Ben Cardall - Eyespy.pdf

COPYRIGHT 2016 © BY BEN CARDALL ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS BOOK OR ANY PORTION THEREOF MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR

EYESPY THE PRESENTATION OF THE BASIC EFFECT Deductionist – One of my skills is to be able to learn about anyone through certain objects, these are items with which I can deduce a lot of information from. This is because you can not have an item in your possession for that long without impressing upon it some part of your life or personality in some way. What I propose to try here is something much more difficult and work backwards to figure out an item that you are thinking about. So I would like for you to think of a room from your house, a room that you spend a lot of time, perhaps the most time. Spectator – Okay I have one. Deductionist – Then I would like for you to think of any item in that room at all, but to think of it in simplistic terms. For example if you are thinking of your iPhone then think phone. If you are thinking about the green photo frame on your bedside table with you and your friends on from the last night out you went on then please just think photo. With me? Spectator – Okay no problem, I have an object in mind. Deductionist – Cool, don’t forget the room it was in but that isn’t as important as the object. Now, are you familiar with the classic car game I spy? Spectator – I am Deductionist – Great, I would like you to imagine us both sat in this room and then I want you to play the game as normal. Really take a second to visualize the room in as much detail as possible as it will help me do this. Spectator – Okay so, I spy with my little eye something beginning with S Deductionist – Lovely, now I would like you to think of the last letter of this word and come up with a word to describe your object that starts with this final letter. For example if you are thinking of a bed

you might choose the descriptive word durable. You can cheat as well if you’d like, you could describe it as Definitely comfy. With me? Spectator – Got it, so ill say extremely sticky. Deductionist – So all I know at this point is it starts with s and has something to do with an adhesive of sorts, bare in mind I don’t know where you live, you could live in a detached house, a flat, a terraced house or even a caravan. I don’t even know what you do for a living, yet! This is upstairs? Spectator – Yes! Deductionist - I have a couple of objects in mind so I will need to ask you a question, is this object something to do with a liquid of sorts? Spectator – No Deductionist – Okay so, if I am reading this situation correctly and you had a free choice of any object then you will be thinking of sellotape. The spectator falls over and urinates in their own trousers due to having their world turned inside out by your deft wizardry!

BACKGROUND This was never an effect I pursued from the outset, it came about through happenstance. During the course of developing techniques to hone my observational skills I was involved in a game of sorts with my girlfriend. She was asking me where her missing sock was. The only twist being that I was in London and she was at home. The whole game was taking place via text. It suddenly dawned on me that this would be an incredible game to practice your observational skills unconsciously, using your own home as a comfortable practice ground. So how then to turn the idea into a game which wouldn’t feel too much like a test and therefore become annoying. I spy! The classic car game! I spent years playing this game, my girlfriend would tell me what room of the house she was in and then I would get a text. ‘I SPY WITH MY LITTLE EYE, SOMETHING BEGINNING WITH C’ Then based on the observational knowledge I had developed, it would be up to me to deduce the object that my partner was thinking of, no way to cheat. She then began to test me, by texting me when she was at her friends house, or work, places I hadn’t seen, much less been to. The success rate was still in the 90% boundary at a minimum. A couple of years ago, I wrote up my book The Monographs, which detailed the skill set I had developed over the past 16 years to make anyone an expert Deductionist. I was chatting to Titanas via facebook messenger about my book and some of the techniques involved and the inductive challenge to figure out objects in rooms you hadn’t been in, he asked for a demonstration and I played the I spy game with him and his wife, over the messenger service. The reaction given was that of an effect I had just performed which is when it dawned on me. I have a propless thought of object routine that is super easy and accurate! 18 months later of working it as an effect and not just a practice drill, and you have the summation of about a decade of work sat in front of you. With just a few important lines and details, mixed in with your own personal style and you have a routine that will destroy all the people you want it to. Now, lets begin!

THINK OF A ROOM The techniques that are combined here serve a very important purpose. That is to create an illusion of freedom, as Peter Turner says ‘To be restrictive without seeming restrictive’. Technically speaking, this isn’t a necessity but it doesn’t hurt, and works very well within the presentation of the routine. So, you tell whoever the person is you’re reading to think of a room from their house, one they spend a lot of time in. This already cuts the options down immediately. Technically speaking the most time spent in rooms of the house would be bathroom or bedroom for upstairs, living room (lounge) and kitchen for downstairs. Before I go on I would just like to point out that there is a very simple reason I don’t announce the exact room they are thinking of. It is because I want to hide the fact that I know a lot at that point. This way when I nail the object, it is that much more of a kick for the viewer in their psychological shin bone so to speak. To know whether or not the room they have in mind is upstairs or downstairs I refer you to the classic ambiguous statement. I just changed the wording slightly to ‘This is upstairs?’ I put the focus on the expression on my face and the tone of voice I use. Speaking from personal experience, when I add the ‘is’ in front of it makes it sound like too much of a question and less ambiguous and therefore believable. So I change it to a statement, and slightly increase the tone of my voice at the end. I liken it to the way a caricature of an American cheerleader can say anything and it can sound like a question because the tone of voice goes up toward the end of everything they say. Obviously don’t imitate the caricature just play around with it to naturally find what works for you. The expression is key, it needs to be as neutral as you can without looking brain dead, and it needs to be coherent with the rest of the statement. Asymmetrical body language is unconsciously uncomfortable. So to squint your eyes slightly as you say it, reads too much like you are actually asking a question, and to say it with a smile or ease on your face reads too much like it is a statement so to remain neutral means you can keep the illusion of ambiguity alive. So whatever they say afterwards you can always appear to be right.

THIS IS UPSTAIRS? – NO – I KNEW IT. THIS IS UPSTAIRS? – YES – I HAD A FEELING IT WAS. After this you simply move on. Now you can also use the techniques developed by Fraser Parker and Ross Tayler in the incredible Ouija books and Ross’ own Abyss. They name some rooms out loud and you know which one is the important one.

THE FIRST/LAST LETTER Its insultingly simple and you know it already, you have them play the game of I spy. Whether the reason is that they recall the frustration of failing at this game on long car journeys, or they forget, or it doesn’t feel like they are giving me information or all of these ideas but if I were to hazard a guess at the amount of spectators I have performed this for have focused on the game giving you the first letter I would say around 5% at most. A lot of this information is washed away in the reframe, but we will get to that later. As the game of I spy is a spoken one, I have never felt the need to try this without speaking or saying anything for 2 reasons. 1 it now fits with my psychologically deductive approach, and to say nothing as part of the I spy game would be contradictory to everything we know about the game so in order to keep things simple and not over complicated, I instruct them to speak. The last letter of the word is enshrouded in mystery and description. You ask them to think of the last letter and to describe the object in some way that begins with that first letter. Allow them to cheat if they need to as some people cannot think that quickly, a sad but true statement. So if they need to they can add an extra descriptive element. Self explanatory how you know the last letter after this, but to the spectator the focus is on the description itself and not the last letter. This is also washed away in the reframe element. Two fairly, simple and easy elements to gain two letters in the word and a description of the object itself.

THE REFRAME ELEMENT Now the real fun! You are about to convince your spectator of the insurmountable odds you faced in being able to deduce the object they have in mind. This is achieved through pointing out logical notions as part of the conversation and changing the wording of the descriptive element that was based on the last letter. Lets say for example that the I spy game gave you the letter W and the way they described it was EVERY COLOUR and you know it to be upstairs. You can point out that you have no idea if they live in a semi, or a detached, a flat, a bungalow, a caravan or even a mansion, you don’t know what they do for a living or how much money they might have that is disposable, you don’t know what their hobbies are, the only thing you know for sure is that it starts with a W and is quite colourful. Though after I’ve listed all of the information I couldn’t possibly know, I always like to add in ‘Yet’ at the end. For the simple reason that I like to suggest that this isn’t out of the remit of possibility for me to be able to do. It really gives the impression that you know next to nothing about them and by extension, the object they have in mind. You are essentially pulling focus from the information they have unknowingly communicated. This is beautifully covered by the fact that everything you’re saying can not be refuted. Which adds further credence to me not announcing that I know the room they have in mind. Lets see if you can get this then from the information I have just given you.   

Begins with a W Ends with an E and contains every colour. The object lives upstairs in the house

That, believe it or not is all you need. Through your knowledge of the English language you will know that a vowel will have to follow the letter W. Genuinely try this now. Go through some objects that are upstairs in your house and fit the criteria. The answer is below so do cover it up or don’t look. Wardrobe.

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER. There is an extra idea that will help you to narrow down the exact item. Other than your command of the English language. As you will know the only certain letters can follow other letters. The idea is a very simple one and that is to use the rooms of your own house as a basis for your thoughts. If you have more information about the person at that point then use that as well. If you know them to be a plumber then I would go to my friends in my head and if I know anyone who is a plumber and have been to their house, I can use this to my advantage in the same vain. Let us say that as part of the routine you know the object begins with an S, ends with a T and was described as Tight. You also know that the room they have in mind is upstairs, or if you have used Ross Tayler’s Abyss then you know the exact room is the bedroom. Then you simply quickly go through the objects in your own bedroom that fit the criteria. There is only 1 item in my room that could fit the criteria and that is a shirt. So let me pose you a few practice examples. 1. First letter is V, last is E. Described as expensive and lives 2. 3. 4. 5.

downstairs. First letter is a B, last is E. Described as enjoyable and lives downstairs. First letter is N, last is E. Described as extremely beautiful and lives upstairs. First letter is T, last is E. Described as Ebony and lives downstairs. First is S, last is S. Described as sharp and lives downstairs.

The answers will be on the following page so do play along.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

VASE BOTTLE NECKLACE TABLE SCISSORS

It really is that simple. It would work the same in any face to face scenario. Video call, Skype, Snapchat, Facetime, Live performance, anything. To do this via text is essentially the same but to strip back the performance script a little more, meaning you will have to tax your cognitive processes a little more. The photo included was from a sort of demonstration of the effect. This was about the fourth or fifth time I had tried it with my friend Rob and I had already explained the workings of it to him at this point. So as you can see, he just sent the elements.

For the full version of the text effect you will basically be eradicating the idea of getting them to focus on the room and asking them about it because the ambiguity is lost in the message. So go through the full

presentation from the script enclosed but the focus will be on them imagining that you are in the room with them. Script example. Deductionist – One of my skills is to be able to learn about anyone through certain objects, these are items with which I can deduce a lot of information from. This is because you can not have an item in your possession for that long without impressing upon it some part of your life or personality in some way. What I propose to try here is something much more difficult and work backwards to figure out an item that you are thinking about. Even more difficult because I cant see to be able to deduce anything from you to begin with. So I would like for you to think of a room from your house, a room that you spend a lot of time, perhaps the most time. Spectator – Okay I have one. Deductionist – Then I would like for you to think of any item in that room at all, but to think of it in simplistic terms. For example if you are thinking of your iPhone then think phone. If you are thinking about the green photo frame on your bedside table with you and your friends on from the last night out you went on then please just think photo. With me? Spectator – Okay no problem, I have an object in mind. Deductionist – Now, are you familiar with the classic car game I spy? Spectator – I am Deductionist – Great, I would like you to imagine us both sat in this room and then I want you to play the game as normal. Spectator – Okay so, I spy with my little eye something beginning with T. Deductionist – Lovely, now I would like you to think of the last letter of this word and come up with a word to describe your object that starts with this final letter. For example if you are thinking of a bed you might choose the descriptive word durable. You can cheat as well if you’d like, you could describe it as Definitely comfy. With me? Spectator – Got it, so i'll say Helpful in the morning.

Deductionist – So all I know at this point is it starts with T and serves a specific purpose in your daily routine, bare in mind I don’t know where you live, you could live in a detached house, a flat, a terraced house or even a caravan. I don’t even know what you do for a living, yet! I have a couple of objects in mind so I will need to ask you a question, is this object something to do with your mouth? Spectator – Yes Deductionist – Okay so, if I am reading this situation correctly and you had a free choice of any object then you will be thinking of T--------h. That is essentially it for the text version, you have slightly less information to go on so you will just need to think a little more about it. The reason I have covered the word up is because I want you to tell me what it is. The answer will be at the end of the PDF.

CREDITS Michael Murray’s 0290 Ross Tayler’s Abyss Fraser Parker’s False Messiah Fraser Parker and Ross Tayler’s Ouija Peter Turner’s Restrictive idea first seen by me in Bigger Fish Many car journeys The Monographs by me. FINAL THOUGHTS The techniques of this are incredibly simple, I would urge you (once you have mastered this method) to try it with a think of any object flavor, because it is doable. Again, you will just have to think about it a little more. Your speed will come with practice. For example: Begins with L, ends with R and is described as really sturdy. Any guesses? That is correct it’s a ladder.

Should you need any extra help, you can use Michael Murray’s CUPs principle to gain the word length. Follow the methods and make sure you remember the reframe and you will be well on your way to repeated success in a piece of a-prop both powerful and simple. I use this in a thought of object routine as part of a murder mystery effect. Suited best to the psychological performer due to the nature of the game but for the more ethereal readers there is a method out there in Fraser Parker’s sync to be able to gain the first letter of the word without the need for them to speak, the description of the object works simply as a description thanks to the focus of the routine and the reframe. That’s it my friends. Enjoy! Toothbrush. Ben Cardall.