Confused by Banachek’s Psychokknetic Time
- Thread starter The VIP Gentleman
- Start date
There's a lot you can do with it. The basic effect is that you place the watch face down in their hand and the time changes. I've seen many presentations for it. You can have the time move a named amount of minutes, you could have it change to a certain time, etc. I don't own it myself but I have seen it performed countless times. It doesn't visually change though.
Like he said, it changes face down on someone's hand.
If you're interested in this routine, I also recommend PsychoChronetic by Alain Nu. That's more of a stage piece, but it's really cool.
If you're interested in this routine, I also recommend PsychoChronetic by Alain Nu. That's more of a stage piece, but it's really cool.
As mentioned above, it doesn't visually change in front of them, but the effect in their minds is that the face down watch in their hand shows the "normal" time (why would it not?). Then you don't touch the watch anymore, and certainly you never touch the watch after asking them for the number. So in their minds, you caused the time on the watch to change without touching the watch.
Presentation is key here. You want to minimise their memory of you touching the watch, and maximise their memory of them giving you a number and then you "performing the magic" after that point. For example, when they give you the watch, handle it casually. As if the trick hasn't started yet. You're just holding it to maybe to help display it to other people or point out something interesting. Then you can actually place the watch face up on their hands, look in their eyes (so they look at you rather than the watch), and then ask them to put their other hand on top and hold it tight "so you can start the trick". Note you don't say "cover" the watch, which would imply you don't want anyone to see the face, but rather "hold it tight" and it just so happens that people can't see the face. They don't know yet that the time on the watch is relevant anyway. You can even say, as an after thought, "Actually, before I start, I want someone else to cover your hands with theirs - I want there to be no doubt that I never touch the watch."
The second part is emphasising that the magic happens after the number is named. You should spend enough time doing whatever it is that you say is making the time change. Whether it is the spectators imagination, your mind power, whatever. You can pretend to fail and then try harder. All of this is going on when two spectators have enclosed the watch between their hands. This is the image you want them to remember.
If you just did the trick quickly and mechanically, they will "guess" the right method straight away, even if they didn't see you do anything. The magic is created in the presentation.
Presentation is key here. You want to minimise their memory of you touching the watch, and maximise their memory of them giving you a number and then you "performing the magic" after that point. For example, when they give you the watch, handle it casually. As if the trick hasn't started yet. You're just holding it to maybe to help display it to other people or point out something interesting. Then you can actually place the watch face up on their hands, look in their eyes (so they look at you rather than the watch), and then ask them to put their other hand on top and hold it tight "so you can start the trick". Note you don't say "cover" the watch, which would imply you don't want anyone to see the face, but rather "hold it tight" and it just so happens that people can't see the face. They don't know yet that the time on the watch is relevant anyway. You can even say, as an after thought, "Actually, before I start, I want someone else to cover your hands with theirs - I want there to be no doubt that I never touch the watch."
The second part is emphasising that the magic happens after the number is named. You should spend enough time doing whatever it is that you say is making the time change. Whether it is the spectators imagination, your mind power, whatever. You can pretend to fail and then try harder. All of this is going on when two spectators have enclosed the watch between their hands. This is the image you want them to remember.
If you just did the trick quickly and mechanically, they will "guess" the right method straight away, even if they didn't see you do anything. The magic is created in the presentation.
When doing mentalism, never use the word "trick" to describe what you're doing. That turns it into a magic trick, which is not mentalism. Too much emphasis on process also makes it seem like a magic trick.
Mentalism != Magic
Mentalism != Magic
In this case, I think OP was referring to a specific effect without specifying a mentalism or mental magic performance.
In general though, I know what you're saying is generally accepted wisdom, but I don't agree with it as an absolute rule. Even in a "mentalism" context, it depends on how the mentalism is being presented. Derren Brown named an entire TV series "Trick of the Mind" for instance.
The point is not about the words, but rather about the extent one wishes to differentiate oneself from a magician, and if so, how. There is no single answer to this question. Many prominent mentalists (e.g. Osterlind, Anneman) are/were not concerned about a "pure" black and white distinction and include(d) magic tricks in their mentalism shows. Others wouldn't be caught dead doing anything that even refers to a playing card. It really is a spectrum and depends on how you wish to present your mentalism.
