to a table near you, away from the spectator. This is to keep him from opening the book, but also so that the book seems to be unimportant to you. Tossing the book aside casually is good suggestion. If the spectator should ever look as if he wants to say anything or move towards the book, just say firmly “Focus! Say nothing! Concentrate! Stay silent and focused or this will not work!” That will do the trick. This looks to the audience to be just what you are saying – to the spectator it means “shut up”. But it is a nice way to say it. Happy playing with this most entertaining book test. I suggest you will like it a great deal, if you can stop from laughing while you perform it. The Other Side of Astonishment by David Abrams. (Previously published as “Making Magic” in the Utne Reader” Jan/Feb 1988) They told me I had powers. Powers? I had been a magician for seven years, performing steadily back in the states, entertaining in clubs and restaurants throughout the country, yet I had never heard anyone mention powers. To be sure, once or twice a season. I was rebuked by some spectator fresh out of Bible school for “doing the work of Satan,” but the more customary refrain was “How did you do that?” Every evening in the clubs: ”How did that happen: C’mon, tell us – how does that work?” “I don’t know,” I took to saying, mostly out of boredom, yet also because I felt there was a grain of truth in that statement because there was some aspect of my sleight-of-hand

tricks that mystified even me. It was not something I could experience when rehearsing alone, at home or when practising my sleights before a mirror. But when I would stand before my audience, letting my fingers run through one of their routines with some borrowed coins, and I’d see the spectators’ eyes slowly widening with astonishment, well there was something astonishing about that for me as well, although I was unable to say just what it was. When I received a fellowship to support a year’s research on the intertwining of magic and medicine in Asia, I thought I might have a chance to explore the secrets that lay hidden within my own magic, or at least to discern what mysteries my magic had in common with the magic used in traditional cultures not merely for entertainment, but for healing, fortification, and transformation. I was intending to use my skills as a Western sleight-of-hand magician to academic researcher, not as an anthropologist or sociologist, but as a magician in my own right, and in this manner would explore the relation between ritual and transformation form the inside. As it turned out, this method worked well – at first almost too well, for the potency my magic tricks took on in a rural Asia brought some alarming difficulties. In the interior of Sri Lanka, where I began my quest. I was rather too pen with my skills; anxious to get a sense of the local attitude toward magic. I began performing on village street corners much as I had three years earlier while journeying as a street magician through Europe. But these were different streets, much more worn and dusty than those concrete thoroughfares, reeking with smells of incense and elephants, frequented as much by gods and demons as by the human inhabitants of the island. Less than a week after I began plucking handkerchiefs form the air, “the young magician from the West” was known throughout the country. Huge crowds followed me wherever I went, and I was constantly approached by people in the grip of disease, by the blind and crippled, all asking me to cure them with my powers. What a frightful, saddening position to be in! When like a fool, I attempted to show that my magic feats were but illusions accomplished by dextrous manipulations, I only insulted these people – clearly, to them, I was using clumsy explanations to disguise and hide my real powers. I fled Sri Lanka after only three weeks, suffering form a severe case of ethical paradox, determined to begin my work afresh in Indonesia, where I would above all keep my magic more to myself. It was five months later – after carefully immersing myself in the Indonesian island universe, observing and recording the patterns of culture, while slowly, inadvertently, slipping into those patterns myself – that I first allowed myself a chance to explore the more unusual possibilities of my position. For five months I had been true to my resolve, keeping my magic much more “up my sleeve” than I had in Sri Lanka – waiting for just the right moment o make something impossible happen, and performing for only a few people at a time, perhaps in a tea stall or while sauntering past the rice paddies. In this manner I slowly and much more surely wove my way in to the animist fabric of the society. I had the sense that I was becoming known in the region, but in a more subtle and curious manner than before – here and there I had begun to hear stories about a Westerner, glimpsed on the far side of the island who actually had access to the invisible world to the spirits.

Gradually I had been contacted by a number of dukuns, or sorcerers, often in some clandestine manner, throughout a child or a friend, and asked to visit them in their homes. The initial meetings had been strained, sometimes frightening, for these practitioners felt their status threatened by a stranger who could so easily produce shells from the air or make knives vanish between his hands. And I in return felt threatened by the resultant antagonism – I did not want these magicians to view me as their competitor for I knew the incredible power of the imagination and had no wish to be the victim of any dark spells (When I came down with a nightmarish case of malaria, I was sure, in my delirium, that I had brought it upon myself by offending a particular sorcerer.) As the months unfolded, I had learned not to shy away form these tensions, but to work with them. I had become adept at transforming the initial antagonism into some sort of mutual respect, at times into a real sense of camaraderie. I had lived with a sorcerer-healer in Java and traded magic with a balian tapakan, or spirit medium, in Bali, both of whom were convinced that my presence in their household enhanced their own access to the gods and accentuated their power as healers. But that is another story. On a certain early monsoon day I sat in a rice stall in a small fishing village on the coast of Bali, shielding myself from the afternoon rain. Munching my rice, I stared out at a steamy, emerald landscape – with the rainy season finally braking overhead, all the Balinese greens were beginning to leak into the air. Inside, an old woman was serving rice across the wooden slab of a counter to two solemn fishermen, in the corner of the hut three others were laughing and conversing in low Balinese. The downpour outside stopped abruptly, now other sounds – dogs fighting in the distance, someone singing. I stood up to pay the woman, counting out the correct number of coins and reaching across to drop them into her hand. I opened my fingers – the coins were not there! The woman and I looked at each other, astonished I turned my empty hands over several times, looked on the dirt floor behind me, then reached under my rice bowl and found the coins. Feigning relief, I took them up and reached across to hand them to the bewildered woman – except that the coins were missing once again when I opened my fist. By now the men in the corner had stopped talking and the two at the counter had paused in the middle of their meal, watching as I became more and more annoyed, searching the floor and the bench without finding my money. One of the fishermen suggested that I look under my bowl again. I lifted it up, but the coins were not there. Upset, I stared at the others. One of them backed slowly into the street, I shrugged my shoulders sadly at the woman, then caught sight of the two half-filled rice bowls resting in front of the other men at the counter. I motioned hesitantly for one of the fishermen to lift up his bowl. He looked around at the others, then gingerly raised one edge of the bowl - there they were! The coins glittered on the palmwood as the fishermen began shouting at each other, incredulous. The old woman was doubled over with laughter. The man who had uncovered the coins stared at me long and hard. As the others drifted out onto the street, still shouting, this man shoved his rice aside, leaned over to me and asked, in Indonesian, if I would be so kind as to accompany him to meet his family. Something urgent in his voice intrigued me, I nodded. He paid the old woman, who clapped me on the shoulder as we lift, and led me down the street toward the beach. He

turned off to the right before reaching the sand, and I followed him through the rice paddies, balancing like a tightrope walker on one of the dikes that separate the flooded squares. To our left the village spread itself out along the shore; a young woman nursed an infant; smoke rose from cooking fires; three pigs rummaged through a pile of rags and wood. The man turned to the left between two paddies and led me through a makeshift gate into his family compound. Children were playing. He motioned me inside one of the two building – his brother lives in the other, he explained – where a young woman sat with a child on her lap. Before I could make a formal greeting, the fisherman pushed his wife and child out the door, slinging a blanket over the doorway and another over the window. He sat me down in the dark, offered a Javanese cigarette, lit one for himself, then sat down cross-legged on the floor next to me. He gripped my ankle as he began to explain his situation. He spoke quickly, in broken Indonesian, which was good, since I could never have followed his story had he spoken so quickly in Balinese. Essentially what he had to say was this: that he was a poor and ignorant fisherman blessed with a loving wife and many children, and that despite his steady and enthusiastic propitiation of the local gods and ancestors, he had been unable to catch any fish for the last months. This was especially upsetting since before that time he had been on to the most successful fishermen in the village. He said it was evident to everyone in the village that his present difficulties were the result of some left-handed magic; clearly a demon had been induced by some sorcery to take up residence in the hull of his fishing boat, and was now frightening the fish away from his nets. Furthermore, he knew that another fisherman in the village had secretly obtained a certain talisman from a priest, a magic shell that made this other man’s boat fill up with fish whenever he took it out on the water. And so perhaps I, who obviously knew about such things and had some powers of my own, would be willing to work some special magic on his boat so that he could once again catch enough fish to feed his family. Now it was clear that this man was both honest and in earnest (his grip on my poor ankle had increased considerably). But I had been in this position before, and thought less disconcerted by it than I had been five months earlier, I was still reluctant to play very deeply within the dream-space of a culture that was not my own. And so I explained to Gede (one of his many names) that my magic was only good for things like making coins vanish or causing fruit to appear (I plucked a ripe banana out of the darkness, making him laugh), that my magic was useless when it came to really practical matters. Besides, I told him, I had never worked with fish, but was sure (since they could breathe underwater and all) that their own powers were even more potent than mine: if a demon was frightening them away, he or she was certainly beyond my influence. Gede nodded in agreement, released my ankle and changed the subject. After a few minutes he led me to the doorway and thanked me for coming. I felt sure I had convinced him with my excuses. But perhaps I had failed to take into account the Balinese habit of self-effacement before accepting praise (Saya bodoh, “I am stupid,” any Balinese healer will reply when told that he or she is skilful), including, apparently the praise and respect implied in being offered a difficult task. Unaware, I walked along the beach toward the little bamboo hut I had procured for the night. As the

sun sank into the land, the moon rose from the ocean, pale white, nearly full. In the distance, between the rising and lowering, sat the great volcano silently looming on the horizon. That night I had difficulty falling asleep. A weird symphony of chirping crickets accompanied the chorus of frogs gurgling in unison outside my hut. Sometimes this loud music stopped all at once – leaving only the faint lapping of waves and the afternoon rain dripping off the night leaves. Toward midnight I was awakened by a persistent tapping at the window. I stumbled to my feet and lifted the thin slab of wood – there was Gede, grinning nervously. He hissed that we must attempt the magic now, while the others were asleep. In an instant I understood the situation – that Gede was not taking no for an answer, or rather, that he had taken my refusal as an acceptance – and I found myself, oddly enough, giving in to the challenge this time without hesitation. Wrapping a sarong around myself, I recalled the dream from which Gede’s tapping had awakened me; I had been back in the states, performing strange, hypnotic magic for sea monsters in a night-club that was actually an aquarium, Just before wakening, I had heard one monster applauding; his clapping had become the tapping at my window. Now, looking around hastily for something to use, I grabbed an empty coke bottle I had tossed in the corner, then, on an inspiration, dug in my backpack for some flashpaper I’d brought from the states (Flashpaper, a common took of the stage magician, is thin paper that has been soaked in a magnesium solution. When crumpled and ignited it goes up in a sudden, bright flash, leaving no ashes behind-wonderful stuff.) I shoved the flashpaper into a fold in my sarong and, gripping the Coke bottle, hurried outside where Gede was fidgeting anxiously. When he saw me, he turned and led the way down to the beach. We walked quickly along the water’s edge to where the boats were resting on the sand, their long, painted hulls gleaming in the moonglow. As we walked, Gede whispered to me that the fishermen don’t go out fishing on nights when the moon is full or nearly full, since the fish can then see the nets. Only on such a night as this could we accomplish the magic in secret, while the other fishermen slept. He stopped before a sleek blue and white boat, somewhat longer than most of the others, and motioned for me to help him. We lifted the bamboo outriggers and slid the craft into the dark water. I hopped back onto the beach and scooped my Coke bottle full or the black, volcanic sand then waded back out and climbed into the boat with Gede. Really a long dugout canoe with limbs – the two bamboo outriggers and a short, rough-hewn mast near the bow – it rested on the swells while Gede unrolled a whit triangle sail and hoisted it from a beam on the mast. The breeze rose up and the boat glided silently into the night. Overhead, the moon drifted behind a cloud and set the whole cloud glowing. The volcano, luminous, watched and waited. In the Balinese universe, the volcano provides a sort of gateway to and from the upper world, the world of the ancestors, of the gods. The sea, meanwhile, provides passage to the lower world of demons, these destructive forces are known to reside in the black depths of the waters that surround the island. Consequently those islanders who live near

the shore and especially the fishermen who make their living on the water, are a highly nervous and wary bunch, and they partake even more than the average Balinese of the animistic rites and ceremonies of protection for which the island is famous. At this point in my journey I was only beginning to sense what I would later see clearly: that while the magicians of all traditional cultures are working fundamentally toward the same mystery, the magic of each culture takes its structure form the particular clues of the region, that is, from the particular powers of earth to be found only there – whether volcanoes, or wind, or ocean, or desert – for magic evolves form the land. The wind shifted, became cooler, I moved close to where Gede sat in the stern guiding the rudder, and asked him why it was so necessary for us to work in secret. “So other fishermen not jealous,” he explained softly. He lit himself a cigarette. After some time I turned away from him and slipped a piece of flashpaper, crumpled, in the mouth of the Coke bottle. The beach was a thin silver line in the distance. I told Gede that I thought we were out far enough for the magic to take effect, and he agreed. As I took down the sail, I wedged the rest of the flashpaper under a splinter near the top to the mast. Gede heaved an anchor over the side. How to improvise an exorcism? I leaned with my back against the mast, emptying my mind of thoughts, feeling the rock and sway of this tiny boat on the night waters. Small waves slapped against the hull, angrily at first, then softer, more playful, curious. Gradually something regular established itself – the swaying took on a rhythm, a steady rock and roll that grew in intensity as my body gave in to the dance. Phosphorescent algae glimmered like stars around me. The boat became a planet, and I leaned with my back against the axis of the world, a tree with roots in the ocean and branches in the sky, tilting, turning. Without losing the rhythm, I began to move toward the rear of the boat, keeping it rocking, swinging he bottle of black sand around myself in circles, from one hand to the other. When I reached Gede I took the cigarette from his hand, puffed once or twice, then touched the lit end to the mouth of the bottle. A white flash of fire exploded from the bottle with a “Whooshh” propelled by the pressure inside, a wild spirit lunging for air. Gede sat bolt upright, with his arms quivering the sides of the hull. I motioned for him to cup his hands, he did so, and I tipped the bottle down, pouring a small mound of spirit-sand onto his fingers. There were little platforms affixed symmetrically around the hull, Platforms upon which Gede, when fishing would place his lanterns to coax the fish up from the depths. I moved around to each of them, nine in all, the cardinal points of this drifting planet, and carefully anointed each one with a mound of sand, I then sat down in the bottom of the carved-out hull and planted my hands against the wood, against the inside of that hollowed-out tree, waiting to make contact with whatever malevolent presence slumbered beneath the chiselled surface. I felt the need for a sound, for some chant to keep the rhythm, but I could think of nothing appropriate, until a bit of Jewish liturgy sprang to my lips from somewhere, perhaps from my own initiation of age 13. I sang softly. The planet heaved and creaked, the hollow tree rolled from side to side, the upright tree with roots in the sea swung like a pendulum against moon-edged clouds.

At the same point the moon itself rolled out from a cloud pocket and the whole mood shifted – sharp shadows slid back and forth across the wood. Somewhere inside me another planet turned, I began to feel slightly sick. I stood up and began weaving from one side of the boat to the other, sweeping the mounds of sand off the platforms. When I came to the fisherman, I reached into the sky above him and produced another cigarette, already lit, from the dark. I felt a fever flushing my forehead and cheeks. I held the cigarette first to his mouth, then to my own, and we each took a puff on it. I held my breath, walked back rather dizzily, and blew a long line of smoke from the bottom to the top of the mast. Then I touched the cigarette to the paper wedged in up among the invisible branches. A rush of flame shot into the sky. Instantly I felt better – the fever was gone, the turning stopped, the little boat rocked on the waves. I turned to Gede and nodded. A wide grin broke across his face and he tossed the sand, still cupped in his hand, over his head into the water. We drew anchor, hoisted the sail, and tacked back to the village with Gede singing gaily at the rudder. I had to leave the coast the next day to begin work with a healer in the interior, but I promised Gede I would return in a month or so to check on the results of my impromptu exorcism. Five weeks later I returned, with mounting trepidation, to the fishing village, I found Gede waiting for me with open hands. I was introduced to his family, presented with gifts, and stuffed with food. The magic had been successful. The fishing business was thriving, as was apparent from the new gate and the new building Gede had had built to house the family kitchen. After the meal Gede took me aside to tell me of his new ideas, projects he could accomplish if only he had a little magic help. I backed off gracefully, paid my respects, and left the village feeling elated and strange. I am scribbling the last words of this story at a table in the small Vermont night-club where I have been performing magic this winter. Tonight I was doing mostly card magic. With some handkerchiefs and coin stuff thrown in for good measure. Some hours ago a woman grabbed my arm. “How?” she gasped. “How did you do that?” “I really don’t know, ” I told her I think there’s something honest in that. iAn earlier version of this chapter was presented at the 1991 Parapsychological Association Convention (Roe, 1991). I would like to thank Professor Morris. others at the unit, and two conference referees for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper. Thanks are also due to Richard Wiseman for his assistance in running the pilot study. iiThere are exceptions. See, e.g., Roll et al. (1973).

iiiDespite this not requiring the reader to come to the reading 'cold', which would seem to be the essence of cold reading. ivIn this paper I have adopted the convention usually found in the pseudopsychic literature, in which the reader is given as male and the client female. This has been done merely for ease of description and need not reflect any sex biases in mediumship, although the vast majority of pseudopsychic books have been written by men, and Jones (1989: 16) claims that 8 out of 10 readings are for women. vA pseudopsychic can be defined here as a person who produces information or effects which are claimed to be the result of special psychic abilities, but which are in fact generated through normal means. viActual ages of sitters were not recorded. viiThe terms 'sitter' and 'client' are used interchangeably here to refer to an individual who has solicited a reading from a professional psychic. viiiThese categories may not be as discrete as implied here, but may rather represent poles on a continuum of specificity. ixDavidson has drawn a parallel with the passage of a ship from Liverpool to New York; the course isn't fixed from the outset, rather the ship travels a little way, checks its position and modifies course, travels a little further and does the same. As the ship nears its end destination, the modifications in course become increasingly subtle. xThese signals mainly reflect the same back-channel signals discussed earlier. The reader offers the same behaviours (head nods, smiles etc..) to encourage the client to continue to speak. xiAlso (more commonly) known as 'pumping' (Whaley, 1989).